Known as MasoniChip, the program is openly administered by the Grand Lodge and is operated with the support of governments in both the United States and Canada. Indeed, MasoniChip has received so much support from the government sector that many have been duped into believing that it is merely a government program being supported by the Masons even though the reality is actually the opposite.
MasoniChip promoters set up fairs, advertise the program through local school districts and enter into partnerships with local law enforcement. In typical form, the mainstream media also promotes the program and the organization, which apparently has possession of its own police dog, Mason.
For those who may be in the dark as to what MasoniChip is, Amy MacPherson of the Huffington Post describes the program is this manner:
It begins on the surface as a child identification project, in case your loved ones are ever to be horrendously abducted. Parents are familiar with at-home kits to record their kids’ vital information, for protection against the greatest of all fears to be inflicted on a family. Normally height, weight, hair and eye colour are recorded, along with a set of fingerprints and hopefully a current photograph. It’s just the good folks at your local Masonic Lodge saw fit to take things further.
With advances in technology, they began to offer digital fingerprints, digital imaging, digital video, dental impressions and DNA mouth swabs. This data processing is managed by their proprietary software that’s designed to be compatible with local and national law enforcement. This is after all, a campaign created by police in the brotherhood regardless of its private funding.
Posts Tagged ‘Surveillance Society’
By Christopher Ross Harrison, 2011-03-25
Where the debate over privacy rights is concerned, there exists a perpetual danger of being drawn into one of two extreme camps: One that would dismantle all security entirely, leaving us open to those very real threats that exist at home and abroad, and the other that would submerge our basic rights and freedoms beneath an Orwellian surveillance state, all in the name of our collective safety. Of course; freedom isn’t free, it just seems that way because we have been blessed to live in an oversaturated freedom market. On the other hand, although the price of freedom is still eternal vigilance, it seems there are those who would impose an artificial price hike; having us pay eternal vigilance, plus groping and manhandling fees, plus a whopping one hundred and fifty percent interest. These folks don’t necessarily hate freedom, they’d just prefer that you visit it in a museum under a glass cover.
If this sounds like a paranoid fantasy, let us reflect upon the following evidence for the recent and undue ascension of Big Brother in our Western Democracies.
Darlene Storm - March 3, 2011
Having previously looked at how biometric recognition is more than a fictional spy-thriller, we didn’t look at biometric technology used in the past which seems like something out of the future. These are some of those past biometrics, followed by a few new biometric recognition technologies being proposed for everything from securing your smartphone, replacing the ID in your wallet, and even required testing to prove paternity.
From WikiLeaks diplomat cables, we discovered that the State Department is more interested in collecting biometric data than was previously disclosed. A cable supposedly from Hillary Clinton told certain embassies in Africa to collect more biographical information like fingerprints, facial images, DNA, and iris scans for U.S. Intelligence. Besides asking for "detailed biometric information," the government asked for "e-mail listings; internet and intranet ‘handles’, internet e-mail addresses, web site identification-URLs; credit card account numbers; frequent flyer account numbers; work schedules, and other relevant biographical information." Other diplomatic cables asked other countries to pick up their spying effort by collecting biometric DNA identification as well as health, biographic, and assessment information on leaders.
Paul and Phillip Collins Discuss the Modern Pagan Revival on TCR Reports
Resurgence of paganism in our time. Last June when the authors of The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship were last here they spoke about the strange UFO cults abounding in our time and the history of government Black-Ops relative to the phenomenon. This time the discussion will center on the philosophical underpinnings of all this and other consequences of rejecting the Christian world view. [Listen here]
VFTB Live: Paul & Phillip Collins — The Virtual Panopticon
Authors of The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship discuss the influence and legacy of 18th century philosopher and architect Jeremy Bentham. Bentham’s invention of a new type of prison, in which inmates could be watched by jailers at any time and all the time — without their knowledge — has disturbing implications for the total surveillance society in which we find ourselves today. Plus the Bunker Intelligence Briefing and your calls. [Listen here]
By Giordano Bruno
Neithercorp Press - 01/18/2010
Governments, regardless of their political structure or historical background, have always striven to not only control information, but also to gather it from the people by covert means. Often, this secretive observation of the citizenry escalates into a completely open and full-fledged surveillance state. The U.S. in particular stands on a precarious edge: the line between abhorring invasion of privacy, and embracing invasion of privacy as necessary for the “greater good.” Many people assume that such a mindset is forced on the masses by the elite, that strength of arms is somehow required to make them accept the conditions of a police state, but this is not always so. It is very difficult for governments, despite any technological developments or resources they may have, to enforce and maintain a fascistic political construct. In order to retain control, they must build a “Surveillance Culture;” a society in which the people watch each other, and where individuals censor themselves instead of being censored by the authorities. In the end, a police state cannot exist without the help of the people it means to dominate. By spying on each other, we destroy ourselves.
