by A Lily BitMarch 19, 2024
from ALilyBit Website
European Parliament Approves
‘Artificial Intelligence Act,’
ushering in Mass Surveillance
in the Name of “Public Safety”…
In a move that rings with Orwellian undertones, the European Parliament has propelled the Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) Act from its conceptual cradle in 2021 to the precipice of legal reality, transforming what was once a bulwark against the tide of biometric surveillance into its standard-bearer.
This legislation, which is poised to be unleashed upon the European populace this May following the Council of the EU’s sanctification, stands as a testament not to the protection of individual freedoms, but rather to their calculated erosion, set to fully manifest by 2025.
The European Union, with a flourish of self-congratulation, has heralded the enactment of the AI Act as a milestone in legislative history, a protector of the common good.
They claim it as a masterpiece of regulation, designed to shepherd AI’s vast potential while reining in the sprawling tentacles of law enforcement’s identification systems.
According to the EU’s glowing narrative, this act is the harbinger of safety, compliance, and a renaissance of innovation, promising to shield the bedrock of European values – fundamental rights, democracy, the rule of law, and environmental integrity – from the shadow of high-risk AI technologies.
Yet, beneath the surface of these grand declarations lurks a disconcerting reality.
This act, for all its ostensible safeguards, emboldens a framework that,
could readily morph into a surveillance apparatus, veiled under the guise of progress and innovation.
The EU’s portrayal of the AI Act as a balancing act between innovation and individual freedoms glosses over the grim prospect of its dual use, as both,
- a tool for advancement
- an instrument for unprecedented levels of surveillance
This legislation raises the specter of a future where the watchful eyes of AI are interwoven into the fabric of daily life, under the banner of “public safety and order”…
It prompts us to question the true cost of innovation, particularly when it encroaches upon the sanctity of our personal freedoms and privacy.
Are we, as citizens of the digital age, prepared to navigate the murky waters of this new reality, where the lines between protection and surveillance are increasingly blurred…?
The European Union posits the AI Act as a cornerstone of its leadership in the digital domain, yet one cannot help but ponder if this leadership comes at the expense of the very ideals it seeks to protect.
The MEPs from the Pirate parties stand as vehement dissenters against this legislative current, casting their votes into the stormy seas of opposition.
Their critique hinges on the murky trilogue negotiations, a tripartite dialogue among,
- the European Parliament
- the European Commission
- the Council of the EU,
…that, in their view, clouded the legislative process in opacity.
This lack of transparency, they argue, has not only diluted the original intent of the AI Act but has mutated it into a vehicle that sanctions the deployment of unreliable facial surveillance and recognition technologies across the public sphere.
MEP Patrick Breyer‘s words paint a dire picture of these amendments, implicating them as the keystones in the construction of a surveillance architecture underpinned by error-riddled technologies and dubious AI practices:
“The AI Act is a disappointment to me.
There is a clear need for rules on artificial intelligence.
However, the current form that has emerged from the negotiations with national governments falls short of what it should have done.
The national governments have inserted a section that de facto creates a legal framework for widespread snooping on people by biometric cameras.
Such cameras, equipped with artificial intelligence, are able to recognize people’s faces and thus keep track of who has been where, when, and with whom.
The AI Act should have banned such an Orwellian tool, but instead it explicitly legalizes it.
That’s an invasion of privacy that Pirates will never raise a hand for. It’s a shame, because the AI Act has also its positives.
I’m for example glad that I was able to negotiate rules for so-called e-proctoring.
Programs that are used to check on students when they take exams online. If the artificial intelligence is poorly trained, it can evaluate, for example, noise from the hallway in a dorm as cheating.
Given the impact this can have on a young person’s life, it’s worth keeping an eye on and making sure the program works as it should.
Unfortunately, in the end, when it comes to the AI Act, the negatives outweigh the positives.”
Patrick Breyer
Breyer’s alarm extends to the broader arsenal of surveillance tools now at the beck and call of the EU government.
