PP NewsBrief: 2021-05-12

We need to begin to reclaim control over the institutions which have such oversized roles in our lives. As you read this people work tirelessly to see to it that you are dumb and docile. Let's stop them.

========

Canberra’s controversial ban on Australians returning home from India upheld by federal judge

"Monday’s ruling came after Prime Minister Scott Morrison imposed a temporary ban on all travel from India, including by Australian citizens, over fears the country’s quarantine facilities would be unable to cope with monitoring potentially infected travelers.

Federal Justice Thomas Thawley ruled that, despite concerns about the legality of the ban, the Australian government had not overstepped its biosecurity powers by closing its border while case numbers are spiraling in India.

...

The case was brought by a 73-year-old Australian citizen who is trying to return home from Bangalore, in the southern Indian state of Karnataka. However, the court agreed with the government that biosecurity measures can overrule other rights, such as a citizen’s right to return. The current restrictions are set to remain until May 15.

Since early in the pandemic, Australian citizens have had to either remain in the country or risk an uncertain length of time abroad before being able to easily return home. The government has effectively banned overseas travel, with foreign visitors needing to secure individual exemptions to enter the island nation."

========

A Vaxxing Question

"In 1956 German pharmaceutical company Chemie Grünenthal GmbH, licensed a new experimental drug designed to treat colds, flu, nausea and morning sickness. Known as Distaval in the UK, Distillers Biochemicals Ltd declared the drug could ‘be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child’ – a basic pre-requisite for licensing a drug.

While forty-nine countries licensed the drug under multiple different names, the then head of the FDA Dr. Frances Kelsey, a physician-pharmacologist with a profound interest in fetal development, refused authorization for use in the US market due to her concerns about the lack of evidence regarding the drug’s safety.

The drug was also known as Thalidomide.

Sixty-five years on and the stringent safety measures brought in to avoid another scandal on the scale of Thalidomide have been swept aside in order to fast track the approval of experimental mRNA vaccines. This is in spite of concerns voiced by (among others) Dr Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr Michael Yeadon who petitioned the European Medical Agency (EMA) with a Administrative/Regulatory Stay Of Action in regard to the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b – not just in regard to concerns about pregnant women, the foetus and infertility – but also in regard to the effect of the mRNA vaccines on those with prior immunity, for whom immunization could lead to a hyperinflammatory response, a cytokine storm, and a generally dysregulation of the immune system that allows the virus to cause more damage to their lungs and other organs of their body."

========

Apple provided FBI with data on Sci-Hub founder

"A woman who has in the past been described as “the spiritual successor to Aaron Swartz” – who was a US web pioneer hounded to suicide by US prosecutors for making academic research available to everyone – has now learned the FBI is investigating her.

Alexandra Elbakyan is the founder of Sci-Hub, that fellow scientists say is “making publicly funded research freely available” – though her detractors have accused her of “copyright infringement and piracy.”

Still, those who support her have praised her work as a “modern Robin Hood who deserves a Nobel Prize.”

In any case, Kazakhstan-born Elbakyan, who, according to available information, lives in Russia (and may, if that’s the case, be well out of reach of the FBI), revealed on Twitter that she received an email informing her that the agency has been requesting her data from Apple.

...

Looming large in the background of the whole story is the issue of academic publishing, which has for many years been denounced as fundamentally broken, with tax-payer funded research hidden behind pricey paywalls, sometimes even from its authors, who are also often unable to decide to make their work open and free to the public due to threats from publishing corporations.

No wonder that the topic is highly polarizing, with publishers on one hand protecting their increasingly problematic model and going after anyone who challenges it – as more and more researchers get fed up with it and prone to supporting whoever is “liberating” this particular type of content."

========

This Biden “Health Security” Proposal Could Make the US a “Digital Dictatorship”

"Last Wednesday, President Biden was widely praised in mainstream and health-care–focused media for his call to create a “new biomedical research agency” modeled after the US military’s “high-risk, high-reward” Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA. As touted by the president, the agency would seek to develop “innovative” and “breakthrough” treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and diabetes, with a call to “end cancer as we know it.”

Far from “ending cancer” in the way most Americans might envision it, the proposed agency would merge “national security” with “health security” in such as way as to use both physical and mental health “warning signs” to prevent outbreaks of disease or violence before they occur. Such a system is a recipe for a technocratic “pre-crime” organization with the potential to criminalize both mental and physical illness as well as “wrongthink.”

...

This new agency, set to be called ARPA-H or HARPA, would be housed within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and would raise the NIH budget to over $51 billion. Unlike other agencies at NIH, ARPA-H would differ in that the projects it funds would not be peer reviewed prior to approval; instead hand-picked program managers would make all funding decisions. Funding would also take the form of milestone-driven payments instead of the more traditional multiyear grants.

ARPA-H will likely heavily fund and promote mRNA vaccines as one of the “breakthroughs” that will cure cancer. Some of the mRNA vaccine manufacturers that have produced some of the most widely used COVID-19 vaccines, such as the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, stated just last month that “cancer is the next problem to tackle with mRNA tech” post-COVID. BioNTech has been developing mRNA gene therapies for cancer for years and is collaborating with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to create mRNA-based treatments for tuberculosis and HIV.

...

ARPA-H is not a new and exclusive Biden administration idea; there was a previous attempt to create a “health DARPA” during the Trump administration in late 2019. Biden began to promote the idea during his presidential campaign as early as June 2019, albeit using a very different justification for the agency than what had been pitched by its advocates to Trump. In 2019, the same foundation and individuals currently backing Biden’s ARPA-H had urged then president Trump to create “HARPA,” not for the main purpose of researching treatments for cancer and Alzheimer’s, but to stop mass shootings before they happen through the monitoring of Americans for “neuropsychiatric” warning signs.

...

For the last few years, one man has been the driving force behind HARPA—former vice chair of General Electric and former president of NBC Universal, Robert Wright....

...

As first proposed by Wright in 2019, the flagship program of HARPA would be SAFE HOME, short for Stopping Aberrant Fatal Events by Helping Overcome Mental Extremes. SAFE HOME would suck up masses of private data from “Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo, and Google Home” and other consumer electronic devices, as well as information from health-care providers to determine if an individual might be likely to commit a crime. The data would be analyzed by artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms “for early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence.”

