The Police State Suspends God-Given Unalienable Rights Under The Constitution

TN Note: As Technocracy asserts compliance over all areas of life, the door is wide-open for a police state to be established, and that is exactly what is happening in the U.S. This is the trickle-down effect to the lowest levels of law enforcement, that is, that Constitutional rights are not important and can be arbitrarily suspended for any little cause. The effect of a police state is to intimidate everyone else into obeying all the technocratic rules and regulations so as to not attract the scrutiny of law enforcement in the first place. 

The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.”—Hillary Clinton, Meet the Press (April 3, 2016)

When presidential candidate Hillary Clinton declares that unborn babies do not have constitutional rights, she’s not just spouting partisan rhetoric in the heated national debate over abortion. She’s providing us with a glimpse into an increasingly troubling mindset among government officials who believe that the government not only has the power to determine who is deserving of constitutional rights in the eyes of the law but also has the authority to deny those rights to an American citizen.

The unborn are not the only persons being denied their rights under the Constitution.

American families who have their dogs shot, their homes trashed and their children terrorized or, worse, killed by errant SWAT team raids in the middle of the night are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Disabled individuals who are being strip searched, handcuffed, arrested and “diagnosed” by police as dangerous or mentally unstable merely because they stutter and walk unevenly are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

School-aged children as young as 4-years-old who are leg shackled, handcuffed and strip searched for violating school zero tolerance policies by chewing a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun and playing an imaginary game of cops and robbers, or engaging in childish behavior such as crying or jumping are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Unarmed citizens who are tasered or shot by police for daring to hesitate, stutter, move a muscle, flee or disagree in any way with a police order are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Likewise, Americans—young and old alike—who are shot by police because they pointed a garden hose at a police officer, reached for their registration in their glove box, relied upon a cane to steady themselves, or were seen playing with air rifles or BB guns are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Female motorists who are unlucky enough to be pulled over for a questionable traffic infraction only to be subjected by police to cavity searches by the side of the road are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Male pedestrians and motorists alike who are being subjected to roadside strip searches and rectal probes by police based largely on the color of their skin are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

American citizens subjected to government surveillance whereby their phone calls are being listened in on, their mail and text messages read, their movements tracked and their transactions monitored are being denied their rights under the Constitution. The same goes for individuals who are being denied access to body camera footage of their interactions with police, school officials and even medical professionals.

Homeowners who are being fined and arrested for raising chickens in their backyard, allowing the grass in their front yards to grow too long, and holding Bible studies in their homes are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Decorated military veterans who are being arrested for criticizing the government on social media such as Facebook are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Homeless individuals who are being harassed, arrested and run out of towns by laws that criminalize homelessness are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Individuals whose DNA has been forcibly collected and entered into federal and state law enforcement databaseswhether or not they have been convicted of any crime are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Drivers whose license plates are being scanned, uploaded to a police database and used to map their movements, whether or not they are suspected of any crime, are being denied their rights under the Constitution. The same goes fordrivers who are being ticketed for running afoul of red light cameras without any real opportunity to defend themselves against such a charge are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Protesters and activists who are being labeled domestic terrorists and extremists and accused of hate crimes for speaking freely are being denied their rights under the Constitution. Likewise, American citizens who being targeted for assassination by drone strikes abroad without having been charged, tried and convicted of treason are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

Hard-working Americans whose bank accounts, homes, cars, electronics and cash are seized by police (operating according to asset forfeiture schemes that provide profit incentives for highway robbery) are being denied their rights under the Constitution.

So what is the common denominator here?

These are all American citizens—endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, rights that no man or government can take away from them, among these the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—and they are all being oppressed in one way or another by a government that has grown drunk on power, money and its own authority.

If the government—be it the President, Congress, the courts or any federal, state or local agent or agency—can decide that any person has no rights, then that person becomes less than a citizen, less than human, less than deserving of respect, dignity, civility and bodily integrity. He or she becomes an it, a faceless number that can be tallied and tracked, a quantifiable mass of cells that can be discarded without conscience, an expendable cost that can be written off without a second thought, or an animal that can be bought, sold, branded, chained, caged, bred, neutered and euthanized at will.

It’s a slippery slope that justifies all manner of violations in the name of national security, the interest of the state and the so-called greater good.