But how does a nation reach such a point in its collective psyche? How are we driven to passive enslavement? In this article we will examine the methods used by governments and aristocratic minorities to manipulate the majority towards self imprisonment, as well as examples of how this process is burgeoning in the U.S. at this very moment…
Communist China: The Future Of America?
Many of us conjure images of Hitler’s Germany and hordes of Nazi stormtroopers when considering the idea of a police state, and this extreme example often blinds us to the tyranny slowly building in our own country.
Christopher Soghoian - Dec. 1, 2009
Sprint Nextel provided law enforcement agencies with its customers’ (GPS) location information over 8 million times between September 2008 and October 2009. This massive disclosure of sensitive customer information was made possible due to the roll-out by Sprint of a new, special web portal for law enforcement officers.
The evidence documenting this surveillance program comes in the form of an audio recording of Sprint’s Manager of Electronic Surveillance, who described it during a panel discussion at a wiretapping and interception industry conference, held in Washington DC in October of 2009.
It is unclear if Federal law enforcement agencies’ extensive collection of geolocation data should have been disclosed to Congress pursuant to a 1999 law that requires the publication of certain surveillance statistics — since the Department of Justice simply ignores the law, and has not provided the legally mandated reports to Congress since 2004.
Recognition techniques based on facial features, known as facial biometrics, is usually based on the search for those traits which make one face different from another. The research carried out by this team, in contrast, approaches the issue from a slightly different point of view. “The difference between our work and the majority of the others that are found in this field is the idea of individualized models.”, explains one of the study’s authors, mathematician David Delgado Gomez from the UC3M Statistics Department. “Our objective”, he continued, “is to create a model for each person which highlights the most distinguishing features of each face, as a sort of facial “DNI”.
The researchers had this idea when they were imagining the situation of a crowded room where someone comes in asking for one of them. “Our way to describe a person is through some traits that the others don’t have, such as the tall woman with blue eyes, or the bald guy with a beard. We try to apply this idea to our algorithm.”, remarked Professor Delgado, who has been carrying out this research with Federico Sukno, Kaushik Pavani and Alejandro Frangi from the CISTIB Group of Universidad Pompeu Fabra of Barcelona, and Bjarne Ersboll and Jens Fagertun from the mathematical modelling group of Technical University of Denmark, which has recently published an article entitled “Similarity-based Fisherfaces”, with some of their research results appearing in the scientific journal Pattern Recognition Letters.
Mark Lerner - 25 September 2009
The Big Question - should government control the people or should the people control government?
Orwell’s prediction of a future big brother government came true. Whether acknowledged or not, Americans now live in a surveillance society.
Most of that American public falls into one of the categories the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) calls “potential threats;” environmentalists, animal lovers, anti-war protestors, pro-lifers, evangelical Christians, observant Jews, Constitutionalists, returning veterans, and third party candidate supporters are all “potential domestic terrorists.”
Just how far is the American public willing to let the government go in order to assure public safety? Do the people want the police on every block, all emails read by the government, phone calls overheard, or every financial transaction monitored? Do the people want sensors placed in cities that detect how much an individual perspires, in order to assess and monitor supposed guilt?
How about computer software programs that decide whether or not the way people walk or dress presents a threat to the government? In Britain citizens are captured on surveillance cameras an average of 300 times a day; does the American public want to be subjected to this level of scrutiny?
The European Union is spending millions of pounds developing “Orwellian” technologies designed to scour the internet and CCTV images for “abnormal behaviour”.
Ian Johnston - 19 Sep 2009
A five-year research programme, called Project Indect, aims to develop computer programmes which act as “agents” to monitor and process information from web sites, discussion forums, file servers, peer-to-peer networks and even individual computers.
Its main objectives include the “automatic detection of threats and abnormal behaviour or violence”.
Project Indect, which received nearly £10 million in funding from the European Union, involves the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and computer scientists at York University, in addition to colleagues in nine other European countries.
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of human rights group Liberty, described the introduction of such mass surveillance techniques as a “sinister step” for any country, adding that it was “positively chilling” on a European scale.
