The similarities between the British Victorian Empire1. and the older Empires of the past are difficult to see and as time passes, become more and more opaque. The direction of history through the mechanism of time points always toward the darkness. In our own modern period, we have only the National Socialist Nazi Empire to compare our own Victorian Empire with. Between the British Victorian Empire and the General Government of Nazi Germany, there are few similarities.
The British Victorian Empire was a longer lasting and more legally coherent entity in which the various territories under the yoke of various British 'mandates' were first subjected by force, then subjected by economy, and lastly subjected by the law. In each territory, the British Victorian Empire understood that a territory could not be governed by London acting as a central authority, but by a localised form of territorial government with a fully blown polity all its own. Periodically, centralisation did occur but only where a corporation attempted to govern a territory, found the job irredeemably impossible, and then crawled to the British Government for help. In more cases than were not, this nearly always entailed seeking financial help as a result of corporate maladministration.
Over the course of the British Victorian Empires rule, the localised real-politik of the autonomous imperial crown dependant sprang up with its own economy, its own military and its own judiciary to seal its complacency to the crown. For the British, a coercive polity was the mark of savage authoritarianism; a native must be prepared to consume mother England's industrial goods by choice.
As the Empire's chest proudly expanded to fill itself with air, the imperial crown dependent filled with a new para-legal and para-corporate mongrel class of opportunists keen to make a life for themselves within the newly found colonies. In each territory in which they settled, new corporate and legal interests sprang into life adding new weight to the autonomous territories real-politik. Over the course of the decades, the full weight of that real-politik settled into its stride to maintain the Empires holdings. On a daily basis, the British Victorian Empire saw its interests settled in British colonial courts, by British colonial para-legals, representing British colonial para-corporate merchants. As the years passed by, the weight of legislation within these courts grew as did the domestic interests of these para-legal classes. The bulk of that legislation was geared toward further enforcing the localised real-politik of that imperial crown dependant.
Throughout the entirety of the building, development and maintenance of this British imperial order, private interests swearing allegiance to the British crown clamoured for the right to exploit the new imperial reality. Incorporated businesses led the way not just in terms of trade and industry, but also in providing the logical merchant structure in which other professions could work. Para-legals were self-contained entities - and so were judges and Magistrates. In each territory in which the Empire had an interest, private Magistrates sat in matters of local tax revenue to enforce the crowns financial and economic interests. The means by which they achieved their jurisdiction, and the mechanism by which they maintained that jurisdiction, was borne from an imperial polity in which the private merchant incorporated interest was the dominant faction of the period.
In the modern day and age, the veneer of this old imperial merchant order remains in place as a systemic part of the modern British crown. The devices this merchant order used in its foreign territorial heyday, largely remain intact in the domestic territorial present day. Curiously however, it is more visible than it would otherwise be, were it not for a secondary imperial order, in the shape of the United States Empire.
The concept of Priori Assumption2. is a legal device in law in which a statement may be taken as the truth because there is an assumption that no reasonable person would contest it. The notion is obviously troubling in any logical sense but from the point of view of a prosecuting authority, it has recognisable traction when dealing with matters in which a state entity wishes to dominate. A statement such as "The sun will come up in the morning" does not need to be proven at a specific place because it is widely assumed to be true.
A statement such as "The sun will always come up in the morning" is slightly more troublesome and can be reasonably contested as there is sufficient lack of consensus regarding the lifetime of a given star in any given solar system. The means by which this contest could be settled in this particular case, would be the skill with which an absolute scientific argument could be made to dominate the working assumption of the court. Science being an abstract means to logically repeat a known quantity naturally lends itself to control by a well-resourced external entity. In this case, government wins not by the quality of its argument, but by the resources it has available to fund the domination of that argument over the working assumptions of the court.
Priori Assumption is a routine amendment to many legal matters when contested in court and in its ordinary usage, will form the kernel of many an injustice. Any given state authority, in any given territory, and at any given time, will place a tremendous degree of importance on the formation of working assumptions which it can use in the courts of the land. In a territory in which there is a widely held assumption that an unjust authority is just, Priori Assumption in all its forms is the mechanism by which the abuse of that authority can be maintained.
A Priori Assumption in a court of law is in practice comprised of little more than the current working prejudice of the land, that being the mechanism by which a Priori Assumption has most chance of engineering its survival.
The notion of voluntary supply3. on the other hand is not a legal device and has no abstract status in law. Informally, the concept of voluntary supply can still be attached to Priori Assumption in order to gain a layman's understanding of the goals and aims intended when Priori Assumption is used in the public realm. In a court setting, a working assumption if accepted by the court to be a statement of a non-contestable truth, must go from being presented, to being accepted. Whether this acceptance is articulated by the Judge, a jury, a prosecution, a defence or even an appellant; the act of accepting the argument as a statement of the truth requires that the accepter is acting voluntarily. Voluntary supply is therefore an act in which a working assumption is voluntarily accepted.
In the video above, British Magistrates acting in their private capacities attempt to assert their jurisdiction in a non-criminal court in which they are not acting on oath. The Magistrates fail because neither the defendant nor his council, or the members of the public sitting in the public gallery, stand to signal to the Magistrates that they have jurisdiction in the court. By refusing to voluntarily stand and signal the Magistrates jurisdiction, the Magistrates fail to gain jurisdiction in the court and cannot therefore discharge any matter currently before the court.
