1

Former National Security Director Warns The New Yorker – ‘The Terrifying Potential of the 5G Network’

B.N. Frank | Waking Times

The New Yorker published an article yesterday – “The Terrifying Potential of the 5G Network.”

In 2018, Robert Spalding’s job as senior director for strategic planning at the National Security Council included studying ways to insure that 5G can be made secure from cyberattacks.  He seemed more than qualified for the job.  In his interview with The New Yorker, he provides intricate details of why we should all be freaking out over 5G regardless of who installs it. His warnings also go beyond cybersecurity risks:

“What is existential to democracy is allowing totalitarian regimes—or any government—full knowledge of everything you do at all times,” he said. “Because the tendency is always going to be to want to regulate how you think, how you act, what you do.”

More from Spalding:

“I wasn’t looking at this from a policy perspective,” he said. “It was about the physics, about what was possible.”

 

Even before the introduction of 5G networks, hackers have breached the control center of a municipal dam system, stopped an Internet-connected car as it travelled down an interstate, and sabotaged home appliances. Ransomware, malware, crypto-jacking, identity theft, and data breaches have become so common that more Americans are afraid of cybercrime than they are of becoming a victim of violent crime.

Uh-huh. This has been reported many times before by many sources.

Adding more devices to the online universe is destined to create more opportunities for disruption. “5G is not just for refrigerators,” Spalding said. “It’s farm implements, it’s airplanes, it’s all kinds of different things that can actually kill people or that allow someone to reach into the network and direct those things to do what they want them to do. It’s a completely different threat that we’ve never experienced before.”

So the “Race for 5G” is for “all kinds of different things that can actually kill people” and Spalding isn’t the only one to say so.  Fabulous.

“It was meant to be a nationwide network,” Spalding told me, not a nationalized one. “They could build this network and then sell bandwidth to their retail customers. That was one idea, but it was never that the government would own the network. It was always about, How do we get industry to actually secure the system?”

Many other articles and at least one book have been written about how the American government and telecom regulators seem to have no right to ask the Telecom Industry to do much of anything.  Telecom expert, Bruce Kushnick has written A LOT about that.

Even before Spalding began working on his report, the telecom companies were rolling out what they were calling their new 5G services in test markets around the country.

Activist Post has reported about 5G “rollouts” before.  Many Americans have been fighting this in their communities.  (See also 12, 3, 4, 5678910)

Last summer, New Yorkers reported becoming sick after 5G was installed.  Their pets were sick too.  Some were putting their homes up for sale.  Last year, the first 5G court case was won in England but not after it had been installed, people became sick, and some women delivered stillborn babies.

As the Clemson University professor Thomas Hazlett told me, “This is just the transitional part. You have various experiments, you do trial in the market, and various deployments take place that lay a pathway to something that will be truly distinguishable from the old systems.”

It sounds like Professor Hazlett is saying that telecom companies are allowed to perform various experiments on the American people – regardless of the risks.  Unfortunately, experiments on the American people aren’t new and the apologies always seem to be too little, too late.

In the meantime, the carriers jockeyed for position. A lawsuit brought by Sprint and T-Mobile, which was settled on Monday, claimed that A.T. & T.’s 5GE service, where “E” stands for “evolution,” was just 4G by another name.

Just part of the experiment…

Spalding describes more greed-driven behavior by the Telecom Industry and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman Ajit Pai, which seems to have led to Spalding being canned from his job.  The “Race for 5G” then continued without his interference.

Huawei, a Chinese manufacturer, is currently the global leader in 5G technology and has been accused by many sources of being a conduit to Chinese intelligence.

In an op-ed in the Washington Post, the Republican senators Tom Cotton, of Arkansas, and John Cornyn, of Texas, characterized the company, which is funded with subsidies from the Chinese government, as a Trojan horse that could “give China effective control of the digital commanding heights.”

The Times of London reported that the C.I.A. has evidence that Huawei has taken money from the P.L.A., as well as from branches of the Chinese intelligence service. Australia, Japan, and New Zealand have joined with the United States in banning Huawei hardware from their networks. So far, though, the Trump Administration’s campaign to shut out Huawei is finding limited traction.

Freaking out yet?

Huawei equipment is cheaper than its Western rivals and, in the estimation of researchers at the Defensive Innovation Board (DIB), which advises the Secretary of Defense on new technologies, in many cases, it is superior.

I feel sick.  Regardless, banning Huawei won’t secure the networks anyway.

Even in the absence of Huawei equipment, systems still may rely on software developed in China, and software can be reprogrammed remotely by malicious actors. And every device connected to the fifth-generation Internet will likely remain susceptible to hacking.

READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE……




Government “Whistleblower” Sheds Light on What’s Really Going On!

Insider Emery Smith shares some of what he knows about breakthrough technologies, other earth-like planets and more!

Emery Smith has done much in his less than 5 decades on this planet, including, according to him, studied life on (and maybe even visited) other planetary systems.

He’s discussed his interaction with extraterrestrial life, the intricate medical procedures on alien beings he was involved with, and his ongoing efforts to find new breakthroughs in free energy technology.

Today, Emery discusses what brought him to this point, his early influences, and what drives his path. But he also sheds light on his thoughts about portal technology, both manmade and “organic,” along with the reality of Ley Lines. Do they exist only on this planet or beyond? Are there other “duplicate” inhabited worlds like ours?

What exactly does he know?

Let’s hear what Emery Smith has to share!

Alexis Brooks is the #1 best-selling author of Conscious Musings, writer/editor for CLN and host of the award-winning show Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks. Alexis brings over 30 years of broadcast media experience to CLN. For over half of that time, Alexis has dedicated her work to the medium of alternative journalism, having researched and reported on the many aspects and angles of metaphysics, spirituality and new thought concepts.

This article and its accompanying media was originally created and produced by Higher Journeys in association Conscious Life News and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alexis Brooks, HigherJourneys.com and ConsciousLifeNews.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this Copyright/Creative Commons statement.




With Facial Recognition Technology at ‘Crossroads,’ 90 Groups Urge Amazon, Google, and Microsoft Not to Collude With Big Brother

Amazon is under fire from dozens of civil and human rights groups for pitching its Rekognition software to law enforcement agencies that may abuse it. Werner Vogels is the company’s chief technology officer and vice president. (Photo: Amazon)

By Jessica Corbett | Common Dreams

In a trio of letters sent Tuesday to executives at AmazonGoogle, and Microsoft, a coalition of 90 civil and human rights groups called on the companies to refuse to sell facial recognition technology to governments across the globe, cautioning that such systems can endanger people and undermine public trust.

“We are at a crossroads with face surveillance, and the choices made by these companies now will determine whether the next generation will have to fear being tracked by the government for attending a protest, going to their place of worship, or simply living their lives,” warned Nicole Ozer, the technology and civil liberties director for the ACLU of California.

“History has clearly taught us,” Ozer noted, “that the government will exploit technologies like face surveillance to target communities of color, religious minorities, and immigrants.”

The letters come in response to recent public statements by the tech giants’ leaders regarding concerns about government misuse of such products, and reporting that the FBI is piloting Amazon’s Rekognition technology—which the company has also pitched to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), one of the agencies charged with implementing the Trump administration’s cruel immigration policies.

