Men who control the government and its policies from the outside?
Men who have immunity from prosecution?
Men who tell presidents what to do?
Men who can hide in plain sight? Men who don’t need to be elected to public office? Men who can laugh at their critics and call them conspiracy theorists and purveyors of fake news? Men who can determine financial and banking policy? Men who can set up corporate tribunals that nullify national courts? Men who can set virtually any national policy agenda they want to?
If an honest press existed, all this would be out in the open by now.
If, as many people are now saying, the CIA and NSA and neocons are the unelected Deep State, then the people I’m talking about would be the Deep, Deep State.
“… A chapter of Dennett’s latest book, From Bacteria to Bach and Back, an encyclopedic treatise on consciousness, suggests that a natural part of the evolution of intelligence itself is the creation of systems capable of performing tasks their creators do not know how to do.
“The question is, what accommodations do we have to make to do this wisely—what standards do we demand of them, and of ourselves?” ….”
“… brutal and anarchic supercities filled with gangs of youth-gone-wild, a restive underclass, criminal syndicates, and bands of malicious hackers. At least that’s the scenario outlined in “Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” a five-minute video that has been used at the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations University….”
Dr. Russell Glenn, Australian National University, presents, “Megacities: The Good; The Bad and the Ugly” during the 2016 Megacity Mad Scientist Conference at Arizona State University April 21-22, 2016.
“I want you to reimagine how life is organized on earth,” says global strategist Parag Khanna. As our expanding cities grow ever more connected through transportation, energy and communications networks, we evolve from geography to what he calls “connectography.” This emerging global network civilization holds the promise of reducing pollution and inequality — and even overcoming geopolitical rivalries. In this talk, Khanna asks us to embrace a new maxim for the future: “Connectivity is destiny.”
In 2012 I said that such unsustainable social arrangements as we have now are backed by force and fraud. And as the fraud loses its power over time, force must increase, until there is a correction of the system in genuine reform, or an eventual reset.
“The whole world wants to know about what the hell is happening with us. So let’s talk about it. I live in Washington now, and the people I live among have no idea how people live here in the Midwest, not the faintest idea…
The last couple of years here in America have been a time of brisk prosperity according to official measurements, with unemployment down and the stock market up.
For Americans who work for a living however, nothing ever seems to improve. Wages do not grow, median household income is still well below where it was in 2007. Economists have a way of measuring this, they call it the ‘labor share of the Gross National Product’ as opposed to the share taken by stockholders. The labor share of Gross National Product’ hit its lowest point since records were started in 2011, and then it stayed there right for the next couple of years.
In the fall of 2014, with the stock market hitting an all time high, a poll showed that nearly 3/4 of the American public believed that the economy was still in recession, because for them it was.
There was time when average Americans could be counted upon to know correctly whether the country was going up or down, because in those days when America prospered, the American people prospered as well. These days things are different.
Let’s look at it in a statistical sense. If you look at it from the middle of the 1930’s (the Depression) up until the year 1980, the lower 90 percent of the population of this country, what you might call the American people, that group took home 70 percent of the growth in the country’s income. If you look at the same numbers from 1997 up until now, from the height of the great Dot Com bubble up to the present, you will find that this same group, the American people, pocketed none of this country’s income growth at all.
Our share of these great good times was zero, folks. The upper ten percent of the population, by which we mean our country’s financiers and managers and professionals, consumed the entire thing. To be a young person in America these days is to understand instinctively the downward slope that so many of us are on.”
Thomas Frank, Kansas City Missouri, 6 April 2017
What shall we blame for the manner in which our economic system has gone wrong? Or will any with a public podium even admit it has gone wrong? After all, what is truth?
Is it the failure of working people to rise to the occasion and elevate the ‘lesser of two evils’ to power so that she might further enrich herself and her supporters, whose disappointment and outrage at a missed payday knows no bounds?
Is it the impersonal forces of technology, and trade, and all of the superficially structured but high sounding economic laws that have served to promote almost every abuse of the public good that has been suffered for the past thirty years?
Or perhaps it is time for people of conscience to stop standing idly by while a powerful few are serving themselves the most of our gains, at great cost to others, and to break the silence about where we have gone wrong, and what is needed to be done to correct it.
“And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.”
-Martin Luther King, 4 April 1967
“The problem of the last three decades is not the ‘vicissitudes of the marketplace,’ but rather deliberate actions by the government to redistribute income from the rest of us to the one percent. This pattern of government action shows up in all areas of government policy.”
“When the modern corporation acquires power over markets, power in the community, power over the state and power over belief, it is a political instrument, different in degree but not in kind from the state itself. To hold otherwise — to deny the political character of the modern corporation — is not merely to avoid the reality. It is to disguise the reality. The victims of that disguise are those we instruct in error.”
My blogs, especially http://boydownthelane.com, have often featured discussions about creativity and about coaching, starting with my own entry-level efforts in performance psychology with Summon The Magic, then the presentation of the “Je Ne Sais Quoi” virtual online symposium featured top-drawer coaches and leaders, then a recent look at the field of coaching and some of the issues, characteristics and opportunities it represents.
Here now is Jon Rappaport’s post on his availability to consult with people around the issue of their creative expression.
“We’re finding that aesthetic images can induce staggering changes to the body, including radical reductions in the observer’s stress levels” [The Conversation]. The story hook is fractals, and fractals are cool, but the effect of aesthetics is my takeaway. “The impact of nature’s aesthetics is surprisingly powerful. In the 1980s, architects found that patients recovered more quickly from surgery when given hospital rooms with windows looking out on nature. Other studies since then have demonstrated that just looking at pictures of natural scenes can change the way a person’s autonomic nervous system responds to stress.”
Writing, like war-gaming, is a strong and effective approach to thinking. War-gaming allows you to try a tactic or a strategy using a method that will do no harm. No one dies; pieces get put back into the box. I’ve saved as many of the pieces as I could from all those war-games I used to play; I’m an INTP, according to the test that the shrink insisted I take, and being an INTP means that I pack away “stuff” on the chance that it will be of some value again. It will be of value very soon as the large empty table in the family room next to my office will become the playground of my kindertotten who just discovered Monopoly, one of whom has re-written the rules of Checkers (with the help of his cousin) such that “king me” has been extended into “Ace me” and “Joker me”.
A Joker is a stack of three checkers topped by a pawn. These guys are naturally deeply into free play already; imagine what will happen when they discover John Boyd. But I digressed…
Writing allows you to work something out on paper too, and if it doesn’t work, you simply crumple the paper up or delete and grab a clean screen.
Blogging is like writing. It allows you to gather a lot of information about what’s going on in the world out there and see if you can make something of it.
A lot of people have been trained and taught that one shouldn’t put writing or blog entries out into the world that haven’t been perfected, proven, polished. Many of us from our own places of perspective, education, training, and self-image tell ourselves and each other that that written output over there is incorrect, lacks critical thinking, or is [insert here you favorite form of pejorative dismissal].
But writing and blogging can be a place where outlandish new ideas are put out into the social milieu in a way that enables further correction, re-construction, more game-playing, re-writing. They get other people to think and say “No, that’s not right because…” or maybe “that might be right; here’s another piece of confirmatory data” or, better yet, “that analysis needs to be re-jumbled and it will tell you this”.
People often don’t know what to make of what I say. People have not known what to make of me since I was a toddler. I’m used to it.
Are those hundreds of millions forty-caliber hollow-point rounds intended for the forthcoming Earth-based war with extra-terrestrials?
Extra-terrestrials? Aliens? You don’t mean to say that you believe in aliens now, do you?
I’ve always been agnostic. I’ve never seen one, nor a unidentified flying anything. But some pretty smart people are suggesting that the topic deserves our attention.
“When investigating financial fraud you encounter a force field that protects it across the board. It’s a matter of policy, it’s built into the structure. It has had an enormous support from a lot of people.”
Catherine Austin Fitts, Secret Space Program conference 2014
Here’s a very long (almost four hours) videotape presentation by Steven M. Greer, M.D., founder of The Disclosure Project, on the deep state and extra-terrestrials. It was filmed at the “workshop held on Nov 21, 2015 in Washington DC. This expose includes: how secrecy is maintained; lists of bases and corporations involved; documents; how the black budget is funded; the connection between drug running and the secret gov’t , how these unacknowledged special access projects work and much more. He discuses disclosure, ufo sightings, EBEs, CIA, NSA, FBI, NSA first contact and more.”
It’s almost four hours long. It’s been left on autoplay; look down to the right for what’s beyond Greer.
given what some suggest about the probability/possibility of life off the planet and extra-terrestrial presence (in history and currently) on the plant, a search engine was asked to cough up the highest-ranking items found when asked about extraterrestrials on earth.
“… when official public announcement of the extraterrestrial presence occurs, “they will be the ones introduced to Earthlings; ’Oh, by the way, we want to welcome our neighbors from the Pleiades, who by the way have been here since [the beginning of Earth] time, but [are] actually living in our place, date, space and time.’” “They are the diplomatic corps.”
In a speech before the European Parliament discussing the consequences of the Brexit vote, the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, made the stunning comment that he had spoken about it to “leaders of other planets.”
The official transcript released by the European Commission has been edited to remove the reference to “leaders from other planets”. The transcript now reads:
J’ai vu et entendu et écouté plusieurs des dirigeants. Ils sont très inquiets ….
“I saw and heard and listened to several executives. They are very worried …”
Yet, when one listens to an audio loop of what Junker’s actually said, he very clearly includes the phrase “dirigeants d’autres planets,” which translates as “leaders of other planets,” as pointed out by native French speakers discussing Junckers speech, and also by Google Translate.
It was an explanation by several advanced students of deep theologies of the depths and depravities of attempts to improve the human condition by radically modifying and tinkering with the human condition.
Such experiments and theories, the authors explain, are apparently as old as the ages and show up dominantly in the hidden depths. They are also present, though large hidden on purpose from our view, in today’s society and culture. Like most of Joseph Farrell’s books, this is not light reading. Some call this kind of stuff alternative history, but that’s a kind brushing aside of the importance of the deep research that has been done and which he brings to the surface. On the timeline of history, Farrell and his co-author go way way back in order to help you see the trends into the future. I highly commend the bookto your bookshelf so that you may peer into the past, but I am going to zero in on a phrase or term he used on page 136 and discussed for another six or seven pages as the vehicle to assist you in seeing more clearly what’s happening right now and what it’s implications are for the future. [See also http://www.lulu.com/shop/joseph-p-farrell-and-scott-d-de-hart/dialogues-1-transhumanism-in-dialogue/paperback/product-21238670.html ]
Farrell was brought to my attention because I regularly read the blog over at the Solari Project, Catherine Austin Fitts’ private enterprise that teaches people to see and track where the money goes. I got very interested in what Fitts had to say after I’d read her on the topic of 9/11 (she was saying “follow the money” before all the dust had settled in Manhattan), on the topic of narcodollars, and most notably her treatise on the politics of the recent past known as Dunwalke. As part of her development work, she once hired me to help her think through the possibilities of developing a board game, maybe a latter-day version of Monopoly in which people could see how bankers and others extracted financial value from a community and to teach them how to spend, act and shape their own home towns in an assertive and protective manner. I failed that assignment though she paid me the $500 fee anyway, and I turned that money into a life-changing trip down the backside of the Appalachian ridge where I discovered much. She however went on more deeply into Solari Circles, the “Coming Clean” campaign and has since worked with others (including Farrell) to to track covert budgets, an effort that gets updated under the term “Space-based Economy”.
