Archive for the ‘2004-’ Category

Wikileaks:

Today’s courageous truth teller – Shi Tao

Leaking details of cover-up of Tiananmen Square anniversary protest.

In April of 2004Shi Tao, a journalist for the Contemporary Business News in the Hunan province of China, received a document sent by the Chinese government to journalists.

In the document, the Chinese government warned journalists that overseas pro-democracy Chinese dissidents may come back to mainland China during the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 on June 4th. It asked all news media not to report anything regarding the so-called “June 4th event”, Falun Gong or people calling for politico-social change.

Shi used his private Yahoo email account to send a summary of the document to a Chinese democracy web site called Asia Democracy Foundation.

The Chinese government discovered the email and demanded the sender’s personal information from Yahoo’s Hong Kong office; Yahoo turned the information over without asking what it was for. Shi Tao was arrested and sentenced to ten years prison.

By IgnoranceIsntBliss


LINK

While it was known that Woolsey was again thumbing Iraq later that day, this new clip is the first time anyone thumbed Iraq on national TV. (In propaganda) “you gotta keep repeating yourself for the truth to sink in”. –GWB

PNAC member and former Director of CIA James Woolsey named Iraq as a suspect of 9/11 at 2:26AM, 9/12/01, just over 2 hours after the day of 9/11.

James Woolsey just so happened to be a signatory in the Letter to President Clinton on Iraq, in 1998, which called for the removal of Saddam from power at that time. He was also one of the signers of another PNAC document, Statement on Post-War Iraq, on March 19, 2003. Woolsey served on the Rumsfeld Commission, and was a Commissioner on the National Commission on Terrorism which delivered the Report of the National Commissionon Terrorism to President Bill Clinton in June 2000.

While he wasn’t a participant in writing of the infamous Rebuilding America’s Defenses document, he was already a member at that time. This document, which was an uber-imperialist’s wet dream wishlist, called for a technological transformation of the military and imperialist domination of Middle Eastern and Southeast Asian lands and regimes while highlight states like Iraq and Iran as action item threats.

Pessimism was expressed in the manifesto when they complained that “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Full coverage of Woolsey and PNAC in the Bill Moyer’s film: “Buying the War”.

It’s funny they might say that, because on 9/11 they got just that, including a green light to exploit their Iraqi imperial ambitions. At least 16 memebers of PNAC are or were in the Bush administration, including Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and even little brother Jeb Bush. It’s of little surprise that they didn’t ensure that “a new Pearl Harbor” didn’t happen. It’s not like they didn’t have some idea, as according to the 9/11 Commission Report the government had “tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands” of terrorism warnings, yet GWB wasn’t that concerned about terrorism.

Then on the night of 9/11, at 2:26AM, James Woolsey, a frontman stooge of Neo-American Imperialism, was already thumbing Iraq as a suspect sponser state of the 9/11 attacks.

“The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today.” –GWB

In the aftermath, PNAC’s imperislism manifesto ended up reading like a prophecy chart come true, as they got their “New Pearl Harbor”, and their 20 plus point list of technolgical transformation, and their green light for ultra-neoimperialism including the invasion Iraq, and so on.

Today Woolsey can be often seen in the media pounding the war drum and grandstanding for American Imperialism. He is Vice President of Booz Allen & Hamilton, the lead contractor for the Total Information Awareness program. He is also a member of the Policy Advisory Board to the Secretary of Defense. Woolsey attended the September 12-14, 2006, elitist deep-integration North American Union forum entitled the “Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment”, held in secret at Banff Springs Hotel, in Banff, Alberta, Canada.

See Also:

Woolsey’s PNAC Signatories
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_Woolsey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._James_Woolsey,_Jr.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/

Volume 9, Number 1 • January/February 2001

Hands-Off Approach Lands Passenger Jet

Imagine being able to land a jumbo jet without ever taking control of the stick. NASA scientists recently demonstrated the ability to control a 757 passenger jet simulation, using only human muscle-nerve signals linked to a computer.

Scientists outfitted a pilot with an armband implanted with eight electrodes. The sensors read muscle nerve signals as the pilot made the gestures needed to land a computer-generated aircraft at San Francisco International Airport in California. The pilot also demonstrated the ability to land a damaged aircraft during emergency landing drills. The work was reported in the October 2000 proceedings of the World Automation Congress.

