JUDGE ME NOT!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TheGrail Mobile. Announces Debut of New Social Media Platform

Not in search for “The Holy Grail” more so, in search for news media transparency. The Mobile News feature allows for a new method for news delivery, for the people by the people.

New York, NY December 17, 2011 – TheGrail Mobile, is proud to announce the debut of its new social media platform. Are you tired of being lied to? Are you tired of being supplied with biased news coverage? Well the answer is here, with the combination of social media and the intuition of the public, TheGrail Mobile allows people to get transparent information and provide news to others through the usage of their own personal mobile device, and it’s FREE.

“TheGrail Mobile is the perfect solution because it allows users to gain audio visual access to newsworthy events taking place around the world.” If one believes that there is a noteworthy event-taking place in their particular area, for instance, “the Occupy Movement”, they can either stream what is actually going on through TheGrail’s database or they can record and upload the video to TheGrail’s archives. Once uploaded anyone who is interested can search and find these real-time video sand give their own personal feedback on the issue and provide potential solutions.

All the user has to do is enter what they exactly are looking for in the search box and select the specific city, state, or country and all the relevant data regarding that subject will be readily available, either through video streaming or video upload. There is also a new Geotagging feature that allows the user to find out what top video news is trending in the area that they are presently in.

TheGrail Mobile also takes an active poll on the views of its users with the Vote-On-It feature. Vote-On-It allows the public to “vote” and take a poll on potential solutions to the issues that may be brought forth. This way society can get a good, quantifiable picture of how the public wants issues to be solved after witnessing what actually is going on within the videos.

As said by author Mark Twain, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed.” TheGrail Mobile eliminates this problem because the news is created for the people, by the people. The unedited and unadulterated video gives people around the world an untainted view of the world in which they live. Mass media news channels have saturated the airways with news that lacks content and substance. TheGrail Mobile is putting the power back into the hands of the people, by allowing them to provide for themselves hearty, transparent news through video postings. It also allows the public to have a say in the matters that may plague their communities.

With the Mobile News feature, users can stay connected with their community news while away from home, on the road, or anywhere else for that matter. For more information regarding TheGrail Mobile and its features or to register, visit http://www.thegrailmobile.com, or download theGrail Mobile app on your Iphone, Blackberry, or Android from the app store.

Press Contacts:

Andre Delaire

TheGrail

Delaire@thegrail.com

(800)800-8000

“The double-edged sword of technology,” it can be used as a tool in order to help society advance and also as a malicious weapon to hold society back. Over the last decade social networking has grown increasingly popular and has become one of the most essential tools in promotion or interconnectivity with peers. That’s a good thing right? It maybe too good of a thing in my opinion. That is one of the reasons why I deleted my facebook account. I did not like the fact of how easily someone else can obtain some of your most personal information – to know your name, where your from, your social interconnections with others, along with having pictures and facial recognition scanners to confirm that you are exactly who you say you are. One of my peers Alexandra Roman stated on her blog “Mums The Word” that even employers and college recruiters are using social networks to investigate their employees or potential students personal lives. Anyone can access your information. Not just on social networking sites but just about anything you put on the Internet is liable to be pirated and used against you, it just seems as if many of these social networking sites are just one-stop shops for hackers to come and take information.

But to the extent in which hackers are taking information extends way beyond just social networks. While I was searching the Internet I found an article that explained that a cyberterrorism group called “AntiSec” gained access to over 70 law enforcement websites and released over 10 gigabytes of information including, emails, passwords, credit card numbers, social security numbers, along with other compromising information. Hacking groups have even claimed to steal information from the US Senate, in addition to blocking access to Visa, MasterCard, CIA, and several NewsCorp websites.

This leads me to think that no one is safe. If you have information on the Internet whether personal or public it can be accessed. No longer are criminals just around our physical communities. They are everywhere, and especially online and in higher volumes because there are no boundaries to the Internet. Anyone globally with Internet access can potentially be a criminal.

