Surveillance Gone Way too Far…..Government to Start Surveilling Your Poop

Police state government to start surveilling your poop in real time for illicit drug use… RFID tag readers in toilets will upload urine composition to the feds

Friday, May 22, 2015

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) The runaway surveillance state in America has just taken a leap into the gutter. Or the sewer, actually, where government goons running their fraudulent “war on drugs” have begun to monitor raw sewage for traces of illicit drug use.

The American Chemical Society reports this as GOOD news, saying:

The war on drugs could get a boost with a new method that analyzes sewage to track levels of illicit drug use in local communities in real time. The new study, a first-of-its-kind in the U.S., was published in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology and could help law enforcement identify new drug hot spots and monitor whether anti-drug measures are working.

Sure. Because at a time when there’s a race war in America, the nation is headed for financial chaos, North Korea is threatening to nuke Washington D.C. and the world’s most evil Monsanto operative — Hillary Clinton — is threatening to occupy the White House, what America really needs right now is police slogging through s%#t to “crack down” on recreational drug users, half of whom probably work for the government in the first place.

As part of this so-called “sewage epidemiology” pilot program, scientists reportedly monitored sewage in Albany, New York. “[T]he scientists found cocaine in 93 percent of all untreated samples,” reports the ACS, seemingly astonished at this high number.

Fortunately, free thinkers immediately realized the truth behind all this:

“The thought of authorities slogging through the sludge may be comical, but it represents another example of big brother using our money to monitor our behavior,” writes Justin Gardner at the Free Thought Project. “Drug consumption is a non-violent act upon oneself. The drug trade is made violent in a black market under government prohibition.”

Gardner goes on to describe the real reason behind the failed war on drugs:

What is the rationale behind attempts at drug eradication and criminalization? It provides a means for government to assert power; it enriches the prison industry and the jackboot industry and politicians. Take these away and there is no logic to the war on drugs.

If you drink city water, you are now a drug user

Even more comically, the research conducted so far has found that illicit drugs are recycled back into drinking water, then consumed by everyone else in the same city.

As the ACS reports: “They found that the wastewater treatment plants didn’t remove all illicit drugs before releasing water back into the environment — and eventually into drinking water.”

Anyone drinking tap water is, therefore, consuming class-A felony controlled substances which can then be detected in their bodies in parts per billion concentrations. This is how the police state can arrest and imprison absolutely anyone by claiming they’re a drug user since there’s cocaine in their blood and it’s all over their twenty dollar bills, too!

There probably isn’t a single person living in America today who doesn’t have traces of cocaine on their person or in their blood. Notably, federal laws on cocaine possession make no exceptions for “inadvertent possession” or possession of trace amounts. Even one molecule of cocaine qualifies you to be charged with felony possession.

Coming soon: A government monitor on every RFID-equipped toilet

Big Government control freaks are fanatics about total surveillance of all “subjects” who must kow-tow to the whims of the police state. While Washington D.C. is full of high-level government operatives with their noses buried in coke, you almost never see government monitoring its own employees for illicit drug use.

Nope, government selectively presumes the criminality of the civilian masses and then deploys all varieties of surveillance tools to ensnare those people for engaging in the very same behaviors Presidents and their minions routinely pull off in the White House.

If this rise of police state surveillance continues, it won’t be long before there’s a microchip on every toilet that encodes your social security number with your stool chemical analysis and reports it back to the government in real time. The toilet will read the RFID that’s embedded in your skin, as required by federal mandatory vaccine laws, of course. The only way to block the RFID and “pee in peace” will be to wrap the part of your body containing the RFID with a metal foil. Hilariously, this might mean that wearing a tin foil hat — the default derogatory description of conspiracy theorists — would physically protect your identity while sitting on the throne and taking a Schumer.

Every flush is a drug test; every toilet is your narc

It’s not just illicit drugs they might find in your sewage, either. Government-installed sensors can also check your stools for horrible, dangerous things the government doesn’t want you to consume such as vitamin C, colloidal silver or medicinal herbs. Should you dare to consumer any of these “unapproved” substances, your toilet will tattle on you to the feds, and they’ll bring a squad of armed goons to your doorstep to throw flashbang grenades at your infants and have your children kidnapped by CPS.

Simultaneously, your compliance with state-ordered medications will also be monitored, and if you miss a day or two of your state-mandated prescription drugs, you’ll be forcefully diagnosed with Obedience Defiance Disorder which gives the government the authority to lock you up in a mental institution and medicate you against your will. After all, if you don’t take all the drugs you’ve been prescribed, how is Big Pharma supposed to stay in business and boost the national GDP?

Before long, our Brave New World will feature every obedient citizen microchipped with an RFID tag that’s read in real time by the government-issued toilet they’re using, which is of course limited to a total water volume of 2 oz. — the new “California drought standard” — requiring twenty-five rapid flushes to get anything to go down. While you’re trying to flush your stools with these California-class “micro flushes,” the toilet, equipped with government sensors, will be testing the chemical composition of everything and uploading the substance test results to the department of Health and Human Surveillance (HHS) to be recorded alongside your identity chip tracking number. The government, in essence, will “log your logs” because that’s precisely the kind of activity Big Government does best: meddling in everybody’s s##t!

