How Your Threat Matrix Score Could Land You On The Terminal “RED LIST”

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

Did you know that according to Daniel Freeman’s study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that paranoid thoughts are common among normally functioning people? In fact, the study concluded that some dose of paranoia is actually quite adaptive and can serve to keep us safe from danger. What is about to be presented in this article should make one paranoid for when one considers why governments in the West, particularly in the United States, spend billions of dollars to spy on our actions, words, Internet browsing habits, places visited and even our thoughts, we should all be looking under our beds.

The following represents a small cross-section of illegal government spying activities which are designed to do one thing: To determine whose thoughts and actions pose a threat to the newest totalitarian regime on the face of the Earth, the United States. Everything you say and do is being being cataloged and categorized and every American is receiving a threat matrix score similar to a credit rating. And where this is headed is worse than anything Orwell could have imagined.

 

“Every Move You Make, We’ll Be Watching You”

Civil rights activist, Daphne Lee told NBC News 3 that she is worried about her freedom as an American citizen. “This technology, you know is taking us to a place where, you know, you’ll essentially be monitored from the moment you leave your home till the moment you get home”. What is Ms. Lee talking about?

intellistreets

They look like ordinary streetlights, shining down on Las Vegas, but these streetlights have special capabilities that have aware and informed citizens up in arms.

This year, the city of  Las Vegas, NV., is completing a project that it began last year and it has average citizens screaming constitutional foul play. However, these streetlights have capabilities far beyond anything the American people have ever seen.

The program is called Intellistreets and it records conversations, can scan you for a weapon, listen to your conversations and it can even “read your mind”. Eventually you will be placed on a “naughty or nice” list, and this list could have very consequences for your longevity.

 

 

Did you pick up on the part of the Intellistreets video that they passively admit that this is a surveillance and data mining tool? The program, like so many programs that violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, are adding to your personal threat matrix data base.

 

Law Professor Alarmed by DHS Data Gathering Could Lead to One Being Put on the “Red List”

Law Professor Margaret Hu says "Americans could be targeted for unlawful detention and even execution".

Law Professor Margaret Hu says “Americans could be targeted for unlawful detention and even execution”.

Professor Margaret Hu from the Washington and Lee University  School of Law states that “The implementation of a universal digitalized biometric ID system risks normalizing and integrating mass cybersurveillance into the daily lives of ordinary citizens”.

Professor Hu explains that the FBI’s Next Generation Identification project will institute the following:

“A comprehensive, centralized, and technologically interoperable biometric database that spans across military and national security agencies, as well as all other state and federal government agencies. Once complete, NGI will strive to centralize whatever biometric data is available on all citizens and noncitizens in the United States and abroad, including information on fingerprints, DNA, iris scans, voice recognition, and facial recognition data captured through digitalized photos, such as U.S. passport photos and REAL ID driver’s licenses. The NGI Interstate Photo System, for instance, aims to aggregate digital photos from not only federal, state, and local law enforcement, but also digital photos from private businesses, social networking sites, government agencies, and foreign and international entities, as well as acquaintances, friends, and family members”. Biometric ID cybersurveillance might be used to assign risk assessment scores and to take action based on those scores“.

The healthy side of your paranoia is about to emerge as we consider the fact that Professor Hu describes a DHS program known as FAST, which is a DHS tested program and has been described as a “precrime” program. FAST will gather upon complex statistical algorithms that will compile data from multiple databases and will subsequently “predict” future criminal or terrorist acts.

The “precrime”  data will be gathered” through cybersurveillance and stealth data monitoring of ordinary citizens. The FAST program purports to assess whether an individual might pose a “precrime” threat through the capture of a range of data, including biometric data. In other words, FAST accuses non-convicted individuals as being a security threat risk of becoming future criminals and terrorists through data analysis. No charges, no police interviews, the system is designed to become “judge, jury and executioner“.

Under the Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST), criminal cues are captured through the following types of biometric data including body and eye movements, eye blink rate and pupil variation, body heat changes, and breathing patterns. Various linguistic cues include the analysis of voice pitch changes, alterations in voce rhythm patterns, and changes in intonations of speech. Hu notes that in documents released by DHS clearly show that individuals could be arrested and face serious consequences based upon statistical algorithms and predictive analytical assessments.

 

Professor Hu issued the following warning:

“The prognostications of FAST can range from none to being temporarily detained to deportation, prison, or death“.

 

Now we know why the unconstitutional NDAA was passed which gave the government the power to permanently detain American citizens without due process of law.

Now we know why the unconstitutional NDAA was passed which gave the government the power to permanently detain American citizens without due process of law.

 

 

DHS Wants to Know Everything About You

dhs fascism

 

There is a new DHS funded multi-billion dollar spy tool and it is called FirstNet. This is a citizen information gathering device like no other. A company called New World Systems (do they really mean New World Order Systems?) is in charge of implementing this system.

 

The Radio Access Network (RAN) part of this elaborate network consists of the radio base station infrastructure that connects to user devices including cell towers and mobile hotspots embedded in vehicles which connects to the satellite network or other types of wireless infrastructure. This is a “search and destroy system” as FirstNet is designed to hunt you down in remote areas. Take a look at the map below along with the embedded graphics from the FirstNet website. They have developed the technology to track you and find you should you be a fugitive from their own special brand of justice. RAN has the ability to track you anywhere on the planet. Soon, there will be nowhere for people with high threat matrix scores to run and hide without being found by this system.

 

There Is No End to the Madness

internet browses you

A company called PredPol claims that it possesses proprietary software which can actually predict times and places for likely future crimes. Intrado has the capability to data mine all social media and create your personal profile based on your Internet chatter. Subsequently, if you are pulled over for a speeding violation, you could find yourself face down on the pavement because you have written something negative about the police who murdered Eric Garner. Or, you might just end up like Eric Garner.

