Tag Archive | colonialism

Windows 10 Settings Still Raise Concerns: E.U. Privacy Watchdogs*

Windows 10 Settings Still Raise Concerns: E.U. Privacy Watchdogs*

The group asked for more explanation of Microsoft’s processing of personal data for various purposes, including advertising.

European Union data protection watchdogs said Monday they were still concerned about the privacy settings of Microsoft’s Windows 10 operating system despite the U.S. company announcing changes to the installation process.

The watchdogs, a group made up of the E.U.’s 28 authorities responsible for enforcing data protection law, wrote to Microsoft last year expressing concerns about the default installation settings of Windows 10 and users’ apparent lack of control over the company’s processing of their data.

The group — referred to as the Article 29 Working Party — asked for more explanation of Microsoft’s processing of personal data for various purposes, including advertising.

“In light of the above, which are separate to the results of ongoing inquiries at a national level, even considering the proposed changes to Windows 10, the Working Party remains concerned about the level of protection of users’ personal data,” the group said in a statement which also acknowledged Microsoft’s willingness to cooperate.

Microsoft was not immediately available for comment.

A number of national authorities have already begun inquiries into Windows 10, including France which in July ordered Microsoft to stop collecting excessive user data.

The E.U. privacy group said that despite a new installation screen presenting users with five options to limit or switch off Microsoft’s processing of their data, it was not clear to what extent users would be informed about the specific data being collected.

Microsoft uses data collected through Windows 10 for different purposes, including advertising, the group said in its statement said.

“Microsoft should clearly explain what kinds of personal data are processed for what purposes. Without such information, consent cannot be informed, and therefore, not valid,” the group added.

Source*

Related Topics:

Microsoft Taking Vengeance on Windows 7 Users*

Microsoft Shifts Spyware Windows 10 to ‘Recommended Update, Automatic Download*

Microsoft Adding Windows 10 Spyware to Windows 7 and 8*

Senior Russian Lawmaker Seeks Ban on Windows 10 in State Agencies*

Windows 8 – Links to NSA*

U.S. Keeps Stealing Iraq’s Oil*

U.S. Keeps Stealing Iraq’s Oil*

Despite remarks by Defense Secretary James Mattis, U.S. presence in Iraq is aimed at “stealing oil,” an analyst says.

Gordon Duff, senior editor at Veterans Today, made the statement while commenting on Monday remarks by Mattis ahead of an unannounced visit to the war-ravaged country.

In an apparent attempt to distance himself from recent remarks by President Donald Trump regarding Iraq and its oil, the Pentagon chief, who was en route to Iraq, asserted that Americans are “not in Iraq to seize” oil.

In the course of one year after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the U.S. “stole 40% of Iraq’s oil that was sent out thought the Kirkuk pipeline to the Mediterranean port, south of Seyhan, Turkey,” Duff told Press TV.

“And it was loaded on the tankers owned by, well oddly enough, mostly Exxon corporation.”

The former ExxonMobil CEO, Rex Tillerson, currently serves as Trump’s state department secretary.

“Those tankers would be loaded, supertankers one after another, with Iraqi oil that was never paid for and then again we have the issue of ISIS (Daesh) and their 12,000 trucks that the U.S. never saw.”

Photo taken on October 19, 2016 shows a man taking a selfie in front of a fire from oil that has been set ablaze south of Mosul

 

“The oil trade is still going on,” asserted the Ohio-based commentator. “That oil [is] being shipped into Turkey, where it’s processed for the Turkey market or it’s put in the same Seyhan pipeline.”

The stolen oil is also being sold at a “highly discounted price” to ExxonMobil, “and that would be Rex Tillerson.”

Duff noted that Mattis himself “knows all about this.”

There remains the question, he asked, “why does he [Mattis] say this?”

“We are not there in Iraq to steal oil? Or we’re not there to steal oil anymore? Or perhaps we are there to stop stealing oil because the U.S. is still stealing oil from Iraq?”

In March 2003, the U.S. and Britain invaded Iraq in blatant violation of international law, over Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction,” but no such weapons were ever discovered in the country.

Commenting on Iraq in a speech to CIA staff on January 21, Trump said, “We should have kept the oil. But okay. Maybe you’ll have another chance.”

Later he clarified his saying, by stating that the U.S, “should have taken the oil. You wouldn’t have ISIS (Daesh) if we took the oil.”

Iran, Iraq seal deal to export Kirkuk oil

Iran and Iraq have signed a basic agreement that envisages exporting Iraqi oil through the Iranian territory – a scheme that would remove Baghdad’s reliance on the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to export its oil through a pipeline to Turkey.

The agreement was signed during a meeting between Iraq’s Oil Minister Jabar al-Luaibi and his visiting Iranian counterpart Bijan Zanganeh.

Both sides also agreed to commission an international consulting company to conduct a feasibility study over the project, Iran’s Shana news agency reported.

This came against the backdrop of a long-standing dispute between Baghdad and the KRG over a scheme to pipe Iraq’s oil from Kirkuk to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

The flow of the pipeline was interrupted for several months last year as the Iraqi government disagreed with the Kurds on their share in the national oil revenue and budget, Reuters wrote in a report on Iran-Iraq agreement.

