Facial Recognition Technology is Surreptitiously Destroying Privacy

Facial Recognition Technology is Surreptitiously Destroying Privacy. By Art Keller.

Clare Garvie, an attorney at the Georgetown Center for Privacy and Technology, testified before Congress in 2019 about the misuse of face recognition technology in the US. It wasn’t pretty.

Garvie told the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, “Face recognition presents a unique threat to the civil rights and liberties protected by the US Constitution.”

After her testimony, I asked Garvie why unique? She told me face recognition chills First Amendment free speech, and as used by many police departments, outright violates Fourth Amendment rights on unreasonable search, and 14th Amendment rights on due process.

She … found the majority of US police departments that had face recognition tech were not forthcoming about how it was used, or even whether they had it.

The NYPD, for example, claimed it had no documents on face recognition. It later turned over 2,000 pages on it when forced to. The NYPD was found to have fabricated evidence repeatedly. In one case, it tried to catch a beer thief that face recognition software couldn’t ID by using a photo of Cheers actor Woody Harrelson. The detectives thought the thief looked like him, so they fed in Harrelson’s photo to try to force a match from the software. Police routinely used falsified “probe photos” when they couldn’t get a match from the software.

 

A wanted posted for a beer thief, who the NYPD used an image of Woody Harrelson facial recognition to arrest.

 

Privacy laws and civil rights lawsuits, if they ever catch up to surveillance overreach, take years to get through the courts, at tremendous expense. Clearview AI, one of the biggest vendors of face recognition data and services to police, private companies, and even rich individuals, faces multiple class action lawsuits for a litany of legal and regulatory violations. Clearview’s clients include 2,200 domestic and foreign law enforcement agencies, the DOJ, DHS, universities, Walmart, Best Buy, Macys, and on and on. Did Clearview AI ask your permission to use photos you posted to Facebook or Twitter or Instagram in a criminal line up? No? Clearview AI lets police, or a random corporate cog at Walmart, do it anyway, even in localities where that has been specifically ruled illegal.

To make matters worse, face recognition tech can do a horrible job in identifying non-white suspects, putting non-Caucasians at higher risk for “false positives,” e.g., being arrested for a crime they did not commit because of a bad match. …

Amazon also sells a face recognition service, Rekognition. Rekognition has been excoriated for providing inadequate, incorrect, or non-existent training and documentation to clients, which inevitably leads to misuse. In a Washington Post article on Rekognition, the police department that helped develop it, the Washington County Sherriff’s Office in Oregon, stated it never had a complaint from defendants or defense attorneys on the use of face recognition software. But detective Robert Rookhuÿzen also said: “Just like any of our investigative techniques, we don’t tell people how we catch them. We want them to keep guessing.”

Isn’t that obstruction of justice? US police are required to share their evidence with defense attorneys, particularly exculpatory evidence, e.g., a search for a criminal suspect generated multiple matches in the face recognition software. As Georgetown’s Garvie pointed out, refusing to share those matches is a breach of the 14th Amendment.

Clearview AI and Rekognition are but two of dozens of developers of face recognition technology in the US. While much of it has been improving, it is still a mixed bag. Some versions of it can achieve a 99 percent match rate under ideal conditions. Under less-than-ideal conditions, that number can fall to 50 percent. And the rate of accurate matches from composite sketches is unbelievably low, with as few as 20 percent valid matches.

None of these shortfalls are highlighted to the public, defendants, and quite frequently, even the police using the face recognition systems. Instead, cops are told by vendors like Amazon that it works like magic. …

Some police agencies do require face recognition matches to be reviewed by trained human experts, as the FBI does. But as Steven Talley can attest, human face recognition experts are not infallible either. Talley was falsely arrested twice for bank robbery even after police had video footage showing Talley at his job while the robbery occurred. The second arrest, disregarding both fingerprint evidence and a rock-solid alibi, was based on the opinion of an FBI face recognition expert. The arrests cost Talley his job, home, marriage, and access to his children. Talley also suffered a broken sternum, broken teeth, ruptured discs, blood clots, nerve damage, and a fractured penis during the first brutal false arrest.

Surveillance provides safety?

Face recognition is a shinier, sexier iteration of the implicit promise justifying mass installation of CCTVs years ago. It ran, “If only we unleash unblinking and ever-present surveillance technology, we’ll reap a harvest of safety.”

The facts show otherwise. The largest ever meta-analysis on surveillance cameras, including 40 years of data, is that they reduce car theft and other property crime by 16 percent. And violent crime not at all.

They can help catch violent criminals and terrorists after the fact, but surveillance cameras do not prevent violent crime. …

When surveillance becomes too much:

Journalist Jon Fasman … perfectly encapsulated the challenge surveillance technologies pose to civil society:

I want to make a point about efficacy as justification. There are a whole lot of things that would help police solve more crimes that are incompatible with living in a free society. Suspension of habeas corpus would probably help police solve more crimes. Keeping everyone under observation all the time would help police solve more crimes. Allowing detention without trial might help the police solve more crimes.

All of these things are incompatible with living in a free, open, liberal democracy.

The article is mainly about Jetson, a new and secretive technology that can apparently ID people from over 200 meters from their unique heartbeat signature, using infrared lasers (which are invisible). You simply have no idea that it is being deployed.

Obama tries to deflect America’s attention from Critical Race Theory

Obama tries to deflect America’s attention from Critical Race Theory. By Bookworm.

Barack Obama is now and always has been a race hustler. He got into the White House by identifying as the culmination of Black America … and then used his eight years to focus ceaselessly on racial divisions.

With Trump’s colorblind hiatus over, and Americans waking up to the devastating effects of the Democrats’ racial obsessions, Obama, with his usual nastiness, is telling Americans that it’s stupid to care.

If Obama hadn’t been Black(ish), he never would have become president. He was a marginal scholar who had a minimal public sector career before becoming a hard-left, ineffectual politician. And then — voila! — he was president, carried into office on a tide of Americans of all colors proudly voting for a Black American.

