http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tdrPwnK-P40
Some bloggers like the Watchman, believe PRISM stands for:
Pervasive
Reactive
Intrusive
Spying
Mechanism
 |
| The FBI was one of Palantir's customers |
John Poindexter, founder of the Information Awareness Office advised Palantir founders.
Peter Thiel was an early supporter of Face book and and founded Pay Pal and is a co-founded Palantir. Thiel is a Bilderberg steering committee member.
Alexander Karp, the founder and CEO of Palantir Technologies, Jeff Bezos from Amazon and Erik Schmidt of Google spoke at this year's 2013 Bilderberg meeting.
The Bilderbergers are very focused on "Big Data" or data surveillance and data mining on people. I view the Palantir applications to be very dangerous because they can easily be used against the American people and innocent people around the world. This all encompassing information databases will be used by the Illuminati, the New World Order and the anti-christ to surveil, find and capture enemies of the state. The ex-government speaker loves to use the term situational awareness. Kinetic operations are war situations. If you wish you can start watching the Palantir Technologies video at the 7 minute mark. In short, with Palantir mobile you can run but not hide. By the way, Palantir Technologies was funded by the CIA via In-Q-Tel which gave Palantir $2 million dollars of the total of $40M in start-up money. Palantir funnels data to the NSA.
Also keep in mind The Government's Information Awareness Office was founded by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in January 2002. The Palantir Technologies video is after this article.
 |
| Notice that satan's all seeing evil eye is focused specifically on North America and then the rest of the world. |
The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying surveillance and
information technology to track and monitor terrorists and otherasymmetric threats to U.S. national security, by achieving Total Information Awareness (TIA).
This
would be achieved by creating enormous computer databases to gather and store
the personal information of everyone in the United States, including personal
e-mails, social networks, credit card records, phone calls, medical records,
and numerous other sources, without any requirement for a search warrant.[1] This
information would then be analyzed to look for suspicious activities,
connections between individuals, and "threats".[2] Additionally,
the program included funding for biometric surveillance technologies that could identify and
track individuals using surveillance cameras, and other methods.[2]
Following
public criticism that the development and deployment of this technology could
potentially lead to a mass surveillance system, the IAO was defunded by Congress in 2003. However, several IAO projects
continued to be funded, and merely run under different names
The
IAO was established after Admiral John Poindexter, former United
States National Security Advisor to
President Ronald Reagan and SAIC executive Brian Hicks approached the US Department of
Defense with the idea
for an information awareness program after the attacks of September
11, 2001.[5]
Poindexter
and Hicks had previously worked together on intelligence-technology programs
for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. DARPA agreed to host the
program and appointed Poindexter to run it in 2002.
The
IAO began funding research and development of the Total Information Awareness
(TIA) Program in February 2003 but renamed the program the Terrorism Information Awareness Program in May
that year after an adverse media reaction to the program's implications for
public surveillance. Although TIA was only one of several IAO projects, many
critics and news reports conflated TIA with other related research projects of
the IAO, with the result that TIA came in popular usage to stand for an entire
subset of IAO programs.
The
TIA program itself was the "systems-level" program of the IAO that
intended to integrate information technologies into a prototype system to
provide tools to better detect, classify, and identify potential foreign
terrorists with the goal to increase the probability that authorized agencies
of the United States could preempt adverse actions. As a systems-level program
of programs, TIA's goal was the creation of a "counter terrorism
information architecture" that integrated technologies from other IAO
programs (and elsewhere, as appropriate). The TIA program was researching,
developing, and integrating technologies to virtually aggregate data, to follow
subject-oriented link analysis, to develop descriptive and predictive models
through data mining or human hypothesis, and to apply such models to additional
data sets to identify terrorists and terrorist groups.
Among
the other IAO programs that were intended to provide TIA with component data
aggregation and automated analysis technologies were the Genisys, Genisys
Privacy Protection, Evidence Extraction and Link Discovery, and Scalable Social
Network Analysis programs.
On
August 2, 2002, Dr. Poindexter gave a speech at DARPAtech 2002 entitled
"Overview of the Information Awareness Office"[7] in
which he described the TIA program.
In
addition to the program itself, the involvement of Poindexter as director of
the IAO also raised concerns among some, since he had been earlier convicted of
lying to Congress and altering and destroying documents pertaining to the Iran-Contra Affair,
although those convictions were later overturned on the grounds that the
testimony used against him was protected.