The concept of a breakaway civilization is discussed on page 147 in Farrell’s “Transhumanism”, but we really need to step back at least one or two steps for the idea of a “breakaway civilization” comes into focus.
It’s the section of the book that runs from page 135 to 147 that will form the fuel of this blog entry.
The key phrase in particular?: The “GRIN technologies”. I was skimming when I encountered that and immediately went back to find the first reference: what are the GRIN technologies? The acronym stands for Genetic, Robotic, Information, and Nanotechnology.
Genetic technologies, the manipulation by humans of an organism’s genome, have exploded onto the scene in the fields of medicine, food, warfare, the development of laboratory chimera.
Robotics are transforming industry and warfare, aeronautics and space travel, health services including surgery, terrestrial and extra-terrestrial exploration and mining, and in the home environment.
… While the international transhumanist movement has existed for decades, it’s been growing like wildfire in the last 18 months. Media coverage of transhumanism has tripled in the last year according to the Institute of Ethics and Emerging Technologies. Transhumanism is featured in a number of recent blockbuster Hollywood movies, including Transcendence, Lucy, and Oscar-winning Her. And a younger generation—many in high school and college—appear to be embracing it….
If your brain can’t get its synapses around the convergence of these four concepts/technologies, then you surely can understand the concept of a “breakaway civilization” and the fact that some current corporations and governments will work very hard to inform, educate, train and harness financial and other energies and to prevent others from knowing about them and what the powers that be are doing and plan to do with them. That’s why you should be interested in what Fitts and Farrell have to say. The powers that be hasten to effect their escape, leaving the less-fortunate, the not-wealthy, the less informed, the “useless eaters”, to face a world that they have set on a course toward self-destruction.
In Neal Stephenson’s 2015 novel Seveneves, survivors of a worldwide holocaust are tasked with seeding new life on a dormant Earth. Rather than create specific breeds of animals to be hunters, scavengers, or prey, species like “canids” are developed with mutable epigenetic traits, with the intention that the animals would quickly transform into the necessary roles that would be required for an ecosystem to rapidly evolve. Additionally, a race of humans, “Moirans,” are created to survive in space, with the hope that this subspecies of human would be able to adapt to unforeseeable dangers and circumstances, via an epigenetic process called “going epi”.
Two important references noted by Farrell and de Hart in their book are Joel Garreau’s Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies — and What It Means to be Human, and Ray Kurzweil’s The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology.
Garreau notes that the GRIN technologies overlap and intermingle to create a “curve of change unlike anything we humans have ever seen and that each of them, taken individually, are transformative and “each hold the potential to change human nature itself.” Farrell and de Hart cite Kurzweil when they say that “taken together, or engineered or employed in various combinations, the transformation is even more sweeping”; it is alchemical.
The target, says Garreau, is the very essence of man’s nature. “The goal is to seamlessly merge mind and machine, engineering human evolution so as to directly project and amplify the power of our thoughts throughout the universe.”
“… the ultimate goal of transhumanism is nothing less than the scientific and technological reversal of the Tower of Babel Moment of History, of The Fall of Man, and the alchemical ascent back up the scala caeli, the ladder to heaven…. The implications of this are … breathtaking. At the head of the list is the alchemical fusion of man and mineral in the form of implanted computer chips to “enhance” the abilities of humans to interface directly with computers…. Any human being — a microcosm — will be capable of becoming a macrocosm, of literally stretching out to control [something millions of miles away.]. The next step is toward true computer-enhanced telepathy and interface…, to seamlessly merge mind and machine, engineering human evolutionso as to to directly project and amplify the power of thought throughout the universe.” [page 138, Farrell and de Hart]
It is, according to Kurzweil, tantamount to reverse-engineering the human brain. “Indeed, as he points out, the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, based in Munich, has already engineered a computer chip that allows human neurons to be grown on a computer chip, directly interfacing with it, [as well as] technologies that allow it to detect when specific neurons are fired [and] allow them to cause or prevent certain neurons from firing, in short, to modify human consciousness and behavior directly via computer implants.” [page 139, Farrell and de Hart]
In the transhumanist theory, the world-wide web will become a super-brain or super-consciousness long ago envisioned by Nicola Tesla. “[H]ow does one maintain one’s individuality and freedom in such a world, given the ability of these technologies to directly modify memory, behavior, and individual consciousness? [See BoyDownTheLane.com/metabolization.] And who will be the “system administrators” and “operators” in this brave new world? What is being engineered, in other words, is literally the technological version of the corporate person, where it is no longer a legal metaphor, but a technological reality, a single “distributed and interconnected brain…”. The referenced source is the National Science Foundation and the US Department of Commerce [where Penny Pritzker is the chief]. [The book notes the afore-mentioned Garreau book which in turn references Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance [http://www.wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/Report/NBIC_report.pdf ]as well as Gregory Stock’s Redesigning Humans and Metaman.]
The potential military applications are discussed by Farrell and de Hart, especially DARPA’s Continuous Assisted Performance component of their “super-soldier” program, on page 141 through 143. The mission brief of the Defense Sciences Office, described as the DARPA inside DARPA, a coordinating think tank not unlike those used by Nazi Germany, a “secret community of interaction between scientists secretly investigating radical concepts”, in some senses a “breakway civilization” itself, the enhanced isolated from the rest of us, is this: The elite engineered group of new humans will be able to think faster an more creatively, have near-photographic memories, read books with total recall and comprehension in minutes, repair their own bodies and maintain peak health, live longer, require less sleep, and communicate more quickly with greater clarity to allow coordinated action in shorter time periods.
Three scenarios are envisioned [page 145] in the long run:
The “Heaven” scenario, in which the emerging technologies portend a being and blissful future of longevity, of work as play, of sweeping extensions of human group consciousness not only globally but on a cosmic scale;
The “Hell” scenario, in which the same technologies lead humanity to a cart strophic end, due to accidental leaks of deadly viruses, or cataclysmic wars utilizing new weapons, or through simple inability of human society and humans to cope with the sweeping changes as old institutions break down under th technological weight, and crumble into anarchy;
The “Prevail” scenario is, as might be expected, a mixture of the previous twp, full of promise, to be sure, but also of reverses and setbacks, until ultimately, humanity makes choices regarding the technologies, and “muddles through”.
There is much much more in the book; I highly recommend your reading it and/or learning as much as possible as soon as possible about its topics.
For more on the concept of a Breakaway Civilization:
RoboticsTrends notes the top 50 companies in the world for 2016 based on based on their innovation, groundbreaking application, commercial success and potential, and represent many different levels and facets of the robotics ecosystem.
This international compilation spans 11 countries and in addition to the large conglomerates, 20% of the list is comprised of lesser-known startups.
I’ve left this in autoplay: there are two documentaries which follow totaling 80 minutes.
Here’s a map showing “the locations (by zipcode) of companies, universities, government laboratories, and organizations working in nanotechnology around the United States.”
Information technologies will not be covered in detail here; you could probably make your own list, starting with the NSA, including IBM, Apple, et al. If you need further help, here’s Fortune’s list for 2015.
What are the psychic, cognitive and spiritual energies for scientific development of transhumanism?
Who provided the venture capital? Other than business off-shoots created by the CIA, you’ll likely find billionaire transhumanists who are into eugenics, starting with the Rockefellers, and Bill Gates, the very rich fellow who climbed to the top of the information technology heap.
I don’t have a list of the definitive and unbleached histories of the Rockefellers and others of their era and ilk, but the reading list at the bottom of a llong excerpt from Eustace Mullins’ book “Murder by Injection” also notes Tarbell, Coleman, Sutton and others. Here is Chapter ten of that book: http://fr.bio.medecine.narkive.com/pfIwt9hY/murder-by-injection-the-rockefeller-syndicate
According to Wikipedia, transhumanism is sometimes abbreviated as H+ or h+.
“Autonomous weapons select and engage targets without human intervention. They might include, for example, armed quadcopters that can search for and eliminate people meeting certain pre-defined criteria, but do not include cruise missiles or remotely piloted drones for which humans make all targeting decisions. Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has reached a point where the deployment of such systems is — practically if not legally — feasible within years, not decades, and the stakes are high: autonomous weapons have been described as the third revolution in warfare, after gunpowder and nuclear arms.
Many arguments have been made for and against autonomous weapons, for example that replacing human soldiers by machines is good by reducing casualties for the owner but bad by thereby lowering the threshold for going to battle. The key question for humanity today is whether to start a global AI arms race or to prevent it from starting. If any major military power pushes ahead with AI weapon development, a global arms race is virtually inevitable, and the endpoint of this technological trajectory is obvious: autonomous weapons will become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow. Unlike nuclear weapons, they require no costly or hard-to-obtain raw materials, so they will become ubiquitous and cheap for all significant military powers to mass-produce. It will only be a matter of time until they appear on the black market and in the hands of terrorists, dictators wishing to better control their populace, warlords wishing to perpetrate ethnic cleansing, etc. Autonomous weapons are ideal for tasks such as assassinations, destabilizing nations, subduing populations and selectively killing a particular ethnic group. [Emphasis added.] We therefore believe that a military AI arms race would not be beneficial for humanity. There are many ways in which AI can make battlefields safer for humans, especially civilians, without creating new tools for killing people.
Just as most chemists and biologists have no interest in building chemical or biological weapons, most AI researchers have no interest in building AI weapons — and do not want others to tarnish their field by doing so, potentially creating a major public backlash against AI that curtails its future societal benefits. Indeed, chemists and biologists have broadly supported international agreements that have successfully prohibited chemical and biological weapons, just as most physicists supported the treaties banning space-based nuclear weapons and blinding laser weapons.
In summary, we believe that AI has great potential to benefit humanity in many ways, and that the goal of the field should be to do so. Starting a military AI arms race is a bad idea, and should be prevented by a ban on offensive autonomous weapons beyond meaningful human control.”
Correspond as you see fit with the SecDef and/or the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1400 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-1400
Imagine a five-day conference with these people … small-group panel discussions, podcasts, luncheon and dinner speakers, etc.
