msn | Monday Bloomberg report
alleging that a former top Obama administration official requested the
unmasking of U.S. persons tied to the Trump campaign who were swept up
in foreign surveillance is not the “smoking gun” that the President’s backers are making it out to be.
According
to surveillance and national security experts, former Obama national
security adviser Susan Rice would be within her rights to make such
requests if she was trying to determine the extent of Russia’s
interference in the presidential election.
“Part of her job as
national security adviser is to pay attention to what foreign
governments are doing,” Rebecca Lonergan, a former federal prosecutor
who handled foreign surveillance cases, told TPM. “If she’s asking for
specific names to be unmasked in order to understand what Russia may be
doing to influence the U.S. political system and influence our
elections, presumably in a way they thought would benefit them, she’s
doing her job.”
Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst, noted on Twitter
that it was not “odd or wrong” for the national security adviser to
read “a report of foreign officials discussing US persons coming into”
the White House. And Susan Hennessey, a fellow in national security
governance studies at the Brookings Institution, wrote of the Bloomberg
article that “nothing in this story indicates anything improper
whatsoever.”
NYPost | Do you suspect that the noise over Trump-campaign contacts with the
Russians is just a political hit arranged by Obama insiders before they
left? You got fresh evidence of that Monday, with news that then-National Security Adviser Susan Rice was behind the “unmasking” of Trumpites in transcripts of calls with Russian officials.
Again, nothing on the public record so far shows that anyone on Team Trump said anything improper on those calls.
It’s no surprise that US spooks intercept foreign officials’ calls.
But intelligence-community reports don’t disclose the names of US
citizens on the other end. To get that info, a high official must (but
rarely does) push to “unmask” the Americans’ names.
Bloomberg’s Eli Lake now reports that Rice started doing just that last year.
WashingtonTimes | File this under Most Disingenuous Argument Ever. Susan Rice, of Barack Obama national security adviser fame, actually penned
a piece for the Washington Post decrying President Donald Trump
administration’s “false statements” about wiretapping — saying such
unproven allegations present a danger to America.
That buzzing in
your ears is from the rapid head-shaking that probably started,
involuntarily, as soon as you finished reading that quick sentence.
medium | Susan Rice,
who served as the National Security Adviser under President Obama, has
been identified as the official who requested unmasking of incoming
Trump officials, Cernovich Media can exclusively report.
The
White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible
for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The
reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled
conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to
them.
Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes.
“Unmasking”
is the process of identifying individuals whose communications were
caught in the dragnet of intelligence gathering. While conducting
investigations into terrorism and other related crimes, intelligence
analysts incidentally capture conversations about parties not subject to
the search warrant. The identities of individuals who are not under
investigation are kept confidential, for legal and moral reasons.
As
his presidency drew to a close, Barack Obama’s top aides routinely
reviewed intelligence reports gleaned from the National Security
Agency’s incidental intercepts of Americans abroad, taking advantage of
rules their boss relaxed starting in 2011 to help the government better
fight terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking threats, Circa
has learned.
Among
those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence
reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan
Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta
Lynch.
kunstler | If you thought banking in our time was a miserable racket — which it
is, of course, and by “racket” I mean a criminal enterprise — then
so-called health care has it beat by a country mile, with an added layer
of sadism and cruelty built into its operations. Lots of people
willingly sign onto mortgages and car loans they wouldn’t qualify for in
an ethically sound society, but the interest rates and payments are
generally spelled out on paper. They know what they’re signing on for,
even if the contract is reckless and stupid on the parts of both
borrower and lender. Pension funds and insurance companies foolishly
bought bundled mortgage bonds of this crap concocted in the housing
bubble. They did it out of greed and desperation, but a little due
diligence would have clued them into the fraud being served up by the
likes of Goldman Sachs.
Medicine is utterly opaque cost-wise, and that is the heart of the
issue. Nobody in the system will say what anything costs and nobody
wants to because it would break the spell that they work in an honest,
legit business. There is no rational scheme for the cost of any service
from one “provider” to the next or even one patient to the next. Anyway,
the costs are obscenely inflated and concealed in so many deliberately
deceptive coding schemes that even actuaries and professors of economics
are confounded by their bills. The services are provided when the
customer is under the utmost duress, often life-threatening, and the
outcome even in a successful recovery from illness is financial ruin
that leaves a lot of people better off dead.
It is a hostage racket, in plain English, a disgrace to the
profession that has adopted it, and an insult to the nation. All the
idiotic negotiations in congress around the role of insurance companies
are a grand dodge to avoid acknowledging the essential racketeering of
the “providers” — doctors and hospitals. We are never going to reform it
in its current incarnation. For all his personality deformities,
President Trump is right in saying that ObamaCare is going to implode.
It is only a carbuncle on the gangrenous body of the US medical
establishment. The whole system will go down with it.
The New York Times departed from its usual obsessions with
Russian turpitude and transgender life last week to publish a valuable
briefing on this aspect of the health care racket: Those Indecipherable Medical Bills? They’re One Reason Health Care Costs So Much
by Elisabeth Rosenthal. Much of this covers ground exposed in the now
famous March 4, 2013 Time Magazine cover story (it took up the whole
issue): Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us,
by Steven Brill. The American public and its government have been
adequately informed about the gross and lawless chiseling rampant in
every quarter of medicine. The system is one of engineered criminality.
It is inflicting ruin on millions. It is really a wonder that the public
has not stormed the hospitals with pitchforks and flaming brands to
string up that gang in the parking lots high above their Beemers and
Lexuses.
thehill | Senator Chuck Schumer and Congressman Adam Schiff
have both castigated Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee, for his handling of the inquiry into Russia’s
interference in the 2016 presidential election. They should think
twice. The issue that has recently seized Nunes is of vital importance
to anyone who cares about fundamental civil liberties.
The
trail that Nunes is following will inevitably lead back to a
particularly significant leak. On Jan. 12, Washington Post columnist
David Ignatius reported
that “according to a senior U.S. government official, (General Mike)
Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec.
29.”
From Nunes’s statements, it’s clear that he
suspects that this information came from NSA intercepts of Kislyak’s
phone. An Obama official, probably in the White House, “unmasked”
Flynn’s name and passed it on to Ignatius.
Regardless
of how the government collected on Flynn, the leak was a felony and a
violation of his civil rights. But it was also a severe breach of the
public trust. When I worked as an NSC staffer in the White House,
2005-2007, I read dozens of NSA surveillance reports every day. On the
basis of my familiarity with this system, I strongly suspect that
someone in the Obama White House blew a hole in the thin wall that
prevents the government from using information collected from
surveillance to destroy the lives of the citizens whose privacy it is
pledged to protect.
The leaking of Flynn’s name was
part of what can only be described as a White House campaign to hype the
Russian threat and, at the same time, to depict Trump as Vladimir
Putin’s Manchurian candidate.
antimedia | If you’re one of the countless Americans who was distraught to learn
of the revelations made by former National Security Agency (NSA)
contractor Edward Snowden, the mere idea that there might be yet another
agency out there — perhaps just as powerful and much more intrusive —
should give you goosebumps.
Foreign Policyreports
that the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, or NGA, is an obscure
spy agency former President Barack Obama had a hard time wrapping his
mind around back in 2009. But as the president grew fond of drone
warfare, finding a way to launch wars without having to go through Congress
for the proper authorization, the NGA also became more relevant. Now,
President Donald Trump is expected to further explore the
multibillion-dollar surveillance network.
Like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security
Agency (NSA), the NGA is an intelligence agency, but it also serves as a
combat support institution that functions under the U.S. Department of
Defense (DOD).