Except of course, Obama had nothing to do with the American Black experience. His genetic blackness came from an Africa father who left town before Obama was born. He was raised by a White mother and White grandparents, before being educated for several years in Muslim Indonesia. On his return, he attended a chichi private school in Honolulu. Then, despite still-unknown grades (which tells me that his grades were always subpar), he got into Columbia and then Harvard.

When Obama ran for president, leftists told us that he was a “Magic Negro” who would heal America’s racial wounds (which were already healing very well by 2008). Once he became president, we were told that any criticism of Obama’s policies, regardless of facts on the ground or different ideological beliefs about government, was racism so shut up.

Beginning with his writing, continuing during his presidential campaign, and then while he was president, Obama never let up on the issue of racism: …

“The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person….”

“I don’t believe it is possible to transcend race in this country. Race is a factor in this society. The legacy of Jim Crow and slavery has not gone away. It is not an accident that African-Americans experience high crime rates, are poor, and have less wealth. It is a direct result of our racial history.” …

“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon Martin.”

It’s therefore unsurprising that Obama should decide to wade into American’s rising concern about Critical Race Theory (“CRT”) by accusing Whites of overreacting when they should be paying attention to fixing the economy (which Biden is destroying) or climate change (which requires talking to the sun).

“Who knew [giggle] that that [CRT] was the threat to our republic?” he asks Anderson Cooper, the ultimate White guy who always reminds me of something that crawled out from under a rock, rather than being a scion of one of America’s oldest, wealthiest families, with a disgraceful history of owning slaves. Incidentally, neither Cooper (worth $200 million) or Obama (worth $70 million) shows any desire to turn their wealth over to the downtrodden minorities for whom they profess to care.

In fact, CRT is a threat to our republic. We are not a nation bound together by history, by race, by religion, or even ties to a tiny speck of land on the map. Instead, we are a nation bad together by allegiance to an idea, one that says “all men are created equal” and that the agreement between citizens and the government that is embodied in the Constitution will create a safe and prosperous land.

Not any more. The left has encouraged tribalism, which is shattering the American ideal. If America was ever a proposition nation, it is no longer.

This ideological foundation for a nation cannot survive tribalism, yet tribalism is exactly where Critical Race Theory is driving us. You cannot have a functioning nation if our institutions insist that White citizens (who are a majority) are evil and are fair game for economic, political, and even physical destruction.

I used to think that Obama’s racism and racial obsessions were grounded in opportunism. I was wrong. Obama is a genuine racist and he views the Republican party, despite the huge upswing in minority support for Trump, as the redoubt for dangerous White people. His attitude is evil and profoundly anti-American.

However, the historic American nation is more than a proposition nation. But they’re going after that too.

“Trump Won” Banner Unfurled at Boston Red Sox Game

“Trump Won” Banner Unfurled at Boston Red Sox Game. By Cristina Laila.

A fan at Fenway Park on Monday evening unfurled a “Trump Won” banner during a Boston Red Sox game.

The crowd went wild and cheered as the Trump supporters displayed his banner.

According to a Boston Red Sox spox, the fan was escorted from Fenway Park by security for violating the park’s policy prohibiting signs.

Last week at a New York Mets game, a “Trump Won” banner was displayed during the baseball game.

Whiteness and the Final Solution

Whiteness and the Final Solution. By Steve Sailer.

Psychoanalysts, like Aruna Khilanani, now have to work harder to promote their grifts by jumping on Woke bandwagons and pushing them to extremes. For example, here’s some psychoanalyst named Donald Moss publishing an academic article based on his for-pay seminars:

Donald Moss, May 27, 2021, in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association [emphasis added]

On Having Whiteness

Abstract
Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has — a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which “white” people have a particular susceptibility. The condition is foundational, generating characteristic ways of being in one’s body, in one’s mind, and in one’s world. Parasitic Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse. These deformed appetites particularly target nonwhite peoples. Once established, these appetites are nearly impossible to eliminate. Effective treatment consists of a combination of psychic and social-historical interventions. Such interventions can reasonably aim only to reshape Whiteness’s infiltrated appetites — to reduce their intensity, redistribute their aims, and occasionally turn those aims toward the work of reparation. When remembered and represented, the ravages wreaked by the chronic condition can function either as warning (“never again”) or as temptation (“great again”). Memorialization alone, therefore, is no guarantee against regression. There is not yet a permanent cure.

Sailer:

Sounds like the Woke will soon be discussing the need for a final solution to Whiteness.

If “whiteness” really is such a problem as claimed, what other possible solution is there?

RT:

Moss’s claims were so astounding that some observers speculated that the journal article was fictional and perhaps satirical of anti-white wokeness. But the peer-reviewed study is real, and the former New York University educator appears to have plenty of like-minded in mental health circles. …

Other commenters found the article chilling, likening Moss’s language to Nazi propaganda against Jews in the 1930s and suggesting that a final solution is in the works.

“The language of genocide,” one observer said, while another warned, “We should be scared. Next is hospitalizing those afflicted by whiteness, reprogramming them, then extermination of many.”

They say that only whites can be racist, and that all whites are racists. Then they say they are “anti-racist” — which can only mean that they are anti-white.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

I need an AR-15 because the government doesn’t want me to have one.

I need an AR-15 because the government doesn’t want me to have one. By Daniel Gelernter.

I don’t need an AR-15 for hunting: It’s not even legal to take a deer with one in my state — the caliber is too small. I also don’t need an AR-15 for self-defense, though I’d want to have one if someone broke into my house. And I certainly don’t need one just because it’s a beautiful piece of engineering. I need an AR-15 because the government doesn’t want me to have one.

 

AR-15

 

Governments hate private weapons, and have always hated them. In Europe, traditionally only gentlemen (that is, originally, only knights) were allowed to carry a sword. In Japan, the samurai’s right to carry his sword came along with the right to kill any commoner who offended him — uchisute or “strike and abandon.” In Soviet Russia, private weapons were illegal, as they still are in China. And when Hitler’s Germany swept through Holland, Belgium, and France in 1940, they put up notices giving the locals 48 hours to hand over private firearms or face death (by shooting). …

There are only two forms of government: One where the people are afraid of the government, and one where the government is afraid of the people. Whoever has the weapons is the ruling class, and there is only one case in all history, only in America, that the ruling class has actually been the common man.

