Brandon Tuberville
Activist Post
Over the past few months, I have written several articles dealing with the coming cashless society and the developing technological control grid. I also have written about the surge of government attempts to gain access to and force the use of biometric data for the purposes of identification, tracking, tracing, and surveillance.
Unfortunately, the reactions I receive from the general public are almost always the same. While some recognize the danger, most simply deny that governments have the capability or even the desire to create a system in which the population is constantly monitored by virtue of their most private and even biological information. Others, either gripped by apathy or ignorance, cannot believe that the gadgets given to them from the massive tech corporations are designed for anything other than their entertainment and enjoyment.
However, current events in India should serve not just as a warning, but also as a foreshadowing of the events to come in the Western world, specifically the United States.
Recently, India has launched a nationwide program involving the allocation of a Unique Identification Number (UID) to every single one of its 1.2 billion residents. Each of the numbers will be tied to the biometric data of the recipient using three different forms of information – fingerprints, iris scans, and pictures of the face. All ten digits of the hand will be recorded, and both eyes will be scanned.
The project will be directed by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) under the premise of preventing identity theft and social welfare fraud. India has rather extensive social welfare and safety net programs, ranging from medical support and heating assistance to others aimed at helping the poor. Fraud is a rampant problem in India, especially in relation to these programs due to a preponderance of corrupt politicians and bureaucrats who often stuff welfare rolls with fake names and take the money for themselves.
Yet, although the justification for the billion person database is the increased ability to accurately disperse social welfare benefits, it will not be just the Indian government’s social welfare programs that have access to and utilize the UIDAI. Indeed, even before the program has been completed, major banks, state/local governments, and other institutions are planning to use the UIDAI for identification verification purposes and, of course, payment and accessibility.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Howard Stein reports: US Government warns Scientists re: Biological Warfare Weapon in Swine Flu
According to a CBS World Report, Scientists have been told to clam up!
“The virologist who created a potentially dangerous, mutant strain of the deadly bird flu virus has agreed to omit methodology details from his published reports on the new strain. The decision came after the U.S. government warned Tuesday that published details of the experiment could be used to create a biological warfare weapon. Please see the story and video reports here : Dutch Scientist Agrees to Omit Published Details of Highly Contagious Bird Flu Findings
December 2011 Authorities in Hong Kong raised the bird flu alert level to “serious” as they tried to trace the origin of an infected chicken, resulting in major disruptions to poultry supplies over the busy Christmas period. In people it can cause fever, coughing, a sore throat, pneumonia, respiratory disease and, in about 60 percent of cases, death. Scientists fear H5N1 will mutate into a form readily transmissible between humans, with the potential to cause millions of deaths.
Click here for this story “http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-man-critical-bird-flu-185801061.html
Man dies from bird flu in southern China
“A 39-year-old then tested positive for the H5N1 virus, the department said, adding he had apparently had no direct contact with poultry in the month before he was taken ill, nor had he left the city. The H5N1 virus is fatal in humans in about 60 percent of cases.”
http://news.yahoo.com/man-dies-bird-flu-southern-china-102644001.html
“The report is quite disturbing”, said Howard Stein, news commentator for The Truth Denied Talk Radio Show. He said that from what he could find in reports over the past couple of weeks was that “the virus was purposely mutated 5 times, and is now capable of jumping species from Bird to Human.” He went on to say that “Scientists are working on a cure now,which really doesn’t make any sense at all!”
Scientists also confirmed that “”We know which mutation to watch for in the case of an outbreak, and we can then stop the outbreak before it is too late,” Fouchier said in a statement Tuesday on the medical center’s website. “Furthermore, the finding will help in the timely development of vaccinations and medication.”
Click here to read the rest of the article.
“The virologist who created a potentially dangerous, mutant strain of the deadly bird flu virus has agreed to omit methodology details from his published reports on the new strain. The decision came after the U.S. government warned Tuesday that published details of the experiment could be used to create a biological warfare weapon. Please see the story and video reports here : Dutch Scientist Agrees to Omit Published Details of Highly Contagious Bird Flu Findings
December 2011 Authorities in Hong Kong raised the bird flu alert level to “serious” as they tried to trace the origin of an infected chicken, resulting in major disruptions to poultry supplies over the busy Christmas period. In people it can cause fever, coughing, a sore throat, pneumonia, respiratory disease and, in about 60 percent of cases, death. Scientists fear H5N1 will mutate into a form readily transmissible between humans, with the potential to cause millions of deaths.