Yet those who founded this country believed that what we conceive of as our rights were given to us by God—we are created equal, according to the nation’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence—and that government cannot create nor can they extinguish our God-given rights. To do so would be to anoint the government with god-like powers and elevate it above the citizenry.

Unfortunately, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we have been dancing with this particular devil for quite some time now, allowing the government to dictate to us, rather than “we the people” giving marching orders to those whose paychecks are funded with taxpayer dollars.

If we continue to wait for the government to restore our freedoms, respect our rights, rein in its abuses and restrain its agents from riding roughshod over our lives, our liberty and our happiness, then we will be waiting forever.

So what is the answer?

“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor,” warned Martin Luther King Jr., who was assassinated 48 years ago on April 4, 1968. “It must be demanded by the oppressed.”

But how do we demand freedom from our oppressor?

Start by studying history. Take note of the movements that succeeded and the ones that failed. Adopt the tactics of those who successfully brought about reform through nonviolent resistance. Think nationally, but act locally. If you’re not prepared to challenge injustice in your own community, when it happens in your own backyard, then there can be no hope for reining in the government’s abuses at the national level.

Most of all, stop giving the government the power to play god—all-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful—and start putting it in its rightful place as our servant: an institution that derives its powers from the consent of the governed (“we the people”) whose primary purpose is to safeguard our rights.




China Clamps Down With ‘Grid Management’ To Monitor Citizens

China has long led the race to build infrastructure that enables the implementation of Technocracy, and we see this fruit today by its reversion to so-called ‘grid management’ of blocks of citizens. This will allow continuous and personalized surveillance of every citizen to insure their loyalty to the government, and their compliance with all the myriad rules created by unelected and unaccountable Technocrats.

In the teeming city of Guangzhou, 12,000 grid administrators are being hired where each will have monitoring responsibility for 200 families. Within six months, each administrator will be expected to know all pertinent details on the individuals within those families. Monitoring technology, such as cameras and facial identification, the Internet of Things, eavesdropping, etc., will enable such detailed knowledge.

But surveillance capabilities don’t end there.

Last year it was revealed that China was setting up a massive “social credit” scoring system where citizens will be assigned a score between 350 and 950 that reflects their ideological subservience to the government. In other words, dissidents will be duly accounted for and then shunned and shamed into compliance. Those who refuse to comply will be on the government’s short-list for removal from society.

Only two companies are responsible for creating and running this social credit mechanism: Alibaba and Tencent, which run all of the social networks in China. According to an investigation by the ACLU,

  • “In addition to measuring your ability to pay, as in the United States, the scores serve as a measure of political compliance. Among the things that will hurt a citizen’s score are posting political opinions without prior permission, or posting information that the regime does not like, such as about the Tienanmen Square massacre that the government carried out to hold on to power, or the Shanghai stock market collapse.
  • “It will hurt your score not only if you do these things, but if any of your friends do them. Imagine the social pressure against disobedience or dissent that this will create.
  • “Anybody can check anyone else’s score online. Among other things, this lets people find out which of their friends may be hurting their scores.
  • “Also used to calculate scores is information about hobbies, lifestyle, and shopping. Buying certain goods will improve your score, while others (such as video games) will lower it.
  • “Those with higher scores are rewarded with concrete benefits. Those who reach 700, for example, get easy access to a Singapore travel permit, while those who hit 750 get an even more valued visa.
  • “Sadly, many Chinese appear to be embracing the score as a measure of social worth, with almost 100,000 people bragging about their scores on the Chinese equivalent of Twitter.”

Furthermore, China is leading the world in pre-crime technology, or “predictive policing.” One tech journal notes,

“It’s ‘precrime’ meets ‘thoughtcrime.’ China is using its substantial surveillance apparatus as the basis for a “unified information environment” that will allow authorities to profile individual citizens based upon their online behaviors, financial transactions, where they go, and who they see. The authorities are watching for deviations from the norm that might indicate someone is involved in suspicious activity. And they’re doing it with a hand from technology pioneered in the US.”

Any surveillance technology company operating within Chinese borders are required by law to assist in this effort, to wit, they “shall provide technical interfaces, decryption and other technical support and assistance to public security and state security agencies when they are following the law to avert and investigate terrorist activities”.

Apple may fight the FBI over decryption in the U.S., but they will not have that luxury in China.

