Tag Archives: government

Proposed Plan to Improve the Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Accountability of Federal Agencies


The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 13, 2017

Presidential Executive Order on a Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch

EXECUTIVE ORDER

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR REORGANIZING THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Purpose.  This order is intended to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the executive branch by directing the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director) to propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies (as defined in section 551(1) of title 5, United States Code), components of agencies, and agency programs.

Sec. 2.  Proposed Plan to Improve the Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Accountability of Federal Agencies, Including, as Appropriate, to Eliminate or Reorganize Unnecessary or Redundant Federal Agencies.  (a)  Within 180 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall submit to the Director a proposed plan to reorganize the agency, if appropriate, in order to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of that agency. 

(b)  The Director shall publish a notice in the Federal Register inviting the public to suggest improvements in the organization and functioning of the executive branch and shall consider the suggestions when formulating the proposed plan described in subsection (c) of this section.

(c)  Within 180 days after the closing date for the submission of suggestions pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, the Director shall submit to the President a proposed plan to reorganize the executive branch in order to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of agencies.  The proposed plan shall include, as appropriate, recommendations to eliminate unnecessary agencies, components of agencies, and agency programs, and to merge functions.  The proposed plan shall include recommendations for any legislation or administrative measures necessary to achieve the proposed reorganization.

(d)  In developing the proposed plan described in subsection (c) of this section, the Director shall consider, in addition to any other relevant factors:

(i)    whether some or all of the functions of an agency, a component, or a program are appropriate for the Federal Government or would be better left to State or local governments or to the private sector through free enterprise;

(ii)   whether some or all of the functions of an agency, a component, or a program are redundant, including with those of another agency, component, or program; 

(iii)  whether certain administrative capabilities necessary for operating an agency, a component, or a program are redundant with those of another agency, component, or program; 

(iv)   whether the costs of continuing to operate an agency, a component, or a program are justified by the public benefits it provides; and

(v)    the costs of shutting down or merging agencies, components, or programs, including the costs of addressing the equities of affected agency staff.

(e) In developing the proposed plan described in subsection (c) of this section, the Director shall consult with the head of each agency and, consistent with applicable law, with persons or entities outside the Federal Government with relevant expertise in organizational structure and management.  

Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
    March 13, 2017.

SOURCE LINK

It’s not just about Marijuana, anymore…We are in a war for the right to food and water


 

Above:  Old bottle of Paregoric. Circa 1940s. The large red X on the label indicates that it was classified as an “exempt narcotic”, sold without prescription even though it contains morphine. Until 1970, paregoric could be purchased in the United States at a pharmacy without a medical prescription, in accordance with federal law.  Credit: Wikipedia

 

While you are reading this article, listen to THIS VIDEO OF GATEWOOD GALBRAITH – It may change your life!

 

It’s not just about Marijuana, anymore…

Oddly enough, I never believed that it was.  I was filmed in an interview by a couple in Cincinnati in 2005 who asked me why I was in this ‘movement’.  My reply was that it was because I wanted to know the REAL truth about why Marijuana was illegal because it damn sure wasn’t because someone wanted to sell timber and Newspapers.  “This is just a very small part of a much bigger agenda”, I told her.  I wish I had a copy of that interview!

When the 2014 Farm Bill was passed many businesses started up because of the fact that Hemp was officially allowed to be grown and sold, under specific guidelines of course, but nonetheless grown and sold. 

When I first started out writing about Cannabis prohibition I wasn’t too overly concerned about Agenda 21 and the taking of our rights to farm, have and/or use any kind of plant, I thought they were just after the “narcotics”.  It didn’t take too long to figure out that this just wasn’t the case.  But there were very few people who understood the ramifications of Agenda 21 and it’s far reaching effects out there, and even fewer who wanted to hear about it because everyone was under the impression that the U.N. and our own Government was there to protect us and they “wouldn’t do something like that”.  I was a “conspiracy theorist”.

The public is kept pretty much in the dark about what is happening at the U.N., because there is so many branches, divisions, offices, lack of media news coverage and also just the fact that most people work and have kids and do not have the time to sit down and listen to the news everyday, and then research it out on the internet!  They are just now beginning to see the effects of what I believe was a “test case” when the U.N., effectively made it illegal to consume Cannabis.  A test case for what?  Their ability to be able to control and regulate every plant known to man, especially the ones that can be consumed by us for food and medicine, i.e., Cannabis and Hemp, and to watch what our reaction would be.  How hard was it going to be to regulate us and contain us?  Apparently, it wasn’t too hard.

First, a little background on the U.N. and Agenda 21 because that is where they have Cannabis/Marijuana (and the rest of our food and medicinal plants) wrapped up:

The “League of Nations“, founded in 1920, was the start of what would become the “United Nations” in 1941.  The U.N. is responsible for Agenda 21 (Agenda 2030).  The U.N. is also responsible for the UNODC (U.N. Office of Drug Control), and the DEA is an extension of that, used to enforce drug regulation and drug law in the U.S. 

Roosevelt suggested the name (United Nations) as an alternative to “Associated Powers”

The U.N. was set up as a guise and sold to the people as a way …

…to defend life, liberty, independence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice in their own lands as well as in other lands.

The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21, but because Agenda 21 is a legally non-binding statement of intent and not a treaty, the United States Senate did not hold a formal debate or vote on it. It is therefore not considered to be law under Article Six of the United States Constitution. President George H. W. Bush was one of the 178 heads of government who signed the final text of the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992.

Are we fighting a war that we just cannot win?

March 19, 1991: Plant Breeders’ Rights Extended in Newly Revised UPOV Convention

Revisions to the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants strengthen the intellectual property rights of seed developers. The convention was created in 1961 and is one of several international conventions and treaties that operate under the umbrella of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The convention’s governing body is the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). The newly revised UPOV agreement extends the term of plant breeders’ intellectual property protections for new varieties from 15 years to 20 years. It also prohibits farmers from saving seeds, though there is an optional clause that allows member countries to exempt farmers from this restriction under certain conditions. For example, the clause says the restrictions can be waived if member countries implement other mechanisms that provide equivalent protections for the “legitimate interests of the breeder.”