He casts these instruments – ranging from real-time surveillance of public places to racial classification systems powered by a brand of AI that flirts with pseudoscience – as the harbinger of an authoritarian tide, threatening to submerge the democratic foundations of Europe under the waters of a high-tech surveillance state.
Echoing Breyer’s sentiments, MEP Marcel Kolaja of the Czech Pirate Party articulates a similar disillusionment with the act.
Kolaja denounces the legislative encroachments made by national governments within the act, perceiving them as the silent architects of a legal edifice that legitimizes mass surveillance on an unprecedented scale.
The AI Act, in his eyes, had a pivotal opportunity to relegate the dystopian specter of AI-powered biometric surveillance to the realm of forbidden technologies.
Instead, it has chosen to embrace this Orwellian tool with open arms, sanctioning the use of AI-equipped cameras that intrusively map out the intricate patterns of human movement and association.
Such is the landscape painted by these voices of dissent within the European Parliament.
They challenge us to peer beyond the facade of regulatory progress to question the principles that guide our march towards an increasingly digitized future.
In their critique lies a call to the citizenry of Europe and beyond:
to vigilantly guard the bastions of privacy and personal freedom against the encroaching shadows of surveillance…
by Frank Bergman
March 01, 2024
from SlayNews Website
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is calling on governments to ban the general public from growing their own food at home by arguing that they are causing “climate change.”
According to so-called “experts” behind a recent WEF study, researchers apparently discovered that the “carbon footprint” of home-grown food is “destroying the planet.”
As a result, the WEF and other globalist climate zealots are now demanding that governments intervene and ban individuals from growing their own food in order to “save the planet” from “global warming.”
The research indicated that resorting to garden-to-table produce causes a far greater carbon footprint than conventional agricultural practices, such as rural farms.
This research, conducted by WEF-funded scientists at the University of Michigan, was published in the journal Nature Cities.
The study looked at different types of urban farms to see how much carbon dioxide (CO2) was produced when growing food.
On average, a serving of food made from traditional farms creates 0.07 kilogram (kg) of CO2, according to the study.
However, the WEF-funded researchers claim that the impact on the environment is almost five times higher at 0.34kg per portion for individual city gardens.
The paper’s first author Jake Hawes said:
“The most significant contributor to carbon emissions on the urban agriculture sites we studied was the infrastructure used to grow the food, from raised beds to garden sheds to pathways, these constructions had a lot of carbon invested in their construction.”
The study recruited 73 urban agriculture sites around the world.
Those farms included some in Europe, the United States, and the United Kingdom.
The researchers say they conducted a comprehensive life cycle assessment on the site’s infrastructure, irrigation, and supplies.
Hawes and his teammates grouped urban agriculture sites into three categories:
- individual or family gardens, including allotments
- collective gardens, such as community gardens
- larger, commercial-orientated urban farms…
The researchers also found other factors that they claimed are “hazardous” when it comes to impacting the alleged “climate crisis.”
Poorly managed compost and other synthetic inputs contribute to “global warming,” they warned. They further advised that fruit was 8.6 times more “eco-friendly” when grown conventionally compared to in a city.
Vegetables, meanwhile, were 5.8 times better for the environment when left to the professionals, they claim.
Moreover,
two-thirds of the “carbon footprint” of allotments is created by the garden itself, as per their data.
Nevertheless, they insist that people should be limited when it comes to keeping plants inside their homes, as well as growing food in their gardens.
Urban gardeners used to have no qualms about greening their indoor spaces.
For one, this reduces city living anxieties and emotional stress.
Also, being able to take care of plants inside their offices and homes could be part of interior design and a slight improvement in air quality.
However, climate alarmists are not going to give city dwellers peace of mind…
According to the WEF researchers, greening indoor spaces can also come at an environmental cost.
They cite “carbon emissions” from the trucks that transport plants, plastic pots, and synthetic fertilizers. These, they said, are made from petroleum and the harvesting of soil components like peat can “tear up slow-forming habitats.”
