Technocracy IX: Nano-Science (2)


 dna_nano_tech-wide

The military is the largest investor in the U.S. Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The share of the NNI budget given to the Department of Defence (DoD) since the program started has reached $6.6 billion with part of the expenditure going to DARPA and the departmental laboratories of the Navy, Army and Air force while the rest ending up at universities as research grants or as part of the Multi-University Research Initiative (MURI). [1] Though spending has been fluctuating since 2007, there remains steady interest in nanotech’s military capabilities. Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) revealed from their research that “… government funding for military R&D dwarfs that spent on social and environmental programs across the industrialized world …” with military R&D fixed towards “… a narrow weapons-based security agenda.” [2]

Which means the marginalisation of conflict prevention and analysis of the roots of conflict and its links to poverty, the environment, security and health issues continue to be under-funded. Nanotech advances are being hijacked away from improving civilian life with “game-changing” technology as the culprit.

A fervent need to make these grand visions a reality was given a sturdy platform for realization back in 2007 from the DoD and their little known advisory body called the Defence Science Board (DSB) whose paper entitled: “DSB 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Strategic Technology Vectors” laid some important groundwork for the future. In an almost desperate attempt to place nanotech at the top of the military agenda the paper drew their attention to “synergistic combinations” of all forms of nanotech and their “… truly revolutionary capabilities in human performance enhancement, medical treatment and prophylaxis, miniaturization, life extension, robotics, and machine intelligence …” [3]

It was unabashed in its agenda for clandestine tagging and tracking, where: “A combination of nanotechnology, biology, and chemistry promises to provide significant increases in capability to conduct pervasive surveillance on a global basis.”

spybeeSome of these other applications currently in R & D or primed and ready for action include the following:

Nano-biotechnology – or miniaturized biotechnology is the recent development of merging biology research with nanotechnology, most notably using biomolecules, bio-membranes and nano-photonics for vaccinations and virus research. Particularly active in medical fields the new science is seeking to generating cures; develop stem cell treatments, creating muscle tissue and artificial proteins. The convergence between computers and biology is of primary interest where eventually computing will be sourced from a biological platform where “Colonies of live neurons can live together on a biochip device.” [4]

Nano-electronics - The development of molecules with useful electronic properties which can then be used in nano-devices. This includes synthetic chemical methods and the creation of synthetic molecular motors. Other forms include carbon nano-tubes which have taken over from silicon-based chips. Now, the race is on to fit billions of these tubes onto computer chips thereby increasing the chip performance to “… run at more than three times the frequency and consuming just a third of the energy.” [5]

DNA nanotechnology – the construction of structures out of DNA and other nucleic acids. This branch has a special relationship to nano-medicine and “SMART drugs” for targeted drug delivery, the development and creation of vaccines and the adjacent field of nano-electronics with real world applications in both fields looming large. [6]

Nano-robotics/weaponryself-sufficient machines operating at the nano-scale. Applying nano-robots in medicine are proving difficult due to a multitude of problems adapting to the biology of organic systems, though progress is there. However, military nano-robotics in combination with cybernetics is moving ahead in leaps and bounds. There are still very little scholarly articles on the nature and pace of advances on military robotics along with only a sluggish attempt at raising the ethical and moral issues inherent in the use of such weaponry. What is clear is that the military is getting very excited by it all due to the unlimited scope of applications. Reduced to the size of perhaps o.1mm or less autonomous mini and micro-robots could be deployed on the ground, in water and in air, using the same propulsion principles found in larger electronic and mechanical systems. All forms of movement are mimicked such as human legs, various types of hopping, flapping wings like a bird, flagella, and even sidewinding movements of a snake. The multi-purpose nature of robotics means that weapons systems targeting, reconnaissance, communication and surveillance are easily utilized. Insects and small mammals are already being integrated into bio-cyborg hybrids with nervous system and brain interfacing with cybernetics, software and electrodes.

cyborg-mothcyborg moth | © unknown

Returning to our whacky friends down at DARPA and their various sponsored companies and subsidiaries we find they are still churning out helpful prototypes for new ways to spy, maim and murder. Some of these latest offerings are still in the manufacturing stage, prototypes or on the drawing board. They comprise:

1) Nano-Scouts – real insects and simulated bird-like technologies which act as the eyes and ears of intelligence. Flies and mosquitoes have embedded nanotech capabilities which allow them to determine the presence of certain chemicals, changes in moisture levels or barometric pressure, and be able to sense movements, temperature, and vibration.[7]

2) Nano-Poisons – A variety of toxic substances with nanomolecules carefully tailored to illicit the correct responses. By interfering with neuro-chemical inhibitors and release agents introducing precise “onboard” quantities of synthetic poisons behaviour modification is taken to a whole new level. Almost any type of mind control would be available from encouraging the victim to lie obsessively to provoking suicidal thoughts; stimulating a person to react violently or to kill. And of course, a Brave New World of somatic release could be programmed where the person cannot help but love everyone and where anger and aggression is blocked. Nano-molecules would effectively quadruple the effectiveness of purely psychological methods of mind control.

3) Nano Force Fields –nano-coatings which can hermetically seal a vehicle or building by allowing particles to seek out air gaps and block them.

4) Nano Mind Erasers – Want to take out a politician or spy without fuss or bother of assassination? Then, inducing the equivalent of instant Alzheimer’s is the answer. Wiping the sections of the brain clean using micro fields programmed to flare up as tiny, molecular neutron bombs would do the trick.

5) Nano Needles – With no visible wounds and invisible to the naked eye these weapons represent an up-dated version of the old KGB poison-tipped umbrella. The needles could be shot from a suitably modelled gun to paralyze people. Presumably the lethal nature of the needles would be dependent on their carrier capability.

6) Nano Heart-Stoppers – Nano-blood flow restrictors and Stroke Inducers – Long known to be a part of military-intelligence operations the assassination of sensitive targets such as politicians, heads of state and celebrities. Undetectable in the blood stream, nano-molecules could mimic heart attacks or strokes; restrict the blood flow causing an array of symptoms, even inducing personality disorders.

7) Nano-Naut Swarms - These are ‘SMART dust’ particles which act as an information or sensor clouds capable of analysing areas with sharp detail and relying back information to HQ. As reported in the MSM in early February 2013, the British Army has been deploying tiny nano-drones in Afghanistan for over two years. At just 10cm long and weighing only 16 Grams they are used to relay full motion video and still images back to the devices’ handlers. But technology is advancing as fast as weapons can be bought.

8) Cyborg Insects – could be the delivery tool of much of the above allowing viruses and lethal substances to be to their individual or mass target, something that Bill Gates and his forays into mosquito-driven vaccines would no doubt happily welcome. Spying and surveillance capabilities have also been successfully tested and deployed. One of DARPA’s less malevolent offerings, the Nano Hummingbird was named One of Time Magazine’s 50 best inventions of 2011. Shaped like a humming-bird the mini robot is remotely-controlled without an external power source and can fly, hover, move forward and backward in the air while shooting Hi-Resolution video.

9) Programmable Matter – Starting in 2007, with DARPA support Carnegie Mellon delved into the possibility of creating hardware and software to create material that can programmed to morph into 3-Dimensional shapes – essentially, shape-shifting. Named the Claytronics Project, the brains behind this venture believe that it has the capacity to change every facet of human experience. They consider claytronics to be a platform for a new form of called “Pario” with the reproduction of moving 3-D objects the primary goal. In other words, the quest to program the world around us. Just a few years later in 2010 with a “self-folding origami” robot which can literally fold itself up and crawl away. Meantime, shape-shifting sand made an appearance in 2012 where; “New algorithms enable heaps of ‘smart sand’ that can assume any shape, allowing spontaneous formation of new tools or duplication of broken mechanical parts.” This of course beings to the blur the whole fields of nanotechnology bioengineering, cybernetics, biological-based pharmaceuticals, programmable vaccines and the advance of synthetic biology overall.

The US Department of Defence is also researching the feasibility and applications of robotic mosquitoes. So far testing has found that they can be remotely controlled with an on-board camera and a microphone. They will be able to land on unsuspecting dissidents or terrorists with the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. Flying in through a crack in your window or attaching itself to your clothing in passing would prove no problem for these adorables. No doubt law enforcement and Homeland Security are salivating at such a prospect. [8] In fact, sightings of insect-like drones have been occurring for years in the US, most frequently at activist demonstrations and marches. According to a 2006 Flight International report: “… the CIA had been developing micro UAVs as far back as the 1970s and had a mock-up in its Langley headquarters since 2003.”

robot_insectAssuming such machines can fly onto a local protester’s arm and then wing its way back to its controller with a fresh little DNA sample to analyse, this compliments another disturbing scenario as described by authors Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman, and Steven Kotler who “…outline futuristic human genome work that evolves from the very real GE $100 million breast cancer challenge.” In this scenario: “freelancers receive bids to design personalized virus offering customized cures for the sick.” An individual succumbs to colon cancer and instead of going the route of standard chemotherapy he chooses an immediate payment of $1000 to have his genome decoded over two days. Virologists of the near future will have information about the disease and the exclusive genome sequence. The design cure will be outsourced the winning bid providing the formula to rid your body of the specific cancer. Targeting the US President by criminal cartels or terrorist cells would be relatively easy.

A 2010 release of secret cables by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered US embassies “… to surreptitiously collect DNA samples from foreign heads of state and senior United Nations officials.” [9] With that in mind, an article by Atlantic magazine takes the next logical step in personalised bio-weapons and micro-drones. Picture an African President busy with civil war and child soldiers. Perhaps his DNA had been sampled as part of a UN / US mandate. A drug is tailored to that genome sent to an online bio-marketplace and synthesised into actual genetic material. The authors explain that it is here that “… the future of drones and virology could intersect.” The article continues:

A few days later tablets are delivered to a group that dissolves them and injects the liquid into a handful of micro-drones. The team releases the drones and infects the people in the African leader’s circle of advisors or family. The infected come down with flu like symptoms, coughs and sneezes that release billions of harmless virus particles — but when they bring their symptoms in the vicinity of the African leader — the particles change. Once the virus particles are exposed to that very specific DNA sequence, a secondary function within their design unlocks.[10]

Perhaps the formula contained a “fast-acting neuro-destructive disease that produced memory loss and, eventually, death.” For the African leader or any other head of state which was proving an obstacle to US hegemony “the symptoms could be tailored an infinite number of ways. Designed to reflect a uniquely local affliction like Dengue Fever, or to appear like symptoms of a genetic condition.” [11] Combined with the inherent nature of the military-coporate-banking complex and with their puppet Obama who sees no problem with murdering American citizens via remote drone attacks and discarding any notions of law and democratic due process, then you can be sure that such a scenario will take place in the very near future – if it hasn’t already.

The above scenario set against military nanotechnology and other forms of “non-lethal” warfare is justified due to the threat of terrorism and the belief that we can all bring an end to the world’s violence and crime. It is believed that technology will save the day on the battlefield and in civilian life. If left to these people it would rapidly start to resemble an endless battle in itself, which is the general idea. Convincing people not to act on their “evil” thoughts by allowing nano-dust particles to seep into their brains is bread and butter behaviour modification. For anyone else it is a step towards a Huxleyian nightmare.

Although many commentators prefer to believe that the fail-safe mechanisms of quantum computing and the intelligence apparatus would be enough to protect mainstream society, they fall into the trap of believing that those of conscience are presently guiding humanity. Once again, you cannot use a juvenile dictionary to explain a psychopathic reality that is operating on an entirely different cognitive and perceptual mainframe.

110

Biomech Stainless Steel Articulated Arm, 2006Welded and machined stainless steel and brass found objects. Sculpture of Christopher Conte.Photo: © 2009 Eric Vogel

The fractal nature of the nano-world of military applications means that advances in weaponry would take place exponentially with a modus operandi that would excite any social dominator beyond all measure. Using the premise of the molecular assembler, a device capable of breaking and creating the chemical bonds between atoms and molecules, it means duplication is not only feasible and efficient but a requirement once the technology is up and running. Think of the white Storm-trooper clones in the Star Wars films – very much military-technocratic ambrosia. As nanotech guru Eric Drexler explained: “a state that makes the assembler breakthrough could rapidly create a decisive military force – if not literally overnight, then at least with unprecedented speed.” He further observes: “A nation armed with molecular nanotechnology-based weapons would not require nuclear weapons to annihilate a civilization. In fact, it seems that a rather surgical system of seeking and destroying enemy human beings as cancerous polyps could be developed–leaving the nation’s infrastructure intact to be repopulated.” [12]

irobot

Still from ‘I Robot’ (2004) Twentieth Century Fox

A research paper sponsored by the European Commission for a 2004 conference on the military uses of nanotechnology and the hazards to society at large, came to some sobering conclusions. While the benefits in medical and non-military domains was clear and should not be unduly hindered provided regulations and ethical boards were swiftly introduced, there were a number of indirect ways that society could be: “detrimentally affected” through the “diffusion of the technology.” The paper offered some examples, including the temptation for the National Security State as well as related agencies, corporations and criminals to purloin micro-sensors and robots for spying as well as: “the use of small autonomous systems for criminal attacks – and in particular terrorism – including attacks on critical infrastructures.” They included a third possibility, that of:

“… implanted systems and other forms of body manipulation for ‘improving human performance’. Deciding what kinds of body manipulation should be permitted, and under which circumstances is a problem of peacetime civilian life, and should be handled by civilian society. However, military R&D and deployment of such systems could establish a fait accompli before society is able to carry out a thorough debate on the desirability of particular technological developments.”

And there’s the problem.

The last thing psychologically compromised persons enjoying their place at the helm of Official Culture is to see the involvement of local communities and civic society. Genetically modified organisms and foodstuffs went this way as did television, banking, media, warfare and most other socio-political power structures which required either secrecy, perception management or corporate monopolisation to ensure a singular reality. Nanotech will be no different if it is allowed to continue without regulations and in the hands of those who wield power for their own ends. If we have humans behaving in psychopathic ways then it doesn’t require the greatest leap of imagination to realize that military robots will be a reflection of their state of mind and intentions. Pathocratic control systems require global dominance in all domains and nanotech represents a mighty leverage in the race to achieve it. Horizontal proliferation would be nearly unavoidable with small, self-replicating systems where in principle, a single copy would be sufficient for growth in another country or sub-state entity.

The report goes on to state:

Military robots with sizes from nanometres to metres would bring threats on an unknown scale. If they could kill, they could constitute new forms of weapons of mass destruction more potent than known biological warfare agents. With non-lethal effects, such as disruption of personality, mass attacks could lead indirectly to the breakdown of a society and the death of a large portion of its members. Partly as a result of their smallness, but mainly owing to their potential for self-replication and the production of additional weapons on site, nano-robots would create extreme uncertainty. [13]

Given the nature of nanotech, automated decision making would grow based on its tendency for a kind of peak, fractal replication to emerge, once technological thresholds have been reached and surpassed. When this level of technology fuses with the mentality of unlimited growth much like the standard economic mind set currently dominating, then a virtual arms-race at the molecular level could ensue with entirely unforeseen consequences. Military production overlaid with ideological insanity.

tyug

A Steam Insect by Sculptor Christopher Conte; photo by Amanda Dutton/Synesthesia Photo

Alongside the massive drive to foist genetically modified foods on global populations agribusiness is fascinated by the part nanotech can play in making food production and consolidation more efficient. However, using molecular assembly principles “nano scale carriers” will soon be used for delivering fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and plant growth regulators. A case is being made to reduce environmental impact with nanotech. It is believed that this will improve stability and lessen environmental degradation in terms of chemical runoff and other related problems. An example of these carriers would be the use of clay nanotubes for pesticides which will apparently reduce the amount of pesticide use by 70–80 per cent. Nanoparticles can act to help mollify and transform resistant chemical compounds in to non-toxic ones while waste water treatment and disinfectants have the potential to be markedly improved. Fluorescent labelling by “quantum dots” (QDs) using bio-recognition molecules for anti-bacteria and disease control will be supplemented with an array of rapid detection and enzymatic biosensors. There is even a device called the “E-Nose” inspired by the human nose which, through the use of nanoparticle gas sensors can detect precisely the quality and quantity of gas present. [14]

Socio-economic demands will ensure that wireless nanosensors in crops designed to monitor and collate data on agronomic intelligence processes such as planting and harvesting cycles will become more and more important. Water levels, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and other treatments will also be under the nanosensor umbrella in the hope that maximization of crop yields and a reduction in resource input will be the end result. [15]

Biotechnology at the nanoscale is already having some success in the battle against plant resistance and environmental stresses such as drought, salinity and diseases. Nanobarcodes will be used for authentication and tracking in agricultural food and husbandry products. As knowledge grows in the area of plant gene traits and nanotechnology-based gene sequencing it is taken for granted that such process will offer new ways to reduce costs and maximize profits. [16]

With undoubted benefits that nanotechnology can provide, this is still inside the constraints of Official Culture. Farming has already been transformed into a leviathan of corporate efficiency where community, civic and independence has been sacrificed. Nano-farming may increase the overall efficiency and provide intermittent benefits, but will it have the capacity to transform agriculture away from agribusiness corporatism?

If new endeavours are dominated by the matrix of the 4Cs and the 3EM then it will limit the hope for social renewal and become just another tool to increase exploitation still bound by the same lowest common denominator of the psychopath. Consumerism, far from being modified or somehow reduced under this new technology will only intensify mechanisation, commodification and the encoding organic life, this time at the molecular level. Nanotechnology may have a place in improving humanity’s lot but not by being grafted onto a socio-political and economic framework that caused the problems in the first place.

Quite apart from providing new innovative tools for medical advances and the promise of an agricultural revolution, evidence so far in relation to health and environmental concerns doesn’t exactly promote confidence. Some of the latest research results show that:

  • Rats breathing in nanoparticles were found to exhibit inflammation, skin aging and stress responses.
  • DNA and chromosome damage which in turn “linked to all the big killers of man, namely cancer, heart disease, neurological disease and aging”.
  • Carbon nanotubes – the possible replacement for silicon – have shown to have the potential to cause mesothelioma ( a form of cancer).
  • Nanoparticles and nanofibres have shown to cause lung disease in a similar way to asbestos. [17]

Mark Wiesner Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Duke University in Durham N.C., has argued for a rethink as to the way nanoparticles are selected and defined in relation to potential impacts on human health and the environment. His international team of researchers from the federally-funded Centre for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology (CEINT), based at Duke University in the United States, have raised a number of issues which need to be addressed if nanotechnology is to prove viable and ethically responsible. He believes there is presently confusion as to what truly constitutes a nanoparticle where “… materials often do not meet full definition of having special properties that make them different from conventional materials.” According to Wiesner, a key question that needs to be answered: “… is whether or not a particular nanoparticle has toxic or hazardous properties that are truly different from identical particles in their bulk form,” and this due to the fact that: “Many nanoparticles smaller than 30 nanometers undergo drastic changes in their crystalline structure that enhance how the atoms on their surface interact with the environment.”

The professor explains further:

“…because of the increased surface-area-to-volume ratio, nanoparticles can be highly reactive with other chemicals in the environment and can also disrupt certain activities within cells. … “While there have been reports of nanoparticle toxicity increasing as the size decreases, it is still uncertain whether this increase in reactivity is harmful to the environment or human safety,” Wiesner said. “To settle this issue, toxicological studies should contrast particles that exhibit novel size-dependant properties, particularly concerning their surface reactivity, and those particles that do not exhibit these properties.” [18]

Perhaps it is not the health and environmental issues which are really the problem. We humans are extraordinarily creative and ingenious. All the above is driven on the assumption of cybernetics and its systems theory as viable working models; the idea of “nested” organic systems and dissipative structures which are interrelated and interconnected by virtue of their functional similarity. * This means that bio-engineers and technocrats look at nanosystems as providing the potential for exponential growth via automatic and autonomous emergent properties. As described previously this opens up a whole new pandora’s box when matter becomes programmable.

nanotubes_carboneCarbon Nanotubes Source: tpe-nanotechnologie-cb.e-monsite.com/

According to nano scientists this follows that society and the human condition is about to “reshaped” in very positive ways: cleaning the environment, easing the pressure for natural resources, tackling hunger, curing AIDS and other invasive diseases; giving new life to paraplegics whilst enhancing the human body. However, will these laudable aims be set against a background of unresolved questions which threaten to undermine the human species? What has happened to new advances in technology in the past?

Nanotech advocates display frightening naïveté in this regard and an often ironic binary evaluation of what are highly complex issues, notwithstanding an ignorance of ponerology and psychologically compromised cultures. It is a contradiction to say that strengthening our democratic processes will somehow ensure responsible ethics which will insulate against the darker applications of nanotechnology when overwhelming expenditure is already focused in the hands of those who seek weapons advancement and shareholder profits. A barrier to accountability will remain as tenacious as it has proved to be in narcotics, conventional weapons and trafficking. It benefits the Establishment just as nanotechnology promises to do.

Futurist David Brin’s prescription to cultivate a “transparent society” where privacy is effectively non-existent is dangerous as it opens the backdoor for collectivist-corporatist principles to take root and just about every totalitarian precept going. The self-replicating nature of molecular nanotech has given rise to end time scenarios where machines take over the world replacing humanity and organic life. Eric Drexler coined the term “grey-goo” otherwise known as ‘ecophagy’ to illustrate such a cybernetic apocalypse. [19] Think along the lines of “the Collective” from the Borg in the Star Trek TV series or the “Hive mind” so beloved of humanists and transhumanists. Expansion derives from assimilation and adaptive properties – “group think” in a futurist setting.

transmission-5speed-gears.ai

Corporations will be regulated insofar as it does not impinge on the market value of nanotechnology. This means regulations in medical and consumer arenas where it matters less will be followed. Where it is most needed however is in domains such as weaponisation and agriculture and which will likely follow the traditional route of lobbyists and cartel economics – the path of least resistance. Meanwhile, legislation will have a very tough time keeping up with the rise of nanotechnology especially when environmental and privacy laws are only applicable to those adhering to the public domain and wholly irrelevant to government /corporate experimentation outside such accountability.

Although the military is driving nanotech advances (as with all things) the testing ground has begun with many “passive” or “first generation” commercial applications finding their way to the market place. As explored in the previous post, the list is endless. If sunscreen products in the US contain nanoparticles and thus freely pass through the blood-brain barrier then the background of complex toxicology issues must remain at the forefront. In the same way as GMOs, Wi-Fi and cell phones all have serious health questions hanging over them. Similarly, the health and environmental concerns of nanomaterials at this early stage have been completely ignored. Issues of privacy and confidentiality are also profoundly important.

The precautionary principle means that it is essential not to jump in feet first with this technology when there is an absence of suitable definitions regarding nanoparticle properties which could help scientists determine what represents a threat to the environment or human health. Despite certain advocacy groups calling for government regulation, the only principle which governs decisions is the one leading to the quickest possible profit. Nanotech forges ahead, in love with itself and its seemingly unlimited potential.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that it will go the same way as GMOs since the focus behind the drive to conquer nature, deny death and embrace immortality is exactly the same. Until regulation, insurance and extensive public discussion is forthcoming it is likely the more negative scenarios surrounding nanotech will play a greater role. After all, once the perceived genie is out of the bottle the consequences of its “magic” are more difficult to manage. This means that with all the wondrous potential for clearing up the environment patents will arrive forcing us to pay for such ecological magic just as it was with the so-called “Green Revolution” of genetically modified crops. This means an expansion of selective wealth where transformation happens according to your pocket and status thereby replicating the same old divisions and class divides.

To reiterate the immovable direction of technology: it is the military and nano-weaponry which will determine the future of nanotech as a whole not whether a surgeon can provide life-saving operations or the disabled individual can begin to walk again. Altruism is not the primary currency of social exchange in a world shaped by psychopaths. Nanosystems will be nurtured on the same directive until such time we can wrest control.

 


* Dissipative Structure - A system that exits far from thermodynamic equilibrium thus dissipating the heat generated to sustain it. It has the capacity of changing to higher levels of orderliness leading to self-organization. These systems contain sub-systems that continuously fluctuate.

