Facebook and Twitter don't believe Kim Dotcom is real … Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom is already in a fight with the FBI, but now he's going up against some other entities that know about everyone in the US. Dotcom says he can't convince Facebook and Twitter that he's the real deal. The 38-year-old self-proclaimed "Freedom Fighter" and founder of the now defunct Megaupload.com file storage site says he's being misrepresented by a number of fake accounts on social media sites, but his pleas to Facebook and Twitter to have his personal profiles verified are falling on deaf ears. – RT
Dominant Social Theme: In America, the playing field is level and anybody can be a winner.
Free-Market Analysis: This article posted over at the RT website has a lot of truth to it, much that is unpalatable to those who still believe in the egalitarianism of the US marketplace.
It used to be that those who came to America were eager to discover a country where anyone could build a better, freer life with hard work and a modicum of intelligence.
But that was then and this is now. What is souring the American dream is not taxes and is not even regulation. It is the determined and intentional intrusion into the marketplace by US Intel agencies.
If one lifts the veil and is willing to confront the truth, it soon becomes apparent that the war on terror has questions surrounding it. In fact, much of the war on terror is merely a justification for domestic subversion and repression.
This makes sense if one believes in an over-arching power elite that is trying to run the world. Historically, the West's modern Intel agencies have worked for and reported to dynastic families in London's City, among other places.
In other words, intelligence agencies do not support the countries they are in but act as a kind of occupying force perpetuating the aims of global governance rather than supporting the legitimate goals of civil society.
This paradigm helps explain the problems that Kim Dotcom of Megaupload is having. In a normal society, Dotcom's troubles would probably not be so severe. But the modern era is creating quite abnormal societies.
These societies are increasingly intolerant and authoritarian by design. Via war, economic depression and civic depredations, the powers-that-be apparently intend to break down national societies in order to create a global one.
For this reason, strategies like copyright are being strictly enforced. Megaupload, which enabled copyright violations, was deliberately targeted to ensure that copyright "piracy" was slowed.
Of course, when the issue of copyright piracy is examined unemotionally, it doesn't make sense on a number of levels. Most prominently, the logic of government enforcement does not add up.
Good laws do not need much government enforcement, but bad laws, like copyright in the 21st century need a good deal of tending to.
It is not only copyright that is being enforced relentlessly by elites that want to slow the free exchange of information that the Internet makes possible. There is a whole slew of intrusive laws that are being enforced.
And this brings up other disturbing issues, chief among them the increasing involvement of law enforcement in the marketplace. It is Intel gatekeepers these days that make decisions about the viability of companies both public and private.
These same shadowy agencies demand certain business practices of corporations and this extends to a company's public face and how the company may relate to those who are perceived as "enemies of the state."
Kim Dotcom is now experiencing this new American phenomenon that sees private companies working the will of government and those who stand behind government. This article alludes specifically to this phenomenon, as follows:
In an exchange with the website TorrentFreak, Dotcom shows that his efforts to have his official @KimDotcom Twitter account verified by the microblogging site have been by and large ignored by the Silicon Valley company.
"Here is the reply I received [from Twitter] after I sent them a copy of my Hong Kong international driving license with photo and government stamp," Dotcom tells TorrentFreak, which he accompanies with a screenshot of an email addressed from the Twitter Trust and Safety division. In their response, a Twitter representative writes that they cannot confirm Dotcom's identify, despite his inclusion of internationally recognized documentation.
"@Twitter declines to certify me. I faxed an ID. They think it's fake. A search for my name shows imposter as the first result. Might quit!" he adds in a post of his own to his Twitter stream.
Although Dotcom, born in Germany as Kim Schmitz, has over 113,000 Twitter followers, a search for his screen name on the site returns several other fake accounts first, including those for @KimDotcomTruths, @KimDotComFree and @KimDotComPR.
In last ditch attempt to have his screen name authenticated, he tells Twitter in a follow-up Tweet, "Hey … it's really me. Please certify my account and disable the imposter. "In his last tweet, Dotcom offers his plea along with an Instagram photo of himself mugging for the camera next to a homemade sign that reads "Twitter. It's really me."
His problems don't stop there either, though. Dotcom tells Torrentfreak that Facebook has rejected his official identifications as well and insist that "Dotcom" isn't his legal name — Wired reports that he successfully filed the paperwork to go sans Schmitz and adopt this new alias all the way back in 2005, though. Nevertheless, Facebook says they won't assist him with opening an account under his legal identity, because "Facebook requires all users to use their accurate first and last names."
We can see from the above narrative that false 'Net presences are being created for Dotcom and that they are being facilitated by American companies. Not only has Dotcom lost his company and fortune before trial, his efforts at halting what would seem to be malicious propaganda are failing as well due to the cooperation of some of the US's largest corporations with Fedgov "dirty tricks."
This is extremely disheartening for those who believe in freedom and wish that private corporations would not serve as Intel proxies in the 21st century. The implication – reality, really – is that if private corporations serve as Intel allies, then behind the scenes these same corporations are receiving all sorts of advantages that are neither referred to nor explained to the public.
This is the advent then of a new and more vicious kind of mercantilism on a large scale. When congress or the US president arranges favors for a company, the corruption is evident but less worrisome because government is generally a clumsy entity.
But when the Intel facilities of the power elite are controlling corporate responses to perceived enemies of elite one-world ambitions, the stakes are raised considerably. This is what is happening now.
Certainly Dotcom is no angel. But what his saga is revealing increasingly is the shadowy nexus of cooperation between America's top technological facilities and largest corporations.
We've written about this, of course, from the perspective of Google, Facebook and Microsoft. These companies, especially the first two, seem to be virtual outgrowths of the US Intel industry. This is worrisome because these corporations have been given evident and obvious resources and attention that other companies do not receive.
Facebook's ludicrous IPO, Google's early funding, Microsoft's near-term Fedgov support are all evidences of a hand-in-glove relationship that ought to disturb anyone interested in retaining even vestiges of free-market capitalism.
When success is predicated on facilitating government operations against individuals and groups that are basically opposing global governance, then the marketplace itself is in jeopardy. Over time, companies may be valued for their cooperativeness rather than the superiority of their goods and services. It would seem this is already happening:
Although Twitter has not taken a stance for or against Dotcom's legal battle, they have been relatively open about how they've conducted their own relationship with the federal government. Last month Twitter revealed that they handed over information on registered users to the US government around 75 percent of the time the feds requested intel on accounts last year alone. A Reuters report in 2011 concluded that Facebook had been repeatedly served in years' past with warrants for the personal messages and contacts of its registered users as well.
This sort of Intel cooperation is a most worrisome sign of how deeply the US Fedgov is burrowing into the private marketplace. Kim Dotcom is right to complain. But his situation is only representative of a much deeper problem.