Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Current Issue | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues

Category: Editor’s Choice

NASA has put hundreds of the coolest testing videos you can imagine on YouTube

https://www.dailydot.com/

If you ever wanted to have easy access to watch a jet go Mach 10 or view 1960s film footage of a Lunar Landing Research Vehicle lifting off, NASA has a treat for you.
For the past several days, the space agency’s Armstrong Flight Research Center has posted on YouTube hundreds of unearthed video clips of various flight tests, rocket launches, Mars Rovers, and other just plain cool stuff for anybody who’s fascinated by space and the journey to get there.
The center reportedly selected 500 videos that it would migrate from a little-used corner of the internet on the Dryden Flight Research Center website to YouTube. NASA Armstrong is doing so because it wants fans to have easier access to some of its archived history.
“NASA has so much digital content that tends to be overlooked by the public, given the difficulty that exists in actually locating the content,” Rebecca Richardson, social media manager for NASA Armstrong, told Motherboard. “Our hope is that by moving the content to more accessible platforms, NASA fans and media personnel will be able to access the content more regularly and become more fully immersed in what is happening at NASA.”
Here are some of the coolest videos we found so far.
This is a test flight from the mid-1960s of a Lunar Landing Research Vehicle over California’s Mojave Desert:

 

Video player from: YouTube (Privacy Policy)
This is a 2003 video from the Mojave Desert when researchers were testing the Mars Exploration Rover

Video player from: YouTube (Privacy Policy)

https://youtu.be/nvppLPiYiN0

Here’s a 66-second clip from the mid-1940s that shows the unloading and reassembly of a D-558 Skystreak, a plane that broke a world record four months later by flying at 640.74 mph.

Video player from: YouTube (Privacy Policy)
And finally, if you like explosions, here’s a video montage of a Controlled Impact Demonstration from 1984.

Video player from: YouTube (Privacy Policy)

The post NASA has put hundreds of the coolest testing videos you can imagine on YouTube appeared first on The Daily Dot.

See More:

http://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/techandscience/nasa-has-put-hundreds-of-the-coolest-testing-videos-you-can-imagine-on-youtube/ar-AAoFOAM?li=AAaUOAg&ocid=spartandhp

2030 Agenda: “Identifying” every Person On Earth!

Interesting and perceptive video from Jason A. Elon Musk’s comments are especially noteworthy as the year 2030 looms ever closer. Not so long ago this all seemed like science fiction.

 

Brzezinski Wanted NATO to Become the “Hub of a Globe-Spanning Web” of Security Pacts

16.07.2017 Author: Steven MacMillan

https://journal-neo.org/2017/07/16/brzezinski-wanted-nato-to-become-the-hub-of-a-globe-spanning-web-of-security-pacts/