 


Notes

[1] ‘More soldiers in nanotechnology labs?’ By Michael Berger, nanowerk.com August 22, 2007.
[2] Ibid.
[3] http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2006-02-Summer_Study_Strategic_Tech_Vectors_Vol_I_Web.pdf
[4] NanoMedicine – A Review by K.K. Senthil Kumar, International Journal of Innovative Drug Discovery, Vol. 2 / Issue 1 / 2012 / 40-47 (from International Journal of Biopharmaceutics)
[5] ‘Carbon nanotubes fit by the thousands onto a chip’ By Jason Palmer, BBC News, 29 October 2012.
[6] DNA nanotechnology and transhumanism seem to fit snugly together in terms of their technological vision for humanity. Whether or not most persons working in the field are predisposed to this belief is irrelevant but the belief that vaccinations across the board are absolutely necessary and beyond reproach is a powerful part of the medical establishment. As such, the transhumanist paradigm naturally joins forces with materialism, atheism and corporatism to unfold their agenda accordingly. Journalist Sayer Ji has this to say on the subject:

“Not only have humans strayed from their mammalian roots by creating and promoting infant formula over breast milk, and then promoting synthetic immunity via vaccines over the natural immunity conferred through breastfeeding and sunlight exposure, for instance, but implicit within the dominant medical model is to replace natural immunity with a synthetic one. This is the philosophy of transhumanism, a movement which intends to improve upon and transcend our humanity, and has close affiliation with some aspects of eugenics.
The CDC’s immunization schedule reflects a callous lack of regard for the 3 billion years of evolution that brought us to our present, intact form, without elaborate technologies like vaccination — and likely only because we never had them at our disposal to inflict potentially catastrophic harm to ourselves. The CDC is largely responsible for generating the mass public perception that there is greater harm in not “prophylactically” injecting well over 100 distinct disease-promoting and immune-disruptive substances into the bodies of healthy children. They have been successful in instilling the concept into the masses that Nature failed in her design, and that medical and genetic technologies and interventions can be used to create a superior human being.
In this culture of vaccination, the non-vaccinated child is “inferior,” “dirty,” perhaps even “sub-human” to those who look upon vaccination as the answer to what perfects the human immune system.
Transhumanism participates in a dialectic which requires a simultaneous and systematic dehumanization of those who do not share the same way of thinking and behaving. The eugenic undertones of mass vaccination and the cult of synthetic immunity are now only thinly veiled, as we move closer to the point where a psuedo-scientific medical dictatorship lays claim to our very bodies, and the bodies of our children.
The point of no return (if not already traversed) is only around the corner: the mass introduction of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccine technology. Vaccines moved through the following stages (a tortured history of failures and massive “collateral damage”): Live Vaccines > Attenuated Vaccines > Subunit Vaccines > Toxid Vaccines > Conjugate Vaccines, only now reaching towards converting our living tissue into “vaccine-making factories” through the use of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccines, which are designed to directly alter cells within the vaccinated person’s body so that they create the antigens normally provided by vaccines themselves.
While not yet in use, clinical trials are now underway to obtain FDA approval. If we do not educate ourselves now and act accordingly, their mass implementation is inevitable, and our very genomes will become the next target of the vaccination/transhumanist agenda.” – ‘The Vaccination Agenda: Implicit Transhumanism’ By Sayer Ji, Contributing editor, Activist Post, January 24, 2012.
[7] Most Innovative Defense Technology’ 2008 Award Nominee – Nano SCOUT AeroVironment Inc.| http://www.defense-update.com/ | ‘The dragonfly built to spy – Tiny flying robots have the military abuzz, says Mark Harris’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tech.
[8] A COMBINED EXPERIMENTAL-NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE ROLE OF WING FLEXIBILITY IN INSECT FLIGHT Lingxiao Zheng, Xiaolin Wang, Afzal Khan, R. R. Vallance and Rajat Mittal1 Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, George Washington University, Washington DC 20052 Tyson L. Hedrick 2009. http://www.me.jhu.edu/fsag/Publications/Papers/AIAA-2009-382-170percent5B1percent5D.pdf
[9] ‘Hacking the President’s DNA’ November 12, The Atlantic Magazine, By Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman and Steven Kotler.
[10] ‘Micro-Drones Combined With DNA Hacking Could Create A Very Scary Future’ By Robert Johnson, Oct. 28, 2012. Business Insider | http://www.businessinsider.com/
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘A Glimpse Into China’s Post-Nuclear Super-Weapons: An Interview with Lev Navrozov on Nanoweapons by Ryan Mauro for http://www.worldthreats.com Sept. 26, 2003. | Quotes sourced from Engines of Creation By Eric Drexler (1986).
[13] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[14] ‘How helpful is nanotechnology in agriculture?’ By Allah Ditta 2012 Adv. Nat. Sci: Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 3 033002 doi:10.1088/2043-6262/3/3/033002 Vietnam Academy of Science & Technology, 29 May 2012. IOP Science | http://iopscience.iop.org/2043-6262/3/3/033002/article#ansn431989bib05
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘The potential and challenges of nanopore sequencing’ Nature Biotechnology 26, 1146 – 1153 (2008) Published online: 9 October 2008 | doi:10.1038/nbt.1495
[17] ‘Tiny Inhaled Particles Take Easy Route from Nose to Brain’ August 3, 2006, University of Rochester Medical Centre. | Wu, J; Liu, W; Xue, C; Zhou, S; Lan, F; Bi, L; Xu, H; Yang, X et al. (2009). ‘Toxicity and penetration of TiO2 nanoparticles in hairless mice and porcine skin after subchronic dermal exposure’. Toxicology letters 191 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.05.020. PMID 19501137. | Jonaitis, TS; Card, JW; Magnuson, B (2010). ‘Concerns regarding nano-sized titanium dioxide dermal penetration and toxicity study’. Toxicology letters 192 (2): 268–9. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.10.007. PMID 19836437. | Schneider, Andrew, ‘Amid Nanotech’s Dazzling Promise, Health Risks Grow’, March 24, 2010. | ‘ Nanofibres ‘may pose health risk’,’ BBC News, August 24, 2012. | ‘Is Chronic Inflammation the Key to Unlocking the Mysteries of Cancer?’ By Gary Stix, Scientific American, July 2007.
[18] ‘When Nano May Not Be Nano’ Duke University, Depart. Civil & Environmental Engineering September 14 2009.
[19] ‘Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous Nanoreplicators, with Public Policy Recommendations’ By Robert A. Freitas Jr. April 2000. | www.rfreitas.com/Nano/Ecophagy.htm

Technocracy VIII: Nano-Science (1)


 nanotechnology-kd-001

Ted: I don’t like it here. I don’t know what’s going on. We’re both stumbling around together in this unformed world whose rules and objectives are largely unknown, seemingly undecipherable or even possibly non-existent, always on the verge of being killed by forces we don’t understand!

Allegra: That sounds like my game, all right.

Ted: It sounds like a game that’s not gonna be easy to market.

Allegra: But it’s a game everybody is already playing.

The above quote is taken from the 1999 film Existenz by Canadian director David Cronenberg who has been fascinated by the interaction between man and machine for much of his career. In the film, we are introduced to a near-future scenario in which virtual reality games interface directly with the body via “game pods” which have replaced electronic consoles. The pods are attached to “bio-ports”, which have been inserted in the players’ spines, through an umbilical cord of bio-cybernetic flesh. Gaming companies Antenna Research and Cortical Systematics, compete against each other. A resistance group made up of “realists” are fighting to prevent the “deforming” of reality by such technology.Though seemingly an enjoyable fantasy, it is fast becoming close to reality.

Cronenberg’s film touches on many issues associated with the hugely popular world of virtual reality and the move towards integrating the human body with computer circuitry, in this case, as an entertainment tool. This hyper-realistic world seems to provide a seductive alternative from a society which is failing people through a lack of values and the emotional and spiritual nourishment it sorely needs. The integration of synthetic environment modelling, biotechnology, genetic engineering, cognitive technology, neuroscience and SMART visions are all being applied to the future of military and law enforcement under the guiding hand of Pathocratic rule.

And what of nanotechnology and its place in this saw-see between the dark and light of humanity’s destiny?

One of the most exciting, potentially beneficial forms of technology which underlies much of the current practical advances in cutting-edge science is nanotechnology or the manipulation of physical, chemical and biological properties of matter at an atomic and molecular scale. Many scientists believe nanoscience on its own, potentially heralds a change on the scale of the Industrial Revolution. 

The United Kingdom’s Institute of Mechanical Engineers (IME) produced a report in early 2015 titled: Nanotechnology: The Societal Impact of The Invisible which gave a useful summary of the benefits, risks and public concerns, though with a subtle bias in favour of nanotech overall. According to the IME report there is a distinction to made between the science and technology of this field.

“The field of nanoscience grew out of the technological advancements brought about by the tunnelling microscope, enabling scientists to begin to understand and characterise the nature of materials at the atomic level. Conversely, nanotechnology in its purest sense is the design and application of functional systems at the molecular level to create usable structures and devices”.

Nanomaterials are present both in Nature and in synthetic production, the latter essentially attempting to improve on what already exists in the natural world. These organic and in-organic structures include viruses, wax crystals on leaves, Spider silk, the bottom of gecko feet, Butterfly wings, cement, scales, paper, corals, colloids (milk and blood) skin, feathers, horns and hair, clays, opals,  pigments and smoke.

Nanotechnology is apparently much more than the “very small” with precise nano-scale and recognised by what is called an  SI prefix for one billionth (n) or 10-9 (0.000000001). Some examples follow:

image

Table:  Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: 27th Report, Novel Materials in the
Environment: The case of nanotechnology, 2008.

What makes nanoscience so compelling, even magical, is the capacity to buck the rules of Newtonian physics, where materials behave in accordance to quantum laws. This is due to the fact that the properties of materials change at the nanoscale, with a percentage of the atoms involved taking a highly significant role in the process of malleable change. The IME report describes it in the following way:

As the size reduces so the physical properties e.g. the melting/boiling point, conductivity fluorescence, magnetic permeability, absorption rates, strength and chemical reactivity begin to change; properties that the very same substances may not exhibit at the micro or macro scales. Newtonian physics no longer applies and the material behaves according to the laws of quantum physics. Nanomaterials are closer in size to atoms and molecules than they are to bulk materials, and due to this ‘smallness’, electromagnetic forces become more dominant than gravitational ones. Typically, a material or particle is referred to as ‘nano’ when it is 1–100nm in size. However the quantum effects generally occur around the 1–30nm range. At these scales it is necessary to use highly specialised microscopes, known as scanning tunnelling microscopes (STMs) which were developed in the early 1980s.

Which brings us to the process of building miniature structures at the micrometre scale, otherwise known as “microfabrication” which now extends into the nanosphere. This process obviously uses ultra-sophisticated, precision engineering techniques and high level design to carry out such manipulations. An example of how advanced such microfabrication has become hails from a 2014  German/Israeli team of engineers and their creation of a nanoscale ‘robot.’ According to the IME report, It: “…has has the potential to be small enough to manoeuvre inside the human body and possibly inside human cells.” They state further:

The robot has a tiny screw-shaped propeller that can move in a gel-like fluid, mimicking the environment inside a living organism. The filament that makes up the propeller is made of silica and nickel and is only 70nm in diameter; the entirepropeller is 400nm long, making it 100 times smaller than a human blood cell. It is so small,that its motion can be affected by the motion of nearby molecules (known as Brownian motion). The scientists were able to control the motion of the propellers using a relatively weak rotating magnetic field.

So this gives you some idea of the size we are talking about here. Nanotechnology is highly adaptable and takes four main  forms all of which are currently in commerical use. The IME report lists these as:

    •  C60/Fullerenes – Fullerenes[20], named after Buckminster Fuller, the architect who pioneered the geodesic dome, are groupings of 60 carbon molecules often written as C60 and nicknamed buckyballs. Fullerenes are known for their strength and lightness; for example, when compressed to 70% of their original size, they become twice as hard as diamonds.
    • Carbon Nanotubes – Carbon nanotubes were first developed in 1991 and have an array of fascinating electronic, magnetic and mechanical properties; conducting heat and electricity far better than copper. They are at least 100 times stronger than steel, but only one sixth as dense.
    • Nanoparticles – Nanoparticles can be metallic, mineral, polymer-based or a combination of materials. The most common are titanium dioxide, zinc oxide and nanosilver. They have multiple uses: as catalysts, drug delivery mechanisms, dyes, sunscreens and filters.
    • Nanowires – Nanowires are extremely narrow threads (less than 50nm wide) and have the potential to be used in electronic devices. While they are still being developed, the hope is that they could enable further miniaturisation of electronic chips.

The latest hot topic in nanotech is molecular self assembly or self-assembled nanostructures. Using concepts of supramolecular chemistry, and molecular recognition these are brought together to induce single-molecule components to automatically arrange themselves into some useful conformation. In other words, this is the process by which molecules construct themselves into natural structures without external manipulation. Since molecules naturally bond at this level certain molecules are introduced to trigger particular outcomes. It is this automation that is the bedrock of nanotechnology. Research and Development is currently receiving millions of dollars to create self-assembly machines so that: “…in the near future, mass production self-assembly systems will be developed which would allow the mass assembly of electrical interconnections on semiconductor chips in large quantities with high speed and high precision.”

nanoflower

‘Nano Flower,’ a 3-D nanostructure grown by controlled nucleation of silicon carbide. (photomicrograph taken by Ghim Wei Ho, a Ph.D). Source: – redOrbit.com

In plain language, it means nanostructures will self-assemble and replicate under an autonomous yet regulated process, achieving more and more sophistication from each generational synthetic platform.

For now, business is booming with 670 nanotech companies in Europe and funded nanotechnology initiatives developing in countries such as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Globally there are more than 2,000 firms dealing in the production of nano materials and/or research and development. Employment in nanotechnology increases year by year with an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 people in Europe  and over 2 million in the USA. The worldwide prediction of those employed in nanotech by the year 2020 is said to be 10 million. Public funding around the world involves large sums with:

“… total global funding reaching approx $10bn in 2011 (equivalent to c7.7bn). According to Observatory Nano[29], China surpassed the USA in 2011 for the first time, taking the top position as the biggest investor in nanotechnology research with public funding of c1.8bn. Russia and the USA have almost same level of funding (c1.6 and c1.44bn respectively) with Germany, France and the UK the biggest EU investors. The total public funding in the EU (including that from the Seventh Framework Programme) rose to c2bn in 2011, corresponding to approx 25% of the global total.”

A BCC Market Research report values the global market for nanotechnology products at $26 billion in 2014 with and estimate of about $64.2 billion by 2019. This is a “ compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.8% from 2014 to 2019.”

1417160533_NAN031F-0

GLOBAL NANOTECHNOLOGY MARKET, 2013-2019 ($ MILLIONS) Source: www.bccresearch.com/

Despite the IME report findings revealing what the public already knew (intense distrust) and even though nanotechnology has been in the public domain for over 40 years with future profits and investments increasing annually, the  industry and its science is: “…failing to engage with society in an open and clear way and governments continue to lack impetus in committing to international regulation.” Yet, the proliferation of nano-products has been enormous during the past decade. This is just a small sample:

• Engine oil • Car wax • Catalysts to improve fuel consumption • Anti-bacterial fabrics • Tyres • Air and oil filters • Anti-scratch finishes • Air purifiers Clothing and Textiles • Anti-bacterial and anti-odour clothing • UV-resistant and protective clothing • Wrinkle and stain-resistant apparel • Flame-retardant fabrics Electronics • Displays electronics • Data memory • Anti-bacterial and antistatic coatings on keyboards, mouses, cell phones • Batteries • Organic Light-Emitting Diodes (OLED) and LEDs • DVD coatings • Computer processors and chips • MP3 players • Xboxes and PlayStations Cosmetics • Skin cleansers • Lipstick, mascara, make-up foundations • Make-up removal • Sunscreens • Skin creams and moisturisers Food and Additives • Nutritional supplements • Anti-bacterial utensils • Plastic wrap • Energy drinks • Cleaning products • Fabric softeners • Food storage containers • Cutting boards • Nano-tea, chocolate shakes, canola active oil Household • Anti-bacterial coatings in appliances • Irons, vacuums • Self-cleaning glass • Filters • Anti-bacterial furniture and mattresses • Air purifiers • Anti-bacterial, UV-resistant paints • Solar cells • Disinfectant sprays Sports Equipment • Tennis rackets and balls • Hockey sticks • Ski wax • Wet suits • Anti-fogging coatings • Golf balls and clubs • Baseball bats • Skis and snowboards • Bicycle parts Personal Care/Health • Contact lenses • Hearing aids • Cellulite treatment • Shampoos, hair gels • Insect repellents • Man-made skin • Home pregnancy tests • Body wash • Toothpaste • Deodorants • Anti-bacterial creams • Bandages • Drug delivery patches • Anti-bacterial baby pacifiers, mugs and bottles • Anti-bacterial stuffed toys • Stain-resistant plush toys

How many people are aware that they are already using and ingesting products which contain nano-materials? Very few. In the cosmetics sector would you mind if you were slathering your face with nano-materials? According to the report most people are ambivalent but not in outright opposition, even though the same polling stats showed that knowledge of nanoscience and technology was very low.

The Cancer Research industry has also apparently leapt at the chance to explore nanotech, continuing to ignore substantial alternative fields of research in diet, nutrition and other modalities which have presented consistent results in tackling cancer. The Cancer research industry has a lot of money riding behind it and only one way, reductionist science is allowed in  despite NO successes in curing the disease. What has developed is a dependent relationship to Big Pharma with a whole new range of expensive drugs for amelioration and palliative care. For example, Cancer Research UK is: “… funding multidisciplinary projects that are already bringing together collaborative teams of cancer researchers and scientists from the engineering and physical sciences. The new scheme is set to fund about ten projects each year with up to £500,000 each.”

(An extensive infographic entitled ‘How Nanotechnology Could Reengineer Us’ gives an overview of what nanotechnology could offer the human body, by “re-engineering” us).

So “progress” explores new avenues yet remains strangely one way.. None more so than in the field of military and weapons companies. Indeed, by the year 2030 the UK Ministry of Defence sees nanotech playing a vital role across every aspect of society from nano-solar cells to: “… nano-robots designed for a range of purposes – including medical robots used internally in humans and micro-platforms for reconnaissance.”

If you recall the exploration into SMART Agrimatics, it will come as no surprise that nanotech is having a significant impact across the entire agricultural production cycle. Agrichemicals are a prime source of innovation as are the use of nano-sensors in combination with SMART technology.From nano-enhanced packaging to food-related products nanomaterials are slowly being adopted despite nebulous legislation and public suspicion.  Though nanotech implementation in foodstuffs and animal husbandry still remains largely at the R &D stage, according to IME: “ The future application of agri-nanoproducts does however seem certain; the USA is already looking to license some products for use in the coming years, heralding a complete change in the way we grow, maintain and process food.”

There is no doubt there is great beauty, and awe-inspiring innovation in the field of nanotechnology with huge benefits for humanity in so many fields. However, this series is about the dark side of such technology and how these innovations always gravitate to the shadows since that is polarity dominating at this time.The Institute of Mechanical Engineers believe that although there is significant optimism regarding the future of nanotechnology there is still widespread suspicion that that this technology will not ultimately go where it is needed most i.e. for society and consumers. For this reason scientists in this field are not trusted. The fact that there is still no real engagement with the public about their concerns doesn’t help and the IME suggest descreasing that dislocation. Interestingly, they perceive the main reason for this as a misunderstanding on the part of the public:

“It has been suggested that the reason why some people express these views is that the established scientific community genuinely don’t consider what they do to be of any consequence to the wider population. Rather, the spotlight falls on technological advancement rather than highlighting consumer and societal needs. This is not done out of any malice or superiority on the part of the technologists; in truth, the technical community sees it purely as the everyday, the norm, and requiring little external endorsement or explanation.

That may well be but it is a subtle form of arrogance and a lack of awareness about society as a whole. More dangerously, if they have little need to inform the public and do not feel they have a duty to do so, then they fall into the hands of those forces that covet such a separation, namely corporate interests and the State. It is almost cliche now that scientists become so involved with the creativity of their work that they are often seen as geniuses on the one hand, and out-of-touch with the wider world. They are perceived as existing in a kind of intellectual bubble where accusations of outsourced ivory towers and naivete about the larger forces at work can easily stick. It is in this sense that there is most certainly technological advancement for its own sake predicated upon this community “normality,” and therefore a way in for institutionalized hubris. This is especially true in lieu of the massive potential changes we are talking about here.

Engineers in the global defence industry have no problem rationalising their satisfaction and subsequent salary that they receive from this line of “creative work”. They are doing what they love. One individual designs the a console and  another the software for Apache helicopters in Iraq which have notched tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Is there a responsibility there? Or do they fall back on: “If I didn’t do it, someone else would.” The same applies to the dark side of nanotechnology. Official Culture makes it much easier for us not to care and to compartmentalise our conscience, even our emotional life, away from deeper connections to our fellow man and woman.

The historical perspective of technology as an automatic saviour as well as a traditional source of State control lends itself to both a philosophical and practical critique since that is exactly the reality we are facing. The progression is not one of technological emancipation for societies where it counts, it is one of State warfare and corporatism. That is where the greatest innovations in Research and Development generally end up, with the by-products effecting the social and material ecology as a mirror of what is denied. Scientists in this context, can only be effective if the overall system in which they live is designed to foster a natural cooperation of expert and layman which leans overwhelmingly toward a socio-economic framework that is inclusive and just. Clearly, this is very far from the case. Quite apart from endemic corruption in science in general, nano-scientists, and the “technical community” are no exception when they are wholly governed by the military-corporate complex and inside Official Culture, whether they are able to see that or not. Thus it matters little whether they have good intentions, rather what the real world dictates from the outside in.

Meanwhile, the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has referred:

“… to the possibility of information dominance through nano-electronics; virtual reality systems for training; automation and robotics to offset reductions in manpower, reduce risks to troops and improve vehicle performance; higher performance platforms with diminished failure rates and lower costs; improvements in chemical/biological/nuclear sensing and casualty care; improvements in systems for non-proliferation monitoring; and nano-/micromechanical devices for control of nuclear weapons.” [1]

Across the Three Establishment Model (3EM) the idea of enhancing human performance through the convergence of nanotechnology biology, information, cognitive science and warfare is highly seductive because it adds a technological ontology to their plans for society not least for their desire for a synthetic immortality. The promise of nano-implant devices, slowing down or reversing ageing, direct brain–machine interfaces and ‘artificial people’ has been discussed at various conferences and seminars across America since the early 2000’s. This may have something to do with the fact that “… the USA is spending far more [on nanotech] than any other country, and maybe more than the rest of the world combined.” [2] Since future science is part of the armoury of the power elite’s ideology for a World State, governments in Europe, Asia and the United States have invested almost $5 billion dollars between them, contributing to the projected annual market of around one trillion US dollars. [3]


Notes

[1] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[2] Ibid. (“Figures on military NT R&D funding in other countries are difficult to obtain. The conjecture is supported by the following: the USA spends about two-thirds of the global military R&D expenditure at large (BICC, 2002); in the field of MST, according to a cautious estimate the US military R&D spending was more than ten times that of Western Europe (Altmann, 2001: 46); conference and internet presentations show an verwhelming preponderance of US work in military NT.”)
[3] ‘Apply nanotech to up industrial, agri output,’ The Daily Star (Bangladesh), 17 April 2012. | Health Risks Of Nanotechnology: How Nanoparticles Can Cause Lung Damage, And How The Damage Can Be Blocked Science Daily, June 11, 2009.

Technocracy VII: DARPA’s Technophilia (2)


4zRmt

Image credit: © kogoro kurata

It is no secret that DARPA was at the forefront of electronically tagging US combat soldiers parallel to the initiative of tagging criminals in the prison industry currently making huge profits. The chipping project is called “Individual Force Protection System”, the manufacture of which was gleefully taken on by US defence contractor Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). In January 2007, a presentation was delivered outlining IFPS details later found in a PDF document freely available on the internet. It described a 3-inch tag “without GPS” attached to a soldiers uniform with a “LOS range = 113 miles.” The wholesale cost is “$100 per tag.” [1]

As we have seen, Verichip and RIFD technology has its physical drawbacks aside from its ethical and civil liberty implications. From creating a “sixth sense” brain implant through which infrared light can be detected to implanting a chip that controls the brain; allowing thoughts, memory and behaviour to be transferred from one brain to another, these DARPA teamsters are riding high with possibilities. However, in the latter case it was scientists working at the University of Southern California, home of the Department of Homeland Security’s National Centre for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events which came up with that little gem. Working in the fields of “neural engineering” and “Biomimetic MicroElectronic Systems,” chips which have been implanted into rats’ brains can be used as a storage device for long-term memories. Attempts to record, download and transfer memories into other rats with the same chip implanted.

A microchip implanted into a rat’s brain can take on the role of the hippocampus—the area responsible for long-term memories—encoding memory brain wave patterns and then sending that same electrical pattern of signals through the brain. Back in 2008, Berger told Scientific American, that if the brain patterns for the sentence, “See Spot Run,” or even an entire book could be deciphered, then we might make uploading instructions to the brain a reality.

In one study the scientists had rats learn a task, pressing one of two levers to receive a sip of water. Scientists inserted a microchip into the rat’s brain, with wires threaded into their hippocampus. The chip recorded electrical patterns from two specific areas labeled CA1 and CA3 that work together to learn and store the new information regarding which lever to press to obtain water. Scientists then shut down CA1 with a drug and built an artificial hippocampal part that could duplicate such electrical patterns between CA1 and CA3, and wihch was inserted it into the rat’s brain. With this artificial part, rats whose CA1 had been pharmacologically blocked, could still encode long-term memories. And in those rats who had normally functioning CA1, the new implant extended the length of time a memory could be held.

In terms of the new cyborg, it opens up huge potentials for brains training and entrainment. It also gives an extremely updated version of an Orwellian “thought Police” as an adjunct Pre-Crime technology, the fine tuning and enhancements of which are in parallel development.

According to a Los Angeles Times report in 2002, when Donald Rumsfeld was Secretary for Defence in the Bush-Cheney Administration he made it his priority to “… redesign the U.S. military to make ‘information warfare’ central to its functions.” [2] The strategy of “information dominance,” according to American military experts, consists of 1) Building up and protecting friendly information and degrading information received by your adversary. 2) The ability to deny, degrade, destroy and/or effectively blind enemy capabilities. [3]

ghost-recon-soldier

‘DARPA’s Squad X initiative seeks ‘innovative’ tech to enhance troops’ real-time situational awareness’ - DARPA’s Squad X initiative is inviting bright minds to submit their ideas for an integrated digital system to enhance situational awareness on the squad level. Squad X hopes to combine the cornucopia of different technologies into one grand “system of systems” to “organically extend squad awareness and influence” on the battlefield.” –

PSYOPS and Information Dominance was ex-U.S. Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld’s favourite playground. His enthusiasm gave rise to Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) which encompasses everything from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), to nanotechnology, robotics, and biotechnology. RMA is full of wild beliefs about the future of warfare, modern information, communications, and space technology. “Transformation” and “total systems integration” are keywords that make the military technophiles shudder with delight. The defeat of US foreign or domestic adversaries through surveillance technologies, advanced weaponry and the suppression and degradation of communications networks is all part of the RMA and DARPA vision of technological supremacy.

The project which has caught RMA and DARPA’s attention is the “network-centric warfare” designed to turn cities, any city, into a limitless “battlespace.” And the evolution of ID alongside information warfare:

As urbanization has changed the demographic landscape, potential enemies recognize the inherent danger and complexity of this environment to the attacker, and may view it as their best chance to negate the technological and firepower advantages of modernized opponents. Given the global population trends and the likely strategies and tactics of future threats, Army forces will likely conduct operations in, around, and over urban areas–not as a matter of fate, but as a deliberate choice linked to national security objectives and strategy, and at a time, place, and method of the commander’s choosing. [4]

From DARPA’s own website at http://www.darpa.gov these include various programs and projects supported by millions of dollars of tax-payers money. We have the Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO); Cognitive Systems Office working on a project called “Learning Applied to Ground Robots” and the Command & Control brief described as “the exercise of authority and direction by a properly designated commander over assigned and attached forces in the accomplishment of a mission.” This comprises of “Deep Green” an “innovative approach to using simulation to support on-going military operations while they are being conducted.”

real-iron-man-suit-technologymilitary-plans-to-build-real-life-liquid-armor----iron-man----suit-yhcdfiso

Promotional still from Elysium (2013) in which the film’s protagonist is fused with cybernetic “enhancements” to carry out an important mission. DARPA’s dream on celluloid.

Then there is the Heterogeneous Airborne Reconnaissance Team (HART) which is due to:

“… the complexity of counter-insurgency operations especially in the urban combat environment demands multiple sensing modes for agility and for persistent, ubiquitous coverage. The HART system implements collaborative control of reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) assets, so that the information can be made available to warfighters at every echelon.”

Alongside this program are Persistent Operational Surface Surveillance and Engagement (POSSE), which involves:

“… building a real-time, all-source exploitation system to provide Indications and warnings of insurgent activity derived from airborne and ground-based sensors. Envisioning a day when our sensors can be integrated into a cohesive ‘ISR Force’, it’s building an integrated suite of signal processing, pattern analysis, and collection management software that will increase reliability, reduces manpower, and speed up responses.”

Ready to track those pesky dissidents fully integrated into SMART society?

UrbanScape offers the capability to “provide the warfighters patrolling an urban environment with an up-to-date, high resolution model of the urban terrain that can be viewed, manipulated and analyzed.” Whereas the Strategic Technology Office (STO) will “… focus on technologies that have a global or theater-wide impact and that involve multiple Services.”

Other programs well underway with funding from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman include: Integrated Sensor Is Structure (ISIS) whose goal is to develop and deploy a “stratospheric airship based autonomous unmanned sensor with years of persistence in surveillance and tracking of air and ground targets;” and VisiBuilding, which will cater for “a pressing need in urban warfare [by] seeing inside buildings.” [5]

One of the main programs which DARPA provided for the TIAO was called “Combat Zones That See” (CTS). Journalist and author on police state surveillance Tom Burghardt reveals the details:

The plan was to install thousands of digital CCTV networks across occupied cities in the belief that once the system was deployed they would provide ‘warfighters’ with ‘motion-pattern analysis across whole city scales.’ CTS would create a nexus for mass tracking of individual cars and people through algorithms linked to the numeric recognition of license plate numbers and scanned-in human profiles.

