Category Archives: privacy

WashPo Scolds India Over Police RAPE (Cavity-Search) of Diplomat

Posted on by

UPDATE

I have to correct a few things in this post.

While Devyani K. said she was cavity-searched, the US Marshals deny it. They say she was only strip-searched.

A cavity search, according to the Marshals, involves probing of the vagina and rectum.

Bharara used this discrepancy to claim that DK was lying.

But it turns out that a strip-search too involves “baring” the rectum and vagina.

It just doesn’t involve probing them.

To a woman like DK, who has no previous criminal record and is foreign to US procedure,  the strip-search probably felt exactly like “cavity search.”

Both procedures are outrageous, regardless of  the status of the person being stripped and search, Jane Citizen or a high-flying diplomat.

Point Two.  DK was paid around $4000 a month by the Indian govt, but she did also receive free housing and other perks, as did her maid.

I wasn’t aware of that, when I wrote the piece.

DK is also married to an American professor who has an income allegedly of about $100,000. She has further modest income from her properties in India.

Because she didn’t include that property income on her government form, I suspect the USG considered the entire application a type of fraud.

Point Three.

Much is being made of the fact that DK is a dollar millionaire and that she profited from some finagling on her behalf by  her father, a well-connected bureaucrat.

First point.

None of that is relevant to the way DK was treated by the police and the issue of diplomatic protocol, which was grossly violated, regardless of finer points about partial or full immunity and consular status.

All those issues are red herrings. The manner of proceeding was outrageous and provocative in the extreme.

Second.

Anyone who bought land in India in the early part of the last decade, especially in a major city, would have become a millionaire.

Land prices went up about 30 times in some areas. So if you put even very modest savings (and Indians save over 50% of their income), into land, you’d have made a fortune.

The Rothschild media is playing this up to stoke anger against her among Americans who would be ashamed to feel that way at poorer Indians, but can now vent essentially envious and racist feelings against an affluent one, and do so self-righteously, because they’ve dubbed her a “slaver.”

Third.

Khobradage’s father headed the Ministry of External Affiars (MEA) in Delhi, as did DK herself, and the MEA had a running battle with the US embassy.

The current Asst Secy of State for South Asia, an Indian woman, only came on board in October.

The DK affair began in June. At the time the Asst Secy for South Asia was a committed Zionist, known for meddling in domestic politics in Sri Lanka and India, where he earned a reputation as such.

The maid, recall, worked for a senior US diplomat and had relatives who worked in the US embassy, so she is by no means some oppressed Dalit villager.

Instead, she comes from the relatively prosperous state of Kerala, belongs to the  Christian community, which if often closely affiliated with the Indian Jewish community (Arundhathi Roy is a Syrian Christian).

Kerala is heavily unionized and Marxist. It’s also a center of the drug trade, centering around Kochi, with the international drug cartels having close ties with and backing from the CIA ….(it goes on, but that’s enough for now).

ORIGINAL POST

One Swati Sharma at the establishment’s favorite mouthpiece, The Washington Post, tells us seriously that India’s reaction to the rape, er, cavity-search of Devyani Khobragade, an Indian  consular officer, is all wrong.

Devyani was arrested and cavity-searched on allegations (I repeat allegations) that she underpaid her Indian maid and lied about it to the visa office of the US Government.

The Indian government quite correctly regards the cavity search as not only an outrageous violation of diplomatic protocol but barbaric treatment of a mother with two children.

There’s nothing, absolutely NOTHING,  wrong with that assessment.

It is the reaction of NORMAL people everywhere.

Ms. Sharma and her sort are not normal.

Enlightened by the communist belief in complete gender-equality as well as the sanctity of all government action against unenlightened citizens, Sharma believes that a blow has been struck by India against the empowerment of women.

Truly empowered women allow their vaginas to be fingered by strangers in uniforms with equanimity, nay, delight, and if their name is also Naomi Klein Wolf and the fingerer is a a former military officer-turned Tantric sex therapist, with effusions of literary joy.

Sharma is upset not by the cavity search, but by the special Indian outrage she sees directed at the cavity-search of a woman.

This is a sign of India being all wrong, she wails.

Here’s something for this nitwit, who apparently takes her standards uncritically from some combination of Lady Gaga,  Annie Sprinkle, and Karl Marx (my comments in between):

SWATI SHARMA

“Last week, the United States apprehended an Indian diplomat, Devyani Khobragade, and charged her with providing false information in a visa application for her nanny, whom she paid $3.31 an hour, well below minimum wage. Many are wondering why India is outraged.”

