March 31, 2009


On March 28, reported a "WORLD EXCLUSIVE" story of a video being shopped around of a woman alleged to be Ashley Biden, Vice-President Biden's daughter, doing cocaine. They wrote, " In addition to, representatives for the New York Post, a large British newspaper and the National Enquirer have all viewed the tape." The same article says, "The tape was made without her knowledge." March 30, wrote, "The explosive video . . . was shot with a hidden camera, has learned," implying that they received additional information without naming a source. "Our viewing of portions of the tape is consistent with that. The low, tilted angle of the camera and the actions of the woman both indicate the camera was not in plain view." They are also reporting that the lawyer has dropped the client because "he did not want to be involved due to circumstances surrounding the publicity of the matter." Today, March 31, reports they have "learned exclusively" that the video was preplanned as a setup. "It is clear from the tape that the woman said to be Ashley Biden does not know she is being filmed," they say. The New York Post however has been reporting that, "The camera follows the woman from a few feet away, focusing on her as she moves around the room. It appears not to be concealed." Keep in mind that a camera that tracks a moving person requires a human operator to control it. The New York Post also says the seller's lawyers at the time claimed that she "acknowledges the camera in a way that makes it clear she knows she's being recorded, . . . waving at it during a part of the video not shown to The Post." Why is there a discrepancy between the two reports despite both media outlets having viewed the same footage? Is it "clear from the tape that the woman . . . does not know she is being filmed," as says or does it appear "not to be concealed?" as The New York Times says. If saw the video originally, how and where did they they "learn" two days later that the camera was hidden? Was it from Biden's lawyer or someone much more powerful? Did this person also persuade the video seller's lawyer to quit as well?
UPDATE (22:53 31 March 2009): This story just hit digg! UPDATE (15:04 01 April 2009): Neither Ashley Biden nor her father have made any comments about the tape, which gives the impression that it is authentic. The story has been out of the news for a day now.

March 27, 2009


They don't provide URLs or links to what they're writing about whenever they are writing about something posted on the internet.


Sometime within the past 30 minutes, Twitter has "suspended" the account residing at The page has been increasing in poularity with over 89,000 subscribers and has recently been mentioned on many websites. You can read more about the account and the author here. Here is a screenshot of the page shortly before deletion. UPDATE (17:38 22 April 2009): The account appears to have been reinstated at with a different avatar and now has a link to

March 11, 2009


SYMANTEC: "There is no conspiracy theory. We were under attack by a robot."

After being unable to silence their customers on their forums inquiring about Symantec's mysterious PIFTS.exe file Monday night, Symantec has moved on to their Plan B: lie and obfuscate. Releasing a statement Tuesday on their forums, Symantec explained that their customers were incorrect in thinking there was a mass effort to delete all their posts inquiring about PIFTS.exe, because it was in fact a mass effort by Symantec to delete posts by spammers with "unclear" intentions inquiring about PIFTS.exe.

"There is no conspiracy theory. There's nothing we are hiding at all," says Jeff Kyle, group product manager for Symantec consumer products. "Within the first hour there were like 600 posts to that thread. Obviously it was a bot creating this."

Currently, representatives of the company are repeating that the first post referencing PIFTS.exe was made by a spambot, despite being unable to explain how and why a spambot can be the first to be aware of and mention this obscure file on the forums at the exact same time Symantec's staff realized their mistake and were pulling the file from distribution. Witnesses who saw the initial deleted post are having the hardest time accepting Symantec staff's explanation.
(Photo of the culprit courtesy Symantec's Public Relations Dept.)


UPDATE (13:46 11 March 2009): is suppressing the sale of these shirts!

March 10, 2009

DIGG BURIES PIFTS.EXE STORY, a popular social news website in which news stories are voted up or down by users and are placed on the front page according to popularity is keeping the top-voted story regarding Symantec's suppression of inquiries about PIFTS.exe hidden. Digg user Janjko says:
This story is flagged, just when it hit 200 Diggs it disappeared from the upcoming stories with most diggs, Digg doesn't want it on it's front page.
Currently the story has 269 "diggs" (or votes up) and counting.

UPDATE (13:20 10 March 2009): The original story with over 300 diggs is no longer showing up in a search for "PIFTS.exe" on anymore. Lower rated stories still show up but are being systematically removed as this is being written. Screenshots of
Original story
Search for "PIFTS.exe
UPDATE (13:20 10 March 2009): The story about the Digg cover up of the PIFTS.exe cover up has reached Digg itself:

UPDATE (14:55 10 March 2009): If PIFTS.exe is related to the FBI's Magic Lantern software, it would not be surprising if Digg was pressured to squelch this.

UPDATE (03:59 31 March 2009): The story in question was the fifth most popular story on Digg that day.


There is virtually no information on the internet yet regarding a mysterious program called PIFTS.exe, aside from what's posted on this blog. Symantec, makers of the bloated Norton Anti-Virus software, are deleting any mention of PIFTS.exe from their community forums. The topic is being discussed at

UPDATE (02:36 10 March 2009): A google search for PIFTS.exe turns up a link to, a nefarious looking website that I suggest you not go to unless you know what you are doing. The site contains javascript which may be malicious. Here's a screen capture from one of the pages on that site.