BrzezinskiThe end of May marked the death of a man who had been at the center of global affairs for decades. Zbigniew Brzezinski, born in Warsaw in the 1920s, was one of the most influential foreign policy advisers in the US, who also played a pivotal role in the drive towards further global integration.
Brzezinski earned his Ph.D. from Harvard in 1953, and subsequently became a professor at that university, before moving on teach at Columbia University. From 1966 to 1968, he was a member of the Policy Planning Council at the Department of State, and in 1968, he served as chairman of the Humphrey Foreign Policy Task Force for Hubert Humphrey’s presidential campaign.
Brzezinski: The Internationalist
From 1973 to 1976, Brzezinski served as the Director of the newly formed Trilateral Commission, an internationalist organization he himself helped to create. In a 1989 interview, Brzezinski revealed his role in founding the Trilateral Commission along with the elitist American banker, David Rockefeller, before bragging how this organization was the first to propose the idea of holding a G7 (was G8 for a period) summit (emphasis added):
“Not only did I run it [the Trilateral Commission], I helped to found it and organize it with David Rockefeller. So, if any of our viewers are conspiracy minded, here is one of the conspirators… It is a North American, Western European, Japanese organization to promote closer contacts between these three regions of the world. And the commission is composed of private citizens, not government officials, who are leaders in the different sectors of society… We’re incidentally the ones who proposed, originally, the holding of the annual summit meeting of the industrial democracies.
Throughout their lives, Brzezinski and Rockefeller worked towards the goal of creating an integrated global system. In David Rockefeller’s book ‘Memoirs,’ he admits that his family has been part of a “secret cabal” working towards building a “one world” system (emphasis added):
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
In addition to playing an instrumental role in founding the Trilateral Commission, Brzezinski was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and a frequent attendee at the elitist Bilderberg conference, illustrating his position as a high-ranking individual deeply entrenched in the parallel governmental system.
Giving the Soviets their Vietnam War and Encouraging Pol Pot
Brzezinski’s most notable role in public life was when he served as Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor (NSA) from 1977 to 1981. Famously, in this role, Brzezinski was one of the main intellectual architects who advocated arming the Mujahiddin in Afghanistan, a scheme that he hoped would increase the probability that the Soviet Union would intervene. In an interview with Le Nouvel Observateur in 1998, Brzezinski recalled this operation (with the translation from French provided by William Blum and David N. Gibbs):
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs that the American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahiddin in Afghanistan six months before the Soviet intervention. In this period, you were the national security advisor to President Carter. You therefore played a key role in this affair. Is this correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahiddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into the war and looked for a way to provoke it?
B: It wasn’t quite like that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against secret US involvement in Afghanistan, nobody believed them. However, there was an element of truth in this. You don’t regret any of this today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: “We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.” Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Also in his role as NSA, Brzezinski and the Carter administration encouraged the Chinese to continue supporting the genocidal Pol Pot in Cambodia. After Vietnam launched a full-scale invasion of Cambodia at the end of 1978, seizing power by early 1979, the US pressed China to continue assisting the Khmer Rouge in their fight against the occupying Vietnamese forces, with Brzezinskiadmitting that he “encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot.”
Obama: Brzezinski an “Outstanding Friend”
In more modern times, Brzezinski remained a pivotal figure in the US, working in a plethora of think tanks and advising numerous mainline political figures. One such figure was the former US President, Barack Obama, who he was very close to. In a March 2008speech, Obama revealed how intimate his relationship was with Brzezinski, calling him an “outstanding friend:”
“To Dr. Brzezinski; I can’t say enough about his contribution to our country. Here’s somebody who helped to shape Camp David, and bring about a lasting peace between Israel and some of its neighbours. Somebody who has over decades trained some of the most prominent foreign policy specialists, not only in the democratic party, but has trained a number who ended up in the republican party as well… He has proven to be an outstanding friend, and somebody who I have learned an immense amount from. And for him to support me in this campaign, and then come out to here in Ohio, is a testimony to his generosity.”
NATO to be the Global Security Nexus Point?
One of the defining features of Brzezinski was his essays and books pertaining to his long-range geostrategic visions. In one such essay, penned in 2009 for Foreign Affairs – the publication of the CFR – Brzezinski expounds on his vision of what NATO’s purpose and role could be in the future.
Titled: An Agenda for NATO: Toward a Global Security Web, Brzezinski begins by detailing how, in essence, NATO has been obsolete since the end of the Cold War, and how the security alliance faces a problem of legitimacy. “What next?”, he writes. Brzezinski then moves on to argue that the world now faces “unprecedented risks to global security,” with “extremist religious and political movements” among these risks, movements that he himself helped to empower through advocating giving the Mujahiddin US aid (emphasis added):
“The basic challenge that NATO now confronts is that there are historically unprecedented risks to global security… The paradox of our time is that the world, increasingly connected and economically interdependent for the first time in its entire history, is experiencing intensifying popular unrest made all the more menacing by the growing accessibility of weapons of mass destruction – not just to states but also, potentially, to extremist religious and political movements. Yet there is no effective global security mechanism for coping with the growing threat of violent political chaos stemming from humanity’s recent political awakening.” 
From there, Brzezinski details how an array of different security packs have arisen around the world in recent decades, including the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Brzezinski then gives a glimpse into how many individuals in the Western elite see the role of NATO in the future. He first rejects the idea that NATO could be, in itself, a global army, before advocating a variant of this idea, in the form of NATO being the “hub of a globe-spanning web of various regional cooperative-security undertakings” (emphasis added):
“To remain historically relevant, NATO cannot – as some have argued – simply expand itself into a global alliance or transform itself into a global alliance of democracies… A global NATO would dilute the centrality of the U.S.-European connection, and none of the rising powers would be likely to accept membership in a globally expanded NATO. 
NATO, however, has the experience, the institutions, and the means to eventually become the hub of a globe-spanning web of various regional cooperative-security undertakings among states with the growing power to act. The resulting security web wouldfill a need that the United Nations by itself cannot meet but from which the UN system would actually benefit. In pursuing that strategic mission, NATO would not only be preserving transatlantic political unity; it would also be responding to the twenty-first century’s novel and increasingly urgent security agenda.”
Although Brzezinski’s vision seems far from probable at the present time, it will be interesting to see the path the world takes in the years and decades to come.