A Magistrate can operate in the criminal court in which she is under oath to the crown as a Justice of the Peace4. who has been sworn to keep the peace. In a non-criminal court, the oath to the crown does not exist and so no Justice of the Peace is present. The Magistrate in this circumstance is a private citizen seeking jurisdiction by whatever means she can muster.
The key requirement needed here on the part of the Magistrates is the single act of voluntary supply from the defendant, his council, or members of the public sitting in the public gallery. It is assumed by the Magistrates that all persons in the court are voluntarily accepting of the Magistrates jurisdiction. The means by which this assumption of voluntary supply takes place initially involves nothing more than parochial symbolism such as standing in honour of the Magistrates as they enter the court, or responding to the threats made by the clerk of the court on behalf of the Magistrates. More seriously, threats to gaol, imprison, detain or even carry out acts of assault and forced removal may be made. In each case, the working assumption of the Magistrates of the court is that of an expectation of voluntary supply is accepted by the public in the court.
There is a clear and demonstrable link between the legal concept of Priori Assumption, aka the working assumptions of the court, and the act of voluntary supply which allows those working assumptions to become a judgement of the court. In the video above, the Clerk to the Magistrates works hard to engineer an act of voluntary supply on the part of the defendant, his council and the public gallery for the purpose of engineering the working assumption that everybody in his jurisdiction wishes to pay taxes to the state5.. To that end, the Magistrates hope to further engineer some profit at the behest of that assumption. In this specific case above, the Clerk to the Magistrates resorts to threatening behaviour, threats to imprison, threats to evict from the courthouse and finally threats to commit assault by ordering first the security guards in the courthouse and then secondly police officers, to commit to assaulting the defendant and his council if they do not submit to the Magistrates jurisdiction. Throughout, the Magistrates are nothing more than private citizens. In the video above, the threats made by the Clerk to the Court fail and the Magistrates abandon the court. In the absence of a purported Magistrate, common law being the law of the court is used to dismiss the case before the court.
The mechanism of Priori Assumption when used to elicit voluntary supply is an abusive practice in that Priori Assumption would normally be used corpus juris and not by the court to its own end.
Priori Assumption, Voluntary Supply and Industrial Surveillance.
Priori Assumption when used in conjunction with the notion of voluntary supply can and is used in an imperial setting to elicit deference and obedience toward a judicial authority. However, being that the modern corporation is itself a legal entity which is bound by contract law, the notion of Priori Assumption and voluntary supply has the potential to be used outside of its ordinary usage in a corporate setting, in the same way that it has been used outside of its ordinary usage in the corporate court. This is, however, not simply a matter of how Priori Assumption and voluntary supply are used by corporations in a legal sense and within a legal setting, but more how Priori Assumption can be used in order to elicit voluntary supply for the purpose of engineering the logical framework and substance of a corporate endeavour such as industrial surveillance. In a corporate court with an imperial heritage, Priori Assumption is used informally and out of context to elicit a public consensus, even from a defendant in the court who has little to gain from it. If this essential concept is further examined, one can begin to see the kernel of the logic.
A defendant before the court has little to gain in himself by being subject to convoluted sanction often engineered as a means to rid him of his earned income. It is up to the court under its own cunning and guile to bring the defendant under sufficient control to realise its goal. Priori Assumption is the mechanism by which the court enables that goal.
In the modern period, any global corporate surveillance program6. cannot be undertaken by force, but must be enabled by cunning and guile in order that the corporation's goals of data coagulation can be achieved convincingly . In reality, this is achieved by taking the concept of Priori Assumption as it is used in a court setting, and simply enabling that concept within a technological setting. The user of a computer, whether it is a laptop, a desktop or a cellular handset device, must be assumed to be voluntarily willing to provide detailed and private information about herself at the point at which she downloads or otherwise prompts the use of any software component designed to initiate surveillance7.. The act of using or downloading software along with installing the software onto a device, carries within it a corporate assumption that the user does not exercise a preference for privacy - in exactly the same way a defendant before a corporate court does not exercise a preference for the common law.
In practice, this will entail a browser installed onto a user's computer in which configuration settings are normalised toward gathering private data; third party vendor applications downloaded onto hand-held devices which are normalised toward accessing the GSM [Global System for Mobile Communications], email and GPS [Global Positioning System] services of the device; web application services in which browsing history, form data and location user data is held by default; difficulty in changing or otherwise disabling a devices data gathering tendencies; installation of third party software vendor products in which routine access to the devices privacy settings is routinely demanded; installation of third party software vendor products in which private data is being removed and stored on a remote server and not on the device itself and finally the practice of installing several applications to perform different tasks that would otherwise be easily done by one application. This last practice is certainly likely to take place because each individual application has been designed to gather a particular piece of data and is attempting to evade possible suspicion were it to attempt to ask for additional types of data.
Within the 'Android' system owned and operated by the Google Corporation, it is almost impossible to use the cellular device without entailing a degree of routine surveillance. Indeed, if a user uses an 'Android' device for a period before attempting to remove these surveillance services, the device will threaten to destroy the entirety of all the users data by wiping the device clean! This 'behaviour' serves as a strong deterent to the user should she attempt to address her own privacy concerns.