UPDATE (03:56 10 March 2009): In our comments, thepipermethod says the website is just mirroring key words from google trends, which at this time includes the terms "PIFTS" and "EXE" and that the site has no other relation to PIFTS.exe. At, one person reports talking with various representatives of Symantec for two hours without receiving any answer as to why inquiries posted on the Symantec forums were being deleted. The caller was told that PIFTS.exe is part of Symantec's update installation process, was denied any further information regarding the purpose of the file and was repeatedly transferred to a new representative when asking why inquiries about PIFTS.exe were being deleted from Symantec's forums.

UPDATE (10:42 10 March 2009): There is speculation that this is part of the FBI's secret Magic Lantern software. From Wikipedia:
Symantec, the makers of Norton AntiVirus and related products, is reportedly working with the FBI on ways to preclude their products from detecting Magic Lantern. Eric Chien, a top researcher at Symantec, emphasized the ability to detect "modified versions."
Some people are reporting that the Norton forums have been taken offline. There is no information posted anywhere yet regarding what this program does.

UPDATE (11:10 10 March 2009): It's being said that PIFTS.exe contacts an IP address in Africa.

UPDATE (11:50 10 March 2009): This site has links to copies of the PIFTS.exe file which you can download. I can not vouch whether the files are authentic or not. There is contradictory information about what actual IP address the program is contacting.

UPDATE (12:02 10 March 2009): Apparently is also covering this story up. 242 diggs and it's not on the front page. There's a good discussion of this on, a web 2.0 social networking site for techies. The Washington Post and The Register are covering this as well.

UPDATE (14:45 10 March 2009): More details on Digg's cover up of the PIFTS.exe story here. The coordinated opposition to this story tells us that we are on the right track.

UPDATE (16:22 10 March 2009): Symantec has finally issued a statement on PIFTS.exe. Symantec claims that it was just a patch to their software that was accidentally released "unsigned." The company also alleges that inquiries regarding the matter on their forums were deleted because many people made posts about it:
One individual created a new user account and posted about the name of the patch executable, PIFTS.exe. Within minutes, several dozen user accounts were created commenting on the initial thread, and/or creating new threads on the topic. Over the next few hours, over 200 user accounts were created. Within the first hour there were 600 new posts on this subject alone. While the intent of the spammer(s) remains unclear, there were no malicious links and it simply resulted in a widespread communications challenge for Symantec.
It is interesting that there is no accounting for why the first post was deleted along with every single other mention of the issue. It is also worth noting that Symantec refers those customers of theirs who promptly wanted to know what this "unsigned" piece of software was as "spammer(s)" whose intent "remains unclear."

March 9, 2009


A source in Mexico tells me the following regarding martial law in Mexico:

(7:11:27 pm) [Name Withheld]: I asked around and nobody knows anything.

(7:12:15 pm) [Name Withheld]: In the morning, there was a brief notice about it, and father mentioned something about USA annexing Mexico as another state, but I didn't pay attention

(7:32:27 pm) [Name Withheld]: If I learn anything new I'll tell you.

Note that the MSM (mainstream media) is not reporting on this. Another scoop for us!

(When reposting this on blogs or forums, please provide a link back to this page. Some of our previous reporting is unfortunately going uncredited. Thanks!)

March 8, 2009


After we broke the story earlier last night, veteran reporter Geraldo Rivera announced that Mexico was under martial law. A headline on the screen read "BREAKING NEWS: MEXICAN PRES DECLARES MARTIAL LAW - CIVILIANS AND AMERICANS PUT ON LOCKDOWN." Part way through the report, the graphic was taken down and Rivera, under pressure from either Mexican or American authorities, was forced to take back the statement and announce that martial law had technically not been imposed. It was clear from his words though that it was in effect martial law and that there was an effort underway to downplay the events currently proceeding in Mexico. On the broadcast, Mexican officials projected a calm and confident image despite the escalation of guerilla warfare behind them. Check out the previous blog entry for more background information. UPDATE (19:37 8 March 2009): A clip of Geraldo's broadcast described above has surfaced online. If you have software allowing you to download youtube videos, I urge you to download this one. I have a feeling this one will be taken down shortly.
That clip was the last mention of the president of Mexico declaring martial law. Later broadcasts last night were clearly toned down. Thanks to reader Janet for providing some of the information cited in this post.

March 7, 2009


I just heard from a reliable source in Mexico that martial law has been imposed. The country is under complete military lockdown. Mexican citizens and American tourists have had their movement tightly restricted and are being told to stay off the streets under penalty of arrest. Mexican officials are denying that the country is about to collapse. UPDATE (03:28 08 March 2009): These guys just picked up on the story: Here's a collection of some other relevant links from the comments: Geraldo was silenced, but there is more information out there. If you happen to be in Mexico or have more information about this, please post anything you can tell us. I have enabled posting anonymously if you are an official with any government or directly or indirectly involved with this action. UPDATE (20:11 08 March 2009): Video of Geraldo's suppressed report corroborating this story: