Watch: Couple Was Listening To Their Baby Monitor When They Hear This CHILLING Message

An Indianapolis couple is unnerved after a video monitoring system in their daughter’s room was hacked into Wednesday.

The Denman’s two-year-old daughter was playing with her mother in her room when suddenly music began to play through the device, WTTV reported.

“Our privacy was just invaded,” said Jared Denman. “Someone was playing ‘Every Breath You Take’ by The Police.”

Denman’s wife first believed it was a joke, but it soon became apparent the baby monitor was hacked.

“He started doing sexual noises on the camera,” Denman said.

It agitated me a lot because who is to know if those people are even aware that the videos have been posted online. We kind of felt violated and we didn’t feel secure in our own home.

While it is not exactly known who committed the hack, the family has a suspect in mind. WTTV pointed to a Twitter account notorious for showing off its hacking performances. The account’s bio is simply, “Every breath you take, every move you make…,” a key refrain in “Every Breath You Take.” The alleged hackers have reportedly played the song in other hacks before.

“It tends to be quite easy, especially when there is a hole found in a particular device and somebody publishes some method online,” David Szpunar, vice president of technical services at PC Help Services in Indianapolis, told WTTV.

“You can make sure you have a strong wireless network password in case someone is nearby and wants to bypass your firewall completely,” added Szpunar. 

WTTV notes the one key thing which left the Denmans vulnerable.

The Denmans forgot to change the factory pre-set username and password that came on the camera. As a result, the hacker was able to access the camera with relative ease.

“The biggest advice I have for other parents is to change the username and password,” said Denman.

h/t: The Sun

Are your devices secure? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Trump’s Battle With One Of America’s Most Powerful Men Just Escalated To New Heights

Days after Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump offered an immigration plan that would power down a visa program heavily used by America’s technology superstar companies, a pro-immigration reform group founded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has replied by claiming Trump’s plan would cause vast economic devastation.

“What’s absurd is not just these ‘plans,’ but that those who would seek to represent Americans as president are falling all over themselves to support backward policies that would rip apart American families and collapse our economy,” said a statement posted by FWD.us. President Todd Schulte.

Zuckerberg’s support for more immigration led Trump to criticize him by name when Trump released his immigration plan on Sunday.

The FWD.us statement said that Trump’s plan would cause the mass deportation of an estimated 11.5 million undocumented immigrants, costing the economy $1.7 trillion, citing a 2013 study by a Harvard economist. It said it would devastate the construction, agricultural and hospitality industries.

Trump’s immigration plan would reduce the attractiveness of H-1B visas, through which top technology companies import high-skill workers from abroad. Trump wants to increase the minimum wage paid to H-1B workers to force U.S. companies to hire domestically.

“In the year 2015, with 92 million Americans outside the workforce and incomes collapsing, we need to companies to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed. Petitions for workers should be mailed to the unemployment office, not U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS),” Trump’s plan proclaims.

Schulte said more H-1B visas are needed to bring in skilled foreign workers, who he said would create jobs rather than hurt American workers. Tech companies have long been pressing for an increase in H-1B visas.

Expert analysis of the H-1B program offers a less-than-flattering picture of its results.

Employers “don’t use the H-1B visa as a way to alleviate a shortage of STEM-educated U.S. workers; they use it primarily to cut labor costs,” the Economic Policy Institute reported in February. A long-term academic study of the program released earlier this year also questioned the benefits of the program, saying: “The preponderance of evidence indicates that H-1B workers at least partially crowd out other workers, with the estimates typically indicating substantial crowdout of other workers.”

h/t: CNN

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Here’s Why I Don’t Trust Carly Fiorina To Protect Me As President (And You Shouldn’t Either)

Two weeks after 9/11, on September 26, 2001, Carly Fiorina gave a speech titled “Technology, Business and Our Way of Life: What’s Next,” in which she tied courage, leadership, heroes, and “the questions of life and death” to business leaders learning from one of the greatest civilizations to ever exist: Islamic civilization. Her claims evidence her exceptional ineptitude or blatant, galling, willful deceit.

Consider her claims about Islam and America. She says America is “indebted” to the Islamic civilization, whose “gifts are very much a part of our heritage.”

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson would agree, in that they commissioned merchant marines, the Marine Corp, and the Navy to defend America from Islamic invaders.