Last August, a top Iraqi official was quoted by media as saying that Baghdad was considering shipping its crude oil through Iran.

This was raised after indications grew that Iraq and the KRG were unable to resolve disputes over a demand by the Kurds for a bigger share of the oil proceeds.

“If the negotiations [between Iraq and the KRG] come to a close without an agreement, we will start to find a way in order to sell our oil because we need money, either to Iran or other countries,” Reuters quoted Iraq’s Deputy Oil Minister Fayadh al-Nema as saying in a report last August.

Under the scenario, the Iraqi government would be shipping about 150,000 barrels per day of oil through Iran from fields in Kirkuk, the report added.

Source*

Related Topics:

U.S. Changes its Mind on Seizing Kurdish Iraqi Crude Oil*

Oil Drives U.S. and U.K. Airstrikes in Iraq*

U.S. is Buying Disputed Iraqi Kurdish Crude Oil*

U.S. Admits Using Radioactive Weapons in Syria that Left Thousands of Iraqi Babies Deformed*

The Treasure at the Heart of Iraq

Iraqi Engineering Students Share their Graduation Ceremony with Iraq’s Orphans*

A Case against Microwave Technology*

A Case against Microwave Technology*

By Catherine Frompovich

Science is the hallmark of everything—supposedly, except when it’s out to lunch in its hypotheses or when it is downright fraudulent, as is the case with vaccinology in order to protect vested Pharma interests.  Even the U.S. CDC and FDA cover Big Pharma’s derriere when it comes to chanting the mantra “vaccines are safe.”  So much science in the peer review realm is out there published stating totally opposite documented scientific facts, but still U.S. federal health agencies function on the ‘flat earth’ concept regarding human health safety!

Such obstinate scientific posture also prevails in the field of microwave technology regarding EMF/RF/ELF and the various rays emitted by microwaves and their intensities.  The only waves recognized by microwave industry giants and vested interests relative to human exposures are thermal (heat) waves, which were identified back in the 1940s and ‘50s when radar science was in its infancy.  We now live in 2017!  Microwave technology has progressed to the point where it wants 5GHz and above capabilities, but still emphasizes 1940s’ safety principles!  What’s not making sense?

What’s not making sense is this:  IF the microwave industry were to admit what’s been scientifically proven since the 1930s, i.e., non-thermal radiation adverse waves affect human biology (bio-electromagnetics), then their emission regulations for every ‘smart’ gadget invention would have to be revised and corrected to the point where they could not implement safety standards because it would be too costly to implement.  Consequently, the industry and its mouthpieces—industrial professional societies, e.g., IEEE, ICNIPR, etc., keep pushing smart gadgets as ‘safe’ they know  consumers get addicted to, but do little to protect consumers from non-thermal radiation waves, since they adamantly refuse to acknowledge them, even when 32% percent of microwave industry studies found non-thermal adverse effects.

That sounds a little bit like what happens in the vaccine industry.  Big Pharma pushes out more vaccines—almost 300 new vaccines in the pipeline now—and persuades government agencies to mandate those vaccines by law while not protecting healthcare consumers from fraudulent science and technology, including totally neurotoxic ingredients in vaccines.

If non-thermal radiation wave adverse effects aren’t real or recognized, why, then, does the World Health Organization (WHO) designate them as “idiopathic environmental intolerance” or “IEI,” a medical diagnostic term, which physicians use?  IEI also encompasses “multiple chemical sensitivities” (MCS), another adverse health problem previously disavowed for many years until it became recognized as “sick building syndrome.”  Today there are “Sick Building Syndrome Contractors and Design Professionals”

An impressive percentage of the global population is affected by IEI or electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).  Here are some statistics:

  • 26% of the USA population (Caress & Steinemann, 2003)
  • 19% of the Swedish population (Johansson et al, 2005)
  • 27% of the Danish population (Berg et al, 2008)
  • 32% of the German population (Hausteiner et al, 2005)

More and more individuals are becoming electrosmog sensitive daily due to all the ‘smart’ appliances and gadgets humans have become addicted to.  The most sinister is Wi-Fi in schools and the work place.  Wi-Fi channels and frequencies begin around 2.4 GHz, which is overcrowded, so now they want access to 5 GHz and higher.  However, there’s something few folks realize: Wi-Fi and microwave ovens operate in the same GHz-wave lengths, so being in a Wi-Fi environment at work or school is comparable to leaving your operating microwave oven door open with exposure for hours on end.  Few people realize that’s a reality when exposed to Wi-Fi.

In 2014 an exceptional clinical study research paper titled “Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention” was published in Mediators of Inflammation, Volume 2014 [3] by seven international co-authors.  The following is taken from the Introduction of that paper:

The term electromagnetic hypersensitivity or electro-sensitivity (EHS) referred to a clinical condition characterized by a complex array of symptoms typically occurring following exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) even below recommended reference levels and is followed by remission through the complete isolation. The most frequently claimed trigger factors include video display units, radio, televisions, electrical installations, extremely low-frequency ranges of electromagnetic fields or radio-frequencies—including the so-called dirty electricity due to poor isolation of electric wires and telephonic lines, wireless devices, and wi-fi—fluorescent lamps and low-energy lights, appliances with motors, photocopiers, microwave transmitters, and high tension power lines . EHS is characterized by a broad range of nonspecific multiple-organ symptoms implying both acute and chronic inflammatory processes, involving mainly skin and nervous, respiratory, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and gastrointestinal systems, in most cases self-reported in absence of organic pathological signs except skin manifestations. [CJF emphasis]

[Notation should be made that AMI smart utility meters (electric, natural gas and water) are wireless devices and, therefore, are guilty on several fronts, i.e., including dirty electricity and ZigBee radio GHz waves.]