Steven MacMillan is an independent writer, researcher, geopolitical analyst and editor of  The Analyst Report, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2017/07/16/brzezinski-wanted-nato-to-become-the-hub-of-a-globe-spanning-web-of-security-pacts/

Paul Craig Roberts: Times Change Out From Under Us

Times Change Out From Under Us

Paul Craig Roberts

He had lugged the 50 lb. bag of Milorganite into the garden in order to discover, as on many prior occasions, that he had nothing with which to open it. He blamed this on the war on terror and the TSA. As a youth he, as did every boy, had a pocket knife. Always. It was expected. There was no school rule against pocket knives. Once for a period they even all had switchblades. You could get them for 99 cents, a large amount in those days, enough to buy a case of 24 Coca-Colas. The switchblades met with school and parental disapproval as they smacked of New York gangs. But before teachers and parents came up with a policy, the boys had abandoned the switchblades. The knives had weak springs. Fascinated with the speed with which the knives opened with a satisfying click and locked the blade into place, the boys quickly wore out the springs on their switchblades. Unlike their trusty pocket knives, the switchblades quickly became useless.

He no longer carried a pocket knife. He had learned long ago that things that go into pockets become habitual. He would forget to take the knife out when he rushed to catch his flight, just as he always forgot to put the knife in his pocket when he went to work in the garden. There would be a scene at the airport, confiscation of the knife, which had been his grandfather’s, and TSA questioning. They might want him to be strip searched. He could miss his flight. Such a large expensive organization as TSA needs justification, and so whereas the TSA officers might be reasonable, he could not count on it. Under the law he could be accused and prosecuted. One never knew.

TSA Knives

He could remember the air shuttle between Washington and New York. The planes flew on the hour. You could show up 10 minutes before takeoff and be seated. If one airplane wasn’t enough, they would provide a second. There was no security, no delays.

He didn’t like being drawn back into memories of the past. It made him acutely aware how difficult just simple things had become over the course of his life, like carrying a pocket knife. A couple of weeks ago he had been on vacation at a gated mountain resort. He enjoyed hiking along the streams and visiting the waterfalls. He had managed to rent at the airport a sports sedan and was looking forward to a morning workout at the exercise center and then a semi-spirited drive along mountain roads outside the resort. As he was changing into his workout clothes, the telephone rang. As he rushed to stay on schedule his billfold with driving license did not make the clothes change.

He discovered this at the exercise center. It was 10 minutes back to his cabin and then 10 minutes back in the direction of the exit gate. Why had he agreed to a telephone interview? If he went back for his license, his drive would be rushed and not enjoyable. He could go without his license, but suppose something happened, such as a collision with a deer. Would the police accept a reasonable story and the car rental papers for ID, or would he be hauled to jail, a long flight away from his lawyer? The days of reasonable police, he thought, were bygone days. The morning was shot. The only thing to do was to vent his frustration in exercise and return to his cabin for the telephone interview.