“This is a fundamentally new way to communicate with machines–another way to talk with our mechanical world,” said the paper’s principal author, Dr. Charles Jorgensen, head of the Neuroengineering Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California. The other authors are fellow Ames researchers Dr. Kevin Wheeler and Dr. Slawomir Stepniewski. “This new technology is significant in that bioelectric control of computers can replace computer keyboards, mice and joysticks for some uses,” Jorgensen added.

“In the experiment, a pilot closes his fist in empty air, makes movements and creates nerve signals that are captured by a dry electrode array on his arm,” said Jorgensen. “The nerve signals are analyzed and then routed through a computer, allowing the pilot to control the simulated airplane.”

The pilot sees the aircraft and control panel projected on a large, dome-shaped screen while flying the aircraft.

Engineers made the first prototype armband from exercise tights, and used metallic dress-

buttons as dry electrodes. “An advantage of using bioelectric machine control is that human nerve signals can be linked directly with devices without the aid of joysticks or mice, thereby providing rapid, intuitive control,” Jorgensen added. “This technology also is useful for astronauts in spacesuits who need to control tools in space.”

Bioelectric control uses “neural net” software that “learns” patterns that can slowly change and evolve with time, as well as combining many patterns together to generate a response.

Nerve signal patterns, each of which is potentially as unique as a fingerprint, are a perfect application for neural net software. A particular nerve-signal pattern tells muscles to move in a certain way. A computer can match each unique nerve-signal pattern with a particular gesture, such as making a fist or pointing. Scientists designed software that can adjust for each pilot’s nerve patterns, which can be affected by caffeine use, biorhythms, performance stress and the amount of fat under the skin.

To demonstrate bioelectric muscle control of the simulated 757 airplane during emergencies, researchers combined this technology with two other NASA developments, the ability of the neural net software to learn to fly damaged airplanes and propulsion-only landing of aircraft.

In about one-sixth of a second, a computer onboard a damaged aircraft can “relearn” to fly a plane, giving the pilot better control. Severe damage, such as partially destroyed wings, fuselage holes or sensor failures greatly alters how an airplane handles, and a pilot’s controls may respond oddly or might not work at all, according to Jorgensen.

“When we combined the three technologies, the bioelectrically wired pilot took the simulated aircraft into landing scenarios with a cascading series of accidents, first locking rudder controls and then progressing to full hydraulic failure,” said Jorgensen. “For each case, successful landings were demonstrated for autopilot, damaged and propulsion-only control.”

The Neuroengineering Laboratory is also studying the use of direct measurements of brain electrical activity or EEG to control computers and other devices. Dr. Leonard Trejo is training test subjects to change their own brain activity for use as a command signal to select items from a computer menu or to navigate through complex data displays. Sensors in a lightweight headset, much like the headphones of a portable CD player, amplify tiny electrical signals generated by the brain and transmit them to a computer, where they are converted into signals that can be used for control. In the future, it may be possible to combine direct brain control and nerve-muscle control in a completely hands-free interface such as a wearable cockpit.

A blog study made during the 2004 ‘election’ worth noting.

DOWNLOAD FULL PDF

ABSTRACT:

In this paper, we study the linking patterns and discussion topics of political bloggers. Our aim is to measure the degree of interaction between liberal and conservative blogs, and to uncover any differences in the structure of the two communities. Specifically, we analyze the posts of 40 “A-list” blogs over the period of two months preceding the U.S. Presidential Election of 2004, to study how often they referred to one another and to quantify the overlap in the topics they discussed, both within the liberal and conservative communities, and also across communities. We also study a single day snapshot of over 1,000 political blogs. This snapshot captures blogrolls (the list of links to other blogs frequently found in sidebars), and presents a more static picture of a broader blogosphere. Most significantly, we find differences in the behavior of liberal and conservative blogs, with conservative blogs linking to each other more frequently and in a denser pattern.

SNIPPET:

Recently, Welsch [17] studied a single-day snapshot of the network neighborhoods of Atrios, a popular liberal blog, and Instapundit, a popular conservative blog. He found the Instapundit neighborhood to include many more blogs than the Atrios one, and observed no overlap in the URLs cited between the two neighborhoods. The lack of overlap in liberal and conservative interests has previously been observed in purchases of political books on Amazon.com [9]. This brings about the question of whether we are witnessing a cyberbalkanization [13, 15] of the Internet, where the prolif-
eration of specialized online news sources allows people with different political leanings to be exposed only to information in agreement with their previously held views. Yale law professor Jack Balkin provides a counter-argument11 by pointing out that such segregation is unlikely in the blogosphere because bloggers systematically comment on each other, even if only to voice disagreement.

In this paper we address both hypotheses by examining in a systematic way the linking patterns and discussion topics of political bloggers. In doing so, we not only measure the degree of interaction between liberal and conservative blogs, but also uncover differences in the structure of the two communities. Specifically, we analyze the posts of 40 A-list blogs over the period of two months preceding the U.S. Presidential Election of 2004, to study how often they referred to one another and what the overlap was in the things they discussed, both within the liberal and conservative communities, and also across communities. We also study a single day snapshot of over 1,000 political blogs. This snapshot captures blogrolls (the list of links to other blogs frequently found in sidebars), and presents a more static picture of a broader blogosphere.

From both samples we found that liberal and conservative blogs did indeed have different lists of favorite news sources, people, and topics to discuss, although they occasionally overlapped in their discussion of news articles and events. The division between liberals and conservatives was further reflected in the linking pattern between the blogs, with a great majority of the links remaining internal to either liberal or conservative communities. Even more interestingly, we found differences in the behavior of the two communities, with conservative blogs linking to a greater number of blogs and with greater frequency. These differences in linking behavior were not drastic, and we can not speculate how much they correlated, if at all, with the eventual outcome of the election. They were nonetheless interesting, and we believe they show an insightful glimpse into the online political discourse leading up to the election.

SEE ALSO:

*Neuroscience proves that the politically biased are legally insane and medically addicted/diseased!

The Neuropsychology of Pseudo-Skepticism

*Political Delusions

DNA Google Logo At Google Kirkland by dannysullivan.

GOOGLE:

Google accused of bio-piracy – ZDNet.co.uk

March 29, 2006: Search giant Google has been accused of being the “biggest threat to genetic privacy” for its alleged plan to create a searchable database of genetic information.

Biopiracy refers to the “monopolisation of genetic resources” according to the show’s organisers. It is also defined as the unauthorised use of biological resources by organisations such as corporations, universities and governments.

According to the award’s Web site, Google is guilty of biopiracy because plans for a searchable database could make it easier for private genetic information to be abused. “Google, in cooperation with Craig Venter, are developing plans to make all of our genomes Googlable to facilitate the brave new world of private genetically-tailored medicines,” the site claims.

Google and Microsoft Want Your DNA | Wired Science from Wired.com

Sep 27, 2007: According to consumer watchdog Privacy International, Google conducts “comprehensive surveillance” and embodies an “entrenched hostility to privacy.” Microsoft, though a little less invasive, is still Microsoft. What do they have in common? Both want you to trust them with your DNA.

Jesse Reynolds of the Center for Genetics and Society reports on AlterNet about the companies’ investments in 23andMe, a startup in the fledgling online genomic information industry. In the future, such companies will offer to sequence your genome, interpret the information for you, and put you in touch with products and services that fit your genetic profile. There’s even a social networks angle — MySpace meets Gattaca.

Craig Venter: Google your date’s DNA | Tech news blog – CNET News.com

October 19, 2007: The implications for medicine, and its evil twin the insurance industry, are vast. Despite the privacy issues, Venter is in favor of transparency in genomics, so that, for example, you’ll be able to “Google a date’s DNA,” as O’Reilly remarked. Scary? Sure. But “a good idea,” Venter said. “Especially if you plan to have children.”

Google-funded DNA testing to launch in Europe later

January 22, 2008: With the demo of Web-enabled DNA testing later this week at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Google’s DNA Project — the basis of a unique type of social networking — will extend itself to Europe. There, one might locate Dr. Bryan Sykes, a DNA genetics researcher who once found a Florida accountant named Tom Robinson to be a descendant of Genghis Khan.

The Google project — which draws from the premise that people actually yearn to interact with their family members — has already spawned sites as GeneTree.com, Canada’s DNA Ancestry Project, and 23andMe.com, the creation of Anne Wojcicki, who is the wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

The DNA Ancestry Project, for instance, has been behind the sale of “starter kits” at Best Buy and other stores. These kits contain equipment used to take swab samples of the inner cheek. The DNA samples can then be mailed in to the Web site for genetic analysis.

Google wife targets world DNA domination – Telegraph

30/01/2008: Her husband is one of the world’s richest men who has built up an internet empire that delivers and classifies digital information at the click of a mouse. Now Anne Wojcicki is planning to tap into the rise of online global networking to help people make sense of their own genetic information.

“We’d like to reach 98pc of the world, that is our goal,” says Wojcicki from beside her fledgling company’s booth on the first floor of the Belvedere Hotel. “You have to have high standards to get anywhere in life, and if genealogy continues at its current rate, what we’re offering will soon become a standard part of people’s lives.”

Named after the number of chromosomes that make up each person’s genome, 23andme operates by analysing saliva samples to build up a picture of its clients’ inherited traits, ancestry and, in time, personal disease risks. Customers send in their saliva – along with a hefty cheque for $999 – and four to six weeks later receive their results online.

Google Invests In DNA Sequencing Project

Feb 29, 2008: Google has financially backed a project from a Harvard University scientist to unlock the secrets of common diseases by decoding the DNA of 100,000 people.

The project will be the largest human genome sequencing project in the world, and may lead to new cures for disease.

23andMe, the startup widely known as the company whose founder is the wife of Sergey Brin, has plans to make the human genome searchable. Brin, along with Google, gave 23andMe $3.9 million as part of a series A in May of 2007. The company, cleverly… Learn More

Google Wants to Index Your DNA, Too

Apr 18, 2008: Your DNA falls into the realm of “the world’s information,” and it seems that Google (GOOG), as part of its corporate mission, is making a play to organize that, too. The Internet giant received heavy press in 2007 when it invested at least $4.4 million (BusinessWeek.com, 11/29/07) in a genetic screening company, 23andMe, that was started by Anne Wojcicki, the wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin, and her business partner.

Google’s interest in DNA doesn’t end there. It is also putting money into a second Silicon Valley DNA-screening startup, Navigenics. The company is also backed by star venture capital firm Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers. For a spit of saliva and $2,500, your genetic test results are securely delivered to your computer screen with your genetic likelihood for 18 medical conditions, from Alzheimer’s to rheumatoid arthritis to several types of cancer. Navigenics aims to boost disease prevention by providing customers reports on their DNA that they can share with their doctors. The company addresses privacy concerns by encrypting customer identities, and screens only for conditions it deems to have scientifically sound genetic studies. The company also offers genetic counseling.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT:

White House seeks to expand DNA database

4/15/2003: DNA profiles from juvenile offenders and from adults who have been arrested but not convicted would be added to the FBI’s national DNA database under a Bush administration proposal.

Under current law, only DNA from adults convicted of crimes can be placed in the national database, which is used to compare those samples with biological evidence from the scenes of unsolved crimes. As of January, there were about 1.3 million DNA samples in the database, U.S. officials say.

Adding profiles from thousands of adult arrestees and juvenile offenders would greatly expand the DNA system’s worth by increasing the number of potential matches, administration officials say. Justice Department officials have discussed potential changes in federal DNA law with key members of Congress and are pushing for legislation this year.

“DNA is to the 21st century what fingerprinting was to the 20th,” says Deborah Daniels, assistant U.S. attorney general for justice programs. “The widespread use of DNA evidence is the future of law enforcement in this country.”

But critics say adding juvenile and arrestee profiles to the database threatens privacy by expanding the pool of samples beyond adult criminals. Although only digital DNA profiles would be linked to the FBI computer, the blood or saliva samples from which the DNA was drawn would be kept by state labs, they note.

“It’s only a matter of time before the government gets its hands on those DNA samples and starts playing around with our genetic codes,” says Barry Steinhardt, privacy specialist for the American Civil Liberties Union’s national office in New York City. “They say they don’t want to do that, but not too long ago they were saying they’d only take DNA profiles from rapists and murderers and now they want juveniles … We’re not just on a slippery slope, we’re halfway down it.”

Bill Would Permit DNA Collection From All Those Arrested

Suspects arrested or detained by federal authorities could be forced to provide samples of their DNA that would be recorded in a central database under a provision of a Senate bill to expand government collection of personal data.

The controversial measure was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week and is supported by the White House, but has not gone to the floor for a vote. It goes beyond current law, which allows federal authorities to collect and record samples of DNA only from those convicted of crimes. The data are stored in an FBI-maintained national registry that law enforcement officials use to aid investigations, by comparing DNA from criminals with evidence found at crime scenes.

States collecting DNA from arrestees

Jul 27, 2006: Every state takes DNA samples from convicted sex offenders and at least 43 states take samples from other serious felons, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which tracks state laws. But five states – California, Louisiana, Minnesota, Texas and Virginia – now take DNA samples from some arrestees as well.

Kansas and New Mexico passed authorizing legislation this spring and will begin arrestee sampling next January.

