Anonymous supports refugees

A message from Anonymous: Hungary’s treatment of refugees is shocking and unacceptable.

  • We do not forgive. We do not forget.
Hungary fires tear gas, water cannon at refugees.
“Hungarians are standing strong on their pledge to not allow refugees into Hungary. They have now criminalised illegal crossings into Hungary and we suspect that’s the reason why they deployed the water cannons...”
Hungary triggered outrage from the international community on Wednesday after firing gas canisters and spraying water at crowds of frustrated refugees who had briefly broken through a border gate in protest at being prevented from crossing from Serbia. With their path north from Serbia into Hungary – and the European Union – blocked since Tuesday, many migrants and refugees have simply turned west to the Croatian frontier. More than 5,000 people have entered since Hungary’s crackdown...
EU should impose sanctions against Hungary government for their inhumane treatment of the refugees.

Hungarian police violence against foreign journalists covering refugee crisis.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is appalled to learn that the Hungarian police have obstructed foreign media coverage of the refugee crisis on the border between Hungary and Serbia and, in particular, that they have on three occasions in the past week used force against foreign journalists.
RSF condemns these unacceptable violations of media freedom and calls on the Hungarian authorities to guarantee the safety of media personnel. It also voices concern about the medical consequences for the journalists who were beaten and demands that those responsible are punished.
“These incidents are intolerable, Reporters Without Borders editor-in-chief Virginie Dangles said.“ The Hungarian authorities must allow journalists to operate on the ground and they must prevent the police from engaging in threats and violence of this kind.
“This disgraceful police behaviour is consistent with Hungary’s frequent violations of media freedom, especially since the adoption of draconian media laws in 2010 that have been condemned by Hungarian civil society and by international and inter-governmental organizations.”
Democratic standards have declined steadily in Hungary since Viktor Orban’s party, Fidesz, won the 2010 elections. Hungary is now ranked 65th out of 180 countries in the 2015 Reporters Without Borders press freedom index after falling 46 places in just four years


This Book Kills 99.9999% Bacteria, Makes Murky Water Drinkable

When technology meets imagination, the result is the Drinkable Book – a guide to safe drinking water
that also allows the reader to tear out the pages and use them as water filters!
Brainchild of Dr. Theresa Dankovich, the book’s pages don’t just explain the problem of water contamination, but actually solve it by killing 99.9999% of harmful bacteria, including those that cause diseases like cholera, E. coli, hepatitis, and typhoid.
The silver nanoparticle filter paper technology in the Drinkable Book was invented by Dankovich in 2008, for her Ph.D. research at McGill University.
Printed on each page of the 100-page book is a message, written in either English or Swahili – “The water in your village may contain deadly diseases. But each page of this book is a paper water filter that will make it safe to drink.” The water safety tips, printed in non-toxic ink, include washing your hands before eating and keeping trash away from your water source.
To use the Drinkable Book, all a person has to do is rip one of the pages in half, slide it into the filter box (which doubles as a cover for the book) and pour contaminated water through. After a few minutes, the bacteria is reduced by 99.9999%; the murky water becomes clean drinking water which is on par with tap water in the US.

After testing the paper in the lab using artificially contaminated water, Dankovich conducted field trials with the charities Water is Life and iDE. In trials conduced at 25 contaminated water sources in Haiti, Kenya, Ghana, South Africa and Bangladesh, the paper successfully removed nearly 100% of bacteria.

The filter has even proven to be successful in some of the harshest conditions“There was one site where there was literally raw sewage being dumped into the stream, which had very high levels of bacteria. But we were really impressed with the performance of the paper; it was able to kill the bacteria almost completely in those samples,” she told the BBC.
The book costs $10 to make; each piece of filter paper costs about 10 cents. According to her tests, one page can clean up to 100 liters of water. One book can purify roughly 10,000 liters of water, or four years worth of water for one person.
Currently, all the filter papers are made by hand in a local church kitchen by either Dankovich herself or a student. The next step in the project is scaling up production and field testing to distribute filter papers to thousands of people.
Though the book is not yet for sale, Dankovich has started a crowd funding campaign to raise $30,000 through September 18th to fund the necessary equipment, paper production, travel expenses, and personnel time to test the papers in two villages for about a month.
According to the World Health Organization and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 750 million people around the world do not have access to safe drinking water. Dankovich’s ultimate goal is to have these filter papers in the hands of these people.