The top 10 seed companies account for $14,785 million – or two-thirds (67%) of the global proprietary seed market.  The world’s largest seed company, Monsanto, accounts for almost one-quarter (23%) of the global proprietary seed market.  The top 3 companies (Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta) together account for $10,282 million, or 47% of the worldwide proprietary seed market.

Obviously it is  not just about Cannabis, although that is the focus of the drug war because of its illegality causing so many hundreds of thousands or more innocent people to be hurt, imprisoned, even killed and executed over a “treaty” that the U.S. and other signatories used to start the biggest control scheme ever brought down on mainstream humanity, as a whole.  The war over the right to plants.

There is an interesting article about the “top ten” used to be legal drugs on a site called TOPTENZ.  But that is only the beginning of a long list of plants which have been controlled since the beginning of the 20th Century and especially after 1970.  Thank you, President Nixon!  The DEA is the enforcement agency for the UNODC. 

The Drug Enforcement Administration was created by President Richard Nixon through an Executive Order in July 1973 in order to establish a single unified command to combat “an all-out global war on the drug menace.”

RELATED:  “Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

In 1970 the Controlled Substances Act served as the national implementing legislation for the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs   which was/is an international U.N. treaty  to prohibit production and supply of narcotic drugs and directs that they cannot be sold or used except under certain conditions as set forth by the U.N. for medical treatment .

Through this link CBD’s have officially been placed into Schedule I of the CSA, essentially meaning that as it stands right now, effective January 13, 2017, it is illegal to sell any CBD product as a cosmetic or health care product of any kind.  Final Rule : Establishment of a New Drug Code for Marihuana Extract (December 14, 2016)

There will be a battle over this because the people who have started businesses based on the 2014 Farm Bill were under the impression that they were a legal business.  And as far as I am concerned the DEA, up until this point let them believe that they were. The “Hoban Law Group”, a leading Law Firm in the industry of Cannabis has already promised to debate this in Court.

Hoban surmises, “The feeling is that this is an action beyond the DEA’s authority and we believe this is unlawful and we are taking a course of action for our clients. This Final Rule serves to threaten hundreds, if not thousands, of growing businesses, with massive economic and industry expansion opportunities, all of which conduct lawful business in reliance upon the Federal Government also acting pursuant to law, and as ordered by the Ninth Circuit in 2003 and 2004. We will see the Federal Government in court.”

Meanwhile, the DEA imposes a new rule and the CBD Manufacturers and Sales will have to  fight it out in court while the little people watch and wait and are scared to open the door to police because they have CBD products in the house.  They could be charged with a crime and sent thru Hell in a handbasket.  But this feeds the system too.  Through the police, jails, courts and lawyers and the medical system, which will feed everyone else from the construction people who will build the jails, hospitals and offices though to the sanitation workers who pick up their garbage and other refuse.  The flow of commerce and paper money, the “Law of Commerce”.  In fact, The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 was the U.S. attempt to control and regulate narcotics through taxation and the Law of Commerce, in accordance with the 1912 Convention.  The Hague International Opium Convention in 1912 was the beginning to the U.N. control of “drugs” – and plants.

Congress has often used the Commerce Clause to justify exercising legislative power over the activities of states and their citizens

Who is ultimately responsible for the loss of our Human Rights?  Are we not all guilty because it has happened on our own watch, and our parents, and grandparents watch, and we just weren’t paying enough attention?  My Father was an avid watcher of the nightly news, on all two stations.  I was the remote control that he used to switch back and forth between them so that he could catch all of it, because he knew, even in the 1960’s that the media was only telling you what they wanted us to hear.

What could we have done differently?  Our Parents and Grandparents spent most of their lives fighting in WWI and WWII.  By the time they made it home from Iwo Jima they were not able to fight a war against their own government over plants and medicines.  They did not even realize that they needed to!  

What can we do in the future, or FOR the future?  For a start, the power of REPEAL should be utilized, all the way back to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs  in 1961, if not before.  Timothy Leary was successful in getting the 1937 Tax Act on Cannabis Repealed.  However, this did not happen until 1969 and by early 1970’s the CSA was born. 

The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is the statute establishing federal U.S. drug policy under which the manufacture, importation, possession, use and distribution of certain substances is regulated. It was passed by the 91st United States Congress as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 and signed into law by President Richard Nixon.[1] The Act also served as the national implementing legislation for the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.  The legislation created five Schedules (classifications), with varying qualifications for a substance to be included in each. Two federal agencies, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Food and Drug Administration, determine which substances are added to or removed from the various schedules…

During the last decade, opposition to Agenda 21 has increased within the United States at the local, state, and federal levels.[18] The Republican National Committee has adopted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, and the Republican Party platform stated that “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.”

If things are to change around the world and in the U.S. on a peaceful basis, everyone is going to have to pay attention and get political!  I really do not know how to tell everyone to begin, especially those who work two jobs and still can’t afford a place to live for their families.  At the same time they are slaving to provide, they are going to have to pay attention and get political to change things. (?)  There is only 24 hours in a day, and that is what the U.N. is banking on.  That we just do not have enough time to figure the plan out and do anything about it, because we are all too tired from just trying to survive!  In a video by the late great Attorney Gatewood Galbraith (KY), he said;  “if you don’t get political, it will end up in the streets, and nobody wants to go there”…

The only other choice is just to ignore the “Law” around you and live as you can…until you get caught.  Then you end up property of the “correctional institute” of THEIR choice.

#GodBlessYouALL

Sk

 

 

For thought…

When chocolate was first discovered in the New World, the almighty Roman Catholic Church banned it as an addictive, mind- altering, sexually-stimulating drug. Well, it is. Now it is eaten by billions of people, even nuns and virgins, without people going rabid sexually.

If George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were alive today, they would both be facing a Mandatory Minimum Sentence of 5-40 years in Federal Prison for growing more than 100 Cannabis plants at their homes; Ben Franklin would be in prison simply because he was an opium addict, as would most of our Founding Fathers of America who used opium and hemp, had home alcohol stills, and illegally smuggled rum and moonshine to avoid taxes.