With headquarters bigger than the CIA’s, the building cost $1.4
billion to be completed in 2011. In 2016, the NGA bought an extra 99
acres in St. Louis, building additional structures that cost taxpayers
an extra $1.75 billion.
Enjoying the extra budget Obama threw at them, the NGA became one of
the most obscure intelligence agencies precisely because it relies on
the work of drones.
As a body of government that has only one task — to analyze images
and videos captured by drones in the Middle East — the NGA is mighty
powerful. So why haven’t we heard of it before?
theduran | To my mind what this episode shows is how sensitive the Democrats are
about the raising of the whole surveillance issue. This lends further
strength to my opinion – which I note is coming to be increasingly widely shared – that it is the surveillance carried out during the election of Donald Trump and his campaign team which is the real scandal in this affair, and that the fake ‘Russiagate’ scandal is the smoke-screen concealing it.
They will be equally disappointed there. These attempts to use
Congressional committees as investigative and prosecutorial instruments
suffer from a basic misconception: these are oversight committees, not
investigative or prosecutorial committees, and they cannot be used in
that way. They cannot magic up evidence of collusion between the Trump
campaign and Russia that the actual investigation – the one carried out
by the FBI – says is not there.
The single most important fact about the last few weeks, and the
clearest possible sign that the ‘Russiagate’ scandal is flagging, is
that there have been no more leaks from within the intelligence and
security agencies since the ones at the beginning of March about Jeff Sessions’s meetings with the Russian ambassador.
That suggests that the former Obama administration officials, who I
suspect were the people who were physically communicating the
information in the leaks to the media, are no longer being fed
information about Donald Trump and his associates or about the progress
of the FBI investigation by their sources within the intelligence and
national security bureaucracy.
That could be because people within the intelligence and national
security bureaucracy are being deterred by the investigation into the
leaking of classified material which the President has been calling for
but which the House Intelligence Committee hearing on 20th March 2017
suggested FBI Director Comey is resisting (almost certainly because
people within the FBI were involved in the leaks), or it could be
because increasingly there is no damaging information to leak.
Regardless of what the explanation is, in the absence of any more
leaks there has been nothing over the last few weeks for the supporters
of ‘Russiagate’ to work with. The result is that in the absence of
anything new the effort to keep the ‘Russiagate’ scandal going and in
the public eye is flagging.
My best guess is that it will collapse entirely by early summer.
wikileaks | Today, March 31st 2017, WikiLeaks releases Vault 7 "Marble" -- 676 source code files for the CIA's secret anti-forensic Marble Framework.
Marble is used to hamper forensic investigators and anti-virus
companies from attributing viruses, trojans and hacking attacks to the
CIA.
Marble does this by hiding ("obfuscating") text fragments used in CIA malware
from visual inspection. This is the digital equivallent of a specalized
CIA tool to place covers over the english language text on U.S.
produced weapons systems before giving them to insurgents secretly
backed by the CIA.
Marble forms part of the CIA's anti-forensics approach and the CIA's Core Library of malware code. It is "[D]esigned to allow for flexible and easy-to-use obfuscation" as "string
obfuscation algorithms (especially those that are unique) are often
used to link malware to a specific developer or development shop."
The Marble source code also includes a deobfuscator to reverse
CIA text obfuscation. Combined with the revealed obfuscation
techniques, a pattern or signature emerges which can assist forensic
investigators attribute previous hacking attacks and viruses to the CIA.
Marble was in use at the CIA during 2016. It reached 1.0 in 2015.
The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in
English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi. This
would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by
pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not
American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the
use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators even more strongly to the
wrong conclusion, --- but there are other possibilities, such as hiding
fake error messages.