Autonomous weapons will eventually change the type of warfare. It will transform the battle field from a “human space” to a “cyber or machine space”. Commonly referred to as “cyberwarfare” or “netwar”, an electronic war is initiated between two or more opponents within and among computer systems used for attacking the full range of the opposing military and civilian information systems. The attacks can be launched on the networks governing the communication and command of systems used in battle.
Cyber-attacks have long been used domestically since the wake of the information revolution. Whether for financial gains or civil-society activism, domestic cyber-attacks have proven the weakness of the current communication technology and the range of damage they are capable of.
As illustrated in a previous post, titled “Autonomous Weapons”, the communication link between the autonomous weapon systems and the remote control center as well as the communication link between the inter-connected systems are exposed to external noise. Theoretically, not only can intruders eavesdrop on the data transmitted, but also broadcast spoofing commands to the autonomous systems. This is precisely the vulnerability which makes autonomous weapons a target for future cyberwarfare. It doesn’t take a genius to imagine what a hacked robot or drone with lethal capabilities can be used for against an enemy or civilians.
Much more here, including an expandable “mind map”:
The other day I had another one of those dreams that left me deeply embroiled in thought upon awakening. The details of the dream have long since drained away like the rainwater from a sudden thunderstorm in a dry city with a good flood control system, but the problem I ended up being zeroed in on remained behind like a steaming sidewalk: there you are, sitting in the operations center at the absolute highest level of military-intelligence command [remember http://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/would-spies-command-in-a-space-war-dunford-says-maybe/ ?] when suddenly all hell breaks loose.
See? You can play along at home, too. You’ve seen that goofy movie “War Games” and probably watched such oldies as “Seven Days in May” and “Dr. Strangelove”.
But I’m not here to suggest a possible act of calumny on the part of one of the people sitting inside the op center in this future scenario.
I’m enough of a strategic thinker (albeit at the amateur level) to pre-ponder the question. I’ve played my share of military and non-military simulation games, have read my Lao Tzu and BH Liddell-Hart and John Boyd, and played the game “Diplomacy” and “Shogun” enough times to know that the question is not so much how many assets the sovereign state players have or where they are, but more the question of how they are going to be tactically deployed, and against what objective, as well as changing or restored military doctrine.
“… Israeli strategists rely on game theory models to ensure the intended response to staged provocations and manipulated crises. With the use of game theory algorithms, those responses become predictable, even foreseeable—within an acceptable range of probabilities. The waging of war “by way of deception” is now a mathematical discipline.
Such “probabilistic” war planning enables Tel Aviv to deploy serial provocations and well-timed crises as a force multiplier to project Israeli influence worldwide. For a skilled agent provocateur, the target can be a person, a company, an economy, a legislature, a nation or an entire culture—such as Islam. With a well-modeled provocation, the anticipated reaction can even become a powerful weapon in the Israeli arsenal…..”
You can easily find and chart out who in this world has deployable nuclear, space-based and other weapons and make some kind of reasonable assessment as to their reliability, functionality, success rate, etc. Even non-nuclear, non-space-capable states have enough resources to tie up a strategic corner.
There are available guides if you know where to look for them; undoubtedly the most accurate are highly-classified and unavailable to you, but that’s okay; you‘re only playing the home version of this game; your spouse can “turn the letters” and get you another beer; the pros have lots of people to help them.
I do not suggest that I have enough brains, experience, wisdom, wit or humanity to sit at that table and help people make decisions.
But if we are in a world in which the small handful of great remaining powers are in a situation in which there are new alliances and allegiances [BRICS is visible and potent, and the European aide of NATO seems slightly shaky lately, and countries under extreme economic duress are looking for and finding new friends], your side has been holding numerous “exercises” and your opponents have been visibly beefing up manpower and machinery, and small “two-bit” players have been blustering, andall players have been testing their opponents with minor terrain-based moves, or space-based tests, and minor oligarchs are running around on the game-board called Earth flexing their tiny but dangerous mini-armies, and there are at least four nations with small nuclear capacity, and we’ve already arguably seen the covert use of miniature nukes and hearing a lot of talk about “dirty bombs” and EMP pulses (however specious they might be), and we have been saturated with “false flag” events and incidents involving “actors”, perhaps an extension of the use of “synthespians” in military simulations, then it is quite reasonable to expect that there will be at least one example of what serious simulation gaming experts call “wild cards”.
Another of those “wild cards” might be the use with critical timing and placement of some kind of new biological weapon, especially one that acts on the minds of those impacted, and so a backcheck of lists of weapons and capability must be cross-referenced for multiple attack possibilities. [Yes, the Zionist PNAC referenced biological weapons too.]
“… Pollard probably is still the the most harmful spy the US suffered in recent memory. Pollard was apparently cued by the Israelis to find specific intel indentified by file number by a second Israeli spy. In doing that, he gave the Israelis ‘the holy Grail’ of American intelligence-gathering: “sources and methods” i.e. how the US intelligence systems work. In terms of effort and money needed to repair that damage we’re speaking probably about more than a decade and many, many billions.
Parts of this intel the Israelis then repackaged and traded to the Russians (America’s enemy at the time), in exchange for them letting Jews immigrate to Israel. Some ally, but if it’s good for Israel …”
Which country or countries has the ability to simultaneously deliver cyber-attacks with biological attacks with space attacks and a military stand-by component that has at least miniaturied or rapidly-deliverable nuclear-tipped shells or cruise missiles?
Which of those countries carries the possibility of duplicity?
Which of those countries has been acting on an international basis lately like a loaded loose cannon?
Perhaps having a high-speed computer that can juggle multiple variables and play out multiple scenarios in a split second would come in handy so you’ll know who to shoot first.
The commander-in-chief is always in the midst of a series of shifting events and so he can never at any moment consider the whole import of the event that is occurring. Moment by moment the event is imperceptibly shaping itself. At every moment of this continuous, uninterrupted shaping of events, the commander-in-chief is in the midst of a most complex play of intrigues, worries, contingencies, authorities, projects, counsels, threats and deceptions, and is continuously obliged to reply to innumerable questions addressed to him, all of which are in conflict with one another…. A commander-in-chief, especially at a difficult moment, has always before him not just one proposal but dozens simultaneously. And all of these proposals, based on strategies and tactics, contradict one another. A commander-in-chief’s business, it would seem, is simply to choose of one of these. But even that cannot do. Events and time do not wait.
— Tolstoy, War and Peace
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services has announced a change in policy regarding the oath taken by naturalization candidates: They will no longer be required “to declare that they will ‘bear arms on behalf of the United States’ and ‘perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States.’”
Why is it in our interests to recognize citizenship for foreigners who will not “provide for the common defence”? The Constitution was written for us, so it seems fair to ask: What’s in it for us? What’s in it for our Posterity?
It’s also fair to ask, since the whole government ostensibly was set up for us, why such a change was made without consulting us beforehand through our representatives, and asking how we felt about it? For an administration that makes such a big deal out of trying to con people into thinking we live in a “democracy,” why have the representatives of the people been bypassed on such a potentially revealing litmus test of sincerity?
With problems experienced with some foreign nationals let into this country without proper vetting and without ascertaining how their admission further secures the Blessings of Liberty, it’s also fair to wonder how many oaths are just part of a ritual needed to mask hostile loyalties.
While the USCIS policy went into effect July 21, there is still time to provide inputs, including protests, assuming you, as an Oath Keeper, have objections to this change and would like to make your views known. You have a little over a week to do that, by sending your inputs, per the Policy Manual Comment process, to firstname.lastname@example.org. The only thing I would add, assuming your Congressman and Senators are not total wastes of time, is to include them on your correspondence.
Palantir Technologies Raises $450 Million in New Fundraising Effort
New valuation of $20 billion would make company fourth most highly valued startup
By ELIZABETH DWOSKIN
Updated July 23, 2015 6:45 p.m. ET
Palantir Technologies, a Silicon Valley startup that focuses on data mining, has raised $450 million in a new fundraising round, the company announced Thursday in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Speaking of data-mining, did you know that General Wesley Clark, the fellow who recently called for the indefinite internment of vaguely-defined individuals during the ongoing endless war on terror, was — back in late 2001 — at about the same time he was campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination “had been hired as a board member and lobbyist for Acxiom, an Arkansas company that manages data collected by large businesses on millions of Americans. Weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, the company developed a computerized system that would perform instant identity checks on airline passengers. The company paid Clark — as well as other Washington lobbyists — to “use some of his connections to make sales calls to the government,” says Jennifer Barrett, Acxiom’s chief privacy officer.”
“… According to the Wall Street Journal, Clark “joined the board of the Nasdaq-traded company in December 2001, as the company started to market its customer-database software to federal agencies eager to hunt for terrorists by scanning and coordinating the vast cyberspace trove of citizen information.” Fortune magazine reported that Clark “is spearheading the company’s pursuit of contracts with the federal government.….”
The CounterPunch article also noted the company’s involvement with the no-fly list and its relationship with Torch, Inc.., “a military contractor working on designing an updated version of the “Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System” known as (CAPPS-II), one of the few programs that survived the Congressional shutdown of the “Total Information Awareness” program at the Pentagon. It is essentially a passenger profiling system. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, “The basic structure of passenger profiling is to use an algorithm to determine indicators of characteristics or behavior patterns that are related to the occurrence of certain behavior…..”
According to the complaint, Acxiom’s activities constituted unfair and deceptive trade practices, as “Acxiom has publicly represented its belief that individuals should have notice about how information about them is used and have choices about that dissemination, and has stated that it does not permit clients to make non-public information available to individuals,” yet Acxiom proceeded to sell information to Torch Concepts without obtaining consent, an ability to opt out, or furnishing notice to the affected consumers.
The FTC took no action against Acxiom, which had responded that it had followed its privacy principles and was not deceptive in its business practices. “Torch Concepts was acting under contract to the Department of Defense in their efforts to research ways to improve military base security,” a company spokesman said. “Our policy clearly states that we ‘provide information products which include financial information, Social Security number and other related information where permitted by law,’ and that this information is ‘provided to government agencies for the purposes of verifying information, employment screening and assisting law enforcement.’”
Acxiom has a history of making it difficult for consumers to remove themselves from Acxiom’s marketing lists.
In 2005 Acxiom was a nominee for the Big Brother Awards for Worst Corporate Invader for a tradition of data brokering.[
In 2013 Acxiom was among nine companies that the Federal Trade Commission is investigating to see how they collect and use consumer data….”
July 22-23, 2015 — Sinaloa Cartel chief “El Chapo” guest at 2011 Mexican governors’ confab
Liberty Movement Needs More Innovations To Counter Technological Tyranny
Wednesday, 22 July 2015 04:39 Brandon Smith
The great lesson from history that each consecutive generations seems to forget is that the tools of tyranny used outward will inevitably be turned inward. That is to say, the laws and weapons governments devise for supposed enemies abroad will ALWAYS and eventually be used against the people they are mandated to protect. There is no centralized system so trustworthy, no political establishment so free of corruption that the blind faith of the citizenry is warranted. If free people do not remain vigilant they will be made slaves by their own leadership. This is the rule, not the exception, and it applies to America as much as any other society.
