Human Waste James Altucher and His Recent Interview With Phony Jewish Human Rights Activist Garry Kasparov

He's at it again.... he's trying to act like he's a decent human being. James Altucher is an extremely strong supporter of Israel, he's a spy, and he is involved with this. He is interviewing the "concerned" Garry Kasparov who heads a "Human Rights" organization. See here for Garry's Wikipedia write-up.

Why the hell would he or his guest care the slightest bit about human rights when James is complicit in supporting policies like this and knows about and uses classified technology on the population? (See here for more about Israel and Judaism and here for more about the Talmud.) This is a perfect example of how full of crap some of these Zionist whack-jobs are. It is absolutely disgraceful. See this past post about the complete psychopath James Altucher.

Being a phony self-help author isn't enough for this guy, he has to interview phony Human Rights advocates ---all while James knows people like me are being tortured for their political views in the way that I am describing on this blog.

All I am doing is exercising my right of free speech, shouldn't that concern anyone who is a true advocate of human rights? Of course it should! I have committed no violence, nor have I hurt anyone. This is how corrupt Canada and the United States really are, they are completely run by Jewish organized crime. (Go through all the articles at that Jewish organized crime link, you will see articles about Jewish organized crime, the CIA, and drugs.)

These Jewish psychos literally hook people up to computers and blast them with microwaves and just laugh about it. WE PAY OUR TAXES FOR THIS!

THEY DON'T CARE THE SLIGHTEST ABOUT YOU OR ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS. The Human Rights organization that Garry Kasparov is a chairman of is a joke --- just like so many of these human rights organizations. Garry yaps endlessly about Russia and Iran, and of course.... never once mentions anything bad about the United States, Israel or Saudi Arabia --- all who are allies.

This is the current state of affairs in the world you live in.... it is bordering on absolute insanity. How much longer will people put up with such liars?

It is like a giant modern art project that exhibits nothing but nihilism. This is what they are.... one giant Jackson Pollock painting that masquerades as art.

James next book can be called:

FOOL THE SUCKERS! How to Go From a Torturing Scumbag to a Lying Self-Help Author And Pretend Like You Actually Care About People

Four New Human Rights When Our Brains Are Hooked Up To Computers

See here for classified technology and here for more about Elon Musk. The reality is, this has been happening for years, see here for more MKULTRA articles, be sure to scroll down and go through them all. Also, see here for an old New York Times article referring to this topic.  In all actuality, we don't really need any new human rights. They only need to enforce the Bill of Rights in the United States and the Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada. What we need is for the public to be made aware of this technology and that is should be treated with the equivalence of a biowarfare outbreak or a pandemic. 

By Edd Gent

The human-machine mind meld is just around the corner if you believe the buzz coming out of Silicon Valley these days. But neuroethicists worry the technology poses a threat to the last bastion of privacy, our innermost thoughts, and have suggested tweaks to our fundamental human rights to protect that privacy.

Elon Musk made waves last month when it was revealed that he had launched a new company called Neuralink, aimed at building brain-computer interfaces (BCI) that would allow us to “telepathically” communicate with machines.

The tech billionaire has been talking about the need to avert the existential threat of artificial intelligence by merging with machines for some time, but he’s now put his money where his mouth is and set an ambitious target of having healthy people installing these devices as a consumer product within the decade.

Earlier this month, the head of Facebook’s Building 8 research group, Regina Dugan, said they are also working on this kind of neural technology, though they want to create a non-invasive headset rather than an implant. They envisage people being able to use their thoughts to control a cursor in augmented reality or type 100 words per minute.

“The technology is coming and is likely to have dramatic implications for privacy, consent and individual agency.”

The technology is coming and is likely to have dramatic implications for privacy, consent and individual agency. That’s why Marcello Ienca, a neuroethicist at the University of Basel, and Roberto Andorno, a human rights lawyer at the University of Zurich, have outlined four new human rights in the journal Life Sciences, Society and Policy designed to protect us from the potential pitfalls.

“While the body can easily be subject to domination and control by others, our mind, along with our thoughts, beliefs, and convictions, are to a large extent beyond external constraint,” they write. “Yet, with advances in neural engineering, brain imaging and pervasive neurotechnology, the mind might no longer be such an unassailable fortress.”

1. The Right to Cognitive Liberty

The first proposed new right is the right to “Cognitive Liberty,” which states that people have the right to use emerging neurotechnology to modify their mental activity. But it also protects the right to refuse to use it in situations such as an employer requiring workers to take advantage of devices that would improve their performance.