The state-owned defense contractor China Electronics Technology Group is charged with developing the software that will sift through all online data, activities, financial transactions, work data, behavioral data, etc., to predict which citizens will perform “terrorist” acts.

It could not be more obvious that China is accelerating its race toward total citizen domination, where every aspect of life is observed, analyzed and then corrected according to rules enforced by the Skynet-like system of dictatorial control.

In short, China is perfecting command and control surveillance technology that is already being “exported” to the rest of the world, including the United States and Europe. Big Data and Total Awareness Society is the heartbeat of Technocracy as described in my book, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation.

According to the Technocracy Study Course (Scott & Hubbard, 1932), three of the seven top requirements given were,

  • “Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption
  • “Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used
  • “Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.” [p. 232]

The technology available in 1932 was not able to meet these requirements, but it is available today, and herein lies the danger of Technocracy: Will you settle for being micromanaged to the extent seen in Huxley’s Brave New World? Will you be OK with taking orders from unelected, unaccountable and untouchable Technocrats?

If your answer is “No”, then you had better take to the streets before they all turn into a likeness of Tiananmen Square. That’s where its headed.


Patrick Wood is Editor-in-Chief of Technocracy.News and author of Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation.




Home Protection 2025: Virtual Machine Guns, Robo-Security And Drones

TN Note: Advancing technology will provide certain benefits for individual citizens, but this vision of home protection 2025 is a little disconcerting. All of these devices will become integral components of the Internet of Things that allows prying eyes to see everything, anywhere. 

From burglar alarms that identify intruders, to robotic guards and even ‘gun’ turrets, homeowners of the future will have far more imaginative options to protect their property than today.

A report about the future of home security predicts a future that’s a cross between the Minority Report and The Crystal Maze in which burglars would have to run a high-tech gauntlet to make off with goods.

For example, burglar alarms could shout at intruders by name, while indelible sprays could mark them out in case of escape, and drones could give chase.

The report, by future trends experts Futurizon, was commissioned by security company ADT.

In a survey, the Florida-based firm found only four out of ten people feel safe being at home, while one in ten believe their home is at greater risk today than it was only five years ago.

However, the report, authored by futurologist Dr Ian Pearson, predicts a plethora of hi-tech solutions will be available in as little as a decade’s time.

In the short term, it envisages that tiny hidden cameras will soon be commonplace around the home and residential neighbourhoods and could even stop burglaries before they happen.

They would use facial-recognition software to spot known criminals and sound the alarm, in a scenario reminiscent of The Minority Report.

Read full story here…




UN Adopts Resolution To Combat Sex Crimes By Its Own Peacekeepers

TN Note: The spokeswoman states, “our responsibility to address the scourge of sexual exploitation and abuse in U.N. peacekeeping, which has been allowed to persist for far too long.” It is disgusting that the altruistic United Nations, which promises Utopia through the 2030 Agenda and its 17 Goals, is thoroughly corrupt in the worst way. It only proves that unelected and unaccountable personnel will stoop to debasement, given the opportunity. Since the U.S. pays 28% of the peacekeeping budget to perpetuate this abuse, the American public should demand withdrawal from this demented organization.

The United Nations Security Council on Friday backed Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s recommendations to repatriate peacekeeping units where there are grounds to suspect their personnel have engaged in widespread sexual exploitation and abuse.

The United Nations last week reported 99 allegations that U.N. staff took part in sexual exploitation or sexual abuse in 2015. That marked a sharp increase from the 80 allegations in 2014 across the U.N. system. The majority of cases in 2015 – 69 in all – involved personnel in 10 peacekeeping missions.

The 15-nation council adopted a U.S.-drafted resolution endorsing Ban’s recommendations, and also said that if a country fails to either investigate allegations of sexual abuse, fails to hold perpetrators accountable or does not inform the secretary-general of actions, its troops should be repatriated.

There were 14 votes in favor of the resolution. There were no votes against, though Egypt abstained.

The resolution expressed “deep concern about the serious and continuous allegations and under-reporting of sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations peacekeepers and non-United Nations forces, including military, civilian and police personnel.”

During the drafting process, council diplomats said the U.S. text had encountered resistance from Russia, Egypt and some African countries that contribute troops to U.N. peacekeeping missions, who disliked the terms for repatriating troops accused of sex crimes or whose countries do not investigate allegations.

Read full story here…




DHS Tells Congress How & Why It’s Monitoring Facebook, Twitter, Blogs

TN Note: The intelligence community keeps saying that they are not collecting random data on American Citizens and incidents like this keep popping up proving that they are brazen liars. Remember that DHS is not isolated from the rest of the intelligence community; rather, it reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence for everything it does, including line-item budget approval. Thus, the DHS vacuuming of social media an intentional policy from the very top.

At a Congressional hearing this morning that veered into contentious arguments and cringe-worthy moments, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spilled the beans on their social media monitoring project.

DHS Chief Privacy Office Mary Ellen Callahan and Director of Operations Coordination and Planning Richard Chavez appeared to be deliberately stonewalling Congress on the depth, ubiquity, goals, and technical capabilities of the agency’s social media surveillance. At other times, they appeared to be themselves unsure about their own project’s ultimate goals and uses. But one thing is for sure: If you’re the first person to tweet about a news story, or if you’re a community activist who makes public Facebook posts—DHS will have your personal information.

The hearing, which was held by the Subcommittee on Counterintelligence and Intelligence headed by Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-PA), was highly unusual. Hacktivist collective Anonymous (or at least the @AnonyOps Twitter feed) sent a sympathizer to the visitor gallery to liveblog the proceedings under the #spybackhashtag.

Interactions between the DHS officials and representatives were often strained—both Chavez and Callahan were scolded and chastised by Representatives from both parties. Reps. Billy Long (R-MO), Meehan, Jackie Speier (D-CA), and Bennie Thompson (D-MS) all pointed out issues relating to what they variously saw as potential First Amendment violations, surveillance of citizens engaged in protected political speech, the fact that an outside contractor handles DHS’ social media monitoring, DHS’ seeming inability to separate news monitoring from disaster preparedness, and a massively unclear social media monitoring mandate on the DHS’ part.

Video footage of the hearing has already been made available on YouTube, and the written testimony of both DHS experts has been made publicly available. Privacy watchdog group EPIC also filed a formal disclosure to Congress on the results of a FOIA lawsuit. DHS appears to have also stonewalled EPIC regarding their social media monitoring project. The results are staggering.

According to testimony, the Homeland Security Department has outsourced their own social media monitoring program to an outside contractor, defense giantGeneral Dynamics. General Dynamics was the sole party to the original DHS contract, which was not offered to any outside parties—and Chavez was caught misleading the Committee about General Dyamics’ sole status.

General Dynamics employees responsible for the DHS social media monitoring contract are required to attend a training course in DHS privacy practices several times a year. If General Dynamics employees misuse the personal information of journalists, public figures or the general public (to include Twitter or Facebook users) in any way, their punishment is restricted to additional training classes or dismissal from the project.

General Dynamics and the Department of Homeland Security are primarily engaging in keyword monitoring of social media. Callahan admitted in sworn testimony that the bulk of the keywords used by DHS were chosen as the result of being included in commercially available, off-the-shelf bulk packages. These bulk keyword packages were later customized according to DHS specifications.

The DHS, meanwhile, is truly interested in breaking news tweets. The Twitter handles, Facebook names and blog urls of first witnesses to news events (the attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords and a January 2012 bomb threat at an Austin, Texas, school were specifically cited) are being recorded. Homeland Security claims this information is only used to verify reports, and that dossiers are not being assembled on private citizens and that personally identifying information is regularly scrubbed from their servers.

Another worrying tendency is the fact that DHS appears to be keeping tabs on individual American citizens engaged in community activism and hot-button political issues.




AG Loretta Lynch: We ‘Discussed’ Civil Legal Action Against Climate Change Deniers

TN Note: The mere mention of legal action against anyone who doesn’t “believe” as they do, is incredulous. And yet, this is the heart of Technocracy and Technocrats: Our science is sacrosanct and you better believe it, or else.  This is the same mentality that gave rise to the Inquisition during the Dark Ages.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change

During Lynch’s testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that he believes there are similarities between the tobacco industry denying scientific studies showing the dangers of using tobacco and companies within the fossil fuel industry denying studies allegedly showing the threat of carbon emissions.