The program was denounced by privacy and civil liberties advocates’ for its potential use as a mass surveillance system that could just as easily be deployed on the streets of American cities. In theory CTS, or a similar program could be further ‘enhanced’ by Scaleable Network Social Analysis (SSNA)… SSNA’s aim is ‘to model networks of connections like social interactions, financial transactions, telephone calls, and organizational memberships,’ according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s 2003 analysis. Once license plate numbers are ‘mined’ from raw CCTV footage, investigators could: a) identify a car’s owner; b) examine her/his web-surfing habits; c) scan e-mail accounts for traces of ‘inflammatory rhetoric;’ d) monitor recent purchases for ‘suspicious’ items. [6]

A check-point police state is hardly something that comes to the ordinary person’s mind as they go about their daily life but the end of privacy is fast approaching if governments continue to have their way. Location analysis, DNA, retinal scans, fingerprints and tagging and now chemical profiling of subject.

A laser-based “molecular strip-search” was the latest bright idea to be rolled out by the US government’s Homeland Security Agency and implemented across airports, check-points, large-scale venues and anyway that government sought an opportunity for surveillance. The technology has the capacity to instantly scan the bio-molecular structure of your body which includes the prescription drugs in your bag; cocaine residue on your dollar bills and any trace substance that we have come into contact with such as marijuana or gun powder. Ten million times faster and one million times more sensitive than any other system currently available, it can do all this invisibly and from a range of up to 50 metres.

tsascanner1The technology is a “scanner … called the Picosecond Programmable Laser. The device works by blasting its target with lasers which vibrate molecules that are then read by the machine that determine what substances a person has been exposed to. This could be Semtex explosives to the bacon and egg sandwich they had for breakfast that morning.” [7]

So, what will happen if you’ve been smoking pot that day or been down at the firing range? You will be tagged and “detained.” And in a climate of social unrest and false flag terrorism it is likely to be promoted as an unfortunate but necessary part of the world in which we live. We will have to be willing to give up some of our freedoms if the government is to protect us and retain the integrity of the greater good…And so the media will sell it…

By 2015 however there had been such a backlash against the privacy and health concerns that many of the x-ray scanners were taken out of airports and the hands of the The Transportation Security Administration (TSA). This is likely to be only a minor setback before the re-introduction of scanners which have been suitably modified.

As the government document: ‘Strengthening Federal Capacity for Behavioral Insights’ attests, the technocrats are losing no time in finding ways to merge technology and social engineering. Looking to make society much more “efficient,” we can add the latest bright idea by the federal government to hire a “Behavioural Insights Team” (BIT) to change US behaviour, taking its lead from the UK who spearheaded the initiative. Its own Behavioural Insight Team has been up and running for several years.

Commensurate with Common Core education the Obama administration took the opportunity to implement a new executive order in October 2011, after the Bradley/Chelsea Manning whistleblowing scandal. This Orwellian initiative aims to target future whistle-blowers, leaks and security violations by ordering federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues, all of which is based on the very shaky science of BIT. It is part of what is called the “Insider Threat Program”, which covers every federal department and agency and where: “millions of federal officials, bureaucrats and contractors must keep their eyes peeled for watch “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers. Failure to report could result in “penalties” or “criminal charges.” Such reports are bolstered by an integrated computer network monitoring system which detects “suspicious user behaviour” linked to Insider Threat personnel.

Seeing people as numbers in a Game Theory algorithm is bound to cause problems, not least the obvious flaws in trying to predict the future with unproven psychological techniques. Wide open to the usual privacy and civil liberty violations a National Research Council Report highlighted by McClatchy News on July 9 20013, was just one of many science bodies which saw no value in such initiatives stating in 2008: “There is no consensus in the relevant scientific community nor on the committee regarding whether any behavioral surveillance or physiological monitoring techniques are ready for use at all.” Quite apart from the fact that this executive order is on top of some of the most draconian legislation ever enacted in law and which continues to be rolled out in the face of continuing State violations against civil rights.

policestate2The marketing of the Obama myth has permitted the enactment of the National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) which destroys due process and the Bill of Rights. Since your profile indicates dissension and disagreement with government policy then you will be labelled a “terrorist-sympathiser,” “terrorist enabler,” or prone to “incitement” or any other nonsense deemed subversive in order to detain you much longer, without any rights to a phone-call or access to a lawyer. Even if you are not a drug-user the laser will reveal what prescription drugs you are currently using to what stage you at in your ovulation cycle to the presence of cancer. A comprehensive bio-psychological profile will be created ready to be used against you should you become a non-compliant citizen able to think for him or herself. Used cocaine in the past? Then your civil action against the government for abuse of civil liberties is dead in the water. Since traces of cocaine exist on all forms of paper currency so theoretically anybody can be detained and charged with possession should it deemed expedient to do so. This technology will become a useful political tool with almost endless “Big Brother” applications.

As Noel Sharkey, professor of artificial intelligence and robotics at the University of Sheffield said of the new military “Cheetah” robot which can run faster than a human: “an incredible technical achievement, but it’s unfortunate that it’s going to be used to kill people”. [8] The same could be said for the intention behind all the above technology. Put it all together with a rising Police State, social engineering and a SMART growth society, the outlook doesn’t look good for the ordinary citizen. It is however, a perfect direction for the technocratic psychopath to take and his intent to centralise and consolidate power through technology.


Notes

[1] Individual Force Protection System (IFPS)Overview2007 Worldwide Personnel Recovery Conference. | http://proceedings.ndia.org/7040/11percent20IFPSpercent20bypercent20Marshall.pdf
[2] ‘The Office of Strategic Influence Is Gone, But Are Its Programs In Place?’ fair.org, November 27 2002.
[3] ‘Information dominance,’ by David Miller, The Guardian, January 8, 2004
[4] Urban Operations, Field Manual No. 3-06, Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.,October 26, 2006.
[5] http://www.darpra.gov
[6] ‘America’s Cyborg Warriors’ by Tom Burghardt, Global Research, July 23, 2008.
[7] ‘New Homeland Security Laser Scanner “Reads People At Molecular Level” declares a CBS News headline’ CBS local, via GIZMODO July 11, 2012.
[8] ‘Cheetah robot “’runs faster than Usain Bolt”’BBC News, September 6 2012.

Technocracy VI: DARPA’s Technophilia (1)


 KONICA MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA

© infrakshun

 “Fifty years is ample time in which to change a world and its people almost beyond recognition. All that is required for the task are a sound knowledge of social engineering, a clear sight of the intended goal – and power.”

Arthur C. Clarke

In 1964 the director of the CIA Richard Helms who was overseeing much of the experiments in mind control came out with a statement in his memo to the US senate and the Warren Commission where he said: “Cybernetics can be used in ‘moulding of a child’s character, the inculcation of knowledge and techniques, the amassing of experience, the establishment of social behavior patterns … all functions which can be summarized as control of the growth process of the individual.’” Such a wish to mould the masses has not been relinquished.

The human enhancement or “optimization,” as the military now like to call it, has been a trenchant fantasy for decades. Recall Hollywood movies such as The Terminator (1984) Robocop (1987) and Universal Soldier (2001) which explore the idea of a comic-book annihilator dispensing justice and vengeance against those who don’t have a taste for American culture. Making soldiers into a literal army of unquestioning, pharmaceutically-challenged killing machines has proved problematic to say the least. This is partly due to the fact that while huge numbers of soldiers are suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and record numbers committing suicide during and on their return to civilian life, they understandably don’t fancy having their body transformed into a Captain America cyborg, even if their emotional body has been put through the shredder.

However, Pentagon financing keeps rolling in to the Defence Advanced Research Projects Area (DARPA) with national-security goals and the War on Terror acting as guidelines for military R&D and the convergence of nanotech. (Their website features competitions and public-friendly history lessons on how essential these types of innovations are to our human survival..). Artificial systems including neuro-functional implants and ‘biological input/output devices’ will form the basis of a modified biochemistry to counter sleep deprivation and muscle fatigue, reaction time and endurance. This would be complemented by nano-medical monitoring of the soldier’s performance and the administering of therapeutic drugs and hormones according to programmed cycles of release. Other enhancements are possible. Electrodes might be connected to sensory organs, sensory nerves, motor nerves or muscles and appropriate brain-cortex areas. [1] Layered over the fleshly part of this “Terminator” would be a finely-tuned integrated system of equipment, body armour and uniform designed to achieve optimum levels of combat (and carnage) capability if required.

Indeed, in 2015 the DARPA boys have been using gene modifying optical technology to develop a ” ‘cortical modem’ which plugs directly into a person’s DNA and visual cortex.”  Thus, according to online journal CNET: Not only does this unique device help someone overcome blindness or poor eyesight, it generates a built-in heads-up display (HUD) that appears right in before their very eyes.  The implants create an augmented reality projection that appears like magic in your natural vision and without the need for helmets or special eyeglasses.” [2]

Undoubtedly, this new technology named optogenetics has positive implications for the blind and visually impaired. So too, it may prove an exciting prospect for virtual reality enthusiasts and computer gamers with an upgrade that would go beyond and integration of the virtual and material world never before experienced.

Mouse OptogeneticsMouse Optogenetics | Source: Guardian

Whenever there is a public and political reaction to transhumanist philosophy military or otherwise, the PR adapts and words change. Though $4 billion dollars has been syphoned away from cyborg soldier research to the SMART technology of unmanned drone warfare, R & D is still going ahead in the background. [3] The spiralling growth in military spending has long been out of control with over $152 billion going unaudited each year – and that’s not including CIA funded black operations under the radar of Congress. The outer layer of fraud, abuse and overtly criminal behaviour that is going about its business behind such contracts is being missed by the Defence Department’s Inspector General. A 2008 report to Congress stated: “undetected or inadequately investigated criminal activity and significant financial loss,” where: “personnel, facilities and assets are more vulnerable to terrorist activities.” [4]

Part of the U.S. Department of Defence and created 50 years ago in response to the Soviets’ launch of Sputnik, DARPA are clearly dedicated to countering asymmetric warfare and requiring significant amounts of tax-payers cash to do it. The team are particularly excited to re-design our notions of what it means to be a human being, using the guinea-pigs of the US military as the model. Some things never change.

Though no longer listed on DARPA’s website and only included those projects safe for public eyes, we can go back just a few years and read about all sorts of “breakthroughs” such as the $4.5 million attempt to build a miniature, unmanned Osprey that can perch discreetly on trees, rooftops and flagpoles to spy on “foes” (or civilians, which is essentially the same thing.) $5 million was given to work laser-guided bullets able to turn at a 90 degree angle and “with a greater than 2km range.” Not forgetting the “cognitive swarm recognition technology” which is part a program to spot rocket-propelled grenades before they are actually launched. Apparently this might involve a crossover project called “transparent displays” which exploits “… the optical plasmon phenomenology characteristics of nano-scale structures.” [5]

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of DARPA’s modus operandi is the delving into the world of psychology and neurology in order to produce an invincible human fighting machine. Mind reading, cognitive enhancement, pharmaceutically-based mind control, and brain-machine interfaces all offer avenues of million dollar research contracts sourced from the same MKULTRA influences which have changed little over the past fifty years. This messing around in the technological sand-pit has been going on for many decades and the ambition to turn US soldiers into cyborg war units has not lessened. Adaptation and synthesising of the hapless soldier’s brain is a primary target of research.

As a 2003 Wireless News report stated: “Direct neural control of complex machines is a long-term U.S. military goal. DARPA has a brain-machine interface program aimed at creating next-generation wireless interfaces between neural systems and, initially, prosthetics and other biomedical devices.” [6] Or the $3 million funded Systems of Neuro-Morphic Adaptive Plastic Scalable Electronics, or SyNAPSE, a program that will: “… develop a brain inspired electronic ‘chip’ that mimics that function, size, and power consumption of a biological cortex,” … “If successful, the program will provide the foundations for functional machines to supplement humans in many of the most demanding situations faced by war fighters today.” [7]

The latest experiments have called for the next step in understanding the portion of the brain called the neo-cortex which is used for sensory and motor commands, spatial reasoning, language and those requiring conscious thought. In other words, higher brain functions. On September 19, 2013 Networld reported that DARPA is most interested in: “… new concepts and technologies for developing what it calls a ‘Cortical Processor’ based on Hierarchical Temporal Memory.”

In April of the same year, the Obama Administration had announced a project called Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies or the BRAIN Initiative, to be funded by the 2014 budget. With DARPA lurking in the background and giving “support,” the initiative involves the collaboration of several science foundations and organisations. Dr. Francis Collins, the Director of the National Institutes of Health who shared his enthusiasm in a White House statement explained how: “… the BRAIN Initiative will focus largely on realizing new tools for imaging, recording, and eventually controlling neurons.” He said that project stresses the: “Great promise for developing such technologies” including: “… intersections of nano-science, imaging, engineering, informatics, and other rapidly emerging fields of science and engineering.” [8]

This research falls under the $3bn allocated by the Obama White House to develop technology identifying brain circuits, with financial assistance once again, from National Institute of Mental Health, who has: “… promised to move its seven-figure funding away from research into conditions such as schizophrenia and depression towards a system that looks at how brain networks contribute to difficulties that are shared across diagnoses.” The project is called Research Domain Criteria or the RDoCProject, rumoured to be an “… eventual replacement for the diagnostic system used by current-day psychiatrists.” The identification and modification of key brain circuits is the overwhelming interest in this field. [9]

There is no question that medical advances involving nanotechnology, neurology and neuropharmacology are destined to improve those suffering from disabilities and diseases ranging from blindness to multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer’s disease. In this context, the medical future is bright. Whether the desire to achieve a healthier and happier humanity will achieve pole position is a moot point at this stage. It is exactly the same mentality behind DARPA and the MKULTRA programs of mind experimentation of the 1940s-1970s which provides the majority of financial support and thus the continuation of that mind-set with their attendant goals. The pace of change is awe-inspiring in the field of neuroscience and outsourced military applications spreading tentacle-like through Big Pharma, medical and educational institutions. Scientists have reached the point where computers can analyse MRI data from the brain and reconstruct thoughts. While others have broken new ground in making the first brain-to-brain interface, first with rats then with humans using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. [10] More on this later.

Although almost all advances in neuroscience necessarily feed into the military-intelligence apparatus, the real action can be found in the marriage of cybernetics, biology and artificial intelligence. For instance, though it might seem like trying to count the flames in an inferno, one of the avenues of exploration currently occupying scientists is how to unlock memories stored in the brain in order to create a fully autonomous brain – housed in a robot. robot-brain

In 2008, Kevin Warwick, a professor at the United Kingdom’s University of Reading explained in an Agence-France Presse report that the robot (named Gordon) has a brain which is: “… composed of 50,000 to 100,000 active neurons. Once removed from rat foetuses and disentangled from each other with an enzyme bath, the specialised nerve cells are laid out in a nutrient-rich medium across an eight-by-eight centimetre (five-by-five inch) array of 60 electrodes.”

The report continued:

“This ‘multi-electrode array’ (MEA) serves as the interface between living tissue and machine, with the brain sending electrical impulses to drive the wheels of the robots, and receiving impulses delivered by sensors reacting to the environment.

Because the brain is living tissue, it must be housed in a special temperature-controlled unit — it communicates with its ‘body’ via a Bluetooth radio link. The robot has no additional control from a human or computer. From the very start, the neurons get busy. ‘Within about 24 hours, they start sending out feelers to each other and making connections,’ said Warwick.

‘Within a week we get some spontaneous firings and brain-like activity’ similar to what happens in a normal rat — or human — brain, he added.  [11]

Across the pond four years later, Brown University based in Rhode Island had created the first wireless, implanted, brain-computer interface. The wireless BCIs were implanted in pigs and monkeys for just over a year. It seems human subjects will be tested next.  Not wishing to be outdone by the colleagues down the road, the University of Rochester Medical Centre in New York, have carried out revolutionary work in the diagnosis and treatment of brain disorders. They hope their latest research will push new boundaries – ethical constraints notwithstanding. In the same year, scientists successfully grafted human glial cells into the brains of mice, thereby sharply enhancing their cognitive capacities. Improvements were seen across most brain operations such as memory, learning, and adaptive conditioning. The fact that scientists created human chimeric mice which is open to public scrutiny should give you some idea as to what is happening with those fully-funded projects which are conveniently away from public and judicial oversight. [12] 

Just in case chimeric mice become passé then it will no doubt come as a relief to those whose bread and butter relies on such innovation that they can just grow their own brains in test tubes. At least, according to the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology in Vienna. On August 28, 2013 Steve Connor science editor for the UK’s Independent introduced us to a breakthrough in his report entitled: ‘Scientists ‘grow’ a brain in a laboratory for the first time.’ Affectionately named: “cerebral organoids” these miniature human brains were grown from skin cells in a laboratory and are no more than 4mm and: “… equivalent in development to the brain of a human foetus at about nine weeks’ gestation, and even have the complex three-dimensional structure of a real embryonic brain.”

Brain resource issues may not be a problem for the Post Human.

DARPA has pooled its own resources to come up with yet another deterrent against the (largely non-existent) threat to the techno-military complex. The idea is to combine brain data from human sentry duty with machine-vision systems. Named logically as The Cognitive Technology Threat Warning System (CTTWS) it consists of: “… a wide-angle camera and radar which collects imagery for humans to review on a screen, and a wearable electroencephalogram device that measures the reviewer’s brain activity. This allows the system to detect unconscious recognition of changes in a scene—called a P300 event.” [13] 

android1

Source: blog.lnsresearch.com/

Distinct from artificial intelligence systems which rely on standard computer programming researchers have already constructed a tiny machine that “looks and thinks” like a human brain allowing robots to act independently. Substantial amounts of data from decades of studies into electrical activity in the brain, otherwise known as electroencephalography (EEG) played a vital part in advancing robotics to the next level. Teams based in various locations over America have managed to create robots which, according to James K. Gimzewski, professor of chemistry at the University of California: “… will be able to be able to learn and explore the terrain and work its way through the environment without human intervention.” Using the cybernetic and systems theory concepts of self-organization this led the researchers to the creation of: “… nano-scale interconnected wires that perform billions of connections like a human brain, and is capable of remembering information” thus processing data transcends current notions of computer capability. Gimzewski believes: “This could represent a revolutionary breakthrough in robotic systems.”

DARPA’s continuing quest to find the perfect cyborg has resulted in the Darpa Robotics Challenge started in 2013. That challenge consists of developing software to bring to life a 330Ib cyborg named Atlas with a funding tag of $34m available to the winning team. According to The Guardian, copies of the Atlas Cyborg were given to teams that will: “… compete to win military prizes for designing the best software to bring Atlas to life. Already Atlas, and its predecessors, can rapidly climb stairs, do more push-ups than any human, and even pass for a person while donning a chemical protection suit.”

atlas

Atlas Robot developed by DARPA Source: http://makezine.com/

The Pentagon is as coy as can be about the future applications for a number of reasons not least because they are a dangerous liability and ethically dubious. CIA drone attacks in Pakistan have killed up to 3,587 people since 2004, up to 884 of them civilians. Human Rights Watch has created a campaign to raise awareness about the rise of drone warfare based on the unethical premise of machines. According to the organisation robots will have: “… the power to make their own decisions about killing humans” which is not exactlya pleasant thing to consider. An international coalition has now formed which hopes to: “… call for a global treaty that would impose a ‘pre-emptive and comprehensive ban’ on artificially intelligent weapons before they are developed.” [14]  This has led to the formation of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC).

As Obama’s drones are increasingly deployed in the skies over many American cities and happily carving up civilians with asymmetric glee, we can be sure that this is a revolution of sorts. Officials thought it prudent to throw an “official statement” to assuage the minds of those ready for such meaningless PR, and stated in Nov. 2012 Defence Department policy statement: “Autonomous and semi-autonomous weapon systems shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force.” The document added further that: “complete engagements in a time-frame consistent with commander and operator intentions and, if unable to do so, [must] terminate engagements or seek additional human operator input before continuing the engagement.”

The above essentially means that the military will be permitted to do as they please with their new toys. If the machines don’t do as they are told then humans will take over to complete the missions. Exercising “judgment” seems to be the fail safe, which is even  less reassuring considering the woeful legacy of the US military.

If you think getting machines to think like humans in a military setting is disturbing, medical discoveries will continue to surge ahead nonetheless, serving to buffer the disquiet forming in most minds – outside of DARPA, that is. Apparently, the excitement of the challenge is paramount, regardless of the consequences. The idea is to create machines which are as close to functioning humans as possible with the added bonus that they will kill on command. This will take us further down a road of mind control research in programmed assassins which characterised the post-World War II and Cold War machinations. This time, with the added dimension of cybernetic, bio-engineering. After all, developing cyborgs are much less expensive than fully automated robots and far more predictable than the fallibility of hypno-programmed humans. A blend of the two brings expendability to new levels.

What if the government could change people’s moral beliefs or stop political dissent through remote control of people’s brains? A leaked document reveals that the US government, through DARPA research, is very close to accomplishing this.

A program using “Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation” (TMS) where the temporal lobe of the brain is stimulated with electromagnetic fields, continues the tradition. The objective in this particular example is: “… to remotely disrupt political dissent and extremism by employing in tandem with sophisticated propaganda based on this technology.” Such research is given the PR gloss that it pertains to foreign war games when in fact it is more likely to target a domestic populace as social and economic strife increases. According to phase 3 of the study paper entitled: entitled “Toward Narrative Disruptors and Inductors: Mapping the Narrative Comprehension Network and its Persuasive Effects” the ideal is to terminate lines of thinking in favour of thoughts they would not normally be prepared to believe. In a military context we can understand that this is not likely to be persuading people to see through Establishment deceptions – quite the opposite. [15] 

Electro-stimulation and ultrasound technology have a long history in mind control experimentation upon which DARPA has eagerly capitalised. As part of its Faculty Award Program, DARPA kindly made a grant available to Dr. William J. Tyler, Assistant Professor in the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University and co-founder and the CSO of SynSonix, Inc. With initial work supported by the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) Army Research Laboratory (ARL) (just so we know that medical uses are secondary here). After addressing the undoubtedly welcome potential for curing neurological diseases and brain injury, the professor informs us in a US Dept. of Defence article that: “… we have been working to develop methods for encoding sensory data onto the cortex using pulsed ultrasound.” He explains that a new technology has been developed: “… which implements trans-cranial pulsed ultrasound to remotely and directly stimulate brain circuits without requiring surgery. Further, we have shown this ultrasonic neuro-modulation approach confers a spatial resolution approximately five times greater than TMS and can exert its effects upon subcortical brain circuits deep within the brain.” 

The upshot of this work and other research into brain circuitry is that it will be applied to US war-fighters where the professor states he will be putty in his benefactor’s hands and “… look forward to developing a close working relationship with DARPA and other Department of Defense and U.S. Intelligence Communities to bring some of these applications to fruition over the coming years depending on the most pressing needs of our country’s defense industries.” [16] 

I think we already know what those “pressing needs” are.

What is effectively a “Helmet of obedience” opens itself to a wide range of applications. Tyler is a busy worker bee. He has also created another plaything for military loons on his website MyBrainCloud.net which offers: “… a concept application of non-invasive brain stimulation using pulsed ultrasound, which is likely to emerge in the future. The concept is essentially to provide individual users with a personalized connection port through which various brain stimulation protocols can be administered in an open access manner using cloud computing. This technology has many broad applications ranging from at-home medicine to recreational applications such as interactive video gaming and virtual experience downloading.” [17] 

The page has since been taken down.

HAARP

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP)

At this point, we might usefully remind ourselves of the relatively modern use of High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP).

Before it was apparently “closed down” it was based in Garkona, Alaska, and jointly funded by the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, the University of Alaska, and DARPA. HAARP was officially designated as an advanced weather research project focused on the ionosphere. It has been cloaked in mystery as to its true nature, in part due to an official stance of “national security” and the repellent legacy of US experimentation in the field of technotronic warfare and mind control. It seems part of the experimentation involved the use of electromagnetic frequencies and directed energy beams pulsed into the delicate upper layer of the atmosphere called the ionosphere around 1000 km above the Earth’s surface. The aim was/is to heat up specific areas which can create lenses of magnified effects. On the official website at http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/we can read: “HAARP is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.”

Though there is very little to go on regarding the nature, development and future direction of HAARP, Physicist Dr. Bernard Eastlund has given a lot of food for thought from his 1985 US patent entitled: “Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere” filed in 1985. If such a patent can be made available publicly you can be sure classified research is well in advance of similar prototypical research. From this patent, he states:

[The] temperature of the ionosphere has been raised by hundreds of degrees in these experiments.

A means and method is provided to cause interference with or even total disruption of communications over a very large portion of the earth. This invention could be employed to disrupt not only land based communications, both civilian and military, but also airborne communications and sea communications. This would have significant military implications.

It is possible … to take advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network even though the rest of the world’s communications are disrupted.

[This invention] can be used to an advantage for positive communication and eavesdropping purposes.

Exceedingly large amounts of power can be very efficiently produced and transmitted.

This invention has a phenomenal variety of … potential future developments. Large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction or deflection. Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns or altering solar absorption patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device. Ozone, nitrogen, etc. concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased.

Electromagnetic pulse defenses are also possible. The earth’s magnetic field could be decreased or disrupted at appropriate altitudes to modify or eliminate the magnetic field.

Though differing in scope and logistical capabilities this is exactly the type of experimentation which HAARP was – and may be – carrying out, albeit under a entirely different set up.

Though many researchers posit HAARP was indeed a vast geo-engineering project linked to reducing climate change by saturating the atmosphere with specific chemicals – the infamous chemtrails controversy – it seems this was a sub-division of experimental research and a likely cover for something else. The evidence may surface that it is not restricted to weather but a continuation of experiments gained from mind control research, something which the Establishment has been interested in since the days of Nikola Tesla. The real action may stem from this long rumoured experimental mass mind control, in line with the US military’s goal of full-spectrum dominance by 2020.

Author and researcher Nick Begich Jr. and his influential book: Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, suggested that experiments in the ionosphere have advanced greatly to the extent that earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes can be triggered (Hurricane Katrina, 2005, Haitian earthquake of 2009) and localised as part of an on-going geostrategy. More importantly, he theorises that it is the product of decades of research which has resulted in a mind control device of considerable power.

Given that there has been decades of proven experiments in mind programming, huge advances in military technology such as Silent Sound Spectrum carried out by the US government, this is very far from outrageous. Begich’s claims and that of other researchers are supported by public patents relating to HAARP a sample of which follows:

  • C. W. Hansell (1945) “Communication system by pulses through the Earth”, U.S. Patent 2,389,432.;
  • R. L. Tanner (1965) “Extremely low-frequency antenna”, U.S. Patent 3,215,937;
  • G. F. Leydorf (1966) “Antenna near field coupling system”, U.S. Patent 3,278,937;
  • B. J. Eastlund (1987) “Method and apparatus for altering a region in the Earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere”, U.S. Patent 4,686,605;
  • B. J. Eastlund (1991) “Method for producing a shell of relativistic particles at an altitude above the earths surface”, U.S. Patent 5,038,664.

The history of DARPA’s main avenue of research has always been neuroscience, nanoscience and cybernetics adapted to military applications.

Though often designated as a classic conspiracy theory and therefore not worth investigating, it appears even the European Parliament expressed unease at the project in the document: “Minutes of 28/01/1999 – Final Edition, Environment, security and foreign affairs, A4-0005/1999: ‘Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy’: stating that it: “… considers HAARP by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body before any further research and testing.”