Suddenly all the obedient sheeple who put up with NSA surveillance of their phone calls and emails because they “have nothing to hide” will discover they really do have something to hide after all: chronic illicit drug use and medication abuse that the government can now track in real time and trace back to YOU.

Which brings up the all-important question of the day: Why do bears really s##t in the woods? Maybe because the government isn’t spying on them there.

Sources for this article include:

[1] http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/…

[2] http://thefreethoughtproject.com/war-drugs-p…

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/049810_toilet_surveillance_police_state_poop_analysis.html#ixzz3bCm9ouXQ

Fox Network Launching New TV Series That Glorifies Lucifer

Fox network launching new TV series that glorifies Lucifer; marketed with pro-Satan tweets

Sunday, May 24, 2015 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

——–

Joshua 24:15King James Version (KJV)

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve;

——–

Matthew 24:4King James Version (KJV)

And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

image(NaturalNews) The more subtle side of satanism in Hollywood entertainment is now a thing of the past, as primetime television airs blatantly evil shows like the upcoming Fox drama Lucifer, which glorifies the goings about of the “lord of hell” after he fictitiously leaves the lake of fire and retires to Los Angeles.

The premise behind the absurd drama, which is set to release in 2016, centers around so-called “Lucifer Morningstar” and his new life as the owner of Lux, an upscale nightclub located in the City of Angels.

A trailer for the show portrays Lucifer as a handsome, British-accented, well-to-do ladykiller full of charm and wit.

The real-life Lucifer, of course, wouldn’t have things any other way, being the “father of lies” and all. Based on the show’s trailer, the Lucifer character will be offered up to the masses who watch Fox as a likable character with moral and ethical convictions, fulfilling the biblical account of this insidious demonic entity.

Described as the wisest creature that God ever created, Lucifer is said to be “full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty” — that is, before he was cut down and destroyed by his Creator for elevating himself in place of God. Isaiah 14:12 of the Holy Bible describes Lucifer as having “fallen from heaven” due to his sin, only to henceforth become what John 8:44 describes as the “father of lies.”

It’s only fitting, then, that this modern-day show produced by satanists would portray Lucifer as a type of benevolent god, since this was always his goal — to take the place of the real God. Whether you believe what the Bible says or not, this is the clear-as-day implication of this upcoming show that will soon be watched by presumably millions of people.

One “tweet” posted to Twitter regarding the Lucifer show, as covered by Fox, reads: “I’m on board for #Lucifer,” showing how easily deceived the public is when it comes to embracing evil.

“In something of a departure for badness personified, Lucifer makes nice with humans, and ends up helping a homicide detective try to find the killer of one of his new friends,” reads a description by The Verge of how the Lucifer show will play itself out.

The masses are increasingly obsessed with evil, so why not make a show glorifying Satan?

Perhaps this premise of portraying evil as good and good as evil isn’t so unusual after all, though. Modern society does this all the time with politicians, CEOs, celebrities, media-obsessed “humanitarians” and many others who are glorified in the limelight as they secretly perform all kinds of evil in the shadows.

Politicians, both Republican and Democrat alike, are a perfect example of this. Clad in tailored suits and plastered smiles, these phonies parade themselves around as champions of the people while quietly accepting bribes from special interests. Many of them are blatant liars, of course, and yet the people keep voting for them.

But as the saying goes, every country has the government it deserves, and perhaps American society’s growing obsession with demons, vampires, werewolves and other satanic entities is exactly why evil has become a no-holds-barred pastime for millions of Americans. Just look at all the other television shows, movies and music videos out there that pay homage to “the lightbearer,” a.k.a. Lucifer.

The “eye of Horus” is another popular satanic symbol present in movies and other mass entertainment. It’s even the official brand logo for Time Warner:

http://beforeitsnews.com

Sources for this article include:

http://www.fox.com

Homepage

http://biblehub.com

http://biblehub.com

http://www.wnd.com

http://beforeitsnews.com

http://www.theverge.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/049831_Lucifer_Fox_mainstream_media.html#ixzz3bCcizbLr

Utah to Allow Firing Squads for Executions

Updated 8:18 PM ET, Mon March 23, 2015

(CNN) Utah’s governor signed a bill Monday that brings back firing squads as a potential way to execute some death row prisoners.

Lethal injection remains the primary method for carrying out executions in the state, Gov. Gary R. Herbert said in a statement. A firing squad would only be used in the event the necessary drugs cannot be obtained.

“Those who voiced opposition to this bill are primarily arguing against capital punishment in general and that decision has already been made in our state,” said Marty Carpenter, a spokesman for Herbert.

“We regret anyone ever commits the heinous crime of aggravated murder to merit the death penalty and we prefer to use our primary method of lethal injection when such a sentence is issued. However, when a jury makes the decision and a judge signs a death warrant, enforcing that lawful decision is the obligation of the executive branch,” he said.

Utah banned death by firing squad in 2004, though inmates who chose that option before the law changed still ended up being shot to death.

The last execution by firing squad was in 2010, and it was also the most recent execution in Utah.

 A Utah firing squad also executed Gary Gilmore in 1977, the first death by capital punishment after the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty the prior year.

Feeling a Little Tipsy after Your Glass of Wine? It’s Probably the Arsenic

Did I mention there’s arsenic in the air, soil, water, and food too?