He went on to point out that under President Bill Clinton, the Justice Department brought and won a civil case against the tobacco industry, while the Obama administration has “done nothing” so far with regard to the fossil fuel industry.

“My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked.

“This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.”

Read full story here…




FBI Quietly Changes Privacy Rules For Accessing NSA Data Collected On Americans

TN Note: Technocrats always pursue knowing everything about everything and everybody, so a goldmine of data at the NSA is like a candy store to the FBI. No matter that legislators have tried to clamp down on privacy violations, all these agencies have just gone ahead to do whatever they want to do. Remember also that the FBI and NSA answer directly to the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper. In March 2013, Clapper told a Congressional committee that the NSA does not collect any type of data at all on millions of Americans – he was subsequently described as having lied under oath, obstructed justice and having given false testimony. Two Representatives accused him of perjury and 26 Senators complained about his testimony.

The FBI has quietly revised its privacy rules for searching data involving Americans’ international communications that was collected by the National Security Agency, US officials have confirmed to the Guardian.

The classified revisions were accepted by the secret US court that governs surveillance, during its annual recertification of the agencies’ broad surveillance powers. The new rules affect a set of powers colloquially known as Section 702, the portion of the law that authorizes the NSA’s sweeping “Prism” program to collect internet data. Section 702 falls under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa), and is a provision set to expire later this year.

A government civil liberties watchdog, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Group (PCLOB), alluded to the change in its recent overview of ongoing surveillance practices.

The watchdog confirmed in a 2014 report that the FBI is allowed direct access to the NSA’s massive collections of international emails, texts and phone calls – which often include Americans on one end of the conversation. The activists also expressed concern that the FBI’s “minimization” rules, for removing or limiting sensitive data that could identify Americans, did not reflect the bureau’s easy access to the NSA’s collected international communications.

FBI officials can search through the data, using Americans’ identifying information, for what PCLOB called “routine” queries unrelated to national security. The oversight group recommended more safeguards around “the FBI’s use and dissemination of Section 702 data in connection with non-foreign intelligence criminal matters”.

As of 2014, the FBI was not even required to make note of when it searched the metadata, which includes the “to” or “from” lines of an email. Nor does it record how many of its data searches involve Americans’ identifying details – a practice that apparently continued through 2015, based on documents released last February. The PCLOB called such searches “substantial”, since the FBI keeps NSA-collected data with the information it acquires through more traditional means, such as individualized warrants.

But the PCLOB’s new compliance report, released on Saturday, found that the administration has submitted “revised FBI minimization procedures” that address at least some of the group’s concerns about “many” FBI agents who use NSA-gathered data.

Read full story here…




We’ll Bust You For The Crime You Have Not Yet Committed, But Probably Will

TN Note: This whole pre-crime mentality that is sweeping the law enforcement community is very dangerous. Believing that they have the ability to accurately predict the future is an age-old deception seen practiced with Ouija Boards, Fortune Tellers, Astrology, etc. In short, it is mysticism at the base level.

 Computers are getting pretty good at predicting the future. In many cases they do it better than people. That’s why Amazon uses them to figure out what you’re likely to buy, how Netflix knows what you might want to watch, the way meteorologists come up with accurate 10-day forecasts.

Now a team of scientists has demonstrated that a computer can outperform human judges in predicting who will commit a violent crime. In a paper published last month, they described how they built a system that started with people already arrested for domestic violence, then figured out which of them would be most likely to commit the same crime again.

The technology could potentially spare victims from being injured, or even killed. It could also keep the least dangerous offenders from going to jail unnecessarily. And yet, there’s something unnerving about using machines to decide what should happen to people. If targeted advertising misfires, nobody’s liberty is at stake.

For two decades, police departments have used computers to identify times and places where crimes are more likely to occur, guiding the deployment of officers and detectives. Now they’re going another step: using vast data sets to identify individuals who are criminally inclined. They’re doing this with varying levels of transparency and scientific testing. A system called Beware, for example, is capable of rating citizens of Fresno, California, as posing a high, medium or low level of threat. Press accounts say the system amasses data not only on past crimes but on web searches, property records and social networking posts.

Critics are warning that the new technology had been rushed into use without enough public discussion. One question is precisely how the software works — it’s the manufacturer’s trade secret. Another is whether there’s scientific evidence that such technology works as advertised.