...

The national-security applications of Robert Wright’s HARPA are also illustrated by the man who was its lead scientific adviser—former head of DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office Geoffrey Ling. Not only is Ling the main scientific adviser of HARPA, but the original proposal by Wright would have Ling both personally design HARPA and lead it once it was established. Ling’s work at DARPA can be summarized by BTO’s stated mission, which is to work toward merging “biology, engineering, and computer science to harness the power of natural systems for national security.” BTO-favored technologies are also poised to be the mainstays of HARPA, which plans to specifically use “advancements in biotechnology, supercomputing, big data, and artificial intelligence” to accomplish its goals.

The direct DARPA connection to HARPA underscores that the agenda behind this coming agency dates back to the failed Bio-Surveillance project of DARPA’s Total Information Awareness program, which was launched after the events of September 11, 2001. TIA’s Bio-Surveillance project sought to develop the “necessary information technologies and resulting prototype capable of detecting the covert release of a biological pathogen automatically, and significantly earlier than traditional approaches,” accomplishing this “by monitoring non-traditional data sources” including “pre-diagnostic medical data” and “behavioral indicators.”

While nominally focused on “bioterrorist attacks,” TIA’s Bio-Surveillance project also sought to acquire early detection capabilities for “normal” disease outbreaks. Bio-Surveillance and related DARPA projects at the time, such as LifeLog, sought to harvest data through the mass use of some sort of wearable or handheld technology. These DARPA programs were ultimately shut down due to the controversy over claims they would be used to profile domestic dissidents and eliminate privacy for all Americans in the US.

...

Companies such as Amazon, Palantir, and Google are set to be intimately involved in ARPA-H’s activities. In particular, Google, which launched numerous health-tech initiatives in 2020, is set to have a major role in this new agency due to its long-standing ties to the Obama administration when Biden was vice president and to President Biden’s top science adviser, Eric Lander.

As mentioned, Lander is poised to play a major role in ARPA-H/HARPA if and when it materializes. Before becoming the top scientist in the country, Lander was president and founding director of the Broad Institute. While advertised as a partnership between MIT and Harvard, the Broad Institute is heavily influenced by Silicon Valley, with two former Google executives on its board, a partner of Silicon Valley venture capital firm Greylock Partners, and the former CEO of IBM, as well as some of its top endowments coming from prominent tech executives.

...

...in January, the Broad Institute announced that its health-research platform, Terra, which was built with Google subsidiary Verily, would partner with Microsoft. As a result, Terra now allows Google and Microsoft to access a vast trove of genomic data that is poured into the platform by academics and research institutions from around the world.

In addition, last September, Google teamed up with the Department of Defense as part of a new AI-driven “predictive health” program that also has links to the US intelligence community. While initially focused on predicting cancer cases, this initiative clearly plans to expand to predicting the onset of other diseases before symptoms appear, including COVID-19. As noted by Unlimited Hangout at the time, one of the ulterior motives for the program, from Google’s perspective, was for Google to gain access to “the largest repository of disease- and cancer-related medical data in the world,” which is held by the Defense Health Agency. Having exclusive access to this data is a huge boon for Google in its effort to develop and expand its growing suite of AI health-care products.

The military is currently being used to pilot COVID-19–related biometric wearables for “returning to work safely.” Last December, it was announced that Hill Air Force Base in Utah would make biometric wearables a mandatory part of the uniform for some squadrons. For example, the airmen of the Air Force’s 649th Munitions Squadron must now wear a smart watch made by Garmin and a smart ring made by Oura as part of their uniform.

...

One indicator of the push for mass use is that the same Oura smart ring being used by the Air Force was also recently utilized by the NBA to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks among basketball players. Prior to COVID-19, it was promoted for consumer use by members of the British Royal family and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for improving sleep. As recently as last Monday, Oura’s CEO, Harpeet Rai, said that the entire future of wearable health tech will soon be “proactive rather than reactive” because it will focus on predicting disease based on biometric data obtained from wearables in real time.

...

While the use of these wearables is currently “encouraged but optional” at these pilot locations, could there come a time when they are mandated in a workplace or by a government? It would not be unheard of, as several countries have already required foreign arrivals to be monitored through use of a wearable during a mandatory quarantine period. Saint Lucia is currently using BioButton for this purpose. Singapore, which seeks to be among the first “smart nations” in the world, has given every single one of its residents a wearable called a “TraceTogether token” for its contact-tracing program. Either the wearable token or the TraceTogether smartphone app is mandatory for all workplaces, shopping malls, hotels, schools, health-care facilities, grocery stores, and hair salons. Those without access to a smartphone are expected to use the “free” government-issued wearable token.

...

Adoption of these technologies has benefitted from the COVID-19 crisis, as supporters are seizing the opportunity to accelerate their introduction. As a result, their use will soon become ubiquitous if this advancing agenda continues unimpeded.

Though this push for wearables is obvious now, signs of this agenda were visible several years ago. In 2018, for instance, insurer John Hancock announced that it would replace its life insurance offerings with “interactive policies” that involve individuals having their health monitored by commercial health wearables. Prior to that announcement, John Hancock and other insurers such as Aetna, Cigna, and UnitedHealthcare offered various rewards for policyholders who wore a fitness wearable and shared that data with their insurance company.

...

It appears that current trends and events show that DARPA’s decades-long effort to merge “health security” and “national security” have now advanced further than ever before. This may partially be because Bill Gates, who has wielded significant influence over health policy globally in the last year, is a long-time advocate of fusing health security and national security to thwart both pandemics and “bioterrorists” before they can strike, as can be heard in his 2017 speech delivered at that year’s Munich Security Conference. That same year, Gates also publicly urged the US military to “focus more training on preparing to fight a global pandemic or bioterror attack.”

In the merging of “national security” and “health security,” any decision or mandate promulgated as a public health measure could be justified as necessary for “national security,” much in the same way that the mass abuses and war crimes that occurred during the post-9/11 “war on terror” were similarly justified by “national security” with little to no oversight. Yet, in this case, instead of only losing our civil liberties and control over our external lives, we stand to lose sovereignty over our individual bodies.

...

