Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71

      

By Derrick Broze


Civil liberties organizations and activists are pushing back against new laws which criminalize protests and free speech related to pipeline projects.


In late March, a coalition of Native activists, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the ACLU of South Dakota filed suit against the State of South Dakota in an effort to repeal recently passed state laws aimed at curbing “rioters” during the upcoming construction of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline. South Dakota Senate Bill 189 and SB 190 have created controversy due to the potential to prevent peaceful and legal protest of environmental projects.


Senate Bill 189, also known as the Riot Boosting Act, grants the state the authority to sue any individual or organization for what they call “riot-boosting,” or encouraging and/or participating in acts of force or violence. SB 190 sets up funding to pay for state, county, and local police to combat potential pipeline protesters. This means that any individual who is attending a protest or rally against the Keystone Pipeline (or other future pipeline) could become subject to civil or criminal penalties, whether they engage in violence or not. The plaintiffs in the suit argue that the language of the bill is vague and does not clearly define what type of conduct or speech is considered “riot-boosting” or encouraging a riot.




         



      

The Washington Times reports that South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem has stated that the legislation will help shut down protests of the Keystone XL Pipeline and prevent a battle between protesters and police as was seen during the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota in 2016. The Times notes that Noem believes protesters were funded by “out-of-state liberal donors, such as George Soros.” South Dakota State Sen. John Wiik said the introduction of the new laws “stems from what happened up at Cannonball, North Dakota.”


Plaintiffs on the lawsuit include the NDN Collective, the Indigenous Environmental Network, the Sierra Club, Dakota Rural Action, Dallas Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network, and Nick Tilsen, President and CEO of the NDN Collective.




Gov. Kristi Noem’s legislation is yet another way to promote Big Oil interests and prevent dissent by making protesters subject to legal action,” says Kim Pate, Vice President of NDN Collective.


The NDN Collective recently wrote that the broad language in SB 189 means that “anyone that contributes to a protest, whether through monetary donations, donations of supplies, or even through organizing a page on social media, can be held liable, and have civil and criminal penalties for supporting a protest that the state deems ‘violent‘.” Further, the law states that individuals or organizations can be held liable even if they are not on the ground in South Dakota. The NDN Collective also states that the law would allow TransCanada to redirect money seized from protesters and organization towards pipeline construction.


The ACLU of South Dakota has also condemned the new laws, stating, “We’re prepared to stand on the front lines and defend your right to peacefully protest and express your opinions freely.”



72

      

By Nathan Sheard


The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) is about to make a bad privacy situation worse, and it’s urgent that Los Angeles residents contact their city council representatives today to demand they put the brakes on LADOT’s irresponsible data collection. The agency plans to scoop up trip data on every single e-bike and scooter ride taken within the city and, left unchecked, it will do so in the absence of responsible and transparent policies to mitigate the privacy risks to Los Angeles riders.


Take Action


Tell The City Council To Put The Brakes on LADOT’s Rider Surveillance Program 


         



      

Location data is among the most sensitive forms of information related to a person’s privacy. Collected over time, people’s movements from place to place reveal a good deal about them: where they work, where they play, where they worship, their political leanings, and even personal and familial relationships. While the U.S. Supreme Court and California’s State Legislature are in agreement on the sensitivity of location data, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation appears to be much less convinced.


EFF and OTI have called on LADOT to start taking the privacy of Los Angeles residents seriously and cease moving forward with its invasive data collection plans until it has real policies in place to protect the data. Make your voice heard, too.


A Tale of Two API’s


In September, after the streets of Los Angeles were overwhelmed with dockless e-bikes and scooters, the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance calling for the creation of a Shared Mobility Device Pilot Program. In part, the ordinance called on LADOT to issue permits and set guidelines aimed at reducing sidewalk interference and regulating vehicle speed.


LADOT’s Mobility Data Specification (MDS), part of which went into effect shortly after the ordinance passed in September, gives the agency the ability to request massive amounts of information about Los Angeles riders and their day-to-day travels. Specifically, the MDS requires dockless mobility permit holders like LimeBike and Bird to provide LADOT access to a provider-side application processing interface (API), allowing the agency to demand granular trip data for dockless bicycle and scooter rides. This trip data includes extremely precise, time-stamped, location data from the beginning to the end of each trip.


The problem? LADOT has not grappled with the serious privacy and civil liberties issues implicated by such a massive data collection campaign. Months later, despite requests from EFF and the Open Technology Institute; and the Center for Democracy and Technology, LADOT still fails to acknowledge the raw trip data it collects through its MDS is personal data pertaining to real movements of real individuals. More importantly, it has failed to set out basic privacy protections for the sensitive location data it collects every time Los Angeles residents take a dockless scooter or e-bike ride through their city.


Now, despite their lack of a clearly articulated plan to protect Los Angeles residents from the potential harms that could result from the exposure of this data, LADOT plans to make a bad situation worse. Beginning on April 15, LADOT will require dockless mobility operators to push trip data for each and every e-bike and scooter ride taken within the City directly to LADOT, and its for-profit partner Remix, through a new agency-side API as well.


Responsible Data Collection Requires Responsible Data Policy






In our letter to the Los Angeles City Council, EFF and OTI have called on the Council to put the brakes on these additional data sharing requirements before the April 15 deadline. LADOT should by no means be moving forward with increased data demands when it has yet to address the privacy and civil liberties concerns raised by earlier stages of the MDS.