Despite CEO Jeff Bezos’ admission that Amazon’s technology could be misused, the company has appeared more willing to profit from the U.S. government’s effort to achieve Big Brother status while Google and Microsoft have been more cautious.

Last month, Google indicated that it will continue to develop artificial intelligence (AI) programs but will not sell facial recognition technology to governments—at least, until the potential dangers are mitigated to a degree that satisfies the company’s decision-makers.

Microsoft President Brad Smith, meanwhile, wrote a blog post in December charging that facial recognition technology “brings important and even exciting societal benefits but also the potential for abuse.” Smith called for “governments in 2019 to start adopting laws to regulate this technology” but also pledged to be proactive in creating safeguards to address concerns about abuse.

The coalition welcomed the recent moves by Google and Microsoft while also highlighting their inadequacy, and urged both to “fully commit to not releasing a facial recognition product that could be used by governments.”

The letter to Amazon was harsher, declaring that “by continuing to sell your face surveillance product to government entities, Amazon is gravely threatening the safety of community members, ignoring the protests of its own workers, and undermining public trust in its business.”

This is not the first time critics of facial recognition technology have pressured these companies to address the serious threats posed by their AI products.

As Shankar Narayan of the ACLU of Washington pointed out in a statement, “In 2018, groups representing Muslims, African-Americans, immigrants, incarcerated Japanese-Americans, and more met with Amazon and Microsoft to share firsthand stories of the impacts of targeted surveillance on these communities.”

“The groups urged Microsoft and Amazon to not sell face surveillance technology to government entities, because doing so will supercharge a long history of impacts on those communities,” Narayan said. “All of these companies should heed that clear message—they owe it to society, their customers, their shareholders, and the diverse communities represented by this coalition.”

In addition to the ACLU’s national group and a few state chapters, the coalition includes CREDO Action, Demand Progress, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Free Press, the Government Accountability Project, Human Rights Watch, Mijente, the National Immigration Law Center, and the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), among others.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License




Global Internet Freedom Plummets as Governments Use Censorship and Surveillance to Quash Dissent

A new report from Freedom House found that global digital freedom has continued to decline for the eighth consecutive year. (Photo: Free Press/Flickr/cc)

By Jessica Corbett | Common Dreams

Countries across the globe are following in the footsteps of the Chinese government, adopting authoritarian digital practices that pose serious threats to democracy, according to a new Freedom House report released Thursday.

For Freedom on the Net 2018 (pdf), more than 70 researchers comprehensively reviewed internet freedom in 65 countries that represent 87 percent of the world’s internet users. They documented declines in 26 countries—including the United States under the Trump administration as well as Egypt, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Kenya, Nigeria, the Philippines, and Venezuela—and improvements in only 19 nations.

They found that “disinformation and propaganda disseminated online have poisoned the public sphere. The unbridled collection of personal data has broken down traditional notions of privacy. And a cohort of countries is moving toward digital authoritarianism by embracing the Chinese model of extensive censorship and automated surveillance systems. As a result of these trends, global internet freedom declined for the eighth consecutive year in 2018.”

Researchers found that as “internet controls within China reached new extremes in 2018 with the implementation of the sweeping Cybersecurity Law and upgrades to surveillance technology,” Chinese officials also “have held trainings and seminars on new media or information management with representatives from 36 out of the 65 countries.”

As Freedom House president Michael Abramowitz told AFP, this pattern of countries shifting toward China’s model “poses a threat to the open internet and endangers prospects for greater democracy worldwide.”

Writing for the Washington Post‘s opinion page on Thursday, Abramowitz and Freedom House chairman Michael Chertoff expanded on the dangers of China exporting its digital authoritarianism. While calling on Congress to reintroduce and pass the Global Online Freedom Act, which would increase pressure on countries that engage in repressive digital practices to change their ways, they argued that:

…the best way for democracies to stem the rise of digital authoritarianism is to prove that there is a better model for managing the internet. We will have to tackle social media manipulation and misuse of data in a manner that respects human rights, while also preserving an internet that is global, free, and secure.

Policymakers should undertake serious efforts to protect critical infrastructure and citizens’ personal data from misuse by governments, companies and criminals. Tech companies should dramatically scale up their work with civil-society experts to maximize their own transparency and ensure that their platforms are not being misused to spread disinformation. As the 2016 elections in the United States showed, more-responsible management of social media and stronger privacy rights are needed to prevent malicious actors from exploiting open societies to undermine democracy.

In addition to calling out China for fueling a global decline in internet freedom the new report also details contributions from the United States and the Trump administration. Bolstering findings from Reporters Sans Frontières published earlier this year, Freedom House found that authoritarian governments the world over have co-opted President Donald Trump’s favored phrase “fake news” to justify crackdowns on dissent and digital rights.

“In the past year, at least 17 countries approved or proposed laws that would restrict online media in the name of fighting ‘fake news’ and online manipulation,” the report states.

Meanwhile, in the United States, the government has also taken steps over the past year to enable surveillance and limit the open internet. The GOP-controlled Congress reauthorized the FISA Amendments Act, including Section 702, and the Federal Communications Commission repealed net neutrality protections that required internet service providers to treat all content equally.

The report includes a series of recommendations…

For policymakers:

  • Ensure that all internet-related laws and practices adhere to international human rights law and standards;
  • Enact strong data protection laws to provide greater transparency and control over personal data;
  • Include human rights safeguards in national strategies on artificial intelligence (AI);
  • Fund rapid response capacity to counter attacks on internet freedom;
  • Impose sanctions—such as freezing of assets—on foreign tech companies involved in human rights abuses; and
  • In the United States, reintroduce and pass the Global Online Freedom Act (GOFA).

For the private sector:

  • Adhere to the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;
  • Conduct human rights impact assessments for new markets and commit to doing no harm;
  • Grant users control over their information and ensure that it is not being misused;
  • Ensure fair and transparent content moderation practices;
  • Engage in continuous dialogue with local civil society organizations;
  • Label automated “bot” accounts; and
  • Use internal expertise to help counter Chinese state censorship and protect users.

For civil society:

  • Partner with the private sector on fact-checking efforts;
  • Work with scholars to examine how disinformation spreads and why people are likely to share it;
  • Monitor home countries’ collaboration with Beijing and Chinese firms; and
  • Continue to raise awareness about government censorship and surveillance efforts.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License




Walmart Has An Incredibly Creepy Cart Patent To Monitor Your Biometric Data

Image Credit: Activist Post

By Aaron Kesel | Activist Post

Walmart has a totally creepy idea to monitor your biometric data, pulse, and location from the sensors on a shopping cart handle, Motherboard reported.

Walmart recently applied for a patent that details biometric shopping handles that can track a customer’s heart rate, palm temperature, grip, and how fast the cart is being pushed.

The patent titled “System And Method For A Biometric Feedback Cart Handle” published August 23rd, details a cart with sensors in it that would then send data to a server. That server would then notify store employees to check on individual customers.

The company has yet to clarify the use-cases of such a patented cart besides creepy privacy-invasive technology. However, it can be assumed that some of these cart features would be for customer safety and anti-theft measures.

More specifically, imagine there is a shoplifter and the person’s description is partially known but associates seem to have lost them in the store. If the shoplifter was using this cart with biometric data and location data employees would be able to quickly locate the perpetrator.

