
Looks like the Jews are at again, driven by necessity, New Facial Recognition Technology Can Identify Faces Despite the Masks:
When a protester was caught on video in January at a New York rally against Israel, only her eyes were visible between a mask and headscarf. But days later, photos of her entire face, along with her name and employer, were circulated online.
“Months of them hiding their faces went down the drain!” a fledgling technology company boasted in a social media post, claiming its facial-recognition tool had identified the woman despite the coverings. She was anything but a lone target. The same software was also used to review images taken during months of pro-Palestinian marches at U.S. colleges
Maybe the US won’t need the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act to screw Antifas’ masking act after all. They’ll be the next hardest hit after pieces of shit like this:
Yeah, they’re not “anti-war” or “pro-peace”, they’re anti-USA #1, anti-capitalist#2, anti-democratic #3, anti-Jew#4 and defenders of Oppressed Peoples somewhere way down the list to aid them in those higher objectives – which is destroying Western capitalist democracies. Think that’s OTT? Didn’t watch that video? Well here’s some of the transcript from the various talking heads of that Zoom call:
If Palestine is liberated, this is a nail to dismantle the United States of America….When a red triangle goes above an Israeli soldier’s head, and a pig gets iced, we know that is a victory…. It is our job to destroy imperialism, destroy the United States, and destroy capitalism…We will do it by organizing that actively undermines and destabilizes the legitimacy and the power of State and the power and legitimacy of capitalism.
Continuing on the Jewish angle…
On a related note it seems that CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) has filed a defamation lawsuit against one of their former leaders, Lori Saroya after she accused the group of “taking money from foreign governments and having ties to terror groups” as well as being routinely “dishonest” about its use of funds. CAIR frequently sues people to shut them up but they appear to have screwed up in this case:
U.S. magistrate judge David Schultz agreed with the defendant in the case. Judge Schultz ruled the organization must “open its books” to determine the validity of Saroya’s allegations…Saroya’s attorney, Jeffrey Robbins, aptly described the judge’s ruling as “the mother of all legal boomerangs.” Now CAIR’s top leaders (mostly Muslim men) had a great deal more to concern themselves with than the typical pile-up of complaints from former employees alleging the group fostered a “culture of misogyny” and failed to address rampant “sexual harassment.” Such claims were also among Saroya’s numerous allegations.
Another CAIR tactic was to pretend that they have nothing to do with people like Noora Shalash, who was caught on camera screaming “fuck the Jews”, as well as suggesting that ISIS should “kill them all” The incident made global headlines and Shalash was a former leader in CAIR – who quickly said that she’d had nothing to do with them for five years.
Yeah, I’ll bet she only started to think like that when she left CAIR.
Finally over in Britain there has been one of those Left-on-Left intersectional fights, started with an X-comment about Islam from one Dennis Noel Kavanagh, director of the Gay Man’s Network (and a lawyer).
That’s the Islamist Independent MP Adnan Hussain, who then took it further by crying “racism”, which promptly saw him getting kurb-stomped by people about the difference between race and religion. I’m sure he well knows that of course; this is just another tactic like the ones CAIR uses in the US to try and shut down criticism of Islam. Of the many responses, this one from a Jonathon Wong (probably a White Supremacist) was the most brutal.

I’d rate this as the runner-up.
I’m curious as to where this will go.
It’s easy to say “we can identify these people” but I would assume that for there to be any consequences then the technology will need to be proven in court. They can’t just say “our tech shows that this person wearing a mask is Joe Bloggs” and expect everyone to just believe it.
Looks like it’s being done by private groups and while it might not be submissible evidence at a trial it should certainly put these assholes on notice that they can’t just mask up and get away with shit at a “protest”.
If you’re a citizen, protest, but do it openly. Masking up is simply an acknowledgement that you want to commit a crime and get away with it – which fits with the whole “smash-the-system” approach of such people.
Yeah I’d tend to agree. Have the courage to stand by your convictions.
Having said that I’m now sure – in the wake of the C-19 lockdowns and other authoritarian shite – that Western governments will use this tech on ordinary people to pull a CCP Social Credit-style system in their countries.
My bet would be Britain first out of the gate, given the number of cameras they already have watching the streets.
Yes that’s always the issue with things like this. It seems great when it’s used “against the bad guys” – until the day comes that the other side gets into power and decides that you are now in that bad team.
So that’s a second hand report of an unknown unnamed group with no evidence to back up their claims.
Considering that developing a technology to unmask masked people would be very difficult, but CLAIMING that you had done so is very easy, which state of affairs’ is more likely to be true?
What if their claims to have unmasked person X are false? They can do damage to their political opponents without any need to prove it in court.
You should take it up with Associated Press. I agree that they’re suckers for clickbait, like most of the MSM nowadays, and it may be that they published this story and the claims because they’re pro-Palestinian and very anti-Trump. And the groups being targeted believe it as well after the identity of the woman (and others) were revealed. Perhaps they need alternative explanations of how that happened?
Having said that I work with AI tools and teasing out patterns is the name of the game. That an AI image tool trained up on millions of faces could do so via the patterns around a small part of the face, including the eyes – in fact especially the eyes if it got pictures in 4K up close of the eyeball itself – doesn’t surprise me at all, hence I find it credible.
We’ll see if the claims stand up over time. I actually hope they don’t because, as I said to Nick Roberts above, I can see this being perverted as a State tool of control.
I think you need to develop much a stronger sense for disinformation Tom.
If there really is a genuine recording of an activist talking about ” a pig gets iced” then I’d like to hear it and get the source from where it comes from, because he’s using 50 year old street slang. The point about street slang is that it always changes, that’s how it works and how it can be dated.
Perhaps they’re down to get jiggy with the shawties, maybe they’re hep cats who dig the soul brothers or maybe they’re just punk-ass snitches who dropped a dime on the homies, who can tell?
I’m also very interested to meet those protesters shown in the last picture, those ones who want to behead all those who insult Slam or even massacre those who insult Slam. What is their faction? are they Slamic, Slammers, or maybe even Slammer Jammer Rammers?
More information is required.
Icing pigs isn’t archaic language.
Fine, show me a contemporary example of the phrase in use where the context denotes the murder of a law enforcement officer, and not bacon or pork stored at low temperatures.
I’m not doing search engine work for you. This is 2025, not Harlem in 1948, we have the internet and people use all sorts of phrases interchangeably. There’s no “cool” and “uncool” any more.
A genuine recording? Was it because he was wearing a mask? Are you suggesting that a faked voice was inserted in the midst of other recordings of people saying equally extremist things? You’re always wanting the source but how much sourcier can it get? Unless you’re suggesting AI work on their mouths in the video?
Perhaps the X commentator photoshopped out the “I” because of recent police visits to people posting stuff about Islam and anti-semitism online, like this:
There are other photos of the same protest, with some of the same protestors.
Set 1
Set 2
The fact that he was wearing a mask plus the fact that he was using a pseudonym plus the fact no context is given plus the fact that it’s an edited video without the original linked.
You are posting a doctored photo as if it was authentic, that’s bad. The reason why we don’t trust liars and fakers is that they tell lies and make fakes. How can we trust a person who lies about A B and C to tell us the truth about X Y and Z?
All of these things are classic techniques of disinformation. Their use is not acceptable.