Franzia, Trader Joe’s Sued Over Levels Of Arsenic In Wine

Posted: 03/20/2015 3:59 pm EDT

A class action lawsuit was filed Thursday against over two dozen California winemakers, accusing them of producing wine with high levels of arsenic, reports CBS News.

The wines, which include the Trader Joe’s Charles Shaw White Zinfandel known as “Two Buck Chuck,” Menage a Trois Moscato and Franzia White Grenache, had arsenic levels more than three, four and fives times the Environmental Protection Agency’s limit for drinking water, respectively.

The research that makes up the bulk of the lawsuit was conducted by Kevin Hicks, a former wine distributor who created the company BeverageGrades to test wine. He analyzed more than 1,300 bottles of wine and found that about one-quarter of them had higher levels of arsenic that exceeded the EPA’s standards for drinking water, which is 10 parts per billion (ppb).

Attorneys who filed the suit said Hicks tried going straight to the winemakers with the information, but was turned away. The lawsuit, which is based on Hicks’ work but is filed on behalf of consumers against the winemakers, is the only way to get their attention, a lawyer told CBS News.

The Wine Institute, a business association that represents 1,000 wineries, said in a statement that arsenic is a naturally occurring element in air, soil, water, and food, and that the allegations in the lawsuit were misleading.

“As an agricultural product, wines from throughout the world contain trace amounts of arsenic as do juices, vegetables, grains and other alcohol beverages,” the statement said. “There is no research that shows that the amounts found in wine pose a health risk to consumers.”

There’s a fair amount of evidence that a glass of wine can help promote heart health in some people. But if the allegations of this lawsuit prove true, it should be a warning to regular wine drinkers that frequent quaffs of an arsenic-heavy wine may hurt over the long term, says Prof. Bruce Stanton, director of the Darmouth Center for the Environmental Health Sciences.

Stanton wasn’t involved in the lawsuit or Hicks’ report, but in reaction to the news, he told The Huffington Post that it “would be prudent” to avoid any wines that have reported arsenic levels above 10 ppb because there are trace amounts of arsenic in many different kinds of foods.

“We do know that arsenic in food does have adverse health effects,” Stanton wrote in an email. “In an abundance of caution it seems prudent to me to keep arsenic exposure as low as possible from all sources, including water, wine, apple and orange juice and rice.”

Adverse health effects can include skin damage and various cancers of the skin, liver, bladder and lung. Still, Stanton acknowledged that while too much arsenic in water has been shown to damage health, there aren’t very many studies demonstrating the effects of arsenic in wine. Plus, of course, health authorities don’t encourage people to drink eight to ten cups of wine every day the way they do water.

“A number of studies have shown that arsenic in water, even at levels as low as 5 ppb … have adverse effects on children in the U.S. (reduced IQ, for example),” he explained. “To my knowledge no one has studied the effect of arsenic in wine on humans, so we don’t know if the same amount of arsenic in wine would have the same effect as arsenic in water.”

A Trader Joe’s spokeswoman told HuffPost that while the company can’t comment on pending litigation, they are conducting their own investigation with several of their wine suppliers. They also pointed to varying global standards of arsenic in wine — 100 ppb in Canada, and 200 ppb set by the Paris-based International Organization of Vine and Wine — and said that their wines are within those standards.

“We will not offer any product we feel is unsafe. Ever,” wrote spokeswoman Rachel Broderick. “We have no reason to believe the wines we offer are unsafe, including Charles Shaw White Zinfandel.”

Franzia directed HuffPost to the Wine Institute’s statement, which also called into question Hicks’ comparison of water to wine and pointed out that California’s wines meet global standards for the amount of arsenic allowed in wine.

“While there are no established limits in the U.S., several countries, including the European Union, have established limits of 100 parts per billion or higher for wine,” it reads. “California wine exports are tested by these governments and are below the established limits.”

CORRECTION: A previous version of this article stated that Kevin Hicks was a party in the class action lawsuit, but in fact attorneys filed it on behalf of consumers. Hicks’ research provided the groundwork needed to file the lawsuit.

Major Media Outlets Sued for over a Trillion-Dollars to Prove Sandy Hook was Staged

As a Targeted Individual I am totally aware that the Government does bizzare things such as torturing totally innocent citizens.  However it is very far fetched for me to understand that the Government would go so far as to hire crisis actors to stage something as serious as the Sandy Hook School shootings.   All I can do is hope it isn’t true.

(See seperate post with video debunking Sandy Hook School Shootings)

Original story found here:  Sandy Hook Lawsuit

3_4_Sandy_HookBy Pete Papaherakles —The mass school shootings in Pakistan on December 16 have generated controversy about media coverage of the story and rekindled accusations that the mainstream media lied about the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings two years ago. One of the alleged victims in Pakistan seems to have been killed twice, as he was also one of the 20 children reportedly killed at Sandy Hook.During a televised report by the BBC of the Pakistan shootings, the reporter is seen walking in front of a wall with pictures of the children killed there. One of the pictures is none other than Noah Pozner, one of the more oft-displayed faces of the 20 children allegedly killed at the Sandy Hook school shootings, in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14, 2012. BBC has admitted in a short article that “the montage of images includes the photo of a young boy, Noah Pozner, who died in the Sandy Hook massacre in the United States in 2012,” but made no further comments.Noah Pozner’s picture has circulated all across Pakistan, including at several vigils held for the slain children. Bizarrely, Pakistani authorities, officials at the Army Public School (where the massacre occurred) and the media have identified the boy in the photo as Huzaifa Huxaifa. According to website “Islamhelpline.net,” “The name Hudhaifa is derived from the rootword ‘hazaf,’ which means to erase something. The name spells ‘erased’ in two different ways.”