Other features of the cart include a pulse oximeter, and a weight-triggered assisted push innovation to allow the cart to move somewhat with automation.

That doesn’t mean that this high-tech cart is a good idea. The problem is that all customer data would be retained without any form of regulation denoting what Walmart can and can’t do with the data.

This news comes as hundreds of retail stores — and soon thousands — are investigating using biometric facial recognition software FaceFirst to build a database of shoplifters to aid in the fight against theft, Activist Post reported.

However, facial recognition technology currently has a lot of problems. Activist Post recently reported how Amazon’s own facial “Rekognition” software erroneously and hilariously identified 28 members of Congress as people who have been arrested for crimes.

Activist Post previously reported on another test of facial recognition technology in Britain which resulted in 35 false matches and 1 erroneous arrest. So the technology is demonstrated to be far from foolproof.

The fact that hundreds of retail stores want facial recognition technology is a scary thought. But now Walmart wanting our biometric data is an even scarier prospect.

Increasingly our rights are decreasing with the help of big corporations like Amazon and Walmart. Our privacy is disappearing at an alarming rate in trade for convenience.

As previously written, “we are entering the Minority Report; there is no going back after this technology is public and citizens are indoctrinated that it’s ‘for their safety.’”

At that point, we are officially trading liberty and privacy for security. As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

The scariest thought is Walmart and other retail stores are consistently hacked. If these corporations are storing individuals’ biometric data, one has to wonder how secure their systems are to protect customers’ recorded biometrics.




EPA Aims to Weaken Radiation Regulations as FCC Gives Telecoms $2B to Install 5G Everywhere

By BN Frank | Activist Post

An article by The Register, “Eat my shorts, watchdog tells every city mayor in the US – FCC approves $2bn 5G telco windfall,” says it all.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has sold out to “Big Wireless” in a way that is even more embarrassingly obvious than even pro-Telecom elected officials ever expected:

If you were to pick a moment in which America’s telecoms regulator disappeared down the rabbit hole at its monthly meeting, it would probably be when the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Ajit Pai provided a full “up is down” statement.

“I salute Commissioner Carr for his leadership in developing this order,” Pai said today of his fellow commissioner Brendan Carr while discussing a plan to set a federal limit on what local and state governments are allowed to charge telecoms companies to add new 5G mobile cell sites on their property.

“He worked very closely with many state and local officials to understand their needs and to study the policies that have worked at the state and local level. It should therefore come as no surprise that this order has won significant support from mayor, local officials and state legislatures.”

There’s only one problem with this statement: it is wholly, provable [sic] incorrect.

In fact, the FCC just closed a short public comment period in which a very large number of mayors, city officials, and state legislatures explicitly stated the opposite: that they were entirely opposed to the plan.

A separate article by The Register provides more details: “US cities react in fury to FCC’s $2bn break for 5G telcos: We’ll be picking up the tab, say officials.”

Activist Post and others have reported many times already about widespread opposition to reducing municipal control in regard to 5G and small cell towers and related infrastructure.  Complaints from those who oppose this federal legislation are actually still being posted at The FCC docket.

More from the article:

It’s worth noting that the five FCC commissioners are supposed to act as an internal balancing mechanism; each a largely independent thinker and telecoms policy expert in order to provide balance.

Since Pai – a former Verizon lawyer – took over, this shaky balance has come completely off the wheels. Pai pushed for Carr to become a commissioner and persuaded the White House to nominate him. They are old pals. Carr worked for Pai for four years as his legal advisor before Pai promoted him to general counsel and then got him as an FCC commissioner to guarantee him a safe vote on key decisions.

Activist Post has reported about prior shenanigans by Ajit Pai and Brendan Carr already also.  Journalist Norm Alster may have said it best when he labelled The FCC as a “Captured Agency.”

This “captured” condition is only getting worse with the ridiculous and highly risky “Race for 5G.” As reported by Fierce Wireless, “Trump Officials vow, ‘America first, 5G first’”:

Top White House officials today held a “5G Summit” with one basic message: How can the Trump administration encourage the private sector to deploy 5G as quickly as possible?

The meeting, kept largely under wraps until this morning, essentially serves as a stake in the ground by President Trump to figure out ways to aid wireless carriers and the rest of the wireless industry with regulations that will speed up the deployment of the wireless industry’s next-generation technology.

Officials described the event as an opportunity for White House representatives to listen to wireless industry executives and to learn ways the Trump administration can play a role in 5G.

But Kudlow—who replaced Gary Cohn as Trump’s top economic advisor in May—made it clear that the Trump administration wants to give the wireless industry what it needs to deploy 5G quickly.

Kudlow said the administration is taking an “America first, 5G first” approach to the issue. Specifically, he said the administration will work toward policies—including lower taxes and deregulation—that promote growth in the private sector.

“The White House is behind this free market approach,” he noted.

Kudlow also boasted of the Trump administration’s efforts to encourage U.S. economic growth, particularly through corporate tax cuts. “We’re crushing it, we’re absolutely crushing it,” Kudlow said of the overall U.S. economy. “And I want the 5G to be in that crushing it thing.”

Interestingly, Kudlow said that “I’m not here to make war on China,” in addressing worries that China could overtake the United States in the world’s move toward 5G. But he did say that the administration will work to make sure U.S. companies can compete on the global stage.

Crushing it?  Worried about China overtaking the U.S. in the world’s move toward 5G?  Every day this sounds more like a “mine is bigger than yours” contest with China. 

Regardless, The FCC’s “captured” condition started long before the Trump administration.  There have been elected officials who have received large sums of money from “Big Wireless” for many years.  But this reckless mission to put millions of small cell towers and their related infrastructure everywhere – including in front of homes – seems to now unfortunately involve the EPA as well.

APNewsBreak: “EPA says a little radiation may be healthy” 

The Trump administration is quietly moving to weaken U.S. radiation regulations, turning to scientific outliers who argue that a bit of radiation damage is actually good for you — like a little bit of sunlight.

The government’s current, decades-old guidance says that any exposure to harmful radiation is a cancer risk. And critics say the proposed change could lead to higher levels of exposure for workers at nuclear installations and oil and gas drilling sites, medical workers doing X-rays and CT scans, people living next to Superfund sites and any members of the public who one day might find themselves exposed to a radiation release.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




TSA Facial Recognition Experiment Receives 85% Accuracy Rate

Image Credit: Activist Post

By Aaron Kesel | Activist Post

The TSA is using facial recognition technology with a “biometric confirmation” rate of 85% for testing purposes at airports.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is expected to complete a 30-day test next month testing the use of facial recognition technology at Los Angeles International Airport, the LA Times reported.

The DHS, (Department of Homeland Security) desires to use facial recognition technology to better track and record approximately 1 million foreign travelers who each year enter and exit the United States, with a rough estimate of 300,000 traveling by plane.

During test programs at Boston, Houston, New York, and Atlanta, travelers were photographed as they prepared to board planes. The cameras then used facial recognition technology to match up the passengers’ faces with data collected by the federal government on each foreign national who entered the country.

When pictures were taken of travelers whose images were already in the government’s database, the system matched the images 98% of the time, according to the report.