[….]

Clinical similarities and frequent comorbidity between EHS and the other medically unexplained multisystem conditions of environmental origin, like multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), fibromyalgia (FM), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), sick building syndrome, Persian Gulf War veteran syndrome, and amalgam disease, to which EHS is often associated, have induced many authors to hypothesize that these so-called idiopathic environmental intolerances (IEI), more extensively also defined as sensitivity-related illnesses (SRI), may share common genetic and/or metabolic molecular determinants connected with an impaired capability to detoxify xenobiotics

Children on the Autism Spectrum seem to be impacted more disproportionately than children who have no neurodevelopmental problems.

Interestingly, the Viewpoint in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published a timely piece, “The Emerging Market of Smartphone-Integrated Infant Physiologic Monitors” where on their webpage to purchase that published article it states:

In the past 2 years, a new class of infant physiologic monitors marketed to parents for use in the home has emerged. Smartphone applications (apps) integrated with sensors built into socks, onesies, buttons, leg bands, and diaper clips have the capability to display infants’ respirations, pulse rate, and blood oxygen saturation, and to generate alarms for apnea, tachycardia, bradycardia, and desaturation (Table). Despite the lack of publicly available evidence supporting the safety, accuracy, effectiveness, or role of these monitors in the care of well infants, sales of these products are brisk and the market is expanding. For example, the makers of a “smart sock” monitor (Owlet Baby Care) that claims to alert parents if their infant stops breathing recently reported sales of 40 000 units at $250 each.  [5]   [CJF emphasis]

Note sensors have transmitting devices of some type in them to send alarms, which are exposing infants to EMFs/RFs/ELFs depending upon the type of transmitter involved, possibly a ZigBee radio chip, which may transmit at GHz wave length.  It is my opinion, as someone who has researched EMFs, etc., you never want to wear wearable microwave technology, just like you should keep a “live” cell phone off your body.  Take live cell phones out of pants pockets, bras and off belts.  Do your research, please.

And yet, with all the above stated, the microwave industry refuses to make its technology safe!  But read the fine print on cell phone agreements!  Safety guidelines are infinitely outdated and inadequate.  Basically, we’re living in a sea of microwaves and being slow cooked—literally, body organs, especially the human brain.

A more recent development in microwave technology is “flying cell towers.”  AT&T tested that idea and “it could change everything” – I bet!  How about this: Consider the legal culpabilities, plus financial liabilities, for assault and battery offenses filed against operators for perpetrating experiments on humans.

The only way I think the microwave industry wakens up to making safe its business operations and products will happen is when consumers refuse to buy into the addiction of being obsessed and ‘owned’ by electromagnetic technology ‘smart’ gadgets and devices.  Until then, consumers really don’t understand the huge trade off health-wise they find themselves in, as current safety standards are totally inadequate and irresponsible, in my and other researchers’ findings and opinions.

As I stated in the Brief I filed with the PA PUC Administrative Law Court January 25, 2017,

In the BioInitiative 2012 Report,[1] a 1557-page report, which is impossible to include in this Brief, about 1800 new studies regarding low-intensity electromagnetic fields and wireless technology (radiofrequency radiation including microwave radiation) were discussed.  In the Preface to that report, it states:

The great strength of the BioInitiative Report (www.bioinitiative.org) is that it has been done independent of governments, existing bodies and industry professional societies that have clung to old standards. Precisely because of this, the BioInitiative Report presents a solid scientific and public health policy assessment that is evidence-based.

Non-thermal waves adverse effects are something no one in the microwave industrial professional societies, ICNIRP in particular, wants to hear, or even acknowledges, exist!  Industrial societies program the U.S. Federal Communications Commission ‘safety’ standards, though.

The FCC does not have the expertise or the capabilities to determine the safety of electromagnetic fields.  FCC stated “Because the Commission does not claim expertise as a de facto health agency, it necessarily considers the views of federal health and safety agencies and institutes that continue to address RF exposure issues in formulating such judgments” in the Federal Register Vol. 78, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 4, 2013 / Proposed Rules[3].  Basically, the FCC takes no responsibility for the science.   Frompovich Brief Jan. 25, 2017, Pg. 39

Source*

Related Topics:

Electro-Smog and the Shift of Ages

WiFi — an Invisible Threat to all Life*

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity from Microwave Technology Finally Medically Proven*

What You Should Know About Microwaves*

Children’s Exposure Guidelines to EMF Radiofrequencies Updated by ANSES*

Schoolgirl Found Hanged after Developing Allergic Reaction to School Wi-Fi*

Tests Prove Li-Fi 100 Times Faster and More Secure than Wi-Fi*

Canada Parliament Committee Calls for “Protection of Vulnerable Groups” from Wi-fi*