He who controls the guns controls the people:

Our federal government has been trying to undo this remarkable fact for at least the last 100 years. The first serious blow came in 1934, justified by the rise of organized crime at the time. … Organized crime was a midway point in the cascade of unintended consequences from Prohibition. The government thought the best way to keep machine guns, short rifles, and silencers out of the hands of the mafia would be to make a national registry and require anyone buying one of these items to pay a $200 tax.

It may come as a shock that organized crime largely ignored the new registration requirements. And neither were they punctilious in the matter of paying taxes. For law-abiding citizens in 1934, however, when the average annual income was $1,600, the National Firearms Act had the practical effect of restricting ownership of certain weapons to the wealthy and, of course, to the government.

When viewed from the standpoint of limiting crime, the National Firearms Act is patently ludicrous: Requiring criminals to register and pay taxes on the weapons with which they are about to commit murder, or else forcing them to acquire these weapons illegally is crazy. When viewed from the standpoint of controlling people, however, the NFA makes perfect sense.

Every action taken by the federal government has one purpose in mind: To protect the government from its citizens by transferring power from those citizens to the government. It is a striking and horrifying fact that, in this eternal quest, criminals and the government are in perfect alignment. Criminal acts of a certain magnitude are necessary in order to make emergency government measures plausible.

Power grows out of the barrel of a gun:

The real problem is that a government with a monopoly on force might do anything. They might respond to your home-schooling plan by confiscating your children, as happened in Germany. They might jail you for making an offensive joke on your Facebook page, as happened in Britain. They might use a pandemic to force you to close your business indefinitely, as happened in New York.

A man disarmed by his government is not a citizen — he’s a subject. …

The current administration in Washington, D.C. is not elected and is not legitimate. As if confirming this fact, they’ve surrounded themselves with barbed wire and soldiers carrying machine guns. In so doing they implicitly acknowledge the danger posed — to them — by an armed and angry population. An AR-15 is not just a tool of last resort: It is a declaration that the last resort exists, a reminder that there are outer limits to the abuse of power.

The justification for allowing guns in the public is to prevent tyranny. The drawback is that they are potentially dangerous. Both of these points are obvious, but the media/left consistently overlooks the first one.

A reader from eastern Australia:

In NSW, where I live, it is illegal to own a bullet-proof vest! They are classed as “prohibited weapons”.

Almost Overnight, Standards of Color-Blind Merit Tumble Across American Society

Almost Overnight, Standards of Color-Blind Merit Tumble Across American Society. By Richard Bernstein.

A broad revolution is underway in the United States as traditional standards used to measure achievement and provide opportunity are being rejected by schools, corporations, and governments in favor of quotas based on race and gender.

Equality of opportunity is officially out, replaced by equality of outcome:

On just his sixth day in office, President Biden signaled that the nation’s long held principle of equality for all had come to an end, signing an executive order declaring that “racial equity is not just an issue for any one department of government; it has to be the business of the whole of government” — equity referring to the idea that merely treating everybody the same is not enough, and that an equal outcome for all people has to be the goal. …

Who’d want to be a white man working for the US Government or one of these companies?

In May, Hewlett-Packard, the technology company with 50,000 employees worldwide, decreed that by 2030 half of its leadership positions and more than 30% of its technicians and engineers have to be women and that the number of minorities should “meet or exceed” their representation in the tech industry workforce.

That same month, United Airlines announced that half of the 5,000 pilots it would train at its proprietary flight school between now and 2030 will be women or people of color, with scholarships provided by United and JPMorgan Chase helping with tuition. There was nothing in the United announcement showing that there were enough qualified blacks and women in the pipeline so that a black/female quota of 2,500 new pilots could be filled, and nothing about what the company would do if there weren’t enough qualified candidates. …

The left’s coalition of the fringes demands its spoils, now that the Democrats are in power again. In tribal politics, as our African friends point out, the winner takes all:

Discontent over the pace of racial progress, fueled in the past year by the Black Lives Matter movement, has led to an explicit rejection of meritocracy and a call for old standards to make way for new ones.

In the recent past, that effort often involved working with the existing ideological framework of equality of opportunity and merit to identify worthy candidates. Now, the trend is to reject and redefine those standards. …

To say that the concept of “best” needs to be redefined in racial terms is already a significant departure from the idea of neutral standards. To go from there to the notion that meritocracy is a racist stratagem is a sea change, but there is a lot of evidence that that is exactly where society is going, in both small ways and large. …

Even the doctors are going along with the new racism:

The very august American Medical Association announced in May a new Strategic Plan to Embed Racial Justice and Advance Health Equity in medical education and practice. …

Perhaps the most striking passages in the AMA document are those that have to do with equality and meritocracy, which it calls “malignant narratives.”

“Seeking to treat everyone the ‘same’ ignores the historical legacy of disinvestment and deprivation,” the document says of equality, while meritocracy is “a narrative that attributes success and failure to individual abilities and merits. It does not address the centuries of unequal treatment that have historically robbed communities of the vital resources needed to thrive.”

Some critics have noted that the Strategic Plan says nothing about competency; several doctors posting to the blog Legal Insurrection asked if members of the AMA would be comfortable allowing them or their families to be treated, as one of them put it, “by those who have MD attached to their names solely in the name of equity … not because of meritocracy or qualification.”

The AMA rejects that view. …

Blatantly unfair, so why bother trying? Widespread incompetence will result.

The AMA Plan also fails to address the question of principle raised by applying different standards to different groups. Is it fair to effectively prevent some qualified individuals from becoming doctors because their gender or race requires them to score higher than other genders or races? …

“We are taught to study for the test, to get good grades,” Kenny Xu, author of a forthcoming book “An Inconvenient Minority: The Attack on Asian American Excellence and the Fight for Meritocracy,” said in an email. “Why? Because those good grades and test scores will, and should, lead to rewards in the future.

“How would you feel if someone who studied a third as much as you did got an opportunity you’ve been wanting for years? That would be absolutely unfair. And yet, that is what woke ideology does.” …

Elite schools including Lowell High School in San Francisco have dropped their admissions test in favor of a lottery system. This may increase racial diversity, but will the school be able to maintain its high academic standards? …

Merit is out in the USA. Where is this leading?

American high school students have steadily been falling behind their Asian and European counterparts in math and science, most recently ranking 37th in the PISA, the Program for International Student Assessment, which gives a test to 15-year-olds in countries around the world. China’s Shanghai ranks No.1.

The California Math Framework does not acknowledge that in Shanghai, the entirely opposite ideas about testing and standards are followed and implemented, with students tested early and often and placed into classes in accordance with their scores. …

Glenn Reynolds:

The woke left is composed of ugly people who want to be treated as beautiful people, bad people who want to be treated as good people, stupid people who want to be treated as smart people, and the grifters who profit from the above.

The moon landing was the high point. Then the affirmative action and administrative bloat began.

When 10 woke students feel bold enough to cancel the Queen for ‘colonialism’, Britain faces a battle for its soul

When 10 woke students feel bold enough to cancel the Queen for ‘colonialism’, Britain faces a battle for its soul. By Frank Furedi.

It only took 10 student members of Oxford University’s Magdalen College Middle Common Room to vote for the removal of a portrait of the Queen, and the Head of State of the United Kingdom had been cancelled.

Granted, 10 silly, spoiled students are not exactly a threat to the British way of life. .. In normal times, the students’ politics of gesture would not be newsworthy. But at a time when attacking symbols of Britishness and heaping scorn on the country’s past achievements has become a national sport, it is no surprise that for many, many people, the removal of the Queen’s portrait is seen as a threat to their way of life.

The portrait in question

What is significant about this story is not so much the removal of the Queen’s portrait, but the arguments used by some of the students to justify their act. According to the president of the Common Room, Matthew Katzman, the decision to cancel the Queen’s portrait was motivated by the desire to turn the room into a safe space for everyone. He noted that “it was decided to leave the common room neutral.”

Evidently the Magdalen 10 believe that the portrait of the British monarch is so threatening that it may well cause emotional harm to privileged students inhabiting the Common Room. In line with the woke ideology that prevails in elite universities, student sensitivity to threatening objects and symbols is sufficient to remove them from sight. …

Those who argued for the removal of the portrait stated that “for some students, depictions of the monarch and British monarchy represent recent colonial history.” …

By itself, the incident at Magdalen College is of little significance. But the fact that 10 students feel culturally empowered to denigrate a symbol of the community’s way of life is worrying. It indicates that British society faces a struggle for the soul of the nation.

She’s white.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Black studies professor claims the Queen is the ‘world’s number one symbol of white supremacy’ amid portrait row

Black studies professor claims the Queen is the ‘world’s number one symbol of white supremacy’ amid portrait row. By Emer Scully.

A taxpayer-funded academic has labelled the Queen ‘the number one symbol of white supremacy in the entire world’.

Professor Kehinde Andrews, a campaigner who is regularly wheeled out on TV debates to air his divisive views, today said he did not know ‘why it’s such a big deal’ Oxford University students voted to take down a picture of the Queen from their common room.

The professor of black studies at Birmingham City University — where senior lecturers receive an average base salary of £46,000 — has previously branded ‘whiteness’ a ‘psychosis’, called for the overthrow of ‘genocidal’ capitalism and repeatedly compared Sir Winston Churchill to Adolf Hitler.

During a debate into whether the Queen had been cancelled today, Professor Andrews told Good Morning Britain: ‘If we’re honest the Queen doesn’t just represent modern colonialism, the Queen is probably the number one symbol of white supremacy in the entire world. …

The professor’s comments came as members of the Middle Common Room (MCR) at Magdalen College passed a measure to take down an ‘unwelcoming’ portrait of the monarch from the graduates’ common room because ‘she represents recent colonial history’.

It was voted through by a substantial majority, with one student commenting that ‘patriotism and colonialism are not really separable’. …

Professor Andrews added: ‘Even in that picture she’s wearing jewels stolen from different parts of the black and brown world. …

The motion was brought forward by MCR President Matthew Katzman, a 25-year-old lecturer in computer science who studied at Stanford University and is from Maryland in the USA.

Stasi’s most despicable torture: Mind games that drove its own citizens mad. .. lessons for today

Stasi’s most despicable torture: Mind games that drove its own citizens mad. .. lessons for today. By Tony Rennell.

Arbitrary arrest, solitary confinement in special prisons that were censored from maps and officially did not exist, systematic brutality, sleep deprivation and torture — these were the everyday weapons of the nearly 100,000 policemen in the Ministry of State Security as they kept their sinister tabs on a third of the entire nation, logging their every move and building up bulging paper files of information on them. …

The trouble was that all this sinister behaviour was denting East Germany’s international credentials. … So in the 1970s, the masterminds at Stasi School — formally known as the College of Legal Studies — decided on a new, more subtle tactic of repression, a way of stamping out rebellion without the overt use of force.

Instead of pounding their suspects into submission, they would send them mad. And so began the policy of Zersetzung.

The word meant disintegration or corrosion or decomposition. Today we would call it ‘gaslighting’ — playing with someone’s mind and self-worth until any resistance crumbles and he or she becomes either compliant or apathetic.

Another phrase for it was ‘no-touch torture’. …

How they did it:

There were scores of ways to play mind games with suspects, in a bid to create panic, confusion and fear. Some were obvious. The phone would ring but when it was picked up there was no one there. Then it would ring again, and again.

But Stasi agents were also known to break into suspects’ homes when they were out and change the time on the alarm clock in the bedroom so it went off unexpectedly — and frighteningly — in the middle of the night.

Pictures on walls were moved, an electric razor in the bathroom left running, socks moved to a different drawer, furniture shifted to a different position, even the coffee mysteriously disappearing from the kitchen and the variety of tea in a cupboard replaced by a different one.

It was the little things like this that freaked people out, leaving them, in the words of the Stasi handbook, ‘paralysed, disorganised and isolated’.

A married target would be sent falsified photographs of himself in a compromising situation or postcards from another woman demanding child support payments; his wife would get a sex toy in the post; a vibrator — which was classified as decadent Western frivolity — would be planted in his home to embarrass and incriminate him.

All these were tactics to undermine family relations and help destroy him.

‘Decomposition was designed to unglue a dissident’s psyche, to chip away at his sanity,’ according to U.S. academic Professor Dominic Tierney of the think-tank the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia.

‘A regime opponent would find himself trapped in a Kafkaesque nightmare. Everywhere he turned, an evil force seemed to be hounding him, even though he could not prove that he had been singled out.

‘Who would believe that the government was secretly stealing his tea towels?

The effects were powerful. Some victims killed themselves, others suffered insomnia, panic attacks and nervous breakdowns. One target called what happened to him ‘an assault on the human soul’.

Insidious step was piled on insidious step to systematically undermine individuals and prevent them from living a normal life. Their homes were bugged, telephones tapped, cars mysteriously sabotaged, bicycle tyres slashed. A promotion at work would be denied for no good reason. Medical notes were interfered with and they were diagnosed for treatment they did not need.

On whispered Stasi instructions, staff in bars and shops would refuse to serve them, leaving them feeling isolated, unwanted, outsiders. …

The aim, writes Max Hertzberg, veteran investigator in the Stasi archive, was to ‘switch off’ a person’s supposed dissident activities. The secret policemen didn’t care whether this happened through disillusionment, fear, burn-out or mental illness. ‘All outcomes were acceptable, and people’s mental health and social standing during or after an operation were of no interest to them.’

Sullying someone’s reputation was always an effective tactic, as a 14-year-old girl named Regina found out when she was targeted as a way of getting at her father, who ran his own business as a hairdresser and was therefore ‘an enemy of socialism’.

The word was put around that she was a Flittchen — promiscuous — and strangers would stalk her, making lewd remarks and touching her up. She was followed and twice men tried to rape her. In the end she gave up the struggle and became a Stasi informant herself, grassing up her own parents. …

Infiltrating dissident groups:

Dissent and distrust would be stirred up among members with rumours of collaboration with the authorities, of informants in their midst, until they were so busy suspecting each other that they had no time to be active opponents of the state any more.

An agent would infiltrate a group and then surreptitiously disrupt what they were doing by, for example, agreeing to tasks but not getting round to them, losing equipment and sabotaging the production of dissident material.

Paralyzing their opponents worked:

All these soul-destroying activities of the Stasi were frankly hideous and there is every indication that they worked. Many opponents of the regime simply caved in and shut down their activities, worn down and worn out by the relentless pressure on them.

‘The Stasi didn’t try to arrest every dissident,’ writes German historian Hubertus Knabe. ‘It preferred to paralyse them and it could do so because it had access to so much personal information and to so many institutions.’ …

Lessons for today:

Billions of people round the world willingly give away their personal details, and intelligence and police agencies, as well as employers, media and criminals, routinely draw on them.

Where the Stasi had to wheedle out the minutiae of people’s lives and then store the information in millions of physical brown files, today it’s all there tucked away in unseen digital files. …

In China … the WeChat messaging service — used by a billion people across the globe — is routinely scanned. Did you say something critical on WeChat, attend church or visit a foreign embassy? Good luck getting a good job, or a visa to travel. Another Stasi dream come true. …

Bullies today use Stasi tactics:

In this modern world of ours, individuals can easily employ Stasi-like digital tools against anyone.

And now you don’t have to break into someone’s home and change the alarm clock or send an unwanted sex toy in the post to unravel and unnerve them any more.

Social media makes gaslighting instant, easy and remote. [Former FBI agent Ralph Hope] cites the growing frequency of ‘doxing’, the publishing on the internet of real or false private information about someone, as a way of intimidating, discrediting or silencing them.

‘It’s done by small groups, individuals or foreign government actors pretending to be someone else.

‘The goal is to destroy the person, in true Stasi fashion.’

So much easier just to mind your own business. Which is what they want.

How the Two Main US Parties Line Up On Race

How the Two Main US Parties Line Up On Race. By the Z-Man.

That was the real danger of Trump. His voters could see with their own eyes that everyone at his rallies was white. His voters were allowed to discuss immigration, trade, and the endless wars. Trump was a lousy President, but he was a dangerous catalyst. He got white people talking about and noticing things that threaten the ruling regime, which is why they hated him. …

Republicans:

About one percent of the GOP vote is black. Another 5% is Hispanic and another 2-3% is coming from other nonwhite groups. Generously, ten percent of the GOP vote is from nonwhites and this has been true for generations. No amount of outreach or wishful thinking is changing that mathematical reality. …

The fact is, Trump was always the white candidate. His support was over 90% white and he won in 2016 by tapping into disaffected white voters in states the Republican Party had abandoned decades ago. …

This is why the Republican Party must be destroyed. It serves no other purpose than to prevent whites from accepting demographic reality. …

Democrats:

The Democrat Party is the antiwhite party. About 27% of their vote is from whites, while the rest is from nonwhites. That number continues to drop. In 2008 whites were 32% of the Democratic Party base. In 2000 it was 34%. The combination of whites heading for minority status and the Democratic Party becoming viciously antiwhite is collapsing their white support. There is a chicken and egg debate here as to whether they are driving whites out of the party or responding to demographics.

Why aren’t these numbers mentioned in the mainstream media? Because they don’t reflect well on the left.

Why aren’t these numbers mentioned in the right’s alternative media? Because the right are still afraid of mentioning race, preferring to instead hope they can persuade significant numbers of non-white voters with their race-blind policies (a hope that is looking increasing forlorn, because they are constantly being outbid by the left).