However, airport screeners couldn’t always take photos of the passengers because of “poor network availability, a lack of dedicated staff and compressed boarding times due to flight delays,” according to the audit.  As a result, the overall “biometric confirmation” rate was 85%, the examination found.

The audit further blamed the poor quality of digital images for difficulty matching travelers under the age of 29 and over the age of 70.

But the item to highlight is that the facial recognition software once again had difficulty matching persons of color — exactly like Amazon’s facial Rekognition software that erroneously and hilariously identified 28 members of Congress as people who have been arrested for crimes, including six members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Facial recognition historically has resulted in more false positives for African-Americans.

The ACLU has expressed concern before that faulty facial recognition scans, particularly against citizens of color, would result in a possible fatal interaction with law enforcement. Amazon’s Rekognition has already been used by a handful of law enforcement agencies nationwide.

Activist Post previously reported on another test of facial recognition technology in Britain which resulted in 35 false matches and 1 erroneous arrest. So the technology is demonstrated to be far from foolproof.

Last year, Activist Post reported that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) wanted to develop advanced facial recognition technology that scans the faces of travelers as they enter and leave the U.S. border checkpoints. Now, one year along we can see those efforts have expanded to airports. Customs and Border Protection began testing facial recognition systems at Dulles Airport in 2015, then expanded tests to New York’s JFK Airport in 2016.

In 1996, Congress authorized automated tracking of foreign citizens as they enter and exit the U.S. In 2004, DHS began biometric screening of foreign citizens upon arrival.

Airports and border checkpoints aren’t the only places where facial recognition technology is being used. Recently, a new MTA test program announced they will enable cameras near bridges, tunnels, and roadways in New York to recognize the faces of drivers and passengers.

Already privacy advocates have argued that the implementation of the biometric scanners in airports and elsewhere would be a huge step towards a surveillance state, and they’re right.

“Homeland Security has never consulted the American public about whether Americans should be subject to face recognition,” said Harrison Rudolph, a law fellow at the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, in a blog post.

“What’s even worse is there is good reason to think Homeland Security’s face recognition systems will be expanded,” including to TSA checkpoints before a flight, he said.

Congress has agreed several times to extend face scans on foreign nationals leaving the U.S., but critics say that lawmakers never intended for Americans to also become subject to the new measure.

“Congress has passed Biometric Exit bills at least nine times,” said Rudolph. “In each, it has been clear: This is a program meant for foreign nationals.”

Last year, the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) called for a public end to the biometric border screening program, listing 6 reasons to kill the technology and identifying key problems.

The president’s executive immigration order on January 27th of last year — best known for suspending visitors to the U.S. from seven majority-Muslim countries — also included an article expediting the biometric exit program. The order further stated that there will be three progress reports to be made over the next year on the program. Trump’s executive order in March built on that by specifically limiting biometric scans at the border to “in-scope travelers” or those who aren’t U.S. or Canadian citizens.

For more on facial recognition technology and what’s to come for our future, see this writer’s previous article “The Rise Of Facial Recognition Technology Is Now Inevitable.”

No one can deny it, we have undoubtedly entered a mix between Strange Days and The Minority Report, Hollywood wasn’t a script to create a dystopian future. With our future seeded in a surveillance blanket we should all be asking who has control of our biometric data and for what purpose?

As previously noted, a key problem when it comes to using the technology inside airports is the lack of restrictions on how airlines, airport operators, and other commercial third parties can use or disclose data collected under government mandate.




Rethink 9/11 Means To Question Those Who Have Taken Our Rights [47-sec VIDEO with Ben Swann]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=womi9M29pXE

Source: Ben Swann

Ben Swann: It has been 17 years since the attacks of September 11, 2001. 5 years ago I covered the story of a group called Re-Think 9-11. The summary of that report in which I pointed out then and still point out today is that now, 17 years after 9-11 we are so much less free as citizens of this nation.

“To re-think 9-11 means that we still have the right to question those who have taken our rights, how they have taken them, and why?” – Ben Swann

 




Win! Landmark Seventh Circuit Decision Says Fourth Amendment Applies to Smart Meter Data

By Jamie Williams | EFF

The Seventh Circuit just handed down a landmark opinion, ruling 3-0 that the Fourth Amendment protects energy-consumption data collected by smart meters. Smart meters collect energy usage data at high frequencies—typically every 5, 15, or 30 minutes—and therefore know exactly how much electricity is being used, and when, in any given household. The court recognized that data from these devices reveals intimate details about what’s going on inside the home that would otherwise be unavailable to the government without a physical search. The court held that residents have a reasonable expectation of privacy in this data and that the government’s access of it constitutes a “search.”

This case, Naperville Smart Meter Awareness v. City of Naperville, is the first case addressing whether the Fourth Amendment protects smart meter data. Courts have in the past held that the Fourth Amendment does not protect monthly energy usage readings from traditional, analog energy meters, the predecessors to smart meters. The lower court in this case applied that precedent to conclude that smart meter data, too, was unprotected as a matter of law. On appeal, EFF and Privacy International filed an amicus brief urging the Seventh Circuit to reconsider this dangerous ruling. And in its decision, released last week, the Seventh Circuit wisely recognized that smart meters and analog meters are different:

“Using traditional energy meters, utilities typically collect monthly energy consumption in a single lump figure once per month. By contrast, smart meters record consumption much more frequently, often collecting thousands of readings every month. Due to this frequency, smart meters show both the amount of electricity being used inside a home and when that energy is used.”

The Seventh Circuit recognized that this energy usage data “reveals information about the happenings inside a home.” Individual appliances, the court explained, have distinct energy-consumption patterns or “load signatures.” These load signatures allow you to tell not only when people are home, but what they are doing. The court held that the “ever-accelerating pace of technological development carries serious privacy implications” and that smart meters “are no exception.”

This is critical precedent. Last year, roughly 65 million smart meters had been installed in the United States in recent years, with 88% of them—over 57 million—in homes of American consumers; more than 40% of American households had a smart meter. Experts predict that number will reach about 80% by 2020. And law enforcement agencies are already trying to get access to data from energy companies without a warrant.

In this case, a group of citizens called Naperville Smart Meter Awareness challenged Naperville’s policy of requiring every home to have a smart meter, objecting on Fourth Amendment and other grounds. The district court heldthat smart meter data—despite being collected directly a city utility, not any non-governmental third party—was subject to the so-called “third party doctrine.” In other words, the lower court reasoned that simply because the utility company held the data, it was automatically devoid of constitutional protection.

The Seventh Circuit reversed the district court’s decision, holding that the third party doctrine did not apply. The court first noted that application of the third party doctrine would make no sense in this case. The city itself collected the data; there was no third party. The court then cited the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Carpenter v. United States, which rejectedthe third party doctrine in a case involving cell site location information. In Carpenter, the Supreme Court held that this antiquated doctrine does not apply to the exhaustive stores of personal information information collected today by wireless carriers, which can be used “detailed chronicle of a person’s physical presence compiled every day, every moment over years.” The Court reasoned that people do not “voluntarily ‘assume the risk’ of turning over a comprehensive dossier of physical movements” just by choosing to use a cell phone. The Seventh Circuit held that the same goes for smart meter data: “a home occupant does not assume the risk of near constant monitoring by choosing to have electricity in her home.” As the court explained, the third-party doctrine rests on “the notion that an individual has a reduced expectation of privacy in information knowingly shared with another” and “in this context, a choice to share data imposed by fiat is no choice at all.”