So far, LADOT has issued only high-level “Data Protection Principles,” which amount to a list of aspirations and buzz words you would want to see in a strong policy: ‘de-identification,’ ‘data minimization,’ ‘aggregation.’ But they provide no meaningful, enforceable restrictions to protect the privacy of Los Angeles residents. These “principles” are a far cry from the transparent, actionable, and enforceable data privacy policies we would expect of any city agency demanding this level of sensitive information about Los Angeles residents.


Furthermore, LADOT’s failure to limit law enforcement access to raw trip data through anything less than a warrant signed by a judge is in seeming opposition to the Supreme Court’s holding in Carpenter v. United States, which held that “the Government must generally obtain a warrant supported by probable cause before acquiring” location records. In its ruling, The Court recognized that time-stamped location data “provides an intimate window into a person’s life, revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.” The Supreme Court’s analysis of the sensitivity of location data was echoed by the California State Legislature when it passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)—explicitly listing geolocation information as personal information and affirming that “any information that can be reasonably linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular consumer should be considered “personal information.”


Part of the problem is LADOT’s failure to acknowledge the sensitive nature of trip information, claiming that the MDS requires “no personally identifiable information about users directly.” (emphasis added). But even with names stripped out, location information is notoriously easy to re-identify—particularly for habitual trips.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



To demonstrate the process through which this information could be re-identified, EFF Staff Technologists—in a cursory analysis of publicly available data from New York City’s rideshare program, CitiBike—identified what is likely a single rider regularly leaving home between 7:30 am and 8 am each morning and returning home just after 6 pm each evening.


Unlike New York’s public rideshare program, which requires riders to pick-up and return bikes at docking stations dispersed throughout the city, LADOT’s program applies to dockless bikes and scooters, so the location data acquired through Los Angeles’ dockless mobility program is even more unique to each rider. Yet, even with the data available through CitiBike, one need only wait for our rider’s regular routine to begin one morning in order to confirm his identity. This may seem innocuous, but what if our rider was a domestic violence survivor at risk of being stalked by their assaulter? Or, instead of a regular commute to and from work or school, the data showed our rider taking regular trips to attend Jummah prayer at a local mosque or meetings of a local political organization? The potential threat to their safety as well as religious and political freedom makes it easy to see how critical it is that LADOT and the City Council act to protect this sensitive personal information.


Act Now


LADOT’s GitHub Repository and June 2018 press release announcing “A New Digital Playbook for Mobility” make it clear the department has no intention of stopping at dockless e-bikes and scooters. At the same time, LADOT’s General Manager Seleta Reynolds, in her capacity as an official within the National Association of City Transportation Officials, also seems intent on spreading this methodology to other cities across the U.S.


The people of Los Angeles and cities across the country deserve safe streets. They also deserve the freedom to move about those streets without undue risks to their privacy and physical well-being through unchecked vehicle surveillance. With the April 15 compliance deadline for the next phase in Los Angeles dockless mobility program quickly approaching, it’s urgent that Los Angeles residents contact their City Council representative today, and demand that they put the brakes on LADOT’s irresponsible data collection.



As EFF’s Grassroots Advocacy Organizer, “nash” works directly with community members and organizations to take advantage of the full range of tools provided by access to tech, while engaging in empowering action toward the maintenance of digital privacy and information security.


Having witnessed the results of aggressive and militarized policing in the United States, Honduras, and Palestine; and as a target of racial profiling, biased broken windows policing, and police brutality in his own life; nash has worked extensively to help activists and communities mitigate the damage of harmful interaction with law enforcement. nash co-founded the Black Movement Law Project and is a founding member of Just Info, a 24-hour hot-line providing no-cost legal information in New York City. As a member of Mutant Legal, nash organized training’s in Ferguson, New York, and other cities on how to document police conduct, exercise legal rights, counteract state repression and actively participate in one’s legal defense.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
73

      

By B.N. Frank


The Telecom Industry has admitted there are no studies that show 5G wireless technology is safe.  Since 2017 200+ doctors and scientists have demanded a moratorium on installation due to research that has already proven it’s harmful.


Regardless, 5G promotion and installation has continued (See 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) except for where there has been enough opposition to stop it.


Last week, Brussels adopted a 5G moratorium.  Now Vaud, Switzerland is doing the same.  Thanks to TakeBackYourPower for covering this in detail.


         



      



For more information on what you can do to stop harmful 4G and 5G small cell infrastructure from being installed throughout your community, visit the following websites:



Wireless Information Network
Americans for Responsible Technology
5G Information
Environmental Health Trust
In Power Movement
Last Tree Laws
My Street, My Choice
Our Town Our Choice
Physicians for Safe Technology
Scientists for Wired Tech
TelecomPowerGrab.com
Whatis5G.Info
Zero5G

Image credit: Pixabay


   
74

      

By Daisy Luther


A new gun control bill introduced in the Oregon State Legislature added 45 pages of draconian amendments the night before the vote. SB978 passed the Judiciary Committee yesterday and now heads to the Oregon Senate.


It’s a good thing that some parts of this state have vowed to be 2A sanctuaries because Oregonians are going to need them. If the gun owners – and even pepper spray owners – in other parts of the state hope to defend themselves, they could be facing a vast new array of felony charges.