If ARPA-H/HARPA is approved by Congress and ultimately established, it will be used to resurrect dangerous and long-standing agendas of the national-security state and its Silicon Valley contractors, creating a “digital dictatorship” that threatens human freedom, human society, and potentially the very definition of what it means to be human."

Responsible citizens wear Immunabands.

========

People are choosing to buy wearable digital vaccine passports

"For $20, people can buy the bracelet and then send a copy of their vaccine card to the company behind ImmunaBand, which promises to store this information on servers. The product is delivered only after this, containing a QR code that is used to verify, by connecting to the website., that someone has been inoculated against coronavirus.

...

According to reports, the product is taking off and Bernton has already sold thousands, with one customer informing him that he was able to attend a basketball game at Madison Square Garden in New York by showing the bracelet at the door.

Some in the hospitality industry also appear interested in having staff visibly display their vaccination status and therefore personal medical information by wearing a band, with one Los Angeles restaurant already purchasing ImmunaBands.

...

On its website, the company that produces the bands describes them as “seamless” bracelets that are a symbol of vaccination and will help do away with “uncertainty” people are experiencing.

Customers are urged to buy and wear these bracelets to work and restaurants, but also to show that they are supporting and participating in the vaccination effort – and, as ImmunaBand makers say, demonstrate their vaccination status to the world."

========

Cash-for-jabs: Serbia unveils new payment scheme to encourage residents to get Covid-19 vaccine

"The move was unveiled by President Alexandra Vucic on Wednesday after the country’s vaccination rollout stalled due to poor turnout. Serbia has inoculated around 1.3 million of its 7 million people.

The government hopes that by offering a cash incentive to “reward people who showed responsibility”, they will more than double the number vaccinated within the month.

Alongside unveiling the new incentive, Vucic warned that individuals who refused to receive a Covid vaccine would be denied paid sick leave if they contract coronavirus.

...

Serbian epidemiologist Zoran Radovanovic, told AFP that the Serbian proposal appears to be a world first. However, he warned that the government should be careful, as while the measure might encourage some to get vaccinated, it could cause suspicion in others about the government needing to pay people to get inoculated."

========

Facebook censors iconic image of 1970 Kent State shooting on its anniversary

"It remains as one of the most iconic images of the 20th century, one that helped to change the course of history – and yet, on modern-day Facebook, the image is covered over with a “Sensitive content” filter.

The image is of the aftermath of the Kent State shootings, also known as the May 4 massacre of 1970, where unarmed students at Kent State University who were protesting the Vietnam war were gunned down by the Ohio National Guard.

28 National Guard soldiers fired approximately 67 rounds, killing four students and wounding nine others. The fatal casualties were students Allison Beth Krause, 19, Jeffrey Glenn Miller, 20, Sandra Lee Scheuer, 20, and William Knox Schroeder, 19.

John Filo’s photograph of Mary Ann Vecchio kneeling over the body of Jeffrey Miller won the Pulitzer Prize and the photo helped to boost anti-war sentiment in the United States.

...

Facebook’s algorithms often fail to take into account the nuance of many situations, showing how Big Tech’s general and broad-strokes that it uses to police conversations, censor content, and govern narratives often are too broad to cater to a more complex reality – covering over content with little regard to its real-world, newsworthy impact.

The censorship of the photo harkens back to a case in 2016 where Facebook was criticized for censoring another iconic photo – of Phan Thi Kim Phuc, a 9-year-old girl fleeing napalm bombs during the Vietnam war.

...

The situation caused many to speculate whether if those iconic images that had the power to influence the mood of a nation were published in today’s world, they would be deleted and their impact would be nullified by Big Tech algorithms before they even had a chance bloom, changing the future in unknown ways."

========

China bans binge-eating videos as part of new law prohibiting food waste

"Ratified by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC) on Thursday, the new law prohibits vloggers and social media influencers from creating content in which they eat, or pretend to eat, excessive amounts of food. Anyone who makes such videos now risks a fine up of up to 100,000 yuan ($15,451).

Some Chinese content creators reportedly make hundreds of dollars in donations by hosting livestreams, known as a ‘mukbang’ shows, in which they binge on enormous amounts of food or alcohol. Earlier this month, China’s corruption watchdog called on video-sharing platforms to crack down on the ‘shows’, saying they encouraged food waste.

Additionally, the law will allow restaurants to issue fees to diners if they leave large amounts of food uneaten. The legislation also protects consumers from deceptive marketing that leads to food waste. Vendors can be fined if authorities determine that their advertising encourages customers to order more food than they really need. Food providers that are found to be wasteful face a maximum fine of 50,000 yuan ($7,731).

The legislation also extends to office and school cafeterias, as well as food delivery apps, setting out guidelines for reducing waste. Supermarkets will be required to bulk-sell produce nearing its expiration date."

========

WHO gives emergency approval to China's Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccine, sixth jab to be backed by UN agency

"The World Health Organization (WHO) has given emergency use authorization to a Covid-19 vaccine manufactured by China's Sinopharm, making it the sixth such inoculation to receive the agency's green light.

...

The vaccine demonstrated an overall efficacy against Covid-19 of 78.1% in international phase 3 clinical trials and 78.7% efficacy in preventing hospitalization, according to WHO data.

...

While most of the jabs approved by the WHO are either mRNA or viral vector vaccines, Beijing's Sinopharm product is what's known as an ‘inactivated’ inoculation.

Vaccines in this category contain a dead part of the virus, which when injected will trigger an immune response in the body to fight infection."

At least this one allegedly has the virus in it. You still don't need it though.

========

Climate is the new Covid

"The narrative of the “deadly viral pandemic” is slowly losing momentum. Whether this is through the public having “post viral fatigue”(as it were), or a deliberate shift in media talking points is unclear. But there’s certainly less energy in the story than at this time last year.

That said, it’s also perfectly clear that governments around the world are in no mood to give up their newly acquired “emergency powers”, and that alleged “anti-covid measures” are not going away anytime soon.

Especially lockdowns, which are being freshly marketed as “good for the planet”.

...

Before getting to the why of all this, let’s deal with the claim itself: Has the lockdown been good for the environment?

The answer to that is either “probably no” or “certainly not”, depending on your priorities.

For starters there are plastic-fibre disposable masks – which, we remind you, do absolutely nothing to prevent the spread of viruses – hundreds of thousands of which are now busily washing up on beaches, entangling wildlife and clogging sewers all over the world.

“What about emissions?” I hear you say, “won’t they be reduced?”. Well, maybe. But if they are, it’s not by much.

The “lockdowns” have been sold in the press like a total halt to all human activity but, in reality, it’s mostly small businesses being closed down, and a lot of important-sounding but largely unproductive people having zoom meetings.

The militaries of the world still travel, the navies are still at sea. Public transport is still running, even if it is lessened in some places. Emergency vehicles keep chugging along. Rubbish and recycling are still collected. Container ships, cargo planes, long-haul trucks and freight trains are still taking goods to every part of the world.

The big retailers – WalMart, Tesco, CostCo, Amazon etc. – they are all still open, and their supply lines flow all over the world.

The idea that all human activity just stopped dead is a convenient lie, sold to the sort of people who still buy newspapers and believe that absolutely everyone (or at least, everyone who matters) works a job that a) involves commuting into a city, b) can be done just as easily at home.

This is of course untrue, and most of the real, vital work of keeping society moving still happens.

...

Even the study being cited in the Guardian admits the lower CO2 emissions for 2020 are merely “projections”.

In short, no, there is no publicly available evidence that “lockdown” was good for the environment at all.

And, indeed, the idea that it was doesn’t really make much sense when you think about it.

The interesting thing is there’s a whole bunch of articles out there which readily admit this. Such as this one in National Geographic, or this one from the BBC. And a handful of others too.

All arguing that the Covid19 lockdown won’t help stop climate change, or will have only a small impact on emissions, or might even make it worse in the long run.

Why? Because they are the other side of the propaganda. The proverbial stick to the “planet is healing” carrot. Telling people this lockdown won’t heal the planet because it’s not strict enough, or because when it stops we’ll go back to normal.

...

A timely reminder that a lot of the solutions proposed to fight the “pandemic”, were being suggested to fight other things before the pandemic even existed. A cashless society, decreased air travel, population control, mass surveillance, decreased meat production and others have all been on the agenda since long before Covid was close to becoming a thing…and have all been mooted as ways to fight this pandemic (or “future pandemics”).

Even the so-called Great Reset actually pre-dates the pandemic.

After all, what is the much talked about “green new deal”, if not a prototype of the WEF’s Great Reset plan?

...

That’s the takeaway message here, really: The agenda revealed by the past year of pandemic propaganda has always been there, it was just never quite so brazen. It was the before Covid, and will still be there if and/or when they stop talking about Covid altogether.

The “Great Reset” and the “New Normal” are policy goals that pre-date Covid, and are far more important than any of the tools used to pursue them. The created “pandemic” is nothing but a means to an end. They might discard or sideline the narrative of the virus, they might switch storylines for a few months, or stop using certain phrases altogether for a while. But that doesn’t mean their greater agenda has changed at all.

They’ve shown us their hand. They’ve told us – upfront and out loud – what they want to achieve.

Total economic control, marked depreciation of living standards, removal of national sovereignty and radical erosion of individual liberties.

That’s the endgame here. They said so."

========

University of Rhode Island Condemns Faculty Member For Publishing Criticism Of “Trans-Sex/Gender Ideology”

"This week Women’s Studies Professor Donna Hughes was publicly condemned by the University of Rhode Island for writing an op-ed that criticized what she called the LGBTQ ideology.  The op-ed actually criticized the far right as well for what Professor Hughes calls extreme “ideological fantasies” but the university only objects to her criticism of LGBTQ views from a feminist perspective. The university also warned that, while “faculty have the same rights, obligations, and responsibilities as other American citizens” under the First Amendment those rights are not “boundless.”

...

Hughes actually begins and spends much of her op-ed criticizing the far right and its violent history and ideology.  However, she then criticizes what she calls similar fantasies on the far left. In doing so, Professor Hughes was espousing a view shared by other feminists that aspects of LGBTQ writings undermine feminist values and goals. She argues that “The American political left is increasingly diving headfirst into their own world of lies and fantasy and, unlike in the imaginary world of QAnon, real children are becoming actual victims. The trans-sex fantasy, the belief that a person can change his or her sex, either from male to female or from female to male, is spreading largely unquestioned among the political left.”  She added that “[w]omen and girls are expected to give up their places of privacy such as restrooms, locker rooms, and even prison cells.”

...

I am concerned what students will “learn from this situation.”  The university says that professors do not enjoy “boundless” rights and that they must “show due respect for the opinions of others and to “exercise critical self-discipline and judgment” and “appropriate restraint.” However, the objection is that Hughes published her views about LGBTQ writings.  What would the required “restraint” look like in this case? It sounds like Hughes is expected to “exercise critical self-discipline” by not stating her views opposing LGBTQ writing and ideology.  The University states categorically that her “perspectives” of LGBTQ foundations  “can cause pain and discomfort for many transgender individuals” and the university “does not support” them.

The only way that Hughes could not cause such harm would be to stay silent on her criticism of the movement. This is a matter that runs to the very core of her writings as an academic and identity as a feminist. I am glad that the university has not taken to fire Hughes or Loomis. However, this official condemnation raises serious concerns over free speech and academic freedom.  I have no problem with President David Dooley speaking in his individual capacity against Hughes or writing a counter essay addressing her various points of criticism.  However, he chose to have the university as a whole condemn an academic for expressing her objections to LGBTQ writings from her own feminist perspective."

========

Killing Democracy Once and for All: The Global Elite’s Coup d’Etat that Is Destroying Life as We Know It

"Whatever victories have apparently been achieved in the long struggle to achieve political representation, human rights, dignity, economic justice, cultural and gender identity, ecological sustainability and other causes dear to the hearts of those who have struggled, the elite (local, national or global) has always retained control and merely surrendered the minimum necessary to keep the bulk of the human population submissive.

Consequently, as outlined in ‘Why Activists Fail’, while elite control over human societies started to gather pace with the Neolithic revolution 12,000 years ago, it has simply been progressively consolidated since that time. Real power over anything that matters, including fundamental decision-making and the vast bulk of the world’s wealth, remains firmly in the hands of the elite.