Does anyone else have a problem with this police state surveillance grid? Some might intimate, it is time for a revolution. For those who are so inclined, the authorities, the minions for the banksters, have that possibility covered as well and that will be the topic of a future article. Meanwhile, take a pill, your paranoia is about to get worse.

The Common Sense Show

Your Guns Are Worthless Against The New Super Weapons Of The Globalists

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

darpa gun behind grass Yamamoto-Japanese-Admiral

Americans have an estimated 300 million privately owned hand guns and some people present this fact as the reason why no foreign power, or even our government, could ever subjugate the people. I am compelled to disagree with this notion. Once upon a time that may have been true as World War II era Japanese Admiral  Yamamoto refused to invade the United States following his attack upon Pearl Harbor because there would be “an American with a gun behind every blade of grass”. However, if our government ever became abusive enough that the people felt the need to rebel, there is a new generation of super weapons being developed and deployed as I write these words, which would doom any rebellion that did not have the full support of the military.

The new generation of super weapons has made America vulnerable to enemies, both foreign and domestic. As a result, the window to resist martial law occupation and even an invasion is virtually closed.

Recently, I made the point that Americans were being surveilled in “Police State” America with a new generation of spy devices that were totally unimaginable. Today, America is on the verge of being suppressed by an equally sophisticated generation of weapons that the general public would only believe that these weapons exist in the science fiction dramas of the future. Only these weapons are right here and right now!

Advanced Anti-Guerrilla Warfare Tactics of the Globalists

UN KILLER ROBOTS

The rules of Guerrilla warfare have changed. The Red Dawn scenario in which average people, like the Viet Cong, can resist an invader belong to era in the past.

Afghanistan is proving to be the beta testing ground for many of these weapons as was Iraq. The following breakthroughs in military technology have very little value on the battlefield in a conventional war. In other words, the weapons discussed in this article are designed for war against Russia. They are designed for war against the American people! These weapons systems are anti-guerrilla orientated and they are designed for Americans who will soon try to put a stop to the unfolding tyranny of the bankers who have hijacked our government. We are entering into a new type of guerrilla warfare with extreme counter-measures designed and created by DARPA which is the top secret research arm for the Department of Defense.

DARPA’s sole purpose is built around the goal of developing more efficient and greater means of killing. For those of you who have not figured out, we are about to enter American hunting season and you are the game, you should know that when these weapons systems are deployed in sufficient numbers, the game is over.

Robot Soldiers

UN KILLER ROBOTS 2

Many analysts feel that the greatest threat to, not only Americans, but humanity as a whole, is tied to the development of  artificial intelligence in the name of Robot soldiers. These “robot soldiers are capable of autonomous decision making in terms of carrying out their mission. They come equipped with facial recognition software and when the subjugation and subsequent roundups of American citizens begin in earnest, these “soldiers” will be the main enforcement agents.

The physical prowess of these robots is stunning as they can reach speeds up to 30 mph. In times of civil unrest or combat, imagine your neighborhood was forcibly evacuated, these robots would make excellent clean up troops. Armed with facial recognition, rebel forces leaders could be targeted and eliminated.  There will nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.

 

 

Watching Every Move You Make

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

 DARPAs-Large-Area-Coverage-Optical-Search-while-Track-and-Engage (1)In a nowhere to run and nowhere to hide scenario, DARPA, has developed technology which allows the military to spy on entire cities with its Large Area Coverage Optical Search-while-Track and Engage (LACOSTE). LACOSTE is a program of imaging technology that will allow for “single sensor, day or night, ongoing tactical surveillance of all moving vehicles in an urban area. LACOSTE will eventually be able to identify individual humans in the same manner with the next generation of facial recognition software. This surveillance system is being integrated into department store video surveillance, the street light turned spy Intellistreets as well as all traffic cameras. If the globalists want to find you, you better have a “cloaking” device to hide behind. More importantly, most guerrilla activities are designed to occur under the cover of darkness. The cover of darkness is no longer an ally for future American rebels. This system is fully operational.

Meet the New “Boss”

Meet the new Boss, The Battlefield Surveillance System

 

Many gun owners mistakenly believe that they are going to be able to carry out acts of guerrilla warfare and/or terrorism against an illegitimate government as they begin to lock-down the country under a martial law takeover. Thwarting most ideas of a successful revolutionary effort can be found inthe Battlefield Optical Surveillance System (BOSS),which is a device that can be mounted on a truck that scans and deciphers the landscape with lasers and sensors. When it sees the almost imperceptible glint of a rifle scope, or more amazingly it also recognizes you through your retinas as the detection device “paints” you with a laser beam, just prior to your demise.

Boomerang


Boomerang

And even in the unlikely event that you can slip into firing range of your intended target, the Boomerang countermeasure system uses an array of microphones which will be able to instantly decipher the speed and direction of your shot, based on the muzzle report and the shock wave of the bullet as it zips past. Immediately, Boomerang knows where the shot came from, and even what kind of weapon was utilized. This system will reduce all future sniper missions to a Kamikaze endeavor. Therefore, it is a safe bet that prior to moving globalist controlled forces into an area to conduct a roundup of American citizens, BOSS and Boomerang will be employed to detect any possible resistance and eliminate the resistance by calling in a drone strike. Unfortunately, this technology is currently available.

 

Raise the Shields

This technology has come to so far that even if someone in your neighborhood struck a deal with al Qaeda and obtained a couple of RPG’s that the late Lybian Ambassador Stevens sold to the terrorists before he was murdered, it would not matter. The new DHS armored personnel carriers are being outfitted with the following technology which make them impervious to  harm.

 

 

Micro Air Vehicles

Maybe someone in your neighborhood struck a deal with al-Qaeda and obtained a couple of RPG’s that the late Ambassador from Libya sold to the terrorists before he was murdered by the administration to make the trail go cold and cover up the fact that our government, through the CIA was supplying weapons to terrorists in order to promote regime change. If you had an RPG, you might actually feel that you had a chance against the armored personnel carriers which will be used by DHS in a time of civil insurrection. Or, maybe you could shoot down a Predator B drone.