The Documentary Donald Trump Suppressed For 25 Years [VIDEO]

Many political pundits in the United States and beyond have predicted that he is likely to get the nomination as the Presidential candidate on the ticket of the Grand Old Party (GOP) to battle it out in the 2016 US Presidential Elections, but this man is never out of controversy.
On immigration policies, Donald Trump has made it known if he enters the White House, he will never welcome migrants into the land with deep history of immigration. He publicly described Mexican migrants as rapists and drug cartels.
The latest controversy about Trump is that a video has been published on social media showing some hidden secrets of the billionaire. The film was commissioned in 1988 by the billionaire real estate developer, Leonard Stern as the first of a series on celebrity businessmen and finished in 1991.
Republican presidential candidate Trump gestures and declares "You're fired!" at a rally in Manchester
Back then, the only way for a film to be seen was on television or in the theater and Trump threatened to sue any broadcaster, distributor or media outlets that showed the film.
The title of the film is, “What Is The Deal?” It is said that Trump’s reason for suppressing the film was that it was not “pretty to his standard,” and due to his money and influence, coupled with low technological development then, he succeeded in suppressing the film. The film was said to have been screened twice in back-to-back, standing room only showings at the Bridgehampton Community House on July 3rd, 1991. That was the day that Trump announced his engagement to his second wife, Marla Maples.
Currently, a website called, has released the film with a note reading, “Now that Trump is running for president, it is time for the American People to meet the real Donald and learn how he does business. The old Trump and the new Trump? They’re the same Trump.”
d 2
In one scene in the film, Trump scolded former CNN megastar, Larry King for having bad breath. When Trump asked if anyone has ever told him that, a stunned King replied, “No.”
Other memorable moments include Tony Schwartz, co-author of Trump’s most famous book,Trump: The Art of the Deal, telling the camera the businessman would crumble without media attention, and an early Jonathan Alter speaking from a cluttered miasma complete with a prehistoric Apple computer… and that’s just in the first 10 minutes.
In addition, one of the interesting issues which were subjected to close scrutiny in the film is about the fortune of Trump. It became known as, “Does Trump really have as much money as he says he does?”
3 4
The producer, Libby Handros, told Mic in an interview about the film that the film was made during a time when Stern was trying to re-brand himself as a media magnate, and that he has been holding the film from the public for too long.
“I have been sitting on this film for 25 years. I figured someday it would be worthwhile. That totally freaked Donald out. There were three networks …you didn’t have to do much to get broadcasters scared,” Handros said.
You can watch the full 82 minutes video above. It will help you to make your own judgment about the person wanting to lead one of the world’s most powerful countries.


Watch How To Get A Bad Cop Fired, By Matthew Cooke [Video]