Despite the Pozner photo anomaly, no one is actually questioning the veracity of the tragic school massacre in Pakistan. Unlike Sandy Hook, photos and videos were shown of the dead children on the scene, including blood, gore, rescue squad members, police, grieving parents and a scene of general pandemonium.

Many researchers over the past two years have felt that Sandy Hook lacked the transparency necessary to prove it believable and left many unanswered questions. They have pointed fingers at the Connecticut police, the government, first responders and what have come to be called “crisis actors,” but mostly they have blamed the media for spreading false stories and disinformation and fabricating what they call the Sandy Hook hoax.

One of these people is filmmaker and author William Brandon Shanley. He has launched a wave of lawsuits for more than $1 trillion against big media over their Sandy Hook school shooting coverage. The New York Times, Associated Press, the Hartford Courant and The Newtown Bee are being sued for $10 billion in punitive damages.

Shanley’s lawsuit says the media conspired to commit fraud and terrorism. “This fraud involved lying to the public, faking news, publishing one-sided news reports, censoring reality, suppressing facts and deliberately skewing the news to shift public perceptions,” he argued.In an interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS on December 29, Shanley said he believes Americans have been lied to about Sandy Hook.

“I have filed lawsuits against the media in U.S. District Court in New Haven for fraud and terrorism,” he said.

Shanley believes that “the media conspired to brainwash the public into thinking a lone gunman drill known as the ‘Sandy Hook Massacre’ was real, when in fact it was a staged FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] National Level Exercise Event.”

Shanley pointed to two of the main documents he includes in his lawsuit.

“One is the photo that was on the front page of all the newspapers, magazines and on every TV channel,” explained Shanley. “Everyone has seen this picture of a dozen or so children supposedly being evacuated from Sandy Hook School. The children are shown walking single file in a parking lot with their hands on each other’s shoulder while a policewoman is guiding them. Have you seen that picture? Everyone has seen that picture. But guess what? That picture was completely staged by Shannon Hick of The Newtown Bee. It wasn’t even taken on that day. You can tell that the children are not even wearing winter clothes and there is no frost on the ground as there was on December 14. Not a single child is wearing any winter clothes, not even one coat or jacket. That’s because the photo was taken either on November 12 or on October 17 during a drill conducted at Sandy Hook. Other panned out pictures of this photo-op event show that only these 10 to 15 kids are on the scene along with other bystanders. Where are the other 585 children?”

Shanley said the other evidence he has is the video footage from the dash cams in the police cars that showed up at Sandy Hook School that morning.

“The cameras have a running time stamp starting from 9:37 a.m. and running till 12:49 p.m. and show the entire school and parking lot, yet they show absolutely no evacuation activity taking place that morning, nor do they record purported evacuation activity at specific times as recorded in the official Sandy Hook report,” he said. “In at least 36 documented instances, the evacuation activity events reported on the official Sandy Hook report are not reflected in any of the three dash cams pointed at the specific direction of the school building cited in the report.”

The iconic picture of the children being evacuated was allegedly taken at 10:16 a.m. on December 14, 2012. Once again, there is no such activity recorded by any of the three dash cams, which scoped the entire school and parking lot. Aerial video footage taken of the school grounds by news helicopters also do not show any evacuation activity.

It is doubtful that Shanley’s pro se lawsuit will get any traction, as he lacks the funds to proceed with such an ambitious undertaking. Furthermore, since the interview was taken, Shanley’s whereabouts are unknown, as he has mysteriously disappeared.

Pete Papaherakles is a writer and political cartoonist for AFP and is also AFP’s outreach director. Pete is interested in getting AFP writers and editors on the podium at patriotic events. Call him at 202-544-5977 if you know of an event you think AFP should attend.

– See more at: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=22330#sthash.bE5UUSxy.dpuf

Moving to Green Bank, W.Va May Help Lessen Your Electromagnetic Exposure

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/04/green_bank_w_v_where_the_electrosensitive_can_escape_the_modern_world.html

Refugees of the Modern World

The “electrosensitive” are moving to a cellphone-free town. But is their disease real?

By Joseph Stromberg

Nicols Fox.

Nicols Fox moved to the Radio Quiet Zone to escape electromagnetic forces

 

Courtesy of Christine Fitzpatrick

You can turn your phone on in Green Bank, W.Va., but you won’t get a trace of a signal. If you hit scan on your car’s radio, it’ll cycle through the dial endlessly, never pausing on a station. This remote mountainous town is inside the U.S. National Radio Quiet Zone, a 13,000–square-mile area where most types of electromagnetic radiation on the radio spectrum (which includes radio and TV broadcasts, Wi-Fi networks, cell signals, Bluetooth, and the signals used by virtually every other wireless device) are banned to minimize disturbance around the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, home to the world’s largest steerable radio telescope.