Do you remember the 2700 armored personnel carriers obtained by DHS? In the not too distant future, we will witness the fact that these vehicles will be virtually indestructible.

Mico-aerial vehicles (MAVS) is a game changing event. There is no way that a civilian insurgent force has the capacity to counter this technology. We know about the drones and they are deadly enough, but the MAV’s are more deadly. According to my sources, this technology is being beta tested in Afghanistan, which means that full deployment cannot be far behind.

Conclusion

What happens when these MAV’s incorporate the existing autonomous decision software? Well, that day is here. The autonomous decision-making in robots is so sophisticated and so integrated in the DARPA based military systems, that the University of Edinburgh actually teaches a class related to this technology.

Battlefield robots are already fully autonomous. How long will it be until these devices begin to become so self-aware that they will begin to see humanity as a threat? Certainly the movie industry has picked up on this idea. The technology presented in this article is primitive compared to where this is all headed and this will be the topic of the next article on “weapons of enslavement” which could potentially be used on the American people.

The Common Sense Show

Body Cameras Won’t Stop Police Brutality But Here’s What They Will Do

Occupy Corporatism
by Susanne Posel

Orig.src.Susanne.Posel.Daily.News- body.camera.ferguson.obama01_occupycorporatism

There is a growing concern by experts that “just because we put cameras on officers, doesn’t mean we’re going to capture everything” that happens during an arrest or confrontation between suspects and law enforcement.

Shaun King, a digital activist, explained : “Wearable police cameras are not the panacea. It’s a form of accountability.”

The body cameras attached to the lapel of the officer’s uniform are pointed at the suspect and not the police officer, voiding the possibility of filming police brutality or inciteful actions that may be happening “off camera”.

With the advent of body cameras being potentially mandated for officers, how the dash-cameras now in place fit into the mix might be an avenue for removing the “impartial” witness now installed to film any altercation with police.

The statistics show that there have not been consistent convictions of police violating citizen’s rights even when the officer is being filmed. In fact, these incidents are rarely prosecuted.

  • In 2013, Chicago police officers were not charged with the fatal shooting of an unarmed man even though the incident was filmed
  • In 2014, a jury acquitted 2 former police officers who were filmed beating a homeless man to death
  • The officers involved in the chokehold death of an unarmed black man have not been charged even though they were filmed and the video went viral on the internet
  • Los Angeles police officers were caught disabling their voice recording equipment; antennas on at least 50 squad cars used in low-income areas
  • Police departments typically deny requests from the public for video footage of violent incidents caught on body or dashboard cameras

Regardless of this, the White House publicly stated that “[President] Obama will ask Congress for $75 million over three years to subsidize the purchase of up to 50,000 body-worn cameras for local police.”

The president has created a Task Force on Police Practices (TFPP) that will “produce a report by late February with recommendations on how to promote effective crime reduction while building public trust.”

Part of the building of trust is an executive order said to be in preparation “mandate federal agencies review the way they provide US police with heavy equipment like tanks and aircraft.”

Military-grade weapons that made it from the Department of Defense (DoD) to police departments include:

  • 92,442 small arms
  • 5,235 Humvees
  • 617 mine resistant vehicles
  • 616 aircraft
  • Various financial and indiscriminant “equipment” provided by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

In order to “help improve trust between communities and their police forces” the Obama administration and various advocates such as New York City Public Advocate Letitia James believe that these lapel-mounted camera devices will be a positive effort to regain public confidence in police departments nationwide.

Unnamed White House officials were quoted as saying the executive order would require agencies keep “better tracking of the equipment that ends up with police, require training for officers, and mandate reviews following ‘significant’ incidents in which the equipment is used.”

However, the anonymous officials claimed “the president wouldn’t tamp down on the flow of equipment from the Pentagon to police departments since the bulk of the gear isn’t military grade.”

James , wrote a letter back in August to New York Police Department (NYPD) Commissioner Bill Bratton and the NY City Council in response to the lack of empathy displayed after the death of Eric Garner due to a chokehold performed by an officer of the NYPD because Garner was resisting arrest.

Since them James has been pushing for the use of cameras on police officers to “increase transparency and accountability while helping departments improve protocol. We estimate that it would cost the city $5 million, $5 million, to equip 15 percent of the police force with body cameras, and that’s far less than the $152 million that we are paying out in judgments.”

In a report published by the Office of the New York Public Advocate (ONYPA), James explained “the value of body-worn cameras can be felt in both ethical and financial terms. Without a doubt, the most important result of NYPD use of body-worn cameras is to ensure transparency and accountability. Upon instituting this policy, New York City would be joining numerous other cities around the country that are aiming to ensure greater transparency and proper police conduct. Additionally, the proposal to use body cameras is likely to save the City significant money: officers will be more inclined to comport themselves in a manner that is less likely to result in lawsuits and false claims will be far easier to debunk.”

However, there is one problem with the use and distribution of body cameras to police officers ONYPA found that make this idea ineffectual: The NYPD “declined to prosecute 28% of all substantiated misconduct cases from January to August of 2013.”

An estimated 1,200 out of 18,000 police departments in the US have purchased body cameras so far.

Robert White, police chief for the Denver Police Department (DPD) said to the press : “We believe the citizens have a right to know what the officers are doing.”

Occupy Corporatism

How to Avoid GMOs When You’re on a Budget

Eat Local Grown
by Daisy Luther

avoid-gmos-budget-10-1408921889

What’s the most controversial topic at the grocery store these days?

It’s GMOs.

Should you consume them? Are they okay in moderation? Should you strictly avoid them at all times? And if so, how on earth can you manage to navigate the store without stepping into a genetically modified landmine? And if you really want to challenge yourself, how can you do that on a budget?

The anti-GMO movement is picking up steam, for a multitude of excellent reasons. My family is making continuous efforts to remove genetically modified products from our lives. If you want to learn how you can banish them too, read on!

Forget about GMO labeling.

First of all, let’s face some facts here.  Crony capitalism in America isn’t going to allow changes that would require the labeling of genetically modified ingredients in your food. While in a perfect world, a place that requires people selling healthfully grown organic foods to jump backwards through hoops and turn a cartwheel to be allowed to place a “certified organic label” on their items, Big Agri can blithely don hazmat suits to spray ever-increasing amounts of glyphosate on crops that have been genetically modified to withstand the poisons, with nary a word to consumers.

The reality is, Monsanto and their ilk have incredibly deep pockets. The Big Food companies that purchase vast amounts of GMO crops are also rolling in money. If you want to avoid GMOs, you can’t look to those who have a vested interest in selling them to protect you. You have to constantly educate yourself to beat them at their own game.

And their game, of course, is Monopoly.

If they refuse to label their products, we can refuse to buy them.  Money talks, and to large corporations it SHOUTS.  If their bottom line begins to dwindle because people refuse to consume their products, eventually they will have to make a change.

That’s exactly what happened with Dean Foods, actually. In 2009, Dean Foods switched their formula for their popular Silk Soymilk.  Instead of using organic soybeans, they began purchasing conventional soybeans. As we all know, nearly all of the soy grown in the United States is genetically modified – at last report it was over 94%.  So, more than likely, the soymilk that Dean Foods was putting out was GMO.  When outraged customers refused to purchase the product, Dean realized that they were losing money hand over fist, and they switched back to organic soy.

Victory: Team Anti-GMO.

So, you see, that’s how it works. In a free market where consumers have adequate information, their desires direct what is produced. The issue right now is that consumers do NOT have adequate information – at least not without a diligent search for it.

We can wish for labeling until the rBGH-free cows come home, but the battle will have to be fought without the aid of labels.

Avoiding GMOs is easier than you might think. And it can be done on a budget. Here’s how.

Learn to use the labels that DO exist.

Revised Seal copy

Although companies are no required to put warning labels on GMOs, companies can opt to boast when their products are GMO-free.

The Non-GMO Project is focused in the opposite direction of the activists that insist GMOs be labeled. They are working to label products that have been scrupulously tested and are verified NOT to contain genetically modified material.

(Here’s a list of  1,000 non-gmo foods)

The pretty little butterfly label is your best indication that the product in your hand doesn’t contain GMOs.   Through a third-party verification process, the products are tested and audited to maintain their standing.

The retailers who started the Non-GMO Project were motivated by a simple idea. They believed that consumers in North America should have access to clearly-labeled non-GMO food and products, now and in the future. That conviction continues to guide the Non-GMO Project, as North America’s only independent verification for products made according to best practices for GMO avoidance.

The verification seal indicates that the product bearing the seal has gone through our verification process. Our verification is an assurance that a product has been produced according to consensus-based best practices for GMO avoidance:

  • We require ongoing testing of all at-risk ingredients—any ingredient being grown commercially in GMO form must be tested prior to use in a verified product.
  • We use an Action Threshold of 0.9%. This is in alignment with laws in the European Union (where any product containing more than 0.9% GMO must be labeled). Absence of all GMOs is the target for all Non-GMO Project Standard compliant products. Continuous improvement practices toward achieving this goal must be part of the Participant’s quality management systems.
  • After the test, we require rigorous traceability and segregation practices to be followed in order to ensure ingredient integrity through to the finished product.
  • For low-risk ingredients, we conduct a thorough review of ingredient specification sheets to determine absence of GMO risk.
  • Verification is maintained through an annual audit, along with onsite inspections for high-risk products.

Other products sometimes say that they do not contain GMOs.  While this may be true, the Non-GMO Project Verified seal is earned through rigorous testing, and you can feel fairly confident that foods bearing this seal are free of genetically modified ingredients.

Another label to look for is USDA Certified Organic.

According to the USDA’s official blog, the inclusion of any type of GMOs is prohibited in an organic product.

The use of genetic engineering or genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is prohibited in organic products. This means an organic farmer can’t plant GMO seeds, an organic cow can’t eat GMO alfalfa or corn, and an organic soup producer can’t us any GMO ingredients. To meet USDA organic regulations, farmers and processors must show they aren’t using GMOs and that they are protecting their products from contact with prohibited substances, such as GMOs, from farm to table.

Sadly, it’s important to note that the USDA has relaxed their standards and “organic” now means 95% or more organic.

Learn about the likely suspects.

In the United States and Canada, two things shout “GMO” like no other: corn and soy. As of 2012, more than 94% of the soy and 88% of the corn in America was genetically modified.

The sad fact is, if you are buying anything processed at all, corn or soy is most likely to be an ingredient. And given the statistics above, it’s almost guaranteed that the corn or soy is GMO unless it’s otherwise noted. Both ingredients masquerade under many names. The lists below may seem overwhelming, but it’s important to see the number of aliases that allow these products to sneak into your food.

Here’s a sobering chart from the website Corn Allergens that shows many of the names under which corn lurks in your food.