Throughout the entirety of the corporate system located within the United States itself, and within server systems under the control of the United States in other countries, U.S. corporations are using the concept of Priori Assumption to engineer voluntary supply of technical personal data for the purpose of gathering global quantities of surveillance data.
Entrapment doctrine and global networked communications
A modern consumer grade computer with a clock speed of 2GHTZ (two gigahertz) can process 120 billion simple instructions per minute. An instruction is the ability to add a positive number to another number, to move a number from its positive to negative form, or to place a number into memory for processing at a later point. Frequently, the computer may simply wait 1 billionth of a second for some other action to occur. Given this clear and demonstrably obvious fact, the same computer can process 7,200 billion (seven thousand two hundred billion) instructions per hour. As a full day is commonly understood to have 24 hours in it, a consumer grade modern computer can process 172,800 billion (one hundred and seventy two thousand eight hundred billion) instructions per day. If these instruction were single bits of information stored in a computer, that computer would have a hard drive capable of storing 172,8 terabytes of data.
If the total amount of data traversing the internet is 494 exabytes per day8., then 2,858,796 [two million eight hundred and fifty eight thousand seven hundred and ninety six] consumer grade 2GHTZ computers would be needed to flush the traversing data through their processors at such a rate that the data could be then said to be surveilled in real-time. The flushing would entail taking the traversing bit, and placing it onto the processor as a simple calculation.
However, the total processing power of a computer's processor is measured in the simplest of calculations only; adding 1 to the processor is of no use in any task on its own. The bit must be stored in memory, compared to another bit, interrogated to determine what its quantity is, whether it is a negative or positive and so on. Carrying out a multitude of simple calculations like these involving vast quantities of numbers is needed just to bring about the simplest of screen displays. It takes the completion of many thousands of instructions just to render the simplest of individual characters on the screen. The ASCII character 'a' as you see it on this screen for instance, requires a 48 by 48 grid of bits to represent the character itself, multiplied by 3 to produce the character in red, green and blue bits to make a colour display. In total 6,192 bits are required to represent the character 'a' on your computer screen, this does not include the single quotes which surround it! The ability of any given computer to surveill a data stream as it traverses the internet is determined not only on its ability to catch the data as it passes, but its ability to interrogate the data once it has been caught. This interrogation may involve thousands of separate sponsored instructions being performed in order to determine if the data in question is of interest to the surveilling script. If the data is of interest, many more thousands of instructions would need to be performed to pass that data on for further analysis.
In order to surveill internet communication data in real-time, a vast multi-million station networked array of computers with commercial grade processors would need to be deployed in synchronised fashion at multiple points on the globe each running permanently and without pause. The logistical problems associated with linking this network together in a synchronised form alone would easily defeat any nation states resource capabilities, let alone attempting to provide that quantity of machines along with a managed backup system. As the programming detail of the surveilling scripts increased in complexity to make more complex appraisals of the data stream in question, the numbers of surveilling computers would need to increase exponentially well beyond what is currently possible anywhere in the world.
A surveillance network of arrayed computers joined together by a private and secure network would need millions if not hundreds of millions of computers within the array to achieve real-time dominance of the current digital thoroughfare. A change to the scripts of any one of those computers in such a way that extra processing power would need to take place would immediately entail the loss of thousands of clock cycles and large quantities of extra machines would need to be added to the array instantaneously.
Real-time surveillance of internet communications is not possible with modern computing resources from a logical, technological, tactical, strategic or resource deployment point of view.
Entrapment doctrine and global server communications
Communications which arrive at a server system9., which are then converted to a solid state form, and which are then stored permanently for use at a later time are eminently suitable for surveillance. This is obviously because the data is no longer traversing within a network in which it is only momentarily available. Data which is out of a traversing state and which has been stored on some solid state device can then be de-referenced at any time as long as the device itself is available. Therefore, a global surveillance system will entail the positioning of server systems across multiple territories10. in order to entrap data. Once that data is entrapped, it may be stored for later use at any time by a whole host of private individuals positioned at any point within the overall chain of privilege. It is unlikely to be the case that the sole recipient of the use of that data will be the highest public authority. As is now clearly the case, the United States Empire is infested with nationalist elements all keen to enable their own malevolent agenda's11. at every conceivable opportunity. These nationalists are predominantly stationed within the Empires military systems and so have a clear line of sight toward the end product of the U.S.S.I.S. [United States Security and Intelligence Services] various intelligence gathering provisions12..
In terms of the scale of that entrapment doctrine, it must be assumed that all known U.S. corporate communications activity is likely to have either taken part in the surveillance program, has been approached to take part in the surveillance program, or are actively engaged in the surveillance program. It is highly likely that financial incentives continue to be made to various Silicon Valley start-up companies with the aim of eventually converting those companies toward inclusion in the global communications program13..
