Moving My Blog Off Of Google's Blogspot  

Posted by Ryan

    In an attempt to actually follow some of what I say, I will be moving my blog off this blogspot site. If you want to continue to follow this blog go to defythematrix.wordpress.com . People need to stop giving so much power to Google by seeing it as an all purpose internet tool. Google is not a verb even though we are use it as a term for conducting an internet search. If you are concerned about your IP address being tracked you can use StartPage. StartPage uses Google searches to enhance their results, but your IP address is protected by StartPage's policy to not share your IP address with any third party. Google's new privacy policies will integrating all your activities on all Google sites into one file. With all your information integrated Google will have volumes of personal information on each user. Read article below for details.

The real purpose of this is just to notify any followers of my website that you need to go to: defythematrix.wordpress.com
I hope to see you there and keep up the good fight against those who would seek to lock us all into a total information integrated society where privacy and freedom will be a fairy tale of history.
_______________________________________________________________________________

Google announces privacy changes across products; users can’t opt out




Google will soon know far more about who you are and what you do on the Web.
The Web giant announced Tuesday that it plans to follow the activities of users across nearly all of its ubiquitous sites, including YouTube, Gmail and its leading search engine.
Google has already been collecting some of this information. But for the first time, it is combining data across its Web sites to stitch together a fuller portrait of users.
Consumers won’t be able to opt out of the changes, which take effect March 1. And experts say the policy shift will invite greater scrutiny from federal regulators of the company’s privacy and competitive practices.
The move will help Google better tailor its ads to people’s tastes. If someone watches an NBA clip online and lives in Washington, the firm could advertise Washington Wizards tickets in that person’s Gmail account.
Consumers could also benefit, the company said. When someone is searching for the word “jaguar,” Google would have a better idea of whether the person was interested in the animal or the car. Or the firm might suggest e-mailing contacts in New York when it learns you are planning a trip there.
But consumer advocates say the new policy might upset people who never expected their information would be shared across so many different Web sites.
A user signing up for Gmail, for instance, might never have imagined that the content of his or her messages could affect the experience on seemingly unrelated Web sites such as YouTube.
“Google’s new privacy announcement is frustrating and a little frightening,” said Common Sense Media chief executive James Steyer. “Even if the company believes that tracking users across all platforms improves their services, consumers should still have the option to opt out — especially the kids and teens who are avid users of YouTube, Gmail and Google Search.”
Google can collect information about users when they activate an Android mobile phone, sign into their accounts online or enter search terms. It can also store cookies on people’s computers to see which Web sites they visit or use its popular maps program to estimate their location. However, users who have not logged on to Google or one of its other sites, such as YouTube, are not affected by the new policy.
The change to its privacy policies come as Google is facing stiff competition for the fickle attention of Web surfers. It recently disappointed investors for the first time in several quarters, failing last week to meet earnings predictions. Apple, in contrast, reported record earnings Tuesday that blew past even the most optimistic expectations.
Some analysts said Google’s move is aimed squarely at Apple and Facebook — which have been successful in building unified ecosystems of products that capture people’s attention. Google, in contrast, has adopted a more scattered approach, but an executive said in an interview that the company wants to create a much more seamless environment across its various offerings.
“If you’re signed in, we may combine information you’ve provided from one service with information from other services,” Alma Whitten, Google’s director of privacy for product and engineering, wrote in a blog post.
“In short, we’ll treat you as a single user across all our products, which will mean a simpler, more intuitive Google experience,” she said.
Google said it would notify its hundreds of millions of users of the change through an e-mail and a message on its Web sites. It will apply to all of its services except for Google Wallet, the Chrome browser and Google Books.
The company said the change would simplify the company’s privacy policy — a move that regulators encouraged.
Still, some consumer advocates and lawmakers remained skeptical.
“There is no way anyone expected this,” said Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a privacy advocacy group. “There is no way a user can comprehend the implication of Google collecting across platforms for information about your health, political opinions and financial concerns.”
Added Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass), co-chair of the Congressional Privacy Caucus: “It is imperative that users will be able to decide whether they want their information shared across the spectrum of Google’s offerings.”
Google has increasingly been a focus of Washington regulators.
The company recently settled a privacy complaint by the Federal Trade Commission after it allowed users of its now-defunct social-networking tool Google Buzz to see contacts lists from its e-mail program.
And a previous decision to use its social network data in search results has been included in a broad FTC investigation, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is private.
Federal officials are also looking at whether Google is running afoul of antitrust rules by using its dominance in online searches to favor its other business lines.
Claudia Farrell, a spokeswoman for the FTC, declined to comment on any interaction between Google and regulators on its new privacy changes.

The Words Of Charlie Chaplin Echo Throughout Time  

Posted by Ryan

Chaplin began filming only a week into WW2 being officially declared. His words are historic for those who seek to fight tyranny.

Charlie Chaplin's Greatest Speech



*note on video clip - As I agree that the world needs to unite against tyranny, we must never forget that freedom is only achieved through sovereign individuals.

The Road to Tehran Goes through Damascus  

Posted by Ryan

      People have been hyping up the confrontation with Iran coming closer and closer. The news has been heating up for a confrontation over the Straight of Hormuz. The problem is that all the previous indications have hinted that Syria would be targeted before the true build up to Iran. This letter indicates just that. The most realistic predictions at present time would seem to hint that Iran will not become a more open physical war until end of this year, at the earliest being a lead into the election. Even though a large number of soldiers have been coming home from Iraq and elsewhere, there has also been a build up of military into other areas of the Middle East. This shift of military personnel seem to be in preparation in finally pushing forward with a regime change in Syria. Once Syria is detached from Iran our cross-hairs can target Iran. For now any propaganda against Iran is merely a temporary distraction.

Obama’s Secret Letter to Tehran: Is the War against Iran On Hold?

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya | Saturday, January 21, 2012, 14:32 Beijing

“The Road to Tehran Goes through Damascus”

The New York Times announced that the Obama Administration had sent an important letter to the leadership of Iran on January 12, 2012. [1]
On January 15, 2012, the spokesperson of the Iranian Foreign Ministry acknowledged that the letter had been delivered to Tehran by way of three diplomatic channels:

(1) one copy of the letter was handed to the Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammed Khazaee, by his U.S. counterpart, Susan Rice, in New York City;
(2) a second copy of the letter was delivered in Tehran by the Swiss Ambassador to Iran, Livia Leu Agosti; and
(3) a third copy went to Iran by way of Jalal Talabani of Iraq. [2]

In the letter, the White House spelled out the position of the United States, while Iranian officials said it was a sign of things as they really are: the U.S. cannot afford to wage a war against Iran.

