By MassPrivateI

Earlier this year, I warned people that the city of San Diego had been turned into a massive Chinese-Style public surveillance network, complete with facial recognition, spying streetlights, license plate readers and a police-run public watchlisting network.

But what I failed to mention is who is really behind it.

A disturbing news release from the City of San Diego, revealed that the U.S. military is actually helping transform San Diego into a Chinese-Style Smart City.

The City of San Diego, Mayor Kevin L. Faulconer and Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Vincent A. Coglianese signed a Memorandum of Understanding to work together on “Smart City” technologies such as unmanned aircraft systems, spying smart streetlights and the city’s’ “Get It Done” app.

This disturbing partnership is actually referred to as the Marine Corps Installation Command or MCIC not an MOU.

Why does the U.S. military wants to turn the entire city of San Diego into an enormous surveillance city?  Because they have two installations within the city’s boundary: the Marine Corps Air Station and the Marine Corps Recruit Depot.

According to NBC 7, the Marine Corps is very proud of turning San Diego into a spying smart city.

“We’re proud of supporting the community because we are the community,” added General Coglianese. “We’re a part of San Diego.”

Marine Corps Agreement With San Diego Smart City

Closeup of spying smart streetlights (approx 1:15)

When our military starts claiming they are part of the community and they have our best interests at heart, everyone should shudder.

The U.S. military has a long and checkered history of ignoring the public and doing whatever it wants, as The Atlantic warned,

“My concern is this growing disconnect between the American people and our military,” retired Admiral Mike Mullen said.

According to the MCIC, the Marine Corps plan for “supporting the community” is to work with law enforcement and corporations to help develop and produce surveillance drones and spying streelights.

The Marine Corps also plans to conduct monthly conference calls with city officials (law enforcement) to address issues and action plans regarding “protection/security, mobility and public works.”

Two years ago, when I warned everyone that the CIA and Homeland Security were working together to create smart cities, most people did not want to believe it.

But not even the most skeptical observer could ignore what is staring them in the face.

The U.S. military, the CIA and Homeland Security are all working together, perfecting their brand of smart city surveillance on Americans.

The Chinese military openly works with smart city development, collaborating on new ways to spy on their citizens. So how is that any different than what is happening in America?

You can read more at the MassPrivateI blog, where this article first appeared.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Dave Maass

A California legislative committee today voted to direct the State Auditor to launch a probe into the use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) by law enforcement agencies. The audit will include the first comprehensive statewide survey of which agencies use this surveillance technology and what vendors they use. It will also include a deeper audit into four specific jurisdictions across the state.

ALPRs are camera systems that scan the license plates of vehicles in order to track people in real-time and create search databases of drivers’ historical travel patterns. As a mass surveillance technology, ALPR captures information on every driver, regardless of whether their vehicle is under suspicion.

In 2015, EFF supported legislation—S.B. 34—to require agencies to implement policies that protect civil liberties and privacy, and to maintain a detailed log of every time someone accesses ALPR data. In the years since, EFF has filed hundreds of public records requests and analyzed scores of policies only to discover that many agencies are either ignoring the law altogether or failing to follow some of its provisions. Often EFF’s research faces hurdles because agencies signed non-disclosure agreements with the primary vendor of the technology, Vigilant Solutions.

EFF assisted Sen. Wiener in drafting the audit request in order to obtain an impartial review of the spread of ALPRs and to assess whether agencies are complying with S.B. 34. In addition to circulating a statewide questionnaire, the auditor will conduct investigations into the Fresno Police Department, Sacramento County Sheriff and Department of Human Assistance, the Los Angeles Police Department, and the Marin County Sheriff/San Rafael Police Department (these north Bay Area jurisdictions share an ALPR system).

California State Auditor Elaine Howle testified that the audit would take 2,800 hours of staff time and estimated that it will be completed in 7 months.

Last year, EFF collected records from 60 agencies in California: together they accounted for more than 1.1 billion license plate scans in 2017-2018 alone. Only about 0.1% were flagged as relevant to an investigation at the time they were collected. The ACLU of Northern California filed a lawsuit against ICE to obtain records about ALPR and found that immigration authorities routinely gained access to data collected by agencies in California.

The audit is especially timely in light of news that U.S. Customs and Border Protections’ license plate vendor was breached, resulting in massive amounts of confidential records being leaked onto the Internet. While CBP’s system is outside the scope of the audit, it serves as a warning of how ALPR systems not only threaten privacy, but also create cybersecurity risks.

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

A previous audit of the state’s gang databases found the systems were rife with errors, which led to the passage of two reform bills. The ALPR audit may take several months to complete, but we anticipate that the State Auditor will also make concrete recommendations for legislative reforms to reel in this controversial form of mass surveillance.

This article was sourced from EFF.org

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Shane Trejo

The California legislature has approved legislation that will be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom to set up an educational system that will use big data to track children from “cradle to career.”

Senate Bill 75 was approved by a vote of 31-7 in the Senate and 62-14 in the Assembly. It will create a “longitudinal” data system that profiles and manipulates pupils from the earliest of ages so they are guided into a career determined by the central planners.

“This is long overdue. Finally, California, the center of the tech world, has a government that is catching up to the 21st century,” said Arun Ramanathan, CEO of Pivot Learning Partners, a nonprofit that will be benefiting from this legislation.

“I’m encouraged we are moving forward and proceeding through the workgroup in a thoughtful and deliberate way,” said Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California and director of its Higher Education Center.

The state bureaucracy is now tasked with determining exactly what data is collected from children to enable Big Brother.

This is a part of a national movement that is being spearheaded by failed Georgia Governor candidate Stacey Abrams, New York Times writer David Brooks, and Barack Obama’s former deputy secretary of Education Jim Shelton.

These centralizers hope to control and shape young minds from the earliest of ages using powerful technological tools.

“We refuse to settle for a world where a child’s potential is dictated by the conditions in which the child is born. We are committed to helping every child succeed in school and in life from cradle to career, regardless of race, zip code or circumstance,” said StriveTogether CEO and President Jennifer Blatz.

StriveTogether is responsible for the national Cradle to Career Network Convening. They coach their data sweep plan to treat kids like guinea pigs in the language of social justice.

“We know the systems designed to serve our youth are failing children and families of color and those living in poverty. We exist to give every child, every chance, cradle to career. We’re here to help create possibilities — giving children opportunities to go further and do better than the generations before them,” Blatz said.

Studies have shown that more technology in the classroom actually harms student outcomes, but the end game is power, control, and profit for these rapacious bureaucrats.

Big data and technological progress are enabling leftist government officials to take totalitarianism socialism to unforeseen heights. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave.

This article was sourced from Liberty Conservative News.

H/T: Technocracy.News

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Jamie Williams

The California Supreme Court just rejected the government’s attempt to require a youth probationer, as a condition of release, to submit to random searches of his electronic devices and social media accounts. The trial court had imposed the condition because the judge believed teenagers “typically will brag” about drug use on the Internet—even though there was no evidence that the minor in this case, Ricardo P., had ever used any electronic devices in connection with any drugs or illegal activity, let alone ever previously bragged about drug use online.

EFF and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in the case back in 2016, warning that the search condition imposed here was highly invasive, unconstitutional, and in violation of the California Supreme Court’s own standard for probation conditions—which requires that search conditions be “reasonably related to future criminality.” We also warned of the far-reaching privacy implications of allowing courts to impose such broad electronic search conditions. We’re pleased that the California Supreme Court heeded our warnings and recognized the substantial burden this “sweeping probation condition” imposed on Ricardo’s privacy.

The court recognized that the probation condition would give Ricardo’s probation officers “full access, day or night, not only to his social media accounts but also to the contents of his e-mails, text messages, and search histories, all photographs and videos stored on his devices, as well as any other data accessible using electronic devices, which could include anything from banking information to private health or financial information to dating profiles.” And by allowing remote access to Ricardo’s online accounts, the condition would potentially allow his probation officers to monitor his communications in real time. According to the court:

If we were to find this record sufficient to sustain the probation condition at issue, it is difficult to conceive of any case in which a comparable condition could not be imposed, especially given the constant and pervasive use of electronic devices and social media by juveniles today.