Susan Pell, the director of the U.S. Botanic Garden in Washington, D.C., downplayed the narrative. Pell argues that members of the general public should at least still be able to grow potted plants at home, even if they can’t buy them.
They just need to consider the,
“environmental harm of indoor gardening,” she claims.
The news comes amid a growing war against the food supply to supposedly fight “global warming.”
As we reported, 14 major American cities have set a “target” to comply with the WEF’s green agenda goals by banning meat and dairy products by 2030.
The agreement also seeks to ban private car ownership and place other restrictions on public freedoms to meet the WEF’s “Net Zero” goals.
The U.S. cities have formed a coalition called the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group” (C40) which has established an “ambitious target” to meet the WEF’s goals by the year 2030.
To fulfill the “target,” the C40 Cities have pledged that their residents will comply with the following list of “mandatory” rules…:
- “0 kg [of] meat consumption”
- “0 kg [of] dairy consumption”
- “3 new clothing items per person per year”
- “0 private vehicles” owned
- “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person”
Earlier this week, New York’s anti-Trump Democrat Attorney General Letitia James advanced this agenda by filing a lawsuit against the world’s largest beef producer, as we reported.
NY AG James is suing JBS USA over claims the company has failed to meet its so-called “Net Zero” pledge.
The get-Trump prosecutor accuses JBS of allegedly contributing to,
“global greenhouse gas emissions” as “families continue to face the daily impacts of the climate crisis.”
In an announcement, James blasted the agriculture industry and argued that beef production has the largest “greenhouse gas footprint” of any major food commodity.
James also claimed that animal agriculture accounts for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Essentially, the taxpaying masses must stop eating meat and using natural fuels to meet the goals of the elite.
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
March 23, 2024
from Mercola Website
Story at-a-glance
- “Shadowgate” reveals how a “Shadow Government” is manipulating society from behind the scenes and using psychological warfare tactics against the American public
- Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty of covering up an even bigger scandal than the fact that Obama’s administration illegally spied on and tried to frame President Trump and others using manufactured evidence
- The Shadow Government consists of government contractors and defense and intelligence officials who are stealing the personal data collected by the NSA on all Americans, and have privatized and weaponized its use
- “Shadowgate” features two whistleblowers who have spent many years helping to develop the psychological warfare programs that are now directed at the American people and used to influence our elections
- We can protect our freedoms, first by rejecting and abandoning companies like Google and Facebook, which are the largest data collectors and manipulators; second, by promoting and aiding in the effort to expose Big Tech’s manipulations; and third, by restructuring legislatures and the government, and establishing new civil society institutions and news media that support and promote freedom rather than censorship and control
Banned Film Reveals
How We’re Being Controlled by a ‘Shadow Government’
It’s not easy to wrap one’s mind
around the psychological warfare tactics
being used against the American public,
but it’s essential we try to do so
before it’s too late.
Immediately banned on YouTube,
this important film pulls back the curtain
on how we’re being manipulated
and by whom…
Most people have never even heard and there’s a reason for that.
Technocrats have worked in the proverbial shadows for decades, trying to implement a grand economic plan that is global in scope.
To beat them, we must be just as persistent in our efforts to implement a “whole-of-society” plan of action that leads to freedom, and I firmly believe we can.
While technocracy is an economic system and not a political system in and of itself, it does require the undermining and erosion of the democratic system of governance.
This is particularly true for the United States, as our Constitution is a major barrier to the implementation of technocracy.
The documentary far below, “Shadowgate,” is produced and narrated by Millie Weaver, an independent journalist and contributing reporter to Infowars.
Coincidentally, Weaver and her boyfriend, Gavin Wince, were arrested shortly after posting a trailer of the film online, announcing its release. 1
According to Basin Report 2 and News 5 Cleveland, 3 Weaver and Wince were both charged with,
“robbery (second-degree felony), tampering with evidence (third-degree felony), obstructing justice (fifth-degree felony), and domestic violence.”