More importantly, as one result of the elite’s long reign and the grotesquely distorted priorities it has advanced within the delusional versions of democracy we have experienced, human society is now characterized by staggering levels of psychological, social, economic, military and geopolitical dysfunctionality and Earth is on the brink of ecological collapse with Homo sapiens threatened by four distinct paths to extinction.

...

But what is interesting about the elite coup that is being implemented now, under cover of the non-existent virus SARS-CoV-2...and the supposed Covid-19 pandemic, is that the final facade of our ‘democracy’ is being dismantled in plain site with most of the human population begging for it to be done provided that they are kept ‘safe’. It is pitiful to observe and brings to mind one of Benjamin Franklin’s most famous lines: ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

...

While so-called democratic processes have long been a sham and the rule of law (as it is meant to mean in a conventional sense) does not exist...even the sham elements of democracies – rule by Parliament (rather than executive fiat or unelected bureaucrats), respect for human rights (including freedom of speech), obedience of laws and adherence to legal process – have been ignored by virtually all governments (national, provincial and local) around the world as measures decided by the elite and promulgated through its international organizations such as the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organization have simply been implemented by governments without so much as a public (or even a parliamentary) debate. In fact, any attempt to present an alternative view in any mainstream forum leads to one of a range of outcomes such as dismissal from office, censorship – with corporate and major social media leading the way – or howls of accusation such as ‘conspiracy theorist’ to discredit the dissenting voice.

...

Of course, a common response of many people is to fearfully deny that this is actually happening or to deny that it is really as bad as it seems. But reality has a nasty habit of biting, sooner or later, although it won’t be either in this case. It is already happening.

...

...I wonder if you remember voting for the WHO or the World Economic Forum to tell your government to tell you what you to do. In fact, I wonder if you remember having a say in the composition, and hence decision-making, of these international organizations. Do you even know their elite masters?

And yet ‘suddenly’, or so it seems, ‘our’ national, provincial and local governments are doing what these elite agents are telling them to do, which is to tell us what to do in response to this ‘virus’. How did that happen? Do you remember it happening, at least this obviously, previously?

...

So while you might pin your hopes on some political party (and perhaps, even, a new one) most of what has been familiar about your life in the past will vanish. The changes being wrought by the elite’s corporations as you read this article are profound. For example, vastly more satellites are being shot into Space...and a staggering array of new infrastructure is being installed on the ground so that 5G (and 6G) can be used to make elite control of our lives total.

This will enable comprehensive surveillance of our daily activities, digital ID (possibly implanted in your brain) linked to your bank account and health records, a social credit ID that will end up dictating every facet of your life, the digitization of money, the robotization of the workforce and military, and the biological and electronic connectivity (through embedded sensors, software and other technologies) of humans and machines through the Internet of Things. And that is just part of what the fourth industrial revolution and the transhumanist agenda will mean for you and me.

...

But the most comprehensive demonstration that any semblance of democracy is being destroyed is perhaps the removal from political office of those presidents who dared to challenge the elite-driven narrative that our world is seriously threatened by a virus.

As recorded in progressive media, at least two presidents openly resisting the elite-driven narrative have been removed in coups, with both presidents killed outright.

President Pierre Nkurunzia of Burundi dismissed Covid-19 as ‘nonsense’. He was then vilified in the western media before expelling the World Health Organization from Burundi. Soon after he died of a ‘heart attack’ and his successor immediately reversed his Covid-19 policies....

...

Similarly, President John Magufuli of Tanzania not only rejected the Covid-19 narrative but openly ridiculed it in a televised address, in which he exposed the fraudulent nature of the testing ‘when he covertly had non-human samples – from fruits, goats, sheep, and car oil – tested for Covid on the PCR test, returning positive results from a paw-paw, a quail, and a goat’ thus openly irritating the global elite....

As always, this led to his vilification by corporate media...and their failure to mention the fact that President Magufuli had a PhD in chemistry so was rather more qualified than most to question the elite-driven Covid-19 narrative....

...

Human life as you experienced it until the beginning of 2020 has now ended. It will not return. The long-standing elite plan to take complete control of our lives is now being progressively implemented. Act 1 – the ‘Covid-19 pandemic’ – successfully distracted most people so comprehensively that the measures implemented by the global elite to depopulate humanity and take full control of those still living proceeded rapidly. Act 2 is but a short time away.

If you want any chance of restoring a semblance of the lives we have lost, you are invited to join those strategically resisting the elite coup. If your resistance is not strategic, it will have zero impact."

Just remember though: No one has a monopoly on the right strategy. It doesn't matter how long they've been at something. You've got to attempt to figure things out for yourself and do what you deem best. Don't let anyone bully you into the "one true path."

========

The Hard Problems of Vegetarianism

“We have to speak up on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves,” wrote the famous utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer in Animal Liberation, the book that converted me (and countless others) to vegetarianism more than 10 years ago. You don’t have to buy into Singer’s pain-and-pleasure calculus to find the moral force of his argument compelling: Humans are gratuitously inflicting pain and suffering on intelligent, sentient creatures for no other reason than because they enjoy the taste of their meat, the texture of their skin, or the softness of their fur. They do so even though they know they could, at a small cost to themselves, live without it, and even though they share a virtually universal conviction that it is wrong to cause harm for trivial reasons. And yet, vegans and vegetarians remain a small minority.

Almost all of this meat, leather, and fur is being produced in factory farms that deprive animals of most of what would make their lives worth living. Driven by the relentless logic of profit-maximization, we curb the space available to them to the bare minimum, feed them food that is neither particularly healthy nor tasty, but helps them to put on weight quickly, and is replete with antibiotics, with all the disastrous long-term consequences that such a practice entails. It’s a system in which I don’t wish to be complicit. Even so, I will argue that the moral high ground often claimed by animal advocates (for whom the issues at hand are so obvious that they struggle to understand how anyone in their right mind could possibly disagree) is shakier than the movement would like to admit. Honestly addressing these shortcomings, I believe, would lend more credibility to the cause among sympathetic-but-not-quite-convinced onlookers, and make it harder to reject its central message outright because of some supposedly unaddressed internal contradiction.