It would not stretch matters to say that the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 (P.L. 59-384, 34 Stat. 768), also known as the Wiley Act, stands as the most consequential regulatory statute in the history of the United States. The act not only gave unprecedented new regulatory powers to the federal government, it also empowered a bureau that evolved into today’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The legacy of the 1906 act includes federal regulatory authority over one-quarter of gross domestic product, and includes market gatekeeping power over human and animal drugs, foods and preservatives, medical devices, biologics and vaccines.

 

 

 

#Hastags:

#EndDEA #EndProhibition #ReformUN #EndDeathPenalty  #REPEALtheCSA   #PlantsRights #VeteransRights #ChildrensRights #PrisonersRights #USMJParty

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paregoric 

 

https://usmarijuanaparty.net/history/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_Nations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-drugs-that-used-to-be-legal.php

https://www.dea.gov/about/history.shtml

https://kentuckymarijuanaparty.com/2015/10/26/rights-and-freedoms-may-in-no-case-be-exercised-contrary-to-purposes-and-principles-of-the-united-nations-how-the-united-nations-is-stealing-our-unalienable-rights-to-grow/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Substances_Act

https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2016/fr1214.htm

http://m.marketwired.com/press-release/dea-hurts-growing-industry-exceeds-its-authority-regarding-scheduling-controlled-substances-2183399.htm

http://www.votehemp.com/2014_farm_bill_section_7606.html

 https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/12/20/899140/0/en/Earth-Science-Tech-Announces-the-Development-of-3-New-Advanced-Formulated-Cannabis-CBD-Nutraceuticals-and-2-Cannabis-CBD-Based-Pharmaceutical-Drugs-under-its-Cannabis-CBD-Patent-IP.html

http://thelawdictionary.org/commerce/

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leary_v._United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary

http://www.goodmedicinebadbehavior.org/explore/history_of_prescription_drugs.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/the-1912-hague-international-opium-convention.html

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Iwo_Jima

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5moSy-Ooouk

 

Over and over again, the military has conducted dangerous biowarfare experiments on Americans


 

Image result for biowarfare

Kevin Loria / Oct 1st 2016 4:00AM

On September 20, 1950, a US Navy ship just off the coast of San Francisco used a giant hose to spray a cloud of microbes into the air and into the city’s famous fog. The military was testing how a biological weapon attack would affect the 800,000 residents of the city.

The people of San Francisco had no idea.

The Navy continued the tests for seven days, potentially causing at least one death. It was one of the first large-scale biological weapon trials that would be conducted under a "germ warfare testing program" that went on for 20 years, from 1949 to 1969. The goal "was to deter [the use of biological weapons] against the United States and its allies and to retaliate if deterrence failed," the government explained later. "Fundamental to the development of a deterrent strategy was the need for a thorough study and analysis of our vulnerability to overt and covert attack."

Of the 239 known tests in that program, San Francisco was notable for two reasons, according to Dr. Leonard Cole, who documented the episode in his book "Clouds of Secrecy: The Army’s Germ Warfare Tests Over Populated Areas."

Cole, now the director of the Terror Medicine and Security Program at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, tells Business Insider that this incident was "notable: first, because it was really early in the program … but also because of the extraordinary coincidence that took place at Stanford Hospital, beginning days after the Army’s tests had taken place."

Hospital staff were so shocked at the appearance of a patient infected with a bacteria, Serratia marcescens, that had never been found in the hospital and was rare in the area, that they published an article about it in a medical journal. The patient, Edward Nevin, died after the infection spread to his heart.

It wasn’t until the 1970s that Americans, as Cole wrote in the book, "learned that for decades they had been serving as experimental animals for agencies of their government."

San Francisco wasn’t the first or the last experiment on citizens who hadn’t given informed consent.

Other experiments involved testing mind-altering drugs on unsuspecting citizens. In one shocking, well-known incident, government researchers studied the effects of syphilis on black Americans without informing the men that they had the disease — they were told they had "bad blood." Researchers withheld treatment after it became available so they could continue studying the illness, despite the devastating and life-threatening implications of doing so for the men and their families.

But it was the germ warfare tests that Cole focused on.

"All these other tests, while terrible, they affected people counted in the hundreds at most," he says. "But when you talk about exposing millions of people to potential harm, by spreading around certain chemicals or biological agents, the quantitative effect of that is just unbelievable."

"Every one of the [biological and chemical] agents the Army used had been challenged" by medical reports, he says, despite the Army’s contention in public hearings that they’d selected "harmless simulants" of biological weapons.

"They’re all considered pathogens now," Cole says.

Here are some of the other difficult-to-believe germ warfare experiments that occurred during this dark chapter in US history. These tests were documented in Cole’s book and verified by Business Insider using congressional reports and archived news articles.

From Minneapolis to St. Louis

The military tested how a biological or chemical weapon would spread throughout the country by spraying bacteria as well as various chemical powders — including an especially controversial one called zinc cadmium sulfide. Low flying airplanes would take off, sometimes near the Canadian border, "and they would fly down through the Midwest," dropping their payloads over cities, says Cole.

These sprays were tested on the ground too, with machines that would release clouds from city rooftops or intersections to see how they spread.

In the book, Cole cites military reports that documented various Minneapolis tests, including one where chemicals spread through a school. The clouds were clearly visible.

To prevent suspicion, the military pretended that they were testing a way to mask the whole city in order to protect it. They told city officials that "the tests involved efforts to measure ability to lay smoke screens about the city" to "hide" it in case of nuclear attack, according to Cole’s account.

The potential toxicity of that controversial compound zinc cadmium sulfide is debated. One component, cadmium, is highly toxic and can cause cancer. Some reports suggest a possibility that the zinc cadmium sulfide could perhaps degrade into cadmium, but a 1997 report from the National Research Council concluded that the Army’s secret tests "did not expose residents of the United States and Canada to chemical levels considered harmful." However, the same report noted that research on the chemical used was sparse, mostly based on very limited animal studies.

These air tests were conducted around the country as part of Operation Large Area Coverage.

"There was evidence that the powder after it was released would be then located a day or two later as far away as 1,200 miles," Cole says. "There was a sense that you could really blanket the country with a similar agent."

