Saturday, November 8, 2014

I'm terrified of my new TV: Why I'm scared to turn this thing on and you'd be, too

Posted by George Freund on November 7, 2014



From facial recognition to personal data collection, this thing is downright scary -- and so are the implications

MICHAEL PRICE


THURSDAY, OCT 30, 2014 11:26 AM EDT


I just bought a new TV. The old one had a good run, but after the volume got stuck on 63, I decided it was time to replace it. I am now the owner of a new “smart” TV, which promises to deliver streaming multimedia content, games, apps, social media and Internet browsing. Oh, and TV too.


The only problem is that I’m now afraid to use it. You would be too — if you read through the 46-page privacy policy.


The amount of data this thing collects is staggering. It logs where, when, how and for how long you use the TV. It sets tracking cookies and beacons designed to detect “when you have viewed particular content or a particular email message.” It records “the apps you use, the websites you visit, and how you interact with content.” It ignores “do-not-track” requests as a considered matter of policy.


It also has a built-in camera — with facial recognition. The purpose is to provide “gesture control” for the TV and enable you to log in to a personalized account using your face. On the upside, the images are saved on the TV instead of uploaded to a corporate server. On the downside, the Internet connection makes the whole TV vulnerable to hackers who have demonstrated the ability to take complete control of the machine.


More troubling is the microphone. The TV boasts a “voice recognition” feature that allows viewers to control the screen with voice commands. But the service comes with a rather ominous warning: “Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party.” Got that? Don’t say personal or sensitive stuff in front of the TV.


You may not be watching, but the telescreen is listening.


I do not doubt that this data is important to providing customized content and convenience, but it is also incredibly personal, constitutionally protected information that should not be for sale to advertisers and should require a warrant for law enforcement to access.


Unfortunately, current law affords little privacy protection to so-called “third party records,” including email, telephone records, and data stored in “the cloud.” Much of the data captured and transmitted by my new TV would likely fall into this category. Although one federal court of appeals has found this rule unconstitutional with respect to email, the principle remains a bedrock of modern electronic surveillance.


According to retired Gen. David Petraeus, former head of the CIA, Internet-enabled “smart” devices can be exploited to reveal a wealth of personal data. “Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvester,” he reportedly told a venture capital firm in 2012. “We’ll spy on you through your dishwasher,” read one headline. Indeed, as the “Internet of Things” matures, household appliances and physical objects will become more networked. Your ceiling lights, thermostat and washing machine — even your socks — may be wired to interact online. The FBI will not have to bug your living room; you will do it yourself.


Of course, there is always the “dumb” option. Users may have the ability to disable data collection, but it comes at a cost. The device will not function properly or allow the use of its high-tech features. This leaves consumers with an unacceptable choice between keeping up with technology and retaining their personal privacy.


We should not have to channel surf worried that the TV is recording our behavior for the benefit of advertisers and police. Companies need to become more mindful of consumer privacy when deciding whether to collect personal data. And law enforcement should most certainly be required to get a warrant before accessing it.


In the meantime, I’ll be in the market for a new tinfoil hat and cone of silence.


Michael Price is counsel in the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

-----------------------------



Of course the Conspiracy faithful have been in the loop for a couple of years.

THEY SEE YOU WHEN YOU'RE SLEEPING THEY KNOW WHEN YOU'RE AWAKE

WHY DOES YOUR TV'S CABLE DVR USE MORE POWER THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN YOUR HOME 24/7? IT'S RECORDING YOU!‏

Just because we're first raising alarms doesn't mean we're foolish. We're just first. The world moves and the speed of the predator not the prey. It's up to us to catch up.

The CIA and Drugs, Inc.: a Covert History

Region: ,
Theme:

cia
Gary Webb was a good investigator. He linked a drug dealer in Los Angeles, through Contra suppliers, to CIA officers and Republican politicians. His editor let the story rip, and the “Dark Alliance” series made a mighty impact on Black Americans, who saw it as evidence that the ruling class was as racist as ever.
Webb stuck a stake in the evil heart of the national security state and embarrassed the CIA’s contacts in the mainstream media. All of which was unforgiveable. Pressure was applied, history re-written, and Webb, in despair, apparently committed suicide.
The irony, of course, is that Webb had exposed only a small part of the story. The fact of the matter is that the US government has always managed large portions of the illicit, international drug business, and was doing so long before the CIA came into existence.
Documented cases abound, like the Opium Scandal of 1927, in which a “former” US Attorney in Shanghai provided a Chinese warlord with 6500 Mausers in exchange for $500,000 worth of opium.
Two years later, US Customs inspectors found a huge quantity of opium, heroin, and morphine in the luggage of Mrs. Kao, the wife of a Nationalist Chinese official in San Francisco. At which point Secretary of State Henry L. Stimson hustled Chiang Kai-shek’s ring of drug dealing diplomats out of the country.
The State Department likewise protected a ring of drug smugglers in 1934, and thus allowed heroin to pour into New Orleans. Two historians said about the Honduran Drugs-For-Guns case: “the defense of the Western hemisphere against the Axis powers…reduced to insignificance clandestine attempts to link the managerial personnel of a major cargo airline to smuggling.”[i]
As it was in the beginning, it is now and ever shall be: the ruling class’s power resides in its control of the criminal underworld; and since 1947, it has been the CIA’s job to advance and protect the conspiracy.
Consider the Federal Narcotic Bureau’s drug conspiracy case on Bugsy Siegel, which included Lucky Luciano and Meyer Lansky, both of whom had provided services to the US government during the war. The conspiracy had its inception in 1939 when, at Lansky’s request, sexy Virginia Hill moved to Mexico and seduced a number of Mexico’s “top politicians, army officers, diplomats, and police officials.”[ii]
Hill came to own a nightclub in Nuevo Laredo and made frequent trips to Mexico City with Dr. Margaret Chung, an alleged prostitute and abortionist, honorary member of the Hip Sing T’ong, and the attending physician to the Flying Tigers – the private airline the US government formed to fly supplies to Chiang Kai-shek’s forces in Kunming, a city described as infused with spies and opium. As the FBN was well aware, Dr. Chung was “in the narcotic traffic in San Francisco.”[iii]
Chung took large cash payments from Siegel and delivered heroin to Hill in New Orleans, Las Vegas, New York, and Chicago. And yet, despite the fact that West Coast FBN agents kept her under surveillance for years, they could never make a case against her, because she was protected by the American military establishment. Indeed, Siegel’s murder in 1947 may have been a government hit designed to protect its sanctioned KMT-Mafia drug operation out of Mexico. As Peter Dale Scott strengthobserved, right after Bugsy was squashed, Mexico’s intelligence service, the DFS, formed relations with the top Mexican drug lord, at which point the CIA “became enmeshed in the drug intrigues and protection of the DFS.” By 1950, Mexican drug lords were receiving narcotics from the Lansky-Luciano connection, which stretched to the Far East.
The CIA’s involvement in the Far East drug trade began with its predecessor organization, the Office of Strategic Services, which supplied Iranian opium to Burmese guerrillas fighting the Japanese. This is no secret: General William Peers, commander of OSS Detachment 101 in Burma, confessed in his autobiography: “If opium could be useful in achieving victory, the pattern was clear. We would use opium.” [iv]
OSS chief William Donovan and Chiang’s intelligence chief, General Tai Li, tried hard to control drug trafficking in China during the war. To ensure security for KMT smuggling operations, the Americans sent a team to Chungking to train Chiang’s secret political police force. The head of the team, Charles Johnston, was described as previously having spent fifteen years “in the narcotics game.” [v]
Johnston’s team and Tai Li’s agents worked closely with Chiang’s designated drug smuggler Du Yue-sheng. Tai Li’s agents escorted Du’s opium caravans from Yunnan to Saigon, where the Kuomintang used Red Cross operations as a front for selling opium to the Japanese. In so far as national security always trumps drug law enforcement, this operation was afforded the same immunity as OSS Detachment 101.
After the war, the Americans did nothing to stop the French from importing tons of opium from Laos, and selling it on the black market to finance their colonial war against the Vietnamese. During a visit to Saigon in 1948, an FBN agent reported that opium was “the greatest single source of revenue” for the French.[vi]
CIA drug ops took a great leap forward in 1949, when Mao chased Chiang to Taiwan, where KMT gangsters slaughtered thousands of people and set up a worldwide drug ring. To facilitate this particular criminal conspiracy in the name of freedom and democracy, US officials exempted a subsidiary of William Donovan’s World Commerce Corporation from the Foreign Agents Registration Act, so it could supply the KMT with everything from gas masks to airplanes. This subsidiary was accused of smuggling “contraband” to America.