2. The Right to Mental Privacy

Second on the list is the right to “Mental Privacy,” which would protect people from third parties accessing data about their mental activity collected by a neurotechnology device without their consent.

The impulse for this protection is obvious; tech giants are already hoovering up huge amounts of our behavioral data in their efforts to divine our innermost desires and sell us stuff. Brain data could let them bypass this guesswork and precisely tailor our online experiences in pursuit of their goals.

The authors debate whether this right should be absolute or relative, though. In certain situations, allowing the state to access the thoughts of criminals and terrorists could have obvious benefits for society. But the researchers suggest this could erode the already well-established right not to incriminate oneself, which is widely recognized across the democratic world and enshrined in the Fifth Amendment.

3. The Right to Mental Integrity

The last two rights are intertwined and deal with the emerging ability to not just record mental activity, but directly influence it. The right to “Mental Integrity” effectively protects against people hacking brain implants to hijack or interfere with their mental processes or erase memories.

4. The Right to Psychological Continuity

The right to “Psychological Continuity” deals with the vaguer notion of attempts to alter someone’s personality or identity, either through similar brain hacking approaches or more subtle ones like neuromarketing, which can involve companies using insights from neuroscience to try and alter unconscious behavior and attitudes in consumers.

These proposals raise some important issues that will have to be tackled as neurotechnology becomes increasingly common. However, it remains debatable whether the invention of new human rights is the best way to tackle them.

The researchers themselves raise the problem of so-called “rights inflation,” where the push to label anything that is morally desirable as a fundamental right waters down the meaning of those already in place.

While they offer a defense, it is not entirely clear why existing rights to privacy and accompanying data protection laws would not be equally applicable to the personal and medical data collected by neurotechnology devices. Similarly, it could be argued that the final two rights overlap to the point where it may make more sense to combine them.

Either way, though, the paper cuts through the utopian futurism that has surrounded emerging neurotechnology in recent months by highlighting the potential dangers and opening up discussion on how best to tackle them.

And They Said Hitler Was a Struggling Artist...

But no. Not Benjamin Netanyahu. We are supposed to take him and his Wile E Coyote drawing seriously.

They like to speculate about the motivations of anyone who begins to talk "seriously" about politics. It doesn't matter which end of the spectrum you are on or today, the politicians of today are nothing but stage performers and clowns ...and --- that is what the people in power would like them to stay as. They are nothing but puppets.

Those who begin to challenge the people in power will be seen as trouble makers. Anyone who actually cares about justice and the very foundation of our government's constitution  ... which is enshrining our natural human rights --- and then vocally asserts this reminder ... will become a political dissident.

It is not that government or authority is unnecessary, it just means that the laws that are passed must not violate the natural laws and rights of man. Essentially, when your government begins to separate your property from your person,  and says that you have no right to either, you have a problem. You cannot separate human rights from property rights. You cannot have law or justice this way. You will inevitably fall into a contradictory mess.

Though some of our "supposed rulers" in the government would like to believe otherwise, our government was not set up to grant our rights and freedoms to us, only to enshrine them. Even the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms acknowledge this. The Bill of Rights acknowledges that these rights were in the land of Canada before the establishment of Canada as a country because it is a part of Common Law. Common Law is part of English Law going back to the Magna Carta.

When your government no longer cares about your property rights or your rights as a human being, (Bill C-51 and Homeland Security are great examples,) the contract begins to crumble. When people in your government step beyond the contractual limits, the citizens have to begin to question what their governments are still good for. (Essentially, both the Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms acknowledge that our rights are foundational and fundamental.)

If This Was a Contract With a Company,
I Would Break the Contract.  

This is a contract between me as a customer with a company who was supposed to uphold their side of the bargain. If they no longer care about the absolute most important part our constitution, they are showing by their actions that they no longer believe they are servants of the people. They now believe that they are our masters.

Ye Shall Know Them by Their Fruits

Today's Pharisees are the corrupt dirtballs that run the banks, slave trade, the drug trade and the intelligence agencies. They are fast becoming a breakaway society that thinks they can do whatever they want. Even torture the citizens of their own country. Worst of all, they use our tax dollars for research and development of classified technology that gives them a massive edge over the population.

What Should We Do?

One thing for sure....don't do nothing. Do something, do anything before it's all gone. Wake up and assert your rights. Give a shit about your country. Most of all...get MAD.

Stop Sitting on the Fence of Indifference....

Stop say that's  "just the way things are." That is what they want you to think. They want you to be a nice obedient, quiet slave. They want you to compromise. They would rather that you forget about the hard-fought-for history of human rights.

DON'T.