One of the hottest issues in the United States of America, is how police officers are using extreme force against citizens. This has resulted in many fatalities.
The Guardian has predicted in its Counted Project—which is documenting the story of each person who is killed in the US by a police officer—that the police will kill some 1,100 people by the end of this year, with black Americans being twice as likely to die. As of June 2015, the police have killed some 547 people in the US. This figure has since become long outdated.
However, in a quest to provide citizens with a better understanding of the police problem, the Oscar-nominated documentary film producer, Matthew Cooke has created a short video to show American citizens how a bad cop can be fired.
p 6
In the video, Cooke and police accountability activist Van Jones, tackled the highly contested issue from multiple angles. Written below is the transcribed version of how the two gentlemen discussed the issue. Their initials have been used in the conversation; MC: Matthew Cooke and VJ: Van Jones.
MC: My name is Matthew Cooke, and this is how to fire a cop and change everything. There’s always been a tension in law enforcement, or any field in that matter, between working for the public good and letting power run amuck. For a page-turning history, there’s one book that stands above the rest, and that’s Radley Balko’s RISE OF THE WARRIOR COP. If you download the audiobook, you’ll be helping support this series. So back in 1995, there’s a guy named Van Jones and he starts the Bay Area Police Watch, a lawyer-referral service for victims of police abuse. As soon as it was set up, their hotline started receiving 15 calls a day. Van said, “Just because somebody calls and says officer so-and-so did something to me, it doesn’t mean something actually happened. But once you get 6 phone calls about the same officer, you see a pattern, and you can try to take affirmative steps.
p 5
VJ: You think it’s hard to get a teacher fired, or your boss disciplined? Try to get a cop fired, that takes an awful lot.
MC: For two years, Van and Police Watch led a campaign against a dangerous killer named Officer Marc Andaya.
VJ: He’d actually killed two unarmed African American men. [The first man being] Jerry Stantal, who he shot.
MC: Jerry Stantal suffered from a mental illness. He was walking across the street.
VJ: And the police officer goes over to him, starts a fight, starts losing the fight, shoots the guy, reloads, shoots him again—including once in the head.
MC: A few years later, Officer Andaya kills another unarmed man.
p 1
VJ: Erin Williams, [the second victim], was beat and stomped and pepper sprayed to death. This guy [Officer Andaya] had 5 lawsuits against him, 27 formal complaints against him, but he was still on the police force.
MC: Oftentimes, when we put the truth in front of any part of our criminal justice system, it’s not enough. We have to bring the facts to the people, and that’s what Van Jones and his partners did.
p 4

VJ: We discovered that the police commission met every Wednesday night. So what we did was, we went and got hundreds of people from the community to stand in long lines and use their right to talk about what was going on. Everybody had two minutes or three minutes — we had people going out the back of the building sometimes. We had young people doing poetry and expressing themselves for the first time. Ultimately, 4 out of 5 of the police commissioners just quit. The mayor had to appoint a whole new commission.
VJ: That was an important moment for us to realize that these are just human beings, and they can be reasoned with or they can be pressured to do the right thing.
  1. Unearth lawsuits against cop
  2. Share findings with press
  3. Call the mayor
  4. Bring hundreds to public hearings
  5. NEVER give up!
MC: Since that time, Van Jones won a Human Rights Award. He stopped a super jail for juveniles, he wrote a best-selling book on revitalizing our economy with new energy, and served as a White House adviser. Most recently, he created cut50, a national bipartisan effort to safely reduce our prison population by 50% over the next 10 years — which is an appropriate response. The MINIMUM response we should take.
p 3
VJ: We have a massive human rights catastrophe. Some of these people are doing 30 years for nonviolent drug offenses. You get 25 years for shooting a cop! That’s a human rights disaster.
MC: And what Van Jones and the community did in San Francisco, we can do on a national level.
VJ: There is a bill right now in Congress called the Safe Justice Act.
MC: The Safe Justice Act bill, if it became a law, would roll back mandatory minimums; increase incentives for rehabilitation; and expand release programs for elderly prisoners, so harmless men and women won’t spend their dying days behind bars.
VJ: And so, if you believe in liberty and justice for all, if you’re a democrat or a republican, you’ve gotta stand together on this.
MC: If we get a million people to sign this thing, we’ll have one of the biggest citizen coalitions for reforming criminal justice in history.
VJ: To lead means to go first, but often, the leaders are afraid to go first. They need to see the people go first.
MC: Let’s change lives. Bring families back together. Reunite children, fathers, mothers and grandparents, with just a few keystrokes. Visit and download RISE OF THE WARRIOR COP to hear an unbelievable piece of the puzzle, revealing where we are today, and help support this series. You can use the link in the description.