 

The right is adjusting to the new realities.

 


Because some whites prefer more socialism, because virtue-signaling, and because some are making big bucks out of it.

Stop Saying ‘Of Course, Racism Still Exists, But . . .’

Stop Saying ‘Of Course, Racism Still Exists, But . . .’. By Alexander Zubatov.

We’re living in the midst of a hysterical race war, we have nursery schools shamelessly teaching four-year-olds to become hyperconscious of their and others’ skin pigments; we have universities and employers shamelessly using overt, legal discrimination in admissions, hiring, and promotion; we have blatantly anti-white rhetoric being spouted by all the organs of the mainstream media, the entertainment industry and woke capital; we have the mayor of Chicago openly saying she’s only going to grant one-on-one interviews to minority journalists. …

This is the consequence of one of the two main parties — the Democrats — campaigning since 1990 to attract groups based on their race. Once that strategy was adopted, the rest was inevitable.

So, yes, of course, racism still exists, but . . .

But everything. That “but” is everything. Nearly 60 years of Great Society benefits entailing a massive wealth transfer from white Americans to black Americans. Decades of affirmative action that was supposed to be a temporary fix to level the playing field but slyly morphed into a policy of permanent legalized discrimination. Diversity quotas in nearly every major American institution. Black people overrepresented on TV, in film, among the student bodies and governing boards of our most elite universities.

Mass “antiracism” propaganda campaigns by nearly every organ of government, media, academia, public education, and the entertainment industry. Mandatory (and demonstrably counterproductive) diversity training at nearly every major American institution to remind all members of the white majority that they must now play the part of second-class citizens in their own country.

Flagrant, rampant, anti-white hate being broadcasted out from every literal and figurative American megaphone. Attacks upon “white” this and “white” that: white people, white privilege, white fragility, “whiteness” itself. It is almost clever enough to be a diabolical plot to get people who are being slapped in the face again and again, all while being told they are the aggressors, to radicalize, rise up at last and raise the white supremacist battle flag that the race-hustling minions have been waiting for all along, just to snarl their smug I told you so’s to the world as they point at the long-vanquished ghost finally returned to the realm of the living.

We need not fall for the provocation. But we also need not go around apologizing to or even genuflecting before the race-hustling bigots trying to turn us into guests who’ve outstayed our welcome in our own country. It is time to stop giving ground to the race bullies whose Twitter avatars look big and tough but who will be no match for the far larger community of good people of every race who can — and must — stand united against the hate.

Tribalism has returned. Good one, lefties.

Denmark Cracks Down on Mass Migration

Denmark Cracks Down on Mass Migration. By Soeren Kern.

The Danish Parliament has passed a new law that will allow the government to deport asylum seekers to countries outside of the European Union to have their cases considered abroad. The legislation is widely seen as a first step toward moving the country’s asylum screening process beyond Danish borders.

The law, proposed by the Social Democrat-led government, is aimed at discouraging frivolous asylum applications. …

Danish Immigration Minister Mattias Tesfaye, a Social Democrat and the son of an Ethiopian immigrant, told the Financial Times that Denmark had “identified a handful of countries,” mostly in Africa, that might be open to hosting migrant reception centers….

The usual suspects hate it, for no stated reason:

It has been greeted with fury by those who favor mass migration, presumably out of fear that other EU countries may now follow Denmark’s lead. …

Advocates of mass migration have criticized Denmark’s new law. The European Commission, the EU’s powerful administrative arm, said that it had “fundamental concerns” about deporting asylum seekers to countries outside of Europe….

Look at what else Denmark has done in self defense recently. Note that the sky has not fallen in on them.

June 3, 2021. The Danish Parliament approved by 78 votes to 16 a new law that authorizes the government to revoke Danish citizenship from immigrants who are members of criminal gangs. The law is aimed at tackling a surge in migration-linked violent crime. …

Minister of Justice Nick Hækkerup said:

“Gang crime in no way belongs in Denmark. When foreigners or persons to whom we in Denmark have granted Danish citizenship participate in the gangs’ ruthless crime, it is a fundamental expression of contempt for the society of which they are a part.”

May 26, 2021. The Danish Parliament approved by 67 votes to 26 a first-ever Repatriation Law which authorizes the government to deport failed asylum seekers and other migrants illegally in the country. The law allows the government to monitor foreigners’ mobile phones in order to more easily identify and deport them.

The law was approved amid reports that migrants who had been paid between 100,000 and 225,000 Danish kroner ($16,000 and $37,000) by the Danish government to leave the country took the money but then disappeared without actually leaving. Others took the money and left the country and later returned. …

May 6, 2021. The Danish government tightened citizenship rules. In future, individuals with criminal records will be excluded from obtaining Danish citizenship. Individuals found guilty of committing immigration or social security fraud must wait for six years for their citizenship application to be considered. The new rules also introduced an employment requirement. Applicants must have been in full-time employment or have been self-employed for at least three years and six months within the previous four years. Five questions about Danish values have been added to the citizenship test. Applicants will be required to correctly answer four out of the five questions. “There is great agreement among the parties to the agreement that it is crucial that an applicant has adopted Danish values,” the government said in a statement. …

Spokesman for the Liberal Party, Morten Dahlin, added:

“Danish citizenship is a gift to be earned. Therefore, we must make an effort when handing out passports. Those we welcome in the Danish family must have embraced Denmark and stayed on the right side of the law.” …

March 17, 2021. The Danish government announced a package of new proposals aimed at fighting “religious and cultural parallel societies” in Denmark. A cornerstone of the plan includes capping the percentage of “non-Western” immigrants and their descendants dwelling in any given residential neighborhood. The aim is to preserve social cohesion in the country by encouraging integration and discouraging ethnic and social self-segregation.

March 9, 2021. The Danish Parliament approved a new law that bans foreign governments from financing mosques in Denmark. The measure is aimed at preventing Muslim countries, particularly Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, from promoting Islamic extremism in Danish mosques and prayer facilities.