Within the letter written by President Barak Hussein Obama was a U.S. request for the start of negotiations between Washington and Tehran to end Iranian-U.S. hostilities. 
“In the letter, Obama announced readiness for negotiations and the resolution of mutual disagreements,” Ali Motahari, an Iranian parliamentarian, told the Mehr News Agency. [3] According to another Iranian parliamentarian, this time the Deputy Chairperson of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, Hussein Ebrahimi (Ibrahimi), the letter went on to ask for Iranian-U.S. cooperation and negotiations based on the mutual interests of both Tehran and Washington. [4]
Obama’s letter also tried to assure Tehran that the United States would not engage in any hostile action against Iran. [5] In fact, in the same timeframe, the Pentagon cancelled or delayed major joint drills with Israel. [6]
To the Iranians, however, the gestures are meaningless, because the Obama Administration’s actions with Iran have always contradicted its words. Moreover, Iran believes that the U.S. has not attacked, because it knows that the costs of a war with an opponent like Iran are too high and its consequences far too risky.
This, however, does not mean that an Iranian-U.S. showdown has been avoided or will not eventually happen. The currents can go either way, so to speak. Nor does this mean that the Obama Administration is not currently waging a war against the Iranians and their allies. In fact, Washington’s bloc and Iran’s bloc have been fighting a shadow war from the digital arena and television airwaves to the valleys of Afghanistan and the bustling streets of Beirut and Baghdad.
The War Against Iran Started Years Ago
The war in Iran did not start in 2012 or even 2011. Newsweek Magazine even stated the following on a cover title in 2010: “Assassinations, cyberattacks, sabotage – has the war against Tehran already begun?” The actual war may have started in 2006.
Instead of attacking Iran directly, the U.S. has started a covert and proxy war. The covert dimensions of the war are being fought by intelligence assets, cyber attacks, computer viruses, secretive military units, spies, assassins, agent provocateurs, and saboteurs. The kidnapping and assassination of Iranian scientists and military commanders, which started several years ago is a part of this covert war. In this shadow war, Iranian diplomats in Iraq have been abducted and Iranians visiting Georgia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey have been detained or kidnapped. Syrian officials, various Palestinian figures, and Hezbollah’s Imad Fayez Mughniyeh have also all been assassinated in this shadow war.
The proxy wars started in 2006 when Israel attacked Lebanon with the intention of expanding the war against Syria. The road to Damascus goes through Beirut, while Damascus is on the way to Tehran. After their failure in 2006, realizing that Syria was the lynchpin of the Resistance Bloc, which Iran dominated, the U.S. and its allies spent the next five to six years trying to de-link Syria from Iran.
The U.S. is also fighting Iran and its allies on the diplomatic and economic fronts through the manipulation of international bodies and proxy states. In the 2011 to 2012 context, the crisis in Syria on a geo-political level is a front in the war against Iran. Even the Israeli-U.S. drill Austere Challenge 2012 and the U.S. deployment of troops were primarily aimed at Syria as a means of combating Iran.

Syria in the Eye of the Storm
What Washington is doing is exerting psychological pressure on Iran as a means of distancing it from Syria, so that the United States and its cohorts can go for the kill. Up until the start of January 2012, the Israelis have continuously been preparing to launch an invasion of Syria in a rematch of 2006, while U.S. and E.U. officials have continously tried negotiating with Damascus for a deal to de-link from Iran and the Resistance Bloc. The Syrians, however, have always refused.
Foreign Policy, the magazine of the Council on Foreign Relations, published an article in August 2011 stating what was on the Saudi King’s mind about Syria in context of attacking Iran: “The King knows that other than the collapse of the Islamic Republic [of Iran] itself, nothing would weaken Iran more than losing Syria.” [7] Whether the above statement genuinely came from Abdul Aziz Al-Saud or not, this strategic outlook is representative of the reasons for the targeting of Syria. Obama’s own security advisor has also said the same thing, just a few months after the piece by Foreign Policy was released, in November 2011. National Security Advisor Donilon gave a speech saying that the “end of the Assad regime would constitute Iran’s greatest setback in the region – a strategic blow that will further shift the balance of power in the region against Iran.” [8]
The Kremlin has also made statements that corroborate that Washington wants to de-link Syria from its Iranian ally. One of Russia’s highest security officials has announced that Syria is being punished, because of its strategic alliance with Iran. The Secretary of the National Security Council of the Russian Federation, Nikolai (Nikolay) Platonovich Patrushev, has publicly stated that Syria is the subject of Washington’s pressure due to geo-political interests tied to cutting Syria’s ties with Iran and not due to any humanitarian concerns. [9]
Iran has also given signals that should the Syrians be attacked, it will not hesitate to intervene militarily to come to Syria’s aid. Washington does not want this. The Pentagon would much rather swallow Syria first, before turning its full and undivided attention to Iran. The Pentagon’s objectives are to fight its targets piecemeal. Despite the U.S. military doctrine of fighting simultaneous wars in multiple theatres and all the Pentagon literature about it, the U.S. is not ready yet to wage a conventional regional war against both Iran and Syria or risk an expanded war with Iran’s Russian and Chinese allies yet. The march to war, however, is far from over. For now the U.S. government will have to continue the shadow war against Iran and intensify the media, diplomatic, and economic war.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Sociologist and award-winning author. He is a Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal. He Specializes on the Middle East and Central Asia. He Has been a contributor and guest discussing the Broader Middle East on numerous international programs and networks such as Al Jazeera, Press TV and Russia Today. His writings have been published in more than ten languages​​. He also writes for the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF), Moscow.

NOTES
[1] Elisabeth Bumiller et al., “US sends top Iran leader warning on Hormuz threat,” The New York Times, January 12, 2012.
[2] Mehr News Agency, “
Details of Obamas letter to Iran released,” January 18, 2012.
[3] Ibid.
[4]
Ibid.
[5]
Ibid.
[6] Yakkov Katz, “Israel, US cancel missile defense drill,” Jerusalem Post, January 15, 2012.
[7] John Hannah, “
Responding to Syria: The Kings statement, the Presidents hesitation,” Foreign Policy, August 9, 2011.
[8] Natasha Mozgovaya, “Obama Aide: End of Assad regime will serve severe blow to Iran,” Haaretz, November 22, 2011.
[9] Ilya Arkhipov and Henry Meyer, “
Russia Says NATO, Persian Gulf Nations Plan to Seek No-Fly Zone for Syria,” Bloomberg, January 12, 2012.

Total Federalization of Police Under New Homeland Security Mission  

Posted by Ryan

      Ever since 9/11 the government has been expanding their domestic intelligence capacity. According to a recent report from the Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group (filled with the whose who of government, intelligence, and homeland security) Homeland Security wants to play a larger role in state and local counterparts. Possibly in effect federalizing all police departments. This would create a police force totally under the supervision of the federal government. This power grab would allow the federal government to ensure that laws are enforced the way that they want it to be done, totally cutting out the idea of state and local government interpretation of the law. The coupled with the recent NDAA bill would standardize all law enforcement in the vision of the federal government. This is a dangerous step towards the police states erected by the tyrannies of the 20th century.

The Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group - Hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence: “Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission”

Shock Docs: Total Federalization of Police Under New Homeland Security Mission

Mission Creep: DHS Agency Abandons Fighting Terrorism, Shifts to Hiring Police, Taking Over America
Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 24, 2012
A new white paper presented to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence carves out an ‘evolving mission’ for Homeland Security that moves away from fighting terrorism and towards growing a vast domestic intelligence apparatus that would expand integration with local/state agencies and private-public partnerships already underway via regional fusion centers.
Crafted by the Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group, co-chaired by former DHS chief Michael Chertoff and composed of a who’s who of national security figures, the report outlines a total mission creep, as the title “Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission” implies.
Significantly, it puts on paper and into the Congressional record a proposed transition from outwardly dealing with the threats posed by terrorism towards intelligence gathering “focused on more specific homeward-focused areas.” That is, the homegrown, domestic threats we’ve heard so much about from Big Sis already.
In short, it confirms the intentions of key insiders– including former NSA/CIA head Michael Hayden, former Rep. Jane Harmon, former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, 9/11 Commissioners Philip Zelikow and Richard Ben-Viniste, former National Security Advisor Samuel Berger and others– to flesh out a plan we have already seen developing from an outside perspective– namely, to build a domestic Stasi-like force to takeover, monitor and control the population.
Moreover, the media has reported on this changed mission– towards the full spectrum domination of the people under a patently-fascist framework– with the same calm as the weekly weather forecast.
LOCALIZED INTELLIGENCE: HIRING POLICE & BOWING TO PRIVATE INTERESTS
Achieving this new aim includes co-opting local law enforcement and other regional agencies.
“As the threat grows more localized,” the report reads, “the federal government’s need to train, and even staff, local agencies, such as major city police departments, will grow.
That’s right, the feds want to oversee the hiring of your local police.
Fusion Centers, now spread across the nation, have already infected police agencies and local governments with a federalization takeover mentality. A Dec. 2010 Aspen Homeland Security Group report, quoting the Superintendent of the New Orleans Police Department, recommends that “every mayor and governor of a major city in the country should have to attend a DHS-sponsored emergency management course where various scenarios – like hurricanes, levy breaks, and explosions – are exercised.”
But directing local police departments, mayors and governors is only the beginning. Indeed, the Aspen group envisions the ‘foundation for a separate DHS intelligence mission’ by building upon ‘decentralized’ partnerships with the private sector as well.
Homeland Security Should Re-Orient Its Mission, Aspen Panel Says

The bloated umbrella agency aims to lean on its ties with the hospitality (hotel), security and transportation industries, among others, as well. Already, Homeland Security conducts background checks on many security guards working with ‘critical infrastructure,’ and clearly, it aims to expand the use of quasi-government groups like InfraGard and other private snitch networks. Ultimately, all employment would be subject to federal background checks and security clearances.
Private interests should even shape Homeland Security priorities, according to the report: “different private sectors in the United States, from the hospitality industry to transportation, should drive requirements for DHS.”
Read more

The Internet Stole My Brain  

Posted by Ryan

      Humans are the most adaptable species in all the world. If you want to change an adaptable species just change their environment. As soon as the internet was taken from a military application(automatically their is a large chance of it being a weapon or at very least they understood the changes that would happen to the people that use it) it began to change the environment of those who used it and therefore beginning the process of adaptation. The result is the functions that were once done on our own. As the article states this has to do with memory functions. I am sure if you think about it the internet has replaced other functions as well, social networking, shopping, and job searching to name a few. We must always be wary of new tools that are introduced to us, they will always have repercussions (cell phones - do people remember phone numbers anymore?). If we aren't careful there will come a point where we will be so dependent on tools outside our own faculties we will be as infants if we are cut off from certain technology or tools. Our Internet provider and computer holds our lives in their hands.

Are our brains being boggled by Google? Study says humans now use the internet as our main 'memory' - instead of our heads

  • People remember where to look up information - not the info itself
  • People actively forget information if they think they can look it up later
  • Tests on how people remembered items they would normally Google
By Rob Waugh

Last updated at 6:08 PM on 24th January 2012

The Internet is becoming our main source of memory instead of our own brains, a study has concluded.
In the age of Google, our minds are adapting so that we are experts at knowing where to find information even though we don’t recall what it is.
The researchers found that when we want to know something we use the Internet as an ‘external memory’ just as computers use an external hard drive.
Nowadays we are so reliant on our smart phones and laptops that we go into ‘withdrawal when we can’t find out something immediately’.
And such is our dependence that having our Internet connection severed is growing ‘more and more like losing a friend’.
Researchers from Harvard University, the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Columbia University in the U.S. carried out four tests to check their theory.
They involved giving test participants a trivia quiz and then seeing whether they recognised computer-related words more quickly than other words.
The other tests involved seeing if people remembered 40 pieces information they would typically later have normally looked up.
The third and fourth parts of the study involved checking how well people remember where to look up information on-line and whether or not they remembered the location more than the actual data.
The results showed that when people don’t believe they will need information for a later test, they do not recall it at the same rate as when they do believe they will need it.
In fact, some of those in the study ‘actively did not make the effort to remember when they thought they could later look up the trivia statements they had read’, the paper says.
The other results showed that when continuous Internet access is expected, people are better at remembering where they can find it than the details.
The study was lead by Betsy Sparrow, an assistant professor at the department of psychology at Columbia University.
In their paper, the researchers say that we now have access to the Internet 24 hours a day meaning we are 'seldom offline unless by choice' and it is 'hard to remember how we found information before the Internet became a ubiquitous presence in our lives'.
The paper reads: ‘The advent of the Internet, with sophisticated algorithmic search engines, has made accessing information as easy as lifting a finger. 
‘No longer do we have to make costly efforts to find the things we want. We can ‘Google’ the old classmate, find articles online, or look up the actor who was on the tip of our tongue. 
‘When faced with difficult questions, people are primed to think about computers and that when people expect to have future access to information, they have lower rates of recall of the information itself and enhanced recall instead for where to access it. 
‘The Internet has become a primary form of external or transactive memory, where information is stored collectively outside ourselves.’
The study is not the first to touch on such anxieties and similar fears were addressed in ‘The Shallows: How the Internet is rewiring our brains’, a book released last year.
Its author, American technologist Nicholas Carr, talks of how we are unable to concentrate for long periods because of how using the web has affected us.
In research he commissioned for the book, test subjects said they were unable to read copies of Tolstoy’s ‘War and Peace’ because their minds had been altered.
Others were disturbed at how they could only think in ‘staccato’ bursts because they had become little more than ‘decoders of information'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2091127/Google-boggling-brains-Study-says-humans-use-internet-main-memory.html#ixzz1kPFmQ6b8

From The Ashes Of SOPA And PIPA Comes OPEN  

Posted by Ryan

       I never posted much of anything on PIPA or SOPA due to the fact that so many other sources were actually talking about it. I usually try to stick to the unseen news. As we are celebrating the victory against these bills to take over the internet the next attack is coming. It is typical government practice to have a secondary bill to try to pass as the people withdraw to celebrate their assumed victory. The newest attempt is the bill called Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN). The ironic thing is that this may have been the plan all along because the newest bill seeks to give the controls of the internet to an international bureaucracy instead of to the Dept. of Justice. Stay alert and don't let them pass this bill unchallenged. Also, if you don't see Wikipedia or Google stand up against this new bill you better be asking yourself why (If you study their practices, Google only wants to control the internet themselves).