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

 




8 Things You Need to Know (But Probably Don’t)

Image Credit: Nihilist.Fm

By Gary Z McGee | The Mind Unleashed

 

“The system cannot be fixed by the system.” ~Tom Morello

It is of the first order of importance to remember this: “the system cannot be fixed by the system.” It can only be fixed by the resistance of healthy, reasonable, imaginative, knowledgeable, compassionate and non-violent individuals. It can only be fixed by people who have re-conditioned their cultural conditioning, un-matrixed the Matrix, ninjaneered their statist indoctrination, and unwashed their political brainwash.

All of this despite uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, myopic tribal affiliation, and blind nationalism.

In short: the system can only be fixed by people who have dared to take a leap of courage outside the box of the system itself, and then double-dogged dared themselves to gain knowledge that undermines the unhealthy system while proactively building a healthier system.

1.) The expansion of imperial war undermines freedom:

“At the end of the cold war we could have diverted tax dollars to the quality of our lives, things like health care, education, infrastructure, eliminating poverty, and protecting against climate change. Alas, the peace dividend never happened. Why not? Because the military, and persons profiting from the military, like weapons manufacturers and their lobbyists in Congress didn’t want to. That’s why. Only 8 percent of Americans polled in 2014 wanted the United States to lead the world military. But that 8 percent won out. That’s plutocracy.” ~Ted Stanford, WWII Navy Veteran

If slavery is the opposite of freedom, then war is probably its inverse. It’s simple: human beings cannot be free when other human beings are threatening them with guns and bombs.

To the extent that guns and bombs are necessary is only in a defense-minded sense. Otherwise, the use of guns and bombs is just cold, calculated, murderous and offensive, war. It is only necessary if the Non-aggression principle has been violated and the loss of human life is at stake. Then, and only in a defensive sense, is the use of bombs and guns necessary.

The problem with war today is that it is not defense-minded but offense-minded. It is built upon an imperialist agenda and a money-making war machine that’s bolstered by a fight against phantom-terrorism that cannot be won. It seeks power and the control of natural resources, usually at the expense of innocent lives. In short: it is offensive and overreaching and not conducive to healthy and free human beings.

2.) The bloated military budget undermines freedom:

“Once weapons were manufactured to fight wars. Now wars are manufactured to sell weapons.” ~Arundhati Roy

The main reason the war machine is so offensive and overreaching is because of the bloated military budget. Exacerbated by war-profiteering companies like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, the U.S. military is larger than the next seven militaries in the world, combined!

Let that sink in. World military spending totaled more than $1.6 trillion in 2015. The U.S. accounted for 37 percent of that total. If that’s not a bloated military, I don’t know what is. It’s time to scale back. It’s time to see the military industrial complex for what it really is: a terrorist generating war machine propped up by profiting weapons manufacturers.

The propaganda machine that the military industrial complex uses to convince its citizens that it needs more money is based on myopic nationalistic pride that imagines the money is going to our brave military men and women. Nothing could be further from the truth. It goes toward $200 million B-52 bombers and faulty F-35 fighter jets costing $400 billion each. Each! That is the height of insanity. Just imagine what use that money could go towards.

And yet we all just go about our day imagining that the government knows best. Meanwhile, our education system falters, our health care is being eroded, and our infrastructure crumbles. We can no longer see the error of our ways. As Noam Chomsky said, “The general population doesn’t know what’s happening, and it doesn’t even know that it doesn’t know.” And here we are, not even caring that we don’t know.

3.) The continual bailing out of Big Banks undermines freedom:

“The federal rescue of Wall Street didn’t fix the economy – it created a permanent bailout state based on a Ponzi-like confidence scheme. And the worst may be yet to come.” ~Matt Taibbi

Bailing out Wall Street was the ultimate bait-and-switch. It turns out that we’ve all been bamboozled. This mafia-esc, multi-layered, lie-upon-lie shit-cake goes so deep that it fooled congress twice into eating it –hook, line, and sinker. This article goes into detail about it.

The biggest problem with the bail out, other than that it has further entrenched the Too Big to Fail banking system, is that it has made lying on behalf of the most corrupt banks the official policy of the United States government.

This undermines freedom because it not only allows power to become absolute, it allows power to corrupt absolutely. There must be checks and balances on power. Especially power over people’s lives. Unchecked power tends to become tyrannical power. Tyrannical power tends to become evil. Failed systems should be allowed to fail lest failure be confused with success in some Orwellian double-spoken way.

4.) Overreaching offense-minded policing undermines freedom:

“The law is an opinion with a gun.” ~Stefan Molyneux

Healthy policing is an extension of healthy self-defense. Self-defense turned violent and overreaching is no longer about self-preservation. Similarly, policing turned violent and overreaching is no longer about protecting and serving. Violence should only ever be used in self-defense and never as a means toward enforcing one’s values, rules, or laws onto others, no matter how popular they are.

Defense-minded policing must remain a core philosophy if a police force intends to be a moral institution. The solution is not more ill-trained offense-minded police with too much power, but more well-trained defense-minded police with just enough power (a power with built-in checks and balances in place to prevent power from corrupting). In short: a complete eradication of the Thin Blue Line is in order.

The bottom line is that no single person should have as much power as a cop has. Nobody should be allowed to be judge jury and executioner in the street. To the extent that a defense-minded cop has power, it should be checked and balanced by the people who pay for the policing, first, and by other defense-minded cops, second. And all cops should be held to a higher standard precisely because of the immense power that they wield.

Until we can achieve a level of civilization where we have all evolved to a point where voluntarism and the non-aggression principle are second nature, the best alternative is defense-minded policing that doesn’t offensively overreach its power by shoving its gun down everyone’s throat.

 

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE…….




8 Things That Are Undermining Your Freedom That You Need To Know About (But Probably Don’t)

By Gary Z McGee | The Mind Unleashed

“The system cannot be fixed by the system.” ~Tom Morello

It is of the first order of importance to remember this: “the system cannot be fixed by the system.” It can only be fixed by the resistance of healthy, reasonable, imaginative, knowledgeable, compassionate and non-violent individuals. It can only be fixed by people who have re-conditioned their cultural conditioning, un-matrixed the Matrix, ninjaneered their statist indoctrination, and unwashed their political brainwash.

All of this despite uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, myopic tribal affiliation, and blind nationalism.

In short: the system can only be fixed by people who have dared to take a leap of courage outside the box of the system itself, and then double-dogged dared themselves to gain knowledge that undermines the unhealthy system while proactively building a healthier system.

1.) The expansion of imperial war undermines freedom:

“At the end of the cold war we could have diverted tax dollars to the quality of our lives, things like health care, education, infrastructure, eliminating poverty, and protecting against climate change. Alas, the peace dividend never happened. Why not? Because the military, and persons profiting from the military, like weapons manufacturers and their lobbyists in Congress didn’t want to. That’s why. Only 8 percent of Americans polled in 2014 wanted the United States to lead the world military. But that 8 percent won out. That’s plutocracy.” ~Ted Stanford, WWII Navy Veteran

If slavery is the opposite of freedom, then war is probably its inverse. It’s simple: human beings cannot be free when other human beings are threatening them with guns and bombs.