According to the Portage County Sheriff’s Office, the secret indictment against Weaver and Wince was filed July 20, 2020.
‘Shadowgate’
“Shadowgate,” while banned on YouTube (and replaced later on…), is available on alternative non-censoring sites such as Bitchute and Banned.Video.
The film reveals how a “Shadow Government” is manipulating society from behind the scenes and using psychological warfare tactics against the American public.
“What if I were to tell you that a small group of government contractors were hired by government officials to frame the Trump campaign, set him up for the Russia Collusion investigation, provided witnesses for the impeachment hearings, and provided administrative support services to the Department of Justice during the Mueller investigation?
And what if it just so happened that this same group of contractors are behind the fake news in mainstream media, influence operations on social media, and the civil unrest nationwide, pushing the defund the police movement?
The Obamagate scandal only scratches the surface,” Weaver says at the start of the film. 4
“Talk about a cover story. What really happened is much more alarming.”
According to Weaver, both parties – Democrats and Republicans – are equally guilty of covering up an even bigger scandal than the fact that Obama‘s administration illegally spied on and tried to frame President Trump and a number of other individuals using manufactured evidence.
“Shadowgate” reveals what Weaver claims is the tactical and operational role that,
the Shadow Governmentplayed behind the scenes to carry out the attempted coup…
It’s the things that spy novels and movies are made of, for sure.
YouTube, which pulled the film almost as soon as it was uploaded, claims it violates the channel’s policy on hate speech. I urge you to watch it and decide for yourself whether YouTube was justified in taking it down.
According to a Spiro Skouras summary on YouTube, the film,
“showcases two whistleblowers who allege there is a secretive network of government contractors which consists of government and military insiders (both current and former) who have ‘back door’ access to intelligence agencies and all of the information that they collect on everyone including politicians and how this information is used to blackmail powerful people to control them.”
The film also,
“alleges that military psychological warfare programs are being used against the people primarily through the mainstream corporate media and social media to control the population.”
As noted by Weaver,
“The information presented in this video should concern people of all political affiliations.”
Who Are the Real ‘Puppet Masters’?
While many career politicians are certainly part of the so-called Shadow Government, the real puppet masters behind it all are people that most of us are unfamiliar with.
These are the individuals Weaver focuses on in her film.
The real Shadow Government, Weaver says, consists of government contractors and defense and intelligence officials.
“[Government] contractors have used
their connections, power and influence
to create an unprecedented international criminal enterprise
where blackmail is traded
and people’s personal data is gold.”
Millie Weaver
But just how could a Shadow Government arise in the first place?
According to Weaver, the reason they’ve managed to operate in the shadows and gain power for so long is because most of the actual work in government is done by subcontractors.
This way, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests aimed at government departments turn up very little out of the ordinary.
The real “dirt” remains hidden in the archives of “contractors in clandestine networks.”
“These contractors have used their connections, power and influence to create an unprecedented international criminal enterprise,” Weaver says, “where blackmail is traded and people’s personal data is gold.”
Whistleblower Tore’s Story
“Shadowgate” features two whistleblowers:
- Tore, a linguist and Navy intelligence contractor
- Patrick Bergy, a cyber security officer and Army PSYOP program developer
Tore claims to have been approached by people who worked for John O. Brennan while she was undergoing her Naval specialist training.
She was initially recruited into The Analysis Corporation’s (TAC) electronic warfare program, run by Brennan, which later morphed into information warfare.
According to Tore, she worked with intelligence agencies that were privately created and run.
In other words, they were not, and are not, official parts of government.
“Unlike what most people think, our intelligence doesn’t stay within our borders or within federal buildings,” she says.
Tore worked on something called “localization strategy,” which involves finding a group of people (an organization, city, entire country or religious group, for example) and “getting into their mind.”