SOPA and PIPA Fully Alive -- And a New Bill Joins Them

This is what remains of Megaupload.com
Heather Callaghan
Activist Post 
Monday, January 23, 2012

Many of us breathed a sigh of relief when an overwhelming amount of Americans banned together and voiced their opposition to Congress over both the Stop Online Piracy Act, and Protect Intellectual Property Act.

Sites that dimmed the screen for a day or two have gone back to normal -- Facebook users have swapped their anti-SOPA images for their previous profile pictures.

We may have even believed that the postponement of the vote originally scheduled for January 24th was some sort of white flag of capitulation. But that is certainly not the MO of most lawmakers.

While the outcry did get the attention of Congress, they are simply returning unflinchingly back to the drawing board to wait out our attention spans. Articles whirled that SOPA was dead and the bill was pulled when the bill's sponsor Lamar Smith said in a statement that there would be no further action “until there is wider agreement on a solution.”

Lamar isn't really listening. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.”

Actually, SOPA is set to be reformulated in February. PIPA will be revisited with possible amendments in the coming weeks. Case in point, all is still open and possible -- nothing is dead, pulled, or cancelled. If that wasn't enough to keep us on our toes, a new, similar bill has surfaced.

Déjà Vu in the form of OPEN -- The New Anti-Piracy Bill

As an alternative to SOPA-PIPA, Representative Darrell Issa (CA-R), and 24 co-sponsors introduced the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) H.R. 3782 on Wednesday, during the Internet blackout.

From PCWorld:

OPEN would give oversight to the International Trade Commission (ITC) instead of the Justice Department, focuses on foreign-based websites, includes an appeals process, and would apply only to websites that "willfully" promote copyright violation.
The bill pretends to only target foreign websites, while keeping Americans free to surf and post, but the bill's wording is wide open to pursue American sites. Just one example: when describing an infringing site, it starts with those "that are accessed through a non-domestic domain name," but continues in section (8)(A)(ii) for any site that "conducts business directed to residents of the United States."

It sounds like, "in general," copyright holders will be the ones filing complaints to the Commission, but the writing leaves it open for any complainant to file. The ITC would still have the ability to coerce payment processors and ad networks to cease funding and linking the accused in question. Who could determine "willful" infringement?

Also, none of these bills had been decided before the U.S. Government took down New Zealand owned Megaupload.com during the commotion. To which, Anonymous responded by shutting down the websites of the U.S. Department of Justice, Universal Music, Recording Industry Association of America, the U.S. Copyright Office, Broadcast Music Inc. and the Motion Picture Association of America.

"The [DOJ's] action 'demonstrates why we don’t need SOPA in the first place,' points out PCWorld’s Tony Bradley." The government was enforcing a previous anti-piracy law called PRO-IP signed by Bush in 2008.

OPEN is gaining support from groups like Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Consumer Electronics Association and more.

While it seems admirable that the bill is transparent and open for public comment, most laws of this nature are broad and allow for bigger, no-common sense crackdowns later. Plus, there might only be a couple concessions and the pacifying effects of "being heard."

One commenter of the bill aptly noted:
'Reasonable belief' and 'credible evidence' are too vague and have the appearance of inviting highly subjective interpretation with the option for the commission and/or the provider to exercise sweeping powers with impunity.
Whenever any group is appeased after a battle, it cannot be emphasized enough -- the lawmakers' modus operandi will be: aim high, brace for the outcry, make a couple alterations and sneak the bill back in when no one's looking. Keep it going and going. Call it by a different name. Haggle. It appears there is compromise and reasoning now, but once the bill passes into law, reason goes out the window, and we are the only ones compromised.

Theft is a reality -- although not one that has seriously damaged the growing entertainment industry, or caused massive death and devastation. If Hollywood, pitching the biggest fit, were actually going down, why should we go down with it?

It is more unfortunate that Americans must be so tirelessly vigilant to protect their online activities from the same lawmakers who are tanking the country in so many other truly devastating ways.

The dismantling of Internet freedom will not stop here. Let's borrow an MO and not let up.

To SOPA -- Say NOPA!

To PIPA -- Pipe down!

To OPEN -- Shut it!

Additional Sources:

http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/sopa-and-pipa-postponed-but-not-cancelled/
http://mashable.com/2012/01/20/pipa-postponed/
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/nternet-spoke-and-finally-congress-listened
http://www.webpronews.com/lamar-smith-to-delay-sopa-until-wider-agreement-on-solution-2012-01

RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLES:

Must Read: RNC Speaks The Truth About The Dangers Of Agenda 21  

Posted by Ryan

    As we watch the Republicans of the national stage battle for the presidential nomination the more localized Republicans have forced the Republican National Committee to pass a resolution standing up against UN Agenda 21 and the ICLEI which pushes Agenda 21 at the local government level. The resolution calls Agenda 21, "...a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control...". This is not a party issue, but it is very important that the Republican party finally stood up for their foundation principle of small government and see the threat to our freedoms and sovereignty by going along with United Nations and Agenda 21. 