The Marble Framework is used for obfuscation only and does not contain any vulnerabilties or exploits by itself.
gabbard.house.gov | Continuing her commitment to common sense criminal
justice reform, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) spoke on the House floor
today urging Congress to pass bipartisan legislation to federally
decriminalize marijuana. If passed, the Ending Federal Marijuana
Prohibition Act (H.R.1227) would take marijuana off the federal
controlled substances list—joining other industries
such as alcohol and tobacco. Gabbard introduced the legislation with
Rep. Tom Garrett (VA-05), an Army veteran and former prosecutor.
“Our outdated policies on marijuana are having devastating ripple
effects on individuals and communities across the country. They have
turned everyday Americans into criminals, torn apart families, and
wasted huge amounts of taxpayer dollars to arrest, prosecute, and
incarcerate people for non-violent marijuana charges,” said Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.
“Differences in state and federal law have also created confusion and
uncertainty for our local businesses, who face contradictory regulations
that affect their bottom line and ability to operate. I urge our
colleagues to support our bipartisan legislation which would
decriminalize marijuana, bringing about long overdue and common sense
reform."
“There is growing consensus acknowledging that the effects of
marijuana are less harmful than its criminal prohibition, which has
increased incarceration rates, divided families, and burdened state
governments with the high cost of enforcement, prison and probation.
It’s clear that there are more vital needs that we as a society need to
allocate our precious resources towards, such as education, mental
health, and homelessness. Decriminalization is a step forward in making
needed criminal justice reforms, which should also include more
diversion to substance abuse treatment,” said Karen Umemoto,
Department of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Hawaiʻi
at Mānoa and juvenile justice researcher.
“As long as marijuana is federally illegal, FDIC
regulations make it impossible for banks to provide any services to the
eight Hawaiʻi Medical Marijuana Dispensary licensees. Federal
decriminalization will enable professional dispensaries to provide much
needed patient access and cost savings,” said Richard Ha, CEO of Lau Ola, a medical marijuana dispensary on Hawaiʻi Island.
“Descheduling cannabis will benefit Hawaiʻi patients by allowing for
more rapid research to identify the best medical marijuana strains and
dosages for individual medical conditions. Also, eliminating the
barriers to banking will make it easier and safer for Hawaiʻi patients
to purchase the medicine they need and eliminate unnecessary expense and
complexity for dispensaries,” saidBrian Goldstein, Founder and CEO of Mānoa Botanicals, a licensed medical marijuana dispensary on Oʻahu.
Background: Rep. Tulsi Gabbard supports the
full legalization of marijuana on the federal level as part of her
overall effort toward criminal justice reform. Last month, she visited
correctional facilities throughout the state, and met with inmates,
criminal justice advocates and experts, health professionals, educators
and others to discuss reducing recidivism and her continued efforts to pass federal criminal justice reform legislation like the SAFE Justice Act and the Sentencing Reform Act.
The congresswoman has also supported legislation like the Industrial
Hemp Farming Act to support the cultivation of industrial hemp in
Hawaiʻi and nationwide.
prospect |Rob Frankil of Sellersville,
Pennsylvania, followed his father into the family business after
college. “My entire life,” he said, “I’ve been involved with managing
and owning independent pharmacies.” He now owns two stores, a
traditional community pharmacy and another that caters to long-term care
facilities.
Like any retail outlet, Frankil purchases inventory from a wholesale
distributor and sells it to customers at a small markup. But unlike
butchers or hardware store owners, pharmacists have no idea how much
money they’ll make on a sale until the moment they sell it. That’s
because the customer’s co-pay doesn’t cover the cost of the drug.
Instead, a byzantine reimbursement process determines Frankil’s fee.
“I get a prescription, type in the data, click send, and I’m told I’m
getting a dollar or two,” Frankil says. The system resembles the pull
of a slot machine: Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. “Pharmacies
sell prescriptions at significant losses,” he adds. “So what do I do?
Fill the prescription and lose money, or don’t fill it and lose
customers? These decisions happen every single day.”