LILA RAJIVA: Misleading statement. Devyani did not pay her maid just $3.30 an hour. She also provided living quarters in New York City (worth $3000-4000 a month), food, medicine, and other perks, the total of which probably exceeds anything required of her by US law, even assuming foreign maids employed by foreign consular officers are properly a subject of US law.

Also, “many” are not wondering why India is outraged. You and some twitterati – like Sandeep Roy – might be wondering.  Everyone else IS outraged.

The twitterati are known to be used – and in some cases employed – by the US intelligence services to mold public opinion.

One can be forgiven for wondering if Ms. Sharma belongs to that group.

SHARMA:

In a letter to her colleagues, Khobragade, India’s deputy consul general, told her family that she faced “indignities of repeated handcuffing, stripping and cavity searches, swabbing, hold up with common criminals and drug addicts were all being imposed upon me despite my incessant assertions of immunity.” U.S. officials maintain that she was treated along standard guidelines. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh even weighed in on the matter, calling Khobragade’s treatment “deplorable.”

Although Khobragade’s “indignities” seem pretty standard, in India, the perception that a woman’s honor is the community, society and country’s honor still holds.”

RAJIVA: The utterly immoral position taken here is that there is nothing wrong (“seem pretty standard”) with someone being strip-searched by the police for an alleged violation that doesn’t involve concealing anything on one’s person.

Even in the case of suspected drug-mules, there are precautions taken and procedures followed and a cavity search occurs only after the suspect has REFUSED to cooperate in other ways. There is nothing “standard” about a cavity search. It has become standard because we have journalists of the caliber of this vacuous female who apparently thinks anything the government does or says is to be accepted at face value as “the public good.”

God help us all.

And yes, the concept of a woman’s honor  still holds in some form or other all over the world.  That you do not agree with it or believe you have more enlightened standards does not mean, of course, that you actually do.

SHARMA:

It’s not the first time an Indian diplomat has gotten in trouble over this issue — last February, Neena Malhotra was ordered to pay $1.5 million to her former maid for “barbaric” conditions. But there was no strip-search, no jail time and, therefore, no mass protests.

RAJIVA: It is not clear what happened in the Malhotra case. I for one find it very odd and believe that the diplomat was being entrapped, which perhaps is what happened here, but it would be foolish to pass judgment without knowing all the facts.

And yes. The issue is whether someone’s bodily integrity and modesty should be violated in an extreme manner that would be  considered rape, if a citizen were the perpetrator.

SHARMA

She was treated as a common criminal.

It’s also not every day that a high-ranking official is put behind bars, especially for a charge many Indians feel is minor. Khobragade was impounded with people who faced drug-related charges — which are minor in the U.S. penal system. But in India, a female diplomat in jail over a salary issue for her nanny is almost unimaginable, and not a picture Indians are used to seeing.

RAJIVA: Yes. It is unimaginable.  Again, what’s the point?

SHARMA

It’s not just the privileged in India who have help. According to this report, “The going monthly rate for a live-in maid or cook, who often works for more than 12 hours a day, six days a week, is still low: only 4,000-10,000 rupees ($73-184) in the cities.”

RAJIVA:

This whole section is baffling and seems to be an open stoking of class-anger and racial resentment among Americans, directing it against relatively affluent/prominent Indians, rather than against the Anglo-Jewish cartel- that, via central banking, is really behind the economic crisis.

In addition, Sharma’s facts are mistaken.

Most maids  get free living quarters, free medicine and free food.

4000-10000 rupees is a lot of money in India. Why give the dollar figures without also giving the dollar figures for food and rent in India, which are much lower than in the US?

This is the kind of bogus documentation that makes contemporary American journalism cringe-worthy.

SHARMA

While having servants or chauffeurs in the United States is a luxury attained by a select few, even lower-middle-class families in India have some sort of hired help.

RAJIVA:

More class and race war.

In the US, women have appliances and restaurant and food options FAR out of the reach of the middle-class and even the rich in India. Indian roads are so congested and polluted and the shops so overcrowded and hard to access that paying someone else to queue for you at stores is mandatory if you have a professional job.

Most Americans have two or more cars in the family. Even poor people have cars. In India, many in the upper middle-class do not. A car is a luxury.

So lifestyles are adapted to different economic realities.

Labor is plentiful in India so it is cheap. Labor is not plentiful here because of immigration restrictions, so it is dear.   Americans also make twenty times or more than most Indians and ready made food is far cheaper here than there. So having servants who can cook elaborate Indian meals is more prevalent.