 


Notes

[1] op. cit. ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’
[2]’DARPA implant could give people Terminator-like vision, coldorbit.com February 18, 2015
[3] ‘The Rise and Decline of Military Human Enhancement’ By Michael Burnham-Fink, Science Progress January 7, 2011. http://scienceprogress.org/2011/01/the-rise-and-decline-of-military-human-enhancement/
[4] ‘Pentagon Watchdogs Swamped by Military Spending; $152 Billion a Year  Goes Unaudited’ Wired May 2008.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Toward a Brain-Internet Link,’ Rodney Brooks, WirelessNewsFactor, 10 December, 2003.
[7] ‘DARPA 2009: Brain On A Chip, Transparent Displays’ by Noah Shachtman, Wired February 2, 2008.

[8] ‘Obama has announced a $100-million brain mapping project’ io9.com, September 19, 2013.
[9] ‘Vaughan Bell: news from the borders of mental illness’ guardian/Observer September 29, 2013.
[10]’Computer can read letters directly from the brain’ Science Daily August 19, 2013.
[11] A ‘Frankenrobot’ with a biological brain, (AFP) Aug 13, 2008
[12] ‘First human brain-to-brain interface allows remote control over the internet, telepathy coming soon’, extremetech.com/ August 28, 2013
[13] ‘Sentry System Combines a Human Brain with Computer Vision’Lucas Laursen, MIT Tech Review, November 27, 2012.
[14] ‘Rights group launches campaign to ban ‘killer robots” phys.org Apr 23, 2013 by Danny Kemp
[15] ‘Secret DARPA Mind Control Project Revealed: Leaked Document’ – Whistleblower Reveals Military Mind Control Project At Major University. Activist PostJuly 29 2013.
[16] ‘Remote Control of Brain Activity Using Ultrasound’ Armed with Science, http://www.science.dodlive.mil
[17] http://www.tylerlab.com/projects/ultrasound/future

Technocracy V: The Technocrats Tap in (2)


 sbirs-geo-1-missile-warning-satelliteImage credit: gizmag.com | infrakshun

In 2003, under the Bush Administration, the Total Information Awareness program was introduced in order to provide “large, distributed repositories” including “biometric signatures of humans” and “human network analysis and behavior modeling” provided by DARPA. It was a reiteration of what ECHELON and MAIN CORE had been doing for years. Congress defunded the program in the same year, prohibiting any such activities to target Americans.

The Total Information Awareness Office run by convicted Iran-Contra felon John Poindexter and featured a logo on its website resembling the popular occult mythology of the Illuminati. It was so blatant that some visitors thought it was a bad attempt at political satire. It wasn’t. It did however, beg the question as to why such a revealing caricature and its objectives was allowed the go ahead? Moreover, why was it derailed so quickly when other draconian legislation – including the highly controversial PATRIOT act – sailed through without any problems? The reason for this was to provide a distraction so that yet another surveillance hub could be built away from the spotlight.

tia-greatseal

  The Total Information Awareness logo as compared to the Great Seal found on the US dollar bill, a freemasonic emblem. A purposeful distraction?

A 2012 article by online tech magazine Wired reports on Intel journalist James Bamford’s sources who claim that once again, NSA has been continuing its surveillance operations with a new spy data centre based in Utah: “… capable of breaking almost any encryption, reading any email and recording any phone call anywhere in the world, even if it’s not made over the Internet.” Where have we heard that before? This hub is just one of a number of networked sites based around a similar network 0f “ultra-sensitive satellites … with the unique ability to sniff electronic communications from a massive distance.” [1] Bamford’s sources say that the NSA is routinely violating the US constitution by dumping all of America’s communications data into the system for analysis. Perhaps most importantly, and which goes to the heart of the premise of this book is the opinion of another covert source to which Bamford made contact who claimed that: “… the NSA is on the verge of a massive coup, putting the U.S. inches away from ‘a turnkey totalitarian state.’” [2]

Another heavy-weight whistleblower, William Binney, decided to grab the gauntlet and go against his superiors to warn of an Orwellian Superstate which is “ready” and “set up” so that one has to just “turn the key” and this would be an immediate reality. [3] A specialist in traffic analysis Binney worked for the NSA for 37 years and knows its capabilities and technical now-how inside out. He joined Electronic Frontier Foundation’s case against the National Security Agency (Jewel v. NSA) filed July 2, 2012 and their illegal domestic surveillance programs which, according to Binney, “are consistent, as a mathematical matter, with seizing both the routing information and the contents of all electronic communications” inside the U.S. He has stated that over 20 trillion files have been created since the September 11th attacks. [4] Amid significant civil liberty concerns, NSA head and commander of US Cyber Command department General Keith Alexander is still seeking to redesign the internet’s infrastructure so that the NSA may: “… know instantly when overseas hackers might be attacking public or private infrastructure and computer networks.” A trial of 17 US defence companies is already underway.

Tom Simonite from Technology Review tells us:

“Under the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cyber Pilot, Lockheed Martin and other companies set up their computer security systems to automatically alert the agency when the alarm is tripped. They automatically pass a summary of what was detected and the IP address associated with the event to the NSA over the Internet. ‘All you need to pass is the fact of a signature and IP address in real time, and we can take it from there,’ said Alexander.” [5]

Yet there is more to MAIN CORE than high-level data collection and future detention. First, we need to keep in mind that targeting the thinking population is not just an Orwellian fantasy but an objective reality. The NSA and Homeland Security is collecting massive amounts of data on the US and European populations for another purpose which may well have something to do with “Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation” or (SEAS). From their celebratory website we read: “What happens when you take gaming technology, inject it with the latest discoveries in management, economics, and psychology, and apply it to business, political, and social situations? The answer is Simulex’s Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation (SEAS), the result of ten years of research conducted at Purdue University’s Krannert School of Management, in association with the United States Department of Defence and several Fortune 500 companies.” [6]

Looking at Simulex Inc. client base it is fairly easy to guess. As the bold heading that greets us on the client page attests, SEAS has a top heavy bias for the telecommunications industry. It assists the United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) to “model the volatile regions of the world” while also providing their services to United States Department of Homeland Security in preparing “… for bio-terrorist attacks, and by Fortune 500 companies for strategic planning.” [7] Other clients include: United States Department of Defence, United States Department of Justice, United States Army Recruiting Command and Crane Naval Surface Warfare Centre. Their private sector clients are global pharmaceutical corporation Eli Lilly and our old weapons friend Lockheed Martin who got rid of whistleblower Margaret Newsham for blabbing to the press about unwarranted surveillance.

Is it coincidence Lockheed turns up here?

Other Fortune 500 companies are apparently clients but we are not given a list. However, it would be right up the social engineering alley of the Rockefeller Foundation and Monsanto Corp.

(Photo: Mönch / STN)

Which bring us to another 2005 whistleblower Russell D. Tice, a former intelligence analyst for the U.S. Air Force, Office of Naval Intelligence, Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and NSA Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) officer. His statements in an interview to online journal Think Progress Security.org claimed that the surveillance discovered so far was “… only the tip of the iceberg,” and there was “… an angle that you haven’t heard about yet…” [8] In another interview with the online culture journal Reason just prior to a congressional hearing on the NSA wiretapping scandal (which went nowhere) Tice infers that the wire-tapping was not the main issue and that he needed: “… to tell Congress that no one knows yet, which is only tertiarily connected to what you know about now … In my case, there’s no way the programs I want to talk to Congress about should be public ever, unless maybe in 200 years they want to declassify them. You should never learn about it; no one at the Times should ever learn about these things.” [9]

So, surveillance was only scratching the surface. What then, are we to make of this military-corporate complex outsourcing in conjunction with MAIN CORE? What would you do if you wanted to predict how each of us may act in the future, most especially if your main objective was to control population in the face of a real or imagined threat against the Establishment power-base? What is it that we “should never learn about?”

Could that be that each and every one of us who has expressed a level of awareness that thinks out of the box has an electronic kindle file packed full of interesting data? Moreover, this data is part of complex synergy of multi-layered simulations that uses a form of mass “pre-crime” software with a supercomputing power undreamt of.

Blogger and commentator Kevin Flaherty from cryptogon.com makes it clear in the following analysis:

We must assume that They are using the full spectrum of surveillance information to try to PREDICT HOW EACH OF US IS LIKELY TO BEHAVE ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. Where we go. Which routes we take. What we buy. Etc. All of these things can be broken down into a kind of moving average that wiggles around between an upper band and a lower band, kind of like a standard deviation from a mean. Stay within the bands, and the Magic 8 Ball probably won’t bother to flag your profile for closer analysis by some genius at the Terrorist Screening Center.

Obviously, most of us aren’t worth the attention of a human analyst, and They know it. Most of the sheep just go with the herd. They do what they’re told, shop at Wal-Mart, pay their taxes, go to church, the end. More educated sheep read Business Week or the New York Times, etc. Within a fairly wide range of activities, it’s no more complicated, for the vast majority of the people out there, than the way pool balls behave as they bounce around the table and each other.

This is a key point, so I’m going to emphasize it: These systems would excel at finding the artifacts, the outliers, the people who haven’t internalized the programming, but continue to act ‘normal.’ [10] [Emphasis mine]

Journalist and author Walter Bowart who wrote the seminal classic Operation Mind Control (1978) the NSA of the 1960s had computer systems decades in advance of public and governmental agencies of the time. As we hear about the capabilities of “Quantum Light Harvesting” which offers a revolutionary way to advance computational power to undreamt of levels and in a short space of time. That being so, what systems do we imagine the NSA playing with now in 2015?

Having explored the notions of depopulation or “managed genocide” and psychological operations in previous chapters of this book, Flaherty then makes an interesting observation on the nature of all this surveillance and so called resource-grabbing and draws our attention to a recent, and on-going SEAS project in partnership with the US Department of Defence (DOD) called the Sentient World Simulation (SWS). According to the concept paper for the project, a parallel Planet Earth is being developed: “… with billions of individual ‘nodes’ to reflect every man, woman, and child this side of the dividing line between reality and AR… It will be a “synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information.” Apparently, the simulation: “… provides an environment for testing Psychological Operations (PSYOP),” so that military leaders can “develop and test multiple courses of action to anticipate and shape behaviors of adversaries, neutrals, and partners”.

SWS also:

“… replicates financial institutions, utilities, media outlets, and street corner shops. By applying theories of economics and human psychology, its developers believe they can predict how individuals and mobs will respond to various stressors.

SEAS can display regional results for public opinion polls, distribution of retail outlets in urban areas, and the level of unorganization of local economies, which may point to potential areas of civil unrest. Yank a country’s water supply. Stage a military coup. SWS will tell you what happens next.

“The idea is to generate alternative futures with outcomes based on interactions between multiple sides,” said Purdue University professor Alok Chaturvedi, co-author of the SWS concept paper. [11]

The Pentagon still isn’t content. Hundreds of additional spies are being sent overseas as part of a new espionage network that is set to rival the CIA in size according to the Washington Post. The report informs us that the a transformation of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) is underway having been “dominated for the past decade by the demands of two wars” and which will now be a “spy service focused on emerging threats and more closely aligned with the CIA and elite military commando units.” With “collectors” numbering as many as 1,600 all over the world this is no small project. In fact, as we have explored, it seems to be part of an expansive operation to merge military and intelligence agencies into a more centralized system of espionage and domestic surveillance. As the Post mentions: “… the Pentagon’s plan to create what it calls the Defense Clandestine Service (DCS) reflects the military’s latest and largest foray into secret intelligence work. The DIA overhaul — combined with the growth of the CIA since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — will create a spy network of unprecedented size.” [12]

illustration

Photo from Simulex, Inc. advert

On top of all this, in 2012, former CIA intelligence analyst turned Whistleblower Edward J. Snowden leaked more than 50,00 classified documents to the Wikileaks organisation and journalist Glenn Greenwald revealing in black and white just how pervasive and all-encompassing the surveillance capabilities of America’s NSA and Britain’s GCHQ truly is. For some, the jury is still out on Snowden’s motives primarily due to the fact that much of this information had been known for many years by independent journalists and alternative media who had been trying to get the attention of the mainstream media, but to no avail. So, it was a little fishy that Snowden was all over every possible media outlet in a very short space of time as though he had single-handedly dismantled the apparatus himself. Yet, he is the first CIA agent to do so. Is he a patsy, a conscious agent or a hero? Whether the NSA is using him to test the demographic water of mass perception is unclear. So far, the ripples it has created could become very big indeed. For one thing, it allows the public to ease their way into deeper issues surrounding the whole arena of US policy from drone attacks to terrorism. The latter reason has been trotted out to justify all kinds of unconstitutional measures and many are waking up to this fact. After all, so-called “terrorists” are acutely aware that they are always monitored. What Snowden has done is show how surveillance is targeting innocent people not the terrorists. The NSA in all probability, may be extremely peeved that their methods have been revealed. Whether this is a CIA-NSA turf war suggested by some commentators remains to be seen. As the CIA grapples with increasing revelations about its torture and rendition programs and the NSA continues to try and stem the flow of leaked cables on its surveillance capabilities, the leviathan of soft totalitarianism still lumbers foward.

NSACIA Emblem© infrakshun

By 2013, while the magnitude of surveillance of all and everyone is being digested it is true to say that there may be much more to be drawn out of the NSA shadows, not least that Glenn Greenwald stated on November 28th to the BBC’s Hardtalk programme that there are still thousands of leaked cables to go through and make public. As it stands, the leaks have not made the slightest difference to its illegality as some commentators have been saying for quite some time. Far from being chastened, the NSA has romped ahead by creating a secret body of law which gives the agency carte blanche in accessing data on Americans justified by the war on terror and the threat of cyber-terrorism and underground nuclear proliferation.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) has eleven members whose job it was to approve illegal wire-tapping orders and which have  now been expanded to allow the NSA to do as it pleases while doffing its hat to feeble attempts to regulate intelligence surveillance. In a Guardian piece by Spencer Ackerman on August 16, 2013 it was reported that thousands of annual violations of its own restrictions continue to mount as reported by two US senators who sit on the US intelligence committee. They stated that these were, also: “the tip of the iceberg.”

The bottom line is that everyone is presumed guilty rather than innocent simply due to the vast amount of data building on every citizen. The NSA can effectively trap you into suspected wrongdoing. As we have seen, the ubiquitous rise of entrapment operations may reflect something much deeper. Just because you have led a seemingly law-abiding life, it is no protection against mass spying programs seeping into every corner of our lives care of SMART technology. The very definition of “law abiding” is changing so that it is contoured towards government policy rather than what is ethically and morally sound. Whistleblower William Binney has warned for several years that the government is storing literally everything and creating a highly sophisticated, searchable database to be used for anything it wants. Edward J. Snowden says much the same thing in an interview on June 12, 2013:

Because even if you’re not doing anything wrong you’re being watched and recorded. And the storage capability of these systems increases every year consistently by orders of magnitude … to where it’s getting to the point where you don’t have to have done anything wrong. You simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody – even by a wrong call. And then they can use this system to go back in time and scrutinize every decision you’ve ever made, every friend you’ve ever discussed something with. And attack you on that basis to sort to derive suspicion from an innocent life and paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer. [See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdPbvKeRgpk

On July 6, 2013 Eric Lichtblau writng for the New York Times commented on officials’ statements that: “… the court’s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order.” Indeed, though European countries such as France and Spain have been found spying on their own citizens, even handing over data to the NSA it is the United States that has led the charge against the global population’s privacy. This in turn, has led the Surveillance State seeping into every avenue of American life. Even the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has routinely been snooping in order to extract largely unconstitutional taxation claims. It believes that it can continue to operate quite happily without using a warrant to read people’s emails and text messages. Just like the search engine Google Inc. whom we will turn to presently, the Fourth Amendment and every person’s right to basic privacy is deemed irrelevant to the IRS and it’s highly dubious definitions of taxations laws. In summary, they have their ears and eyes tapped into every conceivable communication source while making up their own laws to maintain this illegal surveillance  well into the future. If you listened to the BBC you would think that it is Glenn Greenwald who should be on trial for daring to suggest that intelligence chiefs “routinely lie.”

But the shadow government and the NSA isn’t content. It needs more and more. Research into weaponisation, military capabilities and surveillance has now encompassed much of society. Corporations, multinational security firms and private contractors who act as “digital blackwaters” are all in the NSA bag helping to make society a very SMART Big brother indeed. Outsourcing is key both in terms of diluting accountability whilst encouraging innovation. In just a few examples from many, military-intel company Raytheon has “… secretly developed software capable of tracking people’s movements and predicting future behaviour by mining data from social networking websites.” The company admitted that it was a joint research & development project shared with the US government in 2010 in order “… to help build a national security system capable of analysing ‘trillions of entities’ from cyberspace.

WilliamBinney-EdwardSnowden

Whistleblowers William Binney (left) and Edward J. Snowden (right)

With the security of biometric data maybe a bad joke it has made the sale of private data open to lucrative profits. In 2013, Richard Kerbaj and Jon Ungoed-Thomas reported in the May 13th, edition of The Sunday Times that data of 27m mobile phone users had been: “… offered for sale to the Metropolitan police, private companies and other bodies, enabling them to track users’ movements.” The company involved in the potential sale is: “Ipsos Mori, one of Britain’s biggest research firms, … claimed in meetings that every movement by users can be tracked to within 100 metres.” According to the newspaper, the company: “shelved any deal after being contacted by The Sunday Times.” The report continued: “Documents to promote the data reveal that it includes ‘gender, age, postcode, websites visited, time of day text is sent [and] location of customer when call is made’. They state that people’s mobile phone use and location can be tracked in real time with records of movements, calls, texts, also available for the previous six months.”

To carry out these  games in order to “protect us” the NSA has resorted to impersonating Google in order to obtain its information and swell its billions of files. Edward Moyer’s September 2013 article ‘NSA Disguised itself as Google’ for CNET.com describes the process. Named in the business as a “man in the middle attack” it involves a hacker technique of “… using a fake security certificate to pose as a legitimate Web service, bypass browser security settings, and then intercept data that an unsuspecting person is sending to that service.” Once passwords have been collected users can then log in to genuine banking websites thereby acting as intermediary or “middle man” and re-routing requests to their bank and returning the information to the customer while gathering highly personal data from both participants without either having the slightest clue what has happened. (It also applies to email servers). This time it is not a lone hacker but the NSA and GCHQ, where massive amounts of information is being channelled back to their central hubs.

The idea that informational roadmap of cyberspace has been compromised by Intel PSYOPS and NSA surveillance has become more of a probability that a possibility. It is foolish to believe that anything we do online is secure or private. Not only is the NSA breaking most forms of encryption on the internet but is likely replacing intercepting downloads of open-source encryption software and silently replacing these with their own versions. The NSA is re-calibrating the internet towards its own perception of reality.

Illegality is justified with the favourite canard that it is all to protect us from terrorism. It was confirmed just how manufactured the threat truly is when online journal allgov.net reported in October 2013 that NSA Director Keith Alexander admitted before a congressional committee that he lied when he claimed the agency’s wire-tapping program had thwarted 54 terrorist “plots or events.”  In June of 2013, while the Obama administration was busy denouncing the whistleblowing of Edward Snowden and locking away Bradley Manning for 35 years, the NSA was lying through its teeth once again. Only 13 of the 54 cases were connected to the United States and just one or two suspected plots were: “… identified as a result of bulk phone record collection.” This was nothing new. The head was merely following the “terrorist-under-your-bed” justification for all manner of constitutional abuses practiced by the government and military-intelligence apparatus.

Lying is an inherent part of the deal. Apart from using data and surveillance as a means to implement propaganda, cyber-warfare and the harassment of those deemed “enemies,” mass surveillance is key to Obama’s assassination programs still carried out without oversight. In combination with the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) the NSA and CIA effectively make a private army outside any democratic accountability. Special operations units utilising drones and US soldiers are deployed all around the globe, from Somalia to Yemen, Afghanistan to Iraq. The coordination and logistical support is given by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) who essentially decides who might be a suitable target and the means by which he or she will be murdered.

According to Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) the true purpose of the NCTC is the:

“massive, secretive data collection and mining of trillions of points of data about most people in the United States” …. In particular, the NCTC operates a gigantic data-mining operation, in which all sorts of information about innocent Americans is systematically monitored, stored, and analyzed. This includes “records from law enforcement investigations, health information, employment history, travel and student records” – “literally anything the government collects would be fair game”. In other words, the NCTC – now vested with the power to determine the proper “disposition” of terrorist suspects – is the same agency that is at the center of the ubiquitous, unaccountable surveillance state aimed at American citizens.

Worse still, as the ACLU’s legislative counsel Chris Calabrese documented back in July in a must-read analysis, Obama officials very recently abolished safeguards on how this information can be used. Whereas the agency, during the Bush years, was barred from storing non-terrorist-related information about innocent Americans for more than 180 days – a limit which “meant that NCTC was dissuaded from collecting large databases filled with information on innocent Americans” – it is now free to do so. Obama officials eliminated this constraint by authorizing the NCTC “to collect and ‘continually assess’ information on innocent Americans for up to five years”. [13]

As the NSA and Homeland Security can now, on a whim, label any American a potential terrorist, the most obvious question to ask is how long will it be before American citizens are assassinated on their own soil? Assuming it hasn’t happened already?

drones

Obama’s Drones ready to assassinate from a distance without trial or jury. Based on the woeful intelligence of the last decade chances are you are likely to be an innocent civilian.

Perhaps no better example illustrates how the NSA should be the last people we trust is from the recent confirmation that the agency wishes to defend none other than Wall Street. Rather than wire-tapping genuine criminals infesting the world of cartel economics, this bastion of financial terrorism is deemed worthy of protection.

Salon, journalist Natasha Lennard details how the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper released a statement in early 2013 noting: “It is not a secret that the Intelligence Community collects information about economic and financial matters, and terrorist financing. We collect this information for many important reasons: for one, it could provide the United States and our allies early warning of international financial crises which could negatively impact the global economy. It also could provide insight into other countries’ economic policy or behavior which could affect global markets.”

The NSA could no doubt collect vast amounts of information on the continuing “irregularities” and corporate crimes still devouring any chance of a healthy economy. As journalist Michael Degerald mentioned regarding the admission: “If any part of American society or business had shown itself to be corrupt to the core, and thus in need of surveillance, it’s Wall Street.”

 

Notes

[1] ‘The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)’ By James Bamford, Wired, March 15, 2012.
[2] Ibid.
[3] RT report July 2012.
[4] ‘Sworn Declaration of Whistleblower William Binney on NSA Domestic Surveillance Capabilities’ July 16 2012. Public Intelligence.net, http://www.publicintelligence.net.
[5] ‘NSA Boss Wants More Control Over the ‘Net’by Tom Simonite, technologyreview.com, July 27, 2012.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] ‘NSA Whistleblower To Expose More Unlawful Activity: ‘People…Are Going To Be Shocked’’ By Faiz Shakir, Thnik Progress Security, wwwthinkprorgess.org May 12, 2006.
[9]‘Inside the Puzzle Palace’ – A Reason interview with NSA whistleblower Russell Tice, by Julian Sanchez, http://www.reason.org, January 13, 2006.
[10] ‘Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation’ By Kevin Flaherty, http://www.cryptogon.com, June 30th, 2007.
[11] ‘Sentient world: war games on the grandest scale – Sim Strife’ By Mark Baard, The Register, 23rd June 2007.
[12] ‘DIA sending hundreds more spies overseas’ By Greg Millar, The Washington Post, December 2.
[13] “The President’s Private Army”: NSA-CIA Spying is Central to Carrying Out the Obama Administration’s Assassination Program. By Washington’s Blog / Global Research, September 29, 2013.

Technocracy IV: The Technocrats Tap in (1)


Earth-Wallpaper.jpg© infrakshun

“…As far as intelligence goes the NSA’s far, far superior to [the CIA]—far in advance in the ‘black arts.’…The CIA gets blamed for what NSA does. NSA is far more vicious and far more accomplished in their operations.”- Operation Mind Control (1978) By Walter Bowart, Interview conducted with a confirmed government assassin.

The average British person has the dubious honour of being part of a population that is the most intensely monitored on the planet. In just one week, a British individual will have over 3,254 pieces of personal information stored about him or her, which is then held for years on a variety of databases, or in some instances indefinitely. Where you shop, how frequently, what you buy, how often you use your credit card and where; you’re most common website searches and favourite sites as well as the details of your emails and keyword analysis therein. An average of 50 websites is visited and 32 emails sent per person in Britain every day. That’s a lot of data. And the internet service providers (ISPs) log everything which is then happily handed over to advertisers representing perhaps the most “benign” use of your private data. (Stay tuned).

The dividing line between the corporate sector and government has never been more blurred when it comes to sharing data about customer’s habits. Phone companies already retain enormous amounts of data about British people and presently give it to over 650 public bodies on request. A recent finding by the UK’s Telegraph newspaper revealed that plans to grant local authorities and other public bodies access to the email and internet records of millions has already gone ahead, despite the well-publicised loss of data by government departments, including an incident where HM Revenue and Customs mislaid computer disks containing the personal details of 25 million people. [1]

Microsoft continues to track users of the new Windows phones which has a unique ID that interacts with Wi-Fi locations and GPS to know anyone’s longitude and latitude. Customer privacy isn’t a big issue for Microsoft and any of the big internet companies. Mobile phones are now effectively little tracking devices courtesy of a network of phone masts which allow name, time, location and direction of travel to be catalogued via a unique identifying signal that is pulsed out at regular intervals, even when you are not using the phone. Police and public authorities can access this information at any time, ostensibly for investigating crimes. [2]

The central nexus of surveillance comes from CCTV or closed-circuit television where well over 4.2 million cameras are crammed into this tiny island. Network Rail, London Underground, government and corporate buildings are all littered with the critters, recording an average of 300+ appearances on camera for the ordinary Brit. The tapes can be kept however long it is deemed necessary. The fact that CCTV surveillance has proven by the police’s own crime statistics to have made virtually no reduction or prevention of crime, the SMART city future continues to attract the technocratic faithful., nonetheless.[3] If you are thinking of high-tailing your way out of Britain in search of real privacy automatic number plate recognition systems can always track your speeding car…That is, if airborne drones don’t do it first.

cctv1

Produced by yet another delighted arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) better known as “drones,” and controversially deployed in Afghanistan are now being used for the routine and covert monitoring of the UK and US public. In the United States police, universities, state transportation departments and federal agencies already have some form of drone device monitoring the public. Some of these are anything from small, remote-controlled model “aeroplanes” to large predator drones seen in the military. A consortium of government agencies and law enforcement authorities are falling over themselves to deploy the drones in an attempt to “greatly extend the government’s surveillance capacity and ‘revolutionise policing.’” According to a 2010 Guardian report: “The CAA is currently reluctant to license UAVs in normal airspace because of the risk of collisions with other aircraft.” Despite this, the government and their weapons manufacturers are confident that the widespread deployment of drones will take off… in just a few years. [4]  The Federal Administration Authority (FAA) has estimated 10,000 drones could be flitting about our skies by 2020. With a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, the investment alone will ensure such a deadline remains on course. [5] With a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, the investment alone will ensure such a deadline remains on course. [6] Indeed, early 2015 has already seen drones operating on behalf of amazon, pizza delivery, as waiters in Japan and even drones whizzing around at the Superbowl (until the FAA became jittery and banned them).

Overall surveillance is marching towards the tempo of intel agencies and the creation of so-called “threat assessments.” CCTV photography is entered into a facial recognition database which can then be used to create a 3D model of your face which is distributed across a vast database surveillance network. The United States Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been busy developing the AWARE-2 gigapixel camera which is capable of creating images with 50,000 megapixels. The machine will be used for military surveillance, which means if not being used against suspecting civilians or “insurgents” in foreign lands it will probably mean protesters and law abiding citizens like you and me. The AWARE camera is part of a whole industry rolling out new hardware to meet the demands of a global populace that is becoming more aware.

Governments have been spying on their own people since the end of the Second World War as a consequence of gathering enemy intelligence and code cracking. Codes and encryption technology led to coordinated signal intelligence (SIGINT) which obtained a fresh burst of state support from the pressure of the Cold War. The computer innovations that would follow led to the creation of the ECHELON global spying system, a vast network of digital spy stations carefully maintained by the US, England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Originally named Project P415 with the involvement of a broad network of international intelligence agencies on board, it has continued to grow in size and scope thanks to successive Prime Ministers and Presidents signing off billions of pounds and dollars without congressional approval. By the 1980s, the Anglo-American plan for an expansion of ECHELON was set in motion. It was to be fully operational by the 21st century and its ambitions included the monitoring, collection and analysis of the civilian population overseen by the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) at Cheltenham, England. This is the coordinating centre for Europe, Africa and Russia, West of the Ural Mountains, while the NSA is responsible for the rest of Russia and the Americas. The NSA’s monitoring of the South Pacific, and South East Asia is sourced from a base in Australia.

The still secret UKUSA (UK-USA) monitoring agreement splits the work into several sections assigned to the relevant agency where the global population’s private lives are intercepted from mobiles, land line telephones, fax transmissions and emails and fed through NSA departments where personnel pore over keywords in the hope of isolating phantom suspects’ intent on blowing up the White House.[7]

A 1998 European Parliament sponsored research study entitled: ‘An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control,’ gave credence to journalists’ insistence that a UK-US spy surveillance network was in operation. The Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA) committee of the European Parliament compiled the report and gave cast iron evidence that not only did it exist but showed the NSA was routinely carrying out illegal and sophisticated surveillance experiments on Europeans with UK support.

In the 1980s, Margaret Newsham worked for arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin and had been stationed at the NSA’s Menwith Hill listening post in Yorkshire, England. This is the central clearing house for information that is vacuumed up and dissected by the NSA at fort Meade and other locations. Newsham became a whistleblower and testified to a Congressional committee after realising that the NSA was illegally spying on Americans and Europeans. Their report was never published but investigative journalist Duncan Campbell took an interest and verified her story in a 1988 report of his own, blowing the lid off ECHELON secrecy in the process.

gchq-nsa

America’s NSA Headquarters (top) and UK’s ECHELON surveillance system and GCHQ

Patrick S. Poole, a lecturer in government and economics at Bannockburn College in Franklin, Tennessee compiled a data base on the nature and history of ECHELON. In an extensive series from 1999 and 2000 he outlined some of the surveillance operation code names unveiled over the years mostly by determined investigative journalists which include the following sourced from the Menwith Hill data hub:

STEEPLEBUSH – Completed in 1984, this $160 million system expanded the satellite surveillance capability

RUNWAY –receives signals from the second-generation geosynchronous Vortex satellites, and gathers miscellaneous communications traffic from Europe, Asia and the former Soviet Union. The information is then forwarded to the Menwith Hill computer systems for processing.

PUSHER – An HFDF system that covers the HF frequency range between 3 MHz and 30 MHz (radio transmissions from CB radios, walkie-talkies, and other radio devices). Military, embassy, maritime and air flight communications are the main targets.

MOONPENNY – this system is targeted at the communication relay satellites belonging to other countries, as well as the Atlantic and Indian Ocean Intelsat satellites.

KNOBSTICKS I and II – The purpose of these antennae arrays are unknown, but they probably target military and diplomatic traffic throughout Europe.

GT-6 – A new system installed at the end of 1996, GT-6 is believed to be the receiver for the third generation of geosynchronous satellites termed Advanced Orion or Advanced Vortex. A new polar orbit satellite called Advanced Jumpseat may be monitored from here as well.

STEEPLEBUSH II – An expansion of the 1984 STEEPLEBUSH system, this computer system processes information collected from the RUNWAY receivers gathering traffic from the Vortex satellites.

SILKWORTH – Constructed by Lockheed Corporation, the main computer system for Menwith Hill processes most of the information received by the various reception systems.

Additional systems (TROUTMAN, ULTRAPURE, TOTALISER, SILVERWEED, RUCKUS, et. al.) complete the monumental SIGINT collection efforts at Menwith Hill. [8]

Unfortunately, while disputing the strength of such a system and the danger it poses for ordinary citizens Mr. Poole also buys into the propaganda of terrorism and hails the “successes” that such a framework has yielded, citing a selection of terrorist atrocities that had the sticky hand of State-sponsorship all over of them. Like many journalists and academics he has yet to grasp that the building of extremism and the stimulation of terrorist acts by embedded government agents are intimately connected to the “justifications” rallied by mainstream press to support surveillance apparatus. In conjunction with long-time utilization of PROMIS software – and now thanks to Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing on Internet surveillance programs such as PRISM, XKeyscore, Tempora, and the interception of US and European telephone metadata, remote viewing of any computer in real time is possible, as well as the creation of “back door snooping” in most public systems such as Microsoft.

Unsurprisingly, the Middle East, that bastion of US-NATO interference, has come under extenstive surveillance activites at the turn of the millennium.  The online tech journal The Register revealed in June 2014 that British intelligence had created a secret spy base responsible for tapping undersea cables at Seeb on the coast of Oman. This is only one of a three sites as part of the GCHQ network in Oman codenamed “TIMPANI”, “GUITAR” and “CLARINET”. Iraq and Yemen are the targets of this spying. According to leaked cables by Edward Snowden, it seems telecommunication companies are making a mint by allowing intel operatives to plug in to their networks and stay silent. (This symbiotic relationship reflects the dominance of Israeli spy networks within telecommunications in the United States).

…the intelligence agency annually pays selected companies tens of millions of pounds to run secret teams which install hidden connections which copy customers’ data and messages to the spooks’ processing centres. The GCHQ-contracted companies also install optical fibre taps or “probes” into equipment belonging to other companies without their knowledge or consent. Within GCHQ, each company has a special section called a “Sensitive Relationship Team” or SRT.

BT and Vodafone/C&W also operate extensive long distance optical fibre communications networks throughout the UK, installed and paid for by GCHQ, NSA, or by a third and little known UK intelligence support organization called the National Technical Assistance Centre (NTAC).

Snowden’s leaks reveal that every time GCHQ wanted to tap a new international optical fibre cable, engineers from “REMEDY” (BT) would usually be called in to plan where the taps or “probe” would physically be connected to incoming optical fibre cables, and to agree how much BT should be paid. The spooks’ secret UK access network feeds Internet data from more than 18 submarine cables coming into different parts of Britain either direct to GCHQ in Cheltenham or to its remote processing station at Bude in Cornwall. [9]

oman-1From The Register: “GCHQ’s submarine cable tapping centre for the TEMPORA project at Seeb in Oman, codename “CIRCUIT”.   It was built alongside a commercial satellite interception station, codename “SNICK”, according to documents revealed by Edward Snowden.”

As the tawdry tale of US-NATO led destabilisation policy continues in the Middle East directly connected to the crisis in Ukraine and Baltic states you can be sure more spy centres will be cropping up as surveillance sophistication grows.

The NSA’s warrantless surveillance or “wire-tapping” authorized by George W. Bush’s executive order expanded the monitoring of phone calls, emails, Internet history, text messaging, and any form of communication in or outside US jurisdiction. The search warrant became a thing of the past. Violations of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution continue to be ignored because what’s left of the Bill of rights and the Constitution itself has been so diluted that intelligence agencies and their law-makers take advantage of the myriad loopholes and executive order mandates. The Obama Administration has continued where Bush left off and extended the financing and capability of the surveillance methods. [10]

As a result of its illegal spying programs the NSA still hasn’t foiled a single terrorist plot, including all the copious amounts of suspicious activity prior to 9/11. Once we realize that the War on Terror is at root a hoax, designed to facilitate geo-strategic control, suppress domestic dissent and create leverage for blackmail, we may see that surveillance becomes much more than a protective measure, as former workers and whistleblowers have cautioned. As Duncan Campbell observed: “The targeting of US political figures would not occur by accident, but was designed into the system from the start.” [11]

Since the recent furore of Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World scandal in which journalists were found to have listened in to calls and monitored computer files, one can imagine the capability available to the NSA and GCHQ in the context “deep black” intelligence operations. Satellite systems have become integral to this global project with a network of monitoring stations in Britain and Europe tapping into domestic communications circuits, and analysing every email, text, mobile phone call and just about any data signal that is readable – which is everything. Telecommunications companies in the UK such as BT and Vodafone have made this easier by collaborating with the spy agency and passing on details of their customers’ phone calls, email messages and Facebook entries. As reported in several June 2013 reports at various news outlets, fibre optic cables have been tapped by the NSA with the blessing of the government.

Leaked documents from whistle-blower Edward Snowden has shown that illegal surveillance in the UK is pretty much a carbon-copy of what goes on in the United States, though with even more ubiquitous surveillance devices positioned in everyone’s direction. From overhead satellite systems extremely precise location can be secured along with a raft of data about a company or individual. International communications was said to be its original concern at the US satellite and communications base at Menwith Hill but US national security in the wake of the War on Terror has given “justification” for monitoring all and everything, ostensibly to sift for Al-Qaeda – and now ISIL – gold.

Keep in mind that this isn’t just a rough scan of large quantities data. According to former NSA analysts and whistle-blowers Judy Woodruff, William Binney, Russell and now Snowden, they have all confirmed that the NSA is scanning every email, recording every word of every phone call made within the United States – digitized and archived. This includes files on relevant persons deemed a domestic threat. If we take a look at the extraordinary advances in telecommunications and applications in the public domain then we must also consider the likelihood that the advances in the military-intelligence sector is decades ahead. In the context of ECHELON surveillance, Homeland Security, the SMART Grid, and the delights of technocratic automation of every conceivable suburban amenity, you can now add to the mix the darker reality of what it may mean if you don’t take to this kind of regimentation.

In the 2008 May/June issue of Radar Magazine an article written by Christopher Ketcham entitled: “The Last Roundup” reveals the high probability that the U.S. Government had established a database and tracking system called MAIN CORE used primarily for over eight million Americans who have been designated as threats to national security. Taking its cue from the from the global equivalent that is ECHELON, it uses the same sources of data such as internet activity, mobile, telephone, health records, marketing and financial information and even extends to a cross-network with undisclosed black programs. Need to check out a suspicious individual because he looked funny on a subway camera? The keywords in your Web searches; the destinations of the airline tickets you buy; the amounts and locations of your ATM withdrawals; and the goods and services you purchase on credit cards are all archived on government supercomputers and according to Ketcham and others’ sources, also fed into the MAIN CORE database. It also has another more immediate purpose.

With the program’s inception going back to at least the 1980s and with help from the Defence Intelligence Agency, MAIN CORE is run under the highly classified and controversial Continuity of Government (COG) operations. The COG is the principle of establishing defined procedures that allow a government to continue its essential operations in case of nuclear war or other catastrophic event. President George W. Bush, tasked with eviscerating the constitution, included in his raft of executive legislation the National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20 which served to outline the federal government’s plan for maintaining continuity in the face of such a “catastrophic emergency.” The latter is defined as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.” Constitutional government is effectively bypassed granting Police State powers to the White House, the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) and Homeland Security (DHS).

gty_nsa_surveillance_kb_131029_16x9_992Source: abcnews.go.com

If you think that gives a government the licence to impose Martial Law based on virtually any scenario it chooses, then you’d be correct. Such a state of affairs would be lamentable for the public but a bundle of laughs for those in power, many whom would be gagging for such an opportunity. According to Ketcham’s article, it alleges that Americans listed in the MAIN CORE database, “Could be subject to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning and possibly even detention.” [12] A senior government official who had high level clearance gives a chilling observation: “There exists a database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic, might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived ‘enemies of the state’ almost instantaneously.” [13]

This didn’t extend to the assigned terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden it seems.

What about this hypothetical attack – Another 911? We saw how the US and the world changed radically after that event. This time, the scenario may not be Al-Qaeda bogeyman but the American citizens themselves who would be targeted.

Ketcham describes how events might play out:

“With the population gripped by fear and anger, authorities undertake unprecedented actions in the name of public safety. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security begin actively scrutinizing people who—for a tremendously broad set of reasons—have been flagged in Main Core as potential domestic threats. Some of these individuals might receive a letter or a phone call, others a request to register with local authorities. Still others might hear a knock on the door and find police or armed soldiers outside. In some instances, the authorities might just ask a few questions. Other suspects might be arrested and escorted to federal holding facilities, where they could be detained without counsel until the state of emergency is no longer in effect.” [14]

If we factor in Pre-Crime software, it is obvious that this will play an integral part in the coming SMART revolution, as a former military operative explains:

“… the program utilizes software that makes predictive judgments of targets’ behavior and tracks their circle of associations with ‘social network analysis’ and artificial intelligence modeling tools…. “The more data you have on a particular target, the better [the software] can predict what the target will do, where the target will go, who it will turn to for help,” he says. “Main Core is the table of contents for all the illegal information that the U.S. government has [compiled] on specific targets.” An intelligence expert who has been briefed by high-level contacts in the Department of Homeland Security confirms that a database of this sort exists, but adds that “it is less a mega-database than a way to search numerous other agency databases at the same time.” [15]

Homeland Security’s homage to Phillip K. Dick’s Minority Report is already up and running with their version of an airport based Pre-Crime. Using an algorithmic “prototype screening facility” designed “to detect cues indicative of mal-intent” based on ground-breaking factors of ethnicity, gender, breathing, and heart rate” we can expect great things from those fearless protectors. Combine that still further with the FBI’s nationwide new facial recognition service and we have reason to feel that we are not so much “protected” as invasively monitored. [16]

The Terrorist Watch List garners over 200,000 new unaware individuals every year from housewives to school boys, businessmen to political commentators and ordinary citizens. As of writing, the list is well over the 1 million mark and rising exponentially. A former NSA officer discloses: “… that the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, using an electronic-funds transfer surveillance program, also contributes data to MAIN CORE, as does a Pentagon program that was created in 2002 to monitor anti-war protestors and environmental activists such as Greenpeace.” [17] In the MAIN CORE data base even these definitions are too restrictive.

We can easily arrive at the logical conclusion that if we have voiced an opinion that is contrary to the prevailing “wisdom” of government authorities then you can be rest assured there is a pretty little file just for you. If supermarkets have a marketing profile of your purchasing patterns then imagine what your own governments have?

In 2007, online revelations concerning the NSA’s IP intercept operations and there ubiquitous presence on the internet gave us a level of surveillance that surpassed most people’s wildest imaginations. AT&T telecommunications engineer Mark Klein who participated in building the secret NSA infrastructure blew the whistle on the real designs behind his boss’s wishes. The NSA and AT&T tried their best to prevent disclosure. In a refreshingly rare instance of democracy at work the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) after a class-action lawsuit against AT&T’s allowing secret government surveillance of Internet traffic, released unredacted court documents related to the AT&T/NSA intercept case providing in astonishing detail the capability of surveillance software run by intelligence agencies on service providers’ networks. [16] A company called Narus developed a custom-built network surveillance system named “NarusInsight Intercept Suite” with the capable of real-time analysis of all the data passing through the most advanced and largest network nodes currently in existence.

According to the Narus website:

These capabilities include playback of streaming media (i.e. VoIP), rendering of web pages, examination of e-mail and the ability to analyze the payload/attachments of e-mail or file transfer protocols. Narus partner products offer the ability to quickly analyze information collected by the Directed Analysis or Lawful Intercept modules. When Narus partners’ powerful analytic tools are combined with the surgical targeting and real-time collection capabilities of Directed Analysis and Lawful Intercept modules, analysts or law enforcement agents are provided capabilities that have been unavailable thus far. 

The tip of the iceberg…

 


Notes

[1] How Big Brother watches your every move’ by Richard Gray, The Telegraph, August 2008.
[2] Ibid.
[3] ‘CCTV cameras: If they do not stop crime or catch criminals, what are they for?’ The Telegraph, 24 Aug 2009. | ‘CCTV boom has failed to slash crime, say police’ by Owen Bowcott, The Guardian, 6 May 2008.
[4] ‘CCTV in the sky: police plan to use military-style spy drones’ by Paul Lewis, The Guardian, 23 January 2010.
[5] ‘Drones Are Taking to the Skies in the U.S.’ Los Angeles Times February 18th, 2013.
[6]‘The National Security Agency and Global Electronic Surveillance’ by Duncan Campbell, New Statesman August 12, 1988.
[7] ‘ECHELON: America’s Global Surveillance Network’ by Patrick S. Poole 1999/2000.
[8] ‘Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal’. By Charlie Savage, James Risen, The New York Times, March 31, 2010.

[9] ‘GCHQ’s Middle East cable tap centre revealed’,The Register 3rd June, 2014.
[10] op. cit. Campbell.
[11] ‘The Last Roundup’ By Christopher Ketcham, Radar Magazine, April 29, 2008.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] ‘Homeland Security Moves Forward with ‘Pre-Crime’ Detection’CNET, October 8th, 2011. | ‘FBI to Launch Nationwide Facial Recognition Service’ Nextgov. October 8th, 2011.
[16] Ibid.
[17] https://www.eff.org/nsa/faq/

Technocracy III: Tagged (and Bagged?)


 RFIDChip© infrakshun

As American infrastructure crumbles under the weight of trillions of dollars of debt accumulated from largely illegal and spurious wars abroad, automation is biting further into the human labour market. Parallel advances in data-collection, surveillance and monitoring continues to build a soft police state, all of which must be paid for. New ways of fleecing the populace must be found which means we will be seeing more examples of SMART roll-out across a broad range of societal domains.

Hot on the heels of issuing digital licence plates in California, a little black box has made an appearance that will fit neatly by the dashboard of your car. An October 2013 Los Angeles Times report: ‘A black box in your car? Some see a source of tax revenue’ Evan Halper tell us: “The devices, which track every mile a motorist drives and transmit that information to bureaucrats, are at the center of a controversial attempt in Washington and state planning offices to overhaul the outdated system for funding America’s major roads.” The idea is to extract more money out of the hapless US citizen by allowing the government to keep track of the miles they drive in order to draw up yet another tax bill.

No doubt when this is integrated into “the internet of things” then every little iota of information about where you go and what you spend your money and who you decide to see will be factored in to the bill with increases, decreases and penalties and pluses accordingly. This initiative has its blessing from libertarians and lobbying from environmental groups. The former has a SMART techtopia informing its idealism while the latter sees Agenda 21 and sustainable development as the medium by which their own complimentary ecotopia can manifest. Despite protestations from the American Civil Liberties Union, both camps are blind to the technoractic undercurrents of Pathocracy in this context.

Keen to do its part for the SMART revolution the European Union has proposed a scheme which would see cars fitted with camera systems that ‘read’ the limits displayed on road signs and automatically apply the brakes. Supposedly in a bid to cut the number of deaths in car accidents the scheme labelled ‘Intelligent Speed Adaptation’ would use GPS satellites to transmit data to automatically limit the driver’s speed along with verbal computer commands to slow down. Or, according to The Telegraph’s September 2013 report: ‘EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters,’ drivers can be given “… a warning of the speed limit, or their speed could be controlled automatically under the new measures.”

RFID-Tags

Variety of RFID retail tags

microchip1

The merging of SMART society and surveillance already has a formidable momentum in America. These examples are the tip of an emerging technocratic philosophy of data collection and surveillance which is making inroads into every facet of our once relatively free existence. Just in case you were in any doubt that vaccinations are always a gift from God, registry systems have been set up to track your vaccination status so that you can continue to do as you’re told. Or perhaps you’ve come across the biometrics programs currently be tinkered with in US schools which will “… track students’ eye movements, monitor their conversations or even measure their smiles.” Turning the classroom into a tech-lab paradise of attentive drones is easy – and profitable.

In the same month, online journal The Future Is Now ran an article entitled: ‘Biometrics Help Teachers Track Students’ Every Move.’ Sheila Dharmarajan writes: “When the student is looking up at the teacher, the teacher score goes up. If she looks down at the computer, the computer score goes up. So we’re tracking facial expressions. If she makes a smile, it might be indicative that is enthusiastic about the topic.”

Ah, the simple world of binary perception…

But it isn’t only in the US. While the UK’s ID scheme has been temporarily jettisoned, other countries are pushing ahead. Journalist Katitza Rodriguez, writing for the Electronic Frontier Foundation on January 10, 2012 highlighted Argentina’s resurrected and mandatory National Registry of Persons (RENAPER) which had lain dormant from the era of military dictatorship. Facial recognition and finger-printing are part of a security-surveillance system which is about to be integrated into the Federal System of Biometric Identification (SIBIOS) used by existing police and military networks. The registration of new-born babies’ biometric information has taken place since 2012 with projections that the SIBOS database will reach over 40 million within the next two years.

In January 2012, all 1.2 billion residents of India were the lucky beneficiaries of a nationwide program overseeing the allocation of a Unique Identification Number (UID). Each number will be fixed to the biometric data of the recipient utilizing using three different modes of information detection: fingerprints, iris scans, and face recognition. The implementation of RFID (radio-frequency identification) is the next stage for India’s flourishing biometric industry.

RFID stands for “Radio Frequency Identification”. With the advent of Wi-Fi and SMART applications the platform for RFID is expanding to include SMART labels for consumer products, assest tracking, secuirity and data retrieval for business. Then we have the more invasive tagging  with computer chips implanted into physical objects, animals, livestock and human beings. The Electronic Product Code that lies within the chip can be “read” when the device emits a radio signal. The chips contain electronically stored information which can be read up to several meters away. Active tags are self-powered and have a long range, particularly useful for surveillance. Passive tags are without battery source and use a local power source, the range being variable.

Some Christians have long been frothing at the mouth at the prospect of micro-chipping and what they consider to be the proverbial “Mark of the Beast” from The Book of Revelations, without which: “no man might buy or sell save he that had the Mark.” To be fair, it does sound remarkably similar. The Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility (AIM) sees biometric identification in true technocratic form where federal, state, local governments, military and commercial applications should join together and embrace the SMART culture without a care in the world. According to AIM, the RFID-chipped “SMART cards” and the biometric revolution “are set to pervade nearly all aspects of the economy and our daily lives.” [1] The selling pitch goes like this: The tagging of products from razor blades to underwear represents enormous benefits to consumers, protecting us against fraud and theft as well as providing cost reduction and convenience. What could be simpler? And because it is so simple and so convenient given the fast-paced nature of our modern society, doesn’t it make sense to get yourself tagged too?

As a precursor to this we have contactless technology being pushed by companies such as Google, and the majority of mobile network companies are doing so because data – your data – is king. Disney’s electronic “MagicBand” illustrates why.

In the summer of 2013, the Disney corporation announced the use of an electronic wristband for all visitors to its theme parks. First introduced at Disney World in Florida it can be used at rides, hotel doors, stores and allow Disney staff to greet you using your first name. Who needs a wallet when everything is done for you? The downside to this of course, is that this is a marketing coup d’état where Disney will be able to track what you purchased, which stores you visited, which rides you enjoyed and when, at which hotel you stayed and vast collection of data to provide valuable insights into social psychology of visitors.

So, what’s a little data between friends and theme parks?

RFID_Wristband_braceletmickey

RFID Tracking bracelets for amusement parks, hospitals and children’s playgrounds. It’s all good clean fun kids!

But if you really want to take technology to the heights of efficiency in order to go about your business without a care in the world then your very heart might offer the ultimate hub for hands-free, contactless connection to the New Synthetic World.

CBS News’ much read report from September 2013, introduced us to Canadian biometric company Bionym: ‘”Your pulse could be your new Password.” Indeed, every number and code that you currently use to live your life could be distant memory if people such as Bionym chief executive officer Karl Martin has his way. “Pulse passwords” could be the new ultra-convenience.

The heart has unique characteristics relating to size, position and physiology so those clever bods at Bionym have developed a wristband which recognises the pattern of an individual pulse. The transmission of information allows the user to carry out all the usual transactions and internet-based activities which require a password. And it also pleases those worried about security as heartbeats cannot be replicated. Furthermore, as every heartbeat is unique, should the wristband become lost or stolen, it would not function for another user. And on the market in 2014 at $100 many will see the benefits of such an appendage.

Tattoos used to be a tribal marking of religious or sacred significance. In Western culture gangs, dockers and truckers were some of the groups who took to marking themselves to tell their peers who they were and what they’d been through. Now, tattoos are big business and a fashion statement for the young. As luck would have it, electronic tattoos are now appearing from telecommunications companies like Motorola who are working on a version that contains a computer chip and an antenna. Just to give us an idea what to expect in the new future to complement these tattoos there is also: “A pill that dissolves and turns the entire body into a transmitter …” If they can be used to replace all those dozens of pesky passwords then there is money to be made and an interaction with the internet of things (IOT). We will not need to identify ourselves because we will be integrated into the system.

As discussed previously, Mike Orcutt’s March 2013 article for MIT Technology Review explored John Roger’s work as a materials scientist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He is one of those experimenting with “epidermal electronics” where applications can be printed directly onto the skin. Rogers tells us that these new devices will be very useful to the medical industry and explains: “You can use a rubber stamp to just deliver the ultrathin mesh electronics directly to the surface of the skin.” And by using “spray-on bandage” products a thin protective layer acts to “… bond the system to the skin in a ‘very robust way.’”

Smart-skin-1Back in November 14, 2003, The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, a non-profit, grant-supported advocacy and consultancy organisation for consumer awareness had already produced the “Position Statement on the Use of RFID on Consumer Products.” In the study, they concluded the following:

  • Hidden placement of tags. RFID tags can be embedded into/onto objects and documents without the knowledge of the individual who obtains those items. As radio waves travel easily and silently through fabric, plastic, and other materials, it is possible to read RFID tags sewn into clothing or affixed to objects contained in purses, shopping bags, suitcases, and more.
  • Unique identifiers for all objects worldwide. The Electronic Product Code potentially enables every object on earth to have its own unique ID. The use of unique ID numbers could lead to the creation of a global item registration system in which every physical object is identified and linked to its purchaser or owner at the point of sale or transfer.
  • Massive data aggregation. RFID deployment requires the creation of massive databases containing unique tag data. These records could be linked with personal identifying data, especially as computer memory and processing capacities expand.
  • Hidden readers. Tags can be read from a distance, not restricted to line of sight, by readers that can be incorporated invisibly into nearly any environment where human beings or items congregate. RFID readers have already been experimentally embedded into floor tiles, woven into carpeting and floor mats, hidden in doorways, and seamlessly incorporated into retail shelving and counters, making it virtually impossible for a consumer to know when or if he or she was being “scanned.”
  • Individual tracking and profiling. If personal identity were linked with unique RFID tag numbers, individuals could be profiled and tracked without their knowledge or consent. For example, a tag embedded in a shoe could serve as a de facto identifier for the person wearing it. Even if item-level information remains generic, identifying items people wear or carry could associate them with, for example, particular events like political rallies. [2]

Not that these warnings have made a whole lot of difference to the momentum of such technology.

American and European governments’ expenditure of billions of taxpayer’s money on creating these new systems “for our protection” is unjustifiable for a multitude of reasons. One of these shows how particularly ridiculous the whole scenario really is. If someone wishes to read the biometric information from our passport, driving licence or ID card they need only to purchase a reader device and scan the information without the individual ever knowing. Of course, the government and their spooks have been extracting information in a similar fashion from so called “secure” systems of information for decades. As outsourcing of the state to private companies is becoming the norm it is hardly likely that governments could stem the tide of information theft should they even want to.

In February 2007, the electronics corporation Hitachi proudly revealed the development and successful testing of the world’s smallest and thinnest class of “non-contact RFID Powder IC (integrated circuit) Chip.” It measures just 0.05 x 0.05 millimetres, which is about the size of a pin-head or less. We read on their website in a Research & Development report that their aim is: “… to embed the chip in thin paper, a practice that is already in general use,” informing us that: “These technologies are expected to be seen in a wider range of applications.” [3]

In 2015 this has become a reality. The chips have a 128-bit ROM for storing a unique 38 digit number and can indeed be worked into any product at all. Since these chips are “already in use” it begs the question: what other applications are they thinking about? The military surveillance uses are well ahead of the consumer game. As one writer on the chips mused: “… suppose you participated in some sort of protest or other organized activity. If police agencies sprinkled these tags around, every individual could be tracked and later identified at leisure, with powerful enough tag scanners.” [4]

This echoes trans-national corporation IBM and their business relationship with Nazi Germany’s Third Reich in the 1930s and their subsequent collaboration during World War II. Investigative journalist and author Edwin Black explained how IBM’s technology helped facilitate Nazi genocide against Jews and other undesirables through the creation and tabulation of punch cards based upon national census data. Aside from administrative and logistical support, IBM machines were used in concentration camps. Many prisoners had their details passed through the Labour Assignment Office and assigned a characteristic five-digit IBM Hollerith machine number, 44673. This five-digit number in the punch card system was designed to track prisoners in the camps, most notably the slave labour camp at Auschwitz. The number was the precursor to the numerical tattoo stamped upon the arm of an individual and deemed more cost-effective and efficient.

ibmachine

IBM Hollerith Card Processing Machine used by the Nazis circa 1940s

There is no doubt that the targeted identification of Jews and other racial groupings for: “… asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, and ultimately extermination” took place in a way that is logistically and insanely ambitious. The Nazis were able to kill as many as they did with the help of IBM’s pioneering computer work which required: “… generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany—and later throughout Europe—[to be cross-indexed] a task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.” [5] That’s where IBM came in. And its legacy for number crunching computation has remained, the profits of its participation in the logistical side of the holocaust having kept it afloat for all these years.

So, what has IBM been up to recently?

Harking back to their darker history, the corporation has finished patenting their “Identification and Tracking of Persons Using RFID-Tagged Items in Store Environments.” Security and Privacy analyst Katherine Albrecht, founder of the consumer pressure group CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) writes about RFID’s potential for surveillance: “… where networked RFID readers called ‘person tracking units’ would be incorporated virtually everywhere people go – in “shopping malls, airports, train stations, bus stations, elevators, trains, airplanes, restrooms, sports arenas, libraries, theaters, museums, to closely monitor people’s movements.”

You can already see the acclimatisation taking place with i-phone apps scanning capabilities in billboard ads in bus shelters and shopping malls. When RFID tag scanners are located in the required locations, they scan the RIFID tags on a person. Albrecht continues: “As that person moves around the store, different RFID tag scanners located throughout the store can pick up radio signals from the RFID tags carried on that person and the movement of that person is tracked based on these detections … The person tracking unit may keep records of different locations where the person has visited, as well as the visitation times.” What is more, if personal data does not register on the tag, no problem, IBM tells us: “the personal information will be obtained when the person uses his or her credit card, bank card, shopper card or the like.” [6] Which means a person’s unique RFID number and his or her identity will merge into the overall techno-identity of our SMART society.

Although slower than the technocrats would like, the implantation of RFID’s in the global population is making progress. Another method of gradualism was to implant pets and farmyard animals as part of an agribusiness efficiency and as a prelude to human implantation.

In January 2007 Business Week reported on the Federal mandated National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and their desire to digitally tag “… 40 million farm animals to enable regulators to track and respond quickly to disease, bioterrorism, and other calamities.” The report rightly highlights the fears of the more informed which it summarises thusly: “You test it on the animals first, demonstrating the viability of the radio frequency identification devices (RFIDs) to monitor each and every animal’s movements and health history from birth to death, and then move on to people.”

The report mentions the ambitions of one Scott Silverman who runs a: “… company that sells the rice-size people chips, which are the only ones with Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approval, for implantation in an individual’s right biceps. They carry an identity marker that would be linked to medical records. His goal is to create ‘the first RFID company for people.’” [7] More from Mr. Silverman presently.

 

cow1

© unknown / infrakshun

Things have progressed since 2007 and we can now see implementation of Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and RFID chips in a fusion of agribusiness and SMART technology called by French technocrats as “SMART Agrimatics”. A paper hot of the press at the time of writing is about as innovative as you are going to get on the subject of agribusiness and technocracy. The culmination of a pilot project research, it involves the application and use of RFID tags for “ruminants” (cows, sheep and goats to you and me) the studies of which were conducted between 2005 and 2010. This includes discussions on the relevant use of RFID; use of RFID for feeding automates on farm; use of RFID for performances control; use of RFID for animal trade; use of RFID for slaughter chain and supervision for RFID devices.

The paper reads like a machine mind designing for another machine mind, except there are – inconveniently it seems – sentient beings involved. For the farmer scratching his head as to whether he is human being raising animals or an engineer maintaining “automated consumption units” and keen to make the leap to SMART-Agrimatics, then obviously this dossier would be invaluable for setting his mind straight – one way or another.

With “ear-tag and detection cell” and “fixed readers integrated in the environment” agri-business and GM technology are well placed to maximize their efficiency ratios. Once all cattle have been tagged logged and every aspect of their cellular structure analysed then the collection and transfer of said data can be uploaded to the national database “… the weight linked to the official animal identification number from RFID reading.” [8] Driven by economic incentives and inventory control, larger farms all over Europe and the US are signing on to RFID.

Now, how would that play out for humans?

If we were learn from automated factory farming and now SMART-Agrimatics, the key term here is efficiency. How does one maximize the efficiency in automated methods of keeping an awakening population asleep to a minority of psychopaths? The technocratic, sensual and pharmaceutical amusements of Huxley’s Brave New World should give you some idea. The following picture from the above report might easily apply to the “sheep” in the human population who believe in the authoritarian structures they have grown up with. Wolves come in many disguises.

clip_image002.gif“The Future Sheeple?”

Over in the UK, after a series of well reported dangerous dog attacks new legislation has gone ahead that forces dog owners to pay between £20-£30 to have a RFID chip injected under the skin of their pooch while still a puppy. As one animal welfare spokesman mentioned: “It’s not so much the dogs that should be targeted, but the owners who train them to be vicious.” (A metaphor for psychopaths and their societies perhaps?) Implantation of RFIDs has predominantly taken place within security firms, the military and various dance clubs in European countries whose clientele find it convenient to speed their entry. These are the voluntary lab-rats.

The Verichip Corporation and their various subsidiaries has been one of the leaders in RFID technology with their flagship product the Verichip ™ manufactured by Digital Angel. PositiveID, a developer of medical technologies for diabetes management, clinical diagnostics and bio-threat detection is the company that uses its patented VeriPay system where the chip can be used like a credit card to authorise financial transactions. It is currently being used by the Baja Beach Club in Spain to the delight of many happy party goers.

PositiveID-logoThe Verichip was initially foreseen as a device for retrieving medical records, having received FDA approval for medical use in 2004. But the vision was never designed to stop there. The size of a grain of rice and easily implanted just under the skin in the arm or hand so that the device can monitor human biometric functions and transmit the data with GPS technology. Thousands of Mexicans have since been implanted, from law enforcement workers to ordinary citizens. The latter are doing so in increasing numbers due to a 317 per cent rise in kidnappings, 20 per cent of which has involved corrupt police officers. Many US companies are dubious that the chips actually work in combination with GPS devices but payments of up $2000 are being handed over nonetheless. One slight wrinkle in the chip means that confirmation of identity can only be confirmed when the body has been found. [9]

Currently in talks with the Pentagon to implant Verichip into all 1.4 million US soldiers, PositiveID has also been delighted to receive bulk orders from the Israeli military not wishing to be left out of technocratic party. Marc Poulshock, PositiveID’s Vice President of Business Development, said: “We believe there are many important applications for the VeriChip and our associated intellectual property including next-generation identification and bio-sensing capabilities. Our partner is looking to help healthcare organizations, militaries including the IDF, and governments with their disaster preparedness and emergency response needs.” [10]

VeriCorp insists that the Verichip is very difficult to steal despite two hackers showing just how easy it really was to steal a person’s identity via the RFID. Annalee Newitz and Jonathan Westhues gave a special demonstration at the HOPE Number Six conference in New York City in July 2008. Newitz had the VeriChip RFID implanted in her right arm. Westhues then proceeded to clone the chip by reading Newitz’s arm with an RFID reader, scanning it with a homemade antenna connected to his laptop which recorded the signal from the chip. Finally, he used the same RFID reader to obtain the signal from his laptop, which then gave Newitz’s “unique” ID. Verichip had no comment to make other than they had been too busy to look at their evidence.

That hasn’t prevented the idea that new-borns should be protected from nefarious activities of the public. Ronald Kane, Vice President of CUBIC Corp., a major manufacturer of implantable chips, while discussing the profit margins on RFID tags enthusiastically stated: “If we had our way, we’d implant a chip behind everyone’s ear in the maternity ward.” [11]

verichipmicrochip / verichip ™

According to RFID News Student ID cards equipped with RFID chips are becoming more common sight on schools and college campuses. Education officials are “… adopting RFID technology to track everything from student attendance to valuable assets.” [12] It is part of a wide-ranging rollout of SMART technology including Iris recognition software and cameras which monitor the emotional states of students, both of which has caused considerable controversy, not least at the idea of turning schools into virtual prisons.

A similar efficiency-ratio mentality is being employed in business training software offered by online technology company Mindflash. FocusAssist is a new feature designed for i-Pad which tracks the user’s eye movements via the tablet’s on-board camera. When you’ve looked away for several seconds the course is paused. This apparently forces you to pay attention so that you can finish the assignment. One wonders how long it will be before computers are teaching children and adopting a similar attention mechanism.

The contradictions and double-speak that are on display from the Verichip advocates is quite a show. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave a 2002 ruling that that: “VeriChip is not a regulated device with regard to its security, financial, personal identification/safety applications … VeriChip’s healthcare information applications are subject to regulation by the FDA in the United States.’ As author and journalist Uri Dowbenko mentions: “It’s OK if the VeriChip tracks your credit report history, but not OK if it’s used to inform doctors you’re diabetic? This will undoubtedly be used as an argument to justify the VeriChip as a so-called ‘medical device’ in the future.” [13]

The stages which the RFID tags have followed have moved through: pets = cattle = criminals = military = business workers towards the longer more drawn out process of finally chipping the mass population. Biometric passports, national ID cards and then gracefully having your palm over the supermarket scanner will make things so easy! So easy in fact, that perception management will tell you the next logical step in this New World of SMART design is to be “SMART” yourself and integrate your body into the system, and then you will be “free.” Notwithstanding the potency of such an illusion, there is another problem. Verichip and other companies love to tell us about the medical and community benefits of tagging which include the monitoring of heart troubles, children safety, pet protection and the like, what of the health issues related to RFID tags?

In 2007 the Verichip Corporation and other related companies were dealt a severe blow to their credibility when Katherine Albrecht’s CASPIAN consumer pressure group released a 48-page paper entitled “Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006”. Based on a dense review of academic research on the subject, the causal link between implanted radio-frequency (RFID) microchip transponders and cancer in laboratory rodents and dogs could not be clearer. Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre in New York, said: “There’s no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members.” Given the preliminary animal data it looks to me that there is definitely cause for concern.” [14]

CEO and Chairman of Verichip Corporation Scott R. Silverman played his part in a disinformation campaign launched by RFID companies in response to the findings. Silverman is quoted in a Time article as saying that in the “… second study, conducted in France in 2006, two years after VeriChip’s FDA application was approved, found that while 4 per cent of the 1,260 mice in the study developed tumors, none of them were malignant.” [15] The truth is a little different. The tumours were indeed malignant sarcomas and most of the animals in question died prematurely as a result of the microchip-associated tumours.

Destron Fearing, makers of the HomeAgain pet implant came in a close second when they ignored a finding of fibrosarcoma – a highly lethal cancer – as “benign” in a recent report. Katherine Albrecht stated: “Either VeriChip and the makers of HomeAgain actually don’t understand the difference between a benign fibroma and a malignant fibrosarcoma, or they’re deliberately lying to the public. Either way, it’s clear they can’t be trusted. We hope our new report will set the record straight.” [16]

Despite this, Silverman was correct in that overall, the incidences of cancer in dogs after over 10 million injections is relatively small, which means that this scare is not enough to put off either the medical establishment, security companies and the potential benefits to consumers in a variety of social situations.

***

This brings us back to the National Security State; the various World State advocates that would like to see the global population “culled” and the war on terror tool that has allowed a technocratic Police State infrastructure to rise up virtually unopposed. When SMART, surveillance society arrives on the back of a few more mini-911-type scenarios, there may come a stage where, if you want to eat, you must acquire a chip. It’s a logical step that once mass acceptance of RFID tagging has gradually taken place anyone that is deemed a “terrorist”, “subversive” or merely suspiciously expressing a “radical” opinion on Facebook can be easily tracked and controlled. The next step from targeting dissidents is the expansion of powers to include a wide range of groups or organisations that come under the vague and nebulous definitions of terrorism and a threat to the finely-tuned emergence of a SMART society. Everything must be a perfectly integrated and homogenized example of a Hi-Tec “group-think” and anything “unpredictable” that doesn’t fit into that design will be…well, switched off.

Technocracy is essential to the smooth running of the Elite-collectivist model and as we have seen so far in this series, the younger generations are the primary targets for social engineering. With a sizable marketing drive underway headed by the Verichip slogan: “Get chipped,” RFID tags are being marketed as chic and trendy, cool and desirable. If the recent surge in tattoos is anything to go by, the microchip might be the next fashion statement for those too young (or programmed) to have awareness of the implications.

Despite loud mutterings of discontent in the US and the European Union the advances in SMART technology and the military-security apparatus that informs it, will not be going away. Ideologically driven technology and enormous amounts of money to be made will mean that regulations are unlikely to be enforced. The health hazards of mobile phone use and GMOs are well known but we still use them because society itself is being redesigned to make life unlivable without them. It seems we are no longer human beings but living bar-codes programmed to proffer feedback loops of data in a vast matrix of supply and demand. It should come as no surprise that corporations and their governments are seeking ways to extract more profits from the New Technological Order that is rising up from the shopping mall.

 


Notes

[1] aimglobal.org
[2] http://www.privacyrights.org/
[3]‘Operation of World’s Smallest Class Noncontact RFID Powder IC Chip Successfully Tested’ hitachi.com 2008/2009 Research & Development paper: http://www.hitachi.com/rev/archive/2008/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2008/07/24/r2008_technology_rd.pdf
[4] ‘RFID ‘Powder’ – World’s Smallest RFID Tag’ by Bill Christensen, technovelgy.com February 14, 2007.
[5] IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America’s Most Powerful Corporation. By Edwin Black, Second paperback edition. Washington, DC: Dialog Press, 2009; (introduction).
[6] ‘How RFID Tags Could Be Used to Track Unsuspecting People’ by Katherine Albrecht, Scientific American, August 21, 2008.
[7] Animal Tags for People? by David E. Gumpert, Business Week, January 11, 2007.
[8] ‘Conclusions from the French pilot projects for the use of RFID for ruminants’ by the Institut de l’élevage-France Louise Marguin, Marion Dang. June 14, 2012. | http://www.smartagrimatics.eu/Portals/66/Smartpercent20AgriMaticspercent205_3_RFID_Paris_2012-MD.pdf
[9] ‘Thousands of Mexicans Implanting Tracking Devices- But experts say they are not likely to work’By Evann Gastaldo, newser.com, Aug 22, 2011.
[10] ‘positiveID Corporation Receives VeriChip Order for Use With Israeli Military’ MarketWatch, October 11, 2011.
[11] ‘The IBM 2020 Neural Implant’ The Phoenix Project, Dr. Al Overholt, quoting from The California Sun, by Herb Dorsey, Feb. 1997.
[12] ‘Schools add RFID tagging to student IDs’ RFID News / CR80 News June 18 2012.
[13] ‘VeriChip: RFID Microchip Implants for Humans’ by Uri Dowbenko, conspiracyplanet.com
[14] ‘Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006’ by Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D. November 19, 2007.
[15] ‘Are Microchip Tags Safe?’ By Siobhan Morrissey Time Magazine, http://www.time.com, Oct. 18, 2007.
[16] ‘CASPIAN Releases Microchip Cancer Report’antichips.com November 19 2007.

Technocracy II: Big Brother in your Bag


orwellsmarttvSMART TV c/o of Samsung | © infrakshun

SMART society is not a dream but an inevitable symptom of the technocratic arm of the Establishment. A large proportion of the public consciousness and the purse-strings of business enterprise are behind the philosophy of SMART. The rest of us are following along just as we did with credit cards, mobile phones and every other technological innovation.

In 2012, the vulnerability of SMART TVs was brought into relief when it was proven that hackers could easily compromise, in this case, various parts of Samsung’s new TVs which would allow them to: “… remotely turn on the TVs’ built-in cameras without leaving any trace of it on the screen.” A hacker (government or otherwise) had the capability to watch you while you watched your favourite programme or internet web page. Hackers could also re-routed users to a convenient website in order to obtain their bank account data or other private information. The company apparently fixed the flaws with a worrying proviso: “We know that the way we were able to do this has been fixed; it doesn’t mean that there aren’t other ways that could be discovered in the future.”

Similarly, By 2015, nothing much has improved. Indeed, it’s got worse. Televisions can actively monitor what users say and transmit that information to third parties. Samsung attempted to put these grievances to rest by saying that the latest models are all encrypted, unlike earlier versions.

Feel reassured?

Since SMART technology means that most home-based gadgets and business networks are connected to the internet in some way, technology experts and hackers have cautioned that it is highly likely that the idea of network security is fast becoming a misnomer as the principle of the flaws in the Samsung TVs can be replicated across a broad spectrum of internet-connected platforms. Devices are unsecured.

According to one researcher from an 2013, August 5 article from chron.com entitled: ‘In 21st century America, Samsung TV watches YOU!’ the writer observes:

Many of these unsecured devices can be found with a simple search. In fact, there’s a search engine devoted just to scouring the so-called “Internet of things” called Shadon Playing around with it is an eye-opener. For example, in late July a writer for Forbes discovered an entire home automation product line with Internet-connected features that could be set up without a default password, and were visible to search engines. This would enable a hacker to search and find these systems on the Net, then access them at will. To prove her point, Kashmir Hill breached the home automation systems of random strangers, called them on the phone and demonstrated the vulnerability by turning their lights on and off.

Before we get on to how far the rabbit hole of monitoring and surveillance goes, it may be worthwhile considering how corporate UK and US are data-mining the minds of Joe and Jeanette public.

Remember your useful supermarket “loyalty” card lurking in your wallet or at the bottom of your handbag? This little critter provides huge amounts of information about your shopping habits and retained in a large marketing database which is shared by a multitude of interested parties from advertisers to law enforcement. Transactions, frequency and preferences are all used to create a customer profile that is mapped into various demographic and psychological analyses very useful for sales and marketing strategies.

Another handy British wallet-hugger is the Nectar card which is used by over 10 million people in Britain. Information is compiled from a range of shops visited and offers a nice readout along with a pretty graph of a cardholder’s shopping habits. Though Nectar insists the information is strictly for customers only, data is increasingly flying about the consumer and corporate world regardless.

 

loyalty-cards

Intrusion is a very profitable business. As we saw in the first posts about Official Culture, the constant and pervasive presence of advertising seeks to colonise any and all of the latest advances in information technology, from the internet to bill-board hoardings with literally no place to hide. CAT, PET, MRI brain imaging scanners have fast made the transition from clinical tools to advertisers and marketing weaponry. When it was known that certain regions of the brain “light up” when a person thinks of a pleasurable experience or the solving of a puzzle this means that such knowledge could be applied to advertising. The new jargon speaks of “neuromarketing” or “neuroeconomics” as the next field of mind colonisation. SMART eh?

According to Technology Advice magazine from October 15th 2013, Japan was taking the lead in so called “SMART shelves,” which began appearing in some US grocery stores at the start of 2015. Run by Mondelez International, the shelves operate at the checkout line using various tech tools to identify the sex and age of the shoppers. From the information stored a custom made advert is then  displayed according to that particular person’s demographic. Marketing data will also be collected from how long the advert was watched. If a shopper picks up the item information will be relayed from weight sensors to indicate a potential purchase. Coupons and store discounts can be displayed in order to encourage a sale.

If you want to get the public used to something then the usual mode of “softening” for the future comes via Hollywood and glamour. Otherwise known as “predictive programming” this was used to great effect by butchering Philip K. Dick’s book and making it into the film Minority Report (2002) starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg. It was here that concept of “Pre-Crime” and biometric surveillance was given a thorough airing in the mass mind.  In the shopping mall scene Cruise’s character is stopped in his tracks by an interactive advert which had scanned by iris recognition technology. A voice shouts: “John Anderton, you could use a Guinness!” If this sounds too nightmarish to contemplate, most of that futuristic, pop-corn-munching entertainment has become reality in just under ten years.

The algorithmic software isolates the face, measures the features and extracts it from the scene. Once a match has been found data is flooded in to complete the profile. Think CSI and various other glamorous TV shows that feature all kinds of whizz-bang gadgetry in the hunt for criminals. Facial recognition and Iris scanning technology is already present at airports and passport control in the UK. Advanced versions are being rolled out at a terminal in Love Field, Dallas, Texas consisting of “… 500 high-definition security cameras sharp enough to read an auto license plate or a logo on a shirt. The International Air Transport Association, or IATA, which represents airlines globally, calls it “the checkpoint of the future,” with the PR for the initiative going for the speed angle where passengers will move almost “non-stop” through security. Meanwhile, they “… would identify themselves not with driver’s licenses and paper boarding passes, but by scanning fingerprints or irises to prove they have an electronic ticket.” [1]

(Even Homeland Security has been beavering way since at least 2011 to apply this technology in defending the Fatherland. It seems logical that this is where the real action lies, in bolstering law enforcement and the military-intelligence apparatus).

 

Intelligent digital billboards have been the first in line for this advertising gold rush being fitted with cameras that can discern the gender and age group of passers-by who look at them. The idea is to tailor the messages to the onlooker. Toyko has road tested a collection of billboards of varying size and at different locations. A spokesman for the project said: “The camera can distinguish a person’s sex and approximate age, even if the person only walks by in front of the display, at least if he or she looks at the screen for a second.” (And the data stored will obviously stay in responsible hands, advertisers being extremely responsible people, as we know…) [2]

Germany has also been getting in on the act with an “intelligent” billboard designed for dog owners using “hot technology of location-based social networking,” to sell Granata Pet brand dog food. “As owners pass by with their dogs they can stop in front of it, use their mobile phones to check in on Foursquare and as soon as they do, a dog treat will pop out of the billboard and the dog – or I guess owner – can sample the product before deciding to buy it.” [3]  Or course, targeting your bemused pooch is small fry.

Ad agency BBDO (also from Germany) and broadcaster Sky Deutschland have joined forces to target work weary passengers on commuter trains. When they rest their heads against a window instead of the promise of pleasant dreams they will hear messages beamed into the brains. The advertising platform uses a small box attached to the surface of the window which sends out vibrations which the brain translates into sound. Called “bone conduction” technology, it promises to be used across a range of info-tainment services. Less invasive is the introduction of “Smell-vertising” which had its first test run by food company McCain and its frozen jacket potatoes. A display of 3D fibreglass models of baked potatoes were installed at bus stops in London, York, Glasgow, Manchester and Nottingham which released an aroma of oven-baked potato when a button is pressed.

According to a report published in 2011 by the Centre for Future Studies, 3D outdoor ads that can recognise people’s moods and tested on the on the streets in 2012. Called “gladadvertising” the software picks up on facial expressions associated with certain moods and once it has analysed what the victim is feeling, advertisers move in for the kill, delivering the programmed advert straight into the frontal lobe. The study also concluded that the accessing of personal data from social networks through your mobile phone could be combined with “holograms, mood lighting and smells.” [4] This form of “targeted marketing or “dynamic advertising” has some of us concerned.

personalisedlips

The Washington-based privacy advocate organisation the Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC) warned that: “… this type of surveillance encroaches on civil liberties,” adding that: “Such face, voice and behaviour technology could be a means of tracking individuals on a mass level across their entire lives.” The organisation believes that the demands from advertisers and security-minded governments have made technologies: “… so increasingly SMART and intrusive that they now resemble something out of science fiction.”

As we become assaulted by smells, images and it seems, voices in our heads, these will be increasingly tailored towards the particular demographic in which we reside. And depending how much of our individual data has become available – probably without our consent. Accordingly, even the gender focus can become another marketing dollar. Initially however, it was a charity which was chosen to launch a face recognition billboard in London’s Oxford St. to highlight gender discrimination. (Nothing like blending social conscience and marketing – everyone’s a winner.) On February 23rd 2012, The Independent  newspaper reported on an advert that “plays only to women.” The first of its kind, the technology: “… works by scanning faces before measuring the distance between the viewer’s eyes, width of the nose, length of jaw line and shape of cheekbone to compare the data and estimate their gender.”

Back in November 12, 2008, an Agence France Press ran the report: ‘Firms scan brain waves to improve ads in Japan.’ US Market research company Neilsen and its partner Neurofocus obligingly offered a brain-scanning “service” for the Japanese marketing industry. The technology scans brains waves and the physical features of potential customers in order to accurately study the effects of advertising messages and their products. Attention level, message retention level and emotional involvement of customers is measured the data of which is collected and analysed.

Meanwhile, Londoners can’t even take out their rubbish without being targeted by the ad-men and their SMART toys. Before the Olympics of 2012, Renew, a company who manufactures recycling bins installed over 100, 12 of which had digital tracking devices so that customers were effectively stalked in order to roll out personal advertising in the “real world.” As ludicrous as it may sound – yet perhaps fitting given the product – the little digital screens display Youtube updates, news and of course, targeted ads. According to an August 2013 article by Sam Shead of online magazine Techworld, an experiment to place tracking devices in recycling bins in order to spy on Londoner’s smartphones was well underway. The report explained how it worked: The 12 bins with the technology record a unique identification number, known as a MAC address, for mobile devices in the vicinity that have Wi-Fi switched on. This enables the Renew bins to monitor data including the ‘movement, type, direction, and speed of unique devices’”. The experiment was terminated by early 2013. Don’t worry there are still the London SMART bins. (See below)

Smart Cities: BinsDan Kitwood/Getty Images Europe

“In London’s Square Mile there are already more than 100 “smart bins”. As well as being a receptacle for recycling, they feature digital screens broadcasting a live channel of breaking headline news and live traffic information. They can also communicate directly with mobile devices through Wi-Fi and Bluetooth technology.” Source: ‘Cities get smart: urban innovation.