The object is to figure out,
- how they behave
- how they think
- what pushes them into certain actions,
…and so on.
This information is then used to manipulate them in ways that will further your own particular product, agenda or ideology.
The collection of information on individuals goes far beyond what most people can imagine. As explained by Tore, the information is so detailed, it can be easily used to blackmail or hurt just about anyone.
As an example,
if they know you have an old hockey injury, they know where to hit you in order to cause the most pain and damage, were a physical attack to be ordered against you.
They also know what you fear most, and who the people are in your social circle, and who might be best able to influence you.
Tore claims she actually helped train the algorithms for the program Bergy developed, using these localization strategies.
Whistleblower Patrick Bergy’s Story
For eight years, Bergy worked for the Dynology Corporation, owned by former President Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James Jones.
Bergy worked directly under the General’s son, Jim Jones…
From 2007 to 2010, Bergy’s primary focus was the development of interactive internet activity capabilities, including hacking capabilities.
He also claims to have worked on information operations, so-called “influence operations.”
Like Tore, Bergy worked on intelligence operations run by private companies. ShadowNet is the commercial version of an interactive internet activities (IIA) weapon, which Bergy developed.
Fake news, false news stories and the falsified dossier used to frame the Trump campaign are all characteristic of IIA, which Bergy refers to as “social media psychological warfare.”
According to Bergy, Dynology has been conducting IIA operations for the Department of Defense since 2007.
The ShadowNet program Bergy developed was based on the localization strategies that Tore worked on. As explained by Bergy, it can very effectively control large groups of people by pushing the right hot-buttons.
The COVID-19 hysteria and Black Lives Matter riots are two real-world examples of what this kind of PSYOP program can accomplish, Bergy says.
Interestingly, while these kinds of psychological operations were initially conducted by individual operators or agents, much of it has since been taken over by artificial intelligence, which executes the programming based on the behavioral profile targets the programmer selects.
As noted by Bergy, with enough information about any given individual, you can predict how they will react to a given stimulus with a high degree of accuracy.
So, has this technology been used to influence American elections? According to Bergy, yes…!
While American tax payers paid for the development of the program, Dynology holds the intellectual property and has been using it against the American people for years, propping up certain politicians and undermining others.
How the Shadow Intelligence Apparatus Works
As explained in the film, Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Act allows government to spy on American citizens with a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (FISA) court.
The upstream data collected by the NSA on all Americans is only stored for 72 hours before being dumped.
We’re talking about all phone calls, texts, emails, social media interactions, online activity, facial and voice recognition data and much more, of all Americans…
But what’s actually happening is that this data stream is being duplicated, stored indefinitely and privatized by companies such as,
- the Global Strategies Group
- Clearforce
- the Canadian Global Information (CGI) Group…
The Global Strategies Group is a hub for this information, according to Tore.
So, while these companies claim to be consulting firms, they’re not actually consulting at all. They’re stealing everyone’s data and using it against us in psychological operations designed to move society in one direction or another.
Tore claims she worked for Brennan at The Analysis Corporation and the Global Strategies Group, and that she conducted what were later described as “hacks” at the request of higher-ups.
According to Tore, Brennan’s modus operandi is that when he wants a piece of information about someone – or if he wants to alter data relating to a target – he simply blames it on hackers.
According to the whistleblowers featured in this film, these privatized intelligence companies helped get Barack Obama elected using sophisticated internet influence operations.
The film also reviews a variety of other scandals that have emerged, and how the truth has been spun and covered up, including the illegal “hacking” and surveillance of the U.S. Congress, which occurred while Brennan was director of the CIA.
Private Intelligence Companies Dictate the News
Have you ever wondered who creates the talking points being regurgitated across dozens if not hundreds of news outlets on a daily basis?
According to Bergy, this is the work of this network of privatized intelligence companies, utilizing tools such as ShadowNet.
When asked whether IIA has been used against President Trump, Bergy replies, “Absolutely”…
According to Bergy, the Steele dossier was manufactured and used as a weapon to frame Trump and remove him from office.
Tore agrees. They have been and continue to use military-grade psychological warfare tactics against the president.
She also discusses the IIA strategies employed in an effort to get Hillary Clinton elected.
Backdoor Access to All Data
According to Tore, she had backdoor access to all data and has personally viewed the kind of data collected on political figures. She’s also seen how that illegal data collection is used.
If someone steps out of line, it’s used to blackmail them back into lockstep with whatever the agenda might be. And, according to Tore, deep state Shadow Government actors,
are equally spread between the two political parties of the United States…
She also claims the Cambridge Analytica scandal was an IIA operation to make it appear as though Russia helped Trump win the election.
This way, the Russia collusion hoax narrative would “stick” better.
In reality, the PSYOP was conducted by the privatized intelligence network.
There’s a lot to digest in this film, but I urge you to set aside the hour and a half to do so.
It answers many questions, revealing how government contractors are subverting our justice and political systems to further their own hidden aims.
At the heart of it all is Gen. Jones.
According to Tore and Bergy, Jones, who heads up Clearforce, took ShadowNet and made it what it is today:
a PSYOPs weapon used against the American people and the Shadow Government‘s enemies…
Jones is also the chairman of the board of the Atlantic Council, and according to Bergy, one of the first things he did after being appointed chairman was to enter the Atlantic Council into a partnership with Facebook,
“to restore election integrity worldwide.”
In other words,
Facebook is partnered with the owner of ShadowNet, one of the greatest
PSYOPweapons in the world…!
To think this partnership will actually prevent election interference would be delusional, as its purpose is to do the complete opposite.
The Ultimate Surveillance State Is Near Completion
“More stuff is fake and fabricated now, in the news, than is actually real,” Bergy says.
The reason for this is because IIA is in full force.
As explained by Tore, IIA is essentially an AI program that tells you what you need to do, what message you need to put out, in order to get a specific outcome. It’s now running continuously.
Similar technology is even being used to undermine our judicial system.
According to Tore and Bergy, a program will select jurors most likely to either acquit or find a defendant guilty (depending on the desired outcome).
While jury selection process is supposed to be random, it’s not.
From that initial pool, jurors are then selected by the attorneys. But they were all non-randomly preselected in the first place, based on their proclivities, ways of thinking and behaving, and their belief systems.
And, the data used to make that selection was siphoned from the NSA by these private intelligence companies.
“This is the biggest and boldest move toward the ultimate surveillance state ever made, and it’s near completion”,
…Weaver says, noting that in order to effectively micromanage the surveillance and manipulation of the global population, the technology must be integrated with AI and the Internet of Things, and that is already underway.
Part of the plan is to automate policing using robots and other technologies.
According to Weaver, this may be why there’s now such a strong push to defund police departments across the U.S. This would allow the Shadow Government players to directly benefit by offering up new AI technologies to take over police functions.
Again, I hope you take the time to watch “Shadowgate.”
Then, if you haven’t done so already, listen to my interview with Patrick Wood, featured in “The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy.”
It’s really crucial for everyone to start wrapping their minds around what’s happening, and what’s in store for us if we don’t fight back and demand the restoration of privacy, both online and off.
Time to Break the IIA Programming
The good news is, there’s still time to break the IIA programming.
How do we do it?
First, by rejecting and abandoning the surveillance state’s primary data collection centers – Google and Facebook. Both have tremendous, hidden surveillance powers, act as censoring agencies for the technocratic cabal, and have the power to manipulate public opinion en masse.
For example, Robert Epstein, Ph.D.,
has demonstrated that Google has the ability to shift voting preferences among undecided voters by a whopping 48% to 63%, and the power to determine 25% of global elections.
What’s more, this manipulation is entirely undetectable and untraceable.
Epstein is now working to make Google’s manipulations transparent, through an organization called Feed the Watchdogs.
They have more than 13,000 watchdogs who monitor Big Tech for election bias 24/7 by collecting the ephemeral data that Google and other Big Tech companies are sending out to manipulate voters.
You can help in this indispensable work by making a one-time or recurrent donation.
For just $25, you can sponsor one month of data collecting…
At the time of this writing, Feed the Watchdogs had captured nearly 80,000 pages sent by Google, Facebook, YouTube and others to manipulate Americans.
As their tactics become provable and more well-known, they’ll have little choice but to quit.
Of course, I believe the best strategy is to ditch them all before then.
Say Goodbye to Google
Quitting Facebook is a simple enough affair.
Just cancel your account…
Evading Google, however, can be a bit more complicated,
as their products span a wide range of products.
For a comprehensive purge, be sure to eliminate all of the following:
Google Chrome browser
Uninstall Google Chrome and use Brave or Opera instead. Everything you do on Chrome is surveilled, including keystrokes and every webpage you’ve ever visited. Brave is a great alternative that takes privacy seriously.
Google search engine
Stop using Google search engines or any extension of Google, such as Bing or Yahoo, both of which draw search results from Google. Instead, use a default search engine that offers privacy, such as Presearch, Startpage, DuckDuckGo, Qwant and many others.
Gmail
Close your Gmail account and switch to a secure email service like ProtonMail. If you have children, don’t transfer their student Google account into a personal account once they’re out of school.
Google Docs
Ditch Google Docs and use another alternative such as Zoho Office, Etherpad, CryptPad, OnlyOffice or Nuclino, all of which are recommended by NordVPN.5
Google apps
Delete all Google apps from your phone and purge Google hardware. Better yet, get a de-Googled phone. Several companies now offer them, including Above Phone.
Avoid websites that use Google Analytics
To do that, you’ll need to check the website’s privacy policy and search for “Google.” Websites are required to disclose if they use a third-party surveillance tool. If they use Google Analytics, ask them to switch!
Google Home
Don’t use Google Home devices in your house or apartment. These devices record everything that occurs in your home, both speech and sounds such as brushing your teeth and boiling water, even when they appear to be inactive, and send that information back to Google. The same goes for Google’s home thermostat Nest and Amazon’s Alexa.
Android cell phones
Don’t use an Android cellphone, as it’s owned by Google.
Siri
Ditch Siri, which draws all its answers from Google.
Fitbit
Don’t use Fitbit, as it has been purchased by Google and will provide them with all your physiological information and activity levels, in addition to everything else that Google already has on you.
Additional tips to protect your privacy are included in the following graphic, such as making sure you’re using a secure messaging system and virtual private network (VPN) for your web searches.
Building a Whole-of-Society Solution
In addition to getting yourself (and as many of your friends and family as possible) off Google and Facebook, we also need to build a society that values freedom above all.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, misinformation online is a whole-of-society problem that requires a whole-of-society solution.
By that, they mean that four types of institutions must fuse together as a seamless whole:
- Government institutions, which provide funding and coordination.
- Private sector institutions that do the censorship and dedicate funds to censorship through corporate-social responsibility programs.
- Civil society institutions (universities, NGOs, academia, foundations, nonprofits and activists) that do the research, the spying and collecting of data that are then given to the private sector to censor.
- News media/fact checking institutions, which put pressure on institutions, platforms and businesses to comply with the censorship demands.
To effectively combat the globalist technocrats’ takeover, we need to do the same. Here, an organization called Foundation for Freedom Online (FFO) comes to the rescue.
FFO educates people about this structure, and the ways in which legislatures and the government can be restructured, how civil society institutions can be established, and how news media can be created to support and promote freedom rather than censorship.
To learn how you can be part of the solution, check out foundationforfreedomonline.com.
I firmly believe that we can turn this situation around, if for no other reason than the fact that there are some eight billion of us who want freedom, while those who seek to enslave us number in the thousands, or tens of thousands at the most.