The tactics and goals for Hackers have vastly changes over the years. Hackers in the 80s and 90s are much different than the hackers of today.  Going back 20 years people hacked for a past time and to gain recognition in the computer world. However today, hackers are professionally recruited to implement crimes of malice, for tremendous capital gain. In one sense, cyberterrorism has become less of a hobby and more of a profession amongst hackers. But some hackers claim that cyberterrorism is used as a form of protest. This is very similar to the motives of freedom fighters, or “terrorists” (depending on your perspective) of the natural world. Some believe what they are actually doing is for a good cause. A member of AntiSec stated, “We stand in support of all those who struggle against the injustices of the state and capitalism using whatever tactics are most effective, even if that means breaking their laws in order to expose their corruption.” Basically claiming that members of the government have been using hacking tactics for years on its own citizens. However, when the act is conducted on them it is deemed problematic.

To a certain extent I agree with this member of AntiSec both in the physical and cyber world. In the physical world, the US military goes into foreign countries in order to stop injustices, while in fact creating injustices themselves. For instance, we go into Afghanistan in order to dismantle terrorist groups who kill, by killing them and other people. There really isn’t any justification to it. In the cyber world, just last month NewsCorp was allegedly accused of hacking emails and phone calls of various people in order to get stories. What is stopping the government from gaining information on us? Nothing.

 I believe in stopping oppression and there needs to be some sort of transparency between both the government and its citizens. It seems about every month some new information is leaked about something the government is doing or did that its citizens weren’t entirely aware of what really was going on (i.e. Julian Asange and Wikileaks). Yes, hacking and cyberterrorism is a major problem but our government needs to prevent itself from commiting these same crimes against its citizens. Our online security needs to be increased, because it seems as if hackers have the upper hand on some of the most advanced security companies.

In this day and age time crime is everywhere. One cannot even be sure to say they are safe within the confines of their own household. Acts such as cyberterrorism is steadily growing and becoming more popular due to its elusive nature and the lax penalties given to online perpetrators. We need to implement stronger penalties to violators of cyberterrorist acts in order to deter others from committing the same acts.

BECAUSE DRE THE PROPHET SAYS SO!!!

Hacking Articles

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/06/hacking.websites/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/06/hypponen.cybrcrime.ted/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Yesterday, August 2, 2011 US Senate approved of raising the debt ceiling after a series of debates and conferences that were held days before the vote. 46 Senate members of the Democratic Party and 28 members of the Republican Party voted in favor of increasing the debt ceiling, whereas 19 Republicans and 7 Democrats voted “no” for debt-increase. These results show vast dissimilarity to the House votes that occurred this past Monday, where 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted in favor of the debt increase, while 66 Republicans and 95 Democrats opposed the bill. I wonder where the difference in opinion between the House and the Senate stems from?

Anyway, both the House and Senate majority approval led President Obama to sign the debt-ceiling increase into law. However, with the debt ceiling increase Congress also decided that the government is going to have to cut it’s spending. Within the next few months Congress is going to have to get together and discuss what government funded programs are going to have to be cut in order for government to meet quota.

Five minutes and counting until the beginning of the House of Representative vote on the current debt crisis. If you have been following my blog a couple weeks ago I addressed the courant debt problem in a blog post entitled The Roof is on Fire. In this post I outlined some of the key figures and main matters at hand. The current US debt ceiling is 14.3 trillion and we as a country are steadily encroaching and on the verge of surpassing this limit within the next 24 hrs. Representatives are going to vote on a deal that may cut the federal deficit and raise the current debt ceiling. If the House does not pass the debt ceiling increase then the bill won’t make it to Senate. If passed by the House it will then go to vote in the Senate, then eventually make it to Obama’s desk. I’ll will keep you posted on what happens within these upcoming hours

——————————————-

Debt Crisis Update  #2

Votes have begun. 15 minutes until the debt ceiling bill will be passed or not. Presently, the Republicans are more active on the votes with 121 yes and 40 no. Democrats aren’t, as lively, with 15 yes and 40 no. 137 democrats have not yet voted. Hopefully, the vote gets passed. 9 minutes left. I’ll keep you posted.

——————————————-

Debt crisis update #3

Roar of applause from the House of Reps. Gabby Giffords, politician who was shot in the head earlier this year returns to cast her vote. This is likely to be one of the main headlines in these next upcoming days. Stay tuned for more debt vote updates.

——————————————-

Debt crisis update #4

And the bill is passed in the House! The results ended up 269 yes to 156 no. The United States uncanny love for sport seems to translate to our politics. The debt-ceiling vote came down to the wire in the last 20 seconds of the voting timer. It had the feeling of an NBA buzzer-beater. The vote almost had unanimous Republican support. Most democrats waited to the final seconds to pass their vote. So much for the swiftness of democracy.