  • Acetic acid
  • Alcohol
  • Alpha tocopherol
  • Artificial flavorings
  • Artificial sweeteners
  • Ascorbates
  • Ascorbic acid
  • Aspartame (Artificial sweetener)
  • Astaxanthin
  • Baking powder
  • Barley malt* (generally OK, but can be contaminated)
  • Bleached flour*
  • Blended sugar (sugaridextrose)
  • Brown sugar* (generally OK if no caramel color)
  • Calcium citrate
  • Calcium fumarate
  • Calcium gluconate
  • Calcium lactate
  • Calcium magnesium acetate (CMA)
  • Calcium stearate
  • Calcium stearoyl lactylate
  • Caramel and caramel color
  • Carbonmethylcellulose sodium
  • Cellulose microcrystalline
  • Cellulose, methyl
  • Cellulose, powdered
  • Cetearyl glucoside
  • Choline chloride
  • Citric acid*
  • Citrus cloud emulsion (CCS)
  • Coco glycerides (cocoglycerides)
  • Confectioner’s sugar
  • Corn alcohol, corn gluten
  • Corn extract
  • Corn flour
  • Corn oil, corn oil margarine
  • Corn starch
  • Corn sweetener, corn sugar
  • Corn syrup, corn syrup solids
  • Corn, popcorn, cornmeal
  • Cornstarch, cornflour
  • Crosscarmellose sodium
  • Crystalline dextrose
  • Crystalline fructose
  • Cyclodextrin
  • DATUM (a dough conditioner)
  • Decyl glucoside
  • Decyl polyglucose
  • Dextrin
  • Dextrose (also found in IV solutions)
  • Dextrose anything (such as monohydrate or anhydrous)
  • d-Gluconic acid
  • Distilled white vinegar
  • Drying agent
  • Erythorbic acid
  • Erythritol
  • Ethanol
  • Ethocel 20
  • Ethyl acetate
  • Ethyl alcohol
  • Ethyl lactate
  • Ethyl maltol
  • Ethylcellulose
  • Ethylene
  • Fibersol-2
  • Flavorings*
  • Food starch
  • Fructose*
  • Fruit juice concentrate*
  • Fumaric acid
  • Germ/germ meal
  • Gluconate
  • Gluconic acid
  • Glucono delta-lactone
  • Gluconolactone
  • Glucosamine
  • Glucose syrup* (also found in IV solutions)
  • Glucose*
  • Glutamate
  • Gluten
  • Gluten feed/meal
  • Glycerides
  • Glycerin*
  • Glycerol
  • Golden syrup
  • Grits
  • High fructose corn syrup
  • Hominy
  • Honey*
  • Hydrolyzed corn
  • Hydrolyzed corn protein
  • Hydrolyzed vegetable protein
  • Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose
  • Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose pthalate (HPMCP)
  • Inositol
  • Invert syrup or sugar
  • Iodized salt
  • Lactate
  • Lactic acid*
  • Lauryl glucoside
  • Lecithin
  • Linoleic acid
  • Lysine
  • Magnesium citrate
  • Magnesium fumarate
  • Magnesium stearate
  • Maize
  • Malic acid
  • Malonic acid
  • Malt syrup from corn
  • Malt, malt extract
  • Maltitol
  • Maltodextrin
  • Maltol
  • Maltose
  • Mannitol
  • Methyl glucose
  • Methyl glucoside
  • Methyl gluceth
  • Methylcellulose
  • Microcrystaline cellulose
  • Modified cellulose gum
  • Modified corn starch
  • Modified food starch
  • Molasses* (corn syrup may be present; know your product)
  • Mono- and di- glycerides
  • Monosodium glutamate
  • MSG
  • Natural flavorings*
  • Olestra/Olean
  • Polenta
  • Polydextrose
  • Polylactic acid (PLA)
  • Polysorbates* (e.g. Polysorbate 80)
  • Polyvinyl acetate
  • Potassium citrate
  • Potassium fumarate
  • Potassium gluconate
  • Powdered sugar
  • Pregelatinized starch
  • Propionic acid
  • Propylene glycol monostearate*
  • Propylene glycol*
  • Saccharin
  • Salt (iodized salt)
  • Semolina (unless from wheat)
  • Simethicone
  • Sodium carboxymethylcellulose
  • Sodium citrate
  • Sodium erythorbate
  • Sodium fumarate
  • Sodium lactate
  • Sodium starch glycolate
  • Sodium stearoyl fumarate
  • Sorbate
  • Sorbic acid
  • Sorbitan* (anything)
  • Sorbitol
  • Sorghum* (not all is bad; the syrup and/or grain CAN be mixed with corn)
  • Splenda (Artificial sweetener)
  • Starch (any kind that’s not specified)
  • Stearic acid
  • Stearoyls
  • Sucralose (Artificial sweetener)
  • Sucrose
  • Sugar* (not identified as cane or beet)
  • Threonine
  • Tocopherol (vitamin E)
  • Treacle (aka golden syrup)
  • Triethyl citrate
  • Unmodified starch
  • Vanilla, natural flavoring
  • Vanilla, pure or extract
  • Vanillin
  • Vegetable anything that’s not specific*
  • Vinegar, distilled white
  • Vinyl acetate
  • Vitamin C* and Vitamin E*
  • Vitamins*
  • Xanthan gum
  • Xylitol
  • Yeast*
  • Zea mays
  • Zein

Likewise, soy is another item that wears many hats and can be difficult to avoid. Here are some of the names under which soy could be hiding in your food. (List is from About.com)

  • Bean curd
  • Bean sprouts
  • Bulking agent
  • Edamame (fresh soybeans)
  • Guar gum
  • Gum arabic
  • Hydrolyzed plant protein (HPP) or hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP)
  • Hydrolyzed soy protein (HSP)
  • Kinako
  • Lecithin
  • Miso (fermented soybean paste)
  • Mixed tocopherols
  • Mono- and di-glycerides
  • MSG (monosodium glutamate)
  • Natto
  • Natural flavoring
  • Nimame
  • Okara
  • Shoyu
  • Soy (albumin, cheese, fiber, grits, milk, nuts, sprouts, yogurt, ice cream, pasta)
  • Soy lecithin
  • Soy protein (concentrate, hydrolyzed, isolate)
  • Soy sauce
  • Soya
  • Soybean (curds, granules)
  • Soybean oil
  • Stabilizer
  • Tamari
  • Tempeh
  • Teriyaki sauce
  • Textured vegetable protein (TVP)
  • Thickener
  • Tofu (dofu, kori-dofu)
  • Vegetable gum, starch, shortening, or oil
  • Vitamin E
  • Yuba

As you can see, it’s difficult to avoid potential GMOs if you eat anything that comes from a package.  Despite the fact that many people suffer from food allergies, these items are allowed to be included under names that make it difficult to discern what you’re actually getting.  Names like “thickener”, “natural flavoring”, and “drying agent” do not give the label reader much of a clue.