Some of the “contraband” no doubt emanated from the KMT’s 93rdDivision, which had fled from Yunnan into Burma in 1949. In exchange for launching covert raids into China, these enterprising KMT forces were allowed to grow and export opium onto the black-market in Bangkok and Hong Kong. In the same way the Israeli Lobby blackmails and bribes Congress to achieve its criminal ends, the US China Lobby attacked KMT critics and launched a massive propaganda campaign citing the People’s Republic as the source of all the illicit dope that reached San Francisco.
To facilitate the drug trade emanating from its KMT army in Burma, the China Lobby raised five million dollars of private money, which the CIA used to create its drug smuggling airline Civil Air Transport (CAT). The aforementioned General William Peers, as CIA station chief in Taipai, arranged for CAT to support KMT incursions from Burma into Yunnan – and thus enabled the KMT to bring to market “a third of the world’s illicit opium supply.”[vii]
When Burma charged the KMT with opium smuggling in 1953, the CIA requested “a rapid evacuation in order to prevent the leakage of information about the KMT’s opium business.” The State Department announced that KMT troops were being airlifted by the CAT to Taiwan, but most remained in Burma or were relocated to northern Thailand with the consent of Thailand’s top policeman and drug lord. US Ambassador William J. Sebald wasn’t fooled by this chicanery, and rhetorically asked if the CIA had deliberately left the KMT troops behind in Burma to continue “the opium smuggling racket.”[viii]
Suborning the Police
The story of the CIA’s drug empire is the biggest cover-up in American history – even though the basic facts are available in books like Al McCoy’s The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia and Richard M. Gibson’s The Secret Army.
Organizing the cover-up initially depended on the CIA’s ability to suborn the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which, as the conflict in Vietnam heated up, was forced to investigate the flow drugs from the Far East to America. Thus, in 1963, FBN headquarters sent Agent Sal Vizzini to Thailand to open an office in Bangkok. As Vizzini told me, “Customs was already in Vietnam, but only under the aegis of helping the soldiers. Apart from that, no one’s making cases in Vietnam, because the CIA is escorting dope to its warlords.”
Vizzini’s assertion was validated on 30 August 1964, when Major Stanley C. Hobbs was caught smuggling 57 pounds of opium from Bangkok to a clique of South Vietnamese officers in Saigon. Hobbs had flown into Saigon on the CIA’s new drug smuggling airline, Air America. Hobbs’s court martial was conducted in secret and the defense witnesses were all US army and South Vietnamese intelligence officers. The records of the trial were dutifully lost and Hobbs was fined a mere three thousand dollars and suspended from promotion for five years. As a protected CIA drug courier, he served no time.
The FBN Commissioner wrote a letter to Senator Thomas J. Dodd asking for help obtaining information about Hobbs. But Dodd was stonewalled too, proving that the CIA is able to subvert drug law enforcement at the highest legislative level in the nation.
Later in 1963, FBN Agent Bowman Taylor replaced Sal Vizzini in Bangkok. Taylor was famous for slipping into Laos and making a case on General Vang Pao, commander of the CIA’s private army of indigenous, opium-growing tribesmen. Taylor didn’t know the identity of the person he was buying from: he simply set up an undercover buy, got a flash roll together, and went to “the meet” covered by the Vientiane police. But when the seller stepped out of his car and opened the trunk, and the police saw who it was, they ran away, leaving Taylor to bust the felonious general alone.
“Yep, I made a case on Vang Pao and was thrown out of the country as a result,” Taylor acknowledged. “The prime minister gave him back his Mercedes Benz and morphine base, and the CIA sent him to Miami for six months to cool his heels. I wrote a report to the Commissioner, but when he confronted the CIA, they said the incident never happened.
“The station chiefs ran things in Southeast Asia,” Taylor stressed, adding that the first secretary at the Vietnamese Embassy in Bangkok had a private airline for smuggling drugs to Saigon, as the CIA was well aware. “I tried to catch him, but there was no assistance. In fact, the CIA actively supported the Thai Border Police, who were involved in trafficking.”
Taylor shrugged. “The CIA would do anything to achieve its goals.”
The 118A Strategic Intelligence Network
Not only was the CIA protecting Vietnamese warlords, their Corsican accomplices, and its private armies of opium growers in Laos, Burma and Thailand, it was managing the caravan that moved opium to the world’s biggest market in Houei Sai, Laos.
In 1991, in Chiang Mai, Thailand, I interviewed William Young, the CIA officer who set the operation up.
The son of an American missionary in Burma, Young had learned the local dialects before he mastered English. During World War II, his family was forced to move to Chiang Mai in northern Thailand, where Young’s father taught William Donovan the intricacies of the region’s opium business.
Following a tour of duty with the US Army in Germany, Young was recruited into the CIA and in 1958, posted to Bangkok then Chiang Mai. From Chiang Mai, Young led a succession of CIA officers to the strategically placed Laotian and Burmese villages that would eventually serve as Agency bases.
It was Young who introduced General Vang Pao to his first official CIA case officer.