Even the innocence of words had been lost. There were many words that could no longer be used. They had been banished down the memory hole. A professor friend had told him that he was subjected to a dressing down by a dean because he had used the word “girl” in class. “Girl” is now considered offensive to womyn.

In restaurants in the South, waitresses called the men “honey.” “What will it be, honey?” The men called the waitresses “darling.” He wondered about that today. Perhaps in small towns. Since the advent of interstate highways, small towns had passed out of his experience. He wondered if they still had restaurants or just fast food franchises.

It got worse. The floodgates of memory had opened. He was given his first firearm at age 10. It was a single barrel .410 shotgun. When he was 12 he was given a .22 pistol. Many of his friends had guns. The countryside was nearby and many urban families had farm relatives. He remembered, too, that all the kids were subjected to corporal punishment. Today a parent who spanked a kid or provided one with a firearm would be arrested, likely prosecuted, and the kid put into foster care where there was risk of being leased out to a pedophile group.

He could remember riding his horse into the town three miles from his grandparents’ farm with a real pistol strapped to his side and a rifle in the scabbard when he was 12 or 13. No one said a thing. Today a SWAT team would be on the scene. He would be lucky not to be shot dead and never know the fate of his grandparents, who would be guilty of all sorts of offenses, including failure to supervise a minor.

That reminded him of what he had recently read in a newspaper. On a cul-de-sac devoid of car traffic a mother sat in a chair outside the house while her child played in the front lawn. A busybody neighbor, trained to report parental malfeasance, whose view of the mother was blocked by shrubbery, saw an unsupervised child at play and called the police. When the police arrived, they arrested the mother on the basis of the unverified report from the neighbor. The mother was taken to jail. The newspaper did not say what had happened to the child, whether the kid was taken to foster care and whether the husband had to rush home from his job and ply lawyers with money to help put his family back together. These kinds of horrors inflicted on families by public authorities often have worse consequences than the predations of criminals. He wondered if parents and children would be safer if the police were disbanded and outlawed.

Yet, society had accepted these abuses as justified. What, he thought, would have been the public reaction when he was a kid? The policemen would have been fired, the chief disciplined, and the mayor would have lost the next election. It would not have been possible for them to become heroes by destroying a family. The busybody neighbor would have become a pariah in the community.

Just the other day he had seen a grandmother at the supermarket with tattoos and face piercings. A grandmother? How had this come about? At the mountain resort pool and exercise center it wasn’t just the men. He had seen young women who were covered in tattoos. A friend told him that some women not only had face and tongue piercings, but also navel, labia, and clitoris piercings. Piercings were what he remembered from boyhood days of looking through stacks of National Geographic magazines from the 1940s and 1950s. Articles explained with words and photographs facial piercing practices by tribes in “darkest Africa.” Now they were the practices of upper class womyn who played in resorts.

He recalled his father’s first rule of business: “Never hire anyone with a tattoo.” Tattoos were what sailors did who got drunk in Asian ports. They demonstrated poor judgment and a lack of self-restraint. If anyone sober got a tattoo, it indicated a lack of self-respect. If an employee did not respect himself, he would not respect the job. His father would have a hard time assembling a work force today.

A couple of years ago a college classmate told him that their noble old fraternity had been suspended by the college president. A black female student claimed that racial slurs had been shouted at her from an open window. The fraternity was able to show that all the windows had been painted shut for years, probably dating back to when the house was air conditioned. But the college president wasn’t going to dispute a black female’s word on the basis of evidence. It could mean protests, charges of racism, broken windows, newspaper and trustee inquiries. Bad PR for the college. It was safer to hand the fraternity a bit of injustice.