Either way, they’re clearly outnumbered.
But we need to spread the word, and help our friends and family understand how important our decisions are.
We either support the network that seeks to take our freedom, or the network that seeks to protect it…!
The Power of Choice
Lastly, I encourage you to seek Joy.
At the end of the day, that’s what life is all about. It’s all too easy to fall into the trap of feeling like the sky is falling. What we’re facing is serious, yes. But we can overcome it.
And, I believe that Joy-seeking may be a crucial component to winning.
Why?
Because when you focus on what brings you Joy, everything else falls into place.
New ideas arise.
New solutions.
And that’s precisely what we need.
We need a world full of joyful, inspired people who are living their dreams, and in so doing, end up bringing new solutions to the world…!
Also HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE…
Sources and References
1, 4
2
3
5
by Harold Fensky
March 14, 2024
from Human-Level Website
This writer correctly makes the association between Technocracy and Transhumanism and how they hold the same mechanistic worldview about the utopian/dystopian future.
This radical worldview clashes with over 95 percent of the people in the world and yet is every bit as tyrannical as anything seen in history.
In the realms of both technocracy and transhumanism, there lies a shared belief, a kindred spirit, if you will.
This belief holds that science and technology are not just tools or conveniences, but rather the very keystones of a utopian future, a “perfect” society…
It’s an alluring vision, an ambitious dream where the boundaries of humanity are not just pushed but entirely redrawn through the power of scientific management and technological integration.
Let’s delve into this philosophy, beginning with its roots in technocracy.
The term itself, ‘technocracy’, was coined in 1919, but it was in 1938 that it crystallized into a more defined ideology.
Technocrats argue that politicians and traditional forms of governance are ill-equipped to handle modern problems.
Instead, they advocate for a society governed by technical experts – scientists, engineers, and technologists, those who understand the intricate workings of complex systems, be they in energy, transportation, or economics.
This governance model is underpinned by a profound trust in scientific methodology.
Technocrats believe that through careful, rational, and scientific management of resources, a more efficient, equitable, and prosperous society can be achieved.
The appeal is clear:
decisions made not on the whims of politics, but on the solid ground of data, logic, and expertise…
Transhumanism dovetails with technocracy in its enthusiasm for technology, but it takes a more personal focus.
Where technocracy is concerned with societal systems, transhumanism zeroes in on the human condition itself…
It’s a philosophy or movement that advocates for enhancing the human experience through the application of technology.
It’s not just about making life easier or longer; it’s about fundamentally enhancing human capabilities – cognitive, physical, emotional.
Imagine, for a moment, a world where humans merge with technology so seamlessly that the line between biology and technology blurs.
Transhumanists dream of a future where we overcome biological limitations – where aging, illness, and perhaps even death are no longer inevitable.
But this vision, as inspiring as it might seem, is not without its critics.
Ethical concerns abound…
In a technocratic world, who decides what is efficient or equitable?
In a transhumanist future, who gets access to these life-altering technologies?
There’s a fear that such a society could exacerbate inequalities, or worse, create new forms of division between the ‘enhanced’ and the ‘unenhanced’.
Then there’s the question of humanity itself.
In augmenting our physical and mental capacities, do we risk losing something essential about being human…?
There’s a delicate balance between improvement and loss, between gaining new abilities and losing our intrinsic nature.
In their own words,
technocrats view their approach as the “science of social engineering.”
This phrase captures both the promise and the hubris of technocracy and transhumanism.
It suggests a belief in the power of science not just to understand the world, but to reshape it according to rational principles.
Yet, it also hints at a kind of arrogance, an assumption that complex social and ethical issues can be engineered away as easily as technical problems…
As we continue to advance technologically, these philosophies offer us a lens through which to view our future – a future that is as exciting as it is uncertain.
The challenge lies in,
navigating this terrain thoughtfully, recognizing the potential of technology to transform society for the better, while also being mindful of the profound ethical questions and social implications that such transformations entail…
