placekicker

How many HIV/AIDS workers from USAID were fake aid workers involved in intelligence or covert political work, rather than medical relief? How much of this explains why USAID refused to comply with DOGE audits? How much of this explains why such a dismal % of aid ever arrived?

Thread: 3 Eye-Opening Takeaways from the First MKUltra Congressional Hearing in 49 Years 1/4 – Successful Memory Replacement Claims Expert witness and author Tom O’Neill revealed that CIA-contracted psychiatrist Dr. Louis Jolyon “Jolly” West claimed he had learned how to replace true memories with false ones in unwitting subjects — without their knowledge. West reportedly stated it was “feasible to take the memory of a definite event… and through hypnotic suggestion, bring about the subsequent conscious recall (that) a different fictional event actually did occur.” O’Neill noted the original 1956 report was altered before being given to Congress in 1977.

We're sealing the deal tomorrow... 👀

We just took another major step toward finally closing Rikers Island. By permanently closing a jail and transferring three properties to DCAS, we're moving closer to closing Rikers for good.  Our City's resources should be invested in rehabilitation, restoration, and a smaller, more humane jail system.

This section you see is from the (KIDS ACT) ⬅️ It shows you the REAL INTENTION on page 110. 🚨 First this ENTIRE bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing🚨 - it uses children's safety as a vehicle to expand government control over the internet, normalize surveillance and verification systems, and create a regulatory framework that can be expanded to adults later.⚠️ One section that LIFTS the MASK is page 110 🎭 where they RESTRICTED DC as ONLY place where you can CONSTITUTIONALLY CHALLENGE this SURVEILLANCE court IN COURT ‼️ In the jurisdiction provision (Section 702) IF this bill were truly about protecting children, why would you need to concentrate all constitutional challenges in one court? It TELLS you this is about controlling the legal narrative and preventing scattered rulings that might strike down provisions.⚠️⚠️ ——- Deeper look there are TONS of CONTRADICTIONS 🚨🚨 The bill says it does not require age verification in three separate places: • Page 38, Section 220: "Nothing in this subtitle may be construed to require the provider of a covered platform to implement an age gating or age verification functionality" • Page 99, Section 602(f): Same language for COPPA 2.0 • Page 13, Section 103(f): "Nothing in this section may be construed to require the submission of government-issued identification" But every single protection in the bill is triggered by one phrase: when a platform "knows" a user is a minor. The "knows" standard is defined as "know or should have known" on pages 17, 40, 45, and 79.⚠️ This creates an impossible trap:🚨 1. If a platform does NOT verify age, it "should have known" minors were present and faces liability for failing to provide protections 2. If a platform DOES verify age, it collects age data on every user, which creates privacy risks and potential liability The bill says "you don't have to verify age" while simultaneously making it impossible to comply without verifying age. This is not a contradiction. This is the design. The bill uses children's safety as the vehicle to normalize age verification across the entire internet. Once age verification infrastructure exists for minors, it exists for everyone. The system built to check if you are 16 will be the same system used to check if you are 21, 35, or a registered voter.⚠️🚨🚨🚨 — JURISDICTION SHELL GAME 🚨 Page 107, Section 702: "The United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any challenge to the constitutionality of this Act or the constitutionality of any action, finding, or determination under this Act." One court. All challenges. No exceptions. This means: • A company in California cannot challenge in the Ninth Circuit • A civil liberties group in New York cannot challenge in the Second Circuit • Every constitutional challenge must go to the same DC court that routinely handles federal government cases This is designed to concentrate legal challenges in a venue favorable to the government and prevent multiple circuit courts from issuing injunctions against the law. If the DC court upholds the law once, it becomes extremely difficult to challenge elsewhere.🚨🚨 —- THE ADVERTISING MEASUREMENT LOOPHOLE🚨🚨 Page 39, Section 233(b): "Nothing in this subtitle may be construed to limit the processing of personal information solely for measuring or reporting advertising or content performance, reach, or frequency, including through an independent measurement." ➡️⚠️🚨The "Stop Profiling Youth and Kids Act" does not stop profiling for advertising measurement. It only stops "market research." Platforms can still process minor's personal information for advertising performance metrics. This is the commercial exploitation pathway left open while the privacy provisions are presented as protections. 😆 —-