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21

Republican Assemblies
January 24, 2012
It has been reported that the Republican National Committee passed a resolution exposing Agenda 21 for what it is: a disregard for American freedom, private property rights, and a key player in the Leftist move toward a one world government. Agenda 21 (ICLEI) assaults the very foundation of America. The RNC has not yet made an official statement or released the resolution. We call on the RNC to release this immediately, and we salute the individuals who signed this document.
Text of the RNC Resolution:
RNC Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and
WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment; and,
WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth; and,
WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice; now therefore be
RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan; and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that the U.S. government and no state or local government is legally bound by the United Nations Agenda 21 treaty in that it has never been endorsed by the (U.S.) Senate, and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that the federal and state and local governments across the country be well informed of the underlying harmful implications of implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development” and we hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it, and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of the Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, all Republican candidates for President who qualify for RNC sanctioned debates, and to each Republican state and territorial party office.
Chief Sponsor:
Helen Van Etten
Republican National Committeewoman for Kansas
Co-Sponsors:Carolyn McLarty
Republican National Committeewoman for Oklahoma
Kim Lehman
Republican National Committeewoman for Iowa
Paul Reynolds
Republican National Committeeman for Alabama
Demetra DeMonte
Republican national Committeewoman for Illinois
Solomon Yue
Republican National Committeewoman for Oregon
Donna Cain
Republican National Committeewoman for Oregon
Cindy Costa
Republican National Committeewoman for South Carolina
John Sigler
Republican State Chairman for Delaware
Steve Scheffler
Republican National Committeeman for Iowa
Peggy Lambert
Republican National Committeewoman for Tennessee
Jim Bopp
Republican National Committeeman for Indiana
Bruce Ash
Republican National Committeeman for Arizona
DeMarus Carlson
Republican National Committeewoman for Nebraska
The NFRA has long led the charge to restore conservative values and principles to the RNC, and we believe this is a sign that our message  is being heard. The NFRA Board passed a slate of resolutions at the NFRA Presidential Preference Convention in October, including the following on Agenda 21:
NFRA RESOLUTION OPPOSING UNITED NATIONS’ COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING
WHEREAS, the National Federation of Republican Assemblies recognizes that the pillars of freedom and liberty are life, liberty and property. As such, we seek to identify those candidates that understand and support these same noble characteristics of our great nation and that it is the combination of these truths that makes America “exceptional”; and
WHEREAS, some little known facts about comprehensive land use planning, known as Agenda 21 include, but are not limited to, the following:
  • The UN’s Agenda 21 was revealed to the world at the Rio Earth Summit II in 1992;
  • Agenda 21 was signed into soft law in 1992 and requires only administrative approval and not legislative approval;
  • The UN’s Agenda 21 was granted administrative approval when President Clinton, through Executive Order, created the first President’s Council on Sustainable Development;
  • The President’s Council on Sustainable Development created the domestic plan known as “Sustainable America”;
  • Official non-Government Organizations known as NGOs are certified through the UN based on their compliance and willingness to institute UN created policies like Agenda 21 and the “Wildlands Project”. Examples of NGOs include, but are not limited to: the Sierra Club, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Planning Association, and ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability; formally known as the “International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.”;
  • GATT, NAFTA and other trade agreements also contain components that are derivatives from the economic components of Agenda 21;
  • Income redistribution as a form of “economic justice” is a tool to be used by Agenda 21;
  • Agenda 21 is anti-property rights;
  • The terms “Sustainable Development”, “Smart Growth”, “Comprehensive Land Use Plan”, and “Sustainable Agriculture” are domestic equivalents of Agenda 21; and
  • The Global Biodiversity Assessment Report identifies private property ownership, single family homes, traditional agriculture, and consumerism as “unsustainable.”; therefore be it
RESOLVED, that we, the National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA), oppose the nondomestic policies of Agenda 21 based on failure to recognize private property rights as one of America’s cornerstones of freedom and liberty; be it further
RESOLVED, that Article one, Section ten of the Constitution prohibits any State or subordinate governmental body from contracting with nondomestic entities such as ICLEI; and be it
RESOLVEDthat the NFRA shall not endorse a candidate or elected official including the office of President that refuses to oppose the same.

It Is Nineteen Eighty Four In East Orange, New Jersey  

Posted by Ryan

   Here is Big Brother coming to New Jersey. You thought 1984 was only a book? Now there will be no doubt they are always watching with these cameras, and this is to point out possible criminals. Innocent people will be labeled by being bathed in a red warning light if there is a reason to believe someone might commit a crime. 1984 and Minority Report is becoming reality! 

Red Spotlights to Mark ‘Precrime’ Suspects

East Orange, New Jersey to beam suspects of future criminal activity with flashy, hi-tech police surveillance equipment
Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 23, 2012
In a glowing review of the rising prevalence of high-tech big brother surveillance gadgets in police force use, the Associated Press reports that East Orange, New Jersey plans to cut crime by highlighting suspects with a red-beamed spotlight– before any crime is committed– a “pre-crime” deterrent to be mounted on nearby street lights or other fixtures.

Alternative Video Link.
According to the report, police officers monitor hundreds of video feeds from across the city and opt to brand would-be criminals with a red glow if they believe they are about to engage in a crime, such as a street corner mugging.
“Whereas London has talking cameras, we’re about to deploy light projecting cameras, better known as light-based intervention systems.” said William Robinson, Police Chief for East Orange. He added, “The message to criminals is, we’re observing you, the police are recording you, and the police are responding.”
As Robinson mentioned, other “pre-crime” measures have been deployed both in the UK and United States, as well as other countries. Talking cameras in the UK bark orders at ‘anti-social’ offenders, while the Homeland Stasi here has partnered with Intellistreets to release “smart” street lights capable of saving energy while monitoring & recording citizens, as well as displaying government-mandated emergency alerts on digital banners.
Now “pre-crime” spotlights that bathe surveillance targets in a criminally-branded red color will help complete the circle of preemptive suspicion.
But that’s just one flashy feature in a rash of new high-tech solutions provided to the crime-ridden city under federal grant money. In East Orange, and probably a locale near you, too, everyone is a “pre-crime” suspect until proven innocent.
The video goes on to brag that officer squad cars also scan the license plates of every single vehicle they pass, checking them against a variety of lists– from terrorist monitor lists, to unpaid parking tickets, warrants and more. Officers can then pull over vehicles that match watch lists, even if the driver has committed no violations to draw attention from the patrol vehicle.
Further, cameras tied into police video monitor stations can also be accessed from squad cars; officers can zoom in on nearby locations to determine if a situation is underway, or if a suspect can be identified. The red light is intended to help track a would-be criminal once surveillance is already underway.
A spokesperson for the ACLU noted a worrisome climate of monitoring and spying on political groups, anti-abortion activists and more. Meanwhile, the MIAC Missouri law enforcement memo, as well as similar documents released from the Department of Homeland Security, have made clear that returning veterans and supporters of third party political candidates and many other groups are note only considered “domestic extremists,” but have been put on law enforcement watch lists as well as anti-terrorism databases. It has further been revealed that numerous non-violent political groups and grassroots campaigns have been labeled as “terrorists” and monitored by regional Fusion Centers.

The Mind Has No Firewall  

Posted by Ryan

        In this modern era knowledge of the brain's processes is very important. Today's weapon technology has the ability to not only debilitate you physically but directly interfere with the brain's perception of the world around you. Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas any more. For most people it would not be hard to imagine the such techniques being used against a foreign threat, but with the nature of Government being that which is only natural to itself, the unseen threat is these type of techniques being used against our own people. Government (however it usually is power hungry) does not always need to be in a state of greed for more power, but because it is merely a mutual agreement by the citizenry to follow an idea, government does have a need to justify and ensure its own existence by most (if not all) means necessary. With how bad the current state of the whole world's affairs have you ever wondered why more people don't react and get upset (at least without being prompted by someone else). Could there be more to the apathy of these times? The technology is there, so we must be ever vigilant before we are forever enslaved to sciences we ourselves don't wholly understand.

The Mind Has No Firewall

TIMOTHY L. THOMAS



From Parameters, Spring 1998, pp. 84-92.