On
January 16, 2003, Senator Russ Feingold introduced legislation to suspend the
activity of the IAO and the Total Information Awareness program pending a
Congressional review of privacy issues involved.[8] A
similar measure introduced by Senator Ron Wyden would
have prohibited the IAO from operating within the United States unless
specifically authorized to do so by Congress, and would have shut the IAO down
entirely 60 days after passage unless either the Pentagon prepared a report to
Congress assessing the impact of IAO activities on individual privacy and civil
liberties or the President certified the program's research as vital to
national security interests. In February 2003, Congress passed legislation
suspending activities of the IAO pending a Congressional report of the office's
activities (Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, No.108–7, Division M,
§111(b) [signed Feb. 20, 2003]).
In
response to this legislation, DARPA provided Congress on May 20, 2003 with
a report on its activities.[9] In
this report, IAO changed the name of the program to the Terrorism Information Awareness Program and
emphasized that the program was not designed to compile dossiers on US
citizens, but rather to research and develop the tools that would allow
authorized agencies to gather information on terrorist networks. Despite the
name change and these assurances, the critics continued to see the system as
prone to potential misuse or abuse.
As
a result House and Senate negotiators moved to prohibit further funding for the
TIA program by adding provisions to the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 2004[10] (signed
into law by President Bush on October 1, 2003). Further, the Joint Explanatory
Statement included in the conference committee report specifically directed
that the IAO as program manager for TIA be terminated immediately
IAO research
IAO research was conducted along
five major investigative paths: secure collaboration problem solving;
structured discovery; link and group understanding; context aware
visualization; and decision making with corporate memory.
Among the IAO projects were:
Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID)
Diagram (from official IAO site)
describing capabilities of the "Human Identification at a Distance
(HumanID)" project[12]
The Human Identification at
a Distance (HumanID) project developed automated biometric identification technologies to
detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances for "force
protection", crime prevention, and "homeland security/defense"
purposes.[12]
Its goals included programs to:[12]
·
Develop algorithms for locating and acquiring subjects out to 150
meters (500 ft) in range.
·
Fuse face and gait recognition into a 24/7 human identification
system.
·
Develop and demonstrate a human identification system that
operates out to 150 meters (500 ft) using visible imagery.
·
Develop a low power millimeter wave radar system for wide field of
view detection and narrow field of view gait classification.
·
Characterize gait performance from video for human identification
at a distance.
·
Develop a multi-spectral infrared and visible face recognition
system.
Evidence Extraction and Link Discovery
Evidence Extraction and Link
Discovery (EELD) development of technologies and tools for automated
discovery, extraction and linking of sparse evidence contained in large amounts
of classified and unclassified data sources (such as phone call records from
the NSA call database,
Internet histories, or bank records).[13]
EELD was designed to design systems
with the ability to extract data from multiple sources (e.g., text messages,
social networking sites, financial records, and web pages). It was to develop
the ability to detect patterns comprising multiple types of links between data
items or people communicating (e.g., financial transactions, communications,
travel, etc.).[13]
It is designed to link items
relating potential "terrorist" groups and scenarios, and to learn
patterns of different groups or scenarios to identify new organizations and
emerging threats.[13]
Genisys
Genisys aimed at developing
technologies which would enable "ultra-large, all-source information
repositories".[14]
Vast amounts of information were
going to be collected and analyzed, and the available database technology at the time was
insufficient for storing and organizing such enormous quantities of data. So
they developed techniques for virtual data aggregation in order to support
effective analysis across heterogeneous databases, as well as unstructured
public data sources, such as the World Wide Web. "Effective analysis
across heterogeneous databases" means the ability to take things from
databases which are designed to store different types of data—such as a
database containing criminal records, a phone call database and a foreign
intelligence database. The World Wide Web is considered an "unstructured
public data source" because it is publicly accessible and contains many
different types of data—such as blogs, emails, records of visits to web sites,
etc.—all of which need to be analyzed and stored efficiently.[14]
Another goal was to develop "a
large, distributed system architecture for managing the huge volume of raw data
input, analysis results, and feedback, that will result in a simpler, more
flexible data store that performs well and allows us to retain important data
indefinitely."[14]
Scalable Social Network Analysis
Scalable Social Network Analysis
(SSNA) aimed at developing techniques based on social network
analysis for modeling the key characteristics of terrorist
groups and discriminating these groups from other types of societal groups.[15]
Sean McGahan, of Northeastern
University said the following in his study of SSNA:
The purpose of the SSNA algorithms program is to extend techniques
of social network analysis to assist with distinguishing potential terrorist
cells from legitimate groups of people ... In order to be successful SSNA will
require information on the social interactions of the majority of people around
the globe. Since the Defense Department cannot easily distinguish between
peaceful citizens and terrorists, it will be necessary for them to gather data
on innocent civilians as well as on potential terrorists.