The beauty of the con game that is the “war on terror” is that such a war is ultimately undefinable. An undefinable war has no set enemy; the establishment can change the definition of the “enemy” at will to any culture, country, or group it wishes. Thus, the war on terror can and will last forever. Or, at least, it will last as long as corrupt elitists remain in positions of power.
As I have outlined in past articles, most terror groups are creations of our nation’s own covert intelligence apparatus, or the covert agencies of allied governments.
ISIS is perhaps the most openly engineered terror organization of all time (surpassing Operation Gladio), with U.S. elites and purported anti-Muslim terror champions like Sen. John McCain and Gen. Paul Vallely making deals with “moderate” Free Syrian Army rebels who immediately turn out to be full fledged ISIS fighters (I’m sure they were not “surprised” by this outcome) and the Obama Administration blatantly funding and arming more “moderates” which again in turn seem to be crossing over into the hands of ISIS. Frankly, the whole idea that there is a moderate front in places like Syria where alphabet agencies reign supreme is utterly absurd.
The bottom line – our political leadership, Republican and Democrat alike, created ISIS out of thin air, and now the American people are being expected to relinquish more individual liberties in the name of stopping this fabricated threat. Apparently, the Orwellian police state structures built under the auspices of the Patriot Act, the AUMF, the NDAA, FISA, etc. have not been enough to stop events like the Chatanooga shooting from occurring. So, what is the answer? Well, certainly not a reexamination of our insane foreign policy or an investigation into government funded false flag terrorism; that would make too much sense.
Instead, the establishment claims we need MORE mass surveillance without warrants, tighter restrictions on individual freedoms, and even, according to retired General Wesley Clark, internment camps designed to separate and confine “disloyal” Americans from the rest of the population.
Remember, all of this is being suggested in the name of stopping ISIS, but the language being used by political elites does not restrict such actions to ISIS related “extremists”. Once again, the war on terror is an ambiguous war, so ambiguous that internment camps supposedly meant for those the government labels POTENTIAL Islamic extremists could also be used for potential extremists of any group. Once the fuse is lit on the process of rendition, black bagging, internment, and assassination of citizens, any citizens, without trial, there will be no stopping the powder keg explosion to follow.
I believe that the power brokers that dictate legal and political developments within our country are preparing to turn the full force of the police state machine against the American people, all in the name of protecting us, of course. I do not need their brand of “protection”, and neither does anyone else.
It comes down to this – in the face of an increasingly advanced technological control grid, either liberty movement activists and freedom fighters must develop our own countermeasures, or, we will lose everything, and every generation after us will blame us for our inaction, if they remember us at all.
Keep in mind a countermeasure must be decentralized. Bitcoin, for instance, is NOT a practical countermeasure being that it relies on a centralized and monitored global internet in order to function. It also does not encourage any tangible production capabilities or skill sets. Therefore, it does not provide for the function of a true alternative economy. It is a false solution and a useless countermeasure to a fiat currency based economy.
A real countermeasure to a controlled economy, for instance, would be a localized barter economy in which people must develop ways to produce, rather than play make believe with digital cryptocurrencies.
Countermeasures do not always have to be high tech. In fact, I am a staunch believer in the advantages of low tech solutions to high tech tyranny. As many are already aware, with the aid of Oath Keepers I recently developed a long term wearable cloak system which defeats FLIR thermal imaging, including military grade thermal imaging. Something which has never been offered on the civilian market before.
But this is only one countermeasure to one major threat. I will continue to work on defenses in other areas in which I feel I am best qualified, however, the movement needs more R&D, and we need it NOW before it is too late. I would like to suggest some possible dangers, and how people with far more knowledge than myself could create tools for defeating tyranny. I would also like to examine some simple organizational countermeasures which EVERYONE should be undertaking right now.
This is an amazing countermeasure for the liberty movement because it removes the monopoly of state control over individual security. Nothing pisses off the establishment more than people taking individual and community defense into their own hands. Fear is the greatest weapon of a corrupt government, and if they can’t keep you afraid because you are your own security, then they have lost considerable leverage over you.
This dynamic is represented perfectly in the Oath Keepers Community Preparedness Team model, which has been utilized successfully in places like Ferguson, MO. Today, in the wake of the Chatanooga shootings, Oath Keeper teams are volunteering across the nation to stand guard (discreetly) at military recruiting offices. The recruiters themselves, who are forced to remain disarmed by the DoD, appear to be thankful for the Oath Keeper presence. This kind of effort shows those in the military that the liberty movement is not the great homegrown monster that the government and the SPLC have made us out to be. It also throws a monkey wrench into the use of false flag terrorism or terrorism funded by covert agencies (as ISIS is) as a means to herd the masses into totalitarianism in the name of safety.
You might not be an engineer, or a tactician, but anyone can and should be organizing security teams for the places they live. Nothing could be more important.
Community Food Reserve
Am I talking about feeding your entire neighborhood or your entire town during a crisis? No, not necessarily. But, if you found an innovative way to make that possible, the rest of the movement would surely be grateful. Preppers do what they can for themselves and their families, but the bottom line is, if you are isolated and unorganized, all your prepping will be for naught. You are nothing more than an easy target and no amount of “OPSEC” is going to hide the fact that you will look well fed and healthy while everyone else doesn’t. The solution to this is to organize community defense, as stated above, but to also organize a community food reserve.
I highly suggest approaching already existing groups, like your local churches if they are willing to listen, and discussing the idea of food stores, water filtration, and shelter scenarios. If you can convince at least one community group to make preparations, you have just potentially saved numerous lives and stopped the exploitation of food scarcity as a means to dominate your local population during disaster.
Active WiFi based radar systems have been developed over the past several years which can see through walls (to a point) and potentially detect persons hiding in an urban environment. The number of radio frequency based radar projects coming out of the dark recesses of DARPA have been numerous, and each project appears to revolve around the goal of complete surveillance ability, or total information awareness. Such measures are not as effective against a technologically advanced opponent, but they could be very effective in dominating a lower tech civilian population.
WiFi radar in particular is a rather disturbing concept, and not a field that I am personally well versed. I have seen some examples of radio-wave based personnel tracking and have not been all that impressed with the visual results, but this is only what has been made available to the public. Sometimes, the DoD will present a technology that does not work as well as they claim in order to strike fear in the minds of their enemies. That said, sometimes they also use tech tools that work far better than they let on.
Luckily, radar countermeasure information is widely available to the public, and WiFi blocking and absorbing materials exist also. Liberty champions would do well, though, to look into active countermeasures along with passive, and devise methods for jamming WiFi radar altogether.
RFID chips are a passive technology but rather dangerous under certain conditions. With a grid of RFID readers in place in an environment such as a city, or a highway, a person could be tracked in real time every second of every day. He might not even know he is carrying a chip or multiple chips, the trackers being so small they could be sewn behind the button of a shirt.
This is one threat which would probably have to be solved with higher technology. I have seen RFID jamming and “spoofing” done by civilian computer engineers, mostly from foreign countries. But, this should not just be a hobby for computer experts in technical institutes. The Liberty Movement needs portable RFID jamming and spoofing capability to ensure that these chips, which are set to be ingrained in almost every existing product in the near future from clothing to cars to credit cards, can be rendered useless.
Drones Vs. Drones
The predator drone is not the biggest threat on the block anymore in terms of surveillance ability. DARPA has been working on other drone designs similar to the A160 Hummingbird and the MQ-8 Fire Scout; lightweight helicopter-style UAVs that can stay in the air for up to 24 hours and provide overwatch in a 30 mile area. And lets not forget about JLENS surveillance blimps (also ironically referred to as “ISIS” Integrated Sensor Is The Structure project) which can and are outfitted with high grade cameras and radar that can be used to track people from 10,000 feet up in the sky.
This is the future of combat operations and the lockdown of populations. Standard military units will be reduced as much as possible while UAVs will be deployed en masse. Air power has always been the biggest weakness of civilians seeking to counter corrupt governments, but this is actually changing.
While they may be lower tech in certain respects, civilian based drones are actually keeping pace with military projects, if only because military projects are restricted by bureaucracy and red tape while civilians are encouraged and emboldened by profit motive. Range and elevation limitations in the civilian market are purely legal right now, and such limitations will be of no concern once the SHTF. For the first time in history, common people now have the ability to field an aerial defense.
The DoD is well aware of this, and is already working on measures to counter enemy drones through their Black Dart and Switchblade program. The Liberty Movement needs its own Black Dart program.
Long Distance Radio And Codes
Regardless of the region they live, liberty activists should be developing their own radio code methods for secure communications. There are a few existing frequency hopping and coded radio systems out there on the civilian market, but these are short range units usually with around 1 watt of power. This makes them ideal for quick operational comms and difficult to listen in on simply because their range is so limited. That said, longer range radio communication will likely be essential for the spread of information from one region to the next, and no one should assume that regular phone and internet will be available in the future. News must travel somehow.
This means HAM radio, using mobile repeaters to avoid triangulation, and old school coded messages. The R&D portion of this issue I believe needs to be in the use of an Automatic Packet Reporting System (APRS) for the liberty movement regionally and nationwide. This is a kind of “texting” through HAM radio, and combining this with traditional low tech cipher coding may be our best bet for long range secure comms. It could also help defeat drones that intercept standard messages and use voice recognition software to identify targets.
Information sharing makes or breaks a society. Without the web, the liberty movement would not have found the success it has today, and the alternative media would not exist, let alone be outmatching the readership ratings of mainstream media sources that have otherwise dominated news flow for decades. Unfortunately, the web is NOT a “creative commons” as many people believe. It is, as Edward Snowden’s revelations on the NSA proved, a highly controlled and monitored network in which there is essentially no privacy, even with the existence of cryptography.
The great threat to the establishment is the possibility that people will begin building an internet separate from the internet; a decentralized network. Recently, an inventor named Benjamin Caudill was slated to release a device called “Proxyham”, designed to reroute wifi signals and remove the possibility of government monitoring of digital communications. Strangely, just before the release of Proxyham, Caudill pulled all devices with the intent to destroy them, and will not be releasing the source code and blueprints to the public as planned.
Clearly, something or someone scared the hell out of Caudill, and he is rushing to appease them. We don’t know who for certain, but my vote is the NSA. And if this is the case, it means his project and others like it are a threat to the surveillance state, and must be released to the public ASAP. If Caudill doesn’t have the guts to do it, then the liberty movement must.