Rupert Murdoch falls victim to his own game. The media mogul has recently fallen under intense scrutiny throughout different media mediums for the alleged phone hacking and illegal behavior of his company, News Corporation.

On July 15, 2011, an apologetic Murdoch pleaded in court to the parliament committee in London that he was not aware of the illegal actions being committed by his company. His son James, who took often charge of the defense rebuttals, agreed that they were just as shocked to discover their News of the World tabloid had been responsible for phone hacking victims of 9/11, as well as celebrities, and politicians. In one instance explained by Andrea McCrary on her blog Capricious Ramblings she explained the mysterious hacking of a murdered school girl in order to get a news story. This really leads me to wonder to what extent NewsCorp and other other news outlets like it would go in order to get a story.

It is reported that New Corp. was paying off confidential, large settlement amounts to victims of phone hackings as well as paying the legal fees of private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, who was accused of hacking the phone lines of the royal family staff members back in 2007.  Yet, Mr. Murdoch denies any knowledge of these payoffs.

None of these acts surprise me. Personally, the fact that Rupert Murdoch and his company run a tabloid magazine and own Fox News, two media sources that are known for releasing subjective material, puts his integrity into question automatically. Tabloids are known to use shifty sources like paparazzi, he-say-she-say, and undercover analysts in order to get their information, while Fox News is notorious for twisting truths and broadcasting opinionated news. If you ask me, the man that oversees such companies is likely to share similar values.

What I do find interesting however, is the way different media sources are telling the same tale. When reading up on the event, I chose to view a few articles all from different news sources. I felt the New York Times would be a good place to start because it not only stands as a widely respected newspaper, but it is also now one of Murdoch’s biggest rivalries since his purchased The Wall Street Journal.

The Times did a good job of hiding its opinion, as it should, but the article made sure to reveal the skeptical facts in the case, as well as depict courtroom behavior to allow one to formulate his/her own opinion.

For starters, the article began by noting the hearing to be one of “riveting theater,” poking fun at the foam-pie-to-the-face stunt that was pulled on Murdoch and perhaps also in reference to the theatrical ‘acting’ that was performed by the Murdochs as they apologized and denied knowledge of illegal activity. It went on telling of the large payoffs the Murdoch’s knew nothing about, Mr. Murdoch’s long pauses to answer questions, James Murdoch’s quick attempt to answer questions when his father wavered, and ending the piece with a quote from Mr. Murdoch saying, “…I don’t remember what I said.” The Times kept to the facts, but not without some cynicism imbedded in the language and structure or the article.

In opposition, FoxNews.com used a more supportive dialect of their head boss, proclaiming that Murdoch “endured three-hour grilling,” during the hearing while he “escaped attempts to tar him with individual blame for the scandal that has rocked his empire.” Furthermore, they did not take the foam-pie-to-the-face stunt as a lightly as The Times. Instead of “riveting theater,” FoxNews.com tells of a prankster’s attempt as Murdoch’s wife sprang to his aid. Also, it shares the positive statements made by the Murdochs as opposed to the clueless ones such as when James Murdoch insisted, “these actions do not live up to the standards our company aspires to.” Lastly, the end of the article assures that “Rupert Murdoch is eager to stop the crisis from spreading…” clearly affirming their support for him.

The Times and FoxNews.com are prime examples of two major sources of media outlets that release propaganda in order to sway the listener or viewers opinions without providing objectivity to a story. Murdoch’s phone scandal will affect the world’s media outlets more than one would think. Dictators and tyrants alike can use this media event to combat those who support free press by claiming that “free speech” countries don’t actually abide by their ideals. This leads one to think that any and every country, regardless of system of government, can fall to corruption and espionage. In this case free press isn’t entirely “free” for that matter. One can put a price on gathering information illegally or not.

                                    BECAUSE DRE THE PROPHET SAYS SO!!!!

Justin Bieber and many others have risen to stardom through the usage of YouTube and other social networking sites. These vehicles have proven to be very useful promotional and marketing tools in getting information out to others in all parts of the world.  However, last week in my Politics and New Media graduate class my professor Paul Levinson raised an interesting point. He wondered when the time would come that someone would use primarily YouTube and social networking to bring forth political and social change. He claimed that when this does happen we can explicitly say that social networking has made a deep, profound, positive change within society.