—Sean McGahan[15]
Futures Markets Applied to Prediction (FutureMAP)
Main
article: Future Map
Further
information: Policy Analysis
Market
Futures Markets Applied to
Prediction (FutureMAP) was intended to harness collective
intelligence by researching prediction market techniques for avoiding
surprise and predicting future events. The intent was to explore the
feasibility of market-based trading mechanisms to predict political
instability, threats to national security, and other major events in the near
future.[16] In layman's terms, FutureMap
would be a website that allowed people to bet on when a terrorist attack would
occur.[17] The bookie would have been the
federal government.[17] Several Senators were outraged
at the very notion of such a program.[17] Then Senate Minority Leader
Tom Daschle said on the floor of the Senate "I couldn't believe that we
would actually commit $8 million to create a Web site that would encourage
investors to bet on futures involving terrorist attacks and public
assassinations. ... I can't believe that anybody would seriously propose that
we trade in death. ... How long would it be before you saw traders investing in
a way that would bring about the desired result?"[17] Democratic Senator from
Oregon, Ron Wyden said, "The idea of a federal betting parlor on
atrocities and terrorism is ridiculous and it's grotesque."[17] The ranking Democrat on the
Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, thought the program was
so ridiculous that he thought initial reports of it were the result of a hoax.[17] The program was then dropped.
TIDES
Translingual Information Detection,
Extraction and Summarization (TIDES) developing advanced language processing
technology to enable English speakers to find and interpret critical
information in multiple languages without requiring knowledge of those
languages.[18]
Outside groups (such as
universities, corporations, etc.) were invited to participate in the
annual information retrieval,
topic detection and tracking, automatic content extraction, and machine translation evaluations
run by NIST.[18]
Genoa / Genoa II
Genoa and Genoa II focused
on providing advanced decision-support and collaboration tools to rapidly deal
with and adjust to dynamic crisis management and allow for inter-agency
collaboration in real-time.[19][20] Another function was to be
able to make estimates of possible future scenarios to assist intelligence
officials in deciding what to do,[21] in a manner similar to the
DARPA's Deep Green program which is designed to
assist Army commanders in making battlefield decisions.
War gaming the Asymmetric Environment (WAE)
War gaming the Asymmetric
Environment (WAE) focused on developing automated technology
capable of identifying predictive indicators of terrorist activity or impending
attacks by examining individual and group behavior in broad environmental
context and examining the motivation of specific terrorists.[22]
Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-text (EARS)
Effective Affordable Reusable Speech-to-text (EARS) to develop
automatic speech-to-text transcription
technology whose output is substantially richer and much more accurate than
previously possible. EARS was to focus on everyday human-to-human speech from
broadcasts and telephone conversations in multiple languages.[23] It is expected to increase the
speed with which speech can be processed by computers by 100 times or more.[21]
The intent is to create a core
enabling technology (technology that is used as a component for future
technologies) suitable for a wide range of future surveillance applications.[23]
Babylon
Babylon to develop rapid, two-way,
natural language speech translation interfaces and platforms for the war fighter
for use in field environments for force protection, refugee processing, and
medical triage.[24]
Bio-Surveillance
Bio-Surveillance to develop the necessary
information technologies and resulting prototype capable of detecting the
covert release of a biological pathogen automatically, and significantly
earlier than traditional approaches.[25]
Communicator
Communicator was to develop "dialogue
interaction" technology that enables war fighters to talk with computers,
such that information will be accessible on the battlefield or in command
centers without ever having to touch a keyboard. The Communicator Platform was
to be both wireless and mobile, and to be designed to function in a networked
environment.[26]
The dialogue interaction software
was to interpret the context of the dialogue in order to
improve performance, and to be capable of automatically adapting to new topics
(because situations quickly change in war) so conversation is natural and
efficient. The Communicator program emphasized task knowledge to compensate for
natural language effects and noisy environments. Unlike automated translation
of natural
language speech, which is much more complex due to an
essentially unlimited vocabulary and grammar, the Communicator program is
directed task specific issues so that there are constrained vocabularies (the
system only needs to be able to understand language related to war). Research
was also started to focus on foreign language computer interaction for use in
supporting coalition operations.[26]
Live exercises were conducted
involving small unit logistics operations involving the United States Marines to
test the technology in extreme environments.
Components of TIA projects that continue to be developed
Despite the withdrawal of funding
for the TIA and the closing of the IAO, the core of the project survived.[5][6][27] Legislators
included a classified annex to the Defense Appropriations Act that preserved
funding for TIA's component technologies, if they were transferred to other
government agencies. TIA projects continued to be funded under classified
annexes to Defense and Intelligence appropriation bills. However, the act also
stipulated that the technologies only be used for military or foreign
intelligence purposes against foreigners.[28]
TIA's two core projects are now
operated by Advanced Research and Development Activity (ARDA) located among the
60-odd buildings of "Crypto City" at NSA headquarters in Fort Meade,
MD. ARDA itself has been shifted from the NSA to the Disruptive Technology Office (run by
to the Director of National Intelligence).
They are funded by National Foreign Intelligence Program for foreign
counter terrorism intelligence purposes.
One technology, codenamed
"Basketball" is the Information Awareness Prototype System, the core
architecture to integrate all the TIA's information extraction, analysis, and
dissemination tools. Work on this project is conducted by SAIC through its
former Hicks & Associates consulting
arm run by former Defense and military officials and which had originally been
awarded US$19 million IAO contract to build the prototype system in late 2002.[29]
The other project has been
re-designated "TopSail" (formerly Genoa II) and would provide IT
tools to help anticipate and preempt terrorist attacks. SAIC has also been
contracted to work on Topsail, including a US$3.7 million contract in 2005.
Media coverage and criticism
The first mention of the IAO in the
mainstream media came from The New York Times reporter John Markoff on
February 13, 2002.[30] Initial
reports contained few details about the program. In the following months, as
more information emerged about the scope of the TIA project, civil
libertarians became concerned over what they saw as the
potential for the development of an Orwellianmass
surveillance system.
On November 14, 2002, The
New York Times published a column by William Safire in
which he claimed "[TIA] has been given a $200 million budget to create
computer dossiers on 300 million Americans."[31] Safire
has been credited with triggering the anti-TIA movement.[32]
See also
·
ADVISE
·
Combat Zones That See, or CTS, a project to
link up all security cameras citywide and "track everything that
moves".
·
Intellipedia,
a collection of wikis used by the U.S. intelligence community to "connect
the dots" between pieces of intelligence
·
MALINTENT --
similar program to HumanID
·
TALON
References
1.
^ John Markoff (November 22, 2002).
"Pentagon Plans a Computer System That Would Peek at Personal Data of
Americans". The New York Times.
2.
^ a b Total Information Awareness (TIA), Electronic
Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
3.
^ Dismantling the Empire: America's Last
Best Hope By Chalmers Johnson ISBN
0-8050-9303-6 "Congress's action did not end the Total
Information Awareness program. The National Security Agency secretly decided to
continue it through its private contractors."
4.
^ "Total/Terrorism
Information Awareness (TIA): Is It Truly Dead?". Electronic
Frontier Foundation (official website). 2003. Retrieved 2009-03-15.
5.
^ a b c Harris,
Shane (Feb. 23, 2006). "TIA Lives
On".National Journal. Retrieved 2009-03-16.[dead link]
6.
^ a b "U.S. Still
Mining Terror Data". Wired News. February 23, 2004.
10.
^ Department of Defense Appropriations Act,
2004, Pub. L. No. 108–87, § 8131, 117 Stat. 1054, 1102 (2003)
12.
^ a b c "Human Identification at
a distance". Information Awareness Office (official
website -- mirror). Retrieved 2009-03-15.
13.
^ a b c "Evidence
Extraction and Link Discovery".Information Awareness Office
(official website -- mirror). Retrieved 2009-03-15.
15.
^ a b Ethier,
Jason. "Current
Research in Social Network Theory". Northeastern
University College of Computer and Information Science. Retrieved
2009-03-15.[dead link]
21.
^ a b Belasco,
Amy (January 21, 2003). "EFF: Memorandum Regarding TIA
Funding". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved
2009-03-15.
26.
^ a b c "Communicator". Information
Awareness Office (official website). Retrieved 2009-03-15.
28.
^ The Total Information Awareness
Project Lives On,Technology Review, 26 April 2006, retrieved
27 July 2007
30.
^ Markoff, John (February 13, 2002). "Chief
Takes Over at Agency To Thwart Attacks on U.S". The New
York Times. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
31.
^ Safire, William (2002-11-14). "You Are a
Suspect". The New York Times. p. 2. Retrieved
2010-10-21.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aja8ANrhg7U#!
No comments:
Post a Comment