At present it is certainly clear that beyond a given user base, such as those companies able to command the attention of substantial percentages of the overall internet architecture, inclusion within the U.S.S.I.S. program will be a given. Google's Gmail14., Google+ & YouTube products, Facebook, MySpace, Yahoo, Hotmail, AOL and an assortment of email providers will all fall within the architectural domain of the United States domain awareness programs in its various forms. For many, considerable confusion has existed for many years regarding the ability of these corporations to generate active profits from their products given that they are offered for free15, 16. 17. For many more, the lack of a clear business strategy with an equally clear forward plan for economic growth has also been of interest. If these corporations had started with the best of business intentions and had simply failed as the reality of offering free products resulted in a lack of profit, then all of these companies would have rightly failed by now under the shareholding model, as should always the case. But if a company starts and goes on to achieve a staggering rate of growth with that exact same "free" product line, without being able to demonstrably monetise that product line, then a suspicion of foul play must inevitably be entertained as and when that company moves into a period of existence beyond its natural lifetime. Persistently across the whole sector, U.S. corporations fail to provide any evidence at all that they are ongoing operable businesses with a shareholding equity that isn't wholly derived from bulk investment from external actors.
It is likely, that the free products which make these corporates products so alluring to the public, are subsidised by the U.S.S.I.S. and other various occluded business interests acting in collusion with the United States Imperial government.
Entrapment doctrine and cellular 'Android' communications
We will share personal information with companies, organizations or individuals outside of Google if we have a good-faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary to:1. meet any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request. 2. detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues. 3. protect against harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, our users or the public as required or permitted by law.- Google Corporation Terms and Conditions - 11th August 2013.
In every conceivable area in which these routine surveillance abuses have taken place, no coherent attempt has been made to deal with the underlying structure of the abuses18..
In every area in which an abuse can take place, it routinely does take place. In the case of the Google Corporation, the company clearly states in its terms and conditions that it will routinely make available, on request, all information it has on a given user of its services in any matter relating to the security of itself as a corporation, or any of its users worldwide. Under the terms of the United States Patriot Act, any given domestic corporation will and must make available any data it has collected and which it has stored on any system under its control in whatever territory it operates in, domestic or foreign. In all territories in which Google operates, using either its desktop or cellular surveillance technology, Priori Assumption and voluntary supply are in routine use throughout all its products.
Priori Assumption and voluntary supply clearly form the bulk of the marketing of these surveillance products. In the case of the Google Corporation, its surveillance products have been built into the cellular technology of various cell-phone manufacturers operating worldwide. Within the 'Android' operating system [O.S.], variously marketed under the juvenile monikers of "Jelly Bean", "Ice Cream Sandwich", "Honeycomb", "Gingerbread", "Froyo" and "Eclair" mass marketing terms, chronic and histrionic data mining activity is being undertaken routinely. Within the 'Android' system, the abuses take place by Priori Assumption and voluntary supply. At the first point, Priori Assumption determines that an assumption is made that the user of the Android system is happy to allow the installation of third party software in which access to the devices geographic location, GSM services and email communications are assumed. By gaining access to these device services, the third party software package is routinely able to carry out detailed surveillance of the devices user.
In this regard the Google Corporation is not only carrying out surveillance on behalf of the U.S.S.I.S. itself, but is also providing a cellular environment in which the abusive 'Android' operating system is creating new environments for surveillance by the U.S.S.I.S. covertly operating as third party software vendors.
Where third party software U.S.S.I.S. 'applications' are being installed on a device, and where it is being installed using an initial software configuration that is abusive using the para-legal abuse of Priori Assumption and voluntary supply, the user is supposedly protected from herself by her ignorance. This is the mechanism by which Google, and other U.S. surveillance actors, are able to claim that a degree of consensus exists under which that surveillance can be made.
The 'Android' operating system is owned and controlled by the Google corporation and facilitates access to the hardware components of the cellular technology such as geo-location GPS [Global Positioning System], GSM, email and GPRS [General packet radio service]. Using these aspects of the devices hardware, Google is able to map and surveill a user's location, mobile data and web based communications with ease. The installation of third party software components, including those from corporation's set-up and operated by covert elements of the U.S.S.I.S then becomes a straightforward practice and can be realised strategically in direct correlation to the ability of the user to activate their privacy protections. In the vast majority of cases, technical handicap, lack of specialist knowledge, illiteracy and deficit of technical proficiency will allow that surveillance to go on unnoticed to such a degree that routine surveillance on a global scale becomes normalised.
The global digital security state
The primary method under which the global digital security state is articulated is not surveillance of the world's population as is often claimed, but an entrapment doctrine in which a globally reaching domain awareness system has been put into place to entrap information with the intention of gaining assets with which to expand the Empires doctrine. For the Empire, Socialism, Capitalism, Communism and other hard one political platforms are of little use to the Empire, the agenda of Empire is only Empire. Throughout the period from the 3rd to the 5th century AD, the 'western' Roman Empire was scarcely concerned with its political assets but only concerned with its survival. In the 5th century AD, the 'western' Roman Empire collapsed and upon its failure, was liberated all of the material assets it had taken ownership over. This was considered a great and compelling period of freedom throughout the European petit-continent.
However, in Eastern Europe, the old imperial order remained and became the Byzantine Empire. For another 900 years, the Byzantine Empire consolidated these previously liberated assets until it too was finally overrun by European nationalists in the form of the Ottoman Turks in 1453AD. As the old imperialist order fell away and into dereliction, an imperial exodus began with the departure of its advocates away from Europe and toward the America's. There was no political, cultural, economic or ideological mechanism in play anywhere on the European petit-continent capable of arresting this exodus. From that time to this, while the United States domestic unitary states of the Union have toyed with various political schools of thought to enable strident representation of the rights of the domestic populace, no coherent or cogent articulation of that political narrative has ever formed conclusively at the federal government level. From 1945 to present, the federal government has become weaker as each Presidency has waned further under the yoke of a more and more visible American internecine imperialism.