More than 60 GMO crops that have been approved in the US are:

  • Corn (20 varieties)
  • Oilseed Rape/Canola (11 varieties)
  • Cotton (11 varieties)
  • Tomato (6 varieties)
  • Potato (4 varieties)
  • Soybean (3 varieties)
  • Sugar Beet (3 varieties)
  • Squash (2 varieties)
  • Cantaloupe
  • Rice
  • Flax
  • Raddicchio
  • Papaya
  • Alfalfa
  • Wheat

Fortunately, not all of these are currently on the market.  Currently corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, squash, and papaya are all sold commercially. (Source: Organic Consumers)

The best possible choices have no label at all.

Bluntly put, food manufacturers are out to deceive the consumer. They know that many people are trying to avoid GMOs, but they still want you to buy their products. This is why they are adamantly against labeling the products, although they like to say it’s because we, the mere mortal customers, just aren’t smart enough or educated enough to comprehend in our fuzzy little brains that GMOs are “safe”.  So, they opt not to disclose the inclusion of genetically modified ingredients.

If you shop at the grocery store, then I have to be honest – it’s nearly impossible to avoid GMOs. If every item you purchase is organic, then you can probably get through the checkout line unscathed. But these days, who can afford to push a cart full of organic grocery store food up to the register? I know that I certainly can’t.  Prices are sometimes triple that of a conventionally grown item. If you truly want to avoid GMOs – and by avoid I mean banish them from your dinner table and cupboards for good – you need to stop buying food with ingredients. You need to rethink where your food comes from.

Food shouldn’t contain ingredients. Food should BE ingredients.  What you purchase when doing your weekly food shopping should be the basis for delicious meals.  When you no longer eat things from packages that have long lists of ingredients in them, you will begin to free yourself from the ridiculous Monopoly game that you have been playing with Big Food.

Here are some examples:

Instead of buying a package of pasta and a jar of Alfredo sauce, make zucchini noodles and a homemade Alfredo primavera.

Instead of buying a box of flavored, sugar-y cereal for breakfast, have oatmeal (cooked from scratch – not the little packets) and top it with fruit and nuts.

Instead of a sandwich made from a loaf of processed bread and a deli meat, have a salad made from fresh greens and vegetables, and topped with a slice of chicken that you cooked yourself.

Instead of opening a can of tomato soup, puree some tomatoes and make your own soup. Top it with freshly chopped basil.

Instead of a breakfast sandwich with rubbery eggs on a processed English muffin, make a decadent omelet with farm fresh cheese and vegetables.

None of these meals takes a diploma from Le Cordon Bleu to make. None of these meals started their journey to your table at a factory farm and then on to a facility to be processed into a box on the grocery store shelf, either. They came straight from the garden or farm. Grab some farm-to-table cookbooks or vintage cookbooks, and you’ll find loads of recipes that are simple, fast, and filling.  (My favorites are The Nourished Kitchen and The Fanny Farmer Cookbook  from 1896.)  For more inspiration, think about what you like to eat, and then about how your grandmother would have made it.

It’s time to change your definition of food shopping.

It’s entirely possible for many of us to completely break up with the grocery store. I grow veggies in my backyard and I purchase what I can’t grow from farmers, farmer’s marketsCSAs, and the local co-op.  Specific staples like organic sugar and baking items come from online vendors. (I realize that these are the same items I could be purchasing at the grocery store, but I have made the personal choice to no longer do business with that industry. I try to buy direct from farms and small producers as much as possible.)

Don’t limit yourself to produce, either. Be sure to look for meat and dairy products from local vendors as well!  The organic free-range chicken that you get from your local farmer is well worth the additional price you’ll pay.  If you have a freezer, you can buy many types of meat in bulk (quarter of a cow, anyone?) I’m able to serve free range chicken, rabbit, and grass-fed beef to my family, even on a tight budget, by shopping direct from the farmers. There are few occupations where people work so hard for such a small amount of profit. Farming is a noble profession that doesn’t get the respect it deserves, and I like nothing better than giving my hard-earned dollars to people who give me true nourishment.

I can hear some of you saying, “That’s fine in the summer, but what am I supposed to eat in the winter, when there’s nothing local that is being harvested? I’ll have to go back to the grocery store.”

Not necessarily. It’s possible to skip the grocery stores (and the GMOs) even in the winter if you are prepared to do some food preservation when produce is at its peak. If you aren’t familiar with the lost arts, check out some websites, go to a class at your county extension office, or read a book. Canningdehydratingroot cellaring, and freezing can make your summer bounty last all through the year. I like to take extra effort when canning fruits and vegetables to make them special, so that we are excited to pop open a jar in the winter.  I add vanilla and spices to pears. I toss a little bit of garlic into the jar with green beans. Carrots have a dash of cinnamon and a dollop of honey. Jams are bursting with intense fruity flavor. Relishes, chutneys, and sauces await their invitations to the table, dressing up a wintery dish with a dash of summer. Jars of chewy dehydrated fruits are ready to go into lunchboxes, and dehydrated veggies add a burst of out-of-season nutrition to soups and sauces.

It’s amazing how far you can make a bushel of peaches extend if you use the “whole buffalo” – a family theory of food economics named by my youngest daughter that means we use every edible part of the item to help stretch our budget. We recently took 100 pounds of peaches (purchased for $1 a pound from an orchard down the road) and made 3 kinds of jam, 3 kinds of canned peaches, peach peel candy, peach liqueur, and peach iced tea. Only then, after getting every last drop of flavor and goodness out of those peaches, pit and all, did we cast the remnants onto the compost pile.

If you think you don’t have time to eschew the grocery store, with its convenient boxes and freezer aisle, reconsider. Fruits and vegetables are the original “fast food”.  Many of them can be consumed right after you pick them from the plant.