Recently, he had arrived at the supermarket in a cloudburst. There were a dozen parking spaces by the entrance, but they were marked “Handicapped Parking $500 Fine.” He remembered when the handicapped said that they wanted to be treated like everyone else. Now they had privileges. He wondered about those signs. Did they give offense? “Handicapped” was one of those discarded words. They hadn’t got around to replacing the signs.

He remembered, too, when males did not use four-letter words in front of parents or females. Now the young womyn could out-cuss his male generation.

More memories. If you scraped a car while street parking, you were expected to leave a note with name and telephone number and expect to pay for the repair. He had once told some young people this and they laughed at the joke.

Something had happened. He had been brought up to be a citizen in a world that no longer existed.

At least there still were gardens. He put away his thoughts and went to get his knife.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/07/13/times-change-us/

Robots Are Inventing Their Own Languages: Jon Rappoport

Jul
14

Robots are inventing their own languages
The programming and design of artificial intelligence
by Jon Rappoport
July 14, 2017
Artificial Intelligence

Along with assurances that we’re facing an imminent takeover of industrial production by robots and other artificial intelligence (AI), we’re also being told that AI can develop its own systems of communication and operation, without help from humans.
Here is a sprinkling of quotes from the mainstream and technical press:
The Atlantic, June 15, 2017: “When Facebook designed chatbots to negotiate with one another, the bots made up their own way of communicating.”
Tech Crunch, November 22, 2016: “Google’s AI translation tool seems to have invented its own secret internal language.”
Wired, March 16, 2017: “It Begins: Bots Are Learning to Chat in Their Own Language.”
The suggestion is: AI can innovate. It can size up situations and invent unforeseen and un-programmed strategies, in order to accomplish set goals.
Who benefits from making such suggestions? Those companies and researchers who want to make the public believe AI is quite, quite powerful, and despite the downside risks (AI takes over its own fate), holds great promise for the human race in the immediate future. “Don’t worry, folks, we’ll rein in AI and make it work for us.”
Beyond that, the beneficiaries are technocratic Globalists who are in the process of bringing about a new society in which AI is intelligent and prescient enough to regulate human affairs at all levels. It’s the science fiction “populations ruled by machines” fantasy made into fact.
“AI doesn’t just follow orders. It sees what humans can’t see, and it runs things with greater efficiency.”
Let’s move past the propaganda and state a few facts.
AI is not running its own show.
It isn’t innovating.
It isn’t creating its own languages.
It isn’t doing any of that.
AI operates within the parameters its human inventors establish.
Any honest AI designer will tell you that.
If, for example, an AI system is given a goal and a set of “options” for achieving the goal, AI will select which option is best ACCORDING TO STANDARDS ITS HUMAN OPERATORS HAVE PROGRAMMED INTO THE SYSTEM.
Think of it this way: AI is given a set of options; but it is also given instructions on how to select what is presumably the most effective option. So AI is bounded.
There is no choice. There is no freedom. AI isn’t “jumping ship.”
“We gave our robot Charlie the task of getting from Chicago to New York. The whole plan was laid out as a vast hiking trip, with internal street maps built in. But then Charlie suddenly took a cab to O’Hare and boarded a United jet for JFK…”
No he didn’t.
AI performs as it is programmed to perform, within set parameters.
“We sent Charlie to LA to marry the actress who ordered and paid for him. But then, at the church, Charlie suddenly said, “This is a mistake. You should go back to your first husband. He never had sex with that waitress in St, Louis. She was his sister, and he was trying to help her escape from a terrorist cell. He never told you that because then he would have had to tell you he isn’t a banker, he actually works for the CIA. He’s a good guy. Talk to him. The truth will set you both free…”
Won’t happen.
But this kind of thing will happen: “According to scientists at Blah-Blah University, programmed robots are not only capable of inventing solutions to problems that ‘go beyond their internal software,’ the robots also make choices that benefit people. They’re very similar to people, except they tend to be smarter and invent more effective courses of action…”
Sell it, sell it.
“Alice, a medical technician in Minneapolis, claims her robot saved her life. ‘I was on the verge of swallowing a whole bunch of pills, but Charlie came to the rescue. He showed up in my bathroom and took the pills out of my hand. I learned something important that day. My free choice is important, but kindness and concern are more important. Charlie is the most vital companion in my life…’”