As this governmental and democratic failure takes hold, it is becoming increasingly obvious that the domestic polity among the federal governmental institutions of the United States are becoming governed by paranoia and mistrust of a whole welter of external foreign actors19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27.. It is here, that the actual reality of the Empire at this present time is most especially evident. It is here within this occluded paranoia, that we can see further into the Empires imperial and tenacious insistence that its domestic security situation, must form the basis for the rest of the world's freedoms. This insistence, is routinely liable to form at periods of corporate or anti-imperial stress.
There has never been an argument more clumsily made, nor an agenda more ruthlessly postulated for international diplomacy, than this.
The fundamental properties of the global digital security state are contained within a networked system of servers and routing protocols in which composite information is collected and converted to solid state format (saved to a hard drive device). The purpose of this networked system is to attract persons of interest to the U.S.S.I.S. This is unlikely to be for the purpose of carrying out prosecutions or combating terrorism or any other criminal detection endeavour, but is more likely to be for the purposes of gathering human intelligence assets for later use28.. Only in cases where the most clumsily and poorly articulated assaults against the Empires holdings have taken place29, 30, 31. will a public prosecution be staged, and only then if there is no material benefit to be had by taking any other course of action. In every case, the United States will be looking for a vector to re-direct to some other aim in which the Empire's expansive doctrinal goals are served.
The agenda of Empire, is Empire.
This data collected within this imperial corporate framework, can be described as User Supplied Data [U.S.D] in which a prior assumption has been made regarding the data's importance to the U.S.S.I.S. The voluntary use of the technology by hapless social media users constitutes an act of voluntary supply in the eyes of the U.S.S.I.S.
User Supplied Data
User Supplied Data [U.S.D.] is data that has been supplied by, unsurprisingly, a human user. The data can be any data the user has created on a computer by any means. There is, on the part of the U.S.S.I.S., an assumption that data which has been created in this way, has been created by a human user and not an automated software component which is computing an automated data signal. Data which has been created by a human user and which has been submitted to a server, either through http header protocol or direct submission through a network, arrives at a server port and is then processed. This will ordinarily involve being converted to a solid state in order to allow the data to be retrieved at a later time. From the moment the data has been converted to solid state, it will be available for retrieval by surveillance technology and can be stored within a separate retrieval system usually in the form of a database. Depending on the nature of the assumptions the U.S.S.I.S. will have made about that data, the data may be stored for any period of time, in a high or low level U.S.S.I.S. system.
User Supplied Data is tactical in pieces and strategic by mass.
In all cases where data can be submitted by local, intranet or internet means; the user may or may not be aware that they have submitted the data. On local systems, key-logging software or interventionist scripts may be running within the user's software which may submit data quietly without the user's knowledge. While using intranet and internets, the user may find that data is being quietly submitted via spying software in the case of intranet use, and AJAX scripting in the case of internet use. Indeed, it is highly likely that U.S. servers which are already co-opted to gather data for the U.S.S.I.S., will be under the control of corporations which will employ any and all techniques in service to gathering as much data as is technically possible.
The majority of U.S.D. which has been collected in the past has required an act on the part of the user and this has been amended by an assumption that the user has undertaken that act voluntarily. When operating software on a computer, the user has a number of potential options open to her to prevent assumptions being made about how much privacy she wishes to maintain while using her computer. In the case of software which emanates from corporations that are now known to be collecting data on behalf of the U.S.S.I.S., such as the Google web browser Google Chrome, configuration settings which assume that the user has a limited understanding of her privacy are routinely set when the browser is installed. Most commonly, this can be seen in the practice of conditionally separating private browsing from normal browsing and imposing on the user the notion that privacy must be enabled, rather than being present by default. This is certainly done to help ensure that data which is submitted to U.S.S.I.S. controlled servers, contains as much information about the user as is technically possible.
However, this situation has rapidly and disturbingly changed for the worse over the previous 5 year period as the number of cellular devices running internet capable software has increased. Within these devices, Priori Assumption has begun to overtake voluntary supply as the primary mechanism by which the user's identity can be established. Google's Android system for cellular handheld devices has been configured in such a way that the device is largely inoperable unless the user specifically permits a configuration regime in which a compelling quantity of data is being removed from the device in every instance where U.S.D. is being submitted to a remote server. In this case, Priori Assumption has been engineered into the device to over-rule the user's ability to act voluntarily. This practice not only exposes the innocent user to the surveillance program undertaken by the U.S.S.I.S., but also exposes the user's identity and data to foreign nation states that have learned to convert U.S.S.I.S. tools toward their own ends.
The use of the para-legal devices of Priori Assumption and voluntary supply within the para-corporate environment of United States Empire information systems manufacturing is routinely used to shepherd as much data as is technically possible into the surveillance Domain Awareness Program [D.A.P.] of the United States. The claim that this system is exclusively concerned with terrorism and the prevention of terrorism is highly unlikely excepting within territories in which there is a standard suspension of disbelief in the existence of the Empire32, 33, 34..