An alternative internet would be a holy grail in the fight against tyranny, if only to show the world that people can indeed decouple from the system and create advanced networks themselves, and do it better than the establishment.
These are just a few of the areas that require immediate attention from those with ingenuity in the liberty movement. The time for talk is over. The time for tangible action has begun. Beyond the need for immediate local organization by those preparing for social and economic breakdown, there is a desperate need for out-of-the-box thinkers to develop countermeasures to technological fascism. It’s time for the movement to go beyond mere intellectual analysis and provide concrete solutions. There is nothing left but this.
the DOJ’s isolation of its ownwatchdogon the topics of wiretaps and national security letters;
“… The department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a 68-pageopinionThursday saying that Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz’s office should not be granted access to several different kinds of typically confidential material unless there is a clear law-enforcement or counterintelligence purpose — and that the department’s lawyers, not the inspector general’s, would make that determination…..”
But the lead article as of midnight Thursday was about“el-chapo”:
“… According to leading Mexican investigative newsmagazine Proceso, the agents who arrested Guzmán weren’t Mexican at all — they were Americans, members of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the U.S. Marshals Service, dressed as Mexican marines, working alongside one or more unidentified U.S. intelligence agencies.
Government officials from Mexico and the U.S. have yet to dispute the accuracy of the story, published in the magazine’s July 18 issue, eight days after the world’s most powerful drug trafficker escaped from Mexico’s top maximum security prison, though former officials from both sides of the border expressed their doubts to The Intercept. The magazine’s special features are behind a paywall online.
The Proceso article, by J. Jesús Esquivel, a veteran reporter who has written two books on the history of the DEA and CIA in Mexico, follows anonymous claims from U.S. officials to U.S. media outlets asserting that Guzman’s escape was foretold in warnings provided to authorities in Mexico. Mexican officials have denied these claims.
Filed from Washington D.C., Proceso’s account of Guzmán’s capture is sourced to two U.S. officials whose positions in government are not revealed. Together they claim that his arrest — and much of the intelligence that led to it — was kept secret from Mexican officials until after he was apprehended.
The Mexican constitution places strict limits on the operations of foreign law enforcement, military personnel and intelligence agencies on Mexican soil. In recent years, however, joint U.S. and Mexican counternarcotics operations have pushed those constraints to the brink, with Americans more deeply embedded in the so-called drug war in Mexico than ever before. If true, the Proceso account would represent one of those operations taken to the extreme — with Americans keeping their Mexican counterparts in the dark in order to drive an armed operation to capture Mexico’s most wanted man, in potential violation of Mexican law.
According to Proceso’s sources, U.S. marshals and DEA agents had “perfectly” zeroed in on Guzmán’s “movements” through “interception systems” including satellite tracking in the three weeks prior to his arrest; they were waiting for the right moment to strike…..”
In this week’s [32-minute] Radio WhoWhatWhy Podcast, Guillermo Jimenez talks to Ioan Grillo, a journalist based in Mexico City with over 15 years experience covering crime in the country, and the author of the book El Narco: Inside Mexico’s Criminal Insurgency. In this casual conversation, they explore a range of possibilities related to this colossal “blunder.”
(For background on El Chapo and on the US government’s unusual stance toward him, see this WhoWhatWhy article and this and this.)
“The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed a hotly debated measure that blocks any mandatory labeling of foods made with genetically engineered crops, including pre-empting a state law set to take effect next year in Vermont.
Dubbed the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act by supporters, but the “Deny Americans the Right to Know” or DARK Act, by opponents, the measure was approved 275-150 with 45 Democrats voting for the bill.
House passage marks a victory for food and agricultural companies that have lobbied for the bill, and a blow to opponents, which include consumer, health and environmental groups and organic food industry players.
House members had a heated debate ahead of the vote with supporters claiming GMOs are proven safe. They said mandatory labeling would burden the food industry with unwieldy and costly requirements…..”
As private citizens stand guard at military recruiting centers across the nation, the Army has released a warning to its personnel and recruits, stating that armed citizens should be treated as a “security threat”.
The Army has warned its recruiters to treat the gun-toting civilians gathering at centers across the country in the wake of the Chattanooga, Tenn., shooting as a security threat.
Soldiers should avoid anyone standing outside the recruiting centers attempting to offer protection and report them to local law enforcement and the command if they feel threatened, according to a U.S. Army Recruiting Command policy letter issued Monday.
“I’m sure the citizens mean well, but we cannot assume this in every case and we do not want to advocate this behavior,” according to the Army Command Operations Center-Security Division letter, which was authenticated by the service.
Recruiters were ordered not to interact or acknowledge the armed civilians, who have been greeted by a mix of concern, indifference and gratitude by the public.
“If questioned by these alleged concerned citizens, be polite, professional and terminate the conversation immediately and report the incident to local law enforcement …,” the command advised.
As the incidents crop up around the country, police could be asked to confront the civilians with guns on the Army’s behalf.
“Ensure your recruiters clearly articulate to local police the civilian may be armed and in possession of a conceal/carry permit,” it told the centers.
The command said recruiters should also immediately fill out an Army security report.
Sen. Mike Lee gives a look at the corrupt workings of the legislature.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) gave America a disturbing look at what happens behind-the-scenes in the legislature. While a printer worked furiously behind him, Lee explained how the Senate was just given under 1 hour to read and comprehend a massive spending bill before the scheduled vote.
Here is Senator Lee’s message from July 21st, 2015:
LEE: We received this bill at 3:07 p.m. The bill is 1,033 pages long. We’re being called on to vote on it at 4 o’clock. We’re only up to about page 500 in printing it off. I’m pretty sure that its going to be hard to read the whole bill in its entirety and understand it in the roughly 30 minutes between now and when we have to vote on the bill.
If I don’t have time to read legislation before voting on it, my default vote is no. We received the highway bill today at 3:06 p.m., and it is over 1,000 pages long. Our first vote on this legislation is scheduled for 4:00 p.m.
“If I don’t have time to read legislation before voting on it, my default vote is no,” Senator Lee commented on his video. That’s a principle endorsed by Police State USA in a 2013 article, A Pro-Liberty Approach to Lawmaking.
Responsibility for the rush-to-vote ultimately lies with the Senate Majority leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY). McConnell reportedly had just reached a deal with Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) on six years of federal spending and wanted to ram it through with little debate and no amendments. The schedule made it sot that effectively no one aside from the authors would know for sure what was buried in the massive bill.
It goes without saying that if the Senators themselves don’t have a chance to read a bill, then neither does the voting public have a chance to analyze it and give feedback to their representatives. The very idea of voting on bills without debate is undemocratic and incompatible with a free society.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time we have seen egregious abuse of power from majority leaders. Last session, House leader John Boehner successfully pushed through a federal gun-ban with only 10 (out of 435) members present!
Fortunately, McConnell’s treacherous maneuver was unsuccessful, this time. Riled opponents rejected a motion to begin debate, 41-56.
Despite the setback, McConnell intends to pressure a vote as soon as possible, even if it means keeping the Senate in session over the weekend. Even with a few extra days, who can realistically read, digest, and understand 1,033 pages of legalese in under a week?
When Americans correctly understand the level of corruption in the legislature, there can be no wondering about the source of the bad laws and injustices we lament so frequently on this website. The only remedy is more exposure and political pressure, but the vast majority of voters are too wrapped up with sports and Reality TV to be bothered with political activism.
V-STAG is also designed to provide students involved in threat incidents with appropriate mental health counseling services, with parental involvement, and reduce the numbers of long-term school suspensions or expulsions and alternative school setting placements.
What’s really being said is police and school administrators can put your kid(s) into mental health counseling which will follow them throughout their adult lives! Oddly there isn’t any mention of the school-to-prison pipeline!
The V-STAG, threat assessment team will be used even if a student is alleged to have committed a crime and can’t be identified:
In the conference brochure the LAPD’s Threat Management (Assessment) Unit is listed prominently because they founded the ATAP! If you guessed the ATAP has close ties to DHS give yourself a gold star, click here & here to read more.
“This training will address the critical intersection between compliance with federal laws to address sexual and intimate partner violence, and the role that threat assessment can play in effectively addressing these issues.”
Our government want us to believe that EVERY student is a potential threat and we need threat assessments to stop them.
The fact is student homicides are RARE:
With nearly 106,000 public and private schools in the U.S., there were shootings at only 0.009% of schools since December 2012. According to the National Center for Education Statistics’ 2013 “Indicators of School Crime and Safety” report, from the 1992-93 school year until the 2010-11 school year, there were between 11 and 34 homicides of youths ages 5-18 at schools each year (including attacks with weapons other than firearms), with an average of about 23 homicides per year.
Compare that to NCES’s enrollment statistics, about 0.000044% of public and private K-12 students were killed at school per year between 1992-93 and 2010-11. That’s about one out of every 2,273,000 students per year. By contrast, the odds of being hit by lightning in a given year is one out of 700,000 according to National Geographic. For more information read the “Youth Violence Fact Sheet”
To find out more about how the Secret Service and the FBI are using threat assessments, read the following articles:
“I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First, the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that, though, the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern.” ~ Bill Gates
AI isn’t science fiction any longer. Mainstream news doesn’t often report that artificial intelligence may be running the world. Was the Oracle in the movie the Matrix, for example, really just a renegade AI program? Even Bill Gates, the man who owns Monsanto stock and tries to push vaccines on innocent tribal children in India, has warned about artificial intelligence and the threat of smart machines.
Sometimes little snippets of what is actually possible leak through – like the recent news item touting the self-awareness of a tiny, “cute” robot.
The ability for something to be able to recognize that it is an individual, separate and with its own consciousness, is one of the classic signs of self-awareness.
Researchers at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute AI and Reasoning Lab in New York have adapted the classic inductive reasoning puzzle known as The King’s Wise Men and posed the problem to a trio of robots. One of them passed their little test.
The chairman of the department of cognitive science at the Institute, Selmer Bringsjord, programmed French robotics, namely Aldebaran’s humanoid design called a Nao robot. It is only 58 centimeters tall. The Nao robots were programmed with a proprietary algorithm called Deontic Cognitive Event Calculus, which enables the machines to carry out reasoning.
The robots were told that two of them were given “dumbing” pills which made them unable to speak, and one a placebo – even though all that was really done is a button was pushed on top of their heads.
When asked if they were given dumbing pills or the placebo, there is an awkward silence and then one robot stands up and says “I don’t know.”
What happens next is amazing. The robot then raises its hand like a child in a class room, and offers a correction: “Sorry, I know now. I was able to prove that I was not given the dumbing pill.”
If a spy satellite is attacked, who will command America’s response — the head of Strategic Command or the Director of National Intelligence? If an Air Force satellite is attacked first, who would command America’s response? These questions are being hotly — but very quietly –debated at the highest reaches of the U.S. government.