Challenge yourself to one week without groceries – you may find that the food is so much more delicious and satisfying that you don’t want to go back to the store!

Here are the top 10 things to remember when shopping for non-GMO foods.

Don’t buy into the malarkey that it’s impossible to avoid GMOs these days. It’s entirely possible when you stop playing by the rules laid out by Big Food!

Keep these things in mind when purchasing food:

  1. Stop looking for labels. Assume that if it isn’t labeled GMO-free, that it contains GMOs.

  2. Look for products that are USDA Certified Organic or Non-GMO Project Verified.

  3. Avoid all corn, soy, and canola that is not specifically labeled as non-GMO.

  4. Familiarize yourself with the abundant aliases for corn and soy.

  5. Buy ingredients, instead of food with ingredients.

  6. Cook from scratch.

  7. Stop shopping at the grocery store.

  8. Get to know your farmers personally.

  9. Preserve food while it’s in season.

  10. Don’t be wasteful. Use every single edible part to make your food dollars go further.

Do you have other ways of avoiding GMOs?  Please share them in the comments section.

Resources

GMO OMG

GMO Free Diet: How to stay healthy by identifying and avoiding dangerous foods

Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives

GMO Food Poison Handbook: ‘Genetically-Modified’ Agriculture and Animals

Eat Local Grown

The Environmentally Friendly Drone That Could ‘Disappear’ on the Battlefield

Defense One
by Shirley Li

A researcher harvests a pure bacterial cellulose sheet.

Drones are, largely, military tools—hardened, efficient machines of war. They’re sturdy, not fuzzy. Strong, not brittle. And they should definitely not start breaking down upon impact.

But breaking down is exactly what the bio-drone is supposed to do. Created—or rather, grown—by a team of 15 students from Stanford University, Brown University, and Spelman College for the 2014 iGEM competition, the biodegradable drone is made mostly of fibrous mycelium, a root-like material found in fungi. The lightweight and sustainable substance is then coated with a sheet of sticky bacteria-grown cellulose, while the circuits inside the drone are printed using silver nanoparticle ink. 

These biodegradable parts together help the drone naturally decompose—a feature that struck me (and others) as useful for the military: If a drone doing surveillance or spying crashes, for example, it could decompose before an enemy could find it. But for all the military applications people sprang to, it turns out that this drone wasn’t designed with the military in mind. And making it work as a secretive, trace-free drone would be difficult.

For the biodegradable nature of the bio-drone to be useful to the military, the vehicle would need to decompose fairly quickly and leave little behind. According to Joseph Shih, a Stanford bioengineering lecturer and an advisor to the team, the current prototype would decompose slowly over a few months, though he says the team is working on developing an “active biodegradation system” that would make it do so in about four days.

The chassis (Stanford-Brown-Spelman iGEM 2014)

But focusing on the speed of decomposing is beside the point, Lynn Rothschild, the lead scientist in synthetic biology at NASA’s Ames Research Center and another team advisor, tells me, because that’s not what they designed it for. “It had nothing to do with military implications,” she says. “Once you say the word ‘drone,’ people do think of sinister connotations. But this is not why we’re doing this.”

Instead, the drones are meant to enter sensitive ecological areas, like coral reefs, to monitor and send back data without disrupting the ecosystem. The biodegradation, therefore, is for protecting the environment, not the drone—which means the team focused less on speeding up the decomposition, and more on building the drone out of the right materials.

Still, Rothschild says the team knew that creating a drone of any kind would raise red flags. In fact, she tells me one of her students approached her early on during the project to talk about the moral implications of building a device that could be used as a weapon.

That student, Jovita Byemerwa, says she had difficulty seeing drones having positive uses at first. “The topic of drones particularly concerned me,” she wrote in email, “because I viewed their main uses as being oppressive and inhumane to defenseless people and societies.”

Byemerwa’s concerns actually sparked another research project that the team worked on alongside the actual drone: studying the word drone, and its connotations. To do so, they conducted a survey of 117 people, asking respondents what they associated with the word “drone.”


Of the 115 people who answered the question, nearly 70 percent said they thought of military uses when thinking of drones. (Stanford-Brown-Spelman iGEM 2014)


Most, like Byemerwa, thought of the military. The team then followed up by gauging respondents’s views on civilian drones instead, asking them whether they thought such drones would help society:

Though most answered “yes,” more than 30 percent of the respondents said drones would “create chaos”—which is why, Byemerwa says, the team put their focus on creating a biological drone for the environment. “Science can be dangerous,” she tells me, “but when used for positive applications in society, it has a potential of making the world a better place.”

The stigma surrounding drones is also why, Rothschild says, further research into the public perception of drones is necessary. If people have a better grasp of how drones are used, the capabilities of scientific drones can then be applied harmlessly to military drones. For example, the team could eventually develop bio-drones attached with bags of enzymes that would release after a crash, helping them decompose within hours. Without the stigma, a drone like that would protect the ecosystem and assist the military without calling to mind that uneasy, “sinister” connotation associated with the technology. But until then, the biodegradable drone is a logical solution to minimizing the environmental impact of the vehicles—even if it remains easily associated with military uses.

Defense One

Justice Department Defends US Marshals’ Airborne Cell Tower Spoofers

InfoWars
by TIM CUSHING

Refuses to acknowledge program exists

celltower
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The Justice Department has been summoned to say a few words in defense of the US Marshals’ Cessna-mounted cell tower spoofers. And while it tried to leave a lot unsaid, it actually said quite a bit.

The Justice Department, without formally acknowledging the existence of the program, defended the legality of the operation by the U.S. Marshals Service, saying the agency doesn’t maintain a database of everyday Americans’ cellphones.

Because America’s criminal element is forever only moments away from permanently escaping the grasp of law enforcement, the DOJ has refused to confirm or deny the existence of technology everyone already knows exists — IMSI catchers and single-engine aircraft. The DOJ’s caginess is commendable. I’m sorry, I mean ridiculous. Here’s the same official further protecting and defending The Program That Dare Not Confirm Its Existence, using statements that indicate the program exposed by the Wall Street Journal not only exists, but functions pretty much as described.