In doing so, I will not spend much time on edge cases, neat and challenging though they may be. Vegetarianism (and veganism) is not refuted because it is self-defeating under certain hypothetical circumstances. The fact that I can imagine situations in which it would be morally justifiable to consume animal products says little about the value of vegetarianism as such. For example, I would eat meat if it were the only thing that could save me from starvation. I do not necessarily object to the killing of chickens that have lived a good chickeny life on a pastoral farm (terms and conditions apply), and I do think that animal testing for medical research can be justified in many—although not all—cases. While animal rights activists disagree on those issues, I don’t think they offer compelling reasons to reject the general idea, or that supporting any of them makes one an unprincipled hypocrite. Rather, they are a natural defect of any system of morality devised by fallible humans in the same way that not lying is a good social norm, but “never lie under any circumstances” isn’t. Therefore, philosophical thought experiments to tease your ethical intuitions will not be featured prominently in the following. My goal is to probe how well vegetarian norms generalize under the assumption that all borderline cases have been taken care of.

...

It’s tempting to put this in the context of the inevitable, if often bumpy, march of progress. Just like our views on homosexuality have been gradually transformed, moving its status from criminal offense to mental disorder to accepted behavior, it took time for humanity to become “enlightened” about the cause of animal welfare. Singer calls this the “expanding circle,” which encompasses an ever-wider range of beings and deeds. The danger of such a view is that it makes our own day and age more exceptional than they most likely are, which is of course an all too human attitude towards things. It makes you susceptible to believe that our era represents a kind of logical endpoint in our species’ moral development (incidentally, previous generations shared this conviction). Another way of putting this is that the notion that we have finally figured out the right way to treat animals should be discounted if there are other reasons that could explain why the issue has suddenly gained prominence. I’m thinking of industrialization, of course.

As human societies became more urban, more concentrated, more modern, the question of how to supply food to the hungry masses took on a whole new logistical dimension. The population density of newly emerging shanty towns and slums did not allow for families to continue to grow their own vegetables, raise their own chickens, or slaughter their own hogs. The tried-and-tested pastoral approach to producing food, the family farm—a source of much misplaced nostalgia—had to give way to a more scalable way of manufacturing the required calories. It should come as no surprise that factory farming developed in parallel with the industrialization of many other sectors of the economy, and with it all the problems that result from the massive concentration of livestock.

...

Scale and mechanization of the slaughtering process have made the killing psychologically more bearable for both slaughterhouse employees and consumers. Would the latter still be eating meat if they had to get their own hands dirty at least once? If you are inclined to say no, should we then not encourage things like hunting as a way to create a more meaningful, responsible relationship with the creatures that end up on our plates?

Maybe this will be dismissed as a rather silly and far-fetched point, and that may well be the case. It does, however, point towards some thorny issues to which moral purism is poorly suited. The historical observation that moral progress is not solely a function of changing convictions, but also of changing material conditions that make conforming to these convictions less costly, remains under-appreciated. Taking it seriously may require presenting meat-eaters with alternatives that are imperfect from a strictly vegetarian point of view, but stand a better chance of reducing animal suffering overall.

...

Our understanding of animals’ mental capacities has advanced tremendously since the days of Descartes’s “soulless machines.” However, decades of research have not brought us much closer to a subjective understanding of what is going on inside the head of a pig, a cow, or a dog. As Thomas Nagel famously argued, while we can understand how bats use echolocation to navigate, we do not understand what it is like to be a bat. We can, albeit with some difficulty, put ourselves in someone else’s shoes, but not in a horse’s hoofs, so to speak. Absent the experience of an animal’s qualia, we rely on somewhat crude behavioral observations to judge how our actions affect them. Pain and pleasure, joy and sadness are at least in principle observable, and they are typically used to justify who does and doesn’t count as a “moral patient.” Even those non-utilitarian theorists who hold that animal lives are intrinsically valuable will draw the line somewhere, and will not demand that bugs or amoebas be awarded the same rights as humans.

...

...Let’s assume that we had, by divine revelation or other suitable means, collectively come to realize that vegetarianism is the correct philosophy. Even then, problems remain for which the vegetarian framework doesn’t provide obvious answers.

Is the individual animal the proper object of our concern, or should the preservation of a species trump those interests in cases where the two conflict? Suffering certainly takes place at the individual level, but we have already seen that this concept is fraught with difficulties. And there is the fundamental evolutionary reality that in the struggle for the survival of the fittest, the well-being of any individual member is secondary to the expansion of a species’ ecological niche, which is how genes maximize the copies they pass on to the next generation.

Have you ever wondered, for instance, why cows seem to show absolutely no inclination to throw off the yoke of their masters? While we can probably explain the fact that they don’t panic on their way to the slaughterhouse (but is that so obvious?), they don’t seem to resist any kind of restrictions placed upon them, unlike what a wild and untamed beast would do. It all makes perfect sense until you start thinking about it.

The most probable explanation for their behavior is an evolutionary one, in that domesticated animals co-evolved alongside humans to become walking, breathing sources of food. It’s been a great deal so far—there are 650 million pigs alive today (down from an 800 million high in 2013), compared to around 1,000 ferocious mountain gorillas or around 4,000 vicious tigers that remain in the wild. By giving away their meat, skin, and milk, farm animals have traded liberty for security, with stunning reproductive success....

...

...a committed animal advocate ought to be asked what kind of utopia they have in mind when advocating for their cause. At what point would our society have advanced so far that any remaining injustices towards animals are either so insignificant that we should spend our time tackling other problems, or so entrenched that we’re likely to do more harm than good in trying to solve them? Would hunting still be allowed? Could we still have pets, and if so, under what conditions? Would we actively be managing wildlife or let things run their course? Could we continue to slaughter and consume animals that had enjoyed a long and fulfilling life? And assuming that animal testing would still not be entirely replaceable by artificial means, should it still be legal? These are very different questions from whether one should, here and now, personally consume animal products, but it is worth reflecting on how well these individual norms can be universalized, and what kinds of implications this generalization would have. If we are then led to believe that widespread adoption of such norms would have disastrous consequences, this should make us rethink how defensible those norms really are."