From his headquarters at the CIA airbase at Long Tieng, on the south side of the opium-rich Plain Of Jars, Vang Pao conscripted 30,000 tribesmen, many as young as 13, into a secret army to fight the Pathet Lao and its Vietnamese allies. In exchange for selling his people as cannon fodder, he was allowed to make a fortune selling opium. Much of the brokering was done at the village of Houei Sai in western Laos. Pao’s front man was the chieftain of the local Yao tribe, but behind the scenes Young set up deals between Pao, the top Laotian generals and politicians, and the KMT generals inside Burma. The Burmese generals operated clandestine CIA radio listening posts inside Burma, and in return were allowed to move 90% of the opium that reached Houei Sai.
It was a happy arrangement until October 1964, when the Chinese detonated an atomic bomb at Lop Nor. That seminal event signaled a need for better intelligence inside China, and resulted in the CIA directing Young to set up a strategic intelligence network at Nam Yu (aka Base 118), a few miles north of Houei Sai. The purpose of the 118A Strategic Intelligence Network was to use a KMT opium caravan to insert agents inside China. The agents placed by Young in the caravan were his childhood friends, Lahu tribesmen Moody Taw and Isaac Lee. Young equipped them with cameras, and while in China they photographed Chinese engineers building a road toward the Thai border, as well as Chinese soldiers massing along it. Knowing the number and location of these Chinese troops helped the CIA plot a strategy for fighting the Vietnam War.
Once the 118A network was up and running, Young turned it over to CIA officer Lou Ojibwe, and after Ojibwe was killed in the summer of 1965, Anthony Poshepny took charge. A Marine veteran who served with the CIA in the Indonesia and Tibet, “Tony Poe” was the balding, robust model for Marlon Brando’s Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now! Poe also served as a father figure to the junior CIA officers (including Terry Burke, a future acting chief of the DEA) he commanded in the jungles of Laos.
When I interviewed Poe in Udorn, Thailand in 1991, he said he “hated” Vang Pao because he was selling guns to the Communists. But Poe was a company man, and he made sure the CIA’s share of opium was delivered from Nam Yu to the airfield at Houei Sai. The opium was packed in oil drums, loaded on C-47s, and flown by KMT mercenaries to the Gulf of Siam. The oil drums were dropped into the sea and picked up by accomplices in sampans waiting at specified coordinates. The opium was ferried to Hong Kong, where it was cooked into heroin by KMT chemists and sold to the Mafia and Corsicans.
FBN Agent Albert Habib, in a Memorandum Report dated 27 January 1966, cited CIA officer Don Wittaker as confirming that opium drums were dropped from planes, originating in Laos, to boats in the Gulf of Siam. Wittaker identified the chemist in Houei Sai, and fingered the local Yao leaders as the opium suppliers.
By 1966, when FBN Agent Douglas Chandler arrived in Bangkok, the existence of the CIA’s 118A opium caravan was a known fact. As Chandler recalled, “An interpreter took me to meet a Burmese warlord in Chiang Mai. Speaking perfect English, the warlord said he was a Michigan State graduate and the grandson of the king of Burma. Then he invited me to travel with the caravan that brought opium back from Burma.” Chandler paused for effect.
“When I sent the information to the CIA, they looked away, and when I told the embassy, they flipped out. We had agents in the caravan who knew where the Kuomintang heroin labs were located, but the Kuomintang was a uniformed army equipped with modern weapons, so the Thai government left them alone.”
As described by Young and Poe, the 118A Strategic Intelligence Network was the CIA’s private drug channel to its Mafia partners in Hong Kong – people like Santo Trafficante, the Mafia boss the CIA hired to kill Fidel Castro, and protected ever thereafter. The same thing is happening today in Afghanistan, with the DEA providing cover for the CIA and military, just as the FBN did in the 1960s.
Which brings me back to Gary Webb. The CIA wasn’t happy that Poe and Young were talking. Poe was told to shut up after his chat with me, and he did. But Young sold his story to a major Hollywood studio for $100,000. And that was unforgivable.
On April Fool’s Day, 2011, Thai police found Bill Young’s corpse. It had been perfectly arranged with a pistol in his one hand and a crucifix in the other.
Maybe he was depressed too?
And it is seriously depressing, the fact our utterly corrupt government, aided by its criminal co-conspirators in the mainstream media, pretends as if the CIA doesn’t deal drugs.
Doug Valentine is the author of The Strength of the Wolf: The Secret History of America’s War on Drugs, and The Strength of the Pack: The Personalities, Politics, and Espionage Intrigues that Shaped the DEA.
Notes:
[i] Douglas Clark Kinder and William O. Walker III, “Stable Force In a Storm: Harry J. Anslinger and United States Narcotic Policy, 1930-1962,” The Journal of American History, Volume 72, No 4, March 1986, p. 919, note.
[ii] Ed Reid, The Mistress and the Mafia, p. 42.
[iii] Reid, Mistress, p. 90.
[iv] William Peers and Dean Brellis, Behind The Burma Road, Boston: Little Brown, 1963 p. 64.
[v] Milton Miles, A Different Kind of War, New York: Doubleday, 1967.
[vi] William O. Walker, Opium and Foreign Policy, University of North Carolina Press, 1991, p. 177.
[vii] Burton Hersh, The Old BoysThe American Elite And The Origins Of The CIA, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1992 p. 300
[viii] Walker, Opium, p. 210.