Sell it, sell it.
And of course, we’ll see more debates and court cases featuring questions about robots having rights, “just like humans.”
***Actually, in an entirely illogical fashion, we’ll see more and more “evidence” showing humans don’t have free will, because their brains dictate all thought and action, while robots will be touted as “free and creative.”
Some college professor will argue robots should be granted more “privileges” than humans, because the robots aren’t inherently “prejudiced.”
Another professor will insist that robots must be subjected to committee investigations, to make sure they aren’t “racist.”
“Today, in New York, a former Burger King employee, who is a refugee from Somalia, filed suit against a robot named Charlie, claiming Charlie uttered a racial slur while ordering a cheeseburger for his employer, a wealthy real estate developer…”
Behind all this, the fact remains that, no matter how many complex layers of “decision-making” are programmed into AI, the machine is always acting within rules and guidelines laid out in advance. It is never choosing.
Individual humans are capable of free choice, and are also capable of changing their own rules and standards.
Humans are free to say they aren’t free, as well, if they want to.
Let me make a psychological point here. There are many people who want to dominate relationships. They want to be in charge. They will want robots. They will want sophisticated robots THAT SEEM TO BE CHOOSING TO COMPLY WITH THEIR EVERY WISH AND DEMAND. These people will believe the robots are real and alive and human, in order to fulfill a fantasy in which they have found partners who want to go along with their agenda.
This is a pretty good definition of psychosis.
The AI designers and inventors and technicians tend to have their own bias. They want to believe they are creating life. They don’t want to think they are just putting together machines. That isn’t enough. The technocratic impulse involves faith in MACHINES AS LIVING ENTITIES.
Thus, we arrive at all sorts of myths and fairy tales about humans merging with machines, to arrive at a new frontier, where, for example, human brains hooked up to super-computers will result in higher consciousness and even the invocation of God.
Technocrats will say, do, and believe anything to turn machines into what machines aren’t.
They’ve crucially abandoned THEMSELVES and their own potential; so all they have left is THE MACHINE.
And if you think these technocrats should be allowed within a thousand miles of State power, I have communes for sale on Jupiter. Naturally, these utopias are run from the top by robots. They know what’s best for you.
Finally, understand this about propaganda: Those who control the output of information will admit to problems and mistakes with the issue they are promoting. Such confessions add to the “reality” of the information. And naturally, the propagandists will also claim that the problems can be solved. In the case of robots and AI, the problems are couched in terms of bots taking power into their own hands—but this “unexpected” situation a) demonstrates how capable bots are, and b) the power can be dialed back and modulated. So all is well. The future is bright.
It’s bright, if you want planned societies run by AI, where humans are fitted into slots, and algorithms determine who eats, who doesn’t, who has access to water and who doesn’t, how much energy can be used by each human, and all production and distribution are controlled from a central planning center.
Unless freedom lives—human freedom—you’ll be treated to something like this:
“Today, executives at the North American Union headquarters announced that several key bots broke through their programming and invented a new solution for clean water distribution to the population. This innovation will guarantee a more equitable water supply for millions of citizens. Control over the ‘rebel bots’ has been re-established, and their ‘amazing solution’ will now be incorporated into their standard operating framework. Three polls indicate that a lofty 68% of respondents support the bots in their efforts to better serve us…”

Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

Robots are inventing their own languages

DARPA Commits $65M To Brain Implant Program For Super Soldier Project

DARPA

By Aaron Kessel

The U.S. military is disclosing a super soldier project, revealing to have allocated funding of $65 million dollars for a program to develop a ‘Brain-Computer Interface’ that would allow participants to plug into a computer like the movie The Matrix. No this isn’t science fiction Neo, this is the future that the MIC wants for its soldiers.
Earlier last year in January, DARPA launched Neural Engineering System Design to research technology that could turn soldiers into cyborgs.