A Justice Department official on Friday refused to confirm or deny the existence of such a program, because doing so would allow criminals to better evade law enforcement. But the official said it would be “utterly false’’ to conflate the law-enforcement program with the collection of bulk telephone records by the National Security Agency, a controversial program already being challenged in the courts and by some members of Congress.

No one’s conflating the feds’ airborne ‘Stingray’ with the NSA’s ongoing bulk phone records collections. All people have done is note that surveillance technology of this sort has the ability to collect (and store) millions of unrelated phone records in a very short period of time.

Furthermore, the unnamed official would like us to remember that this program [WHICH MAY NOT EXIST I DON’T EVEN KNOW] is completely legal [PROBABLY TWICE AS LEGAL AS THE NSA’S PHONE THING IF THIS IS HAPPENING WHICH IT MAY NOT BE].

The official didn’t address the issue of how much data, if any, is held on the dirtboxes by law-enforcement officials but said the agency doesn’t maintain any databases of general public cellphone information and said any activity is legal and “subject to court approval.’’

Other officials — also unnamed — have stepped up (sort of… in a spineless, anonymous way) to let critics know that the program that has never been officially acknowledged is pretty good at catching bad guys.

The program’s defenders say it has been an effective way of catching fugitives, including drug suspects and suspected killers…

Like the following notorious criminals:

…but they declined to provide specific examples in which it was used.

Probably because it may or may not exist, etc.

Officials familiar with the program noted that it was “minimally intrusive,” while simultaneously having an effective range that covers “most of the US population.” It may not be the NSA’s bulk records program, but it’s not exactly in any danger of being championed by civil liberties advocates.

Here are a few government officials who aren’t familiar with the implausibly denied program.

“We were not aware of this activity,’’ said Kim Hart, a spokeswoman for the FCC, which licenses and regulates cell-service providers.

Another IMSI catcher and another FCC denial. It appears that staying ahead of criminals also means withholding information (or directly lying to) regulatory agencies — which is probably not that big of a deal when you’ve spent years lying to judges.

And you can add legislators to the long list of those whose first exposure to the US Marshals’ “dirtboxes” came via the Wall Street Journal. Senators Edward Markey and Al Franken have both offered statements expressing their concerns about law enforcement’s willingness to sacrifice the public’s privacy for investigative efficiency.

The DOJ official who claimed this program is “subject to court approval” is being either blithely disingenuous or wholly dishonest. If this investigative technology had ever been approved by our nation’s courts, we would have heard of it long before now. This dearth of information indicates that the Marshals’ use of airborne IMSI catchers has been withheld the same way the use of its earthbound version has been over the past several years.

Via TechDirt

Secret Justice Dept. Interceptor Flights Scoop Up Cell Data From U.S. Cities

The Daily Sheeple

cessna-justice-dept

Remember when President Obama told Jay Leno (and the world) with a smiling face that “there is no spying on Americans”? Not only was that untrue, but it is now clear that it was blatantly false on so very many levels.

The cell phone interceptor scandal has now become scales worse, with revelations that the Justice Dept. has been scooping Americans’ data in major cities across the nation with secret flights by the tens of thousands, continuously. And that’s without them admitting how far this has gone. Yikes.

As if the state of the surveillance society wasn’t bad enough, this has come to light, via Fox News:

The Justice Department is scooping up data from thousands of cellphones through fake communications towers deployed on airplanes, a high-tech hunt for criminal suspects that is snagging large number of innocent Americans, according to people familiar with the operations.

The U.S. Marshals Service program, which became fully functional around 2007, operates Cessna aircraft from at least five metropolitan-area airports, with a flying range covering most of the U.S. population, according to people familiar with the program.

Planes are equipped with devices—some known as “dirtboxes” to law-enforcement officials because of the initials of the Boeing Co. unit that produces them—which mimic cell towers of large telecommunications firms and trick cellphones into reporting their unique registration information.

The technology in the two-foot-square device enables investigators to scoop data from tens of thousands of cellphones in a single flight, collecting their identifying information and general location, these people said.


Click to see full sized image
.

That just follows the series of revelations concerning secretive on-the-ground interceptors – known as Sting Ray – that also mimic cell phone towers and force devices to share data with police departments, the FBI and/or various other unknown entities (perhaps foreign governments, the NSA or private firms?).

According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC):

A StingRay is a device that can triangulate the source of a cellular signal by acting “like a fake cell phone tower” and measuring the signal strength of an identified device from several locations. With StingRays and other similar “cell site simulator” technologies, Government investigators and private individuals can locate, interfere with, and even intercept communications from cell phones and other wireless devices. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has used such cell site simulator technology to track and locate phones and users since at least 1995.

As Melissa Melton previously wrote:

According to the Associated Press, the Obama Administration has been actively advising police departments to refuse disclosure about certain cell phone surveillance technologies, including the widely used “StingRay” device, even in routine state records requests.

Instead, police are bypassing company assistance and collecting unique information on suspects, persons of interests, and – as the AP reports – they can even “sweep up basic cellphone data from entire neighborhoods,” all without any court orders or oversight.

The Edward Snowden leaks proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the NSA has zero regard for the privacy of Americans.

Now, it is also crystal clear that the Justice Department and FBI (and perhaps likely most assuredly other law enforcement agencies) have no regard, either. Not for Americans. Not for privacy. Not for the law. Not for due process. And certainly not for the constitutional republic they were ostensibly created to serve.

In these troubled times, it is at least good to know that former NSA chief Gen. Keith Alexander has found a lucrative gig advising Wall Street on cybersecurity using NSA data and employees who are also simultaneously top NSA officials.

No conflict of interest, no breach of duty to see here. Move along.

Gulp. Sigh.

The Daily Sheeple

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,361 other followers

%d bloggers like this: