FBI File On Jeff Bezos’ Grandfather, A DARPA Co-Founder, Has Been Destroyed
What’s not widely known is that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’ grandfather, Lawrence Preston Gise, helped form the Pentagon’s supersecret Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA—renamed DARPA) in 1958. Years later, DARPA developed the internet and spurred breakthroughs in high-speed networking, voice recognition, and internet search.
One year before Gise died in 1995, Bezos founded Amazon in the garage of his Bellevue, Washington home.
Or so we’re told…
John Greenewald Jr., who operates The Black Vault, a website dedicated to revealing declassified government documents through obtaining Freedom of Information Act requests, posted on X that he went after Gise’s “FBI file, but found out if there was one, it has been destroyed.”
News website Leading Report’s Patrick Webb commented on Greenewald’s findings, saying, “There has long been speculation that DARPA has been involved in the creation of many popular big tech companies, using “frontmen” for the allusion of a startup led by outsiders.”
With the contents of Gise’s FBI file unlikely to ever be unearthed and likely never destroyed, just inaccessible to FOIA requests or the public, other X users commented on Webb’s and Greenewald’s posts, pointing out how DARPA possibly created other big tech firms:
Questions swirl about DARPA’s involvement in creating Amazon, given Bezos’ grandfather’s connection to the secret agency.
For decades, Ray Kurzweil has been an unofficial spokesman for the trans-humanist movement. And in 2008 he said that humans would become infused with nano-robots which would vastly improve the human body.
“If you go out even to 2045, that's only, you know, four decades from now, most of our intelligence, of our civil... of our human civilization will be non-biological. We're going to put this inside our bodies and brains. So we're going to become machines, but not... and if you say that people go, well I'm going to become a machine, because they're thinking of machines as we knew them from the 19th century, which were much lesser than humans. And machines today are still lesser than humans. I'm talking about a new type of machine that's actually greater, more subtle, more supple, more intelligent, more creative, more beautiful than humans.”
~ Ray Kurzweil
In 2010 he interviewed Robert Freitas on the Future of Nanotechnology, who said that nano-robots could cure aging and death.
“Medical nano-robots really have the potential to extend human life more or less indefinitely. So what's your view about the role of death? And do we need death?”
~ Ray Kurzweil
“Death is something that is an end. It's an end of life. It's an end to progress. It's an end to thoughts. It's something to be cured. Aging is a disease. It's a curable disease. Nanomedicine is the cure for that disease.”
~ Robert Freitas
He said that this technology is expected to be deployed by 2020, and that laws will be in place to protect the public from its misuse.
“I expect that by the time nano-robots are deployed, which will be sometime, perhaps in the 2020s to the 2030s, we will have a whole set of laws in place. Regulations. There will be things you can and cannot do.”
~ Robert Freitas
The laws were never put in place. But the technology was patented and deployed to billions of people without their knowledge in 2020. We know this because several independent labs have confirmed the presence of this nanotechnology in the COVID vaccines. And Bill Gates recently admitted to this as well.
“Making the mRNA is really easy and really cheap. And that's the magic of this thing. But there's no doubt in the next five years we can... you know, we just need to mess around. There's a lot of lipid nanoparticles, and some are very self-assembling.”
~ Bill Gates
Self-Assembly and Self-Replication seem to be the same technology when it comes to nano-robots. And this was considered to be the greatest danger involved with the use of this technology.
“Self-replication causes disease. Nano-robots are inherently much stronger than biological systems, being built of Diamondoid, so if they self replicate, that ‘disease,’ quote unquote, could be even a tougher problem than biological disease. So first of all, what's the feasibility of self-replication in the nanotechnology world?”
~ Ray Kurzweil
“As a general principle, you do not want to put self-replicating nanobots inside the human body. I suppose not everybody agrees with me on that. But that is the way I think that we can best guarantee safety. If the robots... nano-robots, are able to replicate inside the human body, that means they are using some component of the human body as food. And we don't want them to be doing that.”
~ Robert Freitas
In his 1986 book, Engines of Creation, Kim Eric Drexler wrote about what he termed the “Gray Goo Scenario.” A hypothetical catastrophic event caused by out-of-control self-replicating nanotechnology which consumes the biomass of the host. And this is exactly what independent researchers are finding. It explains the large so-called blood clots being found in the dead. And its spreading. Evidence shows that the vaxxed are shedding this to the unvaxxed.
“How do we prevent a terrorist or someone who's bent on destruction from creating such a self-replicating system?”
~ Ray Kurzweil
“There will be some terrorist acts because that's what humans do, unfortunately. So what we're going to be needing in this era of nano-factories is something equivalent to the fire department. Hopefully the incidents will be very few, but we will have an emergency regime which is set up to deal with that... that type of event.”
~ Robert Freitas
But the event is worldwide, and there is no agency setup to put this fire out. Our governments are not even discussing the problem. And the perpetrators are planning a second round of nano-bot deployment with another fake pandemic. If we the people can not unite and stand together now, then what exactly are we?
Musk thinks this technology will eventually allow full data-streaming to the brain.
Meaning: loads and tons and mega-tons of information will enter brains. Sent from the outside. From outside people who decide what to insert. In brains.
There is only one response to Musk’s claim. When he’s ready to deploy full data-streaming, HE’S the first volunteer.
Because I have news. Not only is this program a crime, not only is it a medical assault…
It doesn’t work.
Musk and other high IQ idiots fail to understand a simple thing. The brain is not the mind.
The brain isn’t consciousness.
The INDIVIDUAL isn’t the brain.
Sending 500 tons of data into brain cells doesn’t make that info usable.
It will, however, cause massive confusion, chaos, and psychosis.
Musk will find that out when he’s the first volunteer.
Musk is one of those high-IQ people who were educated during the first flush of the Age of Information—and bought into the myths. They believe, wrongly, there is something intrinsically alive about data. They like that idea because they have a facility with data.
Whereas, actually, data are dead.
You could put a trillion pieces about flying planes into the brain of an inventory manager at a warehouse, and then sit him in the cockpit of a Cessna, and if he could somehow get the plane off the ground, he’d crash it. Right away.
He’d have all the data, but he wouldn’t KNOW anything. He wouldn’t have piloting skills.
A shop steward at an auto plant wouldn’t suddenly start playing Bach harpsicord fugues.
A doctor wouldn’t throw a no-hitter at Yankee Stadium.
Chances are good that, after the “full data-streaming,” they’d all be on Thorazine. Permanently.
And we’re not even getting into the mind control1 aspect of all this insertion insanity:
President Joe Biden vetoed a Congressional resolution aimed at overturning the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 (SAB 121).
Critics argue that SAB 121 imposes significant burdens on cryptocurrency firms and risks consumers’ assets in bankruptcy scenarios.
Despite facing criticism, Biden expressed a willingness to work with Congress on appropriate legislation for the digital asset market.
President Joe Biden has vetoed a Congressional resolution seeking to overturn the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 (SAB 121), reinforcing the Administration’s commitment to strict financial regulations.
The resolution, which garnered significant support from Republicans and some Democrats, passed both the House and Senate on May 16.
Biden’s Veto Maintains SEC’s Crypto Oversight
SAB 121, introduced in March 2022, requires financial institutions to report customers’ digital assets. Critics argue that this rule places heavy operational and financial burdens on firms dealing with cryptocurrencies. Senator Cynthia Lummis, a key supporter of the resolution, claimed that SAB 121 jeopardizes consumers’ assets during bankruptcy by placing them on institutional balance sheets.
Facing backlash from crypto industry leaders and several lawmakers, Congress repealed SAB 121. The House of Representatives voted first, with 228 members supporting the repeal and 182 opposing it. A week later, the Senate voted 60-38 to overturn the rule. However, more than this vote count was needed to prevent a presidential veto.
In the statement accompanying the document, Biden stressed that his Administration will not back any measures that could harm consumers and investors.
“By virtue of invoking the Congressional Review Act, this Republican-led resolution would inappropriately constrain the SEC’s ability to set forth appropriate guardrails and address future issues. This reversal of the considered judgment of SEC staff in this way risks undercutting the SEC’s broader authorities regarding accounting practices. My Administration will not support measures that jeopardize the well-being of consumers and investors”, Biden stated.
Reactions to Biden’s veto have been mixed within the crypto community. Some see it as a necessary step for investor protection, while others view it as a barrier to financial innovation.
“SEC actions that prevent highly regulated US financial firms from custodial services for Bitcoin hinder financial innovation and competitiveness. This could drive businesses to relocate to countries with more favorable regulations, resulting in a loss of capital, talent, and technology for the US. For American citizens, these restrictions limit access to financial innovations and investment diversification, putting them at a disadvantage compared to those in other countries”, Manuel Ferrari, Money On Chain & MimLABS Co-Founder, told BeInCrypto.
Despite the veto, Biden expressed his willingness to work with Congress on new legislation for the digital asset market, stressing the need for measures to protect investors. This decision highlights the ongoing debate over how to regulate the crypto industry while balancing innovation with consumer safety.
The Denver Police Department has launched a new program that will include the use of drones as a tool to help officers respond to 911 calls.
The law enforcement agency that was recently defunded by millions to pay for migrants is now launching its own drone program, along with other Colorado police departments.
Robert White, the former chief of The Denver Police Department originally disagreed with the use of drones in 2013 and in 2018, and the agency’s only drone was shelved.
Now, the department is planning on using a $100,000 grant from the Denver Police Foundation to start the program. Denver police plan to buy several drones with that money, and begin their drone program within six to 12 months.
‘We would never simply replace calls-for-service response by police officers,’ Phil Gonshak, director of the department’s Strategic Initiatives Bureau told The Denver Post.
The Denver Police Department has launched a new program that will see the use of drones introduced to help officers respond to calls. In some instances, a drone may be deployed to verify reports made to 911 or assess their severity
‘The DPD would respond to any call for service where someone is physically requesting a police officer on scene. But if there was a fight at Colfax and Cherokee and we put a drone in the air and there is no fight and nothing causing traffic issues, then we would reroute our police officers to other emergent calls.’
‘It’s beginning to lift off,’ Gonshak said.
‘The long-term scope of what we are trying to do is drones as first responders,’ he added.
‘Basically, having stations on top of each one of our districts so we can respond with drones to critical needs or emergencies that arise throughout the city.’
The Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office, based in Centennial, Colorado, has been using the robotic flying devices since 2017.
‘This really is the future of law enforcement at some point, whether we like it or not,’ Sgt. Jeremiah Gates, who leads the drone unit at the Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office, said.
Robert White, the former of The Denver Police Department originally disagreed with the use of drones in 2013 and in 2018, the agency’s only drone was shelved
The Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office has 14 pilots that have used 20 drones to conduct tasks, including tracking fleeing suspects, searching for missing people, providing overhead surveillance during SWAT operations, and mapping crash or crime scenes.
Gates said that the department is now considering using its drones to respond ahead of officers and in some rare instances, instead of them attending at all.
If a drone is deployed before an officer responds to a call, it could map out the area and send live streamed video footage back to the cop before they arrive.
In the case that a drone is flown to the scene of a 911 call, the device will be able to determine the severity of the call to inform officers if they need to respond.
‘I could fly the drone over (a reported suspicious vehicle) and say, “Hey, that vehicle is not out of place,” and I never had to send an officer over to bother them and I can clear it with that,’ Gates said. ‘It’s saving resources.’
The Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office, based in Centennial, Colorado, has been using the robotic flying devices since 2017. (pictured: officers testing out a drone)
The Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office is still in the ‘very early stages’ as they have to consider the cost, public opinion, and determine what kind of equipment will be needed to operate the drones for emergency calls.
Gates said that the flying devices could also be used to respond to traffic light outages by sending a live video to officers.
He added that the remote devices would get to emergency scenes faster than a cop would as they won’t have to deal with traffic congestion in the area.
Gates told The Denver Post: ‘What if we get a call about someone with a gun, and the drone is able to get overhead and see it’s not a gun before law enforcement ever contacts them?’
The Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office has 14 pilots that have used 20 drones to conduct tasks, including tracking fleeing suspects, searching for missing people and providing overhead surveillance during SWAT operations
While Gates is for the use of drones, American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado staff attorney Laura Moraff, is worried that law enforcement agencies using drones could impact people’s rights.
‘We’re worried about what it would mean if drones were really just all over the skies in Colorado,’ Moraff said.
‘We are worried about what that would mean for First Amendment activities, for speech and organizing and protesting — because being surveilled by law enforcement, including by drones, can change the way people speak and protest.’
Moraff also expressed concern that the deployment of drones could result in ‘more over-policing’.
‘We know there is a problem with people reporting Black people doing normal everyday things as if there is something suspicious going on,’ she said.
‘So sending out a drone for any time there is a 911 call, it could be dangerous and lead to more over-policing of communities of color.
‘There is also just the risk that the more that we normalize having drones in the skies, the more it can really affect behavior on a massive scale, if we are just looking up and seeing drones all over the place, knowing that police are watching us.’
Sgt. Jeremiah Gates said that the remote devices would get to emergency scenes faster than a cop would as they won’t have to deal with congested traffic in the area
Read More
Denver city council approves defund the police cuts – the largest ever in city’s budget – to pay for migrant crisis
Meanwhile, Littleton Police Department only uses drones ‘proactively during large public events to monitor certain areas,’ spokeswoman Sheera Poelman said.
The Loveland Police Department used a drone to deliver a defibrillator to a patient before paramedics and authorities were able to respond, Sgt. Bryan Bartnes said.
‘One drawback to it is, obviously, it requires the citizen on scene to apply it and put it on,’ Bartnes said. ‘Drones don’t do that yet.’
The largest drone that the Loveland Police Department has can carry up to 16lbs, Bartnes explained.
Ben Birdsell, the Commerce Police Department’s community service officer supervisor said that the agency plans to launch drones for 911 calls within the next year.
‘What we see out of it is, it’s a lot cheaper than an officer, basically,’ he said.
Drones have to be flown at a limited range as they have to operate in the line of sight to the pilot, and have to follow the Federal Aviation Administration regulations around flights.
Drones have be flown at a limited range as they have to operate in the line of site to the pilot, and have to follow the Federal Aviation Administration regulations around flights. (pictured: Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office tests out using a drone in law enforcement)
White said that kickstarting a drone program for the Denver Police Department would cost about $1.5million to $2million.
The department has already drafted up a ‘Drones as a First Responder Program’ policy and have several trained pilots on the force.
Denver Police spokesman Doug Schepman said that the agency’s SWAT team uses a single drone for limited indoor searches and can use it for emergency response upon approval.
‘So there is no question about what we are doing, because I know there is concern about us flying drones and peering through windows without search warrants,’ Gonshak said.
In April, the Denver City Council’s Finance and Governance Committee approved plans to defund the police as the ongoing migrant crisis has cost city about $89.9million
‘We want to be very public-conscientious in our efforts.’
In April, the Denver City Council’s Finance and Governance Committee approved plans to defund the police as the ongoing migrant crisis has cost the democrat-led city about $89.9million.
The finance committee determined that $41 million in cuts from multiple city departments is needed to house migrants, KDVR reported.
Following the decision, the department experienced $8.4million budget cuts, including the sheriff’s office which lost $3.8million, and the fire department that lost $2.4million.
The sanctuary city’s progressive Mayor Mike Johnston unveiled the budget proposal, allocating $89.9million to assist incoming undocumented migrants, who he referred to as ‘newcomers.’
Researchers Call for Urgent Action to Address Mass Contamination of Blood Supply
May 27, 2024
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Japanese researchers warn of the risks of using blood from mRNA COVID vaccine recipients, highlighting potential deadly effects and the need for urgent action to secure the global blood supply
Blood contaminated with prion-like structures from the spike protein raises the risk of inducing fatal neurodegenerative diseases in recipients. The potential transmission of harmful proteins through exosomes (“shedding”) and the risk of autoimmune diseases due to the vaccines’ mechanism and components like lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) are other major concerns
Proposals for managing blood collection include rigorous donor interviews, deferral periods, and a suite of tests to ensure the safety of blood products
The researchers advocate for comprehensive testing of both jabbed and unjabbed individuals to assess the safety of blood products and suggest discarding blood products contaminated with spike proteins or modified mRNA until effective removal methods have been developed
They call for suspending all gene-based “vaccines” and conducting a rigorous harm-benefit assessment in light of the serious health injuries reported. They also urge countries and organizations to take concrete steps to address and mitigate the already identified risks
In a recent meta-analysis1,2 posted on preprints.org, Japanese researchers warn of potentially deadly risks to patients who receive blood from people who have taken mRNA COVID jabs and call for urgent action to ensure the safety of the global blood supply. According to the authors:3
“… many countries around the world have reported that so-called genetic vaccines, such as those using modified mRNA encoding the spike protein and lipid nanoparticles as the drug delivery system, have resulted in post-vaccination thrombosis and subsequent cardiovascular damage, as well as a wide variety of diseases involving all organs and systems, including the nervous system …
[B]ased on these circumstances and the volume of evidence that has recently come to light, we call the attention of medical professionals to the various risks associated with blood transfusions using blood products derived from people who have suffered from long COVID and from genetic vaccine recipients, including those who have received mRNA vaccines, and we make proposals regarding specific tests, testing methods, and regulations to deal with these risks.”
Blood From Jabbed Donors May Pose Risk to Neurological Health
One particular risk addressed in this paper is the implications of blood tainted with prion-like structures found within the spike protein. Prions are misfolded proteins that can cause neurodegenerative diseases, such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD) in humans, by inducing the misfolding of normal proteins in the brain.
Prion diseases are characterized by a long incubation period, followed by rapid progression and high mortality. The suggestion that the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, especially from certain variants, might contain prion-like domains raises concerns for several reasons:
Transmission risk — If spike proteins with prion-like structures can be transmitted through blood transfusions, there might be a risk of inducing prion diseases in recipients. Prion diseases are notoriously difficult to diagnose early, have no cure, and are fatal, making any potential transmission through blood products a significant safety concern.
Detection and removal challenges — Current blood screening processes do not specifically test for prions, partly because prion diseases are rare and partly due to the technical challenges in detecting prions at low concentrations. If spike proteins with prion-like properties are present in the blood of COVID jabbed individuals, existing blood safety protocols may not be adequate to prevent transmission.
Long-term safety concerns — Prion diseases have long latency periods, meaning that symptoms can appear years or even decades after exposure. This delay complicates efforts to trace the source of an infection back to a blood transfusion and assess the safety of blood supplies over time.
Impacts on blood supply management — Concerns about the potential risks associated with prion-like structures in spike proteins might lead to changes in donor eligibility criteria or the implementation of additional screening measures. These changes could impact the availability of blood products, which are critical for routine medical procedures.
Public confidence — Public awareness of these potential risks, even if they are theoretical or have a very low likelihood of occurring, could affect individuals’ willingness to donate or receive blood transfusions, thereby lowering blood donation rates and the overall trust in the safety of blood transfusions.
The authors stress the need for comprehensive studies to better understand the implications of these prion-like structures in the spike protein, not only for mRNA jab safety but also for the broader implications for public health measures like blood transfusion practices.
Other Potential Health Hazards of Contaminated Blood
Contaminated blood may also pose other serious health risks, including:
•Reduced immune function among blood recipients — It’s been shown that the more doses of the COVID shot you’ve received, the more likely you are to suffer future infections, either by SARS-CoV-2 or other viruses, due antibody-dependent enhancement.
Blood donations from people who have received several doses of mRNA injections may not provide adequate immunity against common infections, resulting in subclinical infections and diseases in recipients.
•Formation of blood clots and amyloid aggregates — If the immune system of a blood recipient isn’t strong enough to neutralize spike protein, blood clots and amyloid aggregates may also form.
•Chronic inflammation — Prolonged exposure to the antigens from the COVID-19 shots can trigger the generation of IgG4 antibodies, resulting in chronic inflammation and immune dysfunction.
IgG4 antibodies are often associated with chronic exposure to antigens, such as those seen in persistent infections, certain cancers, and prolonged exposure to allergens. IgG4 antibodies are also associated with a unique condition known as IgG4-Related Disease (IgG4-RD), a fibro-inflammatory condition characterized by swellings or masses in affected organs.4
Blood Transfusions and the Risk of Autoimmune Diseases
The authors also raise concerns about the potential of contaminated blood to cause autoimmune diseases in recipients. Recent research found that the RNA pseudouridylation, a process in which uracil is swapped out for synthetic methylpseudouridine, can cause frameshifting, basically a glitch in the decoding, which can trigger the production of off-target aberrant proteins.