The battle for the right to bear arms is rapidly spreading across the country. In February, the House of Representatives passed two sweeping national bills.  New Mexico has passed 6 outrageous new laws that sheriffs are refusing to enforce, and sheriffs in Washington state are also rebelling. On the other stand, two states have introduced invasive laws requiring would-be gun owners to hand over access to years of personal social media.


What’s in the unconstitutional bill, you ask?


Well, let’s get started.


         



      

Raising the minimum age


They want to raise the minimum age to buy a gun to 21 in certain cases.


The following may establish a minimum age of 18,19, 20 or 21 years for the purchase of firearms, firearm accessories, firearm components, ammunition or ammunition components, or for the repair or service of a firearm:
“(a) A person transferring a firearm, a firearm accessory, a firearm
component, ammunition or an ammunition component at a gun show;
“(b) A gun dealer; or
“(c) A business engaged in repairing or servicing a firearm


Keeping your gun locked up


Residents will be required to keep their guns locked up at all times that they are not being carried. These rules will render guns all but useless in the event a person needs to access them to protect themselves and their family.



A person who owns or possesses a firearm shall, at all times that the firearm is not carried by or under the control of
the person or an authorized person, secure the firearm:


“(A) With an engaged trigger lock or cable lock that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 10 of this 2019 Act;
“(B) In a locked container, equipped with a tamper-resistant lock, that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 10 of this 2019 Act; or
“(C) In a gun room.
“(b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this subsection, a firearm is not secured if a key, combination or other means of opening a lock or container is readily available to a person the owner or possessor has not authorized to carry or control the firearm.



Failure to follow these rules is a Class C Felony. Also, don’t get excited about the phrase “gun room” because your bedroom doesn’t count.


‘Gun room’ means an area within a building enclosed by walls, a floor and a ceiling, including a closet, that has all entrances secured by a tamper-resistant lock, that is kept locked at all times when unoccupied and that is used for:
“(a) The storage of firearms, ammunition, components of firearms or ammunition, or equipment for firearm-related activities including but not limited to reloading ammunition, gunsmithing and firearm cleaning and maintenance; or
“(b) Conducting firearm-related activities, including but not limited to reloading ammunition, gunsmithing and firearm cleaning and maintenance.


I know that the time I had to protect my daughter with a gun, if my firearm locked up, had on a trigger lock, and had to be loaded, it would have delayed my potential to do so to a horrific degree.


Gun owners are liable for the acts of gun thieves


If your gun/guns are stolen, you must report it. Failure to do so is a Class B felony per weapon. And if the thief hurts or kills someone with the stolen firearm, the owner is liable for two years.


If you have kids, look out.


Any adult who transfers a firearm to a minor is responsible for any actions taken by that minor with the firearm. And if you want to take your kids shooting or hunting, they must be “directly supervised.”  And if a young person gets a hold of a parent’s gun, the parent is liable for the young person’s action. If the gun isn’t secured as per the rules above, then the adult is charged with even more crimes.


“(b) Unlawful storage of a firearm is a Class A violation if the minor who obtains possession of the firearm intentionally, by word or conduct, attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious physical injury.
“(c) Unlawful storage of a firearm is a Class A misdemeanor if the minor who obtains possession of the firearm injures or kills a person by means of the firearm.


Oregon wants to crack down on unregistered guns.


The next section deals with “ghost guns.” Pages 11-19 offer a lengthy list of rules, restrictions, requirements, and record-keeping for the transfer of antique guns, gun parts, and much more. If you have them, you’ll be a felon upon the passage of this bill.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





And as everyone knows, registration is only one step away from confiscation. Here’s an article by Selco, explaining how gun confiscation could go down.


The next section makes it more complicated to transport a gun.


If this passes, gun owners who are not concealed-carry permit holders will have to jump through all sorts of hoops to transport a firearm in a vehicle, including locking it in a box in a “secure” area of the vehicle.


Concealed carry permit fees will go up.


The next section deals with CC permits and the related fees, increasing them in another effort to put an undue burden on law-abiding citizens.


And then there’s the stuff about “public buildings.”


In this bill can find a massive list of restrictions regarding having a gun on the premises of or “near” public buildings. To me, this is the scariest part because it’s so incredibly arbitrary.


In section 25, Local Authority to Regulate Firearms in Public Buildings,” airports, ports, hospitals, schools, colleges, universities probate courts, city halls, homes of officials, and other “public buildings” – and even their grounds – can restrict not only guns but also the following:



“(10) ‘Weapon’ means:


“(a) A firearm;
“(b) Any dirk, dagger, ice pick, slingshot, metal knuckles or any similar instrument or a knife, other than an ordinary pocketknife with a blade less than four inches in length, the use of which could inflict injury upon a person or property;
“(c) Mace, tear gas, pepper mace or any similar deleterious agent as defined in ORS 163.211;
“(d) An electrical stun gun or any similar instrument;
“(e) A tear gas weapon as defined in ORS 163.211;
“(f) A club, bat, baton, billy club, bludgeon, knobkerrie, nunchaku,
nightstick, truncheon or any similar instrument, the use of which could inflict injury upon a person or property; or
“(g) A dangerous or deadly weapon as those terms are defined in ORS
161.015.



Public places as defined in the bill need only to “post a sign, visible to the public, identifying all locations where
the affirmative defense described in ORS 166.370 (3)(g) is limited or precluded.”




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!



And if you ignore the sign and get caught?


You’re guilty of a Class C felony. Even if your gun is unloaded.


Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.


Go here to read the insanity in detail.


Gun grabbers are overjoyed


Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford’s anti-gun foundation was delighted with the bill even before the super-secret amendments were added. In a statement, spokeswoman Robin Lloyd said:



“Gun violence hurts hundreds of Oregon families each year. The proposed provisions in the bills heard today are the critical next steps that Oregon should take to save lives. For example, homemade, untraceable ghost guns pose serious threats to law enforcement and communities impacted by gun violence. A commitment from lawmakers to stem the flow of these firearms will ensure criminals aren’t able to easily get their hands on an undetectable weapon. Today’s hearings highlight a serious commitment by the legislature to reduce the epidemic of gun violence in Oregon. I applaud Attorney General Rosemblum [sic] and the Oregon legislature for prioritizing these lifesaving measures.”


SB 978-1 includes commonsense efforts to reduce gun violence like requiring safe storage of firearms, holding gun owners accountable to make sure kids don’t get their hands on a gun, requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms, and providing increased regulation of 3D-printed guns and unfinished frames or receivers, parts used to produce ghost guns. (source)



If it passes, it will spread.


Gun control laws are like a virus – if they pass in one place they’ll spread to other places. And there’s little reason to believe that in this era of anti-gun hysteria, the legislature will strike down this unconstitutional bill. Thankfully, 13 of 36 Oregon sheriffs have already vowed to make their counties Second Amendment sanctuaries.


But heaven forbid an Oregonian gets caught driving out of their 2A sanctuary county with a usable firearm.


Hat tip: Kris

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 lives in the mountains of Virginia with her two daughters and an ever-growing menagerie. You can find her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
75

      

By Jake Johnson


(CD) – Public Citizen sued Education Secretary Betsy DeVos on Tuesday for allegedly blocking access to the consumer group’s website on her department’s guest Wi-Fi and internal networks.


“This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment,” Public Citizen president Robert Weissman wrote in an email to supporters. “Users attempting to access Public Citizen’s website though the department’s guest wireless networks receive a message that access is ‘in violation of your internet usage policy.’ We requested the department’s policy for blocking access to internet sites, but it hasn’t responded to our request.”


“What we do know,” Weissman continued, “is that our website contains lots of information critical of DeVos and the department.”


         



      

Public Citizen filed its complaint (pdf) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of David Halperin, a Public Citizen board member who frequently attends meetings at the Department of Education and uses its Wi-Fi network.


The organization’s filing alleges that the Department of Education is violating both the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act by blocking access to its website.


“The department and DeVos have no legitimate justification for blocking access to Public Citizen’s website,” the group said in a press release. “Public Citizen’s website includes material on a wide range of issues, including information critical of the department and DeVos… Public Citizen also uses its website to inform the public about litigation, including litigation involving DeVos and the department.”


Public Citizen is seeking “a court order declaring the department’s and DeVos’s action unlawful and enjoining them from blocking access” to its site.


“No way are we going to let them get away with suppressing our views,” Weissman said.


By Jake Johnson / Creative Commons / Common Dreams / Report a typo


   
76

      

By Michael Snyder


According to the Labor Department, the number of job openings in the United States just plunged by the largest amount we have seen in nearly four years.  The latest JOLTS report shows that the number of job openings has declined by 538,000, and that is a really big number for just a single month.  But we shouldn’t be surprised by this at all, because it is perfectly consistent with all of the other dismal economic numbers that have been coming in recently.  An economic slowdown is here, and many believe that it is just getting started.


Very briefly, let’s review some of the reasons why we should expect to see the employment numbers get worse.  As the economy slows down, goods begin to pile up in our warehouses, and that is precisely what the numbers show.  In fact, the inventory-to-sales ratio in the U.S. has now increased for five months in a row.


         



      

Fewer sales should result in less stuff being shipped around the nation by freight, rail and air, and this is yet another thing that we see happening right now.  Overall, U.S. freight shipment volume has dropped for three months in a row.


Once businesses realize that economic conditions have changed, then they start reducing the number of job openings and laying off workers.  That is why employment statistics are often referred to as “trailing indicators”.  The employment numbers don’t usually start to go down until other indicators start dropping first.


And without a doubt, the employment numbers are starting to move.  Continuing jobless claims have been rising at the most rapid pace in 10 years, and U.S. businesses have been adding jobs at the slowest pace in 18 months.


With all of that in mind, we should not be surprised at all by this latest number…


Job openings, a measure of labor demand, tumbled by 538,000 to a seasonally adjusted 7.1 million, the Labor Department said in its monthly Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS, report on Tuesday. The drop was the biggest since August 2015.


That is a really dreadful number, and there is no way to spin it to make it look good.


One factor that is shifting the employment environment is all of the minimum wage laws that are being passed around the country.


A number of liberal enclaves have raised the minimum wage to 15 dollars an hour, and as a result a lot of small businesses have been forced to let workers go…



In what has become just one more example of government intervention going the exact opposite of what socialists intend, minimum wage laws are driving a “payroll tsunami.”  Small businesses are being forced to lay off workers in order to comply with a law demanding an increase in wages.