The Global Domain Awareness Program [G.D.A.P.]
The Global Domain Awareness Program [G.D.A.P.]35 describes a collection of spurious systems casually linked together in order to provide for a universal networked system of surveillance technologies all operating to bring about complete dominance of surveillance for an on behalf of the U.S.S.I.S. The systems operate tactically in both the private and public sector and encase all known mechanisms by which information of any type can be generated, transmitted and disseminated. The system as a whole is object oriented and designed to operate at a profit. In some areas, the various technologies can, have and are being used under the auspices of fighting international terrorism, but are mostly used for dissemination of propaganda against the United States perceived foes and for the gathering up of information linked to corporate espionage36.
The Domain Awareness System [D.A.P.] is comprised in the first part by a technological mechanism by which data can be gathered, followed by in the second part a secure mechanism in which the data can be stored, followed by in the third part by a mechanism by which the data can be disassembled in practical form for carto-graphical analysis. These systemic attributes cannot be gathered in real-time due to the technical limitations of gathering and processing the required amount of data with current technology. Ergo, the D.A.P. will have no value except in tracing points of information that have already been stored in a solid state system (saved from temporary memory to a device). Due to the technological limitations of current computing technology, and the inability to monitor global communications in real-time, the D.A.P. will have no material benefit in an anti-terrorism capacity, excepting where an investigation of an already existing event would need to take place.
In logical terms, the D.A.P. will entail the commission and organisation of data in logical organised form which can be saved to a solid state system for carto-graphical analysis at a later point in time. This statement is irredeemably complex given the resources that have been enabled to allow for its use by the empire and its dependants. Not only does this data regime allow for surveillance, but allows for enhancements to propaganda initiatives initiated not only by government, but by the numerous private contractors and private interests connected to those contractors. For many around the world, the tone of modern broadcasting within the media in the United States domestic territory and beyond, often carries within it a suspicion that all is not what it seems! This public angst certainly has a number of components.
In the first part, the commission and organisation of data in logical organised form when relating to the surveillance operations being operated inside the United States, and within its dependants relates directly to commissioning data from the global communications network by articulating the public mind with pre-rehearsed cues designed to elicit a voluntary type response which can be engineered toward the empires strategic ambitions. This ordinarily will entail flooding media corporations with pre-rehearsed stories across a range of media outlets which are intended to serve as a prompt to elicit an organised public response. After prompting, the resultant data can be saved into a solid state by a range of security corporations for use at a later date. Presumably, prompted alter-narratives that cut across the grain may form the basis of the empires immediate tactical interest. By this mechanism, is the empires horizon adjusted for potential threats that may emerge from as yet unknown quantities.
In the second part, carto-graphical analysis of the data will present the collected information into geo-strategic format for processing of alter-narratives by geographic region. By this mechanism, is the United States Empire able to segment its material interests into territories in which resources can be more finely targeted to enable region specific obedience.
These points are tremendously important for all peoples and all governments given that a global surveillance network which is created outside the mature control of centralised government, has no means by which it can be removed except by violent force, strident intervention or economic collapse. If a global surveillance network is created by incorporation in which the ultimate determinant is profit and economic stridency, then rigid permanence is built into the public and corporate mind by default. If that surveillance is global and being used to enable regional obedience under a single imperial crown, then the situation is clear and unequivocal.
The United States Empire can only ever guess at what might be in store in the future. Ultimately, a U.S.S.I.S. surveillance network is highly unlikely ever to be of any real use.
The Terror polemic and corporate strategy
In a geo-strategic sense, the War on Terror has been a spectacular failure for the United States. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States has been subject to a strident series of regional defeats often inflicted on it by nothing more than peasants wielding sticks. It is no longer the case (if it ever was!), that the United States military is seen as the toughest, most well equipped, and the most disciplined military super state in the world. Its military is now seen as incompetent, ill-disciplined and perpetually given to tactical and strategic stupidity in abundance. These failings are not just the failings of the common soldiery, but strident failures of political and military logic enjoined by severe incompetence and deficit of basic experience on the part of U.S. nationalists. Throughout the entirety of all its holdings, the United States Empire is clearly an incorporated entity and so will always find itself easily defeated by the autonomous vapour. Corporations cannot fight conventional wars, but can periodically engage in conflicts in order to win contracts. The United States Empire being a unionised corporation of unitary states is highly unlikely to be concerned with winning a conventional war, but will always be concerned with winning a profitable peace.
In strictly corporate terms, the War on Terror has been a resounding strategic success for the Empire. Very few places throughout the world are now out of the hands of the United States corporate tentacles. The global Visa and MasterCard credit brands are entirely under the control of the United States37 and so are the entirety of the banks and checking accounts that control them. From the 1980's onwards, the United States was already well on its way to global domination as a result of its credit line products and in 2013, the United States can already state categorically that it understands completely the day-to-day movements of a large part of the global populace simply by monitoring its day to day spending regimes through those credit services. The War on Terror has not provided for an extension or expansion of this global financial system, but has certainly provided the mechanism by which spending within that credit system can be steered toward the purchasing of American goods and products. The mechanism by which that spending can be steered now formats the bulk of American activity in its corporate post-war outlook.