In 2012, Lisa Martino-Taylor, a sociology professor at St. Louis Community College-Meramec, released a report theorizing that the army’s experiments could be connected to cancer rates in a low-income, mostly black neighborhood in the city where zinc cadmium sulfide had been tested. She said she was concerned that there could have been a radioactive component to some testing, though she did not have direct evidence for that possibility.

Her report, however, prompted both senators from Missouri to write to the Army secretary, "demanding answers," the Associated Press noted at the time.

While Martino-Taylor’s suggestion remains purely hypothetical, "the human dimension is never mentioned" in most Army documents, Cole writes in the book. Instead there’s just a discussion of how well the particulates spread and what they learned about the possibility of biological attacks from them.

1966: "A Study of the Vulnerability of Subway Passengers in New York City to Covert Attack with Biological Agents"

In a field test called "A Study of the Vulnerability of Subway Passengers in New York City to Covert Attack with Biological Agents," military officials tried to see how easy it would be to unleash biological weapons using the New York City subway. They would break light bulbs full of bacteria on the tracks to see how they spread through the city.

"If you can get trillions of bacteria into a light bulb and throw it on the track as a train pulls into a station, they’ll get pulled through the air as the train leaves," Cole says, travelling through the tunnels and into different stations.

Clouds would engulf people as trains pulled away, but documents say that they "brushed their clothing, looked up at the grating apron and walked on." No one was concerned.

In a 1995 Newsday story, reporter Dennis Duggan contacted retired Army scientist Charles Senseney, who had testified about the experiments to a Senate subcommittee in 1975. In his testimony, he explained that one light bulb full of bacteria dropped at 14th Street easily spread the bacteria up to at least 58th Street.

But he declined to reveal anything to the Newsday reporter. "I don’t want to get near this," Senseney said to Duggan. "I [testified], because I was told I had to by the people at the Department of Defense … I better get off the phone."

Experiments continued in New York for six days using Bacillus subtilis, then known as Bacillus globigii, and S. marcescens.

A paper from the National Academy of Sciences analyzing military experiments notes that B. globigii is "now considered a pathogen" and is often a cause of food poisoning. "Infections are rarely known to be fatal," the report said — though fatal cases have occurred.

Particularly controversial tests

Cole’s book notes that "portions of a report about an army test in 1951 involving Aspergillus fumigatus … indicate that the army intentionally exposed a disproportionate number of black people to the organism." Most of the employees at the supply center were black.

In the military reports cited by Cole, researchers claim they are preparing for an attack that might target black citizens. He quotes from a section that reads: "Since Negroes are more susceptible to coccidioides than are whites, this fungus disease was simulated."

When these experiments were first revealed in 1980, the racial aspect of these tests engendered controversy and skepticism about the "army’s interest in the public welfare," according to Cole.

Tests revealed by an unexpected source

One 1979 Washington Post news story discusses open air experiments in the Tampa Bay area involving the release of pertussis, or whooping cough, in 1955. State records show that whooping cough cases in Florida spiked from 339 (one death) in 1954 to 1,080 (12 deaths) in 1955, according to that story.

But it’s hard to trace how accurate the information about the whooping cough release is: The only documentation goes back to an investigation by the Church of Scientology.

The Church of Scientology formed a group called American Citizens for Honesty in Government that spent a significant amount of time investigating controversial experiments run by the Army and CIA, according to the Post. Through FOIA requests they uncovered a number of documents related to these experiments in the late 1970s.

Cole understands why some people are skeptical of those reports. "I certainly am not a member and I think a lot of what they do is quackery," he says, but "in this case, I have no reason to believe any of this isn’t real."

Many of the documents Scientologists made public were the same documents he’d received doing his own research, redacted in the same places.

Perhaps the hardest question is how much information is still missing.

As Cole writes in the book:

Many details about the army’s tests over populated areas remain secret. Most of the test reports are still classified or cannot be located, although a few of the earlier ones have become available in response to Freedom of Information Act requests and in conjunction with the Nevin case. Among those available, sections have been blocked out and pages are missing.

What we learned

Military officials were called to testify before Congress in 1977 after information about these biological warfare experiments was revealed.

At the time, those officials said that determining just how vulnerable the US was to a biological attack "required extensive research and development to determine precisely our vulnerability, the efficacy of our protective measures, and the tactical and strategic capability of various delivery systems and agents," according to a record of that testimony quoted in "Clouds of Secrecy."

Cole too says it’s hard to see these events now from the perspective that people had then.

There was "a different mindset in the country then … [a] Cold War mentality," he says. But, he argues, that doesn’t justify glossing over the already known potential danger of the agents used.

At the same time, part of what the military knows about how clouds of chemicals spread comes from these experiments. Cole says that knowledge gleaned from these biological warfare testing programs helped inform the US reaction when reports came in on the potential use of chemical weapons in the first Gulf War.

So what’s happening now?

Cole says that the obvious question that’s on people’s minds is what’s happening now. After all, if secret tests could occur then, what prevents them from continuing? Are they, in fact, still going on?

He doesn’t think it’s likely.

"I would never swear on your life or my life that nothing illegitimate is happening, but based on what I do know, I don’t have any sense that there’s illicit activity now that would involve risking exposure to tons of people, as happened in the 50s and 60s," he says.

Biological agents are still studied and tested, but informed consent is more widely appreciated now. There’s also less of a Cold War mentality that would be used to justify this research.

Still, more recent reports show that experiments in this area went on longer than we thought.

In 2001, a New York Times report revealed projects testing biological weapons that began under the Clinton administration and continued under the second Bush administration. A 1972 treaty theoretically prohibited developing biological weapons, but this program justified it with the argument that new weapons needed to be studied in order to develop adequate defenses.

And the "War on Terror" raises other concerns, according to Cole.

After the 2001 anthrax attacks, funding for bioterrorism research spiked by $1.5 billion. Then in 2004, Congress approved another $5.6 billion bioterror research project.

These projects are meant to protect society from the dangers of biological agents, but they may have an unintended consequence, Cole says.

"Thousands and thousands of people became familiar with pathogens that they were not familiar with before," he says. "You now have many more people that could potentially do bad with these organisms, and it only takes one person."

CONTINUE READING…

Canada to be first G7 country to legalize weed – Gov-General


© Steve Dipaola

 

Next year Canada could become the first country in the G7 group of the world’s leading economies to legalize marijuana as the government announces its plans in a speech to parliament.