This isn’t all that surprising. Economists, small business owners, and other analysts have said that the net result of higher wages is a loss of jobs. And small businesses, who don’t have the capital or return that large corporations do, are feeling the proverbial pinch. According to Fox News, several mom-and-pop coffee shops and restaurants, are responding by cutting hours, eliminating jobs or closing down entirely because they can’t keep up with rising wages under the law.



My very first job was flipping burgers for McDonald’s, and I made $3.35 an hour doing it.  As a teenager, I was grateful to have such a job, but now such minimum wage jobs are in danger.  Walmart and other major corporations are already making extensive use of robots to perform basic tasks, and making human workers more expensive is going to hurt those at the bottom of the economic food chain the most.


But for the moment, things are still relatively stable.  Most Americans still seem to believe that the bubble of debt-fueled economic “prosperity” that we are currently enjoying is going to continue for the foreseeable future, and they are spending money as if tomorrow will never come.


According to ZeroHedge, U.S. consumer credit has now surged past the 4 trillion dollar mark…


After a few months of wild swings in mid 2018, in February US consumer credit continued to normalize, rising by $15.2 billion, slightly below the $17 billion expected, following January’s $17.7 billion increase. The continued increase in borrowings saw total credit storm above $4 trillion, and hit a new all time high of $4.045 trillion on the back of a America’s ongoing love affair with auto and student loans, and of course credit cards.


We better hope that the U.S. economy is able to pull out of this new slowdown, because most of us are living right on the edge financially.




Survival Solar Battery Charger - Free Today!



Sadly, we never seem to learn.  The same mistakes that we made last time around are all happening again, and Americans are completely and totally unprepared for what is coming.


And the warnings are all around us.  On Tuesday, the IMF downgraded their forecast for global economic growth for the third time in six months.  Commenting on this downgrade, IMF executive director Christine Lagarde noted that this is a “delicate moment” for the global economy…



Christine Lagarde, the IMF’s executive director, said the global economy is in a “delicate moment.”


“Only two years ago, 75% of the global economy experienced an upswing,” Lagarde said, according to the text of a speech she’s due to give at the US Chamber of Commerce. “For this year, we expect 70% of the global economy to experience a slowdown in growth.”



It is not often that I agree with a globalist like Christine Lagarde, but she is quite right in saying that this is a “delicate moment”.


Global economic numbers have not been this bad since the last financial crisis, and many believe that we have now reached a major turning point.


About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared Now, The Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News. From there, his articles are republished on dozens of other prominent websites. If you would like to republish his articles, please feel free to do so. The more people that see this information the better, and we need to wake more people up while there is still time.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
77

      

By Aaron Kesel


The FBI is abusing ancestry genealogy websites by tapping into their DNA data. What’s worse, these companies are giving up users’ data under presumed consent that is buried in their terms and conditions, according to several reports.


FamilyTreeDNA is the first company known to be cooperating directly with the FBI to give its agents access to its genealogy database, according to a BuzzFeed report.


A FamilyTreeDNA spokesperson told BuzzFeed that FamilyTreeDNA’s agreement with the FBI gives the agency the ability to search more than a million genetic profiles — the majority of which were given by their customers without knowledge of the company’s relationship with the FBI. As part of the arrangement, FamilyTreeDNA has further agreed to test DNA evidence and identify the remains of deceased individuals in violent crimes for the FBI in its own laboratory.


In a statement, FamilyTreeDNA said that customers have the ability to opt out of matching features in their account settings. Doing so would prevent law enforcement from accessing their genetic information, but it also means a user would be unable to find potential family members through the service. According to Gizmodo, the company also seems to admonish those who choose to opt out by suggesting that it could be a “moral responsibility” to give up their private health information to the FBI.


         



      

However, the fact of genealogy companies are being subpoenaed by law enforcement isn’t a secret. In fact, it’s in the disclosures on their websites — FamilyTreeDNA, AncestryDNA, and 23andMe.


Forensic magazine reports that the FBI had previously had access to FamilyTreeDNA’s database before the partnership with the FBI.


After news broke that the FBI was accessing user data, FamilyTreeDNA announced that it would allow its customers to bar law enforcement from accessing their data, Engadget reported.


As an interesting corporate connection to make, one of the co-founders of 23andMe, Anne Wojcicki, is married to Google’s Sergey Brin. Unsurprisingly, Google Inc. also backs the DNA analysis company.


Last year, Drug giant GlaxoSmithKline invested US$300 million in the DNA-testing company in a deal that should raise eyebrows. A drug company working together with a DNA database company … what could possibly go wrong?


Under the deal, GSK has exclusive rights for four years to use 23andMe’s DNA database to develop new medicines using human genetics.


Activist Post reported last year Houston police launched a pilot program with the company ANDE to test a machine called Rapid DNA that runs DNA tests in under two hours.


Local news station KHOU11 reported,


“This rapid DNA is the future. It comes down to when mathematicians stopped using abacuses and started using calculators. It’s that important to criminal justice,” said Lt. Warren Meeler, Houston Police Department, Homicide Division.


As part of the test program, proper protocol for using the technology has been to swab each piece of evidence twice. First, the Houston Forensic Science Center (HFSC) takes an official sample for the lab, then Houston police take a second sample for the trial machine.


Rapid DNA results can’t be used in court, and the technology is only used for investigations in Houston, according to the news outlet.


The technology has some forensic scientists worried about whether it should be used at crime scenes, warning about the accuracy of the technology.


“I think everybody is comfortable that if there is a high concentration of DNA from a single source, so an oral swab from an individual, we’re confident the instruments produce good data. The questions start to come in circumstances where we’ve got touch DNA — smaller quantities of DNA, more mixtures, there’s more people on that doorknob that I’m swabbing – there I’m not sure anybody knows yet,” said Dr. Peter Stout, President and CEO of the Houston Forensic Science Center.


However, further research shows that Houston isn’t the only city using rapid DNA, police departments across the country—have rolled out their own pilot programs to test these miniature portable DNA lab machines that originate from the DHS.


“Rapid DNA, a newly commercialized technology developed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), addresses these challenges by greatly expediting the testing of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) that is the only biometric that can accurately verify family relationships. This technology can be used on the scene of mass fatality events, in refugee camps around the world, or at immigration office,” the DHS’s website reads.


Police departments in Maryland,  Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Florida, Utah, Arizona, Texas, California and in Delaware are or will be using DHS’s Rapid DNA.


An article in ProPublica warns that “over the last decade, collecting DNA from people who are not charged with — or even suspected of — any particular crime has become an increasingly routine practice for police.”


Congress enacted the “DNA Identification Act of 1994” authorizing the FBI to maintain a centralized, national DNA database and to develop a software system to allow for the sharing of information within and between states for law enforcement. By 2004, the resulting system – the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) – connected the databases of all fifty states, which at that time were limited to profiles from those convicted of serious, violent crimes. Signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 30, 2004, the “Justice For All Act”  greatly expanded the CODIS system, allowing collection of DNA from all federal felons and further enabling states to upload to CODIS profiles from anyone convicted of a crime according to a secret congressional WikiLeaks document entitled: “DNA Evidence: Legislative Initiatives in the 106th Congress.”


On January 5, 2006, a barely noticed piece of legislation entitled the “DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005” was also signed into law by President George W. Bush, that severely expanded the government’s authority to collect and permanently retain DNA samples. The bill slipped through virtually unnoticed because the law was, buried in the back of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization bill.


Unbeknownst to the public, the bill granted the government authority to obtain and permanently store DNA from anyone who is arrested as well as non-U.S. citizens detained under federal authorities like Border Control and DHS.


In December of 2015 nearly 10 years later, results from a rapid DNA device were submitted as evidence in a successful murder prosecution for the first time attempted murder case in Richland County, South Carolina. (That article now has been curiously deleted from Reuters and is only available on archive.org)


A bill before Congress, introduced on December 2015 by Sen. Orin Hatch, R-Utah, called for profiles collected by Rapid DNA devices to be connected to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS, the software and national database that stores DNA profiles from federal, state and local forensic laboratories.


During a Senate committee hearing on the Rapid DNA Act of 2015, disgraced former FBI Director James Comey said that passage of the bill “would help us change the world in a very, very exciting way. It will allow us, in booking stations around the country, if someone’s arrested, to know instantly—or near instantly—whether that person is the rapist who’s been on the loose in a particular community before they’re released on bail and get away or to clear somebody, to show that they’re not the person.”






In 2017, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) introduced “the SECURE Act” (S. 2192) on December 5th. The bill largely borrows from two other federal bills—H.R. 3548 and S. 1757


The Rapid DNA Act of 2017, S.139 and HR.510 passed last year, amended the DNA Identification Act of 1994, allowing previous hurdles to be surpassed by the new technology.


The bill was sponsored by U.S. Senate sponsor Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and lead co-sponsor Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) as well as House sponsor Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and lead co-sponsor Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA), along with 12 Senate and 24 House co-sponsors for their support, Business Wire reported.



“Today marks a landmark day in more efficiently fighting crime and supporting law enforcement,” stated Robert Schueren, President and CEO of IntegenX. “IntegenX products have already enabled numerous DNA profile uploads to our nation’s DNA database (CODIS). We look forward to the updated FBI guidelines, and subsequent CODIS uploads from the booking environment.”


“Rapid DNA is a promising new technology and an effective tool for law enforcement – I’m thrilled to be seeing it signed into law. This technology will help quickly identify arrestees and offenders, reduce the overwhelming backlog in forensic DNA analysis, and make crime fighting more efficient while helping to prevent future crimes from occurring. It will also save time and taxpayer dollars,” commented Congressman Sensenbrenner, Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Oversight.


“This bill will help law enforcement agencies solve crimes faster and help those wrongfully accused to be exonerated from crimes they did not commit—almost instantly. The Rapid DNA Act updates the statutory framework in how DNA samples are entered into the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System by allowing the use of this remarkable Rapid DNA technology,” stated Senator Hatch.



In 2017, President Trump signed into law the Rapid DNA Act, which, enables police booking stations in several states to connect their Rapid DNA machines to CODIS, the national DNA database.


But CODIS isn’t only shared by the states. We learn from a Plus D WikiLeaks release, that the DNA information processing and telecommunications system was gifted to Argentina in 2009 by U.S. Ambassador Earl Wayne, according to a cable. The system was gifted to “help the province solve crimes and exonerate innocent suspects.”