The court noted, for example, that if it were to hold—as the California Attorney General argued—that any search condition facilitating supervision of probationers was “reasonably related to future criminality,” it might be obligated to uphold “a condition mandating that probationers wear 24-hour body cameras or permit a probation officer to accompany them at all times.”

This is a critical ruling. The search condition imposed in this case was not unique, but one that many juvenile probationers have been subject to in California in recent years, under the same unsupported reasoning that the trial judge offered here. The California Supreme Court’s decision not only resolves a split in the lower courts regarding the legality of such probation conditions, but it sends a clear message: probation conditions that have “a very heavy burden on privacy with a very limited justification” are not entitled to deference.

We applaud the California Supreme Court for recognizing the serious privacy invasion imposed by the search condition issued in this case and for striking down the condition as invalid.

Jamie Williams is a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where she is part of EFF’s civil liberties team. Jamie focuses on the First and Fourth Amendment implications of new technologies, and is part of EFF’s Coder’s Rights Project, which protects programmers and developers engaged in cutting-edge exploration of technology. Jamie joined EFF in 2014. Prior to joining EFF, Jamie clerked for Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong in the Northern District of California, and practiced at Paul Hastings LLP, as an associate in the firms’ litigation department. Jamie was also a law clerk at the Alameda County Public Defender. Jamie has a J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall) and a B.A. in journalism from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

This article was sourced from EFF.org

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Catherine J. Frompovich

The State of California and its health agencies better hand in their credentials because they apparently don’t know the facts about Adverse Effects of Drugs or Medicaments!

Equally alarming, health agencies apparently aren’t aware the CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) released the 2018 ICD-10-CM files in June of 2017 [1] and anyone can find them here.

However, the irony of the above CMS coding system for reimbursement of patients’ medical treatment services includes several Diagnosis Codes for:

• Unspecified adverse effect of drug or medicament


• Adverse effect of unspecified systemic antibiotic, initial encounter


• Adverse effect of other viral vaccines, initial encounter [CJF emphasis]

Did you get the last one: viral vaccines?  What doesn’t California get?

Since CMS is a government agency, the information on their websites can be used freely by journalists.

Therefore, I copied and pasted below the CMS codes that ought to negate the serious craziness being undertaken by the State of California and any other state, county or entities who refuse to accept adverse events regarding vaccines and, therefore, grant medical exemptions for vaccinations!

Diagnosis Code T88.7 deals with adverse effects of drug or medicament.  Aren’t vaccines drugs?

Diagnosis Code T36.95XA deals with adverse effects of unspecified systemic antibiotic, initial encounter.  Most vaccines given to infants and toddlers contain ANTIBIOTICS!

Diagnosis Code T50.B95A deals with adverse of other viral vaccines with 22 FDA-licensed vaccines listed!

Familiarize yourself with the following codes, as they are the legal medical reasons for granting medical exemptions from vaccinations, especially if an individual has had any type of allergic reaction.

Vaccine package inserts often caution a vaccine should not be given under certain conditions, including when a child has a fever or not feeling well!

2018 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code T88.7
Unspecified adverse effect of drug or medicament

Clinical Information

• Acute or chronic and often undesirable effects of drugs occurring in addition to the intended or therapeutic objective.


• All noxious and unintended responses to a medicinal product related to any dose should be considered adverse drug reactions (from us fda ‘guideline for industry, clinical safety data management: definitions and standards for expedited reporting’).


• An allergy to a pharmaceutical product.


• Immunologically mediated adverse reactions to medicinal substances used legally or illegally.