Frankil’s troubles cannot be traced back to insurers or drug
companies, the usual suspects that most people deem responsible for
raising costs in the health-care system. He blames a collection of
powerful corporations known as pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. If
you have drug coverage as part of your health plan, you are likely to
carry a card with the name of a PBM on it. These middlemen manage
prescription drug benefits for health plans, contracting with drug
manufacturers and pharmacies in a multi-sided market. Over the past 30
years, PBMs have evolved from paper-pushers to significant controllers
of the drug pricing system, a black box understood by almost no one.
Lack of transparency, unjustifiable fees, and massive market
consolidations have made PBMs among the most profitable corporations
you’ve never heard about.
Americans pay the highest health-care prices in the world, including
the highest for drugs, medical devices, and other health-care services
and products. Our fragmented system produces many opportunities for
excessive charges. But one lesser-known reason for those high prices is
the stranglehold that a few giant intermediaries have secured over
distribution. The antitrust laws are supposed to provide protection
against just this kind of concentrated economic power. But in one area
after another in today’s economy, federal antitrust authorities and the
courts have failed to intervene. In this case, PBMs are sucking money
out of the health-care system—and our wallets—with hardly any public
awareness of what they are doing.
consortiumnews | As those paying rudimentary attention to modern methods of
surveillance know, “wiretapping” is passé. But Trump’s use of the word
allowed FBI and Department of Justice officials and their counterparts
at the National Security Agency to swear on a stack of bibles that the
FBI, DOJ, and NSA have been unable to uncover any evidence within their
particular institutions of such “wiretapping.”
At the House Intelligence Committee hearing on March 20, FBI Director
Comey and NSA Director Michael Rogers firmly denied that their agencies
had wiretapped Trump Towers on the orders of President Obama.
So, were Trump and his associates “wiretapped?” Of course not.
Wiretapping went out of vogue decades ago, having been rendered obsolete
by leaps in surveillance technology.
The real question is: Were Trump and his associates surveilled? Wake
up, America. Was no one paying attention to the disclosures from NSA
whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013 when he exposed Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper as a liar for denying that the NSA
engaged in bulk collection of communications inside the United States.
The reality is that EVERYONE, including the President, is
surveilled. The technology enabling bulk collection would have made the
late demented FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s mouth water.
Allegations about the intelligence community’s abuse of its powers
also did not begin with Snowden. For instance, several years earlier,
former NSA worker and whistleblower Russell Tice warned about these
“special access programs,” citing first-hand knowledge, but his claims
were brushed aside as coming from a disgruntled employee with
psychological problems. His disclosures were soon forgotten.
However, earlier this year, there was a stark reminder of how much
fear these surveillance capacities have struck in the hearts of senior
U.S. government officials. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New
York told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow
that President Trump was “being really dumb” to take on the intelligence
community, since “They have six ways from Sunday at getting back at
you.”
Maddow shied away from asking the logical follow-up: “Senator
Schumer, are you actually saying that Trump should be afraid of the
CIA?” Perhaps she didn’t want to venture down a path that would raise
more troubling questions about the surveillance of the Trump team than
on their alleged contacts with the Russians.
ibankcoin | Aside from what appears to be a brazen confirmation of spying on the
Trump team, the bigger red flag here is Dr. Farkas wasn’t employed by
the Obama administration at the time the Russian allegations arose.
So how did this non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council, member
of the Council on Foreign Relations, and former deputy assistant
secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, gain knowledge of
intelligence regarding members of Trump’s team and their relations with
Russia, when she was the senior foreign policy advisor for Presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton?
Farkas was the prime driver behind the anti-Russia phobia inside the Pentagon during the Obama years — shilling hard for the Ukraine — requesting that the President send them anti-tank missiles — which, essentially, would mean outright war with Russia.
Back to the interview with Mika Brzezinski. Dr. Farkas said ‘we’ had
good intel on Russia. Who does she refer to when she says ‘we?’