========

Saudi Arabia plans to make Covid-19 vaccination MANDATORY for all workers – government

https://www.rt.com/news/523175-saudi-arabia-mandatory-covid-vaccination-workers/

"In a Twitter post published on Friday, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Development said that “Receiving a coronavirus vaccine will be a mandatory condition for male and female workers to attend workplaces in all sectors (public, private, non-profit).” It has called on all employees to start registering for a jab to ensure a “safe and healthy” return to their workplace. The ministry's statement stressed the importance of complying with precautionary measures and health requirements for the safety of employees. The ministry said it would soon clarify the procedure and the date when the decision comes into force."

========

Research: 60-70% of social links go to just 10 online domains

"In 2006, Marian-Andrei Rizoiu, a computer science expert at University of Technology-Sydney, and Paul X. McCarthy of University of South Wales, started research into the online economy by analyzing global trends in online dominance and diversity. The research focused on links on some of the world’s most popular online platforms, including Twitter and Reddit.

After more than a decade of research, they concluded that 60 to 70% of all attention on major online platforms focuses on 10 domains only.

The researchers analyzed over six billion Reddit comments from 2006, which contained over one billion links to websites. They gave each link a uniqueness rating, where a link that led to its own domain got a score of 1, and a link leading to a popular domain such as YouTube got a score of 0.

According to their findings, at the beginning of the study, there were about 20 different domains for each 100 random links shared. However, towards the end of the study, there were only five different domains for each 100 random links.

...

After analyzing over 20 billion links shared in social media over the past three years, the researchers found out that the top 1,000 websites globally continue to grow, in influence, authority, and visibility, at the expense of the smaller ones.

...

The research underscores a harsh reality: as a result of most niches having one or a few dominant domains, whose dominance is ever increasing, it is difficult for a new or emerging successful online business to scale up."

========

Using ‘Russiagate’ & ‘bounties’ logic, anonymous officials now claim GRU behind mysterious ‘sonic attacks’ on US spies

"Mysterious “sonic attacks” a scientist had identified as the work of crickets are now being blamed on some kind of Russian secret sci-fi superweapon by anonymous US officials, using the same script as “bounties” and ‘Russiagate’.

The “suspected directed-energy incidents” that have allegedly afflicted US diplomats and spies around the world may have been the work of “Russia’s military intelligence unit, the GRU,” Politico claimed on Monday, citing “three current and former officials with direct knowledge of the discussions.”

...

Another former official said that Israel and China may also have the technology, but not a presence in all the locations of the alleged incidents, or desire to attack Americans. But Russia does? Again, no evidence, or even explanation what any of this is supposed to be based on.

Politico’s sources also admitted no specific weapon was identified, but that didn’t stop them from speculating about a device that could fit into a car or a large backpack, capable of targeting an individual from 500 to 1,000 yards away. Does any such weapon actually exist?

...

The “Russian bounties” story – likewise based on anonymous sources – emerged just in time to derail President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of 2020, and give then-candidate Joe Biden ammunition to call Trump unpatriotic. After Biden was installed in the White House and announced that he would withdraw from Afghanistan, the “bounties” story was downgraded to “low confidence” and quietly dropped.

...

While Biden campaigned on “following the science” – a phrase the 78-year-old is fond of repeating in speeches – that commitment seems entirely absent from discussions of the alleged sonic incidents. Back in January 2019, a US Berkeley scientist said he had analyzed the recordings of the “attacks” published by AP and identified them as the chirping of the Indies short-tailed cricket."

Obviously Putin has genetically modified the Indies short-tailed cricket into a sonic weapon. That man puts every Bond villain to shame.

========

Top former UK Judge says too much weight is given to trans activists, outlines threats to free speech

"Currently, the UK government is controversially looking to expand the existing hate crime laws and has entrusted that responsibility to the Law Commission, which is consulting with different groups on what subcultures should be added to protected groups.

However, according to Charles Wide, a former OLD Bailey judge, the commission is seeking a “limited range” of views, further arguing that the commission’s overdependence on specific campaign groups has drawn it away from its non-political mission to making “contentious and controversial sociological theories.”

“No adequate thought seems to have been given to the difficulty of reaching beyond a limited range of academics and organizations to the full variety of academic voices, organizations, commentators and members of the public who have no organizations to speak for them,” Wide wrote in an article for the think tank Policy Exchange.

...

Wide feels that the lack of balanced consulting for the upcoming legislation could have a chilling effect on free speech, especially for those people who could want to contradict the current widely accepted views on issues like gender and race.

“Rightly, the interests of those who might be protected are considered in detail but little attention has been paid to those who might suffer, or fear suffering, the consequences of laws being too widely drawn or misused,” Wide said.

...

Wide further explained that the “fear of a Twitter storm or a visit by the police” as a result of stricter laws, might be “enough to silence” most people from contradicting orthodoxies.

“It should be a matter of real concern if the Law Commission is morphing, at least in part, into an engine of social change, pursuing agendas of its own formulation, having a privileged position close to the heart of Government,” he added."

========

FDA authorizes emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech's Covid-19 vaccine for American children as young as 12

"The US FDA has extended emergency use authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine to children as young as 12, saying that, despite low case and death rates in the age group, potential benefits outweigh any known risks.

“Today's action allows for a younger population to be protected from Covid-19, bringing us closer to returning to a sense of normalcy and to ending the pandemic,” acting FDA commissioner Dr. Janet Woodstock said in a statement on Monday. “Parents and guardians can rest assured that the agency undertook a rigorous and thorough review of all available data, as we have with all of our Covid-19 vaccine emergency use authorizations.”

“The FDA has determined that Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine has met the statutory criteria to amend the EUA, and that the known and potential benefits of this vaccine in individuals 12 years of age and older outweigh the known and potential risks, supporting the vaccine’s use in this population,” the press release states.

...

CDC data showed that as of April 30, there had been about 1.5 million US Covid-19 cases among children aged 11-17. Children typically suffer more minor symptoms than adults. While 11- to 17-year-olds account for about 4.5% of overall infections, children under 17 make up less than 0.1% of Covid-19 deaths.

A CDC advisory committee is expected to vote on Wednesday whether to recommend use of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in children aged 12-17, as approved by the FDA. Once that recommendation is made, President Joe Biden's administration plans to quickly distribute the shots to the new age group through pharmacies, family doctors and pediatricians.

...