Consider her claims about the Ottoman Empire:

  • “When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive. When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others.”

Censorship did exist, but under Suleiman’s rule and Islamic Shari’a law, which is exactly what Islamists are seeking to reinstate today.

  • Under Suleiman, three continents were “allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known.” And, the “Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent … contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership.”

One need only read historical evidence of Suleiman’s numerous military conquests, whose methods are nearly identical to those of ISIS.

  • The Ottoman Empire “was driven more than anything, by invention. Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption.”
  • And: America’s technology industry “would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians.”

The Spartans, Leon Battista Alberti, and Thomas Jefferson were the inventors of encryption; and they weren’t Islamists.

Charles Babbage, an English mathematician, philosopher, mechanical engineer, and scientist originated the concept of a programmable computer in 1822, which he built upon in 1837. He also designed a printer.

Centuries earlier, in 1597, Galileo invented and established a factory that constructed instruments to perform trigonometric calculations, multiplication and division, square and cube roots, comparisons of areas and volumes, currency exchange rates, monetary interest, and various military problems.

Neither Babbage nor Galileo were Islamists.

Where did Carly come up with this nonsense—from talking to Aladdin on a magical carpet ride? Her claims top even the mystical fantasies of The Arabian Nights.

For the truth, however, Islamabad writer Dr. Farrukh Saleem pointed out in 2005 indisputable facts about the Islamic world.

Today, the 57 Islamic countries are the world’s poorest and most illiterate:

  • The GDP of 57 Muslim countries is less than $2 trillion;
  • Muslims comprise roughly 22 percent of the world’s population but only produce less than 5 percent of global GDP;
  • 20 percent of Arabs live on less than $2 per day;
  • The average growth rate of per capita income in the Arab world hovers around .5 percent per year [worse than everywhere else except for sub-Saharan Africa];
  • 60 percent of Muslims worldwide are illiterate;
  • 50 percent of Arab women cannot read.

Dr. Javaid Laghari adds that 40 percent of the Muslim states’ population falls below the poverty line.

Today, the 57 Islamic countries contribute the least to scientific and technological advancement, let alone have computers or use the Internet. Saleem points out that over a period of more than 105 years, only two (2) Muslims won the Nobel Peace Prize. (They studied Physics and Chemistry in Italy, the U.K., and California). Only eight (8) Muslims are Nobel Laureates.

Shouldn’t a leader of Hewlett-Packard have known at the time of her speech that of the entire Arab population, only:

  • 1 percent has a personal computer—and;
  • .5 percent uses the Internet?

To reiterate the facts, the 57 Islamic countries are the world’s poorest, most illiterate, and contribute the least to scientific and technological advancement, let alone have computers or use the Internet.

Yet, this future—represented by the achievements of Islamic civilizations—is what Carly suggested should be America’s hope. Two weeks after 9/11.

A former CEO who “created a larger company with more debt,” laid off 30,000 employees, and expanded Hewlett-Packard’s outsourcing while not offering a solution to reverse America’s trade deficit, pointed to poverty and illiteracy as the source of America’s hope.

Worse still, what business leader, or any leader for that matter, would point to the very civilization, as an example of America’s hope, which had just attacked it two weeks earlier?

Politics, historical facts, and leadership aside, on the matter of “life and death” which she mentions—for 9/11 survivors, like myself, or the few Christians who have survived genocide in 57 Islamic countries and violence throughout Europe, or kidnapped and trafficked little girls—Carly’s remarks could not be more offensive.

Perhaps she should move to Saudi Arabia, where women are prohibited from driving; or Iran, where women are prohibited from working.

Her speech 14 years ago only reveals that Carly has been flying on a mystical magical carpet to nowhere for years.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

The ‘Not Enough Jobs’ Scenario: An Economic Fallacy (But Possibly An Accurate Forecast)

Editor’s note: This article first appeared at Forbes.com.

Once again, a scholar with impressive credentials is broadcasting the gloomy notion that Americans face a job-poor future. The insufficient-jobs scenario appeared in George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen’s book “Average Is Over a couple of years ago. It resurfaced again recently in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Vivek Wadhwa, “a fellow … director of research … and distinguished scholar” at several prestigious universities, wrote that we need “a new version of capitalism” for “dealing with our jobless future.”

The crux of Wadhwa’s argument is his belief that technological progress will result in a society divided between a technologically savvy elite, who will prosper mightily, and a larger number of Americans whose jobs will be rendered obsolete and won’t be able to find new jobs. There’s an obvious fallacy here: If technological progress reduces employment opportunities, then why are hundreds of millions of people still working in the technologically and economically advanced countries of the world? What is it with these intellectuals and the recurring nightmare that progress results in a dearth of jobs?

An incident that the late economist Milton Friedman related comes to mind: While visiting a populous but undeveloped Asian country several decades ago, Friedman saw a gang of workers using shovels to excavate a hole where a building’s foundation would be laid. Friedman noted that the job would be completed much more quickly if a modern excavating machine were used. His host replied that a deliberate decision had been made not to use such a machine because the government wanted to maximize employment. Friedman’s rejoinder was to the effect that if the goal were to maximize employment in the country, they should ban the use of shovels and equip a far larger number of laborers with spoons. It doesn’t require great vision to realize that a fully employed nation of spoon-wielding ditch diggers would remain a very poor place.

Can anyone doubt that technological progress has led to economic advancement? The economic principle is elementary: As worker productivity increases (that is, as more wealth is produced from fewer units of labor) prosperity rises, too. When improved agricultural productivity has bankrupted farmers and resulted in our food supply being produced by an ever-smaller percentage of Americans, what has happened to all those ex-farmers? They found employment in new fields, thereby increasing the number and variety of goods and services produced. In other words, more wealth was created; and that is how a society achieves higher standards of living for the masses.

What has just been described is Schumpeter’s process of creative destruction. Old jobs that produce things of less value become obsolete, and new jobs producing things of higher value take their place. This is the natural evolutionary course of free markets.

Any notion that there is a ceiling to the number of potential jobs ignores an elementary and undeniable economic truth—namely, that there is no limit to the potential number of jobs because there is no limit to mankind’s wants. As technology makes it possible to produce what are considered the modern necessities of life (cars and cell phones in addition to the traditional necessities of food, clothing, and shelter), more workers will be available to produce and provide new goods and services that entrepreneurs are dreaming up every day of the year.

Is there anything that can inhibit or halt the natural tendency of entrepreneurs in market economies to generate new job opportunities? Yes, indeed. Government intervention—excessive and costly regulations, wealth-and capital-depleting taxation, misallocation of resources via government spending programs, depreciating currency, etc.—can stifle economic activity, discourage business formation, and cause job opportunities to dry up.

What is scary about Wadhwa’s thesis and related plans (such as Hillary Clinton’s proposal for government to lay a heavier, more controlling hand on American entrepreneurs and businesses) is that their ill-conceived policies will produce results opposite to what they claim to be seeking. There will be less employment instead of more.

When Wadhwa says we need a new “capitalism” that redistributes more wealth and provides everyone with a taxpayer-supported guaranteed income, he is doing two destructive things: First, he is perpetrating a pernicious lexicographical hoax, proposing a new form of statism that is a repudiation of free markets—i.e., that is anything but “capitalism.” A more honest statement would be “It is time to replace capitalism with greater government control of economic activity.” The second destructive aspect of his suggestion is his apparent blindness to the fact that maximum economic freedom—true capitalism—is the world’s best hope for expanding job opportunities. To jettison capitalism and replace it with a greater degree of statism will impede economic growth, squelch the growth of businesses, and consequently hinder job creation, to the economic detriment of those who are hoping for jobs.

There will be enough jobs for Americans only if the political planners surrender their mad ambition to direct the economy from Washington.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

They Live, We Sleep: A Dictatorship Disguised As A Democracy

“You see them on the street. You watch them on TV. You might even vote for one this fall. You think they’re people just like you. You’re wrong. Dead wrong.”—They Live

We’re living in two worlds, you and I.

There’s the world we see (or are made to see), and then there’s the one we sense (and occasionally catch a glimpse of)–the latter of which is a far cry from the propaganda-driven reality manufactured by the government and its corporate sponsors, including the media.

Indeed, what most Americans perceive as life in America—privileged, progressive and free—is a far cry from reality, where economic inequality is growing, real agendas and real power are buried beneath layers of Orwellian doublespeak and corporate obfuscation, and “freedom,” such that it is, is meted out in small, legalistic doses by militarized police armed to the teeth.

All is not as it seems.

This is the premise of John Carpenter’s film They Live (1988), in which two migrant workers discover that the world’s population is actually being controlled and exploited by aliens working in partnership with an oligarchic elite. All the while, the populace—blissfully unaware of the real agenda at work in their lives—has been lulled into complacency, indoctrinated into compliance, bombarded with media distractions, and hypnotized by subliminal messages beamed out of television and various electronic devices, billboards and the like.

It is only when homeless drifter John Nada (played to the hilt by the late Roddy Piper) discovers a pair of doctored sunglasses—Hoffman lenses—that Nada sees what lies beneath the elite’s fabricated reality: control and bondage.

When viewed through the lens of truth, the elite, who appear human until stripped of their disguises, are shown to be monsters who have enslaved the citizenry in order to prey on them. Likewise, billboards blare out hidden, authoritative messages: a bikini-clad woman in one ad is actually ordering viewers to “MARRY AND REPRODUCE.” Magazine racks scream “CONSUME” and “OBEY.” A wad of dollar bills in a vendor’s hand proclaims, “THIS IS YOUR GOD.”

When viewed through Nada’s Hoffman lenses, some of the other hidden messages being drummed into the people’s subconscious include: NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, CONFORM, SUBMIT, STAY ASLEEP, BUY, WATCH TV, NO IMAGINATION, and DO NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY.

This indoctrination campaign engineered by the elite in They Live is painfully familiar to anyone who has studied the decline of American culture. A citizenry that does not think for themselves, obeys without question, is submissive, does not challenge authority, does not think outside the box, and is content to sit back and be entertained is a citizenry that can be easily controlled.

In this way, the subtle message of They Live provides an apt analogy of our own distorted vision of life in the American police state, what philosopher Slavoj Žižek refers to as dictatorship in democracy, “the invisible order which sustains your apparent freedom.”

We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality. The powers-that-be want us to feel threatened by forces beyond our control (terrorists, shooters, bombers). They want us afraid and dependent on the government and its militarized armies for our safety and well-being. They want us distrustful of each other, divided by our prejudices, and at each other’s throats. Most of all, they want us to continue to march in lockstep with their dictates.

Tune out the government’s attempts to distract, divert and befuddle us and tune into what’s really going on in this country, and you’ll run headlong into an unmistakable, unpalatable truth: the moneyed elite who rule us view us as expendable resources to be used, abused and discarded.

In fact, a 2014 study conducted by Princeton and Northwestern University concluded that the U.S. government does not represent the majority of American citizens. Instead, the study found that the government is ruled by the rich and powerful, or the so-called “economic elite.” Moreover, the researchers concluded that policies enacted by this governmental elite nearly always favor special interests and lobbying groups.

In other words, we are being ruled by an oligarchy disguised as a democracy, and arguably on our way towards fascism—a form of government where private corporate interests rule, money calls the shots, and the people are seen as mere subjects to be controlled.

Consider this: it is estimated that the 2016 presidential election could cost as much as $5 billion, more than double what was spent getting Obama re-elected in 2012.

Not only do you have to be rich—or beholden to the rich—to get elected these days, but getting elected is also a surefire way to get rich. As CBS News reports, “Once in office, members of Congress enjoy access to connections and information they can use to increase their wealth, in ways that are unparalleled in the private sector. And once politicians leave office, their connections allow them to profit even further.”

In denouncing this blatant corruption of America’s political system, former president Jimmy Carter blasted the process of getting elected—to the White House, governor’s mansion, Congress or state legislatures—as “unlimited political bribery… a subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect, and sometimes get, favors for themselves after the election is over.”

Rest assured that when and if fascism finally takes hold in America, the basic forms of government will remain. As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, fascism will appear to be friendly. The legislators will be in session. There will be elections, and the news media will continue to cover the entertainment and political trivia. Consent of the governed, however, will no longer apply. Actual control will have finally passed to the oligarchic elite controlling the government behind the scenes.

By creating the illusion that it preserves democratic traditions, fascism creeps slowly until it consumes the political system. And in times of “crisis,” expediency is upheld as the central principle—that is, in order to keep us safe and secure, the government must militarize the police, strip us of basic constitutional rights, criminalize virtually every form of behavior, and build enough private prisons to house all of us nonviolent criminals.

Clearly, we are now ruled by an oligarchic elite of governmental and corporate interests. We have moved into “corporatism” (favored by Benito Mussolini), which is a halfway point on the road to full-blown fascism.

Vast sectors of the economy, government and politics are managed by private business concerns, otherwise referred to as “privatization” by various government politicians. Just study modern government policies. “Every industry is regulated. Every profession is classified and organized,” writes economic analyst Jeffrey Tucker. “Every good or service is taxed. Endless debt accumulation is preserved. Immense doesn’t begin to describe the bureaucracy. Military preparedness never stops, and war with some evil foreign foe, remains a daily prospect.”

In other words, the government in America today does whatever it wants.

Corporatism is where the few moneyed interests—not elected by the citizenry—rule over the many. In this way, it is not a democracy or a republican form of government, which is what the American government was established to be. It is a top-down form of government and one which has a terrifying history typified by the developments that occurred in totalitarian regimes of the past: police states where everyone is watched and spied on, rounded up for minor infractions by government agents, placed under police control, and placed in detention (a.k.a. concentration) camps.

For the final hammer of fascism to fall, it will require the most crucial ingredient: the majority of the people will have to agree that it’s not only expedient but necessary. But why would a people agree to such an oppressive regime? The answer is the same in every age: fear.

Fear makes people stupid.

Fear is the method most often used by politicians to increase the power of government. And, as most social commentators recognize, an atmosphere of fear permeates modern America: fear of terrorism, fear of the police, fear of our neighbors and so on.

The propaganda of fear has been used quite effectively by those who want to gain control, and it is working on the American populace.

Despite the fact that we are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack; 11,000 times more likely to die from an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane; 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than a terrorist attack, and 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist, we have handed over control of our lives to government officials who treat us as a means to an end—the source of money and power.

We have allowed ourselves to become fearful, controlled, pacified zombies.

In this regard, we’re not so different from the oppressed citizens in They Live. Most everyone keeps their heads down these days while staring zombie-like into an electronic screen, even when they’re crossing the street. Families sit in restaurants with their heads down, separated by their screen devices and unaware of what’s going on around them. Young people especially seem dominated by the devices they hold in their hands, oblivious to the fact that they can simply push a button, turn the thing off and walk away.

Indeed, there is no larger group activity than that connected with those who watch screens—that is, television, lap tops, personal computers, cell phones and so on. In fact, a Nielsen study reports that American screen viewing is at an all-time high. For example, the average American watches approximately 151 hours of television per month.

The question, of course, is: what effect does such screen consumption have on one’s mind?

Psychologically, it is similar to drug addiction. Researchers found that “almost immediately after turning on the TV, subjects reported feeling more relaxed, and because this occurs so quickly and the tension returns so rapidly after the TV is turned off, people are conditioned to associate TV viewing with a lack of tension.” Research also shows that regardless of the programming, viewers’ brain waves slow down, thus transforming them into a more passive, nonresistant state.

Historically, television has been used by those in authority to quiet discontent and pacify disruptive people. “Faced with severe overcrowding and limited budgets for rehabilitation and counseling, more and more prison officials are using TV to keep inmates quiet,” according to Newsweek.

Given that the majority of what Americans watch on television is provided through channels controlled by six mega corporations, what we watch is now controlled by a corporate elite; and, if that elite needs to foster a particular viewpoint or pacify its viewers, it can do so on a large scale.

If we’re watching, we’re not doing.

The powers-that-be understand this. As television journalist Edward R. Murrow warned in a 1958 speech:

We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information. Our mass media reflect this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.

This brings me back to They Live, in which the real zombies are not the aliens calling the shots but the populace who are content to remain controlled.

When all is said and done, the world of They Live is not so different from our own. As one of the characters points out, “The poor and the underclass are growing. Racial justice and human rights are nonexistent. They have created a repressive society and we are their unwitting accomplices. Their intention to rule rests with the annihilation of consciousness. We have been lulled into a trance. They have made us indifferent to ourselves, to others. We are focused only on our own gain.”

We, too, are focused only on our own pleasures, prejudices and gains. Our poor and underclasses are also growing. Racial injustice is growing. Human rights are nearly nonexistent. We too have been lulled into a trance, indifferent to others.

Oblivious to what lies ahead, we’ve been manipulated into believing that if we continue to consume, obey, and have faith, things will work out. But that’s never been true of emerging regimes. And by the time we feel the hammer coming down upon us, it will be too late.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth