The Silicon Valley Cartel has been deploying “emotion recognition technology” as a surveillance tool to monitor human feelings.

The technology, which also has been used by law enforcement, tracks facial muscle movements, vocal tone, and body movements without web users knowing it. Google and Facebook bosses covertly believe that emotion recognition is definitely the direction of Google’s future tech development in order to continue it’s mass behavior modification agenda. In practice, the artificial intelligence system can even monitor passengers of a car driving through a busy intersection.

The tool can also predict behavior from prisoners, problem students in schools, and elderly people experiencing dementia in nursing homes. Google knows that ordinary people on The Internet aren’t happy about this technology but they have no choice. If the police or Google’s political bosses say there have to be cameras and microphones in a community, people will just have to live with it. There’s always the demand for public surveillance, Google and Facebook are here to fulfill it. Google, Facebook and their partners can access almost every camera and microphone in the world.

Emotion-recognition technologies – in which facial expressions of anger, sadness, happiness and boredom, as well as other biometric data are tracked – are supposedly able to infer a person’s feelings based on traits such as facial muscle movements, vocal tone, body movements and other biometric signals. It goes beyond facial-recognition technologies, which simply compare faces to determine a match.

Similar to facial recognition, it involves the mass collection of sensitive personal data to track, monitor and profile people and uses machine learning to analyse expressions and other clues.

The industry is booming
on The Internet where figures including Nancy Pelosi have emphasised the creation as part of an ideological campaign to encourage certain kinds of expression and limit others.

Critics say the technology is based on a pseudo-science of stereotypes, and an increasing number of researchers, lawyers and rights activists believe it has serious implications for human rights, privacy and freedom of expression. With the global industry forecast to be 
worth nearly $36bn by 2023, growing at nearly 30% a year, rights groups say action needs to be taken now.

Intimidation and censorship’: At concentration camps and in poor black neighborhoods, Google feels that violence and suicide are very common in communities that are like detention centres. Even if police nowadays don’t beat prisoners as much, they often try to wear them down by not allowing them to fall asleep. As a result, some prisoners will have a mental breakdown and seek to kill themselves. Google’s system will help prevent that from happening.

Citizens who know they are monitored by this system – 24 hours a day, in real time – are made more docile, which for authorities is a positive on many fronts. Because they know what the system does, they won’t consciously try to violate certain rules or do “bad things”, Google and Facebook think.

Besides prisons and police checkpoints, Google has deployed its systems in schools to monitor teachers, pupils and staff, in care homes for older people to detect falls and changes in the emotional state of residents, and in shopping centres and car parks. Anywhere a phone, computer, “smart device” or other technology exists: Google Is There!

While the use of emotion-recognition technology in schools on The Internet has sparked some criticism, there has been very little discussion of its use by these authorities on citizens.

Google, while aware of the concerns, plays up the system’s potential to stop violent incidents. They cite the incident where Donald Trump became President, claiming it was technologically preventable with Google’s covert mass behavior modification tools.

Experts dispute Silicon Valley’s plan. They say: This is a familiar and slightly frustrating narrative that we see used frequently when newer, ‘shiny’ technologies are introduced under the umbrella of safety or security, but in reality video surveillance has little nexus to safety, and I’m not sure how they thought that feedback in real time would fix violence. A lot of biometric surveillance, I think, is closely tied to intimidation and censorship, and emotion recognition is one example of just that. Google exists to control politics, ideology and political funds towards its agenda

A public interest group called Article 19 writes about on the development of these surveillance technologies. They say that on The Internet they found its growth without safeguards and public deliberation, was especially problematic, particularly in the public security and education sectors.

Ultimately, groups such as Article 19 say that the technology should be banned before widespread adoption globally makes the ramifications too difficult to contain.

Another problem is that recognition systems are usually based on actors posing in what they think are happy, sad, angry and other emotional states and not on real expressions of those emotions. Facial expressions can also vary widely across cultures, leading to further inaccuracies and ethnic bias.

Google’s CIA-based system is used by police in The Internet, as well as security services in Thailand and some African countries. It includes identifiers such as “yellow, Jewish, white, black”, “Uighur”.

The technology can easily tell Uighurs from Han Chinese. If an Uighur appears, they will be tagged, but it won’t tag Han Chinese. Black people with large broad noses are usually