How Wi-Fi Will Be Used to Erase Civil Liberties*

Parents Sue School over Son’s ‘Wi-Fi Allergy’*

Conscientious Scientists Make an Int’l Appeal on the Wide-scale Problem of Wi-fi*

Wi-fi Affects the Memory*

The Counter-Productive Health Risks of Wi-Fi in Schools*

Son Died from Wi-Fi Induced Brain Cancer Parents Say*

Principal of Australian Girls School Resigns Over Wi-Fi*

Walking into a Wi-Fi Field 2*

Students and Parents Rebel Against RFIDs

 

Two Police Officers Turned in Badges in Support of Standing Rock Water Protectors*

Two Police Officers Turned in Badges in Support of Standing Rock Water Protectors*

By Lance Schuttler

It was reported by Redhawk at Standing Rock in North Dakota that two police officers have turned in their badges in support of the water protectors.

“There have been at least 2 reports of police officers turning in their badges acknowledging that this battle is not what they signed up for. You can see it in some of them, that they do not support the police actions. We must keep reminding them they are welcome to put down their weapons and badge and take a stand against this pipeline as well. Some are waking up.”- Redhawk

Hearts are opening...

Hearts are opening…

Hearts are opening

With actions from militarized police continuing to be seen as extremely violent and dangerous, this news is a big win for the water protectors and for humanity as a whole. While the actions of some police officers are not appropriate, we all must continue to visualize and intend/pray that the hearts of all involved in this situation continue to open. Police must be held accountable for their actions, though we must continue to welcome them over to the side of the water protectors.

Having the police lay down their weapons and join the people is the goal. It is also a win-win solution, which is the best case scenario. So what is it that opened the hearts of these two officers?

At the time of this writing, the answer is not known but we can speculate on a few different items.

  • Word is spreading quickly that there are 17 multi-national banks funding this pipeline and that the propaganda being spread about this deal “creating American jobs” or “helping America’s economy” is being seen as just that, propaganda. The American people, as well as people of the world, know that the big banks and U.S. Government does not care for the people, but only themselves. These banks and the government showed their hand in 2008 when they were bailed out after the stock market crash, leaving the public to bear the economic and social burdens. Even the police are becoming aware of this fact that the government and banks do not care for them and see the police only as pawns in a bigger game the government wishes to control.
  • Water is life is not just a meaningless slogan in many people’s minds. It is becoming understood by more and more that water IS indeed life. If water becomes toxic, all life that depends on that water becomes toxic…including the families of these same police officers who are currently protecting the construction sites. They too would be affected by toxic water.
  • It is innately traumatizing for humans to hurt other humans. While we have been seeing this for some time now with this situation, police officers are realizing the harm they do when they assault an unarmed, peaceful water protector. In essence, peace is wanting and needing to be established.

Take a look at what happened in Frankfurt, Germany in May of 2012. The police removed their helmets and began marching with the people who were protesting the big banks, while also safely escorting them down the streets.

Let us all use this latest news as a big step forward towards peace and resolution of this pipeline issue. The pipeline construction needs to and must stop. With the announcement from Barack Obama yesterday that the White House is considering “re-routing” the pipeline, we must continue to demand that it’s construction cease entirely. We can also view that statement as a buckling of the Establishment. Continue on, water protectors. Truth and love is spreading.

Source*

Related Topics:

Standing Rock Protestors Use Mirrors to Inspire Humility among Police Officers*

Mirrors Brought to Protests to Force Police to Look at What They’ve Become*

German Police Officers Take Off Helmets & Marched With German Citizens Against Rothschild European Central Bank!

Wisconsin Police Join the Mass Protest

Islamophobes Found Themselves Surrounded in a Sea of Diversity*

What They Don’t Want You to Know About the E.U.-Canada Trade Deal*

What They Don’t Want You to Know About the E.U.-Canada Trade Deal*

By Amy Hall

Canadian Tar Sands: CETA may force the EU to accept this dirty fossil fuel. Image: Greenpeace

Canadian Tar Sands: CETA may force the EU to accept this dirty fossil fuel. Image: Greenpeace

Canadian Tar Sands: CETA may force the EU to accept this dirty fossil fuel. Image: Greenpeace.

Meet the corporate sell off trade deal that Dr. Liam Fox snuck through a back-room of parliament as the Commons debated Brexit.

It is one of a ‘new generation‘ of trade deals agreed in secretive negotiations around the world. It has been described as the ‘ugly brother‘ of TTIP, the E.U-U.S trade deal, and the ‘most ambitious’ trade agreement that the E.U. has concluded.

The E.U/Canada trade deal threatens to put corporate interests over many things that we in Britain take for granted. The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement – to give it its official name – risks our food standards, undermines our rights at work, and fails to adequately protect the environment or bolster efforts to stop runaway climate change.

While civil society has largely been left out of negotiations, it seems that corporate lobbyists have been closer to the action.

If the European parliament votes CETA through (voted through 15th Feb), much of the deal can be provisionally implemented without the agreement of member states. While Britain remains part of the E.U., we will be bound by this. If our parliament ratifies CETA before we leave the E.U. we will be bound by the whole thing.