The freshly-elected Liberal government has reaffirmed their pledge to legalize marijuana as Governor-General David Johnson addressed the parliament with a speech that outlined the legislative agenda for the coming year.

“The Government will introduce legislation that… will legalize, regulate and restrict access to marijuana,” Johnson said, Canadian Global News reports. He did not elaborate on how the government plans to regulate or restrict access to the soft drug.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s mandate letter to the Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould also includes a provision suggesting that the justice minister should work “with the Ministers of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and Health, create a federal-provincial-territorial process that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana.”

Trudeau said that legalizing marijuana would fix a “failed system” and help remove the “criminal element” from marijuana production and trade, adding that Canadians would benefit from studying the experience of the US state of Colorado and Washington, which recently adopted similar laws.

The PM has stuck to that position since becoming the leader of the Liberal party in 2013. He says his support for the legalization of marijuana is influenced by the fate of his late brother, who was charged with drug possession for having “a tiny amount” of weed before his death in an avalanche in 1998.

Legalizing pot was a high profile election promise made by Trudeau during the latest election campaign that raised the Liberal Party to power after almost a decade of the Conservative rule. Two previous Conservative administrations also made such election promises but failed to live up to them.

In Canada, people are allowed to use medical marijuana in dried and edible forms on condition they do not smoke it. Growing marijuana at home is also legal, according to Global News.

Apart from legalizing marijuana, the new government also plans to cut taxes for citizens with middle income as well as to provide higher child benefits to the needy, which would be financed by a tax increase on the wealthiest 1 percent of the population.

The government also announced plans to provide significant investments in infrastructure, cut military spending, limit the budget deficit to 10 billion Canadian dollars ($7.5 billion) per year as well as to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

CONTINUE READING…

FBI Louisville Seeks the Public’s Assistance in Identifying Public Corruption within the Commonwealth of Kentucky


FBI Louisville July 31, 2015

  • Louisville Press Office (502) 263-6000

Special Agent in Charge Howard S. Marshall of the FBI’s Louisville Division, joined by John E. Kuhn, Jr. United States Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, and Kerry B. Harvey, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky, announced today a new initiative designed to solicit the public’s help in identifying public corruption within our community. The initiative includes the launch of a new, toll-free tip line (844) KYNOPC1 (596-6721), a billboard campaign, and a dedicated e-mail address Kentucky_PC_Complaints@ic.fbi.gov.

Public corruption is the FBI’s top criminal priority because it undermines the public’s trust in our government. A 2014 study by Harvard University’s Center for Ethics identified Kentucky as one of the most corrupt states in the country. In fact, in Kentucky between 2003 and 2012, approximately 300 individuals were convicted of federal crimes related to public corruption. It is a violation of federal law for any federal, state, or local government official to receive anything of value in exchange for or because of an official act. While the vast majority of public officials in Kentucky are dedicated and honest, SAC Marshall stressed “there is simply no acceptable level of corruption.”

“Public corruption victimizes everyone—taxpayers, voters, communities,” stated U.S. Attorney John Kuhn. “Public officials, whether elected or appointed, are more than mere employees. They are servants of the public interest, and we must insist on absolute honesty, integrity and trustworthiness from every one. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Kentucky will continue working with our law enforcement partners to ensure crimes involving public corruption are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

U.S. Attorney Kerry Harvey agreed stating, “Public corruption is a terribly destructive force throughout Kentucky and has been a particularly pernicious problem in certain areas of the Eastern District of Kentucky. While the overwhelming majority of public officials serve honorably, those who corrupt the operations of government rob their communities-their friends and neighbors-of the fundamental right to honest government. We are pleased to continue our longstanding partnership with the FBI as we work together to combat this statewide problem.”

In a few short months, Kentucky will go to the polls for significant state-wide elections with a national election looming in 2016. SAC Marshall noted, “There is simply no greater right than to elect our political leaders. Anyone attempting to corrupt this process will be investigated as a top priority for our office.”

This year also presents a new opportunity for our state government to partner with the FBI to address a potential, long term problem. For the first time ever, audits for Special Purpose Government Entities will be due in September. The FBI will work with the Kentucky Auditor of Public Accounts to identify individuals who have violated the public’s trust and misused SPGE funds.

The FBI relies on our federal, state, and local partners to address corruption matters, but concerned citizens are our biggest asset when it comes to exposing officials who use their positions for personal gain. As a result, the Louisville Division has set up the following hotline and e-mail address seeking the public’s assistance in combating public corruption:

You will also see billboards around the state bearing this number and e-mail address. SAC Marshall noted, “The End Corruption Now campaign seeks to unite the commonwealth in the fight against corruption at every level, from the proverbial dog catcher, to the police officer, to the highest state and federal officials in the commonwealth.”

CONTINUE READING…

Lawmakers, sign on now, to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA).


JackieTreehorn

Joined: Sep 2005

USA TX, USA

Posted: 10/20/2008 3:04:42 PM EDT

Lawmakers, sign on now, to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA).

Without this authority, the ill-conceived War On Drugs (WOD) stops in its tracks. No one has talked about the War On Drugs for a long time. It has not gone away.

We still squander scarce resources on the fight against ourselves, at a time when foreign enemies are at the gate. Enough is enough, too much is too much, and more of this futile war would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility. Do now, for the War On Drugs, what the 21st Amendment did for the 18th, and with it, alcohol prohibition. Stop throwing good money after bad.
We should have learned a lesson from alcohol prohibition, namely that it doesn’t work.
Isn’t there enough blood in the streets already, without continuing to shoot ourselves in the feet?

Do we really need to ruin the lives of so many of our own children, perhaps on the theory it is for their own good?

The CSA is unconstitutional. The CSA never had a constitutional amendment to enable it, like the 18th amendment enabled alcohol prohibition. The drug warriors have, so far, gotten away with an end run, subverting the lack of constitutional authority.

An authority over Interstate Commerce provides a pretext of constitutionality. Any excuse is better than none. So, how is that interstate commerce going, these days? Why would a bankrupt treasury distain to derive revenue from its number one cash crop? The anti-capitalist policy inhibits small farmers from cultivating for a taxed market, and gifts a tax-free monopoly to outlaws, some of whom may be friends of our enemies. This is not what the founders had in mind when they authorized meddling in interstate commerce. Lets bring the underground economy into the taxed economy.

The Supreme Court got it wrong in Gonzales V Raich. Good on Clarence Thomas for noticing that the so-called constitutionality of the law is a mockery.
www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZD1.html

How did we get this CSA? Was there an informed debate on the floor? Did the substances ever get their day in court? What congressman then, or now, would admit to knowing a thing or two about LSD?

The lawmakers have never wanted to know more than it is politically safe to be against it.

Governments around the world ignore fact-checkers and even their own reports.

Forgive them, Lord, they make it their business to know not what they do.

Common sense tells us that personal experience deepens the understanding of issues. Personal experience is a good thing. But we herd the experienced to the hoosegow. We keep them out of jobs. The many who avoid detection must live double lives.
The congressmen who passed the CSA probably don’t even get it that they deny freedom of religion to those who prefer a non-placebo as their sacrament of communion.

Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religious freedom, says the First Amendment. But they did.

Many of the prohibited substances provide access to unique mental states. You can’t say your piece, if you can’t think it up. You can’t think it up, if you are not in a receptive state of mind. Neither the Constitution, nor its amendments, enumerates a power of government to prevent access to specific states of mind. How and when did the government acquire this power, to restrict consciousness and thought?

Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, says the First Amendment. But they did.

What would happen if the CSA was enforced one hundred percent? What if all the civil disobedient turned in notarized confessions tomorrow? That is a double digit demographic. Even after years of spending more on prisons than on schools, the prisons don’t have that kind of sleeping capacity. Converting taxpayers into wards of the state mathematically increases the tax burden on the remainder. Higher tax burdens are not what the doctor is ordering at this time.

None of these substances are alleged to be as harmful as prison is. Granny’s justice is a saner benchmark. A kid caught with cigarettes must keep on smoking them, right then and there, until he or she has wretched. Drugs are sometimes accused of causing paranoia, but it is prohibition’s threat of loss of liberty, employment, and estate, that introduces paranoia. Apparently it is true that some of these substances do cause insanity, but the insanity is only in the minds of those who have never tried them.

There shall not be cruel and unusual punishment, says the Eighth Amendment. But here it is, in the CSA.

In the 1630’s, the pilgrims wrote home glowingly that the native hemp was superior to European varieties. Now, the government pretends it has a right to prohibit farmers from the husbandry of native hemp, but it so doesn’t. Could an offender get a plea-bargain, by rolling over on someone higher up in the organization? The farmer does nothing to nature’s seed that God Himself does not do when He provides it rain, sunlight, and decomposing earth. How can it be a crime to do as God does? Is the instigator to get off scot-free, while small users are selectively prosecuted?

God confesses, in Genesis 11-12, it was He who created the seed-bearing plants, on the second day. Then, He saw they were good. There you have it, the perpetrator shows no remorse about creating cannabis or mushrooms. Neither has He apologized for endowing humans with sensitive internal receptor sites which activate seductive mental effects in the presence of the scheduled molecules. Book Him, Dano.

Common Law must hold that humans are the legal owners of their own bodies. Men may dispose of their property as they please. It is none of Government’s business which substances its citizens prefer to stimulate themselves with. Men have a right to get drunk in their own homes, be it folly or otherwise. The usual caveats, against injury to others, or their estates, remain in effect.

The Declaration of Independence gets right to the point. The Pursuit Of Happiness is a self-evident, God-given, inalienable, right of man. The War On Drugs is, in reality, a war on the pursuit of happiness. Too bad the Declaration of Independence is not worth much in court.

Notwithstanding the failure of the Supreme Court to overturn the CSA, lawmakers can and should repeal the act. Lawmakers, please get to it now, in each house, without undue delay. Wake up.

Who has the guts to put America first and not prolong the tragedy?
We don’t need the CSA. The citizenry already has legal recourse for various injuries to itself and its estate, without invoking any War On Drugs. We should stop committing resources to ruin the lives of peaceful people who never injured anyone. If someone screws up at work, fire him or her for the screw-up. The Books still have plenty of laws on them, without this one.

Without the CSA, the empty prisons could conceivably be used to house the homeless. Homeland security might be able to use the choppers that won’t be needed for eradication. Maybe the negative numbers that will have to be used to bottom-line our legacy to the next generation can be less ginormous.

Cannabis has a stronger claim to the blessing of the state than do the sanctioned tobacco and alcohol. Cannabis does not have the deadly lung cancer of tobacco, nor the puking, hangover, and liver cirrhosis of alcohol. To the contrary, cannabis shows promise as an anti-tumor agent. Nor is cannabis associated with social problems like fighting and crashing cars. Cannabis-intoxication is usually too mellow for fighting, and impaired drivers typically drive within the limits of their impairment. The roads will be safer, if slower, for every driver that switches from drink to smoke. Coffee drinkers cause more serious accidents by zipping in and out of traffic and tailgating. To assure public safety on the road, cops need a kit to assess driving competence and alertness objectively. Perhaps science can develop a virtual reality simulator. Hopefully it could also detect drowsy, Alzheimer’s, and perhaps road-raging, drivers.

John McCain should recuse himself on the CSA repeal issue, due to the conflict of interest of potential competition for his family beer franchise. Both candidates have promised to end ‘failed programs’, but neither has issued a timetable, or a roadmap, for standing down on the WOD.

The debate how a crippled USA can manage ‘the two wars’ is blind. Hello, there are three, not two, wars. The War On Drugs has not let up, after 38 years of failure. Its costs are in the ballpark of the foreign wars. There is no lower-hanging, riper, or higher yielding budgetary fruit than to stop this third war, cold turkey. We are making new enemies faster than we are killing the old ones. We are losing old friends. In this national crisis of global humiliation, we should cut a little slack to those who still love the United States of America, no matter what they may be smoking.

Stave off national meltdown, by repeal of the CSA, this week, if possible. TIA.