Click here for this story “http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-man-critical-bird-flu-185801061.html
Man dies from bird flu in southern China
“A 39-year-old then tested positive for the H5N1 virus, the department said, adding he had apparently had no direct contact with poultry in the month before he was taken ill, nor had he left the city. The H5N1 virus is fatal in humans in about 60 percent of cases.”
http://news.yahoo.com/man-dies-bird-flu-southern-china-102644001.html
“The report is quite disturbing”, said Howard Stein, news commentator for The Truth Denied Talk Radio Show. He said that from what he could find in reports over the past couple of weeks was that “the virus was purposely mutated 5 times, and is now capable of jumping species from Bird to Human.” He went on to say that “Scientists are working on a cure now,which really doesn’t make any sense at all!”
Scientists also confirmed that “”We know which mutation to watch for in the case of an outbreak, and we can then stop the outbreak before it is too late,” Fouchier said in a statement Tuesday on the medical center’s website. “Furthermore, the finding will help in the timely development of vaccinations and medication.”
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Scientists: UN Soldiers Brought Deadly Superbug to Americas
Compelling new scientific evidence suggests United Nations peacekeepers have carried a virulent strain of cholera -- a super bug -- into the Western Hemisphere for the first time.
The vicious form of cholera has already killed 7,000 people in Haiti, where it surfaced in a remote village in October 2010. Leading researchers from Harvard Medical School and elsewhere told ABC News that, despite UN denials, there is now a mountain of evidence suggesting the strain originated in Nepal, and was carried to Haiti by Nepalese soldiers who came to Haiti to serve as UN peacekeepers after the earthquake that ravaged the country on Jan. 12, 2010 -- two years ago today. Haiti had never seen a case of cholera until the arrival of the peacekeepers, who allegedly failed to maintain sanitary conditions at their base.
"What scares me is that the strain from South Asia has been recognized as more virulent, more capable of causing severe disease, and more transmissible," said John Mekalanos, who chairs the Department of Microbiology and Immunobiology at Harvard Medical School. "These strains are nasty. So far there has been no secondary outbreak. But Haiti now represents a foothold for a particularly dangerous variety of this deadly disease."
More than 500,000 Haitians have been infected, and Mekalanos said a handful of victims who contracted cholera in Haiti have now turned up in Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, and in Boston, Miami and New York, but only in isolated cases.
How cholera landed in Haiti has been a politically charged topic for more than a year now, with the United Nations repeatedly refusing to acknowledge any role in the outbreak despite mounting evidence that international peacekeepers were the most likely culprits. The UN has already faced hostility from Haitians who believe peacekeeping troops have abused local residents without consequence. They now face legal action from relatives of victims who have petitioned the UN for restitution. And the cholera charge could further hamper the UN's ability to work effectively there, two years after the country was hobbled by the earthquake.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
The vicious form of cholera has already killed 7,000 people in Haiti, where it surfaced in a remote village in October 2010. Leading researchers from Harvard Medical School and elsewhere told ABC News that, despite UN denials, there is now a mountain of evidence suggesting the strain originated in Nepal, and was carried to Haiti by Nepalese soldiers who came to Haiti to serve as UN peacekeepers after the earthquake that ravaged the country on Jan. 12, 2010 -- two years ago today. Haiti had never seen a case of cholera until the arrival of the peacekeepers, who allegedly failed to maintain sanitary conditions at their base.
"What scares me is that the strain from South Asia has been recognized as more virulent, more capable of causing severe disease, and more transmissible," said John Mekalanos, who chairs the Department of Microbiology and Immunobiology at Harvard Medical School. "These strains are nasty. So far there has been no secondary outbreak. But Haiti now represents a foothold for a particularly dangerous variety of this deadly disease."
More than 500,000 Haitians have been infected, and Mekalanos said a handful of victims who contracted cholera in Haiti have now turned up in Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, and in Boston, Miami and New York, but only in isolated cases.