• Most of the time, medicines make our lives better. They reduce aches and pains, fight infections, and control problems such as high blood pressure or diabetes. But medicines can also cause unwanted reactions.one problem is interactions, which may occur between
  
  • two drugs, such as aspirin and blood thinners
  
  
  • drugs and food, such as statins and grapefruit
  
  
  • drugs and supplements, such as gingko and blood thinners
  
  
  • drugs and diseases, such as aspirin and peptic ulcers
  
  

interactions can change the actions of one or both drugs. The drugs might not work, or you could get side effects. side effects are unwanted effects caused by the drugs. Most are mild, such as a stomach aches or drowsiness, and go away after you stop taking the drug. Others can be more serious. drug allergies are another type of reaction. They can be mild or life-threatening. Skin reactions, such as hives and rashes, are the most common type. when you start a new prescription or over-the-counter medication, make sure you understand how to take it correctly. Know which other medications and foods you need to avoid. Ask your healthcare provider or pharmacist if you have questions.

• Unintended, deleterious effects of otherwise licit, therapeutic, properly administered drugs; for effects of illicit and abused drugs, or of environmental chemicals, see toxicology or poisoning.

https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/S00-T88/T80-T88/T88-/T88.7

2018 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code T36.95XA
Adverse effect of unspecified systemic antibiotic, initial encounter

The following code(s) above T36.95XA contain annotation back-references that may be applicable to T36.95XA:

S00-T88
Injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes

T36-T50
Poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of drugs, medicaments and biological substances

T36
Poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of systemic antibiotics
Approximate Synonyms
Adverse effect of antibiotic
Antibiotic adverse reaction
Antibiotic-associated diarrhea
Diarrhea associated with antibiotic

ICD-10-CM T36.95XA is grouped within Diagnostic Related Group(s) (MS-DRG v35.0):

793 Full term neonate with major problems

917 Poisoning and toxic effects of drugs with mcc

918 Poisoning and toxic effects of drugs without mcc

https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/S00-T88/T36-T50/T36-/T36.95XA

2018 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code T50.B95A
Adverse effect of other viral vaccines, initial encounter

ICD-10-CM Codes

S00-T88  Injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes

T36-T50 Poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of drugs, medicaments and biological substances

T50- Poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of diuretics and other and unspecified drugs, medicaments and biological substances

The following code(s) above T50.B95A contain annotation back-references that may be applicable to T50.B95A:

S00-T88
Injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes

T36-T50
Poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of drugs, medicaments and biological substances

Approximate Synonyms

Adverse effect of haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine
Adverse effect of hepatitis a vaccine
Adverse effect of hepatitis b vaccine
Adverse effect of human papillomavirus vaccine
Adverse effect of influenza vaccine
Adverse effect of measles, mumps and rubella vaccine
Adverse effect of polio vaccine
Adverse effect of rotavirus vaccine
Adverse effect of varicella vaccine
Adverse effect of viral vaccine
Adverse effect of zoster vaccine
Adverse reaction of human papillomavirus vaccine
Adverse reaction of rotavirus vaccine
Adverse reaction of varicella vaccine
Adverse reaction of zoster vaccine
Adverse reaction to viral vaccines
Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine adverse reaction
Hepatitis a vaccine adverse reaction
Hepatitis b vaccine adverse reaction
Influenza virus vaccine adverse reaction
Measles/mumps/rubella vaccine adverse reaction
Poliomyelitis vaccine adverse reaction

ICD-10-CM T50.B95A is grouped within Diagnostic Related Group(s) (MS-DRG v35.0):

793 Full term neonate with major problems

Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!

917 Poisoning and toxic effects of drugs with mcc

918 Poisoning and toxic effects of drugs without mcc

https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/Codes/S00-T88/T36-T50/T50-/T50.B95A

[CJF emphasis]

The Alliance for Natural Health has initiated an Action Alert, which I encourage everyone to use immediately and cite the CMS codes as the legal reasons for medical exemptions for vaccines and vaccinations.

References:

[1] https://www.icd10monitor.com/cms-releases-files-on-2018-icd-10-cm-codes

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

Catherine’s NEW book: Eat To Beat Disease, Foods Medicinal Qualities ©2016 Catherine J Frompovich is now available.