From 2001 onwards, The United States Empire engaged in a protracted campaign of proscriptive behaviour in which it routinely articulated ethnic hatred toward the Islamic religion via the polemic of the War on Terror. Throughout every aspect of this polemic, advocates of the war on Terror searched for every conceivable opportunity to refine and renovate the persecution of that war in such a way that the polemic would survive. From 2009 onwards, that polemic has survived well beyond its natural life. From 2004 onwards, the United States Empire had clearly realised that its ultimate long term interests would be served in using the terror narrative to a directed commercial network in which its global credit generation systems (Visa, MasterCard) could be enjoined with its anti-terror systems to create a new focused economic model. This model would provide a global surveillance system in which the buying habits of millions of credit users could be forcefully steered toward activity inside the domestic United States, and presumably for a price, within the domestic territories of the Empires dependencies.
The Global Security Nexus
The world is now moving toward the full incorporation of its individual economic systems toward an imperial Anglo-Saxon model polity in which the vast bulk of the wealth of the various continental trading blocs is being directed toward the United States Empire. Where the Empire has dependencies, the nexus is fully articulated and near fully operational. In the United Kingdom especially, there is no surviving opposition in any form whatsoever and no national security component to the U.K.'s everyday or ordinary polity. Where this wealth re-direction is being blocked, obstructed or otherwise slowed by any means whatsoever, the United States Empire chooses of its own accord to see terrorist cells each one of which is perpetually linked to the pan-Arabian Mujahedin38. When this is the case, it is always the case that the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Israel, either collectively or individually, will always happen along with the intention of capitalising from the polemic by some means. Where an attempt is made at capitalisation of the polemic, a routine attempt is always made to engineer construction of the polemic through U.S. surveillance technology in order that internal dissidence within the Empires dependencies can be mapped and presumably dealt with by some internal or external means.
Where this is not the case, brazen commercial exploitation is the result to such an extent that substantial profits can be engineered by those corporations acting within the Empires security sectors.
The technology itself often takes the form of social networking corporations placing software components on server systems within those territories in which they operate with the intention of either surveilling the domestic populace with the intention of promoting U.S. propaganda of both a commercial and non-commercial type, or surveilling the domestic populace for signs of internal dissidence which can be used to engineer greater complacency within the dependency itself. In the United Kingdom, a greater number of British citizens39 are now experiencing imprisonment and sanction as a direct result of being entrapped within U.S. imperial corporate systems.
The golden phoenix of this arrangement however, is the potential for entrapment of Arabic Muslim dissidence40 which is directed toward the United States Itself. Serious and very long-standing currency can be engineered over extended periods of time, and across extended geo-graphical territories, if an example of Arabic Muslim dissidence can be found, or engineered.
The social networking component of this newly arrived from of industrialised trans-boundary surveillance, uses the para-legal devices of Priori Assumption and voluntary supply to bring forward the requisite data it needs to be of use to its imperial outlook. This data is generated on technology that is under the control of the corporations of this empire, using software components created by corporations within this empire, distributed freely by the populations of the dependencies of this empire, for the purpose of surveilling and itemising the every-day habits and patterns of the Empire's dissidents for its security, and the everyday user for its profits. There is no controversy here, excepting that proposed and articulated by those who see the Global Security Nexus - but do not see the Empire.
The para-legal concept of Priori Assumption when buttressed to the concept of voluntary supply is the building block of the means by which a sitting entity in a territory can engineer the complacent dependency of a domestic populace toward the authority of that sitting entity. In courts in which the domestic populace believe that the law of order is being enacted, but in which a tax levy is being performed for profit, there is a clear need for that authority to engineer jurisdiction in order to realise that profit. To that end trickery, sleight of hand, threatening behaviour and threats of violence are routinely used to affect jurisdiction to act. This is the way it has always been in the imperial commercial courts and to that end a government is pleased to legislate to derive an income for its loyalists. In defence of that system, the government legislates first for the profit, and then for its survival.
Within the British Victorian Empire, this form of 'business within the court' is a throwback to an imperial age in which the Empire would alight into a territory, and after a short period of carefully crafted but strategically invisible violence, would begin the process of transposing itself onto the domestic populace through imposition of the imperial courts using the imperial law. The profits that would be derived would generate the income needed by the Empire to survive in the newly complacent territory. For that populace, the court was imposed as the mark of a civilised man and civilised men would, naturally, resort first to the jurisdiction of the court, not to the arms of the man. By this convoluted mechanism, would the empire engineer its survival in a place that it had no legitimate business.
In the modern day long after the British Victorian Empire has collapsed, this corporate court system continues to generate income for the British government but also forms the foundation for Britain's complacent dependency on a new, more modern, imperial order. The United States Empire is itself an imperial entity which shares the history of the United Kingdom and, undeniably, draws its para-legal histrionics from the British imperial system. The corporate courts of the United Kingdom - are one and the same corporate courts of the American Empire. The para-legal devices of Priori Assumption when stirred with the more informal notion of voluntary supply, are the judicial building blocks of today's para-corporate and para-legal imperial order.