How cholera landed in Haiti has been a politically charged topic for more than a year now, with the United Nations repeatedly refusing to acknowledge any role in the outbreak despite mounting evidence that international peacekeepers were the most likely culprits. The UN has already faced hostility from Haitians who believe peacekeeping troops have abused local residents without consequence. They now face legal action from relatives of victims who have petitioned the UN for restitution. And the cholera charge could further hamper the UN's ability to work effectively there, two years after the country was hobbled by the earthquake.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Spying on Americans rising rapidly as warrantless use of undercover police, drones increases
There was a time when ordinary citizens still had an expectation of the right to privacy, even in public, but as technology has improved over the past generation, so has the government's ability to get around the Constitution and the rule of law when it comes to keeping the common folk under surveillance.
We're talking about more than just traffic light and city surveillance cameras. We're talking about the use of undercover police to infiltrate otherwise peaceful groups, and employing drones to spy on citizens without proper legal authority to do so.
"There is no question that this could become something that people will regret," said former U.S. Rep. Jane Harmon, D-Calif., on the use of federally owned drones by state and local police agencies. Harmon, a onetime chairperson of the House Intelligence Committee's subcommittee on homeland security, said when federal agencies like Customs and Border Protection were first authorized by Congress to unarm Predator drones, use by local agencies was never discussed.
"Any time you have a tool like that in the hands of law enforcement that makes it easier to do surveillance, they will do more of it," added Ryan Calo, director for privacy and robotics at the Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society.
In recent Occupy L.A. protests, local undercover cops infiltrated the group on the grounds that they might be stockpiling human waste and crude weapons. Though cops wound up arresting more than 40 people on various charges including drug use, and discovered buckets of feces, water bottles filled with urine and pieces of bamboo with sharpened tips stashed in bushes and trees after breaking the protest up Nov. 30, it was the manner in which they made those arrests that troubled civil libertarians.
Police, who admittedly have a tough job, are still supposed to operate within the confines of the Constitution, and no one reported seeing any search warrants before, during or after the protests.
"It should make everybody at least uncomfortable," Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, told Reuters. "That's the fundamental difference between America's free democratic system and the kind of system one would expect to find in Iran."
As for the increasing use of drones, advocates have no trouble when they are used to, say, protect U.S. borders from unauthorized incursion by people who are sneaking into the country illegally and could be terrorists or criminals. But they are less understanding when drones are used, if for no other reason than the temptation to employ them without first considering the constitutional implications.
"This could be a time when people are uncomfortable, and they want to place limits on that technology," says Calo, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. "It could make us question the doctrine that you do not have privacy in public."
Not everyone agrees that the use of this technology is a bad thing - especially those in positions of power - and that ought to be disconcerting, to say the least.
"I am for the use of drones," Howard Safir, former head of operations for the U.S. Marshals Service and former New York City police commissioner, told the Times.
Source - NaturalNews.com
Related article - US Civilians Are Now Helping Decide Who To Kill With Military Drones
We're talking about more than just traffic light and city surveillance cameras. We're talking about the use of undercover police to infiltrate otherwise peaceful groups, and employing drones to spy on citizens without proper legal authority to do so.
"There is no question that this could become something that people will regret," said former U.S. Rep. Jane Harmon, D-Calif., on the use of federally owned drones by state and local police agencies. Harmon, a onetime chairperson of the House Intelligence Committee's subcommittee on homeland security, said when federal agencies like Customs and Border Protection were first authorized by Congress to unarm Predator drones, use by local agencies was never discussed.
"Any time you have a tool like that in the hands of law enforcement that makes it easier to do surveillance, they will do more of it," added Ryan Calo, director for privacy and robotics at the Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society.
In recent Occupy L.A. protests, local undercover cops infiltrated the group on the grounds that they might be stockpiling human waste and crude weapons. Though cops wound up arresting more than 40 people on various charges including drug use, and discovered buckets of feces, water bottles filled with urine and pieces of bamboo with sharpened tips stashed in bushes and trees after breaking the protest up Nov. 30, it was the manner in which they made those arrests that troubled civil libertarians.
Police, who admittedly have a tough job, are still supposed to operate within the confines of the Constitution, and no one reported seeing any search warrants before, during or after the protests.
"It should make everybody at least uncomfortable," Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, told Reuters. "That's the fundamental difference between America's free democratic system and the kind of system one would expect to find in Iran."
As for the increasing use of drones, advocates have no trouble when they are used to, say, protect U.S. borders from unauthorized incursion by people who are sneaking into the country illegally and could be terrorists or criminals. But they are less understanding when drones are used, if for no other reason than the temptation to employ them without first considering the constitutional implications.
"This could be a time when people are uncomfortable, and they want to place limits on that technology," says Calo, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. "It could make us question the doctrine that you do not have privacy in public."
Not everyone agrees that the use of this technology is a bad thing - especially those in positions of power - and that ought to be disconcerting, to say the least.
"I am for the use of drones," Howard Safir, former head of operations for the U.S. Marshals Service and former New York City police commissioner, told the Times.
Source - NaturalNews.com
Related article - US Civilians Are Now Helping Decide Who To Kill With Military Drones
Obama says he doesn't even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans
It's called "Washingtonspeak," and it's different than the rest of the English language. President Obama used some of it last week when he agreed to sign the National Defense Authorization Act that allows, among other things, the military to detain American citizens indefinitely, to conduct secret kidnappings of suspected terror suspects (even if they are Americans living on American soil), and murder of same if said suspect is deemed a threat to national security. All without a trial. All without any deference to any other constitutional protection.
Very mindful of what the NDAA truly authorizes, Obama, in signing the legislation, said this: "The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable. Against that record of success, some in Congress continue to insist upon restricting the options available to our counterterrorism professionals and interfering with the very operations that have kept us safe."
"My Administration has consistently opposed such measures. Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded."
The president went onto say that the provisions in question - specifically Sect. 1021, which he said merely "affirms the executive branch's authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force." He describes the provision as "unnecessary."
President Obama stated: "Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force. Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States."
In other words, the president is using Washingtonspeak to say he already had the authority to do what the NDAA law merely "codifies." So the danger that many Americans, lawmakers and advocacy groups are concerned about is why this president claimed the authority to kill an American citizen in Yemen earlier this year who had not actually carried out any terrorist attacks against the U.S., but was only suspected of wrongdoing.
Is that how it works in America today? No more checks and balances? Or, are there checks and balances so long as the president interprets and implements in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends?
"If President Obama were committed to Constitution and international legal norms, he would veto this bill. Instead, he seems more concerned about consolidating the power of the Executive Branch at the cost of our legal and human rights," says the National Lawyers Guild. We agree. This is a terrible law, no matter how Obama and Co. try to spin it.
Source - NaturalNews.com
Related articles - THE INAUGURATION OF POLICE STATE USA 2012. Obama Signs the “National Defense Authorization Act"
Obama’s Signing Statement on NDAA: I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t
Very mindful of what the NDAA truly authorizes, Obama, in signing the legislation, said this: "The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable. Against that record of success, some in Congress continue to insist upon restricting the options available to our counterterrorism professionals and interfering with the very operations that have kept us safe."
"My Administration has consistently opposed such measures. Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded."
The president went onto say that the provisions in question - specifically Sect. 1021, which he said merely "affirms the executive branch's authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force." He describes the provision as "unnecessary."
President Obama stated: "Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force. Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States."
In other words, the president is using Washingtonspeak to say he already had the authority to do what the NDAA law merely "codifies." So the danger that many Americans, lawmakers and advocacy groups are concerned about is why this president claimed the authority to kill an American citizen in Yemen earlier this year who had not actually carried out any terrorist attacks against the U.S., but was only suspected of wrongdoing.
Is that how it works in America today? No more checks and balances? Or, are there checks and balances so long as the president interprets and implements in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends?
"If President Obama were committed to Constitution and international legal norms, he would veto this bill. Instead, he seems more concerned about consolidating the power of the Executive Branch at the cost of our legal and human rights," says the National Lawyers Guild. We agree. This is a terrible law, no matter how Obama and Co. try to spin it.
Source - NaturalNews.com
Related articles - THE INAUGURATION OF POLICE STATE USA 2012. Obama Signs the “National Defense Authorization Act"
Obama’s Signing Statement on NDAA: I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t
Proposed DNA bank could ensnare NY graffiti artists
Fortune-tellers beware: palm-reading could land you in New York state's criminal DNA database.
Convicted graffiti artists, subway turnstile-jumpers and anybody who writes a bad check could also end up with their genetic information permanently on file under a proposal by Governor Andrew Cuomo.
The Democrat on Wednesday proposed expanding the database, which was created in 1996 and collects DNA samples from people convicted of felonies and some serious misdemeanors. Cuomo wants it to include anyone convicted of a crime under the state's Penal Law.
If the measure passes, New York would have the most expansive DNA database in the country.
For years, supporters have said a larger DNA bank would help lock up criminals and exonerate innocent people.