Researchers Develop New Defense Shield That Shoots Down “Dangerous” Drones

The use of drones is increasing at a faster rate. In Europe and North America, it is easy to purchase a drone at a local shop without any proper security checks.
And due to them being available to the public, some unscrupulous people have taken advantage of this and are using them to commit all sorts of crimes. There have been cases in which mystery drones are equipped with cameras, flying over sensitive sites such as nuclear power stations. Some also are alleged to have been carrying drugs to prisoners. Earlier this year, a drone crashed at the White House; it was suspected that the drone was spying on the facility.
D 3
The recent fear has been that it is likely that drones can be used to carry explosives to commit mass murder by potential terrorists, but these concerns are likely to be history. Engineers from the English town of Luton have developed a new defense shield that seeks out and shoots down dangerous drones, and only dangerous drones.
D 1
According to The Telegraph, researchers at the Luton-based electronic warfare group, Selex, have invented a system which can locate, identify and then control remotely-piloted aircraft which could pose a threat to public safety or peoples’ privacy. It is called Falcon Shield, built with cameras, radar and advanced electronics which monitor signals being broadcast to and transmitted by drones to track them, figure out what type they are and what they might be equipped with.
If they are deemed to be a threat, Falcon Shield then uses classified technology which allows it to take control of or even crash the drones without causing any harm.
The entire system is said to be small enough to be vehicle-mounted. The cameras, radar and other sensors are understood to work at great ranges, giving more time for operators to react to potential threats before starting to combat them.
In the past, other companies have produced systems to defeat drones using electronic warfare, which attacks opponents by jamming or interfering with radio signals. However, these systems are said not to be the most effective as jamming and interfering in radio signals can block other vital transmissions such as emergency services’ communications or even mobile phone networks.

d 4
Selex said the Falcon Shield is unique because it only focuses on and destroys the detected harmful drone without interfering with other services.
Capability Manager at Selex, Stephen Williams said, “Our system is much more subtle. We can focus our transmissions to cause the minimum interference to others.”
Falcon Shield is expected to go on sale early next year. It will include vital infrastructure installations such as power stations, organizers of large public events and the military. It is estimated to cost around £200,000 and wealthy individuals, celebrities and anybody else who can afford it, can buy one to give them privacy on their homes or yachts.
d 5
Williams also said the new defense shield became necessary because drones are gradually posing danger to security zones and civilian lives.
“Drones costing just a few hundred pounds are capable of carrying explosives which could be used for attacks. They can take other payloads or even just a bag of flour which if they dropped it in crowded places such as football stadiums could cause a mass panic,” he said.
Selex is owned by Finmeccanica; the company first began work on electronic warfare, combating Zeppelin airships in the First World War. It currently has over 1,000 staff members at its Luton headquarters, in England.


The Sham We Call Bottled Water

That bottle of drinking water in your hand, the one you spent around an excess of 3 dollars for, is the biggest scam created by the corporate world. The con is so large that corporations have the majority of consumers fooled, ultimately raking in billions for multinationals each year.
PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Company and Nestle enjoy a combined $110 billion a year selling bottled water worldwide, on our behalf. Fifty percent of the U.S. population alone enjoys the refreshing and cool taste of healthy, clean water. Sales for bottled water account for around 30% of liquid refreshment sales, exceeding milk and beer.
But is the expensive water good for us? Is the bottled water better than the water we already get from our tap? The fear tactics used to con us into parting with our hard earned cash come via the marketing these companies have spent millions upon millions on. The conjuring of perceptions surrounding the terrible taste of tap water and the harmful chemicals it contains, are part of their ploy to offer a bottle of water to the population. Considering that the U.S., the U.K., and Australia have some of the cleanest water supplies in the world, their fear mongering is obviously working.
The “healthy alternative” is also unregulated by the standards we hold in high regard. The water provided from a public utility must be monitored under the Environmental Protection Agency standards, yet bottled water is exempt from these. What’s even more alarming is that theimpurities and high levels of arsenic and fluoride found in bottled water are posing health concerns. “FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and state bottled water programs are seriously underfunded. FDA says bottled water is a low priority; the agency estimates it has the equivalent of fewer than one staff person dedicated to developing and issuing bottled water rules…

Marketing Ploy, Strategy, Fear, and Misdirected Suspicions.
Water fountains used to be everywhere, but they have slowly disappeared as public water is increasingly pushed out in favor of private control and profit,” states Peter Gleick, in his book Bottled & Sold. “[They] have become an anachronism, or even a liability, a symbol of the days when homes didn’t have taps and bottled water wasn’t available from every convenience store and corner concession stand. In our health-conscious society, we are afraid that public fountains, and our tap water in general, are sources of contamination and contagion.
Now public water is no longer considered a safe option, yet bottled water is.
Bottled water such as Fiji has been found to hold 6.31 micrograms of arsenic per bottle. While under the EPA and Food and Drug Administration standards, 10 micrograms per liter is considered exceedingly high. In addition, according to Food and Water Watch, many of the other popular brands of bottled water on the market, are nothing more than filtered tap water.