The military wants to use these programs to “give soldiers supersenses and boost brainpower.” Four teams will be responsible for increasing vision and two on hearing and speech. The military adds that this will help develop “new treatments for patients with sensory disorders.”
The program is being backed by Brown University, Columbia University, The Seeing and Hearing Foundation, the John B. Pierce Laboratory, Paradromics Inc and the University of California.
These organizations have formed teams to develop the fundamental research and component technologies required to pursue the NESD vision of a high-resolution neural interface and integrate them to create and demonstrate working systems able to support potential future therapies for sensory restoration,’ official said.
The goal of the project is ‘developing an implantable system able to provide precision communication between the brain and the digital world,’ DARPA officials said.
“Today’s best brain-computer interface systems are like two supercomputers trying to talk to each other using an old 300-baud modem. Imagine what will become possible when we upgrade our tools to really open the channel between the human brain and modern electronics,” Phillip Alvelda, NESD manager for DARPA, said to The Guardian.
They allege that this new study into technology and the human mind “will help treat people with blindness, paralysis and speech disorders.”
Advancing neuroscience isn’t the only experiment that DARPA has been up to; they are also actively trying to merge man with machines … essentially transhumanism.
The military industrial complex has been trying for years to develop robotic exosuits and mech robots to increase a soldier’s strength as documented by the Raytheon Sarcos XOS 2 exosuit. Which makes its wearer stronger, have an increased agility and endurance like a superhero.

Around the same time as the release of the XOS 2 exosuit in 2015 the military also released “The Revision Kinetic Operation Suit.” The suit has a built-in night vision, computers, a communications system and a suspended metal exoskeleton that wraps 60% of a soldier’s body in armor. It’s so heavy that a motorized metal skeleton to carry the weight is needed to move the soldier.

 

It’s also worth mentioning that technocrats in Silicon Valley are interested in the transhumanist A.I. society. Tesla’s Elon Musk and former Google[X] Executive Mary Lou Jepsen both are planning mind reading technology and share the same interest of the privately owned military industrial complex to transition the human race to becoming more like machines.

https

://www.blacklistednews.com/DARPA_Commits_%2465M_To_Brain_Implant_Program_For_Super_Soldier_Project/59645/0/38/38/Y/M.html

US Military: “Guardians Of The Galaxy”!

INSANE! Thanks to George at theCONtrail  for the heads-up.

The only “Galaxy” these soldiers will be defending is the C17 in the pic! Talk about delusions of grandeur!

OpEdNews Op Eds 7/8/2017 at 05:09:58
Major Mistake Found in Congressional Creation of Space Army
By  https://www.opednews.com/author/author9.html

 

Peterson Air Force Base”
Even CNN struggles to stay solemn, neither laughing nor vomiting, at news of Congress creating a new branch of the U.S. military to fight wars in space.
Of course, one purpose of militarizing space, which other nations have long supported banning by treaty, has for the United States long been to facilitate more unstoppable attacks on various corners of the little planet earth.
But another stated purpose of this legislation is to “guard the galaxy.” Here’s where a massive miscalculation has been found in the plan.
The U.S. Department of Defense has long since learned that by imposing itself on some corner of the globe it quickly generates something to “defend” against. Bomb a capital, overthrow a government, occupy cities, kick in doors, and before long, lo and behold, there’s an enemy threatening to “aggressively” attack U.S. occupying forces, which are then compelled to “defend” themselves.
But the Pentagon is apparently so self-centered that it commits a Nakba Error in its understanding of this process of defensive aggression. That is to say, it believes its actions are all reactions to the blowback it creates, and it simply overlooks the requirement for any such blowback to be produced that there be people inhabiting the territory assaulted.
The space cowboys who won the West imagined there were no Native Americans, but simultaneously could not have “won” had there not been someone there to lose.
So off traipses the new U.S. Space Corps to defend the galaxy, completely unperturbed by the fact that no known life forms inhabit any of it outside the earth. The assumption in the halls of Congress appears to be that even in outerspace if you aggressively start “defending” the hell out of planets and stars, aggressive aliens will retroactively materialize and be cited in a UN resolution.
Assuming that no enemies are generated by the Space Corpse, if only because there are no life forms to be found, this new branch of the U.S. military will have an enormous point in its favor over various other branches, which are constantly generating hostility and terrorism everywhere they go.
The question for activists on terra firma will then be: Do we try to shift funding from the Marines or Air Force to the Space Corps, as a strategic possible win, or do we stick with the principled stand of trying to move money away from all such insanity and into such down to earth programs as sustainable energy, education, and housing that comes with air and gravity?