BIOWEAPONS EXPERT REAFFIRMS THE EBOLA SCARE MIGHT BE AN ENGINEERED VIRUS

For those who have been following the ebola story, there is a certain strain – no pun intended – in the conversation that has been maintaining all along that the whole thing could very well be the case of a bioweapon, either deliberately or inadvertently let out of the box.  In this case, the argument was shared by Mr. V.T., and quite an argument it is:
Bioweapons Expert Reaffirms Belief that Ebola Escaped from a Biowarfare Lab
What interests me here is the connection to central Africa, which I have commented on both in blogs and in my News and Views from the Nefarium (for Oct 18th of this year):
4. “This means that these outbreaks arose from different “jumps” from the animal reservoir to the human population. The similarity between samples from the current outbreak confirm that it originated from a single jump, and since that time the disease has spread exclusively from human to human. This is different from previous outbreaks, which had spread via multiple zoonotic events.”
If  there were different “jumps” then we should have seen a pattern of “jumping” ebola outbreaks continuously over time and space from Zaire in 1976 to West Africa in 2013. There is no such pattern. That’s 3500 kilometers and no “jumping” ebola outbreaks.
5. Now to the Science article: “Phylogenetic comparison to all 20 genomes from earlier outbreaks suggests that the 2014 West African virus likely spread from central Africa within the past decade. Rooting the phylogeny using divergence from other ebolavirus genomes is problematic ….”
Once again, if it spread from central Africa within the past decade, we would have seen the “spread” of Ebola outbreaks during the past decade as it made its way to West Africa. We have not. And notice right out at  the outset they admit their basic methodology here is “problematic.” That is precisely correct. The entire study they admit themselves is “problematic.” It sure is “problematic” Basically the  US biowarriors at Kenema are covering their own rear ends. That’s the problematique of this “study”—cover-up”
Precisely.
While everyone is focused on the current outbreaks, however, the one that has always interested me is Zaire. In previous blogs I have pointed out the possible connection of the first outbreaks in Zaire to the then contemporary West German OTRAG private compound. In this respect, I pointed out that the whole murky OTRAG story was first comprehensively addressed precisely in the context of engineered bioweapons by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz (D.M.D..,M.A., M.P.H.) in his book Emerging Viruses: AIDS AND Ebola:Nature, Accident, or Intentional?(In my opinion, a vitally important book.)  It seems appropriate in the above context, to revisit something he quoted in his book, citing his own attempts to track down the origins of AIDS and Ebola:
Among the government documents I discovered, while visiting the BPL in search of the Rockefeller Commission report, was a Moscow WorldService radio broadcast alleging a Pentagon link to the development of AIDS…. Gorbachev had not laid the AIDS allegation to rest in 1987. In the Spring of 1988, a high-ranking Soviet press official, Boris Belitskiy, offered the latest Soviet position regarding Pentagon involvement in the creation of HIV:
BELITSKIY: Several US Administration officials, such as USIA (CIA) Director Charles Wick, have accused the Soviet Union of having invented this theory for propaganda purposes. But actually, it is not Soviet scientists at all who first came up with this theory. It was first reported in Western journals by Western scientists, such as Dr. John Seale, a specialist on venereal diseases at two big London hospitals and one of the first scientists to point to the viral nature of AIDS.”
The host then asked if there had been any new evidence to support Seale’s contention. The official replied:
“BELITSKIY: Just recently a Soviet journalist in Algeria, Aleksandr Zhukov, managed to interview a European physician at the Moustapha Hospital there, who made some relevant disclosures on the subject. In the early seventies, this physician and immunologist was working for the West German OTRAG(Orbital Transport and Missiles, Ltd.)Corporation in Zaire. His laboratory had been given the assignment to cultivate viruses ordinarily affecting only animals but constituting a potential danger to man. They were particularly interested in certain unknown viruses isolated from the African green monkey, and capable of such rapid replication that they could completely destabilize the immune system. These viruses, however, were quite harmless for human beings and the lab’s assignment was to develop a mutant virus that would be a human killer.” (, Moscow World Service in English, Belitskiy on How, Where AIDS Virus Originated March 11, 1988. Published in International Affairs, FBIS-SOV-88-049, March 14, 1988, p. 24, cited in Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola: Nature, Accident, or Intentional? [Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 1996], pp. 393-394, boldface emphasis added).
In other words, had not Dr. Horowitz dared to publish this information in his 1996 book, few of us would have been aware of it, and of the possibility that there is yet another connection to bioweapons research in the precise area where ebola first broke out, and to a research facility with its own definite, and very murky, connections to the world of postwar covert operations and intelligence fronts of all varieties. Notably, this quotation also confirms the contentions of Dr. Boyle in the article first quoted, namely, that the vector of the outbreak appears deliberately obfuscated, and that a cross-species jumping is difficult to envision without the hand of man being at some point deliberately involved.

The Deeper Meaning of Snowpiercer (2013)

Manichaean dialectically controlled revolution. Image; wikipedia.com
Manichaean dialectically controlled revolution. Image; wikipedia.com
By: Jay
Snowpiercer stands out as a recent example of a trend fans of film are witnessing more of: philosophically-focused science fiction and fantasy.  While it could be argued that many science fiction classics deal with some philosophical themes, the trend has become far more common than in previous decades.  In the last several years, films such as After the Dark, The Double, Enemy, Another Earth, as well as many others ask audiences to grapple with complex conundrums such as globalism, meaning and the self, morality and death, and even deeper esoteric questions, like alternate worlds and mystical symbology.  While Hollywood is busy with found-footage horror, cynical raunchy comedies and comic book blockbusters (the latter of which do incorporate conspiriana), lesser-known independent films are touching on far more abtruse matters that extend beyond the realm of the political.  Seeing new films clearly influenced by Terry Gilliam, for example, is a welcomed beacon of hope.  A rebellion in the arts towards asking meaningful questions that challenge social engineering and prepackaged think tank paradigms is precisely what is needed, and that is partly my intention with this site.
Based on the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige, Snowpiercer is Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho’s first English release.  The plot involves a post-apocalyptic world that has entered a new ice age due to mankind’s failed geoengineering and climate-altering hubris.  The amorphous chemical “CW7″ is sprayed globally to halt a supposed “global warming” catastrophe, while the ice age actually occurs as a result of the chemical spraying, and not “climate change.”  To see a film present the very real threat of geoengineering and climate alteration through aerosol spraying, as well as questioning the “global warming” hoax (now morphed into “climate change” by public relations consultants) is startling to say the least.  While there may be some film that has previously questioned these establishment orthodoxies, I am not aware of it.  For unknowing skeptics and system hacks, I present two clear examples of the reality of aerosol chemical spraying (“chemtrails,” as opposed to normal ice crystal “con trails”) and geoengineering that are undeniable.
The first is The Guardian’s piece on Bill Gates’ support for geoengineering, under the very auspices Snowpiercer questions – global warming. The Guardian reports in its 2012 article, ‘Bill Gates Backs Climate Scientists Lobbying for Large-Scale Geoengineering':
“A small group of leading climate scientists, financially supported by billionaires including Bill Gates, are lobbying governments and international bodies to back experiments into manipulating the climate on a global scale to avoid catastrophic climate change.  The scientists, who advocate geoengineering methods such as spraying millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth, argue that a “plan B” for climate change will be needed if the UN and politicians cannot agree to making the necessary cuts in greenhouse gases, and say the US government and others should pay for a major programme of international research.”
Atmospheric aerosol spraying and geoengineering opens Snowpiercer.
Atmospheric aerosol spraying and geoengineering opens Snowpiercer.
Skeptics are likely to claim this is only theoretical, inasmuch as the article reports on scientists merely calling for this, as opposed to it actually being accomplished.  Such naiveté is common on these matters, as so-called skeptics perpetually display their own ignorance of establishment tendencies.  Like the taunting of psychopathic criminals, whatever is “called for” in the news is generally what’s actually been practiced for a long while, and aerosol geoengineering and atmospheric manipulation is no exception.  The technology is decades old, and began as weather warfare during World War II, where seasonal changes and storms could be harnessed to harm enemy resources through controlled droughts, floods, etc.  Earthquake weaponry also falls into this category, as well as biological waarfare, EMPs and HAARP, all falling under the broad umbrella of the concept of weaponized nature.  However, for hardened skeptics, I refer to the even stronger example of the Stanford VLF Group, which openly publishes dozens of scientific papers on HAARP, atmospheric aerosol spraying, geoengineering, frequency manipulation, and other advanced research projects.
Snowpiercer begins with planes spraying the sky, while news casts report the importance of CW7 as the last hope to save humanity.  As a result, virtually all life on earth perishes, while a small number of “chosen” are whisked away aboard a high-speed perpetual motion-run train that circles the globe.  A perpetual motion machine is, in fact, a holy grail of technology, as its desire grew from the mechanistic model of the universe that gained sway in the Enlightenment.  From the Enlightenment came the reign of quantity and rationalization of all reality into the collapsed, reductionist grand narrative of evolutionary materialism.  Within this paradigm, man is viewed as a cog in the deterministic, naturalistic machine of the inanimate, eternal and universal ecosystem.  In this view, the symbiotic ecosystem requires an inchoate metaphysical principle of “balance,” and thus the Malthusian presuppositions of eugenics come into play, removing man from his previous position of ordained steward of creation under God, to an impersonal artifact on a social Darwinian ladder, who must ever grapple to become the fittest.  The “fittest” then rapaciously destroy one another to subjugate and dominate nature en toto, in order to transcend it.  The culmination of this worldview is, of course, transhumanism, and Snowpiercer will become, as I argue, a warning for this worldview.
Malthusian themes of "sustainability" where the train's ecosystem must be kept in "balance" through continual murder.
Malthusian themes of “sustainability” where the train’s ecosystem must be kept in “balance” through continual murder.
Protagonist Curtis (Chris Evans) plays the revolutionary leader of the “back” of the train, who, under the tutelage of the aging former leader Gilliam (John Hurt), must organize the final rebellion against the tyrannical “front” of the train.  Class warfare clearly comes to the fore, as the front of the train are all presented as decadent elite, wining and dining on the finest delicacies, enjoying every possible luxury a train can afford, while the workers at the back are forced by a brutal police state to produce for the parasitical front.  Minister Mason (Tilda Swinton) heads up the front class’ security forces in a role reminiscent of something akin to Mao Tse Tung’s wife, Jiang Qing.  Her communist dictator persona may seem out-of-place, given the monopolistic capitalism of the train’s inventor, Mr. Wilford (Ed Harris), yet regular readers will be familiar with the longtime argumentation presented here that communism and monopoly capitalism are flip sides of the same dialectical coin.  The corporate fascism of Wilford works hand in hand with the dictatorial militaristic police state polices of Minister Mason.  It is also not accidental that her name is Mason, given the history of world freemasonry exhibits a clear proclivity for communism, from Robespierre and Marat to Salvador Allende.  Communism and fascism are both political technologies designed to suit the same totalitarian ends.
Brainwashed children of Wilford Industries.
Brainwashed children of Wilford Industries.
As the Curtis Revolution progresses, car by car, each compartment gives a new revelation of the dark nature of the system.  The train’s unbending regimented eugenics policies and schoolhouse indoctrination programs emerge are the most significant, as viewers witness a classroom propaganda video portraying Mr. Wilford as a literal god and savior.  Here the film’s symbolism used to describe the train exemplifies an important deeper message.  The train is compared symbolically three ways in the narrative: to a machine, to the world, and to a human body.  Early on, as an angry worker loses his arm as a punishment, Minister Mason curiously describes the train as a body with a “head” and a “foot.”  “Everything must stay in its preordained place,” she exclaims, as the foot trying to become the head leads to chaos, and chaos means the dissolution of mankind and loss of the train’s balanced ecosystem.  As the insurrection seizes the car associated with water production, a captive Minister Mason informs Curtis that water comes “from the mouth of the train, not the bum,” and that a resource war will harm all the train’s inhabitants.  When Curtis reaches the front of the train, Wilford gives the descriptive imagery of the train as “an eternal machine” and as “the world,” but its significance will be detailed below.
While the revolution progresses, Curtis gradually begins to make tough moral choices that reveal more about his pragmatic designs to the viewer, as well as to himself.  Curtis is forced to sacrifice his friend’s life to apprehend Minister Mason, then shoot Mason in the head, as well as admitting to cannibalism in the past to survive.  Curtis slowly grasps that his own nature is quite cruel, calculating and vicious, and the difficulty of holding everyone to his egalitarian and equalitarian moral standards becomes more challenging.  By the time Curtis reaches the front car and the engine, Wilford divulges the entire regime change was staged and engineered.  Gilliam, the old revolutionary leader, is actually Wilford’s old friend, with a special direct phone line that communicates front to back.  Gilliam and the revolution are then sacrificed by Wilford to maintain the 74% eco-balance for “sustainability.”
Wilford’s monologue then paints the train as the world, revealing to Curtis that all along the plan was to offer him leadership of the train, replacing Wilford.  Since Curtis was the first worker to make a successful coup and reach the front, he was in a unique position to have seen the entire “machine” and its full hierarchical order, as no one else had.  Wilford explains that the train must be ruled by “anxiety, fear and horror” in a balance to psychologically manipulate and control the masses.  Meanwhile, the Curtis Revolution explodes into full anarchy and Wilford whispers to Curtis that without a hero, the train won’t run.  “The eternal engine. It is eternity itself,” Wilford sneers, waiting for Curtis to accept the implications of his failed mutiny.  The crucial point in all this is the principle of managed dialectics – iconized in the communist revolutionary as a controlled creation of the engineers of the system (Wilford), whose aspirations are already calculated to serve first class when anxiety, subversion, chaos or depopulation were needed. The phony left-right paradigm of Hegelian duality could not be better demonstrated. The train is a mini one world government built upon the industrial ingenuity of mass travel and global commerce, foreshadowing our own bleak dialectical future of a planetary regime.
Approaching the climax, Wilford hands Curtis a final secret message that reads “blood,” having previously sent “water,” which are basic elements of life and energy.  They are also crucial components of the human body and its machinery, so we can make a connection here between the heart and the engine.  Curtis also discovers the ominous reality that the engine runs on the work of child slave labor, while Wilford sneers that the tail section supplies a steady stream of kids.  The parasitical tyranny that is the train proves too much for Curtis, who opts to sabotage and derail it with the aid of the prophetic drug addict Nam and his daughter, Yona.  However, Nam and Yona have discovered the great secret – the ice and snow are gradually melting, meaning there is the possibility of life outside the train.  The real ecosystem is restoring its own balance, and man can be reconciled to it.  As the train derails,. Nam and Curtis sacrifice themselves to shield Yona and a child from the explosion, and as a result, they become the last two survivors of humanity.  Upon exiting the train, Yona spots a polar bear, meaning the existence of the train as the sole means for life and survival to be a farce.  Whether intentional or not, we aren’t told, the myth of the impossibility of life outside the train was a farce.  Although CW7 had brought an ice age, the principle of life triumphs over man’s technological dominance and alienation.  The great irony is that in Wilford’s doctrine of “everything in its place,” everything was out-of-place.  Wilford had succumbed to the same irrational hubris that blinded pre-apocalypse humanity before the ice age.
Curtis returns to the One.
Curtis returns to the One.
On an esoteric level, there are elements of gnosticism throughout (and communism shares gnostic origins): Curtis is a kind of new man, destined to be the philosopher king Wilford desired.  Wilford’s revelation of the need for the “noble lie” of divine rulership to quell the masses echoes Plato’s Republic, which also curiously utilizes the symbology known as the “anthropic principle”.  The anthropic principle is the notion that observations about the physical universe bear some fundamental correlation and connection to human consciousness as its observer.  In esoteric tradition, the anthropic principle extends as far as the idea that the human body itself is the microcosmic (microprosopus) mirror to the macrocosmic (macroprosopus) universe as a whole.  Thus, in Plato’s Republic, the ideal republic is compared the body of man, while in his creation account, the Timaeus, this tradition replicates on the cosmic scale, comparing the universe to the body of a man.  Curtis’ journey from the tail to the front may also symbolize the ascent of the soul in many traditions, particularly traditions that describe the soul after death passing through several gates or planetary “toll houses” to reach God, heaven or some blissful afterlife.  Having forgotten his former life before the train, Curtis’ journey also echoes the Platonic doctrine of the soul’s migration from embodied particularity back to the One, from which all being flows.  Curtis can be viewed on this level as the enlightened philosophic or religious soul seeking to escape the illusory reality the platonic demiurge has imposed upon the senses through the veil of materiality and flux.
In a world where man has acquiesced to allow his technological lust to outweigh his wisdom, the dangers of bare gnosis without wisdom become apparent.  Snowpiercer asks us to ponder this profound question, and consider scientism’s past mistakes and blunders that have not led to human apotheosis, but mass death and self-destruction.  Is large-scale geoengineering, tampering with the ecosystem under phony Malthusian sustainability and eugenically-regimented population control not itself the cause for much of the misery, chaos and alienation man experiences in his modern technocratic, quantification-obsessed existence?  Snowpiercer answers in the affirmative, and the film displays this wise message in a skillful and sophisticated form that makes it stand out in its craft.  Can we exit crazytrain before crazytrain suffers a train wreck?