March 9, 2021. The Danish Parliament approved by 96 votes to 0 a new law that bans religious marriages of minors and forced marriages. Islamic preachers and others who conduct such marriages now face up to two years in prison and deportation from Denmark. …

February 18, 2021. The Danish government announced that it would review the residency status of 350 Syrian migrants from Syria. The move came after the Danish Refugee Board decided that the Rif Damascus region of Syria is now safe and that there is no longer a basis for granting or extending temporary residence permits. …

September 11, 2020. The government proposed an amendment to the Foreigners’ Citizenship Act that would deny Danish citizenship to Danish jihadists — so-called foreign fighters. …

May 31, 2018. The Danish Parliament approved a ban on Islamic full-face veils in public spaces. … In addition, anyone found to be requiring a person through force or threats to wear garments that cover the face could be fined or face up to two years in prison.

Denmark is now over 5% Islamic, the point at which Islam generally starts to get assertive and disruptive:

Denmark, which has a population of 5.8 million, … is now home to sizeable immigrant communities from Syria (35,536); Turkey (33,111); Iraq (21,840); Iran (17,195); Pakistan (14,471); Afghanistan (13,864); Lebanon (12,990) and Somalia (11,282), according to Statista.

Muslims currently comprise approximately 5.5% of the Danish population … As in other European countries, mass migration has resulted in increased crime and social tension. Danish cities have been plagued by shootings, car burnings and gang violence.

Denmark is determined to survive. Sensible people, now bucking the EU’s PC nonsense.

Stephen:

Amazing how easy it actually is to do something about islamic immigration. And this from a left-of-centre government.

hat-tip Stephen Harper

Why I Stopped Hiring Ivy League Graduates

Why I Stopped Hiring Ivy League Graduates. By R.R. Reno.

Student activists don’t represent the majority of students. But I find myself wondering about the silent acquiescence of most students. They allow themselves to be cowed by charges of racism and other sins. I sympathize. The atmosphere of intimidation in elite higher education is intense. But I don’t want to hire a person well-practiced in remaining silent when it costs something to speak up.

The traditional Islamic world exhibited a modicum of tolerance. Christians and Jews were dhimmi, allowed to exist, but on the condition that they accepted their subordinate role in society. While studying this arrangement, sociologists coined the term “dhimmitude,” which refers to the mentality of those who have internalized their second-class status. …

In the past decade, dhimmitude has become widespread. Normal kids at elite universities keep their heads down. Over the course of four years, this can become a subtle but real habit of obeisance, a condition of moral and spiritual surrender.

Some resist. … But even this kind of graduate brings liabilities to the workplace. I’ve met recent Ivy grads with conservative convictions who manifest a form of posttraumatic stress disorder. Others have developed a habit of aggressive counterpunching that is no more appealing in a young employee than the ruthless accusations of the woke.

In recent years, I’ve taken stock of my assumptions about who makes for the best entry-level employee. I have no doubt that Ivy League universities attract smart, talented and ambitious kids. But do these institutions add value? My answer is increasingly negative. Dysfunctional kids are coddled and encouraged to nurture grievances, while normal kids are attacked and educationally abused. …

Large state universities and their satellite schools are also good sources. In my experience, top-performing students at Rutgers are as talented but less self-important than Ivy Leaguers. They’re more likely to accept the authority of those more experienced. This allows for better mentoring, which in turn produces better results over time.

The biggest liability that comes with hiring graduates from places like Haverford and Harvard is that they have been socialized to panic over pseudocrises. Talk of systemic racism and fixation on pronouns inculcate in young people an apocalyptic urgency, a mentality that often disrupts the workplace and encourages navel-gazing about “diversity,” “inclusion” and other ill-defined notions …

A few years ago a student at an Ivy League school told me, “The first things you learn your freshman year is never to say what you are thinking.” The institution he attended claims to train the world’s future leaders. From what that young man reports, the opposite is true. The school is training future self-censors, which means future followers.

The market, as always, soon routes around inefficiencies and non-performance.

Harry And Meghan Announce Birth Of Beautiful ‘Half-Oppressed, Half-Privileged Baby’

Harry And Meghan Announce Birth Of Beautiful ‘Half-Oppressed, Half-Privileged Baby’. By the Babylon Bee.

Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have announced the arrival of a beautiful new baby. In the announcement, they described their new baby as “a beautiful, 7 pound, 11-ounce baby girl who is half-oppressed and half-privileged.”

“Mother and baby are doing well,” said Prince Harry to reporters. “Even in these early days, we are making sure to teach our child that she carries the blood of white colonial oppressors, as well as oppressed people of color. This unique mix may make raising our child extremely difficult.” …

Local non-college-educated electrician Joe Yoder disagrees. “Maybe Harry and Meghan are simply two precious human souls made in God’s image, and their baby is too, and all this ‘oppression’ stuff is nonsense.”

At the time of publication, it is unclear exactly where Mr. Yoder got his crazy ideas, but it’s probably safe to ignore them since he doesn’t have a college degree.

Probably not related:

hat-tip Stephen Neil, Stephen Harper

The Extended Vaccinated Trumpian V-shaped Recovery

The Extended Vaccinated Trumpian V-shaped Recovery. By Lawrence Kudlow.

If Uncle Joe’s policies — I’m calling them his plan for a Green Workers’ Paradise — get through, then the outlook is going to turn poor: stagnation, growth recession with big inflation. …

But does extreme Uncle Joe have enough support in Congress to pass all his legislation? Perhaps not. Some Democrats are balking.

A couple of weeks ago, when the Senate parliamentarian allowed only one 51-vote reconciliation package, I … started getting interested in the possibility that these far-left policies just might not make it across the finish line and that the forces of growth and good and prosperity would eventually prevail.

The congressional Republican Party is completely united against the high-tax Green Workers Paradise.

Increasingly it’s the Democratic congressional caucus that is divided over key issues like massive tax hikes destroying the fossil fuel energy economy. Or like vetoing ID and eligibility so as to nationalize elections. Like permitting the Group of Seven, the European Union, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or other multilateral globalist institutions, to dictate American tax or climate policies.