To the extent that guns and bombs are necessary is only in a defense-minded sense. Otherwise, the use of guns and bombs is just cold, calculated, murderous and offensive, war. It is only necessary if the Non-aggression principle has been violated and the loss of human life is at stake. Then, and only in a defensive sense, is the use of bombs and guns necessary.

The problem with war today is that it is not defense-minded but offense-minded. It is built upon an imperialist agenda and a money-making war machine that’s bolstered by a fight against phantom-terrorism that cannot be won. It seeks power and the control of natural resources, usually at the expense of innocent lives. In short: it is offensive and overreaching and not conducive to healthy and free human beings.

2.) The bloated military budget undermines freedom:

“Once weapons were manufactured to fight wars. Now wars are manufactured to sell weapons.” ~Arundhati Roy

The main reason the war machine is so offensive and overreaching is because of the bloated military budget. Exacerbated by war-profiteering companies like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, the U.S. military is larger than the next seven militaries in the world, combined!

Let that sink in. World military spending totaled more than $1.6 trillion in 2015. The U.S. accounted for 37 percent of that total. If that’s not a bloated military, I don’t know what is. It’s time to scale back. It’s time to see the military industrial complex for what it really is: a terrorist generating war machine propped up by profiting weapons manufacturers.

The propaganda machine that the military industrial complex uses to convince its citizens that it needs more money is based on myopic nationalistic pride that imagines the money is going to our brave military men and women. Nothing could be further from the truth. It goes toward $200 million B-52 bombers and faulty F-35 fighter jets costing $400 billion each. Each! That is the height of insanity. Just imagine what use that money could go towards.

And yet we all just go about our day imagining that the government knows best. Meanwhile, our education system falters, our health care is being eroded, and our infrastructure crumbles. We can no longer see the error of our ways. As Noam Chomsky said, “The general population doesn’t know what’s happening, and it doesn’t even know that it doesn’t know.”And here we are, not even caring that we don’t know.

3.) The continual bailing out of Big Banks undermines freedom:

“The federal rescue of Wall Street didn’t fix the economy – it created a permanent bailout state based on a Ponzi-like confidence scheme. And the worst may be yet to come.” ~Matt Taibbi

Bailing out Wall Street was the ultimate bait-and-switch. It turns out that we’ve all been bamboozled. This mafia-esc, multi-layered, lie-upon-lie shit-cake goes so deep that it fooled congress twice into eating it –hook, line, and sinker. This article goes into detail about it.

The biggest problem with the bail out, other than that it has further entrenched the Too Big to Fail banking system, is that it has made lying on behalf of the most corrupt banks the official policy of the United States government.

This undermines freedom because it not only allows power to become absolute, it allows power to corrupt absolutely. There must be checks and balances on power. Especially power over people’s lives. Unchecked power tends to become tyrannical power. Tyrannical power tends to become evil. Failed systems should be allowed to fail lest failure be confused with success in some Orwellian double-spoken way.

4.) Overreaching offense-minded policing undermines freedom:

“The law is an opinion with a gun.” ~Stefan Molyneux

Healthy policing is an extension of healthy self-defense. Self-defense turned violent and overreaching is no longer about self-preservation. Similarly, policing turned violent and overreaching is no longer about protecting and serving. Violence should only ever be used in self-defense and never as a means toward enforcing one’s values, rules, or laws onto others, no matter how popular they are.

Defense-minded policing must remain a core philosophy if a police force intends to be a moral institution. The solution is not more ill-trained offense-minded police with too much power, but more well-trained defense-minded police with just enough power (a power with built-in checks and balances in place to prevent power from corrupting). In short: a complete eradication of the Thin Blue Line is in order.

The bottom line is that no single person should have as much power as a cop has. Nobody should be allowed to be judge jury and executioner in the street. To the extent that a defense-minded cop has power, it should be checked and balanced by the people who pay for the policing, first, and by other defense-minded cops, second. And all cops should be held to a higher standard precisely because of the immense power that they wield.

Until we can achieve a level of civilization where we have all evolved to a point where voluntarism and the non-aggression principle are second nature, the best alternative is defense-minded policing that doesn’t offensively overreach its power by shoving its gun down everyone’s throat.

5.) The corrupt electoral system undermines freedom:

“If you vote, you have no right to complain.” ~George Carlin

The electoral process has cemented into place a system of legalized bribery. Elections have become auctions. They are ridiculously overrated and flawed to begin with. They attract power-hungry egomaniacs at best and warmongering sociopaths at worst. It’s time to usher in a new system of appointing leaders.

The problem is our choices are limited due to bi-partisan claptrap. Our decision seems to be “vote” or “not vote” which is influenced by state manipulation, cultural conditioning, and entrenched political propaganda with corrupt lobbying that creates divisiveness.

But there is a third option. We can “elect” to think outside the ballot box. We can “elect” to take money out of politics. We can “elect” to have a complete electoral system reboot. We can “elect” to implement a sortition system that lotteries-in leaders from an assembly of authentic leaders and prestigious elders and votes-out bad leaders. We can “elect” to devise a system that uses impeachment more often than it uses aggrandizement.

Indeed. We can “elect” to not elect a president at all, because we don’t need a scapegoat-puppet who is hamstrung by lobbyists, corporations, and bankers for a “leader.” We just need authentic leaders and prestigious elders –plural; chosen randomly from a competitive assembly of other authentic leaders and prestigious elders. That will get the job done just fine, while also preventing scapegoating and the rise of psychopaths.

6.) Despotic leadership undermines freedom:

The control of information is something the elite always does, particularly in a despotic form of government. Information, knowledge, is power. If you can control information, you can control people.” ~Tom Clancy

The chain of command. The chain of obedience. Allegiance to authoritative hierarchies. Top-down leadership. These forms of “leadership” have utterly failed us as a species. They have only ever led to unhealthy rigid order – creating robots, pawns, and sheep; which has only ever led to unnecessary wars waged between robots, pawns, and sheep who never had the courage to question authority. As Mark Passiosurmised, “Order followers are the people who keep the system of slavery in place.”

The chain of command isn’t even leadership. It is despotic followership. It’s grossly outdated. They don’t train followers how to become leaders, they train followers how to remain followers through rank and file. A true leader must break rank at some point in order to become such, otherwise he/she is only a “leader” by authoritarian dictate, or according to some myopic and vacuous rank.

True leaders cannot be controlled; they learn, through self-mastery, through the teachings of other leaders, from Pain and Nature, how to discipline themselves. True leaders don’t follow power; they learn how to turn the tables on power, even their own, so that power does not corrupt.

True leaders don’t kowtow to tyranny or authoritarian rule; they attempt to dismantle it, despite the “rank and order” that props it up. Therefore, a true leader is a bottom-up leader who has the courage and the wherewithal to question the despotic top-down chain of obedience.

Strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom must be thwarted. This requires courageous bottom-up leaders to throw a wrench into the machinery of the so-called “chain of command.”

7.) Hoarding and shortsighted distribution undermines freedom:

“The problem with the Western world is surplus production. We’re in surplus production in almost every area. But there is a terrible distribution system where people around the globe suffer and die from starvation. This is a distribution problem, not a production problem.”~John Ralston Saul

Extreme poverty and starvation are avoidable in this age of extreme surplus. The utter failure of our distribution system undermines freedom. It prevents people from thriving because they are expending all their vital energy on merely surviving.