Without the War On Drugs, Americans can come together as a people in ways that are not possible with so many of our best and brightest under threat of disenfranchisement.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/773950_Call_for_Repeal_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act_of_1970.html

DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS RELATED TO 9/11 ATTACKS


Published on CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov) (http://www.foia.cia.gov)


DECLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS RELATED TO 9/11 ATTACKS

Declassified Documents Related to 9/11 Attacks
For an official statement on this release, please click here [1]


Source URL: http://www.foia.cia.gov/collection/declassified-documents-related-911-attacks

Links
[1] https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/2015-press-releases-statements/cia-releases-declassified-documents-related-to-9-11-attacks.html

 

More like this

Documents in this Collection

Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®

INSPECTION REPORT OF THE DCI COUNTERTERRORIST CENTER DIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONS AUGUST 2001

Document Number: 0001525482

 

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0001525482.pdf

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0001229684_0.pdf

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0006297294.pdf

http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0006220800.pdf

Let’s talk about “corporate cannabis”…


 

1412462694814

 

In the last few years the corporate agenda has led the legalization movement of cannabis right thru the processes of capitalism, all nice, and tied up with a pretty bow on the “bag”.

There is a serious problem with this.

First of all I am not anti-capitalist.  In fact it would be my pleasure to be able to walk in my local town drug store and purchase an ounce of Herb and pay the taxes on that purchase as well.

I would probably be the first person in line in Cave City when the store opened if that were possible.  I would also love to see a Cannabis Café on the corner of  Broadway and First Street. 

That being said I can compare the legalization of corporate cannabis with the “Wet” vote that just passed in my town. 

Before the town went “wet” there were a couple/few people around the area that served the locals occasionally.  Yes, it is illegal, but in my opinion it shouldn’t be because taxes have already

been paid on that product by the “bootlegger” when he bought it from the store.   At any rate, the people who “served” us were good people and were hurting no one.  They were just trying to

get by day by day like most of the rest of us and provide a service.  Point is, now that the town is “wet” there will be no more business for the “bootlegger” who is just a small town

person trying to make a dollar…not a million dollars.  Although this is not a totally accurate comparison because alcohol is already taxed and regulated it is still illegal for someone to buy and

resell or even serve someone alcohol in this county with the exception of a couple of wet restaurants we had previously.

I find it ironic that a city could legalize alcohol consumption in a couple of restaurants, with the purchase of an alcohol license of course, even though that the county itself remains dry. 

Corporate cannabis will not give us the right to grow for personal use,or to be able to sell at the vegetable market like fresh oregano, catnip, white sage, etc.,

If we continue to “legalize” in the current fashion only corporate driven companies will be allowed access to the growth, processing and marketing of cannabis much the same as alcohol is now.

The “legalize, tax and regulate”  push was very convenient for corporate America. 

That is why that either repeal or re-legalization must be the avenue we take to ensure that we have our own personal rights to this plant restored.  If “legalize, tax and regulate” wins we will loose

our rights to this plant forever.  Laches will rule.

Another thing to consider is the fact that just because something is produced in a corporate environment does not necessarily mean that it is a good product.

Look at all the recalls that have been issued on the cars we drive everyday which were issues that have proven to be fatal in a lot of instances. 

With a new market emerging such as the one we have with cannabis is it imperative that we retain our own personal rights to the plant AND that any corporate products which are

produced and sold from cannabis are ensured to be safe whether it be for medical or recreational purposes.  And just like the farmer’s market on Saturdays it will be “buyer beware”

when purchasing home grown or made items. 

Be smart.  Do not give up your personal rights in order to let the government regulate everything and then assume because it is government regulated that it is safe. 

Just read the side effects on prescriptions.  That right there will explain to you how interested the government is in your safety.  Regulation although needed in some

form or fashion cannot be relied upon to ensure your safety when purchasing or using any type of food or prescription medicine or herbal remedies.  So don’t let them take away

your personal rights under the guise of health and safety regulations.  That is just a farce. 

Cannabis/Hemp is a wonderful plant that can be used for so many things.  It is a treasure that God gave us to use.  We need to make sure the government does not take yet another

human right away from us.  If the laws governing cannabis/hemp are completely repealed then it will be free for everyone.   I can put my “flower” in the kitchen window and

Pharma’s can produce their own version of cannabis medicines, as well the recreational use will support many café’s, etc., 

Freedom for everyone to use and enjoy… and be thankful for.

Fight for freedom from the prohibition of your freedoms!

smk

*A Project CBD Special Report on Medical Marijuana Inc., HempMeds & Kannaway

*George Soros’ real crusade: Legalizing marijuana in the U.S.

* America’s Drug Companies Are Bankrolling The Crusade Against Legal Weed

*Investing in MJ

*Inexco Mining (C.IMC): Canadian medical marijuana goes worldwide

*Medical marijuana update: Organigram certified organic

Kentucky has 237 of the children crossing into US


By Associated Press Friday, July 25, 2014

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) – Kentucky has received less than 1 percent of the unaccompanied children crossing into the United States.

New federal data published Thursday by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families showed Kentucky received 237 of the more than 30,000 children who have been released to sponsors this year through July 7.

Texas, New York, Florida and California received the most, accounting for 46 percent of the children received during that time.

Unaccompanied children have been fleeing violence in Central America and crossing into the U.S. because they believe they will be allowed to stay.

Children are placed in government shelters and then released to sponsors while they go through deportation proceedings. In many cases, the sponsors are the children’s parents, other relatives or a family friend.

___

Online:

Administration for Children and Families report: http://1.usa.gov/1nYpbLB

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/25/kentucky-has-237-of-the-children-crossing-into-us/#ixzz38TV2vSvz
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Has U.S. started an Internet war?


By Bruce Schneier, Special to CNN

updated 10:46 AM EDT, Tue June 18, 2013

Editor’s note: Bruce Schneier is a security technologist and author of "Liars and Outliers: Enabling the Trust Society Needs to Survive."

(CNN) — Today, the United States is conducting offensive cyberwar actions around the world.

More than passively eavesdropping, we’re penetrating and damaging foreign networks for both espionage and to ready them for attack. We’re creating custom-designed Internet weapons, pre-targeted and ready to be "fired" against some piece of another country’s electronic infrastructure on a moment’s notice.

This is much worse than what we’re accusing China of doing to us. We’re pursuing policies that are both expensive and destabilizing and aren’t making the Internet any safer. We’re reacting from fear, and causing other countries to counter-react from fear. We’re ignoring resilience in favor of offense.

Bruce Schneier

Bruce Schneier

Welcome to the cyberwar arms race, an arms race that will define the Internet in the 21st century.

Presidential Policy Directive 20, issued last October and released by Edward Snowden, outlines U.S. cyberwar policy. Most of it isn’t very interesting, but there are two paragraphs about

"Offensive Cyber Effect Operations," or OCEO, that are intriguing:

"OECO can offer unique and unconventional capabilities to advance U.S. national objectives around the world with little or no warning to the adversary or target and with potential effects ranging from subtle to severely damaging. The development and sustainment of OCEO capabilities, however, may require considerable time and effort if access and tools for a specific target do not already exist.

"The United States Government shall identify potential targets of national importance where OCEO can offer a favorable balance of effectiveness and risk as compared with other instruments of national power, establish and maintain OCEO capabilities integrated as appropriate with other U.S. offensive capabilities, and execute those capabilities in a manner consistent with the provisions of this directive."

Opinion: Cyber arms control? Forget about it

Obama: NSA programs are transparent

Releasing NSA leaks: A public service?

NSA fallout could be ‘harmful’

Could the NSA leaker defect to China?

These two paragraphs, and another paragraph about OCEO, are the only parts of the document classified "top secret." And that’s because what they’re saying is very dangerous.

Cyberattacks have the potential to be both immediate and devastating. They can disrupt communications systems, disable national infrastructure, or, as in the case of Stuxnet, destroy nuclear reactors; but only if they’ve been created and targeted beforehand. Before launching cyberattacks against another country, we have to go through several steps.

We have to study the details of the computer systems they’re running and determine the vulnerabilities of those systems. If we can’t find exploitable vulnerabilities, we need to create them: leaving "back doors" in hacker speak. Then we have to build new cyberweapons designed specifically to attack those systems.

Sometimes we have to embed the hostile code in those networks, these are called "logic bombs," to be unleashed in the future. And we have to keep penetrating those foreign networks, because computer systems always change and we need to ensure that the cyberweapons are still effective.

Like our nuclear arsenal during the Cold War, our cyberweapons arsenal must be pretargeted and ready to launch.

That’s what Obama directed the U.S. Cyber Command to do. We can see glimpses in how effective we are in Snowden’s allegations that the NSA is currently penetrating foreign networks around the world: "We hack network backbones — like huge Internet routers, basically — that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one."

The NSA and the U.S. Cyber Command are basically the same thing. They’re both at Fort Meade in Maryland, and they’re both led by Gen. Keith Alexander. The same people who hack network backbones are also building weapons to destroy those backbones. At a March Senate briefing, Alexander boasted of creating more than a dozen offensive cyber units.

Longtime NSA watcher James Bamford reached the same conclusion in his recent profile of Alexander and the U.S. Cyber Command (written before the Snowden revelations). He discussed some of the many cyberweapons the U.S. purchases:

"According to Defense News’ C4ISR Journal and Bloomberg Businessweek, Endgame also offers its intelligence clients — agencies like Cyber Command, the NSA, the CIA, and British intelligence — a unique map showing them exactly where their targets are located. Dubbed Bonesaw, the map displays the geolocation and digital address of basically every device connected to the Internet around the world, providing what’s called network situational awareness. The client locates a region on the password-protected web-based map, then picks a country and city — say, Beijing, China. Next the client types in the name of the target organization, such as the Ministry of Public Security’s No. 3 Research Institute, which is responsible for computer security — or simply enters its address, 6 Zhengyi Road. The map will then display what software is running on the computers inside the facility, what types of malware some may contain, and a menu of custom-designed exploits that can be used to secretly gain entry. It can also pinpoint those devices infected with malware, such as the Conficker worm, as well as networks turned into botnets and zombies — the equivalent of a back door left open…

"The buying and using of such a subscription by nation-states could be seen as an act of war. ‘If you are engaged in reconnaissance on an adversary’s systems, you are laying the electronic battlefield and preparing to use it’ wrote Mike Jacobs, a former NSA director for information assurance, in a McAfee report on cyberwarfare. ‘In my opinion, these activities constitute acts of war, or at least a prelude to future acts of war.’ The question is, who else is on the secretive company’s client list? Because there is as of yet no oversight or regulation of the cyberweapons trade, companies in the cyber-industrial complex are free to sell to whomever they wish. "It should be illegal,’ said the former senior intelligence official involved in cyberwarfare. ‘I knew about Endgame when I was in intelligence. The intelligence community didn’t like it, but they’re the largest consumer of that business.’"

That’s the key question: How much of what the United States is currently doing is an act of war by international definitions? Already we’re accusing China of penetrating our systems in order to map "military capabilities that could be exploited during a crisis." What PPD-20 and Snowden describe is much worse, and certainly China, and other countries, are doing the same.

All of this mapping of vulnerabilities and keeping them secret for offensive use makes the Internet less secure, and these pre-targeted, ready-to-unleash cyberweapons are destabalizing forces on international relationships. Rooting around other countries’ networks, analyzing vulnerabilities, creating back doors, and leaving logic bombs could easily be construed as an act of war. And all it takes is one over-achieving national leader for this all to tumble into actual war.

It’s time to stop the madness. Yes, our military needs to invest in cyberwar capabilities, but we also need international rules of cyberwar, more transparency from our own government on what we are and are not doing, international cooperation between governments and viable cyberweapons treaties. Yes, these are difficult. Yes, it’s a long slow process. Yes, there won’t be international consensus, certainly not in the beginning. But even with all of those problems, it’s a better path to go down than the one we’re on now.

We can start by taking most of the money we’re investing in offensive cyberwar capabilities and spend them on national cyberspace resilience. MAD, mutually assured destruction, made sense because there were two superpowers opposing each other. On the Internet there are all sorts of different powers, from nation-states to much less organized groups. An arsenal of cyberweapons begs to be used, and, as we learned from Stuxnet, there’s always collateral damage to innocents when they are. We’re much safer with a strong defense than with a counterbalancing offense.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Bruce Schneier.

CONTINUE READING…