For most people, this restriction is a nuisance. But a few dozen people have moved to Green Bank (population: 147) specifically because of it. They say they suffer from electromagnetic hypersensitivity, or EHS—a disease not recognized by the scientific community in which these frequencies can trigger acute symptoms like dizziness, nausea, rashes, irregular heartbeat, weakness, and chest pains. Diane Schou came here with her husband in 2007 because radio-frequency exposure anywhere else she went gave her constant headaches. “Life isn’t perfect here. There’s no grocery store, no restaurants, no hospital nearby,” she told me when I visited her house last month. “But here, at least, I’m healthy. I can do things. I’m not in bed with a headache all the time.”

The idea that radio frequencies can cause harm to the human body isn’t entirely absurd. Some research has suggested that long-term exposure to power lines and cellphones is associated with an increased chance of cancer, although most evidence says otherwise. But what these people claim—that exposure to electromagnetic frequencies can immediately cause pain and ill health—is relatively novel, has little medical research to support it, and is treated with deep skepticism by the scientific mainstream.

That hasn’t stopped them from seeking to publicize the dangers of wireless technology. One of the most prominent activists in the field, Arthur Firstenberg, gained notoriety in 2010 for suing his Santa Fe neighbor for the effects of her Wi-Fi network. But he began organizing EHS-sufferers way back in 1996—when digital cellular networks were initially installed across the country—forming the Cellular Phone Task Force and publishing Microwaving Our Planet, one of the first books on the topic. In the years since, a fringe movement has grown around the idea, with some 30 support groups worldwide for those affected by radiation. The purported “epidemic” is particularly concentrated in the United Kingdom and Sweden, where surveys have found that 1 to 4 percent of the population believes they’re affected.

Here in the United States, West Virginia’s Radio Quiet Zone has become a gathering place for the hypersensitive since the mid-2000s, when they first began arriving. Most find out about the area through EHS groups, at conferences, or by reading about it in the handful of news reports published over the last few years. Diane Schou estimates that, so far, 36 people like her have settled in and around the tiny town to escape radiation.

***

When you walk in the Schous’ two-story brick house, 4 miles up a forested road from the Green Bank post office, the first item you see might be a radiation meter they keep in their living room. She and her husband, Bert, moved here from Cedar Falls, Iowa, because they believe Diane is sensitive to very specific radio frequencies. She first began noticing her sensitivity in 2002, she says, when U.S. Cellular, a wireless provider based in the Midwest, built a tower near their farm. “I was extremely tired, but I couldn’t sleep at night,” she said. “I got a rash, I had hair loss, my skin was wrinkled, and I just thought it was something I ate, or getting older.” After she started getting severe headaches, she heard about EHS from a friend and did some reading online, and eventually came to believe the tower had triggered her latent sensitivity. She went for a consultation at the Mayo Clinic, but doctors refused to consider the possibility, and when she wrote to the FCC complaining about the tower, they simply replied by saying it was safe.

Over the next four years, she repeatedly left the farm to search for a safe place, traveling through Scandinavia (where their son was studying abroad) and logging more than 75,000 miles driving across the United States in their RV. She’d find relatively safe spots but still got pounding headaches and chest pains from a range of triggers: if someone nearby turned on his phone, if she drove past a signal tower, if a neighbor next door used a coffee maker. “It would be like a sledgehammer on top of my head,” she said. Initially, only U.S. Cellular phones had harmed her, but eventually, being near any electrical device was a risk. (Virtually all devices that use electricity, even if they don’t rely on wireless signals, emit a low level of radiation.)

Then, in 2007, she learned about the Radio Quiet Zone. When she visited, she finally started to feel better. She and Bert sold half of their Iowa farmland and bought the house in West Virginia, unfinished, and have since installed wiring with thick insulation to reduce radiation. (Bert—who gets much milder symptoms of EHS, including tinnitus—still goes back to their farm every summer to conduct corn research.) Over time, living without exposure reduced Diane’s sensitivity, and she can now tolerate many devices without pain. The Schous use a landline and an Internet-connected computer (without Wi-Fi). But they still haven’t found a refrigerator with low enough radiation emissions, so Diane manually fills an icebox with ice each day. Even now, if she leaves the Radio Quiet Zone, exposure can set her off: “I’ll say, ‘Oh, I have a headache,’ and then someone’s cellphone will ring,” she said. “This happens time and time again.”

The Schous often host EHS-sufferers who want to test out Green Bank. One person who relies on their hospitality is Deborah Cooney, a singer, pianist, and voice coach from San Diego. Her problems began in 2010, she told me, when a smart electricity meter was installed on her house; she believes this triggered her boyfriend’s heart issues, led to her own hypersensitivity, and even caused her cat to start panting, pacing, and shaking her paws. Over time, Cooney’s symptoms intensified—they included fatigue, numbness, circulation problems, and intense jolts of pain in her heart—and she impulsively moved out one night in October 2011. “I got so sick that I felt my life was in serious jeopardy, and if I didn’t leave that minute, I didn’t know if I’d survive,” she said. She drove cross-country to the one friend she had who didn’t get any cell service (he lived elsewhere in West Virginia) and learned about the Radio Quiet Zone soon after she arrived.