Read full story here…




Agression Therapy: Scientists Pinpoint Area Of Brain Where Anger Originates

TN Note: It is just a matter of time before this discovery makes its way into the hands of technocrat social engineers who would use it as mandated therapy to thwart violence in society. Note that this finding is a result of President Obama’s “brain mapping initiative” that seeks to do for understanding the brain what the human genome project did for genetics. 

The ground breaking study found that the same area of our brain controls both our appetite for food and for aggression
scientists pinpoint the exact area of the brain where anger originates, making Clockwork Orange-type therapies possibleBreakthrough: Scientists think they’ve found the ‘anger spot’

Scientists have pinpointed the exact area where violence and anger originates, which could pave the way to aggression-curbing treatments such as those in movie A Clockwork Orange.

The discovery was found during a study into the ventromedial hypothalamus, or VMH, in the brain.

This part of the brain’s circuit is usually associated with appetite, as it was found that animals with damage to the area ate more and became obese.

But the study also found that the VMH has a darker side, as one element of it is thought to control aggression and provides the spark to ignite violence.

This could lead doctors to creating a form of anti-aggression treatment, such as the therapies used in cult flick A Clockwork Orange.

But a leading scientist warned it was only a distant possibility, and that is if the ethical and legal issues surrounding it could be resolved.

US lead scientist Dr Dayu Lin, from New York University, said: “That said, our results argue that the ventrolateral part of the ventromedial hypothalamus (VMHvl) should be studied further as part of future efforts seeking to correct behaviours from bullying to sexual predation.”

In Stanley Kubrick’s 1971 movie A Clockwork Orange, set in a dystopian near-future society, sociopath delinquent Alex is subjected to an experimental aversion therapy to cure him of his craving for “ultraviolence”. But by rendering him incapable of wrongdoing, the treatment also robs Alex of his free will.

The new study focused on aggression in mice, which have many of the same brain circuits found in humans.

Read full story here…




China Aggressively Pursues Pre-Crime Technology To Catch Evil-Doers Before They Act

TN Note: China is run by technocrats who rule with an iron fist. Surveillance in China is turning into an art form, driven by technology-crazed engineers and scientists who believe that they can completely control their citizens. There are few laws preventing them from accomplishing this. 

China’s effort to flush out threats to stability is expanding into an area that used to exist only in dystopian sci-fi: pre-crime. The Communist Party has directed one of the country’s largest state-run defense contractors, China Electronics Technology Group, to develop software to collate data on jobs, hobbies, consumption habits, and other behavior of ordinary citizens to predict terrorist acts before they occur. “It’s very crucial to examine the cause after an act of terror,” Wu Manqing, the chief engineer for the military contractor, told reporters at a conference in December. “But what is more important is to predict the upcoming activities.”

The program is unprecedented because there are no safeguards from privacy protection laws and minimal pushback from civil liberty advocates and companies, says Lokman Tsui, an assistant professor at the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, who has advised Google on freedom of expression and the Internet. The project also takes advantage of an existing vast network of neighborhood informants assigned by the Communist Party to monitor everything from family planning violations to unorthodox behavior. A draft cybersecurity law unveiled in July grants the government almost unbridled access to user data in the name of national security. “If neither legal restrictions nor unfettered political debate about Big Brother surveillance is a factor for a regime, then there are many different sorts of data that could be collated and cross-referenced to help identify possible terrorists or subversives,” says Paul Pillar, a nonresident fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Building a crystal ball to predict and prevent terror attacks, a real-world version of Minority Report, is the ultimate goal of crime fighters the world over. But, so far, more data has just meant more noise, security experts say. “There are not enough examples of terrorist activity to model what it looks like in data, and that’s true no matter how much data you have,” says Jim Harper, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. “You need yeast to make bread. You can’t make up for a lack of yeast by adding more flour.”

China was a surveillance state long before Edward Snowden clued Americans in to the extent of domestic spying. Since the Mao era, the government has kept a secret file, called a dang’an, on almost everyone. Dang’an contain school reports, health records, work permits, personality assessments, and other information that might be considered confidential and private in other countries. The contents of the dang’an can determine whether a citizen is eligible for a promotion or can secure a coveted urban residency permit. The government revealed last year that it was also building a nationwide database that would score citizens on their trustworthiness.

Read full story here...