The antibodies that develop as a result may, in turn, trigger off-target immune reactions. In addition to that, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), a key component of the COVID shots, have been identified as highly inflammatory and possessing more potent adjuvant activity compared to traditional vaccine adjuvants, which further increases the risk of an autoimmune response. As reported in the featured paper:5
“Recent studies have shown that RNA pseudouridylation can result in frameshifting. It is not yet clear whether a portion of the pseudouridinated mRNA for the spike protein is translated into another protein of unknown function in vaccine recipients. If these proteins are also pathogenic, additional testing for such frameshift proteins may be needed in the future.
Even if a frameshift protein is not toxic, it must be foreign to the body and could cause autoimmune disease. In addition, LNPs themselves are highly inflammatory substances … LNPs have been found to have stronger adjuvant activity than the adjuvants used in conventional vaccines, and there is also concern about autoimmune diseases resulting from this aspect.
Thus, although it is not clear what the causative agent of autoimmune disease is, the large number of reported cases of autoimmune disease following genetic vaccination is extremely concerning.
The very mechanism of gene vaccines that causes one’s own cells to produce the antigens of pathogens carries the risk of inducing autoimmune diseases, which cannot be completely avoided even if mRNA pseudouridylation technology is used.
In this context, individuals with a positive blood test for spike protein may need to have interviews and additional tests for autoimmune disease indicators, such as antinuclear antibodies.
Alternatively, if the amino acid sequence of the protein resulting from the frameshift is predictable, these candidate proteins could be included in the initial mass spectrometry assay. In any case, it is particularly important to develop tests and establish medical care settings in anticipation of these situations.”
Proposals for Managing Blood Collection
The authors outline several specific proposals for managing blood collection and blood products from individuals who have received genetic “vaccines.” Given the variety of blood-related abnormalities observed post-jab, the researchers argue that rigorous and precautionary measures in blood handling and transfusion practices have now become a necessity.
A key part of the proposal involves conducting thorough interviews with potential blood donors. These interviews should cover their vaccination status, number of doses received, their COVID-19 infection history, and any symptoms they might be experiencing that could indicate conditions like post-vaccination syndrome (PVS), long-COVID or other complications.
The researchers also recommend deferral periods for blood collected from COVID jab recipients — 48 hours for mRNA shots and six weeks for AstraZeneca DNA jab recipients. A series of tests are also proposed to ensure the safety of collected blood, including:
Mass spectrometry to measure spike protein content
PCR for detecting the presence of spike protein mRNA and DNA
Testing for markers associated with autoimmune disorders
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)
Immunophenotyping
Liquid biopsies combined with proteomics to detect and quantify spike protein and its mRNA
The authors also note that policies and procedures must be constantly revised as new risks and problems with blood products derived from mRNA and DNA jab recipients are identified.
Ensuring Safety of Current Blood Products
The paper also reviews strategies to ensure the safety of blood products already collected, highlighting the complex challenges that medical institutions, regulatory bodies, and the broader healthcare ecosystem must navigate in the wake of widespread use of mRNA injections.
The primary concern is the risk posed to patients by the use of blood products from donors who have received gene-based injections without confirming the presence or absence of spike proteins or modified mRNA. To ensure their safety, methods to quantify potential contaminants must be developed and implemented as soon as possible.
Another critical issue that must be addressed is the current lack of reliable methods to remove spike proteins or modified mRNA from blood products. The authors warn that, given the potential persistence, low solubility, heat resistance, and radiation resistance of these components, current methodologies are inadequate for the job. The only solution, they say, is to discard all blood products found to contain these contaminants until effective removal techniques are established.
Researchers Call for Widespread Blood Testing
Additionally, the researchers call for widespread testing of both jabbed and unjabbed to assess the potential transmission of spike proteins through exosomes (so-called shedding).
As noted by the authors:
“… when exosomes collected from vaccine recipients were administered to mice that had not been vaccinated with the genetic vaccine, the spike protein was transmitted.
Therefore, it cannot be denied that the spike protein and its modified genes can be transmitted through exosomes. For this reason, we suggest that full testing be done initially, regardless of genetic vaccination status, and that a cohort study be conducted to quickly capture the full picture …
In addition … it cannot be ruled out that even those who have not been vaccinated with the genetic vaccine, but have had long COVID, may have residual spike proteins or fibrin- derived microthrombi in their bodies, so it would be advisable to conduct the same testing and follow-up as for genetic vaccine recipients.
The presence or absence and amount of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies as well as antibody isotypes may be an indicator(s) in distinguishing whether genetic vaccination or long COVID is the cause. In any case, these cohort studies are expected to help establish cutoff values for blood levels of spike protein and other substances to determine the safety of blood products.
Faksova et al. conducted a large cohort study of 99 million people using a multinational Global Vaccine Data NetworkTM (GVDN®) and found a significantly increased risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in genetic vaccine recipients.”
Ensuring the traceability of blood products and establishing a rigorous legal and regulatory framework to manage the myriad issues arising from the use of blood products derived from COVID jabbed individuals are also paramount. This includes creating systems for the registration of all potential donors, ensuring the traceability of blood products, and conducting recipient outcome studies.
Call to Pause: Evaluating the Risks and Benefits of Genetic Vaccines for a Safer Future
In conclusion, the authors point out that if we continue using mRNA-LPN-based platforms to replace conventional vaccines or create new ones, then the risks to our blood and bone marrow supply will be augmented further.
“The impact of these genetic vaccines on blood products and the actual damage caused by them are unknown at present,” they write.6
“Therefore, in order to avoid these risks and prevent further expansion of blood contamination and complication of the situation, we strongly request that the vaccination campaign using genetic vaccines be suspended and that a harm-benefit assessment be carried out as early as possible, as called for by Fraiman et al.7 and Polykretis et al.8
[T]he health injuries caused by genetic vaccination are already extremely serious, and it is high time that countries and relevant organizations take concrete steps together to identify the risks and to control and resolve them.”
“This will be achieved autonomously, without relying on guidance from the ground.”
An illustration of the pair of satellites that’ll create an artificial eclipse.(Image credit: ESA)
While the world eagerly awaits the total solar eclipse in April, scientists are already planning observations for the next — except this will be an “artificial” one. Here’s what that means.
Proba-3, a mission led by the European Space Agency (ESA), has been in the making for at least 14 years. It’s due to finally launch this September, and is designed to better detect tiny, faint features in the sun’s extremely dim outer atmosphere called the corona.
To accomplish that goal, the mission will launch two small satellites together which will separate once in space and fly in tandem in an orbit around Earth. Much like the moon passes in front of the sun during a solar eclipse, the two satellites — an occulter and a specialized instrument called a coronagraph — will mimic a natural solar eclipse by lining up 144 meters (472 feet) apart, such that the former blocks out the sun’s glaring disk for the latter.
“This will be achieved autonomously, without relying on guidance from the ground,” according to a previous ESA statement.
While the pair of satellites will take 19.5 hours to circle Earth once, they will maintain their formation for just six hours in each orbit to reduce fuel costs, said ESA. Such a configuration, reportedly the first of its kind, will bring the corona into view. This solar feature is so faint that it’s visible only during natural solar eclipses, which don’t last very long and aren’t very common.
“We won’t see quite as close to the solar limb as during a terrestrial eclipse,” Russell Howard, an astrophysicist at the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab who was not involved with the Proba-3 mission, said in the statement. “But having such images for hours on end compared to the five to 10 minutes duration of an eclipse event will be spectacular.”
Coronagraphs normally include an occulter, so they come capable of blocking out the sun’s bright disk themselves. But they also experience data-damaging diffraction, a consequence of light spilling around their edges and sometimes overshining very faint signals.
“The best way to reduce diffraction is to increase the distance between the occulter and the coronagraph, which is precisely what Proba-3 is going to do,” Proba-3’s project manager Damien Galano said in a statement earlier this week.
Europe temporarily lacks independent access to space after it retired its Ariane 5 rocket and is yet to debut its successor, Ariane 6. It also delayed the return to flight date of another rocket, Vega C, to late 2024. Not to fear, the Proba-3 mission will lift off from India instead, from the country’s spaceport in Sriharikota.
A Discusssion of What is going on at the border and its potential for chais in this country:
Chris and Tim Kennedy discuss the migrant crisis on the southern U.S. border. What’s the current state of the U.S.- Mexico border according to Tim Kennedy? How does Tim Kennedy think the border crisis should be handled? What strategies are the cartel running that’s contributing to the border crisis according to Tim Kennedy?
Sars-Cov-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, came from a laboratory. While there are some legitimate differences of opinion about who exactly released it, where, and for what exact reason, it is clear that Sars-CoV-2 was described in a certain 2018 financing proposal.
Igor’s Newsletter
Sars-Cov-2 was Lab Made Under Project DEFUSE
This long article will explain how Sars-Cov-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was created as a result of intentional laboratory work. It will also show that the blueprint for Sars-Cov-2 was described in the “Project DEFUSE” proposal by Peter Daszak, which was preceded by years of relevant lab work and virus manipulation…
Read more
2 years ago · 452 likes · 252 comments · Igor Chudov
Who is Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, who submitted the proposal? Some new material surfaced about his early criminal life that may shed light on what kind of person Peter is.
While young, Peter Daszak apparently stole stuff he needed instead of paying for it, such as the above-mentioned TV set and a hi-fi radio. For entertainment, he broke off and stole the “head of a Madonna statue” and even painted its lips with lipstick. (Daily Post: The Paper for Wales, Thu, Jun 26, 1986 ·Page 3)
Why, of all things, did Peter decide to paint her lips? Was it for some perverse sexual gratification he wanted from Madonna’s head?
The drunkenness mentioned above, offered as an excuse for his behavior, may be fabricated to reduce his punishment. Generally, petty criminal behavior is typical for a growing sociopath. (other signs include harming animals, which is easy for a biology student to do)
Peter’s career led him to found EcoHealth Alliance, a venture to manage the health of the entire planet—not just the health of humans. The approach he champions is called “One Health.”
At EcoHealth Alliance we’re governed by a clear and direct philosophy; we call it One Health: that the health of humans, animals, and their environment are all connected. It’s that principle which guides our work from our headquarters in New York all the way to southeast Asia and everywhere in between. Those connections are apparent in everything we do.
I personally never signed up to be governed by criminal psychopaths wanting to control the health of people and animals, who started their lives by breaking Madonna statue heads and painting Madonna’s lips with lipstick.
Should we be thankful to Bill Gates, the World Economic Forum, and Peter Daszak for caring so much about our health?
Is it anti-science to mention prior sociopathic, criminal acts by leading proponents of “planetary health”?
What about you? Do you want convicted psychopaths to be heading efforts to govern planetary health?
Manufacturing Consent: The Border Fiasco and the “Smart Wall”
The political response to the crisis at the southern border continues to advance the bipartisan “smart wall,” having been backed by Trump and Biden alike. This bipartisan consensus reaches far beyond the US, as much of the world is similarly speeding along in implementing “digital borders.”
The disastrous situation at the US-Mexico border is, and has been, intentionally produced. Throughout the last several administrations, regardless of campaign and other public rhetoric, the porous nature of the border has remained unresolved. On several occasions, the situation as it has developed has been blamed largely on incompetence and government inefficiency. Though some administrations have been tougher than others in regards to terrestrial migration (under some metrics), the US-Mexico border has not been sealed off so to force entrants to cross through officially recognized and managed ports of entry.
Under the current administration, it has been pointedly obvious that even the sections of the border that do contain physical barriers are being dismantled on purpose, all the while illegal crossings have risen to unprecedented levels. Whatever the motives for this deliberate policy on the part of the Biden administration, the end result has been the widespread characterization of the crisis as an “invasion,” priming the voter bloc usually most concerned with border security – the American Right – for military-style “solutions.”
While the justifications for the frenzied media coverage are based on the actual reality that the border is indeed highly insecure (and has been for some time), the policy responses from American politicians reveal that there is a bipartisan consensus about what must be done. Tellingly, the same “solution” is also being quietly rolled out at all American ports of entry that are not currently being “overrun”, such as airports. That solution, of course, is biometric surveillance, enabled by AI, facial recognition/biometrics and autonomous devices.
This “solution” is not just being implemented throughout the United States as an alleged means of thwarting migrants, it is also being rapidly implemented throughout the world in apparent lockstep. The reasons for the unspoken, but obvious, global consistency in implementing invasive, biometric surveillance is due to the fulfillment of global policy agendas, ratified by nearly every country in the world, that seek both to restrict the extent of people’s freedom of movement and to surveil people’s movements (and much, much more) through the global implementation of digital identity. Those policy agendas include mainly the UN’s Agenda 2030 or Sustainable Development Goals, specifically SDG 16, as well as Interpol’s Global Policing Goals.
While the American Right has been rather outspoken in its rejection of the UN’s Agenda 2030, and the digital ID project at large, the distress over the border situation is being used to manufacture consent among this specific group for “solutions” that are focused on expanding surveillance and biometric collection as opposed to the implementation of physical barriers.
The Virtual Wall
The Hawaiian shirt-wearing inventor of the VR headset Oculus Rift, Palmer Luckey, has become the face of America’s “virtual border wall.” Luckey, the brain behind the defense tech firm Anduril, is a long-time associate of Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, with Luckey having met Thiel at 19 when Luckey presided over his first company Oculus Rift, which was later sold to Facebook. Thiel was then on Facebook’s board and was also instrumental in the rise of the social media company. Luckey’s Anduril is also backed by Thiel’s Founders Fund and another Palantir co-founder, Joe Lonsdale, is also an Anduril investor.
Anduril is one of the main beneficiaries of government contracts to build autonomous surveillance towers along the US-Mexico border, which are now also being rolled out along the US-Canada border. As a consequence, they are likely to be among the beneficiaries of the Senate’s current proposal for “border security,” which sets aside $170 million for additional towers to be build.
Under the Trump and now Biden administrations, Luckey has been vocal about how Anduril will create “a digital wall that is not a barrier so much as a web of all-seeing eyes, with intelligence to know what it sees.” As noted by WIRED in 2018, Luckey and Anduril has long been pitching its technology “as a complement to – or substitute for – much of [then] President Trump’s promised physical wall.”
Luckey was a donor to Trump’s inaugural committee and his apparent mentor, Peter Thiel, was a key figure on Trump’s transition team, particularly for defense. The company dresses itself in “America First” rhetoric, especially when it comes to border security, framing itself as a beacon of “Western democracy” and nationalism in an age of globalism. Despite this, Anduril is part of a network that fronts for the long-standing surveillance ambitions of the same American “Deep State” that Trump supporters revile.
An Anduril surveillance tower deployed on the US-Mexico border, Source: FedScoop/Anduril
Luckey’s Anduril would not exist without the assistance of Thiel and several executives from Thiel’s Palantir. As Unlimited Hangout has reported in multiple articles, Palantir isa CIA front explicitly aimed at resurrecting the controversial surveillance dragnet once housed by the Pentagon’s DARPA known as Total Information Awareness (TIA), which sought to use warrantless, dragnet surveillance of Americans to prevent crime and terrorism before it happens (i.e. pre-crime, a field which Palantir has since pioneered and which was essentially made DOJ policy by Trump’s Attorney General William Barr).
One of those Palantir executives who later came to Anduril, Trae Stephens, worked at a government intelligence agency (he declines to specify which one) before joining Palantir. From there, Stephens joined Thiel’s Founders Fund and ended up on the boards of some of the most controversial Founders Fund-funded companies, such as Carbyne911. Financed in part by Jeffrey Epstein and the brainchild of former Israeli Prime Minister (and Epstein associate) Ehud Barak, Carbyne’s platform also involves invasive data collection from civilians and “predictive policing” functionalities. On Carbyne’s board, Stephens originally sat alongside Barak as well as Israeli intelligence-linked figures like Pinchas Buchris (former commander of Israel’s Unit 8200), Lital Leshem (“former” Israeli intelligence operative who know works for documented CIA asset and former head of the infamous mercenary group Blackwater, Erik Prince), and Nicole Junkermann (an Epstein associate who has since rebranded as a venture capitalist in emerging technologies and FinTech). Stephens remains on Carbyne’s board, where he now sits alongside former US Homeland Security chiefs Michael Chertoff (Bush administration) and Kirstjen Nielsen (Trump administration).
Thanks in part to Thiel’s influence over the early Trump administration, Stephens was chosen to oversee Trump’s transition team for the Defense Department, where he “steered” Trump’s early Pentagon policies. At the time, Stephens was also in talks with Luckey to create a new company. After Luckey left Facebook under a cloud of controversy in late March 2017, he and Stephens created Anduril and other Palantir executives were recruited to join the company. Within a year of its existence, Anduril had already netted millions in contracts from the Department of Homeland Security. Stephens has remained at Thiel’s Founders Fund since co-founding Anduril.
Not unlike Palantir, Anduril is also a modern reboot of a failed DHS initiative from around the same time as TIA. The Secure Border Initiative Network (SBInet) was a Bush-era DHS effort that sought to build a virtual border wall that could not only deter and detect illegal border crossings, but also automatically designate those illegal crossers a “threat level” as well as predict “illegal border activities” before they occur. Like Anduril, it relied on surveillance towers and a litany of sensors spread throughout the environment. The program, though shuttered by DHS in 2011, never actually ended, as the DHS report announcing the “end” of SBInet stated the following:
DHS is currently developing a comprehensive border technology deployment plan that will build upon successful technology currently deployed and provide the optimum mix of proven surveillance technologies by sector. Where appropriate, this technology plan will also include elements of the former SBInet program that have proven successful.
Just like Anduril’s marketing strategy, SBInet was pitched as a cheaper, more cost-effective and “faster” means of securing the border than the construction of physical barriers. Anduril has openly laid out its strategy to avoid the pitfalls of SBInet; whereas SBInet was doomed to fail by hiring incompetent contractors to build and sell the system to the government, Anduril plans to own the system it builds and lease it to the government, which – according to Trae Stephens – “creates an incentive to keep development costs low.” Despite claims it is “low” cost, since 2017, massive DHS contracts have been given to Anduril to fulfill many of the original ambitions of the SBInet project and, despite the construction of hundreds of towers and millions spent, the border remains more insecure than ever.
One of Anduril’s earliest advocates was Congressman Will Hurd, a former officer in the CIA’s clandestine operations division who now represents Texas in the House of Representatives. With Hurd’s help, Anduril was able to place their first prototypes for the “virtual wall” on the border-adjacent private property of an anonymous rancher. Custom and Border Protection (CBP) then conducted their first official pilot of Anduril towers in 2018, leading to the Trump administration’s approval to deploy Anduril’s towers along the entirety of the south-western border in 2020. That approval saw Anduril awarded a five-year and still-ongoing contract and also saw the contract designated a “program of record,” meaning it is deemed essential enough to be a dedicated item in the DHS budget.
Trump, in the latter years of his presidential term, began to embrace the type of virtual wall that Anduril would enable even more so than the physical barrier he had campaigned on. In January 2019, for example, Trump stated “The walls we are building are not medieval walls. They are smart walls designed to meet the needs of frontline border agents.” The “smart walls”, Trump went on to say, would include “sensors, monitors and cutting-edge technology.”
Under the Biden administration, Anduril’s star has continued to rise. This is partially due to the millions the company has spent lobbying Congress, but also facilitated by the long-standing bipartisan love affair with building a “smart wall” on the Southern border. CBP was given millions for autonomous surveillance towers along the border in the 2021 US Citizenship Act and then again in the 2022 omnibus bill, with millions more granted last year. The lion-share of that money is destined for Anduril’s coffers. This year, if the Senate’s bipartisan “border security” efforts are any indication, Anduril stands to gain even more contracts to build ever more autonomous towers, which are now accompanied by autonomous drones and other connected devices. Luckey, despite Anduril’s claims that there will always be human oversight of its products, has stated that his vision for the future of warfare that Anduril is helping to build will soon result in humans playing ever more insignificant roles.
Palmer Luckey works on an Anduril product, Source: Inceptive Mind
While Anduril is one of the main companies building the “virtual wall,” they are not alone. General Dynamics, a defense firm deeply connected to organized crime, espionage scandals and corruption, has developed several hundred remote video surveillance systems (RVSS) towers for CBP while Google, another Big Tech firm with CIA connections, has been tapped by CBP to have its AI used in conjunction with Anduril’s towers, which also utilize Anduril’s own AI operating system known as Lattice. Anduril is merely the visible face of the “virtual wall” that has positioned itself in close proximity to Trump’s political movement and is sure to benefit if Trump is re-elected later this year. However, Anduril has been more than happy to cozy up to the Biden administration, having praised Biden for calling to develop border protection measures using “high-tech capacity,” which they have say they’ve “delivered.”
Yet, despite support from both political parties, millions upon millions of funding and several hundreds of towers and supporting devices deployed, this “virtual wall” has done nothing to stop the drastic increase in illegal migration into the United States. Why, since the towers were deployed, are illegal crossings skyrocketing? Why is it that the proposed solution to this “invasion” is to build even more towers? One could argue that the answer to those questions lies in the fact that the border crisis is being used to manufacture consent amongst Americans for the implementation of a surveillance panopticon, not just on the border, but well into the interior of the country.
The Thiel-Funded, All Seeing AI
Anduril’s other government contracts suggests that the company’s installations on the border are only a small component of what a completed “smart wall” might entail. In addition to their contracts with CBP, Anduril is a major contractor for the Department of Defense and supplies (or is soon to supply) the military with autonomous aircraft, such as its Ghost platform and autonomous underwater vehicles. Like the drones that interface with their surveillance towers on the border, they are framed as useful for surveillance and reconnaissance, but are also able to deliver payloads, i.e. they are able to be outfitted with weapons of war. They have also been developing weapon systems that appear to fall under the controversial category of autonomous weapons, meaning that the unmanned device could kill without meaningful human oversight. These drones utilize Lattice, the same AI-enabled operating system as those that run Anduril’s border towers and surveillance drones. Last year, Anduril unveiled a new version of Lattice that “is designed to foster dynamic collaboration among autonomous systems,” e.g. allowing surveillance drones/towers and weaponized ones to be interoperable and conduct missions together without necessarily needing a human to coordinate them.
An Anduril underwater drone developed for the Australian military, Source: Breaking Defense
Anduril’s ambitions go far beyond dominating the Pentagon’s push into autonomous vehicles and AI and the Southern border’s “virtual wall.” Anduril’s website describes how Lattice can be deployed to surveil and protect the 16 critical infrastructure sectors that have been identified in the United States, including “dams, energy, nuclear reactors, transportation systems, water and wastewater, and communications.” “Securing critical infrastructure is vital for the U.S. and beyond, and, similar to our border security solution, Lattice can take over the dull work of monitoring cameras and sensors for threats to critical infrastructure sites and free up humans to do something about it,” the company states on their website. The company has also pitched Lattice for use in detecting and responding to wildfires and conducting civilian search and rescue missions. Luckey has stated that Anduril ultimately plans “to turn American and allied warfighters into invincible technomancers.”
The potential dangers of Anduril can only fully be fleshed out when considering the family of Thiel-backed defense/intelligence companies as a whole. For instance, Thiel’s Palantir, which has numerous ties to Anduril aside from just Thiel, is the engine that intelligence agencies and militaries (in the US and beyond) use to analyze drone footage, satellite imagery, and open-source data and turn that visual and non-visual data into actionable intelligence. It has been openly described by mainstream outlets like Bloomberg as “using War on Terror tools to track American citizens” and has long been a major driver of “predictive policing”, i.e. pre-crime.Another Thiel-funded venture, Clearview AI, has developed AI-powered facial recognition tools that were trained off of billions of photos scrapped from the internet, many of them from the Thiel-backed social media platform Facebook and the Facebook-owned Instagram. Despite being a favorite of US law enforcement and DHS, Clearview AI has been sued numerous times over privacy violations and its database has been banned in numerous countries including Australia, Britain, Italy and Canada. Like Palantir, which mainstream media has acknowledged for years as knowing “everything about you” and even called an “all-seeing eye,” Clearview AI’s tools are allegedly able to “identify activists at a protest or an attractive stranger on the subway, revealing not just their names but where they lived, what they did and whom they knew.”
In looking at the overlap shared between Palantir, Anduril, Clearview AI and even Elon Musk’s SpaceX (which has been backed by Founders Fund since 2008 and is tied to Anduril co-founder Trae Stephens), one wonders if this Thiel-backed family of companies could eventually serve as an interoperable system for total AI surveillance. Troublingly, there are numerous indications this is already happening. Furthermore, given their common links to Thiel, it seems that such an outcome was likely always the intent.
For instance, as Stavroula Pabst previously reported for Unlimited Hangout, Anduril and Palantir, both contractors to military and intelligence agencies, are currently collaborating on the Army’s Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node (TITAN) program. In addition, Anduril has announced that its Lattice AI system “is now for everything” and designed to be interoperable with the products of other contractors. All three of these Thiel-backed companies have been testing the interoperable use of their products already in the Ukraine conflict and appear to be using Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip for the same ends.
How Peter Thiel-Linked Tech is Fueling the Ukraine War
As war in Ukraine continues, controversial defense contractors and adjacent companies like Palantir, Anduril, and Clearview AI are taking advantage to develop and level-up controversial AI-driven weapons systems and surveillance technologies. These organizations’ common link? The support of the controversial, yet ever-more powerful Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel.
Often, these technologies are tested and used abroad first before they are deployed at home, something that even mainstream media has acknowledged that Palantir has been doing for years. The so-called War on Domestic Terror has long been about retooling the weapons of the War on Terror as a means of curbing domestic dissent and Palantir is just one of several companies aiding that shift. Similarly, Clearview AI, despite claims that the company is Trump-linked and tied to right-leaning political circles, has bragged about its utility to the US law enforcement community by highlighting the company’s role in identifying those involved in January 6th, which the company’s CEO refers to as an “insurrection.” After January 6th, Clearview AI’s use by US law enforcement jumped by 26%.
However, Thiel, Luckey and others in this network who are building the domestic panopticon often claim that they are defending “Western values” and “democracy” by embracing military and intelligence contracts. They also rely heavily on “America First” rhetoric. These companies contrast themselves to companies like Google, where employees have previously scuttled the big military contracts over ethical concerns, even though figures like Eric Schmidt, the former Google CEO who is a big backer of the Democrats and the Biden administration, are similarly developing autonomous weapon technology also under the guise of “defending democracy.” These Big Tech oligarchs ultimately agree about the plan, though Thiel and his ilk are much more vocal about their willingness to overlook ethical quandaries in the pursuit of ever more lucrative government contracts and cloak themselves in right-leaning, “America First” rhetoric.
An example of Anduril’s marketing materials and narratives, Source: Shack News/Anduril
This intelligence-linked web of Thiel-backed companies is poised to follow this same trajectory with respect to the “smart wall” being erected on the southern border as well as the northern border. While framed as only surveilling border crossings, the surveillance towers, drones and related devices being deployed are able to spy beyond the border and into American border cities and towns. While Anduril’s towers in particular are often framed as being placed in rural, sparsely populated parts of the southern border, there are several that are located close to major urban centers.
There is also the issue of the so-called “Constitution Free Zone,” which refers to the “border region” claimed by the US government that extends roughly 100 miles inland from all of the US’ terrestrial (including coastal) borders. It is estimated that 2/3 of all Americans live within this “border region”, which also includes 9 of the 10 largest US cities. The blatant overreach has been criticized by left-leaning (e.g. the ACLU) and right-leaning groups (e.g. the CATO Institute) alike. Whenever there are frenzied pushes in the media (mainstream and alternative alike) demanding new border security measures, many forget or are simply unaware that the government defines “the border” as much, much more than just the physical US-Mexico border and – thus – military-style measures rolled out on “the border” could also be rolled out much more inland.
The “Constitution Free Zone” may soon have implications for the border “smart wall.” Those surveillance devices could also be utilized, once they are capable, to surveil within the government-defined “border region,” where the violation of basic civil rights by law enforcement and CBP is a well-documented phenomenon. Given that intelligence agencies have been known to engage in the warrantless wiretapping of Americans for well over a decade, it seems likely that the “smart wall” could be used for much of the same.
Though some recent US court cases have tackled modern video surveillance tactics by law enforcement, it is still possible for them to collect data from surveillance cameras without a warrant if the intent is to “guard against […] crime.” The precarious state of civil liberties in the US, combined with the growing dominance of a small, close-knit and intelligence-linked group over the surveillance infrastructure of the State, should be carefully scrutinized, not rapidly rubber-stamped on the back of media-generated panic.
Agenda 2030 and Global Policing Goals
The bipartisan consensus around an Anduril-built “smart wall” likely has its roots in the same global agenda that is spurring the rapid implementation of biometric entry/exit systems at ports of entry throughout the Western world. For instance, this is the year where the European Union’s biometric entry/exit system is due to launch, whereby travelers crossing the EU’s new “digital border” system – whether terrestrial or aerial – will have to provide their fingerprints and submit to facial scans if they wish to enter an EU member state. Despite claims that the “digital border” would facilitate easier travel and reduce wait times, current estimates reveal that the new system is likely to take almost ten times longer per entry. The UK, despite leaving the EU, is also poised to “make its borders digital” by 2025, i.e. next year, with Canada implementing similar policies.
A pilot of BorderXpress biometric kiosks at Keflavik International Airport in Iceland in 2020, Source: Biometric Update
In the US, the move toward the “real ID” system, which is to come into force in 2025, will see biometric collection in the US become a requisite for domestic flights and any other “official purposes” that the DHS Secretary can unilaterally determine require a “real ID.” The “real ID” also provides favorable provisions for digital IDs, such as digital drivers licenses (such as the “Florida smart ID” being piloted in Ron DeSantis-governed Florida) and other “mobile digital documents and digital cards.” Elsewhere in the US, in airports, the push for digital IDs and facial biometric scans continues torapidly advance.
It is quite obvious that the “smart wall” being built on the US’ southern and northern borders is intended to be part of the same “digital border” system that DHS has been designing and gradually implementing for most of the past 20 years. For instance, CBP currently utilizes the same biometric facial comparison technology used at numerous land, sea and air ports of entry throughout the country and plans to continue to expand its use nationwide. As noted above, Anduril’s towers or its affiliated drones could easily be equipped with facial recognition or other related technologies, while official terrestrial port of entries are already using the same biometric system being rolled out at American airports. In addition, many of those seeking to cross the southern border are being onboarded to the CBP One app, which CBP initially claimed would result in a “safe, orderly and humane” border processing when it was launched in January 2023. That app also collects biometric information from applicants of certain nationalities, a functionality CBP will likely expand in the future as reliance on its app increases.
The apparent global coordination of biometric entry/exit systems is no coincidence, as it is a policy initiative deeply connected to the UN’s Agenda 2030, or the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Specifically, it is tied to the implementation of SDG 16, which contains provisions for digital identity systems, among other things. The UN has chosen the global law enforcement entity Interpol as its “implementing partner” of SDG 16, a decision that ultimately spawned Interpol’s SDG-aligned Global Policing Goals (GPGs). The GPGs were approved and adopted by Interpol’s 196 member countries in 2017. As previously noted by Unlimited Hangout, Interpol is a dangerous organization to trust with the vast power these goals and their associated policies will bestow upon them, as they operate as a “pay-to-play” organization and have been embroiled in several significant corruption scandals.
SDG16: Part 1 — Building the Global Police State
The United Nations claims that the purpose of Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG16) is to promote peaceful and inclusive societies and to provide access to justice for all. Hiding behind the rhetoric is the real objective: to strengthen and consolidate the power and authority of the “global governance regime” and to exploit threats—both real and imagined—in order to advance regime hegemony.
One of the GPGs, GPG No. 2, is to “promote border security worldwide.” Interpol specifically notes that the implementation of this goal will involve establishing “advanced global standards for an intelligence-led border management, including standards for border surveillance, border checks and related equipment.” These standards, they continue, “should be underpinned by technology and digital advancement and risk analysis.” Elsewhere, they discuss how the implementation of this goal will also involve “managing and sharing biometric data, including with the use of the Interpol’s Biometric Hub [“a state-of-the-art system for identifying criminals˝] and other hubs.” Interpol has teamed up with biometric digital ID companies Idemia and Onfido as part of this effort. Both of those companies facilitatedvaccine passports during Covid-19 and are currently helping to create digital driver’s licenses in some US states.
Interpol is mainly funded by the European Commission and the governments of Germany, the US and Canada, all of which – as noted above – are implementing the same biometric entry/exit systems on similar timelines. However, many other Interpol member countries are similarly ramping up their adoption of biometric, digital IDs for foreign travel and domestic use, including the West’s ostensible adversary countries, like Russia and China. The vast majority of the world’s countries, whether West or East, have signed onto Interpol’s GPGs and the UN’s SDGs, both of which push for comprehensive, biometric digital IDs interfaced with a digital currency wallet (whether a CBDC or private sector-issued equivalent). Globally, these agendas are being rolled out rapidly, forming the foundation for the next era of highly centralized global governance.
However, in some countries, such as the United States, where a significant portion of the population has become wary of digital IDs and digital, programmable money, unprecedented efforts are being made to sell these globalist policies via right-leaning talking points in contrast to years prior. For instance, digital, programmable money is being developed in the US, not as a CBDC, but a mix of regulated stablecoins and tokenized bank deposits. Even global carbon markets are being framed, not as being about climate change, but about innovation and profiting off a new class of assets. Now, it seems, the biometric “digital border” tied to the UN’s SDGs – a key component of the infrastructure for digital ID – is being sold mainly to the populist right and being rolled out under the guise of tackling illegal immigration. Not unlike Israel’s “smart wall,” these walls can be “turned off” when a crisis needs to be manufactured and, just like so much else, used to sell the same agendas that are pushing us all into a global, public-private panopticon.
Whitney Webb has been a professional writer, researcher and journalist since 2016. She has written for several websites and, from 2017 to 2020, was a staff writer and senior investigative reporter for Mint Press News. She is contributing editor of Unlimited Hangout and author of the book One Nation Under Blackmail.