Surveillance is a gradual and incessant creep, the House of Lords warns. Unchecked, we march towards a mark where every detail about an individual is recorded and pored over by both the state and private sectors.
By then, though, it will be no use asking who is watching us – because everyone will be.
THE all-seeing eye was once seen as a divine force, surrounded by dazzling rays of light from on high. Its eyelid heavy but gaze unwavering, the eye was the protective stare of a supreme being watching over us from above.
Now, though, it simply watches, often from the shadows. Peering down from security cameras as we walk the city streets, buy bread at the corner store, fill the car with petrol, or catch a taxi or tram. Tracking us through our mobile phone or when driving through a tollway to Melbourne Airport, which last year trialled “virtual strip search” security scanners. Someone’s watching while we’re surfing online, sending an email, or updating our Facebook profile to paranoid. Melbourne once held pretensions of being the city that never sleeps. Now, at least, it is the city that never shuts its eyes.
Joseph Cannon - June 20, 2009
After I wrote this diatribe against social networking tools, I decided to put matters to the test. More at less at random, I picked out the MySpace page of a young woman I’ve never met, who lives in another state. The goal: Find out everything I could about her, using the info on that page plus Google and some elementary-my-dear-Watson deduction. Every technique I used was quite legal.
Within about half an hour, I had this girl’s entire life. I had her real name, her many photos, her place of work, her life history, her parents, her family, her home address, a picture of her front porch (by way of Google Maps Street View), her favorite drink, her schooling, her religious views, her tastes in the arts, her ambitions, her complete itinerary for that day — and of course (since all of America’s daughters nowadays feel compelled to present like mandrills), her measurements, kinks and fellatio depth. But I didn’t get her telephone number, so don’t ask for it.
For half a century, people have fretted about governmental theft of our privacy. That may no longer be a worry. Why should Uncle Sam steal something we’re willing to give away?
by James Bamford
The National Security Agency (NSA) is developing a tool that George Orwell’s Thought Police might have found useful: an artificial intelligence system designed to gain insight into what people are thinking.
With the entire Internet and thousands of databases for a brain, the device will be able to respond almost instantaneously to complex questions posed by intelligence analysts. As more and more data is collected—through phone calls, credit card receipts, social networks like Facebook and MySpace, GPS tracks, cell phone geolocation, Internet searches, Amazon book purchases, even E-Z Pass toll records—it may one day be possible to know not just where people are and what they are doing, but what and how they think.
The system is so potentially intrusive that at least one researcher has quit, citing concerns over the dangers in placing such a powerful weapon in the hands of a top-secret agency with little accountability.
Kurt Nimmo - January 22, 2009
On January 21, former National Security Agency analyst Russell Tice appeared Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC show. Tice, who helped expose the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping in December 2005, told Olbermann government programs designed to spy on the American people are more extensive and far reaching than previously admitted. “The National Security Agency had access to all Americans’ communications — faxes, phone calls, and their computer communications,” Tice said. “It didn’t matter whether you were in Kansas, in the middle of the country, and you never made foreign communications at all. They monitored all communications.”
During the Bush administration, it was claimed the intercepts involved foreign communications and the intelligence gathered was integral to the conduct of the so-called global war on terrorism. In order to get around the warrant requirements of FISA, a bill authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those supposedly responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001, was passed (Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists). The authorization granted Bush the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or those who harbored said persons or groups. AUMF allowed the Bush administration to avoid FISA and Wiretap Act restrictions.
But according to Tice, the NSA program was not limited to alleged al-Qaeda members, as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales claimed at the time, but included “news organizations and reporters and journalists” in the United States. The data “was digitized and put on databases somewhere.” It was not simply journalists, however, the NSA spied on and likely continues to spy now.
Julie Sell - December 16, 2008
VANVES, France — Despite the fact that fascism and repressive state security services dominated Europe — East and West — at different points in the 20th century, a new culture of surveillance is spreading, slowly, across the region again, using tools that the Nazis and the KGB never had.
The U.S. and Britain stepped up their internal surveillance networks after suffering some of the West’s deadliest terrorist attacks in the past decade, but now other European governments are embracing some of the same tools and techniques. The pace of adoption is slower on the Continent than it’s been in Britain because of public concerns about liberty and personal privacy.
Take Vanves, a community of 30,000 with ancient roots that has gradually adopted 21st century security measures. The middle-class suburb that adjoins the southern border of Paris was the headquarters for a Wehrmacht motorized division during the Nazi occupation in World War II.