"DNA is the state of the art, and it's a sword that cuts both ways," said Sen. Stephen Saland, a Republican who last year sponsored a bill to expand the database.
According to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, the database holds more than 445,000 DNA samples and has aided in more than 13,000 investigations.
Misdemeanors excluded from the database include "numerous crimes that are often precursors to violent offenses," Cuomo said Wednesday in his annual State of the State Address. Under current law, 46 percent of convicts are required to submit their DNA.
Critics including civil rights groups and state legislators say policymakers have been blinded by "the CSI effect," as it is called by Robert Perry, legislative director for the New York Civil Liberties Union.
He said people falsely believe DNA technology is infallible, due in part to its depiction in movies and television shows such as the popular CBS series "CSI," short for crime scene investigator.
"To have your sample included in the database means you're under surveillance 24/7," Perry said. "If your DNA ends up matching DNA at a crime scene, you now become subject to criminal suspicion, but there are plenty of innocent reasons for folks' DNA to turn up at a crime scene."
DNA evidence is given great weight by police investigators and prosecutors, Perry said, meaning they may often overlook traditional police work that points to a different suspect.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Convicted graffiti artists, subway turnstile-jumpers and anybody who writes a bad check could also end up with their genetic information permanently on file under a proposal by Governor Andrew Cuomo.
The Democrat on Wednesday proposed expanding the database, which was created in 1996 and collects DNA samples from people convicted of felonies and some serious misdemeanors. Cuomo wants it to include anyone convicted of a crime under the state's Penal Law.
If the measure passes, New York would have the most expansive DNA database in the country.
For years, supporters have said a larger DNA bank would help lock up criminals and exonerate innocent people.
"DNA is the state of the art, and it's a sword that cuts both ways," said Sen. Stephen Saland, a Republican who last year sponsored a bill to expand the database.
According to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, the database holds more than 445,000 DNA samples and has aided in more than 13,000 investigations.
Misdemeanors excluded from the database include "numerous crimes that are often precursors to violent offenses," Cuomo said Wednesday in his annual State of the State Address. Under current law, 46 percent of convicts are required to submit their DNA.
Critics including civil rights groups and state legislators say policymakers have been blinded by "the CSI effect," as it is called by Robert Perry, legislative director for the New York Civil Liberties Union.
He said people falsely believe DNA technology is infallible, due in part to its depiction in movies and television shows such as the popular CBS series "CSI," short for crime scene investigator.
"To have your sample included in the database means you're under surveillance 24/7," Perry said. "If your DNA ends up matching DNA at a crime scene, you now become subject to criminal suspicion, but there are plenty of innocent reasons for folks' DNA to turn up at a crime scene."
DNA evidence is given great weight by police investigators and prosecutors, Perry said, meaning they may often overlook traditional police work that points to a different suspect.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
DHS Officers Armed With Semiautomatics Set Up Unannounced ID Checkpoint
Residents of Leesburg, Florida were shocked to see their local Social Security office turned into a random Homeland Security checkpoint Tuesday morning, as DHS officers armed with semiautomatic rifles and accompanied by sniffer dogs checked identifications of locals.
“With their blue and white SUVs circled around the Main Street office, at least one official was posted on the door with a semiautomatic rifle, randomly checking identifications. And other officers, some with K-9s, sifted through the building,” reports the Daily Commercial.
The activity was part of Operation Shield, an unannounced drill conducted by the DHS’ Federal Protective Service centered around “detecting the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”
Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed FPS officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon.
“Part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, FPS is the federal law enforcement agency that provides integrated security and law enforcement services to over 9,000 federally-owned and leased buildings, facilities, properties and other assets,” states the report.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Former SS Boss Proposes Global Email Fusion Center
Ronald Noble – the former head of the Secret Service, the BATF, and secretary general of Interpol – wants to create a fusion center with the ability to track and trace your email.
Noble says that although there is no known threat posed against the Olympics planned for 2012 in London, the state needs a fusion center to make sure.
“A smart terrorist would know that if the world’s attention is focused on something and they commit a terrorist act it will help them create the kind of fear that would make people want to leave London,” Noble told The Independent before visiting Scotland Yard to discuss arrangements for the Games.
“My concern is that the people planning that attack – that nuclear attack, that bio-terrorist attack, that attack that should concern us all as a world – would be able to plan it more effectively because we don’t have a network in place for tracing the source of email messages on the internet,” he said.