Currently, she lives without running water or electricity in a simple one-room cabin the Schous built at the foot of their driveway, because simply sleeping in a wired building makes her sick. During the day, she shares a nearby apartment with another hypersensitive person, where she cooks, bathes, and occasionally uses a computer. Because she has trouble finding work, she’s having money problems. Recently, she traveled to Texas and Florida to perform, sleeping in her car every night of the monthlong trip because of the devices and Wi-Fi networks in hotel rooms. “This is a tough place to live,” she says. “I really don’t know how I’m going to be able to support myself.”

Some residents of Green Bank, along with the nearby town of Marlinton—also in the Radio Quiet Zone—apparently aren’t thrilled about this influx.* According to Schou, many locals are reluctant to rent housing to people with EHS, perhaps a result of the fact that in a remote area with few job opportunities, any new arrivals only heighten competition—and maybe because they’re likely to ask for special treatment. Schou told me that since she requested to have the fluorescent lights shut off at the community center, she’s faced intense discrimination: Packages have been stolen from her porch, and she once found a dead groundhog in her mailbox. “I’ve been told, ‘We don’t want your kind of people here,’ ” she said. Cooney was banned from the radio observatory for bringing up radiation issues at a town meeting held there and says her tires have been punctured in the night more than once. (I tried to talk to some locals about their new neighbors—but it’s hard to do a man-on-the-street interview in an area with so few streets or proverbial men.)

Cooney, like many with EHS, is particularly angry about the rollout of smart meters by electric utilities in many parts of the country. In some places, the backlash has been fierce, in part because of the belief that their wireless signals (used to monitor electricity consumption in real time) are dangerous. In Maine, consumers successfully demanded opt-outs for those who don’t want smart meters installed, while one utility in Hawaii switched to an opt-in program. But Cooney says this doesn’t go far enough: “Those options doesn’t let me opt out of the smart meter on my neighbor’s house, 10 feet outside my door, or the bank of 100 smart meters on the apartment building behind by house. And radiation doesn’t respect property rights.” She’s currently suing California’s Public Utilities Commission for $120 million in damages and wants a decision that bans smart meters entirely. Cooney also believes the telecommunications industry has been actively concealing the dangers of radio frequencies for some time. “They just want to keep profits high,” she said. “They want to keep injuring people because they don’t want to pay the money it would take to correct the problem.”

It’s clear that Cooney, Schou, and the others are suffering. But the question remains: What exactly is “the problem”?

Even a skeptical thinker can be briefly entranced by the notion that researchers may have simply failed, so far, to uncover a real disease—as Carl Sagan was fond of saying, “the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” It’s especially tempting when talking to someone like Nicols Fox, who reported for the Economist on food safety issues for more than a decade and wrote three books before moving to the nearby town of Renick, W.V., in 2008 in an attempt to control her EHS. A science-minded person who probably would have once scoffed at the idea of hypersensitivity, she gradually came to believe that her shooting pains, unpredictably plunging heart rates, and difficulty speaking were a result of years in front of a computer. “I got more and more sensitive, and eventually there was a day when my body just screamed when I touched the keyboard,” she said.

Now, she lives simply in a little two-bedroom house on a forested ridge and does her writing on a typewriter (she’s working on a novel), mirroring the Luddite tradition she once wrote a book about. At night, she wears a shirt woven with silver fibers to reduce her radio frequency exposure, and though her house has electricity, she shuts it off and uses gas lamps whenever possible. During our conversation, her voice would occasionally get cracked and raspy if I got too close with my audio recorder. In the five years since she’s moved to the Radio Quiet Zone, she hasn’t left once.

Fox’s position on the dangers of radio frequency seems to make sense at first glance. “It’s completely artificial, we’ve invented it, and it’s never been on this planet before, so nothing—not animals or humans—is adapted to it,” she told me. Of course, this kind of thinking (that a natural state is inherently better than an unnatural one) is a logical fallacy, and can’t replace actual evidence in proving the existence of EHS. Nevertheless, Fox and others who believe they suffer from it often compare wireless devices to tobacco—a dangerous addiction that many of us sign up for before fully understanding the risks.

Unlike many people who believe they suffer from EHS, Fox doesn’t seem particularly worried about proving it. “I don’t care if there’s research or not,” she said. “I’ve done my research. Meaning, I’ve sat in the doctor’s office and seen my heart range drop to 36 beats per minute when they turn the equipment on.” As she points out, there’s no reason why she’d turn her life upside-down—abandoning her career and selling her house on Maine’s Mount Desert Island—to fake a disease.

But “faking it” isn’t the right way to discuss EHS—both because it alienates sufferers by making them defensive and because, more importantly, that doesn’t seem to be the case. According to research, these people’s symptoms may be real. But—and this is the important part—radiation isn’t to blame. A 2010 meta-analysis of 46 studies concluded that “repeated experiments have been unable to replicate this phenomenon under controlled conditions,” while the World Health Organization simply says that “well controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms were not correlated with EMF exposure.”

The primary way of testing is a provocation study, in which a purported EHS-sufferer is exposed to either an electromagnetic field or a sham field and asked to identify which is which. James Rubin, a psychologist at King’s College London who studies psychogenic illnesses, has analyzed the literature on provocation studies and conducted some at his own lab. His most recent meta-analysis—which covered 1,175 participants in 46 studies—found no rigorous, replicable experiment in which radio frequencies were identified at rates greater than chance. “It is definitely the case that some people experience symptoms that they attribute to electromagnetic frequencies,” he told me. “But is it really these frequencies causing the symptoms? At the moment, we can say that there simply isn’t any robust evidence to support that.”