Brexit or not Britain faces CETA, or something that resembles it uncannily. Determined to prove that leaving the European Union does not mean that the UK’s free trade hopes are dashed, the way the government has dealt with the CETA process could be an indicator of how trade and investment policy works post-Brexit – and it isn’t looking good.

CETA is being seen as something to emulate in future free trade agreements, including with the European Union and Canada.

“We can pick up the almost complete agreement between the E.U. and Canada, and if anything liberalise it,” wrote David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union on the for Conservative Home.

For now though, the government is not giving up on CETA. Secretary of State for International Trade, Liam Fox, who is no stranger to the world of corporate lobbying, had committed to debating CETA on the main floor of the House of Commons. But he managed to bury this long awaited session to a House of Commons committee room on Monday 6 February: the same time as the Brexit Bill vote.

Fox, who has long made clear he feels the U.K. should have fewer trade ties with Europe and more with North America has been accused of “disregard for proper scrutiny of parliament” over CETA.

It’s not surprising the trade minister was so keen to sneak this deal past MPs. CETA challenges our already flawed democratic system by handing over more power to multinational corporations through the Investment Court System. This has replaced the notorious Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism in E.U. investment negotiations, and can force governments to compensate corporations over public interest policies that threaten their profits, bypassing national legal systems and courts, and hugely undermining the ability of MPs to legislate on vital matters of public interest.

It’s these corporate courts which have been one of the things most rattling people about trade deals like CETA. A European Commission consultation on investment protection and TTIP in 2014, which had nearly 150,000 replies, found ‘wide-spread opposition’ to ISDS.

U.N. Independent Expert Alfred de Zayas has described ICS as “a zombie of ISDS” and argued that ICS and ISDS should be abolished.

“It is States, particularly developing States, and their populations that need protection from predatory investors, speculators and transnational corporations, who do not hesitate to engage in frivolous and vexatious litigation, which are extremely expensive and have resulted in awards in the billions of dollars and millions in legal costs,” he said in a U.N. press release.

CETA will increase the number of companies able to sue the E.U. and its member states. Research by Gus Van Harten of York University and lawyer Pavel Malysheuski published in 2016 found that the beneficiaries of ISDS have “overwhelmingly been companies with more than USD1 billion in annual revenue – especially extra-large companies with more than USD10 billion – and individuals with more than USD100 million in net wealth.”

As well as threats to democracy, food safety, public services and workers’ rights, CETA is a massive danger to environmental protection. The European Commission argues that the agreement contains ‘strong rules‘ to protect the environment, but environmental experts who have seen it argue that it can’t be enforced adequately if they are violated and the language is weak.

One of the major threats comes from industries like mining and fossil fuel extraction. As highlighted by a group of NGOs earlier this year,

“The extractive industry is prolific in launching arbitration lawsuits. Over 50% of global mining companies are based in Canada.”

Canadian companies already have form. For example, in 2016 Canadian energy company TransCanada launched a US$15-billion lawsuit against the U.S. government under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) because of the pre-Trump decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline.

CETA could also increase imports into Europe of oil from Canada’s destructive tar sands. As well as a devastating impact on the climate through emissions and deforestation, these are also causing destruction in and risk the health of First Nations communities, including poisoning their water supplies and destroying sacred territories.

It was hoped that the E.U.’s Fuel Quality Directive could have stopped tar sands oil coming into Britain because of its much higher emissions, compared to conventional oil.

But lobbying from the Canadian government, supported by the likes of BP and Shell, contributed significantly to weakening the directive and leaving the possibilities for tar sands oil in Europe open.

Pressure from campaigners killed TPP and TTIP. Whatever happens with today’s vote on CETA, now is not the time to hold off the pressure. Although there can be provisional application of most of the deal if it passes, there does still need to be ratification in regional and national E.U. parliaments for it to take full effect.

In Britain there is important work to do when it comes to future trade deals negotiated with countries like the US and Canada, but also others around the world.

Mark Dearn, War on Want’s senior trade campaigner says that the movement is looking out for what comes next, including a potential US-UK trade deal post-Brexit. “Is the movement ready?… (I) very much so,” he says. “People have become very wise to the threat of trade deals off the back of TTIP and CETA so they’re very mindful of what comes next.”

As Dearn says, trade mechanisms, and the process of their negotiation, need to be transparent and accountable as we need to make sure things are done in the best interests of people, animals and the planet, and not just profit. We need to look at what it is that could be “negotiated away.”

There are many ways we can try and ‘take back control’ in post-Brexit Britain, including working from the grassroots to challenge neoliberal politics and the power of multinational corporations in the ways we work and live. There also needs to be more pressure on our politicians to stop them treating environmental protection, safety and public services as troublesome ‘red tape’ to be slashed away.

Source*

Related Topics:

European Parliament Demands Legal Scrutiny of CETA’s ‘Corporate Court’ System*

British Gov’t Silent on Secret E.U. Meetings with Lobbyists*

Eurocrats Making Record Number of Laws in Secret*

Growing Opposition Forces E.U. into a Humiliating Climb-down on CETA*

GMO Wheat Trials to Begin in Europe*

E.U. Bullies its Way through an Reciprocal Trade Access in Africa*

Indigenous Women Shut Down Tar Sands Pipeline Hearing*

BP, Trafigura and Vitol Export Dirty Oil to Africa to Kill People*

On the Rights of Nature*

U.S. Border Agents Are Now Searching Digital Devices: What Are Your Rights?