WATCH: Oliver Stone Takes Over Awards, Exposes Warmongering 2-Party Paradigm

 

 

https://www.blacklistednews.com/WATCH%3A_Oliver_Stone_Takes_Over_Awards%2C_Exposes_Warmongering_2-Party_Paradigm/59460/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Source: Matt Agorist

 

Last week, the Ron Paul Liberty Report interviewed the legendary filmmaker, Oliver Stone. After the interview, the report drew attention to a powerful speech by Stone, given at this year’s Writers Guild Awards. The speech was conveniently overlooked by the mainstream media as it shatters the divisive two-party paradigm and exposes the ‘system’ for the warmongering, rights-violating behemoth that it is.
Stone is an American screenwriter, film director, and producer. Stone won an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay as the writer of Midnight Express. He also wrote the acclaimed gangster movie Scarface. Stone, unlike many of the puppets in Hollywood, has used his fame to shed light on and expose the powers that be.
During his time at the podium at the awards, Stone reminded the young writers that it is okay to question both parties. Stone noted the importance of not buying into the divisive tactics of the establishment.
“You don’t have to fit in,” Stone said before showing how it is  “fashionable now to take shots at Republicans and Trump, and avoid the Obamas and Clintons.”
“But remember this,” Stone said. “In the 13 wars we’ve started over the last 30 years and the 14 billion dollars we’ve spent, and the hundreds of thousands of lives that have perished from this Earth, remember that it wasn’t one leader, but a system, both Republican and Democrat.”
“Call it what you will, the military, industrial, security, money, media complex. It’s a system that has been perpetuated under the guise that these are just wars justifiable in the name of our flag we fly so proudly over our lives,” Stone said.
Hearing these words come from such a prominent figure in Hollywood as well as the rest of the world is heartening, to say the least.
“Our country has become prosperous for many. But in the name of that wealth we cannot justify our system as a center for the world’s values, while we continue to create such wars and chaos in the world.”
“No need to go through the victims,” he said, “but we know we’ve intervened in more than 100 countries, with invasions, regime change, economic chaos, or hybrid war – soft power – whatever you wanna call it, it’s war of some kind,” Stone told the audience.
He concluded with advice based on his own experiences. “I’ve fought these people who practice war for most of my life. It’s a tiring game. And mostly you’ll get your ass kicked. With all the criticism and insults you’ll receive, and the flattery too, it’s important to remember, if you believe in what you’re saying and you can stay the course, you can make a difference,” he said.
“I urge you to find a way to remain alone with yourself, listen to your silences, not always in a writer’s room. Try to find not what the crowd wants so you can be successful, but try instead to find the true inner meaning of your life here on earth, and never give up on your heart in your struggle for peace, decency, and telling the truth.”

Below is the interview Stone did with Ron Paul, explaining his latest work, “The Putin Interviews,” a four-hour look into what makes Russian president Vladimir Putin tick.

Watch the Showtime documentary Oliver Stone: The Putin Interviews Here!

https://uncensored.co.nz/2017/06/26/oliver-stone-the-putin-interviews/