Some EHS-sufferers criticize provocation studies, saying that holding them in a lab means spillover radiation from equipment and nearby buildings even in the sham condition. They also argue that the experiments don’t necessarily use the correct radiation frequency. (“The scientist is pretending to be God, knowing what frequency that person will react to,” Diane Schou said to me.) But Rubin points out that many provocation studies start with an unblinded stage, where the participants are truthfully told whether the electromagnetic field is on. “They almost always report symptoms when they know it is on, and not when they know it is off,” Rubin said. “In the second stage, when the experiment is repeated double-blind, they report symptoms to the same extent in both conditions.” When the participants know whether the field is on, in other words, contaminant radiation and frequency specificity suddenly aren’t such big problems.

As such, the best predictor for whether a hypersensitive person will experience symptoms isn’t the presence of radio frequency—it’s the belief that a device is turned on nearby. An elegant demonstration of this on a much larger scale took place in 2010, when residents of the town of Fourways, South Africa, successfully petitioned for a cell signal tower to be taken down because of the sickness caused by its radiation—even though it was later revealed that it hadn’t been switched on during the time of their complaints.

The idea of EHS is also undermined by our basic understanding of electromagnetic radiation. The full spectrum of electromagnetic radiation is divided into ionizing and non-ionizing frequencies. The former category, which includes X-rays and nuclear fallout, is energetic enough to tear electrons off our body’s atoms and cause radiation sickness; the latter isn’t. While the frequencies in this latter group (which includes visible light, cell signals, Wi-Fi, and the radiation from power lines) can burn biological tissue at extremely high intensities, our devices operate at levels well below anything considered harmful. The alluring idea that life hasn’t evolved to withstand non-ionizing radiation becomes silly when you consider that the main source of it on planet Earth is sunlight.

As Fox and others note, there is research supporting the idea that EHS is real—but scientists largely dismiss it as pseudoscience. Most well-known is the BioInitiative Report (a non–peer-reviewed publication authored by 29 self-described “scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals”), which has been widely criticized for selectively using favorable studies and data. The European Commission noted that, contrary to its claims, the report was a post facto assembly of many different papers and studies, not the consensus of a working group, and that it often ignored the conclusions of the researchers themselves in interpreting the data. A recent article in the Guardian cited a 2011 study by a team of LSU neurologists that purported to find that electromagnetic frequencies caused headaches and muscle twitching, but the study involved only one subject—and even she wasn’t able to identify if a field was turned on at rates better than chance.

Given the data, the long-hidden danger of tobacco isn’t an apt parallel for the supposed harm of radio frequency radiation. But other episodes from history are. Technology historian Genevieve Bell says that in the early days of rail travel, experts warned that if a woman traveled faster than 50 miles per hour, her uterus could suddenly fly out of her body. Bell has charged the many instances throughout history in which new technologies triggered unfounded, irrational “moral panics.” She theorizes that innovations which change our relationship to time, space, and other people are the most likely to incite fear. It’s hard to imagine technologies that hit all three of these all comprehensively as smartphones and the mobile Web.

You could also view EHS as a mass psychogenic illness, in which very real symptoms arise from a socially contagious belief in a nonexistent disease. In 1962, for example, after a June bug infestation at the Montana Mills textile factory in North Carolina, workers began getting sick: They broke out in rashes, experienced nausea, and in some cases fainted and required hospitalization. A total of 62 workers exhibited symptoms, but doctors and entomologists couldn’t find any explanation. In a seminal 1968 study, a pair of psychologists who had interviewed the staff concluded that their physical symptoms had been triggered by the belief that they were at risk, reinforced by local news stories about the infestation and resulting contagion. Interestingly, those with close friends who’d gotten sick first were more likely to develop symptoms, as were those more stressed and dissatisfied with their jobs. Other episodes attributed to mass psychogenic illness include a supposed post-9/11 chemical attack at a Maryland Metro station (in which window cleaner somehow caused 35 people to develop headaches, nausea, and sore throats), and last year’s mysterious outbreak of twitching among female high school students in Le Roy, New York.

As The New Yorker recently pointed out in a blog post, EHS, along with these types of episodes, hint at the bizarre power of the nocebo effect: the flip-side of the placebo effect, in which inert substances or the suggestion of harm brings about real physical symptoms. In many studies of the nocebo effect, simply explaining to patients that a pill might trigger side effects has been enough to cause everything from back pain to erectile dysfunction. “If you believe that a substance, compound, or phenomena harms you, and you start experiencing symptoms, there’s confirmation for your belief right there, and then it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy,” Brian Dunning, a prominent skeptic who hosts the Skeptoid podcast and frequently takes on pseudoscientific claims, told me. “You see that your phone has a signal or that there’s a Wi-Fi router in the room, it further increases your stress level, and you have very real and very distressing physical symptoms. Once you have this confirming experience, it becomes really difficult to sit there and be told otherwise.”

Our brains’ expectations, it turns out, have a surprisingly potent effect on the functioning of our bodies. If the people who moved to Green Bank truly suffer from piercing headaches, nausea, and dizziness when they are around wireless signals, the nocebo effect (and previous instances of mass psychogenic diseases) is as good an explanation of anything we have so far.

