My twitter post just changed: you all saw it before
it took 2 days for it to magically change my tweet.. tweets can no longer be used as evidence for anything.. they can be changed
im deleting my posts about the tweets of vimeo.. still the fundraisers and google cache are yet to be explained…
this is how an investigation goes folks..
Professor wonâ€™t back down from Newtown massacre conspiracy theory
James Tracy, who writes a personal blog about conspiracy theories, believes the events that unfolded at Sandy Hook did not happen as reported.
The professor writes on his blog, Memory Hole, â€œWhile it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took placeâ€”at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nationâ€™s news media have described.â€ He suggests that there were multiple shooters and that the number of dead is incorrect. The blog post was published on the Global Research site, where it caught the attention of the Web.
The academic, who is known for his conspiracy theories on 9/11 and the Oklahoma bombing, believesâ€”as he claims on his blog and recently stated on a radio showâ€”that trained â€œcrisis actorsâ€ may have been employed by the Obama administration to shape public opinion on gun control.
The 47-year-old, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of Iowa in mass communication, wrote on his blog, â€œ As documents relating to the Sandy Hook shooting continue to be assessed and interpreted by independent researchers there is a growing awareness that the media coverage of the massacre of 26 children and adults was intended primarily for public consumption to further larger political ends.â€
According to his faculty profile, the professor “teaches courses examining the relationship between commercial and alternative news media and socio-political issues and events.” He also lists his recent work in â€œCensored 2013: Sourcebook for the Media Revolution. The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012.”
When questioned about his theories by a local CBS12 news reporter, Tracy responded, “The whole country mourned about Sandy Hook, but yet again the investigation that journalistic institutions should have carried out never took place, in my opinion.”
He added, “As a society we need to look at things more carefully. Perhaps we as a society have been conditioned to be duped.”
His blog, with 222 followers, lays out his theory in detail, suggesting that it was a training exercise in which actually nobody was killed. He writes, “To declare that the shooting ‘never took place’ is cause for intense opprobrium in most polite circles where, in familiar Orwellian fashion, the media-induced trance and dehistoricized will to believe maintain their hold.”
Speaking on behalf of Tracy, Peter Phillips, president of the Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored, said in a statement to Yahoo News:
James Tracy isn’t promoting a “conspiracy” theory regarding Sandy Hook, but rather saying the mainstream media distorts the news, and doesn’t follow up on important questions. There were reports of more than one shooter in the Sandy Hook case. Tracy is not denying that it happened, but he is saying that when such events do happen it is the responsibility of the media to fully investigate all aspects of the story and not just sensationalize the tragedy.
Tracyâ€™s employer has distanced itself from its faculty memberâ€™s remarks. Mary Jane Saunders, the president of Florida Atlantic University, said in a statement to Yahoo News that reads in part:
I am sure that many of you are aware of the recent comments by a Florida Atlantic University faculty member regarding the tragic events that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14. I want to make it clear that those views and opinions are not shared by Florida Atlantic University, and I am personally saddened by any media stories that have added to the pain felt by the victimsâ€™ families. FAU joins the entire nation and people around the world in feeling profound grief for the lives lost on that awful day.
In an April 2010 agreement, Twitter granted the Library of Congress permission to archive public tweets from the social networkâ€™s inception in 2006 until 2010. 170 billion tweets later, the Library of Congress has completed its task and continues to process roughly 50 million tweets per day in an effort to record the digital communications that mark societal trends.
Integral in serving both Congress and the public, an archive of tweets is not only representative of the modes of communication that define the twenty-first century, but reflect the dominant narrative shaping society.
In order to create more relevant legislation in the future, the archive of tweets will be available to researchers and lawmakers, provided it is not used for profit. The National Library announced in a public document,
â€œArchiving and preserving outlets such as Twitter will enable future researchers access to a fuller picture of todayâ€™s cultural norms, dialogue, trends and events to inform scholarship, the legislative process, new works of authorship, education and otherÂ purposes.â€
With technological constraints, however, the Library of Congress has not yet granted access to scholars and legislators. â€œIt is clear that technology to allow for scholarship access to large data sets is not nearly as advanced as the technology for creating and distributing that data,â€ Gayle Osterberg, the libraryâ€™s director of communications wrote in the press release.
Since its completion, over 400 researchers have requested access to the archive, with inquiries ranging from the rise of citizen journalism, interest in elected officialsâ€™ use of the social network, vaccination rates, and stock market activity. Due to the technological hiccups mentioned above, the archive is not yet user-friendly. A single search, Osterberg continues, could take 24 hours, severely limiting search possibilities.
Furthermore, while tweets are public information, concerns over privacy have prevented the Library of Congress from agreeing to make these records readily available to the public. Concerned centered primarily around deleted tweets and personal information, prompting the Library of Congress to include the following in their agreement with Twitter:
â€œThe Library could make available any portion of the collection six months after it was originally posted on Twitter to â€œbona fideâ€ researchers.â€
The Library of Congress also reserves the right to â€œfilter certain things or wait longer to make them available,â€ saidÂ Martha Anderson, director of the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program at the library.
The completion of the first phase of curation comes on the heels of a December announcements of usersâ€™ ability to download their personal archives. Curious about what your first tweet was about? Instructions on how to download your archive can be found here.
Email evidence is any type of information that is contained within or attached to an electronic mail transmission, and is considered admissible as evidence in a court of law. At present, many countries have come to accept email transmissions as constituting reliable evidence that can be presented in both civil and criminal cases. The use of this type of evidence is limited in some jurisdictions around the world, and even prohibited in others.