U.S. Border Agents Are Now Searching Digital Devices: What Are Your Rights?

U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents are searching the phones and other digital devices of international travellers at border checkpoints in U.S. airports.

A man holds up his iPhone during a rally in support of data privacy outside the Apple store in San Francisco. (AP/Eric Risberg)

 

Watchdog groups that keep tabs on digital privacy rights are concerned that U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents are searching the phones and other digital devices of international travelers at border checkpoints in U.S. airports.

The issue gained attention recently after at least three travellers, including a Canadian journalist, spoke out publicly about their experiences.

The episodes have gained notice amid an outcry over President Donald Trump’s travel ban and complaints of mistreatment of foreign travellers, but the government insists there has been no policy change in the new administration.

The Border Patrol says searches increased fivefold in the final fiscal year of the Obama presidency, but still amounted to less than one-hundredth of 1% of all international arrivals.

Here are some things to know about the searches and your privacy rights.

What Has Prompted The Concern?

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation both say they have noticed an uptick in complaints about searches of digital devices by border agents.

The increase has become most noticeable in the last month, said Adam Schwartz, a senior staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

“We are concerned that a bad practice that has existed under past presidents has gotten worse in quantity under the new president,” Schwartz said.

The government says nothing has changed. Customs officials also say the perceived shift can be attributed to a jump in the number of electronic devices that people are carrying with them and shifting tactics as the agency adjusts to the amount and types of information that can be stored on today’s devices.

What Search Authority Does The Border Patrol Have?

Americans have protection under the Fourth Amendment from unreasonable search and seizure.

A police officer, for example, must obtain a warrant from a judge before searching a suspect’s phone.

But the U.S. border is a legal gray zone. Border agents have long had the right to search travelers’ physical luggage without a warrant, and that interpretation has been expanded to include digital devices, ACLU staff attorney Nathan Freed Wessler said.

In 2013, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that if agents want to do a forensic search they need to have a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing, he said. But the court stopped short of requiring agents to obtain a search warrant beforehand, he said.

And an agent can flip through a phone in a cursory search for any reason.

The law has not kept up with the “incredible volume of personal data that we have in our pockets now” — and that creates tremendous constitutional questions, said Wessler.

“In some ways, a search of your phone is more invasive than a search of your house,” he said.

A case currently headed to another appeals court could further clarify the law, said Schwartz.

What Does The Border Patrol Say?

Numbers provided by the Border Patrol show a fivefold increase in electronic media searches in the 2016 fiscal year ending on Sept. 30 over the previous fiscal year.

In 2016, under the Obama administration, there were 23,877 electronic media searches. That comes to .0061 percent of total arrivals into the U.S. In fiscal year 2015, there were 4,764 electronic media searches.

A senior CBP official briefed reporters on the issue Friday, but the agency insisted the official not be identified.

“We see it as an article that is brought into the U.S., no different than a booklet of materials, no different than a suitcase with items in it,” the official said.

“We’ve uncovered very serious and significant information in these types of searches, everything from national security concerns to child pornography to evidence of crimes to determinations of people’s admissibility status under the immigration laws.”

How Can You Protect Your Digital Privacy While Traveling?

Privacy advocates say travellers who are concerned should leave their phones and laptops at home and buy a cheap phone once they arrive at their destination.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is also advising its members to do the same.

Those who can’t leave their devices behind should encrypt them and close out of all social media applications so they aren’t accessible without a password, said Schwartz.

But those steps won’t matter much if a border agent asks a traveller to unlock the phone or provide a password, said Scwhartz.

And travelers should also be aware of the rules in other countries. Israel authorities can check mobile phones at the airport, for example.

What Happens If You Refuse?

The Border Patrol can’t bar a U.S. citizen from entry if they refuse to comply, but agents can make things difficult.

Travelers who don’t unlock their phones could be questioned, detained temporarily and have their phones taken by agents for days.

Travelers who are not U.S. citizens can be denied entry.

Hasaim Elsharkawi, a self-employed businessman from Anaheim, California, told the AP that he was stopped by agents in Los Angeles last week as he was boarding a plane to Saudi Arabia to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. They asked him to unlock his phone without telling him why.

Elsharkawi, a Muslim, said he refused because he didn’t want the male agents to see photos of his wife with her head uncovered.

When he asked for a lawyer, the agents detained him, handcuffed him and interrogated him for four hours before he agreed to unlock the device for a female agent, he said. He was then released and his phone was returned after the female Homeland Security officer checked his email, photos and eBay and Amazon accounts.

Elsharkawi, 34, was born in Saudi Arabia to Egyptian parents. He came to the U.S. in 2004 and became a U.S. citizen in 2012.

“I was already nervous before and after what has happened … I don’t know what to expect next,” he said.

Source*

Related Topics:

100 Mile Border Around the U.S.

LA Judge Issues Most Sweeping Order Yet against Trump Immigration Ban

Deportations Begin Under Trump’s Regime*

U.S.-born NASA Employee Detained at Airport, Forced to Hand over Phone and Pin Code*

 

GMO Wheat Trials to Begin in Europe*

GMO Wheat Trials to Begin in Europe*

By Paul Fassa

Due to the popularity of gluten-free food items, and the rise of digestive disorders related to wheat allergies, much of the public believes that our modern wheat supplies are grown from genetically modified seeds. But this is not the case. There are currently no approved genetically modified varieties of wheat in the market place.