Well as I was looking through various news websites I stumbled across a very interesting article CNN.com. The article was entitled Double Rainbow guy running for president via Facebook (link to article below). This article explained how the “Double Rainbow Guy” or otherwise known as Paul Vasquez and Derek Broes, former VP of the digital division of Paramount Pictures, were launching internet campaigns in order to run for president in the 2012 US election.  They both are using an app called “Votocracy” that allows anyone who is passionate about their political beliefs, has a facebook account, and willing to pay the $99 dollar fee an opportunity to be heard. The Votocracy app allows candidates to gain supporters according to how many “likes” they receive on their Votocracy page. Candidates can post messages, take polls, and post videos on their political positions on certain issues. As of June 1^st, when Votocracy started, there have been 370 people who have announced their run for office in 2012.

                                    Is this good, bad, or just plain ugly?

The good thing is that Votocracy and other media methods like it are opening up the political spectrum with many new people and outlooks on present day issues here within the United States. I would love to see the day when two major political parties don’t dominate United States politics. It can be seen in my tumblr blog description when I said, “I’m not a Democrat nor am I a Republican. I’m just a guy with an opinion…” I believe that there are more than just two sides to any social, economical, or political issue and there is a growing problem that those who are not educated on these issues are more inclined to vote in accord to their preferred political party. Votocracy allows candidates to advocate their true beliefs regardless of vast money constraints, popularity, or political history. Maybe Votocracy and apps like it can readjust people’s political opinions and change how politics are perceived. Perhaps, United States citizens will become more inclined to listen, research, and actually understand the issues that plague our country in order to change it for the better. Anyone with an opinion and drive can be heard and evoke change, regardless of steep money constraints.

The bad thing is all this sounds well and good in theory but is it really feasible? Would you just listen to some random Tom, Dick, and Harry political candidate? Who knows? To some extent Votocracy seems to be very gimmicky in nature. Selling presidential dreams to thousands of people who we know will not get a shot at presidency. Besides, we all know the whole basis of American culture is to generate a buck. Some may think, Votocracy is just trying to capitalize and monetize on the ambition of its users.  There is a $99 fee in order to sign up; this is big difference to the normal ballot fee of $8,100, but $99 adds up depending on the number of people who are actually willing to capture their farfetched presidential dreams. It may also just turn voting into a popularity contest where those such as “the double rainbow guy” and others with the most entertaining videos on YouTube more apt to attain supporters on their Votocracy page. There is also a possibility of few being heard due to the saturation of numerous ideas from many different people on this media outlet.

The ugly thing is that regardless of Votocracy or traditional democracy we as citizens need to be more aware of the issues of our communities.

Whether Votocracy works or not it is a good step in the right direction for United States politics. Maybe in the upcoming years the US will see a president who arose through the outlets of social media. Votocracy CEO Bryan Lee claimed, “Our elected officials really reflect the media of the day…FDR was classically called the radio president, and then we had Kennedy and Reagan and Clinton who are television presidents. And when social media becomes the media of the day, it’s going to be fun to see what kind of politician emerges from that.”

More people + more ideas + greater reach = more understanding = positive change within our communities.

                                                Because Dre the Prophet SAYS SO!

*(original article) Double Rainbow guy running for president via Facebook

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/social.media/07/22/votocracy.president.fb.mashable/index.html

(image by Bob Englehart/ Hartford Courant)

Debt talk, debt talk, and more debt talk seems to be the primary concern for most Americans in these last few weeks. It’s been on the cover of every tabloid and the headline story for most news and talk radio stations.  But, really what is the problem? A few key background figures on the matter is that presently the United States has a current debt limit of 14.29 trillion dollars. It has been calculated that the US government would surpass this limit as early as August 2^nd. Conservatives and liberals alike have been debating on what the relief plan should be in order to solve this current problem. The problem can be solved it is just a matter of agreement on how it will be done.

Many members in Congress have been working diligently on raising the current debt ceiling by 2.5 trillion to prevent a government debt default. If a default does occur this would potentially mean that the government will unable to pay Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, defense contractors, and federal workers as of Aug 3^rd.  It is sort of like a credit system. The government pays on credit, however it is reaching its spending limit. Once the limit is surpassed the government has to find a way to pay back all passed debt AND pay off all current bills by using current incoming cash flow.

 The decision on how this matter will be handled will have an effect on next year’s presidential election. This is problematic in a sense that law and policy makers may be more inherent to solve this problem in the short term to gain reelection. This problem can increasingly grow worse as the years progress, while government seeks to keep patching up this debt scar with bigger bandages, rather than providing stitches to solve the problem

Realistically, this matter is trivial to me personally. I really cannot say there is a significant difference in raising the debt ceiling from 14 trillion and 16.5 trillion dollars. Either way, the government is going to have to find a way to potentially “pay back” or “stop the bleeding” with all the debt that is being accrued. Is it even possible that you can come out of a trillion dollars debt? Who knows, but I know one thing whether or not government executives and administrator to choose raise the ceiling American citizens are still going to have to go to work the next day.

When the government wants to create more money the Federal Reserve prints new bills and then trades with the government for bonds in exchange for these physically printed paper notes we call “dollars”. These bonds that the government gives the Fed are basically promises that the government will pay back this money printed and it intrinsically becomes a loan. However, only 3% of actual money in rotation in the United States is actually printed dollar bills. The other 97% of money is on computers or digital. So actually, when in the news they’re talking about big money these same bills don’t even exist. Debt is used for the government to control its citizens and make them act accordingly. Mostly everything we do in life is determined by paying off bills. We go to school to potentially get better jobs in order to pay off debt. People work their entire lives in order to pay off debt. This current government debt crisis is just on a larger scale, but we as individuals see the effects of debt every day. But the thing is no matter how hard you work, or how much “money” save here in the United States debt is inevitable, and there is practically no way that everyone can have zero debt. People are living to get paid, just a slave to a wage. I don’t have all the answers but it can be seen that reform to this system is certainly needed.

BECAUSE DRE THE PROPHET SAYS SO!

(additional info on US Debt Crisis here)

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/18/debt.talks/index.html?hpt=po_t2

(additional info on debt slavery here)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BT9E1SRrXU&feature=related

While I was surfing the web looking for current news events, I stumbled across some of the funniest material I have seen in a while. The article I read explained a failed government operation – excuse me that is a bit harsh, I meant to say a failure in progress government operation entitled “Operation Fast and Furious.” No, not the movie, however this botched operation would have proved fit for a Hollywood script.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or otherwise known as the ATF, set up an 18-month covert weapons sting in order to take down several notorious, Mexican drug cartels. Their plan was to put over 2,000 different firearms on the street in hopes that these weapons would cycle between different crime scenes within the US and Mexico in turn allowing the ATF to pin cases against these Mexican drug cartels.

Luckily, the ATF was able to trace almost 400 weapons in the US and just over 200 weapons back to Mexico. However, this is where the success of their operation stops. What the hell happened to the other 1,400 guns? That’s right, these firearms are unaccounted for, wandering throughout US and Mexican streets and now the ATF is scrambling to find ways to recover them.

There are a few things I find quite problematic with this “operation.” The article explained that the plan was to recover these probed weapons at various crime scenes after crimes were committed. Okay, I’ve heard the phrase, “Use the little fish to catch the big fish,” but the United States and the ATF have taken this notion to another level. The government should be working to get guns off the street. Allowing these weapons to be sold and trafficked to the hands of criminals is a crime within itself. Not to mention, in late December a border patrol agent was murdered in Arizona by the triggers of two different AK-47 guns that were used in the weapon sting. I understand that the smuggling of drugs from Mexico to the US has become increasingly more serious as the years have progressed, but the US should not go this extent to catch criminals.

In June, President Barack Obama said “appropriate action” would be taken once an investigation of the program is completed. But the only “action” that I would find “appropriate” would be for the United States to chalk up this operation in the loss column, and just put this whole story in a movie script. Maybe after seeing this operation on the big screen I may grow to appreciate its ingenious. 

 This brings me to my next point, that simply guns are bad. The 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution gives us citizens “the right to bear arms.” The country’s forefathers didn’t seem to waste anytime by directly putting this amendment directly after our freedom of speech, press, and religion. We as a country need stricter gun laws to help alleviate the excessive crime that occurs in our country. Firearms are becoming increasingly more available, and wider ranges of people have access to them. I have had several friends die at the hands of guns. One may think guns are used to protect, but I think we more-so need protection from them.

BECAUSE DRE THE PROPHET SAYS SO!

#2ndAmendment #Firemarms

*http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/12/atf.guns/index.html?iref=allsearch