TECHNOCRACY

this is cool

TECHNOCRACY

Can there be any doubt that education matters not just in how we view the world, but in what kind of world we create — or simply accept? And can there be any doubt that, despite a massive educational infrastructure that is crumbling, Americans remain remarkably poorly informed about the world?
It can be witnessed from the day to day perusing of the social network and how the trash talks and bullying becomes part of the daily routine. The political forum has been reduced to various tweets and small bites of information. Anything that is posted in the social network with a link to a referenced article or essay is seldom read, but armchair critics have much to say about the headline, how it is written and whether it is misspelled or misleading.
The political cavalcade of commentary is all but glanced at and forgotten in the social net. There is no 24 hour repetition or commentary that sways the audience. The fickle opinions the low voter turnout and the disenfranchised anarchists all have things to say about the system and it can be concluded that system has changed and that we are being dragged kicking and screaming into the new technocratic era.
It is arguably enlightening to realize that there is inspiration and a learning experience we gain from various failures. At least sane people learn from their various failings.
The American system and its various tried and true institutions like selecting leadership through the act of voting are failing.
Facebook manipulated the news feeds of almost 2 million American users during the 2012 presidential election without telling them. The manipulation led to a 3 percent increase in voter turnout, according to the company’s own data scientist.
In a stunning revelation, the three months prior to Election Day in 2012 saw Facebook “tweak” the feeds of 1.9 million Americans by sharing their friends’ hard news posts rather than the usual personal posts. The effect was felt most by occasional Facebook users who reported in a survey they paid more attention to the government because of their friends’ hard news feeds. Facebook didn’t tell users about this psychology experiment, but it boosted voter turnout by 3 percent.
Americans seem to be easily manipulated by technology and so it won’t be too hard to figure out what will win out in the future, if there is a future to be had.
Americans will eventually have to realize that their system has evolved into a technocracy and the more they think they are informed about an issue the more they realize that the opinion was part of a digital illusion. Something as disposable as an idea that has been excised from their mental network with the pushing of delete button.
In the technocratic era and through social networking we discuss the important issues that decide the vote; Obama’s golf games, the legalization of pot, the birth certificate, the belief that Obama is a Muslim, The first lady’s obsession with fat kids, the apocalypse, Vladimir Putin 2016, Kim Kardashian. The police state, false flag fears, chemtrails, Ebola, climate change, ISIS, Obama the antichrist, Hillary 2016 and the list of the trivial can go on forever.
The internet with all of its convenience and communication capabilities has not been able to teach the average American how to sniff out propaganda. In the media madness that passes for our “information age” It’s uncomfortable to swallow that bitter pill and consider the possibility that we get the society we deserve.
Education cannot keep up with whims and theories that when published become facts in the minds of those too lazy to read and are ready to comment on the headline or hyperlink.
We have always been told that higher learning is an imperative. We are taught that if one wishes for a better job, higher salary, more marketable skills, and more impressive credentials they must go to college, or think about higher learning and education.
If you view education in purely instrumental terms as a way to a higher-paying job –think again. There is no program that is preparing students for life, especially life in a transhumanist bound technocracy.
Institutions of higher learning are going to have to get ready to teach skills and information needed for jobs that don’t exist yet, and also they must prepare their students for the possibility that their training in certain fields may not even be worth anything because in the future they may all be replaced by machines that can do the work for them.
If your education or the education you want your children to have is merely a mechanism for mass programming within the marketplace then perhaps it is time to realize that you are effectively giving the technocracy a free pass to do whatever they want in the future.
Many people that are still convinced that higher learning in all fields will prevail are not thinking about the prevailing machinery of power and those who run it.
Robots are poised to eliminate millions of jobs over the coming decades. We have to address the coming epidemic of “technological unemployment” if we’re to avoid crippling levels of poverty and societal collapse.
There is a solution that is gaining traction in many parts of the world both in developed and developing nations. It’s actually a very simple idea: Everyone in society receives a single basic income to provide for a comfortable living whether they choose to work or not.
The idea of a guaranteed basic income, also referred to as unconditional or universal basic income, is a very simple idea: Everyone in society receives a single basic income to provide for a comfortable living whether they choose to work or not. Needless to say it’s only intended to be enough for a person to survive on.
This of course is a social welfare plan that may have to be provided by the government or some other public institution, in addition to funds or income received from other sources. It could be taxable, or non-taxable, and divided up on a continual basis, monthly, or annually.
Advocates argue that a basic income is essential to a comprehensive strategy for reducing poverty because it offers extra income with no strings attached.
But looking ahead to the future, we may have little choice but to implement it. Given the ever-increasing concentration of wealth and the frightening prospect of technological unemployment, it will be required to prevent complete social and economic collapse. It’s not a question of if, but how soon.
As early as 1795, American revolutionary Thomas Paine called for a “citizen’s dividend” to all U.S. citizens for “loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property.”
In his 1967 speech, “Where Do We Go From Here,” Martin Luther King Jr. said: “I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.”
Conservatives have called it a wage floor, and have discussed how in the future the wage floor would be an effective way to fight poverty and to reduce government spending and intrusion.
Technologically-induced unemployment is a problem that’s only set to get worse with coming of the new transhumanist age.
For example we have been seeing breakthroughs in transportation with the driverless cars. Driverless cars could mean driverless taxis, driverless public transportation, and remote control trains.
Tablets and kiosks are soon to replace waiters and waitresses. As McDonalds employees protest and demand an increase in minimum wage, newer franchises are now using electronic kiosks for patrons to make orders.
Colleges and schools are now offering online learning and many people are now getting their degrees online as opposed to attending a bricks and mortar school.
Eventually things like 3D printing and desktop manufacturing will cut out most of the work between inventors and consumers.
Now think of all of these trends and then think of the trends in high tech being used in the medical industry and in manufacturing. Millions of jobs being lost, and millions of people on food stamps and unemployment.
Technology has started to destroy employment faster than it creates it.
This is the future for the transhumanist technocracy.
So with potentially billions of people out of work, and with the world’s wealth concentrated into the hands of a few, a simple question emerges: How are people supposed to live?
A basic income guarantee would be a good start by combining existing social welfare payments, reducing the size of the bureaucracies needed to maintain each of them separately. So the burden of the state would shrink. Various public resources can be monetized. Various proposals to help with basic income guarantees would include tax revenues, shortening the workweek, and the reduction or elimination of other social security programs such as unemployment insurance. Also if the basic income guarantee existed there would be no need for minimum wage.
Looking further ahead to the future, the prospect of a jobless economy certainly seems daunting. But if we can successfully manage it and put our machines to work, we could enter into an unprecedented era of material abundance while dramatically extending our leisure time. Rather than be tied to menial and demeaning work, we’d be free to engage in activities that truly interest us.
This would mean that people would be motivated to work on projects that interest them. So the idea that the required basic income would promote laziness would be hard to prove.
Providing a wage for a person to live off of does not impact other people in any way. Couple this with affordable housing and maybe morale would improve in the country. The only fear is how this impacts, and possible further divides, the haves and have-nots, on a more “social” level.
The United States is currently in the middle of the longest period of job losses since the Great Depression of the 1930s. In fact, the U.S. economy today has 2.6 million fewer jobs that it did two years ago. Meanwhile, over two million people have lost health insurance coverage and personal bankruptcies hit a record of over 1.5 million households and growing.
In short, economic crises–recessions and depressions–are inevitable and Karl Marx along with his and his collaborator Frederick Engels described these crises that would eventually beset capitalism.
Is the establishment of a new technocracy contributing to the crisis that would eventually bring down capitalism in favor of a hybrid transhumanist Marxism?
Karl Marx believed that science and democracy were the right and left hands of what he called the move from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. He argued that advances in science helped delegitimize the rule of kings and the power of the Christian church.
Technological utopianism refers to any ideology based on the premise that advances in science and technology will eventually bring about a utopia, or at least help to fulfill one or another utopian ideal. A techno-utopia is therefore a hypothetical ideal society, in which laws, government, and social conditions are solely operating for the benefit and well-being of all its citizens.
In a future world, like worlds provided by science fiction writers like Gene Roddenberry there was no need for money in the “Star Trek” universe. In the movie Star Trek: First Contact, Captain Jean Luc Picard explains that economics of the future are somewhat different. Picard explains that ether is no money in the 24th century. The acquisition of wealth was no longer a driving force in the future. In the civilizations of the future humans worked to better themselves and the rest of humanity.
As we await the arrival of what is called the singularity and as we are told that our relationships with machines will change our lives we are beginning to understands that the elite pulls the levers of power while sheep-like humans graze passively.
Perhaps our perceptions will change drastically as we better educated ourselves on how to improve our lives and the lives of others. This might mean embracing changes that will seem new and sudden.
As you probably know already most of these ideas are not new and have already been planned and thought out as we move towards a more mechanized day.