 

***

But what does this mean for people who believe they suffer from EHS? Probably not much. Science might say that they can’t possibly be allergic to cellular networks, but as long as they are certain they are, the Radio Quiet Zone is the one place they can get relief.

So, for now, most of them plan to stay in Green Bank, and more arrive all the time. In just the week before I visited, Bert Schou told me, they’d gotten calls from people in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Virginia asking whether they could come stay. Diane wants to raise money to build a resource center for the hypersensitive nearby, where they can be medically evaluated in a radiation-free setting and stay overnight when necessary.

Above all, they want to spread the message that electromagnetic radiation is dangerous—and that the only solution is getting away from this invisible form of pollution. “You might find a friend or someone in your workplace who’s not feeling well,” Bert said to me as I stood in his driveway, getting ready to head out before it got dark. “Bring them here, and they might feel better, too.”

This article arises from Future Tense, a collaboration among Arizona State University, the New America Foundation, and Slate. Future Tense explores the ways emerging technologies affect society, policy, and culture. To read more, visit the Future Tense blog and the Future Tense home page. You can also follow us on Twitter.

Correction, April 12, 2013: This article originally misspelled the name of the town of Marlinton, W.Va.

 

Joseph Stromberg is a science reporter for Vox.com. Follow him @josephstromberg.

Feds Cut Off Internet, Dress up As Technicians to Conduct Warrantless Search

Source:http://news.yahoo.com/court-filing-fbi-impersonated-repairmen-ruse-040033071.html

iStock
 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dramatic new video obtained by The Associated Press, filmed through the lapel camera carried by an undercover government agent, shows how the FBI tricked its way inside a luxury villa at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas as part of a major international gambling bust.

Defense lawyers said the FBI shut off Internet access to the suspects then impersonated repair technicians to get inside and collect evidence.

The video shows investigators devising code words to use while they were inside, a back-and-forth about the cover story for an agent, who adopted the name “Sam,” which he had used “for other stuff” in the past, and a brief exchange about how another investigator should dress for the role of a technical repair nerd.

“If you put on that shirt, you have to look the part. Go all the way,” said Mike Wood, an outside technician working for Caesars, advising Nevada Gaming Control Board Agent Ricardo Lopez before Lopez headed to one of the suites the morning of July 4.

The AP obtained about 30 minutes of audio and video recordings of the covert reconnaissance recorded over two days.

On another visit to a villa on July 5, Lopez appeared to try to fix an Internet outage for several minutes while glancing around the room and asking more than once to view a laptop screen to verify that Internet connectivity was still down. Defense lawyers said in their filing that Mike Kung, the FBI agent, was sent inside because he spoke Chinese.

Still undercover, Lopez appeared to call Wood from inside the villa and asked him to “check the frame,” the code they had previously worked out. In a brief back and forth, Wood responded that he would “trace the wire and make sure it’s tied down good.”

Defense lawyer Thomas Goldstein, who is challenging evidence the government collected in what he described as an illegal search, said that was code to turn Internet access back on.

After the agents left the villa, Lopez was recorded saying he saw the Internet address of the website that defendant Wei Seng Phua was operating, adding, “Phua had the odds up on his page the whole time.” Federal authorities described Phua, 50, as a high-ranking member of the 14k Triad, a Chinese organized crime group. Goldstein said Phua denied that allegation, which he said had nothing to do with the criminal case in Nevada.

Phua, his son Darren Wai Kit Phua, Seng Chen Yong, Wai Kin Yong and four others were arrested in July after federal agents raided three high-roller villas at the hotel. All eight face charges of transmission of wagering information, operating an illegal gambling business, and aiding and abetting. None of defendants has entered a plea, but Goldstein said they all deny wrongdoing.

Phua also faces charges of running an illegal sports gambling business in Macau. He was arrested in the Chinese gambling enclave on June 18 and flew to Las Vegas a few days later.

The FBI employed the ruse against the recommendation of an assistant U.S. attorney, Kimberly Frayn, according to defense lawyers. They filed a 54-page motion late Tuesday night in federal court in Las Vegas to dismiss evidence in the case. According to a conversation recorded by an investigator for the hotel, the prosecutor told FBI agents “it was a consent issue,” the lawyers said.

Under U.S. law, a person whose property is inspected generally must waive his constitutional protections against unreasonable searches unless authorities obtain a warrant. Evidence collected improperly is not supposed to be used at trial.

The FBI in Las Vegas referred questions about the practice to the U.S. Attorney’s Office there. Natalie Collins, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Daniel Bogden, said prosecutors were aware of the allegations being made by defense lawyers but declined to comment, citing a pending trial.

The gambling case was at least the third to surface in recent weeks raising questions about tactics by federal agents pursuing criminal investigations.

The Drug Enforcement Administration set up a fake Facebook account using photographs and other personal information it took from the cellphone of a New York woman arrested in a cocaine case in hopes of tricking her friends and associates into revealing incriminating drug secrets.

In another case, the FBI sent a fake news story it attributed to The Associated Press to trick a suspect in a bomb-threat case into clicking on the website link and revealing his location. The AP objected that the FBI’s practice was “unacceptable” and “undermined AP’s credibility.”

___

Associated Press writers Eric Tucker in Washington and Ken Ritter in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

___

Follow Alicia A. Caldwell on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/acaldwellap