"It is completely clear that the state which is first to create such weapons will achieve incomparable superiority." -- Major I. Chernishev, Russian army[1]


The human body, much like a computer, contains myriad data processors. They include, but are not limited to, the chemical-electrical activity of the brain, heart, and peripheral nervous system, the signals sent from the cortex region of the brain to other parts of our body, the tiny hair cells in the inner ear that process auditory signals, and the light-sensitive retina and cornea of the eye that process visual activity.[2] We are on the threshold of an era in which these data processors of the human body may be manipulated or debilitated. Examples of unplanned attacks on the body's data-processing capability are well-documented. Strobe lights have been known to cause epileptic seizures. Not long ago in Japan, children watching television cartoons were subjected to pulsating lights that caused seizures in some and made others very sick.
Defending friendly and targeting adversary data-processing capabilities of the body appears to be an area of weakness in the US approach to information warfare theory, a theory oriented heavily toward systems data-processing and designed to attain information dominance on the battlefield. Or so it would appear from information in the open, unclassified press. This US shortcoming may be a serious one, since the capabilities to alter the data- processing systems of the body already exist. A recent edition of U.S. News and World Report highlighted several of these "wonder weapons" (acoustics, microwaves, lasers) and noted that scientists are "searching the electromagnetic and sonic spectrums for wavelengths that can affect human behavior."[3] A recent Russian military article offered a slightly different slant to the problem, declaring that "humanity stands on the brink of a psychotronic war" with the mind and body as the focus. That article discussed Russian and international attempts to control the psycho-physical condition of man and his decisionmaking processes by the use of VHF-generators, "noiseless cassettes," and other technologies.
An entirely new arsenal of weapons, based on devices designed to introduce subliminal messages or to alter the body's psychological and data-processing capabilities, might be used to incapacitate individuals. These weapons aim to control or alter the psyche, or to attack the various sensory and data-processing systems of the human organism. In both cases, the goal is to confuse or destroy the signals that normally keep the body in equilibrium.
This article examines energy-based weapons, psychotronic weapons, and other developments designed to alter the ability of the human body to process stimuli. One consequence of this assessment is that the way we commonly use the term "information warfare" falls short when the individual soldier, not his equipment, becomes the target of attack.
Information Warfare Theory and the Data-Processing Element of Humans
In the United States the common conception of information warfare focuses primarily on the capabilities of hardware systems such as computers, satellites, and military equipment which process data in its various forms. According to Department of Defense Directive S-3600.1 of 9 December 1996, information warfare is defined as "an information operation conducted during time of crisis or conflict to achieve or promote specific objectives over a specific adversary or adversaries." An information operation is defined in the same directive as "actions taken to affect adversary information and information systems while defending one's own information and information systems." These "information systems" lie at the heart of the modernization effort of the US armed forces and other countries, and manifest themselves as hardware, software, communications capabilities, and highly trained individuals. Recently, the US Army conducted a mock battle that tested these systems under simulated combat conditions.
US Army Field Manual 101-5-1, Operational Terms and Graphics (released 30 September 1997), defines information warfare as "actions taken to achieve information superiority by affecting a hostile's information, information based-processes, and information systems, while defending one's own information, information processes, and information systems." The same manual defines information operations as a "continuous military operation within the military information environment that enables, enhances, and protects friendly forces' ability to collect, process, and act on information to achieve an advantage across the full range of military operations. [Information operations include] interacting with the Global Information Environment . . . and exploiting or denying an adversary's information and decision capabilities."[4]
This "systems" approach to the study of information warfare emphasizes the use of data, referred to as information, to penetrate an adversary's physical defenses that protect data (information) in order to obtain operational or strategic advantage. It has tended to ignore the role of the human body as an information- or data-processor in this quest for dominance except in those cases where an individual's logic or rational thought may be upset via disinformation or deception. As a consequence little attention is directed toward protecting the mind and body with a firewall as we have done with hardware systems. Nor have any techniques for doing so been prescribed. Yet the body is capable not only of being deceived, manipulated, or misinformed but also shut down or destroyed--just as any other data-processing system. The "data" the body receives from external sources--such as electromagnetic, vortex, or acoustic energy waves--or creates through its own electrical or chemical stimuli can be manipulated or changed just as the data (information) in any hardware system can be altered.
The only body-related information warfare element considered by the United States is psychological operations (PSYOP). In Joint Publication 3-13.1, for example, PSYOP is listed as one of the elements of command and control warfare. The publication notes that "the ultimate target of [information warfare] is the information dependent process, whether human or automated . . . . Command and control warfare (C2W) is an application of information warfare in military operations. . . . C2W is the integrated use of PSYOP, military deception, operations security, electronic warfare and physical destruction."[5]
One source defines information as a "nonaccidental signal used as an input to a computer or communications system."[6] The human body is a complex communication system constantly receiving nonaccidental and accidental signal inputs, both external and internal. If the ultimate target of information warfare is the information-dependent process, "whether human or automated," then the definition in the joint publication implies that human data-processing of internal and external signals can clearly be considered an aspect of information warfare. Foreign researchers have noted the link between humans as data processors and the conduct of information warfare. While some study only the PSYOP link, others go beyond it. As an example of the former, one recent Russian article described offensive information warfare as designed to "use the Internet channels for the purpose of organizing PSYOP as well as for `early political warning' of threats to American interests."[7] The author's assertion was based on the fact that "all mass media are used for PSYOP . . . [and] today this must include the Internet." The author asserted that the Pentagon wanted to use the Internet to "reinforce psychological influences" during special operations conducted outside of US borders to enlist sympathizers, who would accomplish many of the tasks previously entrusted to special units of the US armed forces.
Others, however, look beyond simple PSYOP ties to consider other aspects of the body's data-processing capability. One of the principal open source researchers on the relationship of information warfare to the body's data-processing capability is Russian Dr. Victor Solntsev of the Baumann Technical Institute in Moscow. Solntsev is a young, well-intentioned researcher striving to point out to the world the potential dangers of the computer operator interface. Supported by a network of institutes and academies, Solntsev has produced some interesting concepts.[8] He insists that man must be viewed as an open system instead of simply as an organism or closed system. As an open system, man communicates with his environment through information flows and communications media. One's physical environment, whether through electromagnetic, gravitational, acoustic, or other effects, can cause a change in the psycho-physiological condition of an organism, in Solntsev's opinion. Change of this sort could directly affect the mental state and consciousness of a computer operator. This would not be electronic war or information warfare in the traditional sense, but rather in a nontraditional and non-US sense. It might encompass, for example, a computer modified to become a weapon by using its energy output to emit acoustics that debilitate the operator. It also might encompass, as indicated below, futuristic weapons aimed against man's "open system."
Solntsev also examined the problem of "information noise," which creates a dense shield between a person and external reality. This noise may manifest itself in the form of signals, messages, images, or other items of information. The main target of this noise would be the consciousness of a person or a group of people. Behavior modification could be one objective of information noise; another could be to upset an individual's mental capacity to such an extent as to prevent reaction to any stimulus. Solntsev concludes that all levels of a person's psyche (subconscious, conscious, and "superconscious") are potential targets for destabilization.
According to Solntsev, one computer virus capable of affecting a person's psyche is Russian Virus 666. It manifests itself in every 25th frame of a visual display, where it produces a combination of colors that allegedly put computer operators into a trance. The subconscious perception of the new pattern eventually results in arrhythmia of the heart. Other Russian computer specialists, not just Solntsev, talk openly about this "25th frame effect" and its ability to subtly manage a computer user's perceptions. The purpose of this technique is to inject a thought into the viewer's subconscious. It may remind some of the subliminal advertising controversy in the United States in the late 1950s.
US Views on "Wonder Weapons": Altering the Data-Processing Ability of the Body
What technologies have been examined by the United States that possess the potential to disrupt the data-processing capabilities of the human organism? The 7 July 1997 issue of U.S. News and World Report described several of them designed, among other things, to vibrate the insides of humans, stun or nauseate them, put them to sleep, heat them up, or knock them down with a shock wave.[9] The technologies include dazzling lasers that can force the pupils to close; acoustic or sonic frequencies that cause the hair cells in the inner ear to vibrate and cause motion sickness, vertigo, and nausea, or frequencies that resonate the internal organs causing pain and spasms; and shock waves with the potential to knock down humans or airplanes and which can be mixed with pepper spray or chemicals.[10]