Noble’s proposed email fusion center will provide a place where “police around the world can go quickly and find out the source of any kind of message or communication that’s come across the internet.”
In order to calm the fears of civil libertarians, Noble emphasized that the fusion center “will only target specific, suspicious emails” and will not have the capability to “track all the messages from billions of innocent people.”
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Noble says that although there is no known threat posed against the Olympics planned for 2012 in London, the state needs a fusion center to make sure.
“A smart terrorist would know that if the world’s attention is focused on something and they commit a terrorist act it will help them create the kind of fear that would make people want to leave London,” Noble told The Independent before visiting Scotland Yard to discuss arrangements for the Games.
“My concern is that the people planning that attack – that nuclear attack, that bio-terrorist attack, that attack that should concern us all as a world – would be able to plan it more effectively because we don’t have a network in place for tracing the source of email messages on the internet,” he said.
Noble’s proposed email fusion center will provide a place where “police around the world can go quickly and find out the source of any kind of message or communication that’s come across the internet.”
In order to calm the fears of civil libertarians, Noble emphasized that the fusion center “will only target specific, suspicious emails” and will not have the capability to “track all the messages from billions of innocent people.”
Click here to read the rest of the article.
Federal Grants Pay to Militarize Local Cops
Since Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of communities across the nation have taken advantage of more than $34 billion in central government grants to
equip police and sheriffs’ departments with assault rifles and exotic weaponry.
In 2011 alone, approximately $2 billion in grants were awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), along with $500 million more allocated to existing programs.
The accounting for this expense was recently compiled by the Center for Investigative Reporting and detailed in a report, “America’s War Within: Homeland security and the first 10 years of the war on terror.” After reviewing records from 41 states and interviewing over two dozen police officials and terrorism experts, researcher G.W. Schulz concludes that police departments “have transformed into small army-like forces.”
Federal grants are just one avenue police are using to get weaponry like armored vehicles, grenade launchers and M-16 assault rifles, suited to use on a battlefield. In fiscal year 2011, the Department of Defense gave away a record total of more than $500 million worth of military surplus to law enforcement through its little-known (to the public) “1033 program.”
“Passed by Congress in 1997, the 1033 program was created to provide law-enforcement agencies with tools to fight drugs and terrorism,” writes Benjamin Carlson in a recent article for The Daily. “Since then, more than 17,000 agencies have taken in $2.6 billion worth of equipment. . . paying only the cost of delivery.”
That trend is showing no signs of slowing, according to Carlson.
So why is the government supplying cops with these dangerous toys? The much-touted threat of terrorism is no justification. The National Safety Council notes: “You are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist.”
A crime wave can’t be blamed either. Since the early 1990s, the incidence of violent crime has steadily been on the decline, as more and more law-abiding citizens arm themselves. Violent crime peaked in 1991 at 758.2 per 100,000 people. In 2010, there was nearly half that number—403.6 per 100,000. The same can be said for officers killed in the line of fire. The number of deaths peaked in 1980, at 104 per 100,000, compared to a low of 50 per 100,000 in 2010.
The real reason these lavish gifts are being provided is that it makes police chiefs and sheriffs more accountable to the federal government than to their own states and local communities. Those agencies may soon be called upon to integrate with federal troops—who may soon be allowed to patrol U.S. streets, pursuant to the passage of the so-called National Defense Authorization Act.
There is also a growing effort by the drone or unmanned aerial vehicle industry to market its products to local law enforcement. In their 2011 annual report, General Atomics (GA), the nation’s leading manufacturer of Predator drones, made it clear their future growth depends upon pursuing new applications that will help create opportunities “beyond the military market.” Meanwhile, GA spent in excess of $2 million last year lobbying Congress on behalf of defense appropriations bills and larger DHS budgets.
Though normal American manufacturing and production is at an all-time low, the defense industry is booming. According to the Homeland Security Research Corp., “The homeland security market for state and local agencies is projected to reach $19.2 billion by 2014, up from $15.8 billion in fiscal 2009.”
Source - Revolt of the Plebs
equip police and sheriffs’ departments with assault rifles and exotic weaponry.
In 2011 alone, approximately $2 billion in grants were awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), along with $500 million more allocated to existing programs.
The accounting for this expense was recently compiled by the Center for Investigative Reporting and detailed in a report, “America’s War Within: Homeland security and the first 10 years of the war on terror.” After reviewing records from 41 states and interviewing over two dozen police officials and terrorism experts, researcher G.W. Schulz concludes that police departments “have transformed into small army-like forces.”