Just about any portion of the email transmission may be used as email evidence. The date and time stamps at both the point of origin and the point of destination of the email may help to establish when the correspondence took place. All text included in the body of the email itself could possibly contain information that is relevant to a civil or criminal trial, including any dates, events, or people who are mentioned within that text. Even attachments to email transmissions that include text, charts, financial data, slide presentations, or any type of images may also be introduces as evidence, assuming they are relevant to the matter under consideration.
When going through the process of email discovery, it is often necessary to confirm that the email evidence is secure. There must be no sign that any portion of the email was tampered with in an attempt to mislead law officials or court officers. For example, before a printed copy of an email would be allowed as evidence in any type of legal proceedings, there is a good chance that the court of jurisdiction would require that the email copy be certified. Authorized and trained personnel would have to confirm or deny that what is presented on the hard copy is an exact copy of the email transmission that was sent and received.
In order to manage this process of affirming the veracity of the email evidence, it is not unusual for law enforcement to seize devices where the emails are stored. This allows the officers to research the contents of any email files, including inboxes and sent mail in various types of email programs. In some cases, the email service providers may also play a role in affirming the content of an email, thus making it somewhat difficult to successfully tamper with the information included in any given transmission.
While email evidence, as well as other forms of computer evidence, were once considered somewhat suspect, modern methods that make it easier to confirm the nature of the documents has led to many courts readily accepting emails and email attachments as admissible evidence. In some instances, this type of evidence has made it possible to solve criminal cases in much less time, and allow the judicial system to handle cases in a more efficient manner. As the number of people who rely on electronic communications to conduct commercial and private business continues to increase, more court systems are likely to develop and implement programs that make it possible to assess email evidence for inclusion in court cases.
Do the search.. on the right hand side of each listing.. move your mouse.. you’ll see little arrows appear.. click that.. and then click “cache” to see everything.
LOOK AT DECEMBER 10th!!!
why , oh why, is there a site created on December 10th for the “vicitms” of Sandy Hook???
here is just one example of many..
here is the full search.. going from Oct 2012.. to the day BEFORE the shooting:
THIS ISÂ LINK
update 12/21/2012– 27 Killed in Connecticut Shooting, Including 20 Children FALSE FLAG 2 Years In The Making – Newtown CT
In the wake of the Newtown tragedy, the debate over gun control and gun violence has raged. In the midst of this debate, many (but not all) celebrities have raised their voices in favor of stricter gun-control laws. As is often the case when a celebrity dips their toes in politics, outrage and mockery has ensued.
After the Newtown tragedy, celebrities like Beyonce and Jon Hamm filmed a PSA calling for stricter gun control measures as part of the “Demand a Plan” campaign from Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition, which also includes familes of victims from the Aurora, Tucson and Virginia Tech tragedies.
In the video, celebrities cite the names of the numerous recent mass shootings, then ask “How many more?” They then ask the public to “demand a plan” from “our leaders” to do something about gun violence.
In response to the video, YouTube user “ma5one” uploaded a mashup of the PSA campaign, in which he (or she) juxtaposed scenes of violent film or television roles of the celebrities right after their part in the original campaign. The idea appears to be to point out the hypocrisy of celebrities calling for gun control while using violent, gun-fueled images to advance their careers.
If youâ€™re using a Twitter client such as HootSuite, you can easily see the exact time that a tweet in your feed was posted, as HootSuite conveniently displays the timestamp above the message. Other clients work in a similar way. On Twitter.com things are a little different. There, Twitter prefers to show you how long it was since a tweet was posted. For example, it might say 55 seconds ago, 19 minutes ago, or 1 or more hours ago.
At one or more hours, Twitter.com tends to clump tweet timestamps together, so you get many tweets showing the same timestamp (i.e., 2 hours ago), even if they were posted at very different points over that hour. And when you move to a day or more, Twitter.com displays 1 day ago, or 5 days ago, but doesnâ€™t tell you anything about the time at all.
So how do you find out?
Itâ€™s actually incredibly simple â€“ all you have to do is place your mouse pointer over the timestamp on Twitter.com, either in your feed or within the desired tweet, and Twitter will show you the time the tweet was posted via a little pop-up.
As an example, hereâ€™s a tweet captured from our feed earlier today.
Notice it says that it was posted 5 hours ago. That lets you make a rough estimate of the time it was posted, but thatâ€™s about it. However, if you mouseover the timestamp part of the tweet you can see the exact time.
11.04 AM, on October 7, 2011.
Note that this time is local time to you, depending on your Twitter timezone settings. So, for me, thatâ€™s 11:04 AM in the United Kingdom. If youâ€™re in New York, the timestamp will show 6:04 AM.
Why is this useful? Well, sometimes youâ€™ll want to know exactly when a tweet was posted, certainly if youâ€™re tracing the chain of events of an important story. It can also help you determine who was the first person to break a story on any given dayâ€¦ and who is claiming credit for somebody elseâ€™s work.
This works with tweets of any age. Here is the first-ever tweet, written by Jack Dorsey, dated March 21, 2006.
Note that when tweets go back this far Twitter does put a full date on them. But we donâ€™t see the time. So, again, mouseover the date, and the time the tweet was posted will appear.
There you have it: 8:50 PM. Again, this is in my local time. We know that Twitter (and Jack) are based in San Francisco, which is PDT. PDT is GMT minus 8 hours, which means that Jack wrote the first-ever tweet in San Francisco at 12:08 PM PDT on March 21, 2006.
Which, incidentally, was a Tuesday. Although Twitter wonâ€™t be able to help you with that.