Officers commonly take the samples by using cotton swabs to collect saliva. The samples are used to try to solve “cold cases” by comparing them to biological evidence found at crime scenes. DNA profiles, or computerized snapshots of the samples, are stored in local, state and federal databases, allowing law enforcers to compare information.

Last January, President Bush signed the DNA Fingerprinting Act, which allows authorities to collect DNA “fingerprints,” or samples, from anyone arrested on any federal charge. Federal sampling has not yet begun, said Ann Todd, a spokeswoman for the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Va., home of the national DNA database.

In every state but Louisiana, arrestee DNA sampling is limited to those arrested for felonies. The Bayou State, however, also allows sampling of those arrested for some misdemeanors, including prostitution and assault.

California, Louisiana, Kansas and New Mexico and the federal government can keep DNA records even if arrestees are cleared of all charges – a practice that has brought objections from civil libertarians.

U.S. Set to Begin a Vast Expansion of DNA Sampling – New York Times

The Justice Department is completing rules to allow the collection of DNA from most people arrested or detained by federal authorities, a vast expansion of DNA gathering that will include hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, by far the largest group affected.

The new forensic DNA sampling was authorized by Congress in a little-noticed amendment to a January 2006 renewal of the Violence Against Women Act, which provides protections and assistance for victims of sexual crimes. The amendment permits DNA collecting from anyone under criminal arrest by federal authorities, and also from illegal immigrants detained by federal agents.

Over the last year, the Justice Department has been conducting an internal review and consulting with other agencies to prepare regulations to carry out the law.

The goal, justice officials said, is to make the practice of DNA sampling as routine as fingerprinting for anyone detained by federal agents, including illegal immigrants. Until now, federal authorities have taken DNA samples only from convicted felons.

Bush Signs Bill To Take All Newborns’ DNA

May 2, 2008: President Bush last week signed into law a bill which will see the federal government begin to screen the DNA of all newborn babies in the U.S. within six months, a move critics have described as the first step towards the establishment of a national DNA database.

Described as a “national contingency plan” the justification for the new law S. 1858, known as The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007, is that it represents preparation for any sort of “public health emergency.”

The bill states that the federal government should “continue to carry out, coordinate, and expand research in newborn screening” and “maintain a central clearinghouse of current information on newborn screening… ensuring that the clearinghouse is available on the Internet and is updated at least quarterly”.

Sections of the bill also make it clear that DNA may be used in genetic experiments and tests.

Read the full bill here.

ACLU Opposes Expansion of Federal DNA Program to Arrestee Testing (6/12/2008)

The American Civil Liberties Union urges Congress to oppose an amendment sponsored by Representative Adam B. Schiff (D-CA) that is designed to test arrestees as part of an expansion of the federal DNA program. Schiff’s amendment, which recently passed the House Judiciary Committee, will provide incentives for state law enforcement officials to create a permanent DNA database of arrestees that includes people who are detained on misdemeanor charges, wrongfully arrested and others.

“Schiff’s amendment encouraging the collection of arrestees’ DNA samples would turn the presumption of innocence on its head,” said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington Legislative Office. “Anyone wrongfully arrested becomes part of a permanent criminal database. Someone arrested for misdemeanor becomes a suspect for life. Americans who have not been proven guilty under state laws go into a DNA database with criminal offenders.”

Fredrickson predicted, “With this expansion proposal, the federal DNA program will collect and retain DNA from millions of innocent people. The purpose of DNA collection will become population surveillance, not a criminal investigative tool.”

ALSO:

The threats posed by patenting DNA

Patenting in biotechnology has been subject to increasing public scrutiny as a result of the profound changes in the way research in the life sciences has become commercialised. This has resulted in immense ethical and legal controversy.

Numerous human DNA sequence patents have been granted to date but it is questionable as to whether these achieve either the goal of stimulation of innovation for the public good and or rewarding people for useful new inventions.

Patent offices have tended to be generous in granting patents in relation to DNA sequences and many of the patents are broad in scope because a successful patent holder for a DNA sequence will in effect obtain broad protection on all uses of the DNA and often on the proteins that the DNA produces. In addition, patents have been granted when the usual criteria for inventiveness and utility have been inappropriately and weakly applied.

In awarding patents for DNA sequences, patent offices fail to take into account that DNA is a naturally occurring phenomenon and hence, scientific knowledge concerning the DNA is not eligible for patenting.

What is also not considered is that DNA sequences, unlike other patentable chemicals, carry the body’s information as to how proteins are to be constructed. It is questionable as to whether this type of information can properly be patented.