Gas is cheap in the US and expensive in India. Thus, by Sharma’s logic, the Indian government should be allowed to set the gas prices in the US so that things are evened out.

This is the madness of die-hard communist ideology, masquerading as liberalism.

SHARMA

In this case, the treatment of the women in question wasn’t about any form of abuse — it was about a payment discrepancy. In India, that would rarely amount to jail time, especially for someone with means.

RAJIVA

It’s not clear that Devyani’s means were all that much. As a consular office, she received some $4000 a month, which is barely adequate in New York.

SHARMA

This isn’t the first time diplomats received what Indians thought was “unfair” treatment.

In 2010, India’s U.N. envoy, Hardeep Puri,who wore a turban for religious reasons, was reportedly asked to remove it during an airport security check. Also that year, reports suggested that Indian ambassador Meera Shankar was taken to another room and searched because she was wearing a sari. Those events stung in India, and no doubt came to mind when this latest event dominated the headlines.

RAJIVA:

Had Bill Clinton been frisked, or Ms Clinton or Mrs. Obama taken into custody and had their vaginas penetrated and swabbed by Indian policemen, I rather think the US would have nuked Delhi by now. Had  a Mullah been asked to remove his turban, there would have been global jihad.

Are some indignities less than others?

SHARMA

Little attention has been given to the housekeeper. India is siding with a woman who was in the wrong — who lied, paid her help poorly and now is brazen enough to claim that she should not be treated like a criminal.

RAJIVA:

You claim to be a journalist, yet you have already decided what looks like a complicated case. How do you know?

Are you one of the many hirelings of the CIA who are paid to influence stories by planting opinions, twitters, blog comments, or posts intended to push public opinion in the direction it’s supposed to go.

We saw evidence of that in the Tahrir square “color” revolution led  by the twitter brigades of the intelligence services.

Devyani claims, with evidence, that this is an extortion case.   How do you know she isn’t right?

SHARMA

What’s “deplorable,” to use the prime minister’s words, is not Khobragade’s treatment, which was standard, but the fact that many in India aren’t speaking out against the treatment of the nanny.

RAJIVA

They’re not speaking out is another way of saying this intelligence psyop intended to “educate” India and the world is failing. This is a nearly transparent attempt to set classes and races at war in order to destroy opposition to the globalists, but it is not going well.

The “ill-treatment” of the maid is so far only alleged. There is also a history of maids extorting their employers. This maid’s family worked for the US embassy. There are extortion rackets that use false abuse charges to gain visas to the US.

That’s why intelligent people who are aware of all the facts are outraged by the treatment of the consular officer before the facts, let alone the case, have been decided.

SHARMA

India’s reaction is disappointing.

RAJIVA

Not to me. I am immensely heartened that India is showing a spine and not fawning on the US.

However, this article is immensely disappointing…and disgusting. It shows that the author has a  thoroughly colonized mind, unable to reach conclusions not already fed to her by the dominant culture.

SHARMA

The anti-corruption party in India is gaining incredible momentum — the party even unseated the ruling Congress party in the country’s capital, which was a huge victory.

RAJIVA:

Most Indians are well-aware of corruption in their country. They are also well aware that the Rothschild banking cartel (globalists) have used their mouthpieces, Julian Assange and Wikileaks, to co-opt the original anti-corruption movement (like the movement of Baba Ramdev) and replace it with Trojan horses like the Anna Hazare movement, intended to subjugate Indian sovereignty to secret foreign rule through NGO’s.

What happened to the Ramdev movement is what happened to the Tea Party. It got co-opted.

SHARMA

So why are Indians rallying for a privileged treatment of a diplomat?

RAJIVA

They are rallying AGAINST the barbaric treatment of a woman who has not been judged guilty of anything, certainly of nothing serious enough to warrant cavity searches.

They are rallying against the privileged treatment of US law, which has shown itself to be as corrupt or more corrupt than Indian law in many respects and, in any case, should not prevail in a case involving two Indian citizens both employed by the Indian govt.

Because you are a US citizen, Mr. Sharma, it doesn’t mean your opinion is worth more than that of an Indian on Indian matters.

Indians are rallying against the privileged treatment of your opinion and the opinion of thousands of “elite” opinion-makers who force-feed them cultural standards they do not believe in and do not want.

SHARMA

Why shouldn’t she be treated as a common criminal?

RAJIVA:

Because she is not either. She is not a common person but a diplomatic officer representing a country which is an ally, a status which grants her certain privileges and immunities.

And she has not been convicted of any crime, let alone one warranting multiple searches of her private parts.