Image credit

By Joseph Sunde

For the past four years, Deliverance San Diego has been delivering hot meals to the city’s homeless population every Friday, averaging 200 donated meals on any given evening. Now, due to new guidelines passed by the State Legislature of California, the non-profit is ceasing operations and will dissolve by the end of the month.

Through their existing model, hot meals were prepared in volunteer homes and distributed on the streets.

“Volunteers from various churches gather at 17th and Commercial downtown to load four food wagons with chili, soup, cornbread, water, and other snacks,” the group’s web site explains. “We offer prayer and spiritual support, but one of the easiest things we do is get someone’s name and remember it.”

Charity Under Fire

Through the new requirements, set forth by the San Diego Department of Environmental Health, Deliverance would need to use licensed, state-approved kitchens, implement hand-washing stations, and meet a variety of other requirements.

With a yearly budget of less than $7,000, according to the non-profit’s treasurer, Deliverance determined it can no longer sustain operations without extensive and expensive organizational changes. “We’re on a shoestring budget,” explains volunteer Gary Marttila, “so working out all those logistics became too big of an obstacle to overcome.”

ABC 10 News in San Diego tells more of their story:



As the San Diego Union-Tribune explains, several of the law’s backers have expressed surprise at the closure of Deliverance. According to Heather Buonomo, a program coordinator with the Department of Environmental Health, some sort of workaround may have been available or achievable. “We’re happy to work with them to find a solution that works for their charitable organization,” she said. According to Monique Limón, one of the bill’s authors, “The law would encourage more charities to provide food for the needy while also creating a level of oversight to ensure they follow proper health guidelines.”

The fact that it didn’t even try says something about the pressure that these policies put on small and vulnerable charities and institutions who don’t feel they have political sway.

Yet it’s unclear what exactly would or could have been done if Deliverance had tried to negotiate with the state and find “a solution that works.” And the fact that it didn’t even try or think it could try says something about the pressure that these policies put on small and vulnerable charities and institutions who don’t feel they have political sway.

Likewise, one can make any number of arguments about food safety, as Limón does, but it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which more burdens, more requirements, and tighter regulations will somehow “encourage more charities to provide food for the needy.”

The Unseen Costs of Government Action

The reality is that the state’s dream of regulated soup and sandwiches is taking precedence over the bottom-up activity of neighbors who are passionate about loving their neighbors. Is that really an acceptable trade-off, particularly in an area that so desperately needs an intimate and personalized approach?

“We’ve sought to provide comfort to those who are going through an incredibly difficult time,” says Deliverance’s press release on the closure. “In many situations, they are without a home due to no fault of their own. This action by the state creates significant barriers to those organizations like ours who simply want to show God’s love through a hot meal and some conversation.”

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

Given the good—and thus far, safe—work of organizations like Deliverance, such regulations represent a prime example of the “unseen costs” of government action.

In some cases, well-intended government policies lead to trade imbalances or economic surpluses or corporate cronyism or community inequities—all of which yield their own forms of social corrosion. But in cases such as these, we see the ill effects of these policies on charitable activity, resulting in real and tangible barriers to human love and relationship.

Is it really worth it?

---

This article was reprinted with permission from the Acton Institute and was sourced from FEE.org

Joseph Sunde is an associate editor and writer for the Acton Institute. His work has appeared in venues such as The Federalist, First Things, Intellectual Takeout, The City, The Christian Post, The Stream, Patheos, LifeSiteNews, Charisma News, The Green Room, Juicy Ecumenism, Ethika Politika, Made to Flourish, and the Center for Faith and Work. Joseph resides in Minneapolis, Minnesota with his wife and four children.

By Janet Phelan

Around 2009, 40,000 people disappeared from the streets of Los Angeles. The biannual homeless census for 2005, conducted by the Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority (LAHSA), recorded 82,291 individuals as homeless at that point in time.  In 2009, at the height of the economic crisis, which rendered many more homeless across America, the number dropped to 42,694.

What happened to nearly 40,000 people? Was there simply a counting snafu or did that many people actually disappear? And if they did, who would know?