That may soon be changing in Europe, however, as the Rothamsted Research group working in collaboration with researchers from the University of Essex and Lancaster University has reportedly received approval in the U.K. to begin trials of genetically modified wheat. (Source.)

Peter Melchett of the UK Soil Association that supports organic farming said:

We do not believe that this trial should go ahead. It is vital that the trial crop does not escape from the trial site given the inclusion of antibiotic resistance and herbicide tolerance genes, but that is exactly what has happened on multiple occasions with GM wheat trials elsewhere.

It has been proven that there is gene drift from pollen even from GMO test fields to existing non-GMO and organic field farms. There are also seed mix-ups that can occur within seed storage facilities. Organic and non-GMO farmers have shown evidence that it is impossible to maintain coexistence without contamination from GMO crops. (Source)

For example, Switzerland, international corporate home of Monsanto’s chief GMO rival Syngenta, will not allow open field GMO testing. So Syngenta uses the United States and other areas for their open field trials with empty lots and fields leased locally, and usually unknown to non-GMO farmers in the same area.

GMO Wheat Has a Negative Economic Impact on Wheat Exports out of the U.S.

An Oregon wheat farmer’s unexpected discovery of GMO contamination from what is believed to have been GMO wheat open field testing ten years earlier created a halt of wheat exports from the U.S. to several countries back in 2013, harming U.S. wheat exports that year. (Source.)

Asian and E.U. nations that have zero tolerance for GMO won’t allow GMO traces of grain imports due to their labeling laws, even if only suspected of genetically altered wheat and other grains or crops, which had led to refusing it instead of purchasing it.

In other words, GMO crops have an economic impact on non-GMO and organic crop exporters in the USA, yet GMO seed producers refuse to produce mapping of their testing fields and the federal government protects their secrecy. (Source)

This was a major flop at the time, resulting in lawsuits initiated by conventional and organic farmer groups against Monsanto for damages suffered by GMO grains discovered in their non-GMO exports of wheat that excluded them from exporting their crops. And since there is no commercially offered GMO wheat in the USA yet, these were from field tests only. (Source)

GMO Crops Worldwide: A Serious Health Impact

Despite the mainstream media’s refusal to seriously acknowledge the growing sentiment against GMO agriculture, many unbiased independent scientists attest that GMO agriculture threatens our health and the future of food itself.

It’s not only the dangers of genetic damage to animal and human life, but many GMO crops were created mostly for the purpose of withstanding toxic pesticides and herbicides that the GMO people create themselves. One such herbicide is the world’s top seller, Roundup.

Glyphosate is the active ingredient of Roundup, and as you may now know, it has been declared as a probable carcinogenic by a committee of international independent scientists commissioned by the WHO (World Health Organization).

More on glyphosate.

Is it Just the Gluten, or is There More to Gluten Sensitivity?

There is a growing suspicion that perhaps glyphosate is more responsible for the growing epidemic of gluten sensitivity than simply gluten. Rather than simply blaming gluten for digestive issues and gut inflammation completely and creating a whole new food industry of gluten free products, which can be unhealthy themselves, there is more evidence that the culprit for gut inflammation responses to wheat and grains is largely due to glyphosate and the gluten that’s common in harmfully processed breads and baked goods.

A major reason Monsanto created Roundup Ready GMO crops is to withstand their herbicides without being destroyed themselves. Genetically engineered crops are meant to absorb glyphosate completely in order to prevent Roundup herbicides from killing them while they suffocate weeds, that’s all part of the design.

So those who consume non-organic corn or soy products alone, which are 90 percent plus GMO and are ubiquitous in processed and snack foods, are taking in the bulk of glyphosate herbicide toxicity.

Add factory farming livestock that are used for non-organic milk and dairy and slaughtered for most meat products as glyphosate carriers. They are fed GMO soy and/or corn meal from crops that are filled with glyphosate.

Consider that French molecular biologist Gilles-Éric Seralini and other independent researchers have determined that other adjunct booster chemicals in glyphosate herbicides create an even more toxic synergy than the active ingredient of glyphosate alone. (Study text)

They were able to isolate those other ingredients with state of the art chemical analysis lab equipment. Those ingredients can be protected by so called “Trade Secrets Law.” Roundup’s other ingredients were never divulged to the EPA. So the EPA had allowed glyphosate herbicides claiming glyphosate was actually safe.

A class action suit has been initiated by cancer victims who dealt directly with applying Roundup; they claim glyphosate in that product caused their cancer. From this some evidence that an EPA top official suppressed EPA scientists from disclosing glyphosate dangers has emerged.

A letter from a deceased former EPA official whistleblower has created an attempt by plaintiff lawyers to get more documentation of her claims. Questions about EPA-Monsanto collusion raised in cancer lawsuits:

But wait, the topic is wheat. And wheat is not genetically modified to withstand Roundup or other glyphosate herbicides yet – right?