The One Video That Can Change The World

What would happen if this video would be shown on TV, instead of ads? Watch it yourself and share it, if you think it can really make an impact:

Video credit: Spencer Cathcart

You want to discuss a certain topic with likeminded people or you want to organize a local protest or you have an idea for a project that can help people in need in your local community or all around the world? Join our


Racism In Technology: The Automatic Soap Dispenser That Does Not Recognize Black Skin [VIDEO]

It is never in our interest to be sounding what our critics have described as a “racism bell,” but sometimes, when incidents occur frequently and particularly if it is specific to a group of people, then it is only appropriate that we talk about it so that we can all find a reasonable solution to solve the problem.
As we are all aware, nobody can live a meaningful live without technology in this modern era. Technology has become part of our lives, but there is something happening in technology that needs serious attention. We must all admit that there is white hegemony in both science and technology but that is not an excuse for whites to have more privileges than other racial groups in the field.
In the city of Atlanta, Georgia, an automatic soap dispenser at the Marriott hotel does not recognize black skin. The issue was brought to public attention by an African-American guest of the DragonCon sci-fi and fantasy convention, T.J. Fitzpatrick who visited the washroom and wanted to use the dispenser to clean his hands.
The dispenser was manufactured by a British company called Technical Concepts. According to experts of the device, it uses near-infrared technology, which sends out invisible light from an infrared LED bulb for hands to reflect the light back to a sensor, and the reason the soap doesn’t just foam out all day is because the hand acts to, more or less, bounce back the light and close the circuit.
So when Fitzpatrick stretches his hands for the soap, it wouldn’t sense his hands… but when his white friend, Larry tried after him, the device sensed him.
“I wasn’t offended, but it was so intriguing, like why is it not recognizing me? I tried all the soap dispensers in that restroom, there were maybe 10, and none of them worked. Any time I went into that restroom, I had to have my friend get the soap for me,” Fitzpatrick told Mic after filming the incident.
Fitzpatrick said when he first posted the video on social media, many whites made disparaging comments. Some whites made comments such as, “We all know black people don’t actually wash their hands anyways,” and, “Soap dispensers are for humans, not monkeys or subhumans.”
As usual, racism deniers have tried all sorts of explanations to create a situation where the fundamental issues will be ignored, but in a situation where about 10 soap dispensers will never work for a specific group of people, that is never a mere fault or mistake. It is a systemic problem that needed to be addressed as soon as possible. Even in all the arguments and the counter-arguments, neither the Marriott Hotel nor Technical Concepts have responded to the problem. They have blatantly turned down many interview requests by many media outlets.

This is not the first time technology has caused a controversy as far as racism is concerned, however. In 2010, Gadgetwise reported that the Xbox Kinect did not recognize the faces of dark-skinned gamers. The company later attributed this to a tricky light sensor.
A black man and white woman on YouTube also displayed Hewlett-Packard’s uneven facial recognition software. The camera tracked the woman’s movements but didn’t follow those of the man.
Earlier this year, Google Photos’ auto-labeling system ridiculously identified two black friends who took a photo together as “gorillas.”  The issue went viral on social media. Google kept silent on the issue until people demanded the company to step up its technology to be more sensitive about the words it uses in photos of people.
Also, Flickr’s auto-tagging feature mislabeled an African-American man as “animal” and “ape”before the Flickr team went in to remove the tags, claiming the algorithm was still learning how to recognize images.
Maybe in all these unpleasant situations, we will have to revisit the Guyanese political activist,Walter Rodney who wrote in his book, “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa,” that the black man needs to make his own inventions before he can have equality.