WaPo | The first known published description of Donald Trump’s hair, as an
entity that deserved its own description, was mild. “His sandy hair is
probably a bit long by standards of the corporate world,” read a 1984
newspaper profile of the then-38-year-old mogul. “With the sides slicked
back just a bit.”
Three decades later, describing the headstuff
of the leading Republican presidential candidate has been elevated to an
art form. Is is swirled or swooped? Animal or vegetable? (Mineral?)
Burnt sienna or orange Creamsicle? Last week Gawker published an
extensive investigation asserting that the whole concoction might
actually be a $60,000 weave.
GQ | And this is why Dave Chappelle’s recent Netflix specials are so disappointing.
Perhaps
my expectations were too high. I hoped that Chappelle, now entering his
mid-40s, would have used his signature slyness and world-weary insights
to tackle subjects more daunting than the low-hanging and dated comedic
fruit of trans people, rape, and famous black men (O.J. Simpson and
Bill Cosby) accused of horrific crimes against (mostly) white women.
Especially after taking a full decade away from the public microscope.
And especially during a time when there seems to be so fucking
much—politically, culturally, and racially—for a black comedian as sharp
and shrewd as Chappelle to dive into. His focus on the horror of
political correctness, instead, felt like something you’d expect to come
from a megarich 43-year-old man from the outskirts of Ohio. Who,
instead of evolving with the world, has remained stagnant and believes
the world has gone mad while pining for time when things were simpler.
Which is who he is.
I recognize the
presumption and perhaps even self-indulgence of suggesting that I know
what Chappelle should have been talking about better than he does. There
are no emails and comments I hate worse than “Why did you write about this thing instead of this other thing I wanted you to write about?”
and I’m doing this now. I do not wish to be that guy, especially when
discussing Chappelle, a man whose break from the public came as a result
of corporate forces trying to tell him what he could and couldn’t—and
should and shouldn’t—talk about. He is a public figure whom we (black
people) have collectively and justifiably circled the wagons for;
sensitive to his wish for peace of mind, and his attempt to possess it;
ultimately aiming to protect one of our icons from the scourge of
capital letter Whiteness attempting to transmute him.
I just... I don’t know, I just would like for him to join us in 2017. There’s so much he can do here.
thefederalist | The flyer reflects the ideology of anti-Israel student groups and
their leftist allies who seek “intersectionality,” the common bond of
all “oppressed people.” This ideology brings together Muslims who love
Sharia and its denigration of women, and rabid feminists who see their
problems as a consequence of male privilege. Yes, politics does make for
strange bed companions.
Intersectionality
has resulted in an upsurge of anti-Semitism. Whether it is support for
the Jew-bashing Israel Apartheid Week or the campaign of boycott,
divestment, and sanctions against the one democracy in the Middle East,
these initiatives are thinly disguised anti-Semitic hate fests. Whenever
they occur there is a surge in physical and verbal attacks on Jewish
students.
So, it is not surprising that just days after the first
flyer was distributed, a second one appeared, this one focused on
denying the Holocaust. Like the Iranian government, which is always
denying the first Holocaust but actively promising a second, both
flyers’ tropes threaten Jewish existence.
The larger issue is not
the flyers or even their threat to Jews. The issue is that the flyers
reflect a dominant ideology that is inculcated on campuses to a captive
audience in frequently required classes that resemble the Workmen’s
Circle of early Marxism. These courses teach that all gain, except that
achieved by oppressed classes, is ill gotten.
In Middle East
studies courses, Israel is seen as the one illegitimate state in the
world, a last bastion of British imperialism. Obviously, the professors
who teach this do not recall that Britain supported the Arabs in
Israel’s 1948 War of Independence.
Canards
such as “Jews control the media and Hollywood” are commonplace among
leftist professors who spoon-feed their own ideology rather than facts.
If professors were teaching that slavery is a benign institution that
benefited blacks, there would be such public outcry that universities
would not be able to open their doors. But about Jews, almost anything
can be said with impunity.
The issue of the flyers is less that
they are the product of the twisted minds of some brainwashed students,
but that they are the logical outcome of what is taught on our campuses.
theverge | SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk is backing a brain-computer interface venture called Neuralink, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The company, which is still in the earliest stages of existence and has
no public presence whatsoever, is centered on creating devices that can
be implanted in the human brain, with the eventual purpose of helping
human beings merge with software and keep pace with advancements in
artificial intelligence. These enhancements could improve memory or
allow for more direct interfacing with computing devices.
Musk has hinted at the existence of Neuralink a few times over the last six months or so. More recently, Musk told a crowd in Dubai,
“Over time I think we will probably see a closer merger of biological
intelligence and digital intelligence.” He added that “it's mostly about
the bandwidth, the speed of the connection between your brain and the
digital version of yourself, particularly output." On Twitter, Musk has responded to inquiring fans about his progress on a so-called “neural lace,” which is sci-fi shorthand for a brain-computer interface humans could use to improve themselves.
wired | The Voice of God weapon
— a device that projects voices into your head to make you think God is
speaking to you — is the military’s equivalent of an urban myth.
Meaning, it’s mentioned periodically at defense workshops (ironically, I
first heard about it at the same defense conference where I first met
Noah), and typically someone whispers about it actually being used. Now
Steven Corman, writing at the COMOPS journal, describes his own encounter with this urban myth:
At a government workshop some time ago I
head someone describe a new tool that was described as the “voice of
Allah.” This was said to be a device that would operate at a distance
and would deliver a message that only a single person could hear. The
story was that it was tested in a conflict situation in Iraq and pointed
at one insurgent in a group, who whipped around looking in all
directions, and began a heated conversation with his compatriots, who
did not hear the message. At the time I greeted this story with some
skepticism.
It appears that some of the
troops in Iraq are using "spoken" (as opposed to "screeching") LRAD to
mess with enemy fighters. Islamic terrorists tend to be superstitious
and, of course, very religious. LRAD can put the "word of God" into
their heads. If God, in the form of a voice that only you can hear,
tells you to surrender, or run away, what are you gonna do?
And as Corman also notes, CNET recently wrote about
an advertisement in New York for A&E’s TV show Paranormal State,
which uses some of this technology. Beyond directed sound, it’s long
been known that microwaves at certain frequencies can produce an auditory effect
that sounds like it’s coming from within someone’s head (and there’s
the nagging question of classified microwave work at Brooks Air Force
Base, that the Air Force stubbornly refuses to talk about).
That brings us back to the Voice of God/Allah Weapon. Is it
real or bogus? In one version — related to me by another defense
reporter — it’s not just Allah’s voice — but an entire holographic image
projected above (um, who decides what Allah looks like?).
Does it exist? I’m not sure, but it’s funny that when you
hear it brought up at defense conferences, no one ever asks the obvious
question: does anybody think this thing will actually convince people
God is speaking to them? I’m thinking, not.
wikipedia | From January 2002 to August 2003, Poindexter served as the Director of the DARPAInformation Awareness Office
(IAO). The mission of the IAO was to imagine, develop, apply,
integrate, demonstrate and transition information technologies,
components, and prototype closed-loop information systems. This aimed to counter asymmetric threats (most notably, terrorist threats) by achieving total information awareness and thus aiding preemption; national security warning; and, national security decision making
Rejuvenation Pills
-
No one likes getting old. Everyone would like to be immorbid. Let's be
careful here. Immortal doesnt include youth or return to youth. Immorbid
means you s...
Death of the Author — at the Hands of Cthulhu
-
In 1967, French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes wrote of
“The Death of the Author,” arguing that the meaning of a text is divorced
from au...
9/29 again
-
"On this sacred day of Michaelmas, former President Donald Trump invoked
the heavenly power of St. Michael the Archangel, sharing a powerful prayer
for pro...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...