Federal grants are just one avenue police are using to get weaponry like armored vehicles, grenade launchers and M-16 assault rifles, suited to use on a battlefield. In fiscal year 2011, the Department of Defense gave away a record total of more than $500 million worth of military surplus to law enforcement through its little-known (to the public) “1033 program.”
“Passed by Congress in 1997, the 1033 program was created to provide law-enforcement agencies with tools to fight drugs and terrorism,” writes Benjamin Carlson in a recent article for The Daily. “Since then, more than 17,000 agencies have taken in $2.6 billion worth of equipment. . . paying only the cost of delivery.”
That trend is showing no signs of slowing, according to Carlson.
So why is the government supplying cops with these dangerous toys? The much-touted threat of terrorism is no justification. The National Safety Council notes: “You are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist.”
A crime wave can’t be blamed either. Since the early 1990s, the incidence of violent crime has steadily been on the decline, as more and more law-abiding citizens arm themselves. Violent crime peaked in 1991 at 758.2 per 100,000 people. In 2010, there was nearly half that number—403.6 per 100,000. The same can be said for officers killed in the line of fire. The number of deaths peaked in 1980, at 104 per 100,000, compared to a low of 50 per 100,000 in 2010.
The real reason these lavish gifts are being provided is that it makes police chiefs and sheriffs more accountable to the federal government than to their own states and local communities. Those agencies may soon be called upon to integrate with federal troops—who may soon be allowed to patrol U.S. streets, pursuant to the passage of the so-called National Defense Authorization Act.
There is also a growing effort by the drone or unmanned aerial vehicle industry to market its products to local law enforcement. In their 2011 annual report, General Atomics (GA), the nation’s leading manufacturer of Predator drones, made it clear their future growth depends upon pursuing new applications that will help create opportunities “beyond the military market.” Meanwhile, GA spent in excess of $2 million last year lobbying Congress on behalf of defense appropriations bills and larger DHS budgets.
Though normal American manufacturing and production is at an all-time low, the defense industry is booming. According to the Homeland Security Research Corp., “The homeland security market for state and local agencies is projected to reach $19.2 billion by 2014, up from $15.8 billion in fiscal 2009.”
Source - Revolt of the Plebs
Big Brother in St. Louis: Schools Plan to Monitor Student Activity at Home
Elementary schools in Missouri plan to use wristwatch-like devices called Polar active monitors to surveil children – not only at school, but also at home.
Parkway elementary schools in St. Louis plan “to collect data about activity levels and even sleep patterns for a week at a time. It will have the students wear the devices round the clock,” according to STLToday.com.
A pilot program began in April during physical education classes. In early December, the Board of Education approved expanding the project beyond the pilot phase to at all elementary schools.
According to Ron Ramspott, coordinator of health, outdoor and physical education, the district will target grades four and five initially.
The monitors, which cost $90 apiece, measure activity by tracking every movement of the person wearing them and display steps taken, calories spent and time spent at various levels of activity.
“We want to be able to look at both physical activity and sleep patterns,” Ramspott said. “We also want to see how various activity levels correlate to student achievement and behavior.”
The plan is reminiscent of a laptop program discovered in Philadelphia. In 2010, a class action lawsuit was filed after 1,800 students at three high schools were given laptops with built-in webcams that allowed administrators to spy on them.
Source - Infowars.com
Parkway elementary schools in St. Louis plan “to collect data about activity levels and even sleep patterns for a week at a time. It will have the students wear the devices round the clock,” according to STLToday.com.
A pilot program began in April during physical education classes. In early December, the Board of Education approved expanding the project beyond the pilot phase to at all elementary schools.
According to Ron Ramspott, coordinator of health, outdoor and physical education, the district will target grades four and five initially.
The monitors, which cost $90 apiece, measure activity by tracking every movement of the person wearing them and display steps taken, calories spent and time spent at various levels of activity.
“We want to be able to look at both physical activity and sleep patterns,” Ramspott said. “We also want to see how various activity levels correlate to student achievement and behavior.”
The plan is reminiscent of a laptop program discovered in Philadelphia. In 2010, a class action lawsuit was filed after 1,800 students at three high schools were given laptops with built-in webcams that allowed administrators to spy on them.
Source - Infowars.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