Commercially Grown Wheat and Other Grains are Desiccated with Roundup

To desiccate means to dry up or completely remove the moisture. A lot of grains, especially wheat and oats grown in the upper Midwestern and Northwest states as well as Canada are confronted with short harvesting times as winter sets in.

A few decades ago grain growers in Scotland discovered they could shorten harvest times by killing and drying the wheat before winter set in to possibly ruin the crop. They used Roundup for desiccating grain crops since so far there are no Roundup Ready GMO grain seeds and those crops do not resist Roundup’s glyphosate. This has become common in North America lately.

Use of Glyphosate Correlates with Rise in Gluten Sensitive Diseases

They say glyphosate binds to gluten in grains, and glyphosate is known to cause intestinal irritation, damage, and gut flora problems. This may be another link to the gluten source of intestinal issues, according to independent scientists.

Above is a timeline of Celiac incidence graphed against incidence of desiccating wheat with glyphosate herbicides. A similar graph exists with glyphosate herbicides and autism.

And now we have trace amounts of glyphosate appearing in organic grains. The amounts are small, but they shouldn’t be there at all. That’s what international importers of our grains declare, and they’re getting stricter about that.

It’s possible that irrigation streams and rainwater may be responsible for spreading elements of glyphosate. Another possibility is spraying from aircraft could be affecting organic farms near GMO areas. Organic barley has been the most affected. This even threatens our domestic organic beer industry. (Source)

Dr. Don Huber, Professor Emeritus, Plant Pathology of Purdue University, has been attacked by GMO industry hacks and academic researchers who depend on GMO industry funding for his critical view of GMOs and glyphosate’s affect on plant foods, the soil they inhabit, and the farm animals fed with GMO corn and soy meal.

Dr. Huber’s open letter appeal to investigate GMO farming further was sent to the USDA head at the time, Tom Vilsack. It was ignored. Then the attacks, even from Purdue University, began. Coincidence?

Dr. Huber told Dr. Joseph Mercola in an interview that while independent testing has confirmed the chronic toxicity of GMOs and Roundup, which the industry denies and decries, they have not provided proof of their long term safety. Dr. Huber stated:

When the EPA employed the term ‘substantially equivalent,’ it gave the chemical companies essentially a waiver on doing any of the safety tests. The only thing that they’ve ever tested for is acute toxicity. Well, we know that glyphosate, for instance, isn’t an acute toxin. It’s a serious chronic toxin. [Emphasis added] That’s been well-established in peer-reviewed scientific articles. We have more of those coming along all the time. There is no question that it’s a chronic toxin. (Source)

Dr. Stephanie Seneff and Dr. Anthony Samsel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have focused on glyphosate’s environmental, animal, and human damage extensively. They have examined several independent lab reports and done epidemiological studies, of which the above graph is one example, with similar graphs for autism rates.

They released a statement that corroborates Dr. Huber’s remarks of chronic toxicity leading to a toxic overload from daily food consumption of glyphosate treated crops, whether GMO or conventional farmers’ desiccating: (Source)

It’s just that you don’t get killed or die today from it; you have to suffer through the process of gluten intolerance, leaky gut, Crohn’s, Alzheimer’s, autism, or any of those diseases that are related to the health of your gut, which we’re seeing now on an epidemic scale in our society.

Activated charcoal is a possible remedy to detox from glyphosate in the body. Also, this short video is worth viewing for understanding how to employ niacin as part of the detox in lieu of saunas.

How the FDA and USDA Allowed Industry Demands to Ruin Bread and Pasta

Chemically bleaching flour is banned in Europe, where so far nutritional food has some value. There, white flour is created by letting the crushed grains age in the open air and sun for several days. No chemicals are used.

Elsewhere, including here in the USA, even many so-called whole grain breads have some chemically bleached white flour in them. Before it becomes flour, wheat and other non-organic factory farmed grains are treated with fungicides, pesticides, and insecticides from seedling to storage. A really bad start!

Wheat itself was agriculturally hybrid naturally to increase its gluten content, satisfying mass producing bakery demands for an easier, gummier, and more pliable dough to deal with for mass production.

Then the highly nutritious bran and the husk with fiber are removed leaving only the light yellow endosperm, which is virtually all starch with very little nutritional value and a high glycemic index rating.

In order to bypass the aging process, add shelf life, and get that clean white colour, the endosperm is crushed and treated with chlorides to get it white instantly. A byproduct of this process is alloxan, which is used to induce diabetes in lab animals for medical testing!

Never mind looking for that on bread labels. Alloxan is a byproduct of the bleaching process, not an ingredient. To avoid it, simply put any bread back on the shelf that includes white flour unless you’re in Europe or it specifically states unbleached white flour.

And now for the clincher. In order to make the flour dough even easier to use by large scale commercial bakeries, they bromate the flour by adding potassium bromate. In addition to blocking iodine that your thyroid needs to fully function as the control center for your endocrine (hormones) system, potassium bromate is carcinogenic.

Source*

Related Topics:

GM Wheat Trial in U.K. Proves a Failure*

South Korea and Japan Shuts Down U.S. Monsanto Toxic Wheat Imports!

GM Wheat Shutting Us Down!?*

Alarming Amount of Glyphosates in the Foods you Eat*

Glyphosate in your Bread*

Glyphosate has been a Known Carcinogen Since the 1970s*