With modification, these technological applications can have many uses. Acoustic weapons, for example, could be adapted for use as acoustic rifles or as acoustic fields that, once established, might protect facilities, assist in hostage rescues, control riots, or clear paths for convoys. These waves, which can penetrate buildings, offer a host of opportunities for military and law enforcement officials. Microwave weapons, by stimulating the peripheral nervous system, can heat up the body, induce epileptic-like seizures, or cause cardiac arrest. Low-frequency radiation affects the electrical activity of the brain and can cause flu-like symptoms and nausea. Other projects sought to induce or prevent sleep, or to affect the signal from the motor cortex portion of the brain, overriding voluntary muscle movements. The latter are referred to as pulse wave weapons, and the Russian government has reportedly bought over 100,000 copies of the "Black Widow" version of them.[11]
However, this view of "wonder weapons" was contested by someone who should understand them. Brigadier General Larry Dodgen, Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Policy and Missions, wrote a letter to the editor about the "numerous inaccuracies" in the U.S. News and World Report article that "misrepresent the Department of Defense's views."[12] Dodgen's primary complaint seemed to have been that the magazine misrepresented the use of these technologies and their value to the armed forces. He also underscored the US intent to work within the scope of any international treaty concerning their application, as well as plans to abandon (or at least redesign) any weapon for which countermeasures are known. One is left with the feeling, however, that research in this area is intense. A concern not mentioned by Dodgen is that other countries or non-state actors may not be bound by the same constraints. It is hard to imagine someone with a greater desire than terrorists to get their hands on these technologies. "Psycho-terrorism" could be the next buzzword.
Russian Views on "Psychotronic War"
The term "psycho-terrorism" was coined by Russian writer N. Anisimov of the Moscow Anti-Psychotronic Center. According to Anisimov, psychotronic weapons are those that act to "take away a part of the information which is stored in a man's brain. It is sent to a computer, which reworks it to the level needed for those who need to control the man, and the modified information is then reinserted into the brain." These weapons are used against the mind to induce hallucinations, sickness, mutations in human cells, "zombification," or even death. Included in the arsenal are VHF generators, X-rays, ultrasound, and radio waves. Russian army Major I. Chernishev, writing in the military journal Orienteer in February 1997, asserted that "psy" weapons are under development all over the globe. Specific types of weapons noted by Chernishev (not all of which have prototypes) were:
  • A psychotronic generator, which produces a powerful electromagnetic emanation capable of being sent through telephone lines, TV, radio networks, supply pipes, and incandescent lamps.
  • An autonomous generator, a device that operates in the 10-150 Hertz band, which at the 10-20 Hertz band forms an infrasonic oscillation that is destructive to all living creatures.
  • A nervous system generator, designed to paralyze the central nervous systems of insects, which could have the same applicability to humans.
  • Ultrasound emanations, which one institute claims to have developed. Devices using ultrasound emanations are supposedly capable of carrying out bloodless internal operations without leaving a mark on the skin. They can also, according to Chernishev, be used to kill.
  • Noiseless cassettes. Chernishev claims that the Japanese have developed the ability to place infra-low frequency voice patterns over music, patterns that are detected by the subconscious. Russians claim to be using similar "bombardments" with computer programming to treat alcoholism or smoking.
  • The 25th-frame effect, alluded to above, a technique wherein each 25th frame of a movie reel or film footage contains a message that is picked up by the subconscious. This technique, if it works, could possibly be used to curb smoking and alcoholism, but it has wider, more sinister applications if used on a TV audience or a computer operator.
  • Psychotropics, defined as medical preparations used to induce a trance, euphoria, or depression. Referred to as "slow-acting mines," they could be slipped into the food of a politician or into the water supply of an entire city. Symptoms include headaches, noises, voices or commands in the brain, dizziness, pain in the abdominal cavities, cardiac arrhythmia, or even the destruction of the cardiovascular system.
There is confirmation from US researchers that this type of study is going on. Dr. Janet Morris, coauthor of The Warrior's Edge, reportedly went to the Moscow Institute of Psychocorrelations in 1991. There she was shown a technique pioneered by the Russian Department of Psycho-Correction at Moscow Medical Academy in which researchers electronically analyze the human mind in order to influence it. They input subliminal command messages, using key words transmitted in "white noise" or music. Using an infra-sound, very low frequency transmission, the acoustic psycho-correction message is transmitted via bone conduction.[13]
In summary, Chernishev noted that some of the militarily significant aspects of the "psy" weaponry deserve closer research, including the following nontraditional methods for disrupting the psyche of an individual:
  • ESP research: determining the properties and condition of objects without ever making contact with them and "reading" peoples' thoughts
  • Clairvoyance research: observing objects that are located just beyond the world of the visible--used for intelligence purposes
  • Telepathy research: transmitting thoughts over a distance--used for covert operations
  • Telekinesis research: actions involving the manipulation of physical objects using thought power, causing them to move or break apart--used against command and control systems, or to disrupt the functioning of weapons of mass destruction
  • Psychokinesis research: interfering with the thoughts of individuals, on either the strategic or tactical level
While many US scientists undoubtedly question this research, it receives strong support in Moscow. The point to underscore is that individuals in Russia (and other countries as well) believe these means can be used to attack or steal from the data-processing unit of the human body.
Solntsev's research, mentioned above, differs slightly from that of Chernishev. For example, Solntsev is more interested in hardware capabilities, specifically the study of the information-energy source associated with the computer-operator interface. He stresses that if these energy sources can be captured and integrated into the modern computer, the result will be a network worth more than "a simple sum of its components." Other researchers are studying high-frequency generators (those designed to stun the psyche with high frequency waves such as electromagnetic, acoustic, and gravitational); the manipulation or reconstruction of someone's thinking through planned measures such as reflexive control processes; the use of psychotronics, parapsychology, bioenergy, bio fields, and psychoenergy;[14] and unspecified "special operations" or anti-ESP training.
The last item is of particular interest. According to a Russian TV broadcast, the strategic rocket forces have begun anti-ESP training to ensure that no outside force can take over command and control functions of the force. That is, they are trying to construct a firewall around the heads of the operators.
Conclusions
At the end of July 1997, planners for Joint Warrior Interoperability Demonstration '97 "focused on technologies that enhance real-time collaborative planning in a multinational task force of the type used in Bosnia and in Operation Desert Storm. The JWID '97 network, called the Coalition Wide-Area Network (CWAN), is the first military network that allows allied nations to participate as full and equal partners."[15] The demonstration in effect was a trade fair for private companies to demonstrate their goods; defense ministries got to decide where and how to spend their money wiser, in many cases without incurring the cost of prototypes. It is a good example of doing business better with less. Technologies demonstrated included:[16]
  • Soldiers using laptop computers to drag cross-hairs over maps to call in airstrikes
  • Soldiers carrying beepers and mobile phones rather than guns
  • Generals tracking movements of every unit, counting the precise number of shells fired around the globe, and inspecting real-time damage inflicted on an enemy, all with multicolored graphics[17]
Every account of this exercise emphasized the ability of systems to process data and provide information feedback via the power invested in their microprocessors. The ability to affect or defend the data-processing capability of the human operators of these systems was never mentioned during the exercise; it has received only slight attention during countless exercises over the past several years. The time has come to ask why we appear to be ignoring the operators of our systems. Clearly the information operator, exposed before a vast array of potentially immobilizing weapons, is the weak spot in any nation's military assets. There are few international agreements protecting the individual soldier, and these rely on the good will of the combatants. Some nations, and terrorists of every stripe, don't care about such agreements.
This article has used the term data-processing to demonstrate its importance to ascertaining what so-called information warfare and information operations are all about. Data-processing is the action this nation and others need to protect. Information is nothing more than the output of this activity. As a result, the emphasis on information-related warfare terminology ("information dominance," "information carousel") that has proliferated for a decade does not seem to fit the situation before us. In some cases the battle to affect or protect data-processing elements pits one mechanical system against another. In other cases, mechanical systems may be confronted by the human organism, or vice versa, since humans can usually shut down any mechanical system with the flip of a switch. In reality, the game is about protecting or affecting signals, waves, and impulses that can influence the data-processing elements of systems, computers, or people. We are potentially the biggest victims of information warfare, because we have neglected to protect ourselves.
Our obsession with a "system of systems," "information dominance," and other such terminology is most likely a leading cause of our neglect of the human factor in our theories of information warfare. It is time to change our terminology and our conceptual paradigm. Our terminology is confusing us and sending us in directions that deal primarily with the hardware, software, and communications components of the data-processing spectrum. We need to spend more time researching how to protect the humans in our data management structures. Nothing in those structures can be sustained if our operators have been debilitated by potential adversaries or terrorists who--right now--may be designing the means to disrupt the human component of our carefully constructed notion of a system of systems.