The appetite for data from advertisers and marketers is as insatiable as the NSA’s. The objective is to create a rich data base for “predictive analytics” where a precise knowledge of each individual’s “event” (places they have dined, visited etc.) and who has purchased online in the past can be targeted with advertising which knows your behaviour and personal preferences inside out. The report goes on to say: “In tests occurring between 21-24 May and 2-9 June, over four million events were observed, with over 530,000 unique devices monitored.”

Advertisers may enjoy the innovation but the SMART technology they are riding and driving serves another purpose above and beyond selling products. The software and the desires behind it will always advance and so too the more macro-social SMART planning that is on the pathocratic excel sheet; something advertisers will obviously not have considered and even if the awareness was present, probably wouldn’t care. As Bruce Schneier, chief security technology officer of BT points out: “Once the cameras are installed and operational, once they’re networked to central computers, then it’s a simple matter of upgrading the software,” … “And if they can do more — if they can provide more ‘value’ to the advertisers — then of course they will. To think otherwise is simply naïve.” [5]

The Centre for Future Studies produced a recent summary of key trends in social media that showed how advertising and marketing will dove-tail perfectly into the Technocrats’ dream of an automated society or, as the report states, thanks to Facebook, Twitter etc.: “Identity will become embedded in devices” and “propagated into all applications.” The SMART systems will allow us to bypass these sites and will “seamlessly access your profile.” They further suggest that once social identity has become embedded in our devices, online sharing will become fused to media life, where DVDs TV, i-Pod music and internet “sync preferences to preferred identity.”

Back to The Internet of Things (IOT) and uploading and integrating our identity with SMART world until they are fully synonymous.

As the embedding continues and the reliance and surveillance that goes with it, our location will be omnipresent and available: “Location aware devices will employ pre-emptive use of location to alert the user to things or people nearby that may be of interest.” – Along with those listening in and observing. Marketers will start salivating here when they can offer a discount at a nearby MacDonald’s store: Hey Dude! There’s a Double Royale Burger with extra fries half price deal on 5th Avenue if you hurry! Just Lovin’ it!

mcdonaldspersonalised

This “dual use” technology allows a double agenda to come into play. Once again, we have the Brave New (SMART) world lurking in perceived innocence and purity just behind the scenes approaching full integration with satellite and terrestrial, where:

“SMART devices and web apps will automatically check-in and post updates: Identity aware devices, empowered by embeddable RFID tags, (Radio Frequency Identification Chip) will allow this type of technology to spread beyond the mobile phone. A SMART coffee thermos, for example, could enable auto-check ins and send coupons to your phone as you enter your favourite coffee shop.” [6]

And entering our favourite coffee shop with your favourite thermos may be the least of our worries if Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) does indeed spread beyond the mobile phone. Like your arm, for example. In the technocratic future, entering the shop by choice would fast become a luxury. It is at precisely this juncture, where SMART technologies and consumerism suggest how to live your life and where true choices becomes somewhat progressively ill-defined.

What of the workforce in the face of these rapid advances?

A recent report from the Oxford Martin Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology based at Oxford University suggests that 45 per cent of the jobs in the United States will be automated within the next twenty years. Using a standard statistical modelling method, data was accrued from more than 700 jobs on ONet, an online career network. The skills, education and many other variables were all taken into account. With already massive unemployment problems and part-time workers scratching around for jobs automation will force more and more people into the mega-cities and into a managed system – for their own welfare.

Echoing Jeremy Rifikin’s seminal book: The End of Work (1995) the professor explored the clear delineation between a disenfranchised global workforce and an Information Elite. The results yielded a change that would likely happen in two stages: 1) Computers replacing people. Vulnerable fields like transportation/logistics, production, construction, services, sales and administration will all be affected causing a massive increase in the unemployed. The pace of change will then slow and progress in fits and starts according to the particular field. 2) Artificial Intelligence. As the sophistication of computerisation continues to grow, a second tier of work will be under threat including the sciences, management, engineering, and the arts.

Manufacturing is in a bad way having shed 6 million jobs since 2000 as production soars ahead despite trillions of debt in both the US and Europe. The robot revolution and the SMART visions will only continue the erosion of mass employment. The speed at which this will happen, especially regarding stage two depends on access to cheap labour, resources and social, geo-political and environmental instability. It could be much quicker or considerably longer but the direction is clear.

factoryautomation© infrakshun

Professor Erik Brynjolfsson from MIT Sloan School of Management, and his co-author Andrew McAfee have come to much the same conclusions. They believe most of the unemployment stagnation is due to the inexorable rise of robotics and factory automation. According to their research the future is very bleak for a much wider range of jobs, from law, financial services, education, and medicine. More controversially for some, they show that there has been a divergence or “great decoupling” beginning in 2000 – 2011 where economic growth is indicated but with no parallel increase in job creation. Productivity continues to rise as does the long-term unemployed. While Brynjolfsson believes technology does make nations wealthier overall there is an undeniable paradox at work. Quoted in David Rotman’s June 2013 article: ‘How Technology Is Destroying Jobs’ for MIT’s Tech Review he observes: “Productivity is at record levels, innovation has never been faster, and yet at the same time, we have a falling median income and we have fewer jobs. People are falling behind because technology is advancing so fast and our skills and organizations aren’t keeping up.”

Earlier in 2013 Israeli company Rethink Robotics illustrated what will become the norm before very long. “Baxter” a foot high service robot retailing at $22,000 can take on most menial tasks from serving coffee, to fetching the post. Software applications are swiftly being developed to make sure that such robots will be able to take ever more sophisticated jobs from assembly line work in factories to flipping burgers in McDonalds. According to a CNBC News report Baxter is being overtaken: “MIT already has a BakeBot that can read recipes, whip together cookie dough and place it in the oven. The University of California at Berkeley has a robot that can do laundry and fold T-shirts. Robot servers have started waiting tables at restaurants in Japan, South Korea, China and Thailand …”

US agriculture which has already undergone massive monopolisation by five major agribusiness companies is taking the next step in the robotics revolution in keeping with a future collective herding of humanity. Over in California the Lettuce Bot is one such example Phys.org ran a July 2013 article entitled: ‘Robots revolutionize farming ease labor’ which reported how the bots: “… can ‘thin’ a field of lettuce in the time it takes about 20 workers to do the job by hand.”

Though a new sector of employment is emerging comprising of Robot IT and maintenance personnel, security developers, designers and salespeople for robot accessories, software, and apps it will not ameliorate the millions of blue collar workers whose talents and working wage is outside specialist technology. As automated vehicles begin to replace truck drivers and better software obviates the need for lawyers, bartenders and burger flippers and even some medical care workers then the divide between the rich and the poor will become a case of who has access to technology and who does not; who is living on the edges of society and who lives at its core. As one tech journalist Jon Evans commented: “The new law of the economic jungle is this: either write the software that eats the world, or be eaten.”

Author and technology journalist Nicolas Carr has written about the dark side of the approaching revolution in automation. In an October 2013 article for The Atlantic Monthly . Carr opines that in putting our knowledge in the hands of machines, we are inadvertently – and ironically – signing away our greatest potential.

He provides an overview of what automation is doing to a number of sectors in society and how they are altering the nature of work. For instance, air accidents are revealed to be have been caused by pilot error, which in turn was caused by an over-sophistication of software which has by-passed normal human reaction and good old fashioned intuition working in unison with years of experience. Now they are essentially computer operators. Aviation and automation experts have found that what the accidents had in common (when human error was a factor) was that: “Overuse of automation erodes pilots’ expertise and dulls their reflexes,” which leads “a de-skilling of the crew.” And since pilots hold the controls on a typical flight for only three minutes such is the state of software sophistication it means that the problem isn’t likely to get better. Unless that is, you get rid of pilots all together. What will this do to the knowledge of flying? Will flying be yet another skill that becomes the province of the computer?  (Carr’s book: The Shallows: How the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember is well worth the read).

The overuse of automation may be putting lives at risk. Faith in such technology could be misplaced if we compare it to the beliefs of the Industrial Revolution from which most of these ideas derive. The scope and magnitude of automated tasks has taken on an entirely different mandate. Software is increasingly rendering the presence of humans unnecessary even for intellectual tasks which until recently were considered strictly human-based. As our focus narrows, we are moving into a technocratic army of workers who do nothing more than monitor and input data rather than truly engage in creative activities which require the friction of challenge and stimulation. Routine will inevitably supplant the nourishing of talent even more than the mechanical assembly line.

Automation2

Automation: the future of manufacturing. Where do all the people go?

The cause of this drive to automate our lives is based on a trenchant fallacy of a machine-based future that will naturally provide for us all and cater for our every mental, emotional and even spiritual needs. As Carr suggests, this is merely another “substitution myth” which fails to address core issues at the heart of change and adaptation. He further states: “A labor-saving device doesn’t just provide a substitute for some isolated component of a job or other activity. It alters the character of the entire task, including the roles, attitudes, and skills of the people taking part.” It is this mass alteration combined with power-hungry individuals presently infesting our social systems which will spell disaster for the human condition if we don’t – somehow – apply the brakes.

Meantime, this will inevitably lead to what psychologists have called complacency and bias leading to poor performance. A false sense of security will descend which over time, leads to an erosion of our levels of attention and awareness. As our trust and faith in automated systems increases so too our hard talents and instincts atrophy, where other informational sources become secondary. This does not absolve us from ignoring incorrect or subtle mistakes in computational data however and a vicious circle is enacted. But there is also a deeper problem as Carr explains:

Automation turns us from actors into observers. Instead of manipulating the yoke, we watch the screen. That shift may make our lives easier, but it can also inhibit the development of expertise. Since the late 1970s, psychologists have been documenting a phenomenon called the “generation effect.” It was first observed in studies of vocabulary, which revealed that people remember words much better when they actively call them to mind—when they generate them—than when they simply read them. The effect, it has since become clear, influences learning in many different circumstances. When you engage actively in a task, you set off intricate mental processes that allow you to retain more knowledge. You learn more and remember more. When you repeat the same task over a long period, your brain constructs specialized neural circuits dedicated to the activity. It assembles a rich store of information and organizes that knowledge in a way that allows you to tap into it instantaneously. Whether it’s Serena Williams on a tennis court or Magnus Carlsen at a chessboard, an expert can spot patterns, evaluate signals, and react to changing circumstances with speed and precision that can seem uncanny. What looks like instinct is hard-won skill, skill that requires exactly the kind of struggle that modern software seeks to alleviate.

Translating information into applied knowledge is fast becoming an obstacle to achieving not only place in society but a deeper sense of fulfilment. With an already growing malaise of narcissism afflicting our present generations this does not bode well for the coming technocratic age. In our enthusiasm to replace pilots with programs and suitable algorithms so that diagnoses can take doctors out of the equation entirely the vacuum to which we are all being drawn is based on a cure that is nothing more than total automation which is by definition a technocracy. How on earth do we prevent our distinctly unique talents disappearing as rapidly as technology has arisen? As a consequence, it has comes down to a question of existential meaning. Carr asks: “Does our essence still lie in what we know, or are we now content to be defined by what we want? If we don’t grapple with that question ourselves, our gadgets will be happy to answer it for us.” It doesn’t matter from what cultural origins we derive our sense of meaning and place in the world, the eternal constant is that “knowing demands doing.”

If we embrace the riptide of total automation where the notion of personal vocation is becoming refined and narrowed into software programs in the name of efficiency and ease, then our definition of who we are will be dangerously tied up with the instantaneous result – at the expense of the journey. What we may be losing in return for this new Official Culture and its addictive race for results will only be known when we begin to wonder what it was like to live without the screen. Creativity, meaning and a real world connection may be difficult to claw back when we have become a mirror of the machines we seem to covet. But automation isn’t the only change that is pressing down on human consciousness. The drive to merge with machines by allowing incremental integration is already taking place.

 


Notes

[1] ”Checkpoint of the future’ takes shape at Texas airport’ USA Today June 21, 2012.
[2] ‘Tokyo’s intelligent digital billboards can tell gender, age of passerby’ by Andrew Nusca, http://www.smartplanet.com, 15 Jul 2010.
[3] ‘Intelligent Billboard gives you dog treats: truly the future is here.’ By Anna Leach, March 30 2011. http://www.shinyshiny.tv.com.
[4] ‘Emotion Recognition Software Will Tailor Digital Out-of-Home Advertising Messages to a Person’s Mood’ March 3 2011, http://www.screenmediadaily.com
[5] ‘Big Brother is watching you shop’ By Michael Fitzpatrick, BBC News, October 2, 2009.
[6] Insights – centreforfuturestudies strategic futures consultancy, 21 September 2010, http://www.futurestudies.co.uk/files/Centrepercent20forpercent20Futurepercent20Studies/INSIGHTpercent20Socialpercent20Media.pdf

[7] ‘All Can Be Lost: The Risk of Putting Our Knowledge in the Hands of Machines’ By Nicolas Carr, The Atlantic Monthly, Oct.23rd 2013.

 

Technocracy I


 2012-07-21 18.22.48© infrakshun

“Technopoly is a state of culture. It is also a state of mind. It consists in the deification of technology, which means that the culture seeks its authorization in technology, finds its satisfactions in technology, and takes its orders from technology. This requires the development of a new kind of social order, and of necessity leads to the rapid dissolution of much that is associated with traditional beliefs.” – Neil Postman

Under the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) heavily funded by the Rockefeller Foundation we see the centralisation of food under agribusiness merging with SMART society. Technology is the key to delivering a world of plenty according to these scientists and financial backers. On the website we read: “The Rockefeller Foundation envisions a world with SMART Globalization – a world in which globalization’s benefits are more widely shared and social, economic, health, and environmental challenges are more easily weathered.” Recall too, our exploration into the scare-tactics of global warming, the implementation of UN Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development (SD) all of which is hijacking genuine concern for our planet in order to use it to advance a New World Control System, by stealth. On the one hand, we have overt geo-political deception forcing chaos into being upon which a Hegelian solution for that post-war (post-catastrophe?) world can be laid. On the other hand, the requisite, centralised “New International Order” is delivered as a “benign” ecological, socio-cultural and economic template incorporating urban, energy efficient and sustainable “human habitat” zones requiring a high-level population density.

After great disasters, there are always great opportunities to create new institutions and infrastructure predicated on elite ideologies.  World War I and II were prime examples, and indeed partly initiated for this very purpose. Humanity’s spirit must be broken in order that such phases of a New Order are welcomed, albeit with inclusive-sounding labels for peace and prosperity. The aftermath of intense Earth changes and asymmetric warfare will provide the same opportunities for another phase in the Pathocratic encroachment over normal human beings.

If the Pathocrats have their way, we will be carefully managed into SMART operated high-rises with uniform amenities and leisure parks, where metered energy consumption, automation and a digitisation will be encased in an overarching surveillance – for your own “protection.” Only the new technocratic gentry will inhabit lands deep in the countryside. For the rest of us it will be off limits, our movements strictly monitored. In accordance with New World Religion protocols and the New World Civil Servant Resolutions Nature will be protected as “sacred” and barred from the mass of humanity. These Mega-cities will provide for our every need … Provided that is, conformity and compliance remains paramount for the New Collective and the maintenance of a group consciousness duly cultivated, as envisoned by Zone Council Resolutions. This will ensure the efficiency of our SMART society. Break consensus and community cracks. Serve the individual and promote the Self, SMART grid dysfunction and the potential for overall system failure is inevitable and thus a return to fragmentation and dissociation of the past. This cannot be permitted – for the good of the whole. Resistance is like an infection, before you know it, the whole grid would be infected. As such, we must be treated like the historical virus that we are and protected from ourselves and the potential despoiling of Mother Earth. A vast number of protective measures have been put in place to promote efficiency and inner happiness. You will want for nothing. To maintain optimum levels of sensate satisfaction, human habitats will have their own integrated “Malware” and “anti-virus” enforcement systems in place as envisioned and voted for by Neighbourhood, Zone Councils and Regional Elects – for the good of all. Community is all, group consciousness is all…

You can probably continue the narrative with all kinds of creative allusions inspired by various books and Hollywood flicks. This is the real inverted totalitarianism that both Orwell and Huxley warned about and countless myths and oral traditions.

So, are the checks and balances in place to prevent such a future? Or is it just a silly Dystopian fantasy?

When SD and SMART systems are set against the strangle-hold that our power brokers still maintain currently manifesting as ubiquitous surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties, then questioning the direction this form of technology is taking  becomes an imperative.

Society is rapidly changing with technological innovation advancing in ways that challenge the imagination. The horizon is limitless as to how technology will be used. The important question to ask is: do we have any say in how technological knowledge is being applied  in the present and thus how it will shape our future? As with most things in life, there are always positives and negatives to any new innovation on a mass scale,  but it remains to be seen which one will gain ascendance. As always, this is dependent on who holds the overall power of technology and its uses. So far, we have an appalling track record. As it stands the advantages are set to provide unquestionable benefits in the medical field communications sectors. But what are the dangers of an over reliance on digital technology applied to all other sectors of society? Will it augment the path to true freedom or be its demise? Already there are serious questions being asked on a number of issues from health to civil liberties, artificial intelligence to cyber warfare, all of which we will explore.

chicagoillinoiswifi

As this silicon revolution continues to submerge us in an ocean of Wi-Fi waves there are signs that our intense reliance on SMART networks may not be the most expedient way to take humanity forward. Nonetheless, selling the idea of convenience and efficiency is proving extremely seductive. It also offers untold benefits to intelligence agencies, in particular the National Security Agency (NSA) to complete its mission to own information and predict behaviour of every individual in America and the globe.

The acronym “SMART” is the new mnemonic buzzword which is being used to describe a network of gadgets, utilities, services, weapons, energy systems and new forms of governance bound together in a sea of digital and Wi-Fi-based technology. Each letter in the acronym stands for a particular objective which can be loosely interpreted. They are typically defined as follows:

S = Specific / Significant

M = Measurable / Motivational

A = Attainable / Assignable

R = Relevant / Realistic

T = Time-bound / Time-Related

The technology promises a broad range of practical and philosophical ideas which are already re-shaping the very concept of communication, travel, agriculture, medicine and city infrastructure. SMART uses computerised systems which incorporate digital metering to monitor and control energy from power plants to appliances within the home.

Another acronym used to describe this technological structure of Web-connected appliances and in-home devices is the “Internet of things” (IOT). Although domestic appliances such as fridges, freezers, lighting and televisions fall under the IOT, it is the energy companies and infrastructure-  including transportation, health, oil, gas and alternative energy systems – which are being incorporated into a vast SMART awash with Wi-Fi technology that will connect to the internet and allow devices to “speak to each other.”

Many corporations such as AT&T, General Electric, are changing their present system of distribution, storage, administration and the very core of their manufacturing towards the IOT and SMART philosophy. For software companies such as Cisco, IBM, Siemens, Microsoft and Intel, this is a lucrative time. As a September 2013 article by online magazine Standard Digital entitled: ‘Tomorrow’s smart cities’ explained: “In Singapore, Stockholm and California, IBM is gathering traffic data and running it via algorithms to predict where a traffic jam will occur an hour before it has happened. Meanwhile in Rio (Brazil), it has built a NASA-style control room where banks of screens suck up data from sensors and cameras located around the city.” IBM has 2,500 smarter cities projects worldwide and is confident in financial future of redesigning cities. To that end it has trademarked the term “smarter cities”.

The article also quotes Anthony Townsend, director of the Institute of the Future and author of Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. Townsend puts his finger on the pulse when he states: “Some people want to fine tune a city like you do a race car but they are leaving citizens out of the process…” And in relation to a China’s massive new city building projects and huge central control rooms, one of which is already operational in Rio, Brazil: “The control room in Rio was created by a progressive mayor but what if the bad guys get in? Are we creating capabilities that can be misused?”

Constant attempts to try and get the UK public to adopt a bio-metric, National ID card have failed, though a foreign ID card for immigrants was unveiled in 2008 as a possible “softening up” exercise for a re-introduction of the scheme. This seems to be one branch in the creation of database state in the UK and abroad. When all the databases are indexed by what is known in the UK as the National Identity Register (NIR) it is then that our lives will be defined by our NIR number and a host of invasive surveillance which may come into play.

The UK organization NO2ID which campaigns against the Database State sees “Transformational Government” as not just a threat to our civil liberties but a whole way of life. Indeed they state: “… what is being transformed is not government but its power over you.” The reason for this increasing disquiet over State interference in the lives of British people is drawn from broad range of measures integral to the emerging SMART society.

NO2ID outlines just some of the UK government’s plans currently evolving:

  • ID interrogation centres, for passports and ID cards
  • ePassports that help collect data about your travel
  • International eBorders schemes that exchange Passenger Name Record information with foreign countries as well as collecting them
  • Recording of all car journeys, using Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR)
  • ‘Entitlement cards’ as part of, or linked to the ID scheme, logging use of public services
  • Centralised medical records without privacy
  • Biometrics in schools — fingerprinting children as young as 4 or 5
  • ‘ContactPoint’, a database collecting sensitive information on every child
  • Fingerprinting in pubs and bars — landlords forced to monitor their patrons
  • A greatly expanded National DNA Database (NDNAD)
  • New police powers to check identity
  • Increasing Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks for employees and volunteers
  • Businesses under pressure to verify ID of staff and customers with the government [1]

Neil Postman’s reference to a Technopoly as a state of culture is another consolidation of Official Culture. It is a description of an emerging  Pathocracy with emphasis on the scientific technique underpinning the dominance of technology and its applications. When combining the  Surveillance State, and SMART society we fuse Technopoly and Pathocracy to form: Technocracy. a system of society according to which government is controlled by scientists, engineers, and other experts. It is a scientific dictatorship as discussed in ‘World State Policies IV: The Scientific Technique’ and to which UN Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development is integrated.

city-metropolis-buildings-skyscrapers-city-road-lights© infrakshun

Howard Scott and M. King Hubbert founded the Technocracy movement in 1932 during the Great Depression and produced what is seen by many as the Bible of the movement: The Technocracy Study Course. Rather than the “price system” the design was based on the metrics of energy and considered apolitical. It was primarily a technological panacea for global economic problems based on energy production and distribution together with precise monitoring and measuring as the pillars of its potential success.

It was a techno-Marxist plan which included nationalising public utilities abandoning the gold standard (which the financial oligarchs loved) and suspending the stock exchange. Why would you need one when the new currency was mainframe of automation and “digital” currency?

The Technocracy Study Course reads like a strange amalgamation of bureaucratic fundamentalism grafted on to a engineer/mathematician/accountant’s world view of humans as binary energy units. (Perfect for the Lucis Trust’s New World [Civil] Servants). They outline their meter reading diagnosis for society in typically precise fashion:

  • “Register on a continuous 24 hour per day basis the total net conversion of energy.
  • “By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
  • “Provide a continuous inven­tory of all production and consumption
  • “Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used.
  • “Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.” [2]

Many younger online users attracted to hacktivism, spirituality and social networking have been taken in by the recent manifestation of technocracy in the very slickly produced and marketed “Zeitgeist” films and the affiliated Venus Project founded by Jasque Fresco. The first film included some excellent truths regarding the nature of the economic world in which we live, as well as an incisive deconstruction of government influence and false flag operations. But the second film entitled: “Addendum” revealed that it had some fatal flaws. Zeitgeist was designed to grab our attention and prime the not so discerning members of the public to accept another version of Elite control this time through systemic technology as saviour, where computers make key decisions. It is the same techno-Marxism that assumes everyone will be thoroughly happy with such a Brave New World of regimented, rule-based precision where individuals become numbers integrated into a game theory mainframe of “efficiency.”

Naturally, no mention is made of authoritarians and social dominators pre-disposed to the distortion and co-option of well-intentioned technocrats. To say that such a scenario is unrealistic and naïve seems obvious, not least the undesirability of such a sterile future. It is the same old approach to people management with the blessing of the Rockefeller class, all of whom have been extremely active in the “information dominance” brand of social engineering. When you know the awareness is changing the mass mind then you offer the World State scenario under a different guise and adapt good intentions accordingly.

The Zeitgeist Mission Statement gives us all we need to know: “This ‘Resource-Based Economic Model’ is about taking a direct technical approach to social management as opposed to a monetary or even political one. It is about updating the workings of society to the most advanced and proven methods Science has to offer, leaving behind the damaging consequences and limiting inhibitions which are generated by our current system of monetary exchange, profits, corporations and other structural and motivational components.”

The term “Technocracy” in Zeitgeist terms, is really another way of referring to the “scientific technique” dipped in coating of trans-humanist fervour. Think eco-aware, engineering geek meets bank manager, meets human resource chief. Throw in a goatee and there you have it. It’s the same story different wardrobe.

In America, appealing to the new generations born in the digital world is a vital part of the social engineering project reaching its apotheosis of the Rockefeller Foundation. The GMO/agriculture research arm of IRRI calls it: “SMART Globalisation”, a corporatist-collectivist vision that sounds wonderfully benign on the face of it. It is the latest buzzword designed to channel human activity into local, national and global SMART systems from which our finances, health and autonomy would be under complete and automatic control. In other words, a Global SMART Grid. It is here that we see technocracy and neo-feudalism come together in virtual “harmony,” developed with the best of intentions at the lower end of awareness but guided by the worst from the top. The current crisis in the capitalist economic order is all part of the phase to replace the old world with this new eco-technocratic vision. Let’s just recall that David Rockefeller has been a long-time admirer of Communist China and the hybrid vision of the capitalist-collectivist philosophy.

a61paj5smao7

David Rockefeller and Mao’s deputy Zhou Enlai 1973.| The Rockefellers have been hard at work engineering this World State based on the Chinese model for many decades.  For more information see Rockefeller Internationalism by William Banyan

Author Naomi Klein alerted us to the fact that Chinese authorities have taken SMART society to their hearts and created a “model city” of the future re-affirming the Rockefeller and Elite vision for the world. It only took 30 years, for Shenzen to be transformed from a barren wasteland to a SMART city of 21.4 million occupants who are living the “dream” and where 200,000 cameras currently monitor and survey the populace with over 2 million more planned. What this SMART Society provides is a police State testing ground comprising of “central planning, merciless repression and constant surveillance.” Fortune 500 technology companies are watching very closely indeed. So closely, in fact, that high-tech surveillance and censorship programs were provided by IBM, Honeywell, and GE people under the generic name of “Golden Shield,” and used as a test run for what will is envisaged for the US population. [3]

Recall former US National Security State advisor under Carter and Obama head hunter Zbigniew Brzezinski and his 1968 book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. It was a call to re-envision the technetronic era after a few abortive attempts during the 1930s depression. It was to be the inspiration and backbone to the formation of the Trilateral Commission and its support of the Tiger economies of Asia. It was no coincidence that the book was extraordinarily prescient. Brzezinski, like so many geo-political establishment intellectuals often broadcasts Elite visions under a predictive and softly critical narrative. The intent is to broadcast formulas to the faithful and engage a populist understanding of the principles and their future objectives. And by “populist” we mean not just the public but those who may be termed the worker bees in the hive mind of the global Establishment.