Since an attack on our most sophisticated spy satellites would almost certainly be among the first sign of war it is crucial that any response be coordinated between the military and the Intelligence Community. But I hear that few military senior commanders have been willing to accept that the DNI or another senior intelligence official — perhaps the NRO director? — might command both spy and military satellites. However, in the first minutes or hours of an attack, the IC would probably know more about what’s happening and someone would need to decide whether to move satellites or take other actions. Also, the ambiguous and often uncertain ability to discern what is actually happening to a satellite — is it being attacked by man or nature — make these decision even more fraught and their repercussions difficult to predict.
It’s not that the senior military leaders do not want the IC to command. The problem is more fundamental. Since senior American policymakers have long assumed that space would not be the center of a shooting war, we have never categorically detailed who would do what in the event of an attack in space. That is changing.
The debate appears to have begun as the Intelligence Community and the Pentagon began discussing construction of the first “joint interagency and combined space operations in which both the IC and DoD sit,” as Deputy Defense Bob Work put it on June 23 when we first learned about the center.
The highly classified command center — about which we know very few details — should be operational by the end of the year, he said.
All this has been prompted by recent Chinese and Russian efforts to build effective anti-satellite capabilities.
The Chinese have made at least two major anti-satellite tests in the last decade and the Russians are engaged in similar efforts. Air Force Lt. Gen. Jay Raymond told an overflow audience at the annual Warfighters Lunch at the annual Space Symposium that American and allied satellites were no longer safe. “Soon every satellite in every orbit will be able to be held at risk,” the head of the 14th Air Force said.
One of the other Chinese actions that prompted high-level concerns in the US was the May 2013 Chinese “science experiment,” which many senior officials and independent analysts believe was an ASAT test near geosynchronous orbit, where some spy satellites live.
“This was the first time the Intelligence Community really got a scare, because up to that time, they considered that their satellites were relatively safe because they orbit in very high altitudes. The Chinese test shattered those illusions,” Theresa Hitchens, a scholar at the University of Maryland’s Center for International and Security Studies and former director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research in Geneva, says.
China has claimed its test in July last year was for missile defense and noted that nothing was destroyed in the test and the Chinese have never admitted publicly that the 2013 test was connected with the military.
Faced with the Chinese and Russian work, the United States military has begun to make a fundamental strategic shift. Work outlined the changes at this year’s Space Symposium in Colorado Springs. Breaking D readers will remember — because we broke the story — that Work said in a classified speech that the US military “must be able to respond in an integrated, coordinated fashion” to attacks on US space assets and he used the charged term “space control” in making his argument. This is because space is no longer a sanctum free from war. In fact, space is considered by many experts to be where the next major war would begin.
“While we rely heavily on space capabilities, in both peace and war, we must continue to emphasize space control as challenges arise,” he said. “To maintain our military dominance we must consider all space assets, both classified and unclassified, as part of a single constellation (emphasis added). And if an adversary tries to deny us the capability, we must be able to respond in an integrated, coordinated fashion.”
But that is not how we fight now. As things stand today, the head of Strategic Command (STRATCOM) would command military space forces through Air Force Space Command’s Joint Space Operations Center (JSPOC). That is also where a small number of allied space officers work, coordinating with their national governments and with NATO.
On the military side of the fence, STRATCOM created a “Joint Space Doctrine and Tactics Forum,” which first met in February,, to create new doctrine and figure out some of these thorny issues.
I’ve tried speaking with a number of intelligence community sources since I first heard about this debate more than five months ago, but none of them were willing to address the issue.
Then the presumptive new chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Joseph Dunford, was asked this question by the Senate Armed Services Committee in the written questions submitted before his nomination hearing:
What is your understanding and assessment of the authorities and agreements which are in place to allow U.S. military personnel to carry out missions under the authorities contained in title 50, United States Code? Do you believe any modifications to these authorities are necessary?
Dunford’s response to the committee appears to signal that he is willing to let the Intelligence Community command military forces if needs be. “While I believe that our military forces are generally most effective when they operate under a military chain of command, there are circumstances in which exceptions to this general rule are appropriate; authorities and agreements exist to facilitate the granting of such exceptions,” he told the SASC.
I’ve spoken to several space experts who knew of the IC-DoD debate about command authorities and they believe Dunford is addressing this issue in his reply. He cites Section 3038 of Title 50, the law governing the Intelligence Community. That is the section dealing with the three intelligence agencies who dominate space operations: the National Reconnassance Office (NRO), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA). The NRO is the key agency in the IC in terms of command authorities as it flies the nation’s spy satellites.
Space analyst Brian Weeden, an expert at the Secure World Foundation and former Air Force officer in the JSPOC, is skeptical of the administration’s claims about an increased threat in space.
“It is difficult to determine how much of this increase in rhetoric from the US military is driven by the budget debate, and their fear about being held to the sequestration budget caps. We have some evidence of China and Russia working on ASAT capabilities, but it’s very hard to tell how serious that threat is because the US government is not being forthcoming with details,” he said in an email.
He finds it “absurd” that the Indtelligence Community might know something is happening in space and not share it with STRATCOM. “But, unfortunately, this is not a new situation, and it’s not unique to space. For example, it’s been something they’ve been struggling with in targeted drone killings,” he says.
He also notes that the Air Force has long assumed space would be a center of conflict in a war, though it’s clear from policymakers’ recent statements that they believe a fundamental shift is occurring in terms of US vulnerability to attack.
“Policymakers have NOT always assumed space would be free from conflict. When I was on crew in Cheyenne Mountain we had a crew position called the Space Battle Manager and two others called the Space Defense Director and Space Defense Analyst. That’s half of the military positions on the crew dedicated to detecting and characterize threats to US national security space systems. We had TTPs (Tactics, Techniques and Procedures) in place to train for, and response to, attacks on US space systems,” Weeden says, adding that the, “specific type of threats have changed since then, but there was always an assumption space would be contested.”
One issue that comes to mind is what the potential legal implications are of the IC characterizing Weeden sees two primary policy issues at play in the current debate. Who decides what constitutes a threat in space and who decides what should be done about those threats: the IC or the military?
“Another is the inherent conflict between the who is ‘warning’ about an attack and who is the ‘shooter’ deciding on a response. If both of those missions are given to the same entity, you have incentives for escalation,” he writes. “This is the reason that NORAD is the military entity charged with detecting and warning about attacks on North America, while USSTRATCOM is charged with the execution of nuclear forces in response.”
Here’s Dunford’s response to the SASC in full:
“Title 50 of the U.S. Code tasks the Secretary of Defense to ensure that the military departments maintain sufficient capabilities to collect and produce intelligence to meet requirements of the DNI, Secretary of Defense, CJCS, and COCOMs. Title 50 of the U.S. Code also authorizes the Secretary to use such elements of the DOD as may be appropriate for the execution of the national intelligence program functions described in Section 3038 of Title 50. While I believe that our military forces are generally most effective when they operate under a military chain of command, there are circumstances in which exceptions to this general rule are appropriate; authorities and agreements exist to facilitate the granting of such exceptions. In some cases, the Secretary of Defense may approve this exception and in other cases only the President has approval authority. I believe the current authorities strike the appropriate balance between enabling DoD to operate within its independent Title 50 authorities, providing necessary and appropriate support to other agencies of the U.S. government under Title 50, and ensuring critical oversight of sensitive operations.”
(If, dear readers, you know more about this debate and are willing to discuss it sotto voce — on background or deep background– just click here or on our Tips button at the top of the page and I will get your email.)
The Dawn of Privacy-Driven Social Networks | 17 June 2015 | Privacy concerns in the wake of Edward Snowden disclosures have prompted new social networks to offer alternatives with a focus on user privacy. These companies are abstaining from selling user data and offering encrypted apps for their customers’ communications. Manhattan-based Minds, which has run an alternative social media website for two years, just launched a lightweight social-network app for mobile…that encrypts all communications – so they are secure and anonymous (able to be read only by the intended recipient).
It depends on who the user is. Law enforcement and private investigators will use the information to try to:
1. Identify individuals based on behavioral analysis of comments, etc.
2. De-anonymize individuals and leverage this information on other platforms, i.e. checking identical/similar usernames and using the behavioral analysis to predict other (online or offline) hangouts and activities in order to build a more complete picture.
Sociologists and psychologists will use it to build behavioral models for individuals acting as individuals and for ad-hoc groups of individuals without any external organization, goal, etc.
Members of the public and historians will use it to look at and for public figures and to better understand them. More importantly, the public should use this database as a wake-up call that the driving force behind Big Data isn’t Big Brother – it’s the masses. Between this and the Dark Net Market archives and some other releases in the last few weeks, it’s becoming more apparent that the “right to be forgotten” may be recognized by some governments but private individuals and researchers, not just megacorps, remain major obstacles to it.
This is, simply put, the biggest example of open source SIGINT to date. The fact that it was done legally and openly, and not as the result of a hack or data leak, may make it seem less newsworthy – but if anything, it makes even more alarming to privacy advocates. It’s not a one-off either, it’s just one of the biggest signposts we’ve seen so far.
Of interest to me is the Raytheon link, from which I borrowed the featured image.
Raytheon is at the epicenter of the military-industrial complex, headquartered — arrogantly, in my mind — in close proximity to the iconic history of Lexington and Concord. Bolt, Beranek and Newman was very involved in the creation of the linked simulator systems used to teach American armor tactics and strategy (TraDoc) how to fight with its new Abrams tanks and supporting equipment in a desert environment in the run-up to Desert Storm.
You can read about commander’s intent in the book “Into The Storm” by Tom Clancy and General Franks.
I wrote and circulated a proposal for the use of such technology to teach civilian mass casualty incident management “training and doctrine” to local civilian teams and, within a few days, received a call from someone at Langley; this was way back in 1981 wanting to know how I knew about that top-secret project. I pulled my source book off the bookshelf, one I found through a display in the window of the library at my graduate school in Boston — I never got the degree — and gave him the author, chapter title, book title and ISBN number.
BBN’s software engineering team broke off and formed a new company which was active in creating desktop computer-based simulation games to teach military tactics and strategy (one example was MAGTF for Marine amphibious Group Task Force) but which was dominantly focused on creating the supporting backbone or network on which virtually any military official with proper clearance could engage in such simulation gaming from the platoon level on up to grand strategy; dubbed DarWars, it was for DARPA and worked with a number of other vendors as well as training and evelopment centers in Orlando and elsewhere. I worked briefly for that company as a subject matter expert in civilian emergency management and incident command systems before that project was terminated.