Would you miss the fellow sleeping under the hedge at the apartment house across the street? Would you take note if the bedraggled couple, often seen sitting in front of the local 7-Eleven and panhandling, were no longer there? Considering that these are people known as having almost no social support system or connections and often transient, who would know if something nefarious had taken place?

The signs in and around Los Angeles point to the strong possibility that something untoward did indeed happen. LAHSA itself has been unable to account for the breathtaking drop in numbers. When initially contacted, LAHSA asserted that the difference was tied to a change in protocol for counting “the hidden homeless.” When pressed to state that this accounted for the drastic decrease in population, LAHSA admitted it did not.

So we turn to the legal infrastructure in Los Angeles for further signs.

Police abuse of homeless had become significant in Los Angeles at that time, so much so that the ACLU filed a lawsuit in 2009 against the City of Santa Monica, a wealthy beach-side community which is adjacent to the sprawl called LA, alleging police targeting and civil rights abuses of homeless people. In the suit, there is a sidelong reference to some of the discrepancies in the homeless count. The lawsuit states:

The City of Santa Monica reports that in 2009 an estimated 915 homeless residents sleep in Santa Monica each night, although less than twenty percent of this population can be accommodated in local emergency and transitional shelters. (Other sources indicate the homeless population of Santa Monica could be much higher. For example, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority commissioned a survey in 2005, which counted approximately 2,000 homeless individuals residing in Santa Monica on a given day).

That is a decrease of over 50% during a period of time when the population should have been exploding.

According to the 09 ACLU lawsuit, the police in Santa Monica were regularly “harassing, citing and arresting” chronically homeless individuals, in violation of their constitutional rights. The suit states that the City of Santa Monica violated the civil rights of the homeless by “1) Making it a crime to sleep in public places despite the fact there is no shelter available for most of the homeless in Santa Monica and by 2) selectively and discriminatorily citing homeless and disabled residents for sitting, sleeping or smoking cigarettes in public…”

But did the City and its police force do even more than harass, cite and arrest?

I was in Santa Monica from 2003 until mid 2006. It was clear at that time that law enforcement agencies were doing quite a bit more than harassing the homeless. They were, in fact, mining their data and involved in overt and covert efforts to ID the population.

Example 1– Bullied into turning over an ID

A police car would pull up in front of a bus bench, where an obviously homeless person was sitting, waiting for a bus. One of the cops would then rummage through the trash can by the bench. Pulling out an empty beer can, the officer would then state he was arresting the individual for drinking in public.

Protests to the contrary were ignored. The cop would then demand the individual’s ID, and bullied into submission, the person generally handed it over. After writing down the details, the cop would hand the ID back, stating, “This time we will let you off,” get back into the police car and drive off, leaving Mr. Waiting for the Bus entirely bewildered but thanking his lucky stars.

Example 2– Feds Planted Among the Homeless

A federal agent who went by the name of “David Moreno” was regularly seen at homeless agencies and public feedings in Santa Monica. I had encountered “Moreno” previously and he had admitted to me his undercover status, though he declined to state which agency he worked for. (Actually, he was fairly obvious. His blue jeans were pressed and his shoes were expensive Italian leather. He must have thought the rock n roll t-shirt was a good enough costume).

Moreno would wander through the public feedings with a camera, slyly taking photos of homeless individuals. When this became of concern to people, he began to position himself across the street with a telephoto lens.

Homeless Records “Not Available”

The Los Angeles Police Department was contacted asking for their arrest records dealing with vagrancy and other homeless “crimes” for the years from 2005 through 2009. Initially agreeable, the PIO for the LAPD then reversed herself, saying there was no such data.

The PIO for the Santa Monica Police Department at first stated he would be able to produce these arrest records. Lt. Saul Rodriguez then reversed himself, stating “I have consulted with my Crime Analyst and have been informed that the data set you are requesting would be way too over burdensome to gather. Additionally, she is not willing to release any data set requested for that time frame because she believes the accuracy will not be at all reliable.”

Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy

A shroud of silence seems to surround this issue. The ACLU was contacted with questions as to what other research might have been accomplished in pursuit of their 2009 suit against the City of Santa Monica. The ACLU lawyers declined to respond. The law firm of Munger, Tolles and Olson, which also contributed legal work to the lawsuit, was contacted and also refused to speak to this reporter on the record. The lead attorney in the lawsuit, Mark Rosenbaum, now with Public Counsel, agreed to be interviewed and stated that the lawyers did no research which might have resulted in any statistics showing the numbers of homeless individuals taken into custody and that all their research was strictly “anecdotal.”

The agency which serves as the homeless hub in Santa Monica, OPCC (also known as The People Concern), has refused to release any statistics concerning their service figures for the years in question. The City of Santa Monica, which is the major funder for OPCC, supported OPCC’s decision not to release service figures. These figures also could have potentially buttressed—or resolved—concerns about a dramatic decrease in homeless residents during the period dubbed as the Great Disappearance.

OPCC is listed as a “private charity” even though over 98 percent of its funding is from government agencies. Recently, concerns have been publicly raised that OPCC has flagrantly violated numerous laws governing its operations. Oddly, OPCC seems to be coated in teflon and is emerging from each and every allegation with no culpability whatsoever.

Chillingly, a piece of military law called Army Regulation 210-35 might shed some light on the whereabouts or destination of the forty thousand missing. This regulation, passed during the Reagan years, allows for the setting up of civilian inmate labor prison camps on military bases. According to its mandates, these camps should be run according to the mandates of the McKinley Homeless Assistance Act, which points to the possible denizens of such camps. According to 210-35, press coverage of these facilities is restricted and deaths in the camps will not be the responsibility of the facility.

If this provides a glimpse into the fate of almost 40,000 people, and given the inaccessibility of records and the insular and disconnected state of being homeless, how would we ever know?

---

Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist and author of the groundbreaking exposé, EXILE. Her articles previously appeared in such mainstream venues as the Los Angeles Times, Orange Coast Magazine, Long Beach Press Telegram, etc. In 2004, Janet “jumped ship” and now exclusively writes for independent media. She is also the author of two collections of poetry—The Hitler Poems and Held Captive. She resides abroad. You can follow her on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012703457651

By Daisy Luther

Just in case we haven’t provided you with enough creepy dystopian news lately, the nation’s leader in Creepy Dystopia, California, has a brand new program. The “Cradle to Career Data System” will study and document everything about a child born in the state.

But don’t worry, it’s for your children’s own good.

What the heck is the “Cradle to Career Data System”?

Beginning at birth and stalking the child until he or she joins the workforce, California wants to keep on eye on all sorts of demographics and variables. They’ll do this by collecting information from “partner entities.” They’ll use this information, according to the Pasadena Star, to “provide appropriate interventions and supports to address disparities in opportunities and improve outcomes for all students.”

Who are these partner entities, you ask?

The “partner entities” include (but are not limited to) “state entities responsible for elementary and secondary education data, entities responsible for early learning data, segments of public higher education, private colleges and universities, state entities responsible for student financial aid, childcare providers, state labor and workforce development agencies, and state departments administering health and human services programs.” (source)

So, your kid’s teachers, principles, professors, babysitters, and the purveyors of any state services you happen to use will all cough up every detail of your child’s life.

Of course, California just wants to help.

This to me has hints of communist countries who pluck the brightest students from their home and educate them to work for the state. However, the admitted goal is data collection for the folks who make the rules.

Easily the creepiest thing to come out of California since “The Silence of the Lambs” was released into theaters, the “Cradle to Career Data System” aims to collect the ethnic, economic and educational records of every child in the state, track their grades and their progress into early adulthood, and make some form of the data available to policy makers, analysts and activists. (source)

This isn’t a maybe. It’s already passed as a trailer bill (so it didn’t go through the usual legislative process) and has been funded with a budget of $10 million.