Between Two Ages served to ignite the fuse of a Technocracy, the seeds of which were planted in another era of economic depression and ready to download directly into our minds. Brzezinski writes: “In the technetronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities effectively exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.” [4]

between two agesWe are already immersed in the “ether” of radio, micro and now Wi-Fi waves * indicating that not only is this foundation for a Technocracy present, it is accelerating exponentially. For this growth to continue unabated so that a SMART society can have the doors to liberty firmly closed behind it, Brzezinski posits another future scenario that has come to pass, involving: “… the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values (of Liberty). Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” [5]

He warns us with apparent gravitas:

“Another threat, less overt but no less basic, confronts liberal democracy. More directly linked to the impact of technology, it involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled and directed society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific knowhow. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control. Under such circumstances, the scientific and technological momentum of the country would not be reversed but would actually feed on the situation it exploits.” [6]

There are two ways in which this Technocracy is being implemented both of which naturally intersect:

1) Economics and energy

2) Surveillance and state controls.

In the first instance, the energy issue is being promoted and reorganized via the digital automation of SMART technologies. The US Department of Energy defines these technologies as: “… an electrical grid that uses computers and other technology to gather and act on information, such as information about the behaviours of suppliers and consumers, in an automated fashion to improve the efficiency, reliability, economics, and sustainability of the production and distribution of electricity.” [7] A similar grid is underway in Europe under “SMART Grids European Technology Platform.” [8]

America’s old and out-dated power grid is ready for an overhaul and the SMART Grid technology will mean the installation of digital meters in each home and business and 24hr monitoring of energy consumption that goes with it. What SMART means in this context is that there can be communication with other related devices within the home to relay support data information without any contact with the customer. Rather like Homeland Security and its agencies, The SMART Grid Task Force “… is responsible for coordinating standards development, guiding research and development projects, and reconciling the agendas of a wide range of stakeholders.” [9]

SMART Grid technology is big money and represents a potential revolution, particularly in telecommunications and energy. In 2010, the countries investing the most in SMART grid systems were China at $7.32 billion, closely followed by the United States $7.09 billion, Japan at $807 million with Spain, South Korea, France, United Kingdom, Germany, Australia and Brazil all spending millions on transforming their societies’ infrastructure. [10]

Like so much of the post-911, military-corporate infrastructure outsourced both home and abroad, the Department of Energy’s mandate to push ahead with this overhaul did not get Congressional hearing. From October 2009 – January 2010 SMART grid project funding ear-marked for 183 projects in 43 states totalled $3.4 billion thanks to the Obama Administration picking up where the Bush Administration left off with the creation of The Office of Electricity Delivery in 2003. The Department of Energy’s press release gives details of what this will mean for the average electricity consumer:

  • More than 850 sensors called “Phasor Measurement Units” to monitor the overall power grid nationwide
  • 200,000 SMART transformers
  • 700 auto­mated sub­stations (about 5 per cent of the nation’s total)
  • 1,000,000 in-home displays
  • 345,000 load control devices in homes [11]

smartgridvillageThe SmartHouse/SmartGrid Vision c/o The 7th Framework Programme funded European Research and Technological Development from 2007 until 2013 Link: http://www.smarthouse-smartgrid.eu/index.php?id=245

Systems theory and cybernetics had always been attractive to technocrats as a web of relationships that facilitate economic and social control. “The Web of Life” concept of interdependence and interrelatedness of all things within ecological systems was taken on by a number of ecologists and New Age seers. The concept of equilibrium and balance was in fact determined by vastly unpredictable and creative confluence of non-linear principles which is why attempts to bottle such non-linear systems into a means of socio-economic control can never work, no matter how well intentioned by some. However, this is where the World Wide Web (WWW) and the Network of Things (NOT) comes in. It is essential to the mind-set who see people as numbers, algorithms, codes and game theory predictors to be moved around on a computer screen like a game of SIMS.

Sims3UnivLife

Ready to become part of a virtuality and SIMS-SMART?

With NOT, technocrats wish to bathe us in a sea of Wi-Fi waves, where cities and homes will be awash with wireless networks where automation rules. From your dimmer switch to powering your juicer; the garage door to the security code on the residential gates. No human intervention is necessary. Programmers with strict guidelines as to what they will be programming will merely allow the technocrats to download exactly what they want to see and hear, changing it as they see fit and without your knowledge. If you refuse and wish to take it to an ombudsman or even a civil action, how are you going to watch your T.V. or eat your food if your utilities are switched off? Look at the nature of banking. When did you last see your bank manager or get a problem resolved with speaking to some low-wage slave in India you cannot understand? Distance is designed.

The SMART Grid is married to the Wi-Fi Alliance which is readying itself to implement Wi-Fi circuitry in every conceivable device in the home and business sector. It will operate in exactly the same way as Wi-Fi-enabled network modems and routers for personal computers to mobile phones currently being used by homes and businesses globally. Telecommunications electricity, and renewable energy resources will be functionally integrated into a system automatic provision, payment and monitoring. Gmail, i-Pod applications, your fridge and T.V. and the Wi-Fi “ether” that will activate them are ready to be absorbed into the SMART Grid where literally everything communicates with each other in a fully-automated, seamlessly connected world of man and machine.

And now, it means you can literally become part of the fabric of SMART willingly and forever with electronic senors printed directly onto your skin! Oh, the convenience! Mike Orcutt of MIT’s Technology Review comments: “Such systems could be used to track health and monitor healing…” Sure. And if you fall on the wrong side of your friendly SMART government tracking and monitoring takes on a whole different meaning. But having your i-pad on your wrist as opposed to freedom of movement is clearly more important… More on this later. [12]

printable.skin_.electronics.2x299

Another aspect of the Wi-Fi revolution that is not being talked about is the health effects of living our daily immersed in this type of constant radiation. There is a glut scientific, peer-reviewed papers out there which are unsurprisingly, barely receiving a whiff of recognition that they sorely deserve. Adverse biological effects from Wi-Fi signals, Wi-Fi-enabled devices or Wi-Fi frequencies (2.4 or 5 GHz) have been complied by the UK campaign group Wi-Fi in Schools (You can visit them at http://www.wifiinschools.org.uk and print out as many as you like). The many examples of extensive research undertaken by University and independent scientific research institutes provides disturbing evidence across a broad range of experiments carried out on mice, rats and tadpoles. Some of the findings included:

  • Immunohistopathologic demonstration of deleterious effects on growing rat testes of radiofrequency waves emitted from conventional Wi-Fi devices.
  • Decreases in human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation from the use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi.
  • Oxidative injury in rat testis and on oxidative stress in blood induced by 2.45-GHz radiation from wireless devices.WI-FI_ZONE_01
  • A provocation study using heart rate variability shows Negative effects on autonomic nervous system from microwave radiation from 2.4GHz cordless phone.
  • Wi-Fi electromagnetic fields exert gender related alterations on EEG
  • 2.45-Gz wireless devices induce oxidative stress and proliferation through cytosolic Ca2+ influx in human leukemia cancer cells.
  • Microwave Irradiation-Induced Oxidative Stress Affects Implantation or Pregnancy in Mice
  • Cognitive impairment in rats was shown after long-term exposure to GSM-900 mobile phone radiation.
  • Stimulation of production of tumor necrosis when exposed in vivo and in vitro to weak electromagnetic waves in the centimeter range
  • Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. [Source: wifiinschools.org.uk]

Bearing in mind that 16v/m is the average level of exposure for these experiments and that when using a Wi-Fi-enabled tablet computer we can be exposed to electromagnetic fields up to 16V/m. This is only the beginning of research into these areas but the evidence for serious problems on the subtle layers of our biological and neurological make-up is already overwhelming. If we don’t put the brakes on for the health issues alone, then we will be looking at generations with behavioural difficulties, infertility, impaired cognitive ability and an epidemic of endemic brain tumours.

As smartphones begin to rain down from the technocratic ether, the most convincing evidence that mobile phones may be causing brains tumours in the young has arrived from Dr. Boian Alexandrov from the Centre for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. His team have shown that terahertz (THz) waves gradually destroy human DNA which is fairly terminal for the human race. Since chips broadcasting THz waves are being considered for use in mobile phones as imaging systems tool across this SMART society and THZ scanner technology is already being used by the TSA at most of our airports, the question as to whether there are any health issues concerning terahertz technologies seems unimportant as the great wave of innovation roars ahead.

The medical establishment is encouraging the use for operations in which scanning will prove highly useful for otherwise invasive procedures while “exciting” innovations in consumer freedom will allow us all to see through objects and walls to find our lost car keys should we choose to buy into the gadget craze. Dr. Alexandrov and his team’s ground-breaking study (among others)  is lurking in the background as a minor impediment to the euphoria of “progress.” His team discovered that exposure to THz radiation builds cumulatively and affects human and animal tissue DNA, effectively “unzipping” the DNA molecule. In their paper ‘DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field,’ Alexandrov et al conclude:

“We consider the influence of a terahertz field on the breathing dynamics of double-stranded DNA. We model the spontaneous formation of spatially localized openings of a damped and driven DNA chain, and find that linear instabilities lead to dynamic dimerization, while true local strand separations require a threshold amplitude mechanism. Based on our results we argue that a specific terahertz radiation exposure may significantly affect the natural dynamics of DNA, and thereby influence intricate molecular processes involved in gene expression and DNA replication.” [13]

So, if we continue to breathe in the SMART hype, we’ll soon see where the real growth lies.


* “Wi-Fi is a popular technology that allows an electronic device to exchange data wirelessly (using radio waves) over a computer network, including high-speed Internet connections.


Notes

[1] http://www.no2id.net/
[2] p.232; The Technocracy Study Source, by Howard Scott and M.King Hubbard, published by Technocracy Inc. 1940 edition.
[3] ‘China’s All-Seeing Eye’ By Naomi Klein, Rolling Stone, May 14, 2008.
[4] Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era by Zbigniew Brzezinski 1970 / ISBN-10 0313234981 (p.11)
[5] Ibid.(p.97)
[6] Ibid. (p252-253).
[7] U.S. Department of Energy. ‘Smart Grid / Department of Energy’ http://energy.gov/oe/technology-development/smart-grid.
[8] http://www.smartgrids.eu”. smartgrids.eu. 2011.
[9] Smart grid: an introduction US State Department.
[10] http://www.zprymeconsulting.com
[11] ‘Smart Grid: The Implementation of Technocracy?’ By Patrick Wood, August Review 03 March 2010.
[12] ‘Electronic Sensors Printed Directly on the Skin’ MIT Tech, Mike Orcutt, March 11, 2013.
[13] ‘DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field’ by B. S. Alexandrov, V. Gelev, A. R. Bishop, A. Usheva, K. O. Rasmussen. (Submitted on 28 Oct 2009) Biological Physics (physics.bio-ph); Computational Physics (physics.comp-ph) Journal reference: Physics Letters A, Volume 374, Issue 10, 2010.
Abstract: We consider the influence of a terahertz field on the breathing dynamics of double-stranded DNA. We model the spontaneous formation of spatially localized openings of a damped and driven DNA chain, and find that linear instabilities lead to dynamic dimerization, while true local strand separations require a threshold amplitude mechanism. Based on our results we argue that a specific terahertz radiation exposure may significantly affect the natural dynamics of DNA, and thereby influence intricate molecular processes involved in gene expression and DNA replication.

Dark Green XXIII: The IPCC’s All-Seeing-Eye (2)


All_seeing_eye2 © infrakshun

To reiterate, tearing strips off the IPCC is not some exercise in criticising for its own sake but to highlight where science has been politicised and corrupted. Similarly, there is obviously a huge need to care for our environment and everything else in this precious biosphere. We cannot do this until we have climate science firmly outside activism and ecological conservation innoculated against corporatism and Establishment influence.  That said, let’s continue…

If we go back to the Climategate 2.0 scandal, we can see that some of the emails relating to the IPCC are quite illuminating.

For example, Professor Jonathan Overpeck of the University of Arizona’s Department of Geosciences deciding what shouldn’t go into the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4):

“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out. For the IPCC, we need to know what is relevant and useful for assessing recent and future climate change.”

Commenting on another section of an IPCC report he states:

“Need to convince readers that there really has been an increase in knowledge – more evidence. What is it?” [1]

Or Professor Phil Jones of East Anglia University searching for a suitable hurricane paper that dovetails into his beliefs and thus the IPCC AR4 report:

“Seems that this potential Nature paper may be worth citing, if it does say that GW is having an effect on TC [Tropical Cyclone] activity.” [2]

Each of the climate reports (CRs) are weighty, no more so than the 2007 report at 3,000 pages. No one is going to wade through all of that, least of all the sound-bite media. What is more concerning and goes straight to the heart of why science plays so little part in climate change policy, is the IPCC executive summaries which it prepares for the smaller reports that make up the CRs as a whole. Not more than 35 pages in length, this is called “Summary for Policymakers” which gives you an idea how the IPCC wants these summaries to be used, even though the depth of understanding and contextual analysis may be missing.

Scientists are tasked with drafting these documents which are then passed on to those who meticulously pore over each line so that a cleansed and white-washed copy can be presented for inspection by a clueless media and public. So, these will not be scientific documents at all. These “cleansing” meetings are not open to anyone but IPCC staff and suitably vetted observers from environmental groups or organisations. The media are not permitted entry. A core group of IPCC bureaucrats decide what goes into the reports.

A Climategate 2.0 email by Tim Carter of the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) and Climate Change Programme, writing to IPCC authors seems to confirm this fact even within the AGW brethren:

“Regarding the phrase ‘IPCC position’? Would it be wise to check that McCarthy /Watson have the same understanding as we do.”

And the reply:

[TC] You could try, but it has been tricky getting anyone to make statements about anything. It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group.” [3]

Governments and organisations like the IPCC are complicit in the cover up and manipulation of scientific facts. Scientists who contribute to the CRs are being played and used for a political agenda and the short-term greed and the MSM has cheer-led this subterfuge from the beginning. A summary document given out as a press release to the world’s media and public has been put through the politician, bureaucrat and diplomat’s PR machine, vetted to make sure that it conforms to the AGW paradigm in secret and without oversight.

Devoid of facts but replete with conjecture, the media simply parrots the information and goes back to sleep. Indeed, regarding the draft reports the IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri openly stated that they are altered, stating: “we necessarily have to ensure that the underlying report conforms to the refinements.” [4] This means regardless of the validity (or not) of expert science, the authors are side-lined and what they have written is tweaked to give unanimous support to the political agenda, an agenda that has been crystallized within the IPCC for more than twenty years.

vendetta3IPCC as authoritarian climate science?

Scientists within the IPCC also have misgivings, such as Mike Hulme Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia. Commenting in a Climategate 2.0 email, he states: “I am increasingly unconvinced by the majority of climate impact studies – including some of those I am involved in – and feel we are not really giving the right message to our audiences.” [5]

There’s an understatement to beat them all.

One of the holy grails of climate change science is computer modelling which has been responsible for much of the perceived advances in recent years. As we saw with the Club of Rome, the nature of computer modelling is fraught with assumption yet fully embraced as if the world operated on perfectly plotted principles. Evolution of any system is defined by its creative unpredictability a mathematical complexity of non-linear and often chaotic events far from equilibrium. In climate modelling a virtual world is set up that seems to be insulated from the “flies-in-the ointment” that may appear in long-term predicative analysis. The opinions of modellers then become a new science divorced from the observational inquiry. As LaFramboise asserts, the climate modelling science of opinion: “… is a recipe for tunnel-vision. It is groupthink waiting to happen,” and yet another example of the “group mind” steamrolling the creative sparks of objective thought which are not only needed in science but are essential to its healthy functioning so that it remains free from a political and belief-driven consensus.

No rigorous evaluation of climate modelling by independent parties has taken place. (This is presumably due to the love affair our culture is undergoing in relation to technology in general). Instead, the IPCC asks the same modellers to evaluate their own work. This is hardly scientific. Lead author roles for modellers is not the way forward, as there is little chance of them coming to the conclusion that climate modelling may be barking up the wrong tree. Since no true cold-blooded analysis of these models has taken place there is no way to know if they are even useful.

LaFramboise has also discovered that sections in the attribution chapter of the IPCC CRs are also written by climate modellers, the most crucial part of the report which decides the direction of global warming and if it is a man-made or natural cycle. Christopher Monckton and Garth W. Paltridge discovered that is wasn’t just the unreliability of climate modelling that is cause for concern but a strange coded bureaucracy that goes with it. The authors point out:

The big danger is that, with the increasing model complexity and cost, the number of truly independent climate models around the world is decreasing. This is because great slabs of the computer code of a model are often exchanged between research groups so as to avoid writing the stuff from scratch. This sort of exchange satisfies a general bureaucratic tendency to abhor what seems to be a duplication of effort. The net result must surely be a natural decrease in the spread of total feedback over the various remaining models and a consequent joy at the apparent tightening of the range of forecast temperature rise – a tightening that may have nothing at all to do with an improvement in the representation of the physics. [6]

Climate modelling does not ensure the validity of human-influenced global warming claims but rather fits neatly into circumscribed beliefs waiting in the wings. That does not mean to say that global warming is not a reality in some form, but to leave it to climate modelling to define all the parameters by which we can make informed decisions is dangerous because the solutions will lean hugely towards the overarching agenda explored previously. After all, even a minor tweak in feedback representations covering temperature rises can drastically alter a given a picture which can stretch from 1 degree celsius to infinity and beyond. That means that only thing we can be sure of is the fact that the much trumpeted “consensus” on global warming remains a myth.

1074682__global-warming-wizard_p

Climate modelling also fails an important test when it comes to CO2 and temperature increase. In the 2007 IPCC report it even admits that the models do not seem to show the extra heat that should be there if we are to believe the theory. But they believe that the models are still correct and somehow the data out there in the real world is at fault. [7]

And here we come to a few important points relating to climate modelling and the temperature rise hysteria that the media and most academic establishments take for granted. Firstly, and very simply: Positive feedback = the reinforcement or magnification of disturbance. Secondly, Negative feedback = disturb the balance – a counteraction occurs. Thirdly, we have the greenhouse gas theory and the doubling of CO2 which might cause some warming of one degree celsius over a century. But there is the assumption that the climate responds to minute changes resulting in amplification of these changes by hundreds of percent. Positive feedback. But negative feedback is the dominant factor in almost every process in nature yet in climate science positive feedback is assumed to the culprit. Law professor Jason Johnston found in his study that: “climate catastrophe is not an “output of climate analysis but an input.” [8] In other words, the science is based on an assumption with no mention of the positive-negative feedback dichotomy anywhere in the reports.

LaFramboise points out the inevitable conclusion in that:

“… the only reason climate models tell us we are at risk of eco apocalypse is because the climate modellers believe our climate system behaves in a manner that is opposite to the way most natural systems behave. If the modellers had split themselves into two groups, half programming-in negative feedback and half programming-in positive feedback, the first group of models would predict nothing alarming.” [9]

Yet, when we add this to protective bureaucracy, conflict of interest in both journals, media and activist-scientists in educational institutions and further include those IPCC personnel who “systematically conceal or minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties,” in IPCC reports, it is a clarion call for major change. [10]

And major change is the selling point at UN conferences. But rather than practical and preventative solutions emerging from such meetings, there is a lot of talk and a lot of political posturing with non-elected representatives of civil society pushing a consensus that doesn’t exist, except for those with a political agenda. What does happen is the organisation and allocation of mountains of cash. The UN conferences in this respect are like a vast auction of clamouring NGOs and eco-activist groups seeking a top-up or first time injection for the cause, but it is the green of the dollar bill that informs the climate industry more than anything else.

As we have seen, the United Nations and the UNEP are green-dipped in the New Age tank so that the various beliefs stick like parasites to the decision-making process. Not to mention the corruption and sexual abuse scandals which have dogged the UN for years. When you have a vast bureaucracy and a constant stream of money flowing into and out of the body sitting on top a system which has virtually no accountability any issue – no matter how noble – is going to be contaminated by politics, power and greed. It is about as basic a human fable as it gets. Add ponerology to the mix and you have a UN with its charters and declarations which work on paper only.

Like the perpetual rubber-stamping of the IPCC and other agencies, it is a symbiotic relationship of collusion rather than transparency. If you are not the most morally responsible individual and the rules do not apply to you by virtue of your status and you know you can get away with all kinds of back-handers and bribes, the system actively encourages you to maintain that trajectory. This is so often the nexus point for international decisions that determine the fate of nations. If there is no accountability, why should it be any different for UN bureaucrats who juggle the money flow?

***

We have barely touched the surface regarding the problems within the IPCC. What should be clear by now is that it is not a scientific body but a political one fused with the beliefs of scientist-activists. This was illustrated by a Climategate 2.0 email from Professor Heinz Wanner of the University of Bern. On reporting his National Academy of Sciences panel critique of Michael Mann to the media: “I just refused to give an exclusive interview to SPIEGEL because I will not cause damage for climate science.” [11]

In the same way, politicians and environmental activists determine the form, content and outcome of IPCC reports that have been seen as the gospel truth for decades. Political discourse from more than 100 countries determines the direction as does the climate change industry. After all, it is worth potentially billions with a lot of academic posts, consultancies and companies riding on the AGW slipstream. Sounding the global warming bells in a variety of alarmist ways feeds into multiple agendas which have nothing to do with the truth. Consequently, to speak ill of AGW is to commit the outrageous sin of attacking the religious zeal of green militancy that has had a long and dark history.

wfarmsbirds

Birds flying into a wind turbines. Symbolic of IPCC climate science?

Is there any possibility that the IPCC can promote the same “radical shift” and “New value system” within its own ranks and which it insists society should adopt? Can it clean its own house to become the body of open-minded science that is so desperately needed?

Climate scientist Dr. Roy Spencer believes thinks the organisation can never be fixed for the simple reason:

“… that its formation over 20 years ago was to support political and energy policy goals, not to search for scientific truth. I know this not only because one of the first IPCC directors told me so, but also because it is the way the IPCC leadership behaves. If you disagree with their interpretation of climate change, you are left out of the IPCC process. They ignore or fight against any evidence which does not support their policy-driven mission, even to the point of pressuring scientific journals not to publish papers which might hurt the IPCC’s efforts.” [12]

The organisation has embraced the same constructs that every co-opted movement has done in the past, whilst avoiding the opportunity to lead by example and follow the principles it continually demands from society. [13] The inherent danger of science and political ecology is what historian Anna Bramwell calls “a value-saturated creed” which acts like an open door for the movement to become fully ponerised. [14] Science is infused not with objectivity and a quest for truth but with subjective desires peculiar to a historical mind-set of authoritarianism, regardless of the root values present at its inception. This is the story of ponerology.

Bertrand Russell, Julian Huxley and their legion of World State rulers in waiting would be very happy that now a form of scientific elite is redefining human values for us. The myth that governments respond to the will of the people has never been clearer. The real choices and thus the potential solutions have been denied to us all. True debate has been clouded by the same old vested interests doing what they do so well: corralling thought and awareness into their pre-arranged “order”. For those interests to succeed – truth is secondary. As the Under-Secretary to one time UN Chief Kurt Waldheim, Brian Urquhart declared: “The worst way to make an argument is by reason and good information. You must appeal to emotions and to their fears of being made to appear ridiculous.” [15] Irony aside, so it is with the IPCC and so many other connected bodies inhabited by the same men and women willing to stoop to the lowest common denominator.

The IPCC plays an extremely important role in the disseminating information on the science of climate change. If we cannot place our trust and faith in institutions who set themselves up to discover new solutions to some of the most pressing problems of our time then it means precious resources of creative energy is being wasted and re-directed into collective gutters of non-action and short-term gain. It becomes yet another example of pathological infection striking at the heart of what we consider to be our mentors, protectors and pioneers; expert minds dedicated to improving humanities lot. That means acknowledging the danger that ecology, environmental activism and any scientific discipline exposed to ponerological influences, must come under the same scrutiny.

If a deep love of Nature and the environment can historically sit side by side with the most virulent form of fascism then it behooves us all to guard against its all too easy re-appearance.

Pol Pot, the Cambodian dictator was responsible for the deaths of 21% of his country’s people.

He was also a former geography teacher.

 


Notes

[1] Email #4755 and email #1922 Jonathan Overpeck http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[2] Email #0170 Phil Jones http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[3] email #3066 Tim Carter. http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[4] ‘Food, Water Security threatened by Warming UN Panel says’ by Alex Morales,Bloomberg, February 16, 2011.
[5] email #0419 Mike Hulme. http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[6] p.28; The Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming by Garth W. Paltridge. Published by Taylor Trade Publishing, 2010. ISBN-10: 1589795482
[7] op. cit. LaFramboise (p.69)
[8] ‘Global Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination’ by Jason S. Johnston, Law University of Pennsylvania Law School | “Legal scholarship has come to accept as true the various pronouncements of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other scientists who have been active in the movement for greenhouse gas (ghg) emission reductions to combat global warming. The only criticism that legal scholars have had of the story told by this group of activist scientists – what may be called the climate establishment – is that it is too conservative in not paying enough attention to possible catastrophic harm from potentially very high temperature increases.”
“This paper departs from such faith in the climate establishment by comparing the picture of climate science presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other global warming scientist advocates with the peer-edited scientific literature on climate change. A review of the peer-edited literature reveals a systematic tendency of the climate establishment to engage in a variety of stylized rhetorical techniques that seem to oversell what is actually known about climate change while concealing fundamental uncertainties and open questions regarding many of the key processes involved in climate change. Fundamental open questions include not only the size but the direction of feedback effects that are responsible for the bulk of the temperature increase predicted to result from atmospheric greenhouse gas increases: while climate models all presume that such feedback effects are on balance strongly positive, more and more peer-edited scientific papers seem to suggest that feedback effects may be small or even negative. The cross-examination conducted in this paper reveals many additional areas where the peer-edited literature seems to conflict with the picture painted by establishment climate science, ranging from the magnitude of 20th century surface temperature increases and their relation to past temperatures; the possibility that inherent variability in the earth’s non-linear climate system, and not increases in CO2, may explain observed late 20th century warming; the ability of climate models to actually explain past temperatures; and, finally, substantial doubt about the methodological validity of models used to make highly publicized predictions of global warming impacts such as species loss.
Insofar as establishment climate science has glossed over and minimized such fundamental questions and uncertainties in climate science, it has created widespread misimpressions that have serious consequences for optimal policy design. Such misimpressions uniformly tend to support the case for rapid and costly decarbonization of the American economy, yet they characterize the work of even the most rigorous legal scholars. A more balanced and nuanced view of the existing state of climate science supports much more gradual and easily reversible policies regarding greenhouse gas emission reduction, and also urges a redirection in public funding of climate science away from the continued subsidization of refinements of computer models and toward increased spending on the development of standardized observational datasets against which existing climate models can be tested.”
[9] op.cit La Framboise (p.70)
[10] op. cit. Johnston.
[11] Email #1104 Heinz Wanner http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[12] ‘Climategate 2.0: Bias in Scientific Research’ November 23rd, 2011 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph.D.
[13] ‘Western Lifestyle unsustainable says climate expert Rajendra Pachauri’ The Guardian, June 20, 2011.
[14] The Fading of the Greens, by Anna Bramwell, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1994.(p.28)
[15] ‘The UN and Its Discontents’: An Exchange April 26, 1990 Shirley Hazzard, reply by Brian Urquhart The New Yorker March 15, 1990 issue.