Currently sitting on my desk, not yet completely read and annotated, is a copy of Weaponizing Maps, which opens up the door to two previous books on the power of maps as well as War, Violence, and Population: Making the Body Count. [“,,, this book offers a spatial perspective on how and why populations are regulated and disciplined by mass violence—and why these questions matter for scholars concerned about social justice. James Tyner focuses on how states and other actors use acts of brutality to manage, administer, and control space for political and economic purposes. He shows how demographic analyses of fertility, mortality, and migration cannot be complete without taking war and genocide into account. Stark, in-depth case studies provide a powerful and provocative basis for retheorizing population geography.”]
I’ve barely cracked the book Weaponizing Maps but what I see there is at least tangentially related to the topic of what is going on with Jade Helm 15. Here are some excerpts (emphases added):
On the third page of the book (actually xv in what they call “A narrative table of contents”):
“… in what follows, we trace the links among these seemingly disparate contexts in terms of the tactics and strategies of counterinsurgency. In all of them, the US military is confronted this series of unconventional armed threats, both real and potential, post by rebel organizations, criminals, and others not content to simply bow before the demands of US security. Throughout, the US military has been at pains to define the terrain of struggle, one that too often spills off the battlefield into the forests, fields, in cities where people make their everyday lives. Under such conditions, all society becomes a potential battlefield.
Maps have long been an important means of knowing this terrain, showing the locations of towns, where people farm and obtain food, and the trails and waterways they used to move from place to place. To borrow Mao Zedong’s aphorism, the insurgent must move in this every day landscape “the way the fish swims in the sea,” But this means being intimately acquainted with it. Counterinsurgency relies on the same approach to identify threats to security and to manipulate the vulnerability of life in settings where the battlefield is everywhere.…”
Later, in chapter 7, in a description of mapping in Central America and later in Afghanistan and Iraq,” the Army incorporated this approach into its new Counterinsurgency Field Manual, compiled by Gen. David Petraeus and published in 2007. Among other points, the manual highlighted the importance of mapping the “human terrain” as a critical aspect of counterinsurgency, revising”Red Mike” Edson’s vision of the battlefield [“Small Wars Manual”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Wars_Manual ] in the face of an expanding”war on terror”.
Having read this, I leapt ahead to page 138 to read the following: “… Field Manual 3–24 wasn’t the only thing Petraeus was overseeing during his tenure at Fort Leavenworth. There was also the human terrain system (HTS). Like the new field manual, the HTS was another response to the situation in Iraq that had been begun deteriorating in 2003. [See also the book “Weaponizing Anthropology” by David Price.] In the summer of 2004 Maj. Gen. Robert Scales testified before the House Armed Services Committee:
“… consensus seems to be building… that this conflict was fought brilliantly at the technological level but inadequately at the human level. The human element seems to underlie virtually all of the functional shortcomings chronicled in official reports in media stories: information operations, civil affairs, cultural awareness, soldier conduct… and most glaringly, intelligence, from national to tactical.”
[Petraeus, of course, was recently in the news for sharing secrets with his lady friend and is speculatively involved in the accidental death of a journalist whose car suddenly veered off the road into a tree and exploded.]
The lessons were clear, Scales insisted in his testimony, that “computers and aerial drones are no substitute for human eyes and brains,” and this led him to propose emulating the late 19th century British practice of immersing bright officers in the cultures of, for example, China (Charles George “Chinese” Gordon) or Arabia (T.E. Lawrence).
“At the heart of a cultural-centric approach to future war,” Scales concluded,”would be a cadre of global scouts, well-educated, with a penchant for languages and a comfort with strange and distant places.”…
On page 157, in a discussion of a trip made to the indigenous areas of Mexico in 2007 and 2008:
“Two staff from the Foreign Military Studies Office made the trip, as did the US State Department Geographer and a representative from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency team supporting the Army’s new reformed African Command, AFRICOM.”
“… It was clear that it would take at least 15 to 20 years of public and political indifference and another fully indoctrinated generation before the tenets of socialism/Marxism would completely envelop the nation and its social and political institutions, thus being impossible to ever reverse.
It was at this point that Barack Obama was thrust upon the scene. No nominee in the history of the United States was less qualified to be president, as he had no accomplishments or executive experience except to be steeped in socialist/Marxist ideology and tactics. Nonetheless due to a extraordinary confluence of circumstances — the self-inflicted and near universal unpopularity of George W. Bush, a catastrophic financial meltdown six weeks before the presidential election, uninspiring and feckless opposition in the primaries and the general election and, most importantly, the unique factor of skin color — he was elected President…..”
Read these two books with a fine-tip red ink pen and a yellow highliterin your hand, and a large cup of coffee made to your taste:
“… this definitive study chronicles the rise and fall of the fabled Illuminati, revealing their methods of infiltrating governments and education systems, and their blueprint for a successful cabal, which echoes directly forward through groups like the Order of Skull & Bones to our own era.
Describing this clandestine community in encyclopedic detail, with more than 1,000 notes, the book discusses contemporaneous accounts as well as original documents of the Illuminati themselves. Featuring biographies of more than 400 confirmed members and copiously illustrated, this book brings light to a 200-year-old mystery.”
That fine-tip red ink pen and yellow highliterwill really get a work-out when you get to the membership lists in the appendices.
On page 141, citing a front page article in The New Haven Advocate, Antony Sutton’s newsletter notes that that article cites a book, a history of Skull and Bones written in 1933 entitled The Continuation of the History of Our Order for the Century Celebration compiled by F. O. Mathieson, a prominent Marxist. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._O._Matthiessen ]
On page 195, inside the chapter written by the editor and publisher himself, is this tasty morsel:
“James Shelby Downard’s underground classic, Sorcery, Sex, Assassination and the Science of Symbolism, links American historical events with a grand occult plan to turn us into cybernetic mystery zombies. The assassination of JFK was a performance of the occult ritual called The Killing of The King, designed as a mass-trauma, mind-control assault against the national body-politic of the United States.
Mr. Downard’s co-resaercher and author Michael A. Hoffman II wrote in Secret Societies and Psychological Warfarethat: “fabled alchemy had at least three goals to accomplish before the total decay of matter, the total breakdown we’re witnessing all around us today, was fulfilled and these are:
The Creation and Destruction of Primordial Matter.
“This video is three and a half hours in length. Below the video [at the link] are some points of interest for readers who are reluctant to start into a film that long. I hope that the text below will influence motivated readers to make time to enjoy seeing Patrick Wood and John B. Wells on the screen – they deliver a great show, with a great ending.”
Mr. Wood’s latest book, Technocracy Rising, is packed with facts and information, and its contents are the focus in this video interview. The interview gets started early by discussion of the Trilateral Commission’s employment of Technocracy’s principles and their “New International Economic Order”, with mention of the Trilateral Commission’s goal of “transforming government”. By about 24 minutes into the video we see that more than just government is being transformed. Wood lists seven of their primary targets as being:
“Who” is to do all this “transforming”?
1) the Trilateral Commission;
3) the United Nations; and
4) Non-Government Organizations (NGOs).
We note that neither the American People nor the Congress of the United States of America are party to the transformation. Technocracy and Trilateralism and the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations are the four horses on which the New International Economic Order is riding into our lives. Keep that in mind as we go.
Mr. Wood gives us things to notice, things being used by Technocracy to “transform” us:
1. Agenda 21
2. sustainable development
3. smart meters
4. climate change
5. cap and trade
6. the Green Economy
7. Human enhancement (Trans-Humanism: the merger of man and machine, literally)
Scientism is at the base of Technocracy. Here are some notes from Patrick Wood regarding Scientism:
1. The application of scientific methods to social and political modeling
2. Science is the absolute and only access to truth and reality about man and the universe
3. Scientism is specifically opposed to the Holy Bible as truth
4. Scientism upholds Atheism – there is no God
5. Scientism purports to be predictive, able to foretell the future
6. Scientism rejects any opposing inquiry
7. Scientism demands acceptance by non-scientists
Scientism is defined at Wikipedia this way:
“Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints.”
In the three and one-half hour video interview by John B. Wells of Caravan To Midnight Patrick Wood points out that Ray Kurzweil, a senior scientist for Google, is a trans-humanist. Kurzweil wrote the 2005 book entitled “The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology”.
Kurzweil, being a Google hotshot, works with the Chair of the Google corporation, Eric Emerson Schmidt, who is a Trilateral Commission member.
Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin interviewed Schmidt. Impressed by him, they recruited Schmidt to run their company in 2001 under the guidance of venture capitalists John Doerr and Michael Moritz.
Schmidt joined Google’s board of directors as chairman in March 2001, and became the company’s CEO in August 2001.
In 2013 Schmidt stated that the government surveillance in the United States was the “nature of our society” and that he was not going to “pass judgment on that”. However, on the revelation that the NSA has been secretly spying on Google’s data centers worldwide, he called the practice “outrageous” and criticized the NSA’s collection of Americans phone records
Schmidt was a campaign advisor and major donor to Barack Obama and served on Google’s government relations team. Obama considered him for Commerce Secretary. Schmidt was an informal advisor to the Obama presidential campaign and began campaigning the week of October 19, 2008, on behalf of the candidate. He was mentioned as a possible candidate for the Chief Technology Officer position, which Obama created in his administration. After Obama won in 2008, Schmidt became a member of President Obama’s transition advisory board. He proposed that the easiest way to solve all of the problems of the United States at once, at least in domestic policies, is by a stimulus program that rewards renewable energy and, over time, attempts to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy.
Schmidt and Kurzweil work together at Google and Schmidt is a member in the Trilateral Commission. The Trilateral Commission is the chariot for Technocracy’s scientism. Bear that in mind.
Technocracy: The 1930s to Present
Technocracy originated in 1932 at Columbia University. It was founded by M. King Hubbert and Howard Scott in 1933. In 1934 they were booted from Columbia, but carried forth their Technocracy by writing the Technocracy Study Course. (PDF)
In 1954 Hubbert created “Peak Oil Theory”, and later became known as the “father of the eco movement”.
Patrick Wood gives some characteristics of Technocracy:
By nature it produces volumes of inviolable regulations which are “science based”.
It creates totalitarian control in the end, but is not socialism or communism.
Technocracy seeks to replace price-based economic system with energy-based system — (energy credits).
Communism, Marxism, Socialism, and Fascism are all based on a price-based economic system. Technocracy shifts away from that, so it is neither.
Did we catch that third characteristic of Technocracy above? “…Seeks to replace price-based economic system with energy-based economic system”. That is positively huge! Technocracy is talking about doing away with our way of doing business, our system of money, of monetary exchange, replacing it with “energy credits”, which we may not find authorized in the Constitution — a far cry from coining silver and gold. But of course Scientism, Technocracy, and the thusly-directed geniuses of the Trilateral Commission care not one whit about our Constitution.
At 55 minutes into the video Wood gives us some requirements necessary to make Technocracy work.
1. Register on a continuing basis the 24 hour-per-day basis of the total net conversion of energy.
2. By means of registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a “balanced load”.
3. Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption. [Scott, Howard, et al, Technocracy Study Course, p. 232]Think: datamining.