The governor’s Office of Planning and Research is now authorized to enter into contracts with “planning facilitators” who will convene advisory groups “comprised of representatives of students, parents, labor, business and industry, equity and social justice organizations, researchers, privacy experts, early education experts, school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education.” (source)

Californians, your children’s privacy is at stake here. They are going to become part of a pile of data that will be used to enact future laws to assure “equity.” But at any time, these records will be there, the life of your child, every time they got sent to the principal’s office, who stands up to authority, who has special skills or talents, what the child’s parents are like. That person’s entire life in one handy file. And pardon me if I don’t believe the data collection will stop once they get a job. Data is king right now, so why give up on a good thing?

We’re already tracked everywhere we go once we’re old enough to have a cellphone or use the internet. But this starts right, as the title of the program points out, at the cradle.

Why are they doing this?

It’s all about “social justice.” Think quotas on steroids.

“Advocates have been demanding data for the people in the Golden State for years,” the Equity Alert explains, to “answer key questions about whether and how our state schools, colleges, universities, and workforce systems are closing racial equity gaps and serving Californians.”

It sounds as if the goal is to go beyond laws that ban discrimination and beyond affirmative action into a brave new world, one in which government bureaucrats tally the economic success of each racial and ethnic group and sub-group and award government funding in an effort to reach “equity.” (source)

Of course, we all know that things like this are actually not equitable, at least not to kids from groups who are not considered to be “at risk.”

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

There’s no word yet on whether or not parents will be able to opt out on behalf of their offspring.

This certainly normalizes being surveilled.

We’ve written a great deal on this site about the social credit system and the surveillance state in which we live. To me, a program like this seems like just another nail in the coffin of privacy. Don’t think that this will stop at the border of California.

These kids will, from their first moment of awareness, be concerned about their permanent record. That’s an awfully big burden to put on someone who still eats with his fingers and wears pull-ups to bed. These children will spend their entire lives under a microscope, for better or for worse, while some data entry person types their every action of note into their record.

If you want to have a social credit system like the one in China, I guess you’ve got to start early.

---

Daisy Luther is a coffee-swigging, gun-toting blogger who writes about current events, preparedness, frugality, voluntaryism, and the pursuit of liberty on her website, The Organic Prepper, where this article first appeared. She is widely republished across alternative media and she curates all the most important news links on her aggregate site, PreppersDailyNews.com. Daisy is the best-selling author of 4 books and runs a small digital publishing company.  She lives in the mountains of Virginia with her family. You can find her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Janet Phelan

The FBI has declined to answer questions as to whether or not its raid on the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power today had anything to do with allegations that the LADWP has covertly set up a double line water system throughout the city, with disturbing implications.

LA FBI Press spokesman Katherine Gullotta told this reporter that she was unable to comment on the reason for the raid. The Los Angeles Times had reported that the raid was due to a billing scandal, which Gullotta also declined to confirm.

“At this time no charges have been brought,” she stated. She went on to say that “Due to the fact that this is an ongoing investigation, no further comment can be made at this time.”

Back when this reporter was writing a weekly column for the Santa Monica Daily Press, a request to Santa Monica City Hall for water records resulted in her termination from the SMDP. Further requests to the LADWP resulted in that office creating entirely new blueprints to fulfill the Public Records Act request, each of which were stamped “redacted.” “National security” was cited as the reason for the redactions. However, subsequent contacts with city crews working on water lines produced blueprints which clearly showed the double main line system, which was entirely absent from the redacted prints.

The double line system, which also features remote control valves, enables the injection of a chemical or biological agent into preselected service lines, serving preselected dwellings. The city has remained silent on this capability and the implications for its facilitating a  potential pandemic-like attack, selectively targeting individuals and their families.

The LADWP press office also declined to comment on the warrant or to verify the story in the LA Times on the billing issue.

Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist and author of the groundbreaking exposé, EXILE. Her articles previously appeared in such mainstream venues as the Los Angeles Times, Orange Coast Magazine, Long Beach Press Telegram, etc. In 2004, Janet “jumped ship” and now exclusively writes for independent media. She is also the author of two collections of poetry—The Hitler Poems and Held Captive. She resides abroad. You can follow her on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012703457651

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.