There’s also a revolt going on around the country against critical race theory, itself a racist concept, canceling our culture, wokeism in the schools and everyone else, defunding the police, and the idea of equity replacing equality.

At least from my perspective, there’s growing optimism in the air because there’s new pessimism among the Democratic Party. Right now not doing stuff is good because the stuff they’re talking about is not good.

The left is moving too fast, misreading the situation because they read their own press.

Trump planned to hold China and its collaborators to account over Covid-19 revealed

Trump planned to hold China and its collaborators to account over Covid-19 revealed. By Sharri Markson.

Donald Trump wanted to haul Anthony Fauci in front of a US presidential commission to give evidence about funding the Wuhan laboratory suspected of leaking Covid-19.

Why did you fund Chinese bioweapon research?

Advanced plans were underway for the special presidential panel, with an executive order even drawn up to hold China and its collaborators accountable and tally a reparations bill to fire off to Beijing.

Trump’s instincts were usually correct, but then some “advisers” would talk him out of it. Again and again.

But the then US president’s senior advisers talked him out of the idea as it was about to be announced, according to insider accounts detailed in a soon-to-be released book on the origins of Covid-19, What Really Happened in Wuhan.

In another bombshell revelation from the book, US officials suspected China had developed a vaccine for Covid-19 prior to the outbreak, with the claims included in a “sensitive but unclassified” internal report.

The book also reveals Joe Biden scrapped a push by the State Department’s Arms, Control, Verification and Compliance Unit to formally confront China in Geneva over its cover-up of Covid-19 and potential breaches of the biological weapons convention in the Wuhan lab. …

Presidential commission:

In a highly controversial move, Mr Trump’s top adviser on the coronavirus, Dr Fauci, would be hauled in to explain why he funded risky coronavirus research in China and the not-for-profit EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak would be grilled on the missing virus database from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, among other topics. …

The Commission would have also tallied a bill to send to Beijing “to recover any damages as well as all costs estimated.”

Such a commission, determined to hold the Communist Party to account and ask it to pay reparations for the economic and human damage from the pandemic, would have been explosive, and significantly corrode already strained China-US relations. Mr Yu had an office set up in the White House to run the commission and Mr Navarro says, “We almost got to the finish line”.

But the presidential commission was killed off during a meeting in the Oval Office where Mr Trump’s economic advisers argued fiercely against it.

Other officials were concerned the commission would be seen as a political manoeuvre so close to the November election and be derided by the media.

One senior White House official said: “It was actually an excellent idea, just floated way too late.”

“It would’ve looked very political, and (we) had tried very, very hard to make the China issue nonpartisan.”

Another senior Mr Trump official said, “An inquiry like that is exactly the right thing but it was going to be almost impossible for President Trump to appoint a commission that was going to be viewed as bipartisan.”

“People were too crazed on the left. I don’t think the left would have participated in it,” he said. …

Big mistake:

Mr Navarro said it was a mistake to kill off the idea. “They are all China apologists,” he said. … “We had a presidential commission for Pearl Harbor, for the BP oil spill and for the Kennedy assassination. We need one into the origins of the coronavirus as well.” …

Mr DiNanno wrote a memo on December 5, 2020 to senior figures in the State Department attaching a “sensitive but unclassified” document which outlined the case for the démarche.

“The research the Chinese were doing on Gain of Function (GOF) was for potential military offensive purposes, they hid it and did not/have not shared what they knew and know,” he wrote. …

When Mr DiNanno called one of the State Department’s top weapons experts into his office to discuss the démarche, she told him she had not read his memo and said, “Your attitude is anti-science”.

Mr DiNanno lost his temper at the official’s intransigence and admits to yelling at her in fury: “I’m the boss and when I ask you to do something, I expect you to do it.” …

“She didn’t want China to have a biological weapon that got out of a lab. It’s too horrible a thing to contemplate,” Mr DiNanno said in hindsight. “But then maybe you should work for another department. If you’re in the biological weapons [agency] you have to deal with biological weapons.” …

Hunter Biden, Chinese dollars, prostitutes… none of that is relevant, is it?

After several months of negotiations, the State Department eventually won interagency clearance on several questions to démarche China …

By then Mr Biden was President and the move was ditched.

“Biden scrapped it, China would have been demarched with Pompeo still in charge,” Mr DiNanno said.

So close. It was left to the Australian PM to naively suggest an international investigation, for which China retaliated by cancelling billions of dollars of trade with Australia. Touchy, eh?

We must all stand together against China on this issue, or there will be more weapons and more lab leaks.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

No need to get more answers, it’s time to act: Pompeo on China

No need to get more answers, it’s time to act. By Mike Pompeo, who was U.S. secretary of state (2018-2021) and director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2017-2018).

Chinese Communist Party malfeasance sped the coronavirus into an unsuspecting world, killing 3.7 million people so far and inflicting global economic havoc.

President Biden has an opportunity and responsibility to lead a fair, effective international response. … Four months into his administration, Biden shows little sign of rising to this task. …

The bill of particulars against the CCP begins with the overwhelming evidence that for weeks in late 2019 and early 2020, as the coronavirus was loose in China and people fell ill, Beijing covered up its dangers, exponentially accelerating international harm. Even as CCP leaders eventually imposed domestic restrictions, they allowed unwitting travelers to visit infected zones and then spread disease and death abroad.

And it was China’s reckless conduct of inherently dangerous activities — whether in unsanitary “wet markets,” where live animals are sold for food, or in CCP-run virology labs — that unleashed the virus in the first place.

No responsible state would have behaved so badly, as most democratic world leaders would privately acknowledge. Yet they hesitate to say so publicly, no doubt aware of what happened last spring when the Australian government urged an independent inquiry into covid-19’s origins: Beijing instantly retaliated with punitive trade sanctions. Xi seems to be reviving the tradition of Chinese emperors who ended their instructions to officials, “Tremble and obey.”

via Australian Political Skeptic.