If, as Harry Frankfurt said, “From the point of view of morality, it is not important that everyone should have the same. What is morally important is that each should have enough,” then it behooves us, as both reasonable and moral human beings, to make sure that we each have enough by fixing the corrupt system of distribution.

The deeper psychological problem is that we believe that our sense of worth is wrapped up in how skilled we are at something, because we were raised and conditioned in a culture that values competition over cooperation. This creates ego-centric specialists concerned only with narrow-minded one-upmanship over open-minded compassion.

But we are social creatures, first and foremost. We need each other to survive. Competition has always been secondary to cooperation; otherwise we wouldn’t have survived as a species (Darwin).

So, our worth is actually wrapped up in how much we care for each other. The problem is that we’ve had the cart (competition) in front of the horse (compassion) for too long. It’s time we got the horse back in front of the cart. This will be an arduously Herculean task, considering our cultural conditioning. But it is very important, for the survival of our species, that we get it right.

8.) Statism itself undermines freedom:

“At the core of all well-founded belief, lies belief that is unfounded.”~Ludwig Wittgenstein

How do you know if you are a statist? You are a statist if you believe that you need a ruler to rule over you, if you believe that you require permission to be free, if you blindly worship a flag, and if you believe that violence is the answer to solving problems.

As it stands, the USA lives in an oligarchic state disguised as a democratic republic. Since a massive amount of wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, we’re unable to maintain a healthy horizontal democracy. Instead, we’re forced to deal with the snake of an unhealthy vertical democracy which has the diabolical snakehead of oligarchic plutocracy.

If we lived within a horizontal democracy, we would have a better chance at being free. No masters, no rulers, and no chance for power to become concentrated in the hands of a few. As Edward Abbey said, “Since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.” Easier said than done, sure, but as Spinoza said, “All things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.”

When it comes down to it, it’s impossible to live freely within a plutocratic state. The plutocrats will simply continue buying up power by creating oppressive laws and “legal”extortion rackets that keep the people without wealth and power in a permanent state of poverty and powerlessness. Add to that the use of lobbyists and a fiat currency based on debt, and you have a nation of hoodwinked debt slaves (soft slavery) under the delusion that they live in a free democratic republic.

It’s time to decide upon the only choice that really matters: Free human, or indoctrinated statist; uncomfortable freedom, or comfortable slavery. The choice is yours.

And if the overreaching state should continue to use violence against us, then we plant our heels deep into the ground, we lay our shields low, and we declare to the Powers That Be, as Henry David Thoreau did: “I was not designed to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.”

About the Author

Gary Z McGee, a former Navy Intelligence Specialist turned philosopher, is the author of Birthday Suit of God and The Looking Glass Man. His works are inspired by the great philosophers of the ages and his wide awake view of the modern world.

This article was originally created for The Mind Unleashed and is published here with permission. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution and author bio.




MicroBots Can Now be Released by the Military During Natural Disasters

Image Credit: en.wikipedia.com

 

By Markab Algedi | The Mind Unleashed

 

You’re probably familiar with the mad science division of the Pentagon, DARPA. They have spearheaded efforts and made research grants toward such things as self guided smart bullets, robots of war, weaponized artificial intelligence, and just about everything in-between.

Now, they have created yet another technology with an immense potential for abuse: small robots that could be deployed by the government in a time of disaster, supposedly to help clean something up or perform some innocuous task. People who know what the government does might be a bit more skeptical.

Given the title “SHRIMP,” or “Short-Range Independent Microrobotic Platforms,” DARPA claims the reason it wants to develop tiny robots for the US military is some altruistic, natural disaster-solving mission to preserve the safety of humanity.

It sounds just like an episode of Ghost in the Shell. In one episode, Japan used micromachines to clean radiation from the air after a planned bombing.

The robots developed by DARPA aren’t that small, they can fit on a person’s finger like this. These are the components of one of the tiny robots.

The “disaster robots” were justified in a press release from DARPA, in which they claimed that the micro-robots would be useful in, for instance, the event of an earthquake which would cause the destruction of buildings and structures.

DARPA has a Microsystems Technology Office, or MTO. Its program manager for this project, Dr. Ronald Polcawich said:

“Whether in a natural disaster scenario, a search and rescue mission, a hazardous environment, or other critical relief situation, robots have the potential to provide much-needed aid and support.”

“However, there are a number of environments that are inaccessible for larger robotic platforms. Smaller robotics systems could provide significant aide, but shrinking down these platforms requires significant advancement of the underlying technology.”

Articles about this awkwardly tried to reassure the reader that the goal of this technology was “noble.” According to a science website called Edgy Labs:

“These goals remain noble, but the technology to get micro and milli robotics lags behind.

Besides the goal to have SHRIMP robots help in disasters, DARPA wants the program to improve overall understanding of actuator technologies.”

A few distinct factors were considered in the development of such robotics, and they were listed as:

– dexterity
– robotic platform mobility
– strength-to-weight ratio
– load-bearing capacity
– force generation
– overall efficiency
– max work density

Naturally, the development of ultra-tiny robots must be dependent on this strength to weight ratio, and Polcawich emphasized that its a huge factor on the overall endurance and load-bearing capabilities of any sized robot that is “actuator-based.”

 

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE……




Long Time NSA Intelligence Official Shares His Thoughts About Supposed ‘Russian Hacking’

By Arjun Walia | Collective Evolution

Hearing about all of this Russian hacking, Trump, and politics, in general, these days seems to be like eating the same type of food every night, you literally get sick of it. This begs the question, should we even pay attention to it? Of course, we should, the political realm and the corporate stranglehold over it (and above that sit the financial elite) are taking advantage of us because WE are the ones that allow this entire charade to continue. It would be the same thing as not paying attention to the fact that pharmaceutical drugs are killing many people. There are many examples. To simply ignore it allows those ridden with the disease of power to keep taking advantage of us.  One thing is for sure, our so-called “leaders” don’t seem to care. Sure, they gather at summits every year to supposedly discuss solutions to the global problems, but solutions have been in existence for decades and nothing seems to happen. This alone should make every single person question what’s really going on behind the scenes because nothing seems to really make any sense at all.

This article sheds light on one common problem that’s existed for decades, and that’s the constant blaming of Russia, as well as other governments and global politicians for problems that don’t even exist. Perhaps the best example would be 9/11 and Iraq, or the recent supposed chemical gas attacks in Syria, and much more. Each is an example for humanity to wake up and see what’s really going on, because it keeps on happening over and over again, and to stop it, awareness is key, human consciousness is key…

It’s always critical to look at the information that’s not coming from mainstream media sources, and if you do, you will find multiple ex-intelligence agents and employees saying the exact opposite of what’s presented within the mainstream media. You can also find hard evidence to corroborate these statements, unlike the ones that come from mainstream media. These are brave people, who chose to share truth rather than sticking to their national security oaths, simply because “national security” has now become a term used to justify completely immoral action, like mass surveillance, for example.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




Facial Recognition Tech Company Refuses to Sell to Governments

Image via Activist Post

Derrick Broze |  Activist Post

 

The CEO of a company that makes facial recognition software has publicly stated that his company will not sell to law enforcement or governments.