“On the very topical issue of crime and personal security, the Ambassador helped launch the province’s participation in the Combined DNA Indexing System (CODIS). CODIS, an automated DNA information processing and telecommunications system, was donated by the FBI,” the cable reads.


Meanwhile, another WikiLeaks Plus D cable talks about “specialized training and state of the art equipment donations enabling Colombian forensic labs to investigate human rights violations more effectively. These donations included the enhancement of DNA analyzers and the CODIS database; upgrading of the Integrated Ballistics Identification System (IBIS); updating of forensic imaging and document analysis systems; upgrading of the automated fingerprint identification system; and the design and installation of a wireless network providing inter-agency connectivity and information sharing,” according to the cable, entitled: “SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY: THE U.S. RECORD IN COLOMBIA 2004-2005.”


This leads us to several questions.  First, how many more countries were given access to the CODIS system; is this DNA database shared amongst countries in an agreement similar to the Five Eyes spying arrangement, or did the U.S. sell the software similar to the infamous PROMIS software? And, like PROMIS (Inslaw scandal), does this software have a backdoor for U.S. intel agencies to access other countries’ DNA data?


These are all questions we should find ourselves asking.


Even the DHS is looking into using the technology for immigration purposes to stop adults fleeing with kids and ensure that they are their actual relatives. But later the DHS postponed the technology in 2015 to develop a stricter protocol for its use, Nextgov reported.





American Natural Superfood - Free Sample



“The implementation of the program has been postponed until new voluntary consent forms are developed as well as operational protocols for translation,” Department of Homeland Security spokesman John Verrico told Nextgov in an email.


DHS documents obtained by the EFF state that the military may be interested in using rapid DNA in the future to reveal information about individuals such as their sex, race, health, and age.


In a 2013 privacy impact assessment for Rapid DNA pilot testing, the DHS stated that the portion of DNA analyzed by the devices does not reveal any “sensitive information about an individual, and will not, under any circumstances, be used for decisions based on those criteria.”


The EFF disagrees with Comey and the DHS, and has previously stated that the test pilot DNA program “may create controversy,” according to internal documents obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation civil liberties group. In a high priority e-mail from 2011, a DHS officer wrote to colleagues that “if DHS fails to provide an adequate response to media inquiries regarding RapidDNA quickly, civil rights/civil liberties organizations may attempt to shut down the test program.”


There are already numerous issues with keeping a DNA data bank. Privacy and civil rights advocates and watchdog groups have argued against the practice in California of retaining DNA from legally innocent people, thereby violating constitutional privacy rights, Mercury News reported.


Further, forensic labs (including the FBI) have shown flaws over the last few years exposing shoddy laboratory procedures including – grossly inaccurate testimony by law enforcement, and, in a few cases, outright false documentation or mixing up of results. DNA has been constantly linked to the wrong person similar to facial recognition biometric data.


If that’s not a reason enough for us to be skeptical about these systems, in 2015, the FBI found DNA data errors within its own national CODIS database, The Washington Post reported.


In another case, familial DNA was the culprit responsible for a false positive on a murder in Idaho. This resulted in Michael Usry in a police station with an FBI agent cotton swabbing him as he was completely confused by what was happening, Wired reported in 2015.


While genetics might be able to identify a felon, forensic scientists and lawyers agree that the information gathered can’t be able to gather more than that. As the Supreme Court wrote in its Maryland v King decision to allow DNA collection, this issue is “open to dispute.”


Forensic magazine notes the dangers of a DNA database, stating its a threat to “medical privacy.”


These genetic databases are an absolute gold mine for law enforcement. I am not sure anyone can argue that catching serial killers and rapists, or using CODIS for tracking missing children is bad; however, problems start to arise when these genetic databases are used to target people for deportation or sweep up the completely innocent in its dragnet.


Along with facial recognition, DNA databases are the first step towards an Orwellian society where the government knows your whereabouts, at all times. It’s a nightmarish outlook for our future; but what’s worse in some instances, like in the form of DNA, we are being tricked to give up our freedoms and privacy.  As a CRS Congressional “think tank” report warned:  “future DNA collection cases might raise graver Fourth Amendment privacy concerns than previous cases.”


The FBI plans to begin rolling out Rapid DNA to more police departments slowly in 2019, according to a Washington Post report.


“Our goal in 2019 is to be able to have a pilot project done where we actually develop a DNA profile in a booking station, with no human review, and have it electronically enrolled and searched in the national database,” Thomas Callaghan, chief biometric scientist for the FBI Laboratory, told the news outlet. “We have to ensure that the quality that’s done in a lab can be done in a booking station.


Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


      
   

78

      

By Press For Truth


Censorship is becoming one of the main issues moving forward for any freedom-loving individual who likes to challenge the status quo…


In the wake of the banning of Alex Jones, we quickly saw the great Facebook purge of 2018 where Press For Truth and many others in the field of alternative media were taken out in one fell swoop!


Fast forward to spring of 2019 and now Jordan Peterson, Tommy Robinson, David Icke, Faith Goldy and many others are currently on the chopping block and they’re getting axed!


In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth covers the latest censorship news that has devolved into digital book burnings and flat-out bans on ideas and opinions, while also providing a glimmer of hope moving forward when it comes to decentralized blockchain-based media sharing platforms.


         



      


Sources:



https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/0…
https://www.cnbc.com/id/40113769
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/20…
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/j…
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb…
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-2…
Global 5G WIFI: You Won’t Believe What They NOW Have Planned For Humanity! With David Icke! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Jhu…

David Icke opens up about Visa ban in Australia – Studio 10 | 21 February 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpdjr…

https://twitter.com/DanDicksPFT/statu…
https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/08/f…

http://vaxxedthemovie.com/vaxxed-pull… https://pics.me.me/ifyou-dontsupport-…


https://pressfortruth.ca/donate/


NEW: Subscribe to our newsletter: http://eepurl.com/c6Kx35


   
79

      

By Press For Truth


Censorship is becoming one of the main issues moving forward for any freedom-loving individual who likes to challenge the status quo…


In the wake of the banning of Alex Jones, we quickly saw the great Facebook purge of 2018 where Press For Truth and many others in the field of alternative media were taken out in one fell swoop!


Fast forward to spring of 2019 and now Jordan Peterson, Tommy Robinson, David Icke, Faith Goldy and many others are currently on the chopping block and they’re getting axed!


In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth covers the latest censorship news that has devolved into digital book burnings and flat-out bans on ideas and opinions, while also providing a glimmer of hope moving forward when it comes to decentralized blockchain-based media sharing platforms.


         



      


Sources:



https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/0…
https://www.cnbc.com/id/40113769
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/20…
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/j…
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb…
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-2…
Global 5G WIFI: You Won’t Believe What They NOW Have Planned For Humanity! With David Icke! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Jhu…

David Icke opens up about Visa ban in Australia – Studio 10 | 21 February 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpdjr…

https://twitter.com/DanDicksPFT/statu…
https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/08/f…

http://vaxxedthemovie.com/vaxxed-pull… https://pics.me.me/ifyou-dontsupport-…


https://pressfortruth.ca/donate/


NEW: Subscribe to our newsletter: http://eepurl.com/c6Kx35


   
80

      

By Arjun Walia


Nonviolence has been a practice that many prominent social activists have practiced, including Henry David Thoreau, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Gandhi.


When one thinks about major events in history involving human rights, many of these events are centered around a violent act that led to a solution and measures to prevent such acts, such as genocide or war crimes, from happening again.


However, another form of social activism presents an alternative solution to war and a violent resolution to problems. Nonviolence, or the active practice of refusing to use violence to solve violent problems, has been a part of social activism for hundreds of years.


Famous practitioners of nonviolence include Henry David Thoreau, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Gandhi.


         



      

Nonviolence


While the organized term “nonviolence” is relatively new in the way that people respond to violence, organized resistance to oppression has been noted throughout history.


The first event associated with contemporary nonviolent practices was Mohandas Gandhi’s campaign for native rights in South Africa in 1906. Previous nonviolent acts, such as Henry David Thoreau’s practices of civil disobedience as chronicled in his work “On Resistance to Civil Government” and Harriet Tubman’s Underground Railroad system are also examples of nonviolent protests.


Those who practice nonviolence are also politically involved in their communities and work in many areas of their private lives to promote the dignity of individuals.


Practicing nonviolence is, however, different than being a pacifist. Believing and living nonviolent practices means being skeptical that violence is a solution to societal problems. These beliefs are carried out in a nonviolent person’s lifestyle by promoting peaceful resolutions to violent problems.


Practicing Nonviolence




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





Nonviolence is more than just an idea to bring about social change. According to the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACTUP), nonviolence is what many practitioners call an “active lifestyle,” meaning that it is not a philosophy to believe in, but to live. Nonviolent people also incorporate practices such as purchasing from socially responsible companies, using nonviolent discipline, and many other ideas while trying to live peacefully.


Those who lead nonviolent lifestyles speak out against societal issues in peaceful ways. Protests, sit-ins, limited property damage, hunger strikes, marches, and peaceful civil resistance are ways in which those skeptical of violence make their voices heard as a collective unit.


Nonviolence is also celebrated every year during the Season for Nonviolence, which begins on January 30 and ends April 4. The dates commemorate the assassinations of Mahatma Gandhi (January 30) and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (April 4) and the work of social activists and advocates of peace is celebrated during this time.


Nonviolence vs. Pacifism


Although the two schools of thought may sound similar, there is a difference between nonviolence and pacifism.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!



Those who live a nonviolent lifestyle are not completely against violence. However, according to the Ashland Center for Nonviolence, nonviolent practitioners are highly skeptical that violence is a solution to violent problems, but also understand that sometimes human emotions go unchecked and can become violent before the emotions are realized. They are, instead, committed to finding alternative peaceful solutions to violent problems and to promoting the dignity of all individuals.


Pacifists, on the other hand, are against violence in all forms. Those who believe in pacifism may not take action on political or societal issues to avoid possible violent confrontation.


Violence is a problem that has been present in societies around the world throughout history. However, practicing nonviolence to solve social issues provides an alternative school of thought to solve problems and heal wounds caused by violence without creating new ones.


Arjun is an independent researcher, writer, speaker and a consciousness activist. He writes for Activist Post and Natural Blaze.


Image credit: Pixabay


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      






Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
+1
Pin



Previous post


Next post


   


      About the Author
   


   
      
         
            
      
      
         
            Arjun         
      
      
         Arjun is an independent researcher, writer, speaker and consciousness activist      
   


      
   
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10