The Biden administration plans to start vaccinating children under 12 by early next year."

========

New Report Sheds Light on Vaccine Doomsday Cult

"An explosive new study by researchers at the prestigious Salk Institute casts doubt on the current crop of gene-based vaccines that may pose a grave risk to public health. The article, which is titled “The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, shows that SARS-CoV-2’s “distinctive ‘spike’ protein”..”damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease.” While the paper focuses strictly on Covid-related issues, it unavoidably raises questions about the new vaccines that contain billions of spike proteins that could greatly increase the chances of severe illness or death. Here’s an excerpt from the article dated April 30, 2021:

“In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls...."

...

"...How are the public health officials, the politicians, the media and the rest of the pro-Covid Vaxx camp going to respond to these revelations especially with the imprimatur of the Salk Institute affixed to the front of the report? Will they try to sweep it under the rug or will they try to divert the public’s attention to the ‘variant’ hobgoblin? Or will they try something else entirely, like claim that one class of spike proteins are good for you while others lead to protracted illness and death? What will they do?"

...

Doctor Vladimir Zelenko, who has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his use of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, had this to say:

“Do you understand what this means——we are are injecting viral genetic code for the spike protein into innocent people andiIt gets into almost every cell In the body.” (Nobel nominee, Zelenko has also been banned from Twitter.)

...

...according to Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist, the cells “release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun has stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.”"

========

Shhhh, They’re Listening – Inside the Coming Voice-Profiling Revolution

"You decide to call a store that sells some hiking boots you’re thinking of buying. As you dial in, the computer of an artificial intelligence company hired by the store is activated. It retrieves its analysis of the speaking style you used when you phoned other companies the software firm services. The computer has concluded you are “friendly and talkative.” Using predictive routing, it connects you to a customer service agent who company research has identified as being especially good at getting friendly and talkative customers to buy more expensive versions of the goods they’re considering.

This hypothetical situation may sound as if it’s from some distant future. But automated voice-guided marketing activities like this are happening all the time.

If you hear “This call is being recorded for training and quality control,” it isn’t just the customer service representative they’re monitoring.

It can be you, too.

...

Thanks to the public’s embrace of smart speakers, intelligent car displays and voice-responsive phones – along with the rise of voice intelligence in call centers – marketers say they are on the verge of being able to use AI-assisted vocal analysis technology to achieve unprecedented insights into shoppers’ identities and inclinations. In doing so, they believe they’ll be able to circumvent the errors and fraud associated with traditional targeted advertising.

Not only can people be profiled by their speech patterns, but they can also be assessed by the sound of their voices – which, according to some researchers, is unique and can reveal their feelings, personalities and even their physical characteristics.

...

Top marketing executives I interviewed said that they expect their customer interactions to include voice profiling within a decade or so.

Part of what attracts them to this new technology is a belief that the current digital system of creating unique customer profiles – and then targeting them with personalized messages, offers and ads – has major drawbacks.

...

Voice analysis, on the other hand, is seen as a solution that makes it nearly impossible for people to hide their feelings or evade their identities.

...

Most of the activity in voice profiling is happening in customer support centers, which are largely out of the public eye.

But there are also hundreds of millions of Amazon Echoes, Google Nests and other smart speakers out there. Smartphones also contain such technology.

...

Amazon and Google – the leading purveyors of smart speakers outside China – appear to be doing little voice analysis on those devices beyond recognizing and responding to individual owners. Perhaps they fear that pushing the technology too far will, at this point, lead to bad publicity.

Nevertheless, the user agreements of Amazon and Google – as well as Pandora, Bank of America and other companies that people access routinely via phone apps – give them the right to use their digital assistants to understand you by the way you sound. Amazon’s most public application of voice profiling so far is its Halo wristband, which claims to know the emotions you’re conveying when you talk to relatives, friends and employers.

The company assures customers it doesn’t use Halo data for its own purposes. But it’s clearly a proof of concept – and a nod toward the future.

...

Another Amazon patent suggests an app to help a store salesperson decipher a shopper’s voice to plumb unconscious reactions to products. The contention is that how people sound allegedly does a better job indicating what people like than their words.

And one of Google’s proprietary inventions involves tracking family members in real time using special microphones placed throughout a home. Based on the pitch of voice signatures, Google circuitry infers gender and age information – for example, one adult male and one female child – and tags them as separate individuals.

The company’s patent asserts that over time the system’s “household policy manager” will be able to compare life patterns, such as when and how long family members eat meals, how long the children watch television, and when electronic game devices are working – and then have the system suggest better eating schedules for the kids, or offer to control their TV viewing and game playing.

...

When tech companies have further developed voice analysis software – and people have become increasingly reliant on voice devices – I expect the companies to begin widespread profiling and marketing based on voice data. Hewing to the letter if not the spirit of whatever privacy laws exist, the companies will, I expect, forge ahead into their new incarnations, even if most of their users joined before this new business model existed.

This classic bait and switch marked the rise of both Google and Facebook. Only when the numbers of people flocking to these sites became large enough to attract high-paying advertisers did their business models solidify around selling ads personalized to what Google and Facebook knew about their users.

...

Here’s the catch: It’s not clear how accurate voice profiling is, especially when it comes to emotions.

It is true, according to Carnegie Mellon voice recognition scholar Rita Singh, that the activity of your vocal nerves is connected to your emotional state. However, Singh told me that she worries that with the easy availability of machine-learning packages, people with limited skills will be tempted to run shoddy analyses of people’s voices, leading to conclusions that are as dubious as the methods.

...

With the looming widespread adoption of voice analysis technology, it’s important for government leaders to adopt policies and regulations that protect the personal information revealed by the sound of a person’s voice.

One proposal: While the use of voice authentication – or using a person’s voice to prove their identity – could be allowed under certain carefully regulated circumstances, all voice profiling should be prohibited in marketers’ interactions with individuals. This prohibition should also apply to political campaigns and to government activities without a warrant.

That seems like the best way to ensure that the coming era of voice profiling is constrained before it becomes too integrated into daily life and too pervasive to control."

Regulation may be an interim solution but we ultimately must focus on people's beliefs & doing the hard work of spiritual development. Getting people to fully grasp why these technologies are so insidious is essential to our long-term protection from them.