In recent months controversies have erupted over various tech companies contracting with the various law enforcement and military agencies. At Google, employees publicly expressed their distaste for the company’s contract to provide the U.S. Department of Defense with Artificial Intelligence technology. The frustration was so high that some Google employees actually quit. Amazon was also faced with internal strife as a group of employees circulated an internal letter to CEO Jeff Bezos (who also owns the Washington Post, a newspaper with close ties to U.S. intelligence agencies) demanding that he stop selling Amazon’s Rekognition facial recognition software to law enforcement.

In June Activist Post reported that the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch, the Freedom of the Press Foundation and nearly 40 other organizations joined together to demand that Amazon cease providing law enforcement access to surveillance technology. The organizations signed onto a letter to Amazon which condemns the company for developing new facial recognition tools that allow real-time surveillance using police body cameras and the ever growing interconnected network of cameras in most major American cities.

“Amazon has been heavily marketing this tool—called “Rekognition”—to law enforcement, and it’s already being used by agencies in Florida and Oregon,” the EFF wrote. “This system affords the government vast and dangerous surveillance powers, and it poses a threat to the privacy and freedom of communities across the country. That includes many of Amazon’s own customers, who represent more than 75 percent of U.S. online consumers.”

Amazon and Google’s partnership with law enforcement and government has not only sparked a resistance from activists and civil liberties groups. The issue has actually caused the CEO of another tech company to declare that his company will not do business with such agencies. Brian Brackeen, CEO of Kairos, a producer of facial recognition software, recently made the announcement in an op-ed piece for Tech Crunch.

“Having the privilege of a comprehensive understanding of how the software works gives me a unique perspective that has shaped my positions about its uses,” Brackeen writes. “As a result, I (and my company) have come to believe that the use of commercial facial recognition in law enforcement or in government surveillance of any kind is wrong — and that it opens the door for gross misconduct by the morally corrupt.”

Brackeen also states that current facial recognition software has a tendency to falsely identify people of color. “To be truly effective, the algorithms powering facial recognition software require a massive amount of information. The more images of people of color it sees, the more likely it is to properly identify them,” Brackeen wrote. “The problem is, existing software has not been exposed to enough images of people of color to be confidently relied upon to identify them. And misidentification could lead to wrongful conviction, or far worse.”

“There is no place in America for facial recognition that supports false arrests and murder.”

Brackeen told The Wall Street Journal that his company had refused contracts for building a facial recognition program for Axon Enterprise Inc., formerly Taser International, a maker of police body cameras and electric weapons. He also stated that Kairos had refused to build a system to identify people in a crowd from footage collected via drone.

Is Mr. Brackeen exaggerating his fears of placing facial recognition software and AI in the hands of the current government and police? Is there any reason to be concerned about tech companies selling their toys to the “authorities”?

Documents obtained by the ACLU of Northern California recently revealed Rekognition, Amazon’s facial recognition program, is currently used by police in Orlando and Oregon’s Washington County. As with the Stingray cellphone surveillance tools, the tool requires law enforcement to sign nondisclosure agreements to avoid public disclosure. The EFF is calling on Amazon to “stand up for civil liberties” and “cut law enforcement off from using its face recognition technology.”

Amazon’s own promotional material states that Rekognition can identify people in real-time by “instantaneously searching databases containing tens of millions of faces.” Amazon offers a “person tracking” feature that it says “makes investigation and monitoring of individuals easy and accurate” for “surveillance applications.” Amazon says Rekognition can be used to identify “all faces in group photos, crowded events, and public places such as airports.”

The EFF warns that local police could use Rekognition to identify political protesters recorded by officer body cameras. In addition, Rekognition can track people even if it can’t see their face, can identify and catalog a person’s gender, what they’re doing, what they’re wearing, and their emotional state. The program can also flag things it considers “unsafe” or “inappropriate.”

It seems fairly obvious that these types of programs will eventually be used to target perfectly legal, legitimate behavior. This entire apparatus is a part of the growing police and surveillance state. It is of the utmost importance that consumers choose not to use these companies products and services. This means stop searching for information via Google. Use alternative search engines that don’t track you. Stop shopping on Amazon. Use decentralized marketplaces like OpenBazaar. And finally, as Brian Brackeen illustrates, CEO, managers, and other people in positions of power need to take a moral stand and refuse to do business with these governments and companies who are supporting the loss of privacy and freedom.

Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is the Lead Investigative Reporter for ActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com.

 




‘Most Important Surveillance Story You Will See for Years’: Report Reveals How AT&T Buildings Serve as Secret Hubs for NSA Spying

AT&T’s corporate headquarters in Dallas, TX

By Jake Johnson, staff writer | Common Dreams

“The most important surveillance story you will see for years just went online, revealing how AT&T became the internet’s biggest enemy, secretly collaborating against its customers and partners to destroy your privacy.”

That was how whistleblower and privacy advocate Edward Snowden reacted to the publication of an explosive story by The Intercept on Monday, which reveals for the first time how “fortress-like” AT&T buildings located in eight major American cities have played a central role in a massive National Security Agency (NSA) spying program “that has for years monitored billions of emails, phone calls, and online chats passing across U.S. territory.”

“It’s eye-opening and ominous the extent to which this is happening right here on American soil,” Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, told The Intercept in an interview. “It puts a face on surveillance that we could never think of before in terms of actual buildings and actual facilities in our own cities, in our own backyards.”

The Intercept‘s detailed report—based on a large body of evidence that includes public records, classified NSA documents, and interviews with former AT&T employees—shows how the telecom giant has willingly helped the NSA collect the data of its own customers and those of other companies, thanks to its “unique relationships with other phone and internet providers.”

According to Intercept reporters Ryan Gallagher and Henrik Moltke, who bylined Monday’s story, eight AT&T facilities—known as “peering sites”—in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. “serve a specific function, processing AT&T customers’ data and also carrying large quantities of data from other internet providers.”

“The eight locations are featured on a top-secret NSA map, which depicts U.S. facilities that the agency relies upon for one of its largest surveillance programs, code-named FAIRVIEW,” Gallagher and Moltke write. “AT&T is the only company involved in FAIRVIEW, which was first established in 1985, according to NSA documents, and involves tapping into international telecommunications cables, routers, and switches.”

The report continues:

In 2003, the NSA launched new internet mass surveillance methods, which were pioneered under the FAIRVIEW program. The methods were used by the agency to collect—within a few months—some 400 billion records about people’s internet communications and activity, the New York Timespreviously reported. FAIRVIEW was also forwarding more than one million emails every day to a “keyword selection system” at the NSA’s Fort Meade headquarters.

Central to the internet spying are eight “peering link router complex” sites, which are pinpointed on the top-secret NSA map. The locations of the sites mirror maps of AT&T’s networks, obtained by The Intercept from public records.

Fight for the Future (FFTF), an open internet advocacy group, reacted with alarm to The Intercept‘s reporting on Monday, writing on Twitter, “AT&T has bent over backwards to help the U.S. government spy on essentially all internet traffic.”

“Giant telecom companies aren’t just “anti-consumer,” they’re actively helping authoritarian governments and pushing for policies that endanger free expression,” FFTF concluded.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License