The quantities of data which are being delivered into the hands of the United States Empire through the voluntary use of this global para-imperial system are truly staggering. In the priori assumptive mantra of the United States Empires advocates and defendants..."If you have nothing to hide - you have nothing to fear" should have a now familiar imperial ring to it. The assumption of voluntary supply which sits behind this statement demands that an unquestioning imperial obedience must be forthcoming or without it, the hapless disobedient has everywhere to hide - and absolutely everything to fear.
This is neither terrorism nor imperialism - but tyrannical corporate authoritarianism!
In the United Kingdom, domestic national security threats to the security of the domestic populace are daily encouraged by the British Government under the ridiculous notional polemic of protecting the domestic national security of a foreign inter-corporate nation state. In the world of international relations, there is no nation state capable of relinquishing the entirety of its own security to, except that nation state which has been conquered and annexed to its authority. If it is the case that a domestic government seeks to relinquish its domestic security, a national security threat exists. In the United Kingdom, a number of U.S. server systems are positioned to collect domestic User Supplied Data, with the express intention of gathering intelligence on the domestic populace. Where this is claimed by the United States to be for a purpose of combating its own 'terror dilemma', a national security threat to the United Kingdom clearly exists. Where this is claimed to be for some other purpose, domestic commercial and industrial espionage can be reliably suspected.
In all cases in which a suspicion of surveillance exists and is communicated to the various U.S. corporations involved in that surveillance, tactical and strategic denials will present under the umbrella of the U.S.S.I.S. blanket security legislations. A denial made regarding this surveillance practice, will certainly be made itself to protect the national security as it now exists inside the United States. U.S. corporations have no capacity available to them that allows them to fully, honestly and truthfully report the practices they have been and are involved with.
As we move further into the anti-imperial narrative fondly ignored by those at the heart of the United States Empire, its dependants and the clumsier of its dependant's opponents, we are certain to see more examples of Priori Assumption and voluntary supply being articulated by the Empires loyalists as a desperate means to ingratiate the Empire to its consumer base. The meandering and homeless sense of angst and anxiety which infests many throughout the periphery of the Empires diminishing circumference of influence will only consolidate as greater abuses of privacy emanate from the Empire. At each point in each twist and turn of the imperial dilemma, corporate abuses will abound all done under the feeble justification of an attempt to protect the domestic United States, from assaults that are undeniably anti-imperial in tactic and strategy. At each turn of the digital thumbscrew, the virtual global community will be exposed by those engaging in the surveillance to more and more elaborate marketing strategies involving infantile technical terminology and near sociopathic declarations of corporate love and adoration. The imperial United States Empire's global surveillance program was, just a year or two ago, nothing more than a jelly bean that loved and adored you.
Now it is what it should always have been; an invidious global cobweb of nationalist surveillance, undertaken under cover of a murderous and deranged crusade against a non-corporate anti-imperial no man's land.
It has often been claimed that those who claim and demand a strident degree of privacy in their everyday digital communications, and who take steps to limit and abbreviate threats to their security, are themselves secretive, fearful, conspiracy laden and paranoid. From 2001 onwards, there has clearly been in place a large scale U.S. sponsored and paid for propaganda machine capable of infesting all online media with supposedly public commentary regarding the safety of U.S. corporate products together with a rigid insistence that these products are routinely assumed to be safe to use41. In the course of researching and compiling this article, it has been a lamentable thing to see the sight of innocent members of the public posting messages on internet forums alluding to suspected privacy invasions by U.S. corporations. In many of those cases, apparently senior but always anonymous "moderators" of those forum boards have resorted to the most scurrilous accusations and assumptions of wrong-doing in order to bully hapless members of the public into dismissing their own honestly held privacy concerns.
Time and time again, the responsible and free citizen has been bullied, slandered, defamed and in some cases overtly accused of wrongdoing for no other reason than attempting to exercise their own privacy in the corporate sector. This organised electronic bullying is not the conduct of those with a mind toward freedom, but toward the freedom of their empire and that which drives their empire - fear and trans-boundary imperial real-politik.
The U.S.S.I.S. corporate security program which certainly drives and articulates this state of fearsome obedience within the public, has itself brought about a monstrous surveillance system of global proportions every bit in tune with the stark imperialism of the Empires of the past. In each territory in which it alights, the imperial smokescreen of military force is backed and consolidated by the imperial corporate merchants of para-legal and para-corporate self-interest. Priori Assumption, voluntary supply and a corporate system of bullying sequestration are now firmly articulated in all the territories in which the United States Empire falsely and wrongly claims a jurisdiction. In every case, the most infantile terminology is now in full use to spawn greater and greater dependency on the tool-set of empire using whatever works at the basest level.
The Global Security Nexus [G.S.N.] in clear use by the Empires most ardent and fanatical loyalists, derives nothing of freedom from those it placates. Priori Assumption as used by the United States Empire is little more than an old imperial carpet-bagging polity seen in most territories around the world and in each territory in which it has ever been used, it failed after a fashion.
In our world, the current working prejudices of the global marketplace are globalised and borne of racism, terror, fear, belligerence, feeble-mindedness and corporate foolishness. The world's first and leading economy, is now in a state of rigid and irredeemable failure in which the vast bulk of its primary economic systems are bent now heavily toward the destruction of the free liberties of the world.
In a straight contest between those liberties and the rights of the Empire, the Global Security Nexus is as good as a hangman's noose.