NOTES
1. I. Chernishev, "Can Rulers Make `Zombies' and Control the World?" Orienteer, February 1997, pp. 58-62.
2. Douglas Pasternak, "Wonder Weapons," U.S. News and World Report, 7 July 1997, pp. 38-46.
3. Ibid., p. 38.
4. FM 101-5-1, Operational Terms and Graphics, 30 September 1997, p. 1-82.
5. Joint Pub 3-13.1, Joint Doctrine for Command and Control Warfare (C2W), 7 February 1996, p. v.
6. The American Heritage Dictionary (2d College Ed.; Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982), p. 660, definition 4.
7. Denis Snezhnyy, "Cybernetic Battlefield & National Security," Nezavisimoye Voyennoye Obozreniye, No. 10, 15-21 March 1997, p. 2.
8. Victor I. Solntsev, "Information War and Some Aspects of a Computer Operator's Defense," talk given at an Infowar Conference in Washington, D.C., September 1996, sponsored by the National Computer Security Association. Information in this section is based on notes from Dr. Solntsev's talk.
9. Pasternak, p. 40.
10. Ibid., pp. 40-46.
11. Ibid.
12. Larry Dodgen, "Nonlethal Weapons," U.S. News and World Report, 4 August 1997, p. 5.
13. "Background on the Aviary," Nexus Magazine, downloaded from the Internet on 13 July 1997 from www.execpc.com/vjentpr/nexusavi.html, p.7.
14. Aleksandr Cherkasov, "The Front Where Shots Aren't Fired," Orienteer, May 1995, p. 45. This article was based on information in the foreign and Russian press, according to the author, making it impossible to pinpoint what his source was for this reference.
15. Bob Brewin, "DOD looks for IT `golden nuggets,'" Federal Computer Week, 28 July 1997, p. 31, as taken from the Earlybird Supplement, 4 August 1997, p. B 17.
16. Oliver August, "Zap! Hard day at the office for NATO's laptop warriors," The Times, 28 July 1997, as taken from the Earlybird Supplement, 4 August 1997, p. B 16.
17. Ibid.

Monsanto Is Killing Fertility  

Posted by Ryan

        Here is another example of the big corporations knowingly destroying the fertility of the population. Do they only care about their bottom line? When they spend so much money to develop their products is this a campaign with purpose and intent?

Monsanto’s Best-Selling Herbicide Roundup Linked to Infertility

pesticideplanefly 210x131 Monsantos Best Selling Herbicide Roundup Linked to InfertilityAndre Evans
NaturalSociety
January 21, 2012
A recent study has found that Monsanto’s Roundup pesticide may be responsible for causing infertility. After reviewing the many already well-documented negative impacts Roundup has on the environment and living creatures, it is no surprise to add yet another item to the list.
Researchers tested roundup on mature male rats at a concentration range between 1 and 10,000 parts per million (ppm), and found that within 1 to 48 hours of exposure, testicular cells of the mature rats were either damaged or killedAccording to the study, even at a concentration of 1 ppm, the Roundup was able to affect the test subjects by decreasing their testosterone concentrations by as much as 35%.

How can such small levels of exposure have such a profound effect on the reproductive system? Roundup, being a glyphosate-based herbicide is also known to have endocrine disrupting properties.

Monsanto’s Best-Selling Herbicide Roundup Linked to Infertility

Much like BPA, glyphosate-based herbicides have the ability to interfere with the natural hormonal balance in the human body, thereby introducing a number of health risks along with even the smallest levels of exposure. These chemicals are strong enough to affect your metabolism, behavior and mood, reproductive organs, and even provoke cancer.
As a result, any plants that are sprayed with roundup carry with them a chemical effect similar to that of other endocrine disruptors, offsetting the hormonal balance and causing adverse effects, despite even the smallest levels of exposure. This in part contributes to the number of males with increased fertility issues in more recent times.
It is no surprise that Monsanto, a company already infamous for a whole slew of dangerous concoctions, would also be responsible for affecting another major aspect of human health on a large scale.
Ultimately it is highly important to avoid any products sprayed with pesticides or herbicides for the many associated health risks – now fertility included. In addition to avoiding food which has been tarnished by this pesticide, you may also want to consider investing in a water filter. The carcinogenic chemical Roundup contains known as glyphosate has been found to be contaminating the groundwater in areas it is being applied in.
Being aware of the hormonal disruptors you face in your daily life such as BPA and now Roundup is a must. Even the smallest levels of exposure can have the large negative effects.
Explore More:
  1. Monsanto’s Carcinogenic Roundup Herbicide Contaminating Water Supply
  2. World’s Top Commercial Weed Killer Linked to Infertility: Scientist
  3. USDA: Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Damages Soil
  4. Exposure to this Chemical is Linked to Birth Defects
  5. Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Crops Leading to Mental Illness, Obesity
  6. Monsanto’s Roundup Spawns Superweeds Consuming Over 120 Million Hectares