The offense for which she was arrested is relatively petty and is one of which thousands of professionals, Americans included, are guilty. CEO’s. university professors and many, many other people pay their employees less than the minimum wage

Are you strip-searching all of them? If not, why not?

SHARMA

In India, someone with power would rarely be apprehended for paying a servant a low wage.

RAJIVA

Good for India.

Since when is paying someone according to a voluntary contract a crime?

SHARMA

Actually, it’s laughable to think such a charge would even take place. But there was hope that a movement against corruption would change things.

RAJIVA

This passage is completely addled, even for Ms Sharma. What has a movement against corruption got to do with the wage-rate in India? And what makes you an expert on either?

SHARMA

After the global outrage and mass protests in India due to the Delhi gang rape that happened a little over a year ago, there was hope that unfair treatment toward women and opposition to immunity would skyrocket.

RAJIVA

It is a myth propagated by US intelligence that Indian women are treated with exceptional barbarity or that they are in need of Western-style liberation. Actually,  rape cases have exploded precisely since the liberalization of the Indian economy and the advent of Western mores, including pornography in the media, extreme crowding in the cities and massive displacement of hundreds of thousands of people.

That is the RESULT of interaction with the West on its terms, rather than on Indian terms.

The solution is not more Westernization, but less. The Indian constitution is very socialistic in orientation and its emphasis on human rights exceeds that of the US, so it certainly doesn’t need any more “feminist” empowerment. It needs less. It needs, as the US needs too, a return to less emphasis on “rights” and more on obligations and duties.

India guarantees women positions in university and jobs and has done so even before the US (even if you think such quotas are a good thing, which I don’t).  India has had a woman prime minister and several very powerful female politicians. In contrast, the US has had no female president and no woman politician of commensurate power.

Harassment and rape in India have increased only with economic liberalization and with the recent saturation of Indian media with crass sexualized advertising on the Western model.

That seems intended to destroy the social fabric in India.

Having abetted that destruction, the West and its mouthpieces, like Ms Sharma, are now bewildered at the rise in violence against women, although that too, I suspect is played up by the US and the NGOs it employs as its soft-power arm.

I wonder if some of these cases and the media attention to them are not staged. It would be no surprise, since almost all of the major media in the English language in India is owned by the big Western media groups, by communists, and by Zionist Christians.

SHARMA

Instead, many Indians are siding with the wrong woman in this battle.

RAJIVA

No. They..and any reasonably informed person..are siding with the victim. In this case, that was the woman who, before she was even tried by a jury of her peers, was subjected to gross public humiliation and physical distress to feed the self-righteousness of uninformed ignoramuses like Sharma, who are upset by rape committed by citizens but not rape committed by officers with badges.

SHARMA

Like we saw with India’s anti-gay ruling last week, the country is in the wrong once again.

RAJIVA

Actually, I think the Indian Supreme Court is to be applauded for the ruling, which should reflect Indian thinking about the subject, not the thinking of Ms. Sharma or her coterie of international busy-bodies.

Note (added Dec 20): I do not support laws criminalizing sodomy or homo-sexuality, but neither am I particularly interested in codifying homosexual relations in the way heterosexual relations are. I recognize a distinction between the two both in history and in law, which allows for different treatment.

However, I am not an Indian citizen and I support the rights of every judiciary to come to its own conclusions about its own laws without foreign interference.

Further note: Reading more, I begin to see the SC’s thinking on this matter. Homo and heterosexuality are two different things and merit different treatments. The law has never given rise to even one prosecution and therefore cannot be said to have discriminated in reality. It was more a signaling device and, as the court decided, such a signaling might be thoroughly needed today. There is nothing in human history and moral teaching that suggests that homosexuality can be the NORM for a society. It can only be tolerated when it doesn’t seek to change the norm. I think that’s a defensible position and were it not for the hype, I think it would get a respectful hearing.

So the question must be asked. Are gays really only interested in being left alone (they already are) or is it that they are unwilling to leave any one else alone?

Ten Ways To Fight The Police State

Posted on by

Image: technologyjones.com

There are ways to fight the police-state, on your own, without joining any group or party and giving up your independence.  Protecting your privacy on the Internet is one of them.

Just don’t forget that a lot of privacy sites are really government projects. The idea is to steer you to privacy software put out by the government’s buddies. It’s the oldest trick in the book.

But given that, there are a few things you can do to protect yourself. Here are ten of them.

1. Get your name and address off of mailing lists, subscriber lists, forms, directories, and data centers. You may need to keep doing that every year, as long as you have a credit card with your home address on it.

2.  Use Google only if you need to. Otherwise, use private/anonymous search engines. There are a few. I won’t name them, because when people start selecting one or other engine, then the powers-that-be start paying more attention and screw things up for them.

3. Use a virtual private network, but use it with caution. There’s a Catch-22 here. The free ones probably make money by selling your information… or worse. The ones that aren’t free need you to sign up on the net with an account and a credit card. Which means another vulnerability.  Passwords can be hacked and licenses can be stolen. Plus, VPN’s with servers and HQ’s in America, Britain, Europe and many other places, cannot protect your privacy if you get caught up with the police or lawyers, even tangentially.  Your ISP and VPN provider will be forced to comply with subpoenas and laws that demand data-sharing.

Completely anonymous off-shore VPN’s on the other hand can arouse government suspicion, even if you’re as innocent as a baa lamb.

Also, what if someone hijacks your VPN to commit crimes? How would you prove it wasn’t you, if someone wanted  to incriminate you?

I  asked the  FBI this recently, and they tell me that they can figure it out. But do you really want to be in a position where only the FBI can clear your name? And what if it’s the FBI that wants to get you in trouble? I mean, it’s not unheard of.

4. Limit what you do on the Internet. If you can’t stop using the net altogether (which is really the best option), try to curtail what you do. Limit what you buy on the net. Stop sending sensitive emails, even encrypted ones, over the net.  If you have to sell on the Internet to make a living, stay on top of computer crime by following a good security forum. Wilders is one.

5. Share computers or use public computers.  Lots of times, the easiest way to be private is to use a  computer used by other people you can trust, so long as you don’t input sensitive information. That way what you do is mixed up with what lots of other people are doing and it’s harder to track.

6. Don’t tell anyone your privacy tricks. I used to suggest things on this blog before, like using Scroogle or Ixquick. I don’t any more. The more people start using one trick, the more the government…or the criminals on the net…starts focusing on that trick. I’m not about to research things so people can track and harass me using my own research against me.

Who would do such a scummy thing?  Short answer – scum.

On the net, the scum rises to the top.

7. Don’t put your ideas out on the net, unless you’re prepared for everyone to take them without credit. While many people try to be ethical, a substantial number think that the ease of digital crime is a justification for it.

Keep your thoughts to yourself for other reasons, as well.  Any opinion you voice publicly is going to be held against you.

Write what your conscience demands. Just be sure you can live with how people will use it, misuse it, and abuse it.

8.  Avoid social media, unless you have to connect with someone for a reason. I deleted my Facebook account, my Digg account, Technorati, and a bunch of other things I don’t want to mention. I keep my blog up for several reasons, but from the viewpoint of privacy, it’s a terrible thing. I sometimes wish I had never begun it.

9. Keep a low profile. Even if you do have to write/blog, try to keep it under the radar. Blogging about politics is always going to get attention. You can’t avoid that. But you can always avoid  confrontations. You can always make an effort to give both sides their due,  You can filter comments, avoid posting on forums/sites you don’t know personally, and side-step flame-wars with all the cretins and sociopaths out there.

The net is a highway.  You’re driving next to strangers. Honking your horn or waving a hand at them is OK. Getting into their cars and driving off to dinner with them is another.

10. Watch your IP (Internet Protocol). Your IP address is being harvested by someone all the time. Cookies collect it, forums and boards record it, email providers and search engines track it.  You can disguise it or change it, but determined people can always get hold of  an IP.

That means they can figure out where you are, physically. Which is pretty unnerving. I’ve had a few nasty experiences when enemies got hold of my IP.

So change your IP as much as you need to; change your computer and  ISP provider every year, or even every six months. It’s not so hard to change a computer if you buy it refurbished or second-hand. A good Dell laptop can be had for about $120.  You can always sell the old one and get back some of your money.

On the other hand, you might want to arrange for a few traps for any would-be spies. In that case, your approach might be a bit different…..Be creative.

As for ISP’s, there are always deals, if you look for them.  Quote a price and ask your ISP if they will match it.  In this economy, companies are willing to lower their rates to attract customers.

The Traitorware Among Us

Posted on by

Eva Galperin at EFF:

“Your digital camera may embed metadata into photographs with the camera’s serial number or your location. Your printer may be incorporating a secret code on every page it prints which could be used to identify the printer and potentially the person who used it. If Apple puts a particularly creepy patent it has recently applied for into use, you can look forward to a day when your iPhone may record your voice, take a picture of your location, record your heartbeat, and send that information back to the mothership.

This is traitorware: devices that act behind your back to betray your privacy.

Perhaps the most notable example of traitorware was the Sony rootkit. In 2005 Sony BMG produced CD’s which clandestinely installed a rootkit onto PC’s that provided administrative-level access to the users’ computer. The copy-protected music CD’s would surreptitiously install its DRM technology onto PC’s. Ostensibly, Sony was trying prevent consumers from making multiple copies of their CD’s, but the software also rendered the CD incompatible with many CD-ROM players in PC’s, CD players in cars, and DVD players. Additionally, the software left a back door open on all infected PC’s which would give Sony, or any hacker familiar with the rootkit, control over the PC. And if a consumer should have the temerity to find the rootkit and try to remove the offending drivers, the software would execute code designed to disable the CD drive and trash the PC.

Traitorware is sometimes included in products with less obviously malicious intent. Printer dots were added to certain color laser printers as a forensics tool for law enforcement, where it could help authenticate documents or identify forgeries. Apple’s scary-sounding patent for the iPhone is meant to help locate and disable the phone if it is lost of stolen. Don’t let these good intentions fool you—software that hides itself from you while it gives your personal data away to a third party is dangerous and dishonest. As the Sony BMG rootkit demonstrates, it may even leave your device wide open to attacks from third parties.

Traitorware is not some science-fiction vision of the future. It is the present. Indeed, the Sony rootkit dates back to 2005. Apple’s patent application indicates that we are likely to see more traitorware on the horizon. When that happens, EFF will be there to fight it. We believe that your software and devices should not be a tool for gathering your personal data without your explicit consent.”

South Asia Increasingly Under Biometric Surveillance

Posted on by

Wired.com has a piece on the collection of biometric data on hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan.

According to NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan commander Lt. Gen. William Caldwell (as reported to Wired’s Danger Room) the idea is to screen applicants for Army positions to keep out people with ties to the Taliban or criminal histories. But with biometric files are being compiled on Afghans at the rate of 20-25 per week, the process is likely to include a large number of ordinary citizens, especially as there’s now a  plan in the works that aims to have biometric ID’s for some 1.65 million Afghans by May 2011 through the “population registration division” of the Afghan Ministry of the Interior. Apparently, Caldwell is taking a leaf out of the book of General Petraeus, who used biometric monitoring to keep on top of the Iraqi resistance. It’s also modeled on monitoring during the siege of Fallujah, when the only way to get in and out of the place was with an ID card that needed an iris scan.

Right now, there are apparently two biometric projects in the country, one run by the Afghans accounting for about a quarter of a million files and the other by the Americans, which has nearly half a million, but  so far, there’s not been much integration between the two. The Afghan involvement is a change from the past, when Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, has shut down  biometric monitoring at checkpoints by NATO as a violation of Afghan sovereignty.

Meanwhile,  neighboring India has already launched the first biometrically verified universal ID on a national scale. While not compulsory, it will be needed to access certain social and financial services, and is intended for the entire population of 1.2 billion. Biometric IDs were first used in India in 2002 to check corruption involved in accessing services and rations meant for the poor.

Earlier this year (July 2010), Afghanistan and Pakistan concluded a trade agreement that included the exchange of biometric data as part of the deal.

UK Mind-Reading Surveillance System Monitors Anti-Social Behavior

Posted on by

Along the lines of Google Suggest, which replaces your own thoughts with intrusive suggestions, the cheery little police state in Britain is exploring some anticipatory thought control of its own:

“The technology, called Sigard, monitors movements and speech to detect signs of threatening behaviour.

Its designers claim the system can anticipate anti-social behaviour and violence by analysing the information picked up its sensors. Continue reading →

Echelon: The Global Spy System

Posted on by

An article by Nicky Hager at Cryptome.org from Covert Action Quarterly (1998) about Echelon. Hager’s book on the subject, “Secret Power: New Zealand’s Role In the International Spy Network,” is dated 1996, so I’m a little confused by the dating of the article. Echelon is/was a global espionage and interception system coordinated by the US/UK with the aid of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In NZ, writes Hager, it was implemented without the assent of the public and most public officials.

Here’s a timeline for the development of the system. Per Cryptome, the earliest public report on Echelon is in 1972.

The first reporter to write on it is British intelligence reporter, Duncan Campbell: “They’ve Got It Taped,” New Statesman, August 12, 1988 (republished at Cryptome.org). Campbell testified before Congress on the subject in 1999 and prepared a report for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) that was refused by EPIC’s director Marc Rotenberg, on the grounds that much of the information hadn’t been substantiated (see this correspondence between Rotenberg and Young). After that, there was debate between Campbell and Bamford over what the main focus of the espionage was. I will expand on that and link it later…

“IN THE LATE 1980’S, IN A DECISION IT PROBABLY REGRETS, THE U.S. PROMPTED NEW ZEALAND TO JOIN A NEW AND HIGHLY SECRET GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM. HAGER’S INVESTIGATION INTO IT AND HIS DISCOVERY OF THE ECHELON DICTIONARY HAS REVEALED ONE OF THE WORLD’S BIGGEST, MOST CLOSELY HELD INTELLIGENCE PROJECTS. THE SYSTEM ALLOWS SPY AGENCIES TO MONITOR MOST OF THE WORLD’S TELEPHONE, E-MAIL, AND TELEX COMMUNICATIONS. Continue reading →

Google: The CIA’s Spy-Buddy

Posted on by

From Eric Sommer at Pravda.ru via Market Oracle, January 14, 2010:

“The western media is currently full of articles on Google’s ‘threat to quit China’ over internet censorship issues, and the company’s ‘suspicion’ that the Chinese government was behind attempts to ‘break-in’ to several Google email accounts used by ‘Chinese dissidents’.

However, the media has almost completely failed to report that Google’s surface concern over ‘human rights’ in China is belied by its their deep involvement with some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet: Continue reading →

Wikileaks’ Julian Assange “In Danger” From Pentagon?

Posted on by

More on the ubiquitous founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange. I maintain a neutral to positive rating on Assange, despite criticism of him. The whistleblower emails on anthropogenic global warming that were published on Wikileaks (climategate) hugely damaged the climate cabal, but there are some credible writers who maintain that he’s passing off disinfo as well. I honestly can’t tell one way or other. Lately it’s occurred to me that that the controversy might relate to infighting between factions of the intelligence community, but how is the question. Anyway, that’s pure speculation on my part. Continue reading →

Obama Decrees Codex Alimentarius In US Through Executive Order?

Posted on by

Update:(June 25):

A commenter states that Section G (the controversial passage said to be a stealth introduction of the Codex) refers only to FEDERAL programs outside the Department of Health and Human Services. But the language elsewhere specifies the DHS when it’s meant, so why is the language in this section ambiguous? Still, I went back to check and noticed that the original mail alert was sent out by Dr. Rima Laibow whose credibility has been questioned. So I’ve attached a question mark to this piece. Codex is on the agenda, but there’s no need  to be inaccurate about when or how it will be introduced.

NOTE (JUNE 20):

IN THE ORIGINAL HEAD TO THIS POST I REFERRED TO THE NEW BODY CONSTITUTED BY OBAMA,
‘THE NATIONAL PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION, AND PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL,’ AS THE ‘NATIONAL HEALTH COUNCIL,’ SIMPLY TO HAVE A SHORT ENOUGH CONTRACTION. I’VE SINCE CHANGED THE HEADER,

SO, IF YOU SEE THE ORIGINAL IN ANY LINK, PLEASE NOTE THAT IT SHOULD BE ‘NATIONAL PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION AND PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL,’ NOT ‘NATIONAL HEALTH COUNCIL.’ APOLOGIES FOR THE CARELESS ERROR.

ORIGINAL POST

On June 10, 2010, while public attention was diverted toward the Gulf oil spill, Barack Obama passed an executive order mandating that all preventive health measure, even those outside government purview, be brought into alignment with science-based guidelines developed by the Centers for Drug Control and Prevention (CDC). This is in effect a way to bring in Codex Alimentarius, the globalist project to outlaw all alternative therapies, except those proposed by the government.

Per this order, you will no longer be able to take whatever herbs or pills you want.

Here is the full text of the order, at the White House website (the specific paragraph is Section G).

The White House, Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release, June 10, 2010

EXECUTIVE ORDER -ESTABLISHING THE NATIONAL PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION, AND PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 4001 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148), it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Establishment. There is established within the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Council).

Sec. 2. Membership.

(a) The Surgeon General shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall be composed of:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture;

(2) the Secretary of Labor;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Education;

(6) the Secretary of Homeland Security;

(7) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;

(8) the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission;

(9) the Director of National Drug Control Policy;

(10) the Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council;

(11) the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs;

(12) the Chairman of the Corporation for National and Community Service; and

(13) the head of any other executive department or agency that the Chair may, from time to time, determine is appropriate.

(b) The Council shall meet at the call of the Chair.

Sec. 3. Purposes and Duties. The Council shall:

(a) provide coordination and leadership at the Federal level, and among all executive departments and agencies, with respect to prevention, wellness, and health promotion practices, the public health system, and integrative health care in the United States;

(b) develop, after obtaining input from relevant stakeholders, a national prevention, health promotion, public health, and integrative health-care strategy that incorporates the most effective and achievable means of improving the health status of Americans and reducing the incidence of preventable illness and disability in the United States, as further described in section 5 of this order;

(c) provide recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the most pressing health issues confronting the United States and changes in Federal policy to achieve national wellness, health promotion, and public health goals, including the reduction of tobacco use, sedentary behavior, and poor nutrition;

(d) consider and propose evidence-based models, policies, and innovative approaches for the promotion of transformative models of prevention, integrative health, and public health on individual and community levels across the United States;

(e) establish processes for continual public input, including input from State, regional, and local leadership communities and other relevant stakeholders, including Indian tribes and tribal organizations;

(f) submit the reports required by section 6 of this order; and

(g) carry out such other activities as are determined appropriate by the President.

Sec. 4. Advisory Group.

(a) There is established within the Department of Health and Human Services an Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (Advisory Group), which shall report to the Chair of the Council.

(b) The Advisory Group shall be composed of not more than 25 members or representatives from outside the Federal Government appointed by the President and shall include a diverse group of licensed health professionals, including integrative health practitioners who are representative of or have expertise in:

(1) worksite health promotion;

(2) community services, including community health centers;

(3) preventive medicine;

(4) health coaching;

(5) public health education;

(6) geriatrics; and

(7) rehabilitation medicine.

(c) The Advisory Group shall develop policy and program recommendations and advise the Council on lifestyle-based chronic disease prevention and management, integrative health care practices, and health promotion.

Sec. 5. National Prevention and Health Promotion Strategy. Not later than March 23, 2011, the Chair, in consultation with the Council, shall develop and make public a national prevention, health promotion, and public health strategy (national strategy), and shall review and revise it periodically. The national strategy shall:

(a) set specific goals and objectives for improving the health of the United States through federally supported prevention, health promotion, and public health programs, consistent with ongoing goal setting efforts conducted by specific agencies;

(b) establish specific and measurable actions and timelines to carry out the strategy, and determine accountability for meeting those timelines, within and across Federal departments and agencies; and

(c) make recommendations to improve Federal efforts relating to prevention, health promotion, public health, and integrative health-care practices to ensure that Federal efforts are consistent with available standards and evidence.

Sec. 6. Reports. Not later than July 1, 2010, and annually thereafter until January 1, 2015, the Council shall submit to the President and the relevant committees of the Congress, a report that:

(a) describes the activities and efforts on prevention, health promotion, and public health and activities to develop the national strategy conducted by the Council during the period for which the report is prepared;

(b) describes the national progress in meeting specific prevention, health promotion, and public health goals defined in the national strategy and further describes corrective actions recommended by the Council and actions taken by relevant agencies and organizations to meet these goals;

(c) contains a list of national priorities on health promotion and disease prevention to address lifestyle behavior modification (including smoking cessation, proper nutrition, appropriate exercise, mental health, behavioral health, substance-use disorder, and domestic violence screenings) and the prevention measures for the five leading disease killers in the United States;

(d) contains specific science-based initiatives to achieve the measurable goals of the Healthy People 2020 program of the Department of Health and Human Services regarding nutrition, exercise, and smoking cessation, and targeting the five leading disease killers in the United States;

(e) contains specific plans for consolidating Federal health programs and centers that exist to promote healthy behavior and reduce disease risk (including eliminating programs and offices determined to be ineffective in meeting the priority goals of the Healthy People 2020 program of the Department of Health and Human Services);

(f) contains specific plans to ensure that all Federal health-care programs are fully coordinated with science-based prevention recommendations by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and

(g) contains specific plans to ensure that all prevention programs outside the Department of Health and Human Services are based on the science-based guidelines developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under subsection (d) of this section.

Sec. 7. Administration.

(a) The Department of Health and Human Services shall provide funding and administrative support for the Council and the Advisory Group to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.

(b) All executive departments and agencies shall provide information and assistance to the Council as the Chair may request for purposes of carrying out the Council’s functions, to the extent permitted by law.

(c) Members of the Advisory Group shall serve without compensation, but shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons serving intermittently in Government service (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707), consistent with the availability of funds.

Sec. 8. General Provisions.

(a) Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C App.) may apply to the Advisory Group, any functions of the President under that Act, except that of reporting to the Congress, shall be performed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in accordance with the guidelines that have been issued by the Administrator of General Services.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(1) authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,

June 10, 2010