4.Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc, of all goods and services, where produced and where used.
5. Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.
Today, Mr. Wood notes, we have the technology to do these things. Hence Obamacare, the NSA spying on all Americans, Common Core, fitting students into a master plan, etc., etc. — data collection gone wild. Combined with the Trilateral Commission’s strong-armed reach into seats of governmental power, Technocracy is quite literally transforming America…..”
“Google has been aggressively expanding in the lucrative military contacting market to the point where it has sold advanced military grade data products to just about every major military and intelligence agency in America… And it all started with their acquisition of CIA-backed Keyhole.”
“What deal did Google — now the biggest private surveillance operation on planet earth — make with the CIA and the NSA, which run the largest government surveillance operations?”
“The irony, of course, is that Google has always boasted about standing up to the national security state.”
“And therein lies the truth, and the hypocrisy, of Silicon Valley’s outrage over government snooping: The only people who love big data more, and who care about our privacy less, than the NSA are the outraged Libertarians of Silicon Valley.”
By now, many of you have had (and hopefully taken) the opportunity of listening to “D.J.” present her research on that long Caravan to Midnight show, replicated on the Hagmann and Hagmann show. I sent that link on to a number of people, in addition to posting it here and elsewhere, looking for reactions from others. I can always tell a lot by gauging how others react and what they see; sometimes I miss some things. I’ve asked them if they can find some confirmation; that’s one of the things I teach decision-makers active in a chaotic and rapidly-changing world. It’s straight out of a Britisher’s approach to crisis management; dig for disconformation and confirmation rapidly. I’ve posted related information already, but it takes a lot of time to sift through and comprehend a lot of this material, especially when it’s not within one’s usual scope of experience. There’s an ancient Chinese maxim, the one I’ve already put into my collection of excerpts on how to use your mind (it’s in the section on decision-making): ask one person and you get an opinion; ask two people and you might get a controversy; ask a lot of people and you get enlightened.
Here’s some material for your enlightenment.
It comes off the pen and minds of the Collins brothers, perhaps well-known to some of you, and their material is posted at the web site run by the author of that book called “Perfectibilists”.
Here are the links, with an excerpt:
“Taken cumulatively, the integration of the world as a whole, particularly in terms of economic globalization and the mythic qualities of “free market” capitalism, represents a veritable “empire” in its own right . . . No nation on earth has been able to resist the compelling magnetism of globalization. Few have been able to escape the “structural adjustments” and “conditionalities” of the World Bank , the International Monetary Fund, or the arbitrations of the World Trade Organization, those international financial institutions that, however inadequate, still determine what economic globalization means, what the rules are, and who is rewarded for submission and punished for infractions . Such is the power of globalization that within our lifetime we are likely to see the integration, even if unevenly, of all national economies in the world into a single global, free market system.”
“… the technocratic agenda of a fully functional “scientific dictatorship,” is the objective to which the neoconservatives have resolutely committed themselves. One needs to look no further than the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, and other recent neoconservative-conceived machinations to see the intimations of this emergent “scientific dictatorship.”
By now, there should be no more confusion over the true identity of neoconservatism. They are not the Godly statesmen endorsed by America’s evangelical Christian establishment. Nor are they the pro-American anticommunists portrayed by left-wing ideologues. They are a cult of techno-socialists and the outgrowth of an older conspiratorial traditional…..”
“… In other words, science or “knowledge” becomes the instrument by which the “illuminati” re-sculpts reality. It also becomes an epistemological weapon against the minds of men, wielded by the proverbial Descartean “evil demon.” This was the central precept of Weishaupt’s Illuminati and the conceit of the Technocracy today: God was not in the beginning, but evolved from Man in the end. According to this conceit, Man could recreate Eden without the God. ….”
“… In the scientifically regimented state, the citizen becomes little more than an amalgam of behavioral repertoires whose every thought, feeling, and idea is the product of external stimuli. From the scientistic vantage point, the populace’s motivations can be calculated and systematized, thereby allowing those few conditioners who are accountable to no moral master to develop economic and technological stimuli that can produce the desired patterns of mass behavior…..”
If you have been following along for some time and have taken in, read, watched, and absorbed the series here that focuses on the advancing totalitarianism and the merger of software, biomedical engineering, simulation and surveillance that seems to be culminating in Jade Helm and which have been discussed serially in
I say that not because I got a mention but because there’s a video there that you need to watch (or listen to).
It’s the Caravan to Midnight episode #309 that comes after 35 paragraphs and a bunch of other videos, and it’s two and a half hours long, and it’s followed by another 40 minute video and then the Hagmann and Hagmann report podcast that runs for another two hours and 45 minutes.
Hey, it’s a holiday weekend. Put this on your outdoor speakers at the holiday BBQ.
I didn’t even get halfway through the Caravan to Midnight show and I’d heard enough.
It’s late here, and I’ll listen to the rest of it all tomorrow and the next day.
But I’ve around the block and I’m not computer illiterate, and I heard enough to understand. It’s fully explained; you don’t need to have finished three years at MIT to begin to grasp the breadth, depth and tenor of what the lady is saying.
If you want to explore further, try these (they are in inverse order of complexity):
As Christmas nears for my three grandchildren, I wondered what the next 25 years will hold in store for them.
Obviously the idea of a train set around the base of the tree is no longer valid.
Railroads Seek One-Person Crews for Freight Trains
What do we expose our toddlers to in hopes that they will seize upon an interest that will serve them and fuel an educational inquiry and make them broadly more intelligent in a way that will result in a successful life’s engagement?
You can read it through for yourself. I’ve zeroed in on the several of the ghosts of Christmas future, and added some emphasis and notes:
6 Neuroscience: ‘We’ll be able to plug information streams directly into the cortex’
By 2030, we are likely to have developed no-frills brain-machine interfaces, allowing the paralysed to dance in their thought-controlled exoskeleton suits. I sincerely hope we will not still be interfacing with computers via keyboards, one forlorn letter at a time.
I’d like to imagine we’ll have robots to do our bidding. But I predicted that 20 years ago, when I was a sanguine boy leaving Star Wars, and the smartest robot we have now is the Roomba vacuum cleaner. So I won’t be surprised if I’m wrong in another 25 years. Artificial intelligence has proved itself an unexpectedly difficult problem.
Maybe we will understand what’s happening when we immerse our heads into the colourful night blender of dreams. We will have cracked the secret of human memory by realising that it was never about storing things, but about the relationships between things.
Will we have reached the singularity – the point at which computers surpass human intelligence and perhaps give us our comeuppance? We’ll probably be able to plug information streams directly into the cortex for those who want it badly enough to risk the surgery. There will be smart drugs to enhance learning and memory and a flourishing black market among ambitious students to obtain them.
Having lain to rest the nature-nurture dichotomy at that point, we will have a molecular understanding of the way in which cultural narratives work their way into brain tissue and of individual susceptibility to those stories. [Ed.: Very interesting, Will Robinson… undoubtedly the propaganda machine —and its master the national security state —are already on the way to mastering these.]
Then there’s the mystery of consciousness. Will we finally have a framework that allows us to translate the mechanical pieces and parts into private, subjective experience? As it stands now, we don’t even know what such a framework could look like (“carry the two here and that equals the experience of tasting cinnamon”).
That line of research will lead us to confront the question of whether we can reproduce consciousness by replicating the exact structure of the brain – say, with zeros and ones, or beer cans and tennis balls. If this theory of materialism turns out to be correct, then we will be well on our way to downloading our brains into computers, allowing us to live forever in The Matrix.
But if materialism is incorrect, that would be equally interesting: perhaps brains are more like radios that receive an as-yet-undiscovered force. [Ed.: The Emerging Mind, ed. by Karen Nesbitt Shanor, PhD, (based on the Smithsonian Institution lecture series on new research into consciousness), Renaissance Books, Los Angeles, CA 1999 is a book that mentioned the finding that there are crystalline receivers among the neurons and synapses in the brain.]
The one thing we can be sure of is this: no matter how wacky the predictions we make today, they will look tame in the strange light of the future.
David Eagleman, neuroscientist and writer
10 Gaming: ‘We’ll play games to solve problems’
In the last decade, in the US and Europe but particularly in south-east Asia, we have witnessed a flight into virtual worlds, with people playing games such as Second Life. But over the course of the next 25 years, that flight will be successfully reversed, not because we’re going to spend less time playing games, but because games and virtual worlds are going to become more closely connected to reality.
There will be games where the action is influenced by what happens in reality; and there will be games that use sensors so that we can play them out in the real world – a game in which your avatar is your dog, which wears a game collar that measures how fast it’s running and whether or not it’s wagging its tail, for example, where you play with your dog to advance the narrative, as opposed to playing with a virtual character. I can imagine more physical activity games, too, and these might be used to harness energy – peripherals like a dance pad that actually captures energy from your dancing on top of it.
Then there will be problem-solving games: there are already a lot of games in which scientists try to teach gamers real science – how to build proteins to cure cancer, for example. One surprising trend in gaming is that gamers today prefer, on average, three to one to play co-operative games rather than competitive games. Now, this is really interesting; if you think about the history of games, there really weren’t co-operative games until this latest generation of video games. In every game you can think of – card games, chess, sport – everybody plays to win. But now we’ll see increasing collaboration, people playing games together to solve problems while they’re enjoying themselves.
There are also studies on how games work on our minds and our cognitive capabilities, and a lot of science suggests you can use games to treat depression, anxiety and attention-deficit disorder. Making games that are both fun and serve a social purpose isn’t easy – a lot of innovation will be required – but gaming will become increasingly integrated into society.
Jane McGonigal, director of games research & development at the Institute for the Future in California and author of Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Happy and How They Can Help Us Change the World (Penguin)
It’s not difficult to predict how our transport infrastructure will look in 25 years’ time – it can take decades to construct a high-speed rail line or a motorway, so we know now what’s in store. But there will be radical changes in how we think about transport. The technology of information and communication networks is changing rapidly and internet and mobile developments are helping make our journeys more seamless. Queues at St Pancras station or Heathrow airport when the infrastructure can’t cope for whatever reason should become a thing of the past, but these challenges, while they might appear trivial, are significant because it’s not easy to organise large-scale information systems.
The instinct to travel is innate within us, but we will have to do it in a more carbon-efficient way. It’s hard to be precise, but I think we’ll be cycling and walking more; in crowded urban areas we may see travelators – which we see in airports already – and more scooters. There will be more automated cars, like the ones Google has recently been testing. These driverless cars will be safer, but when accidents do happen, they may be on the scale of airline disasters. Personal jetpacks will, I think, remain a niche choice.
Frank Kelly, professor of the mathematics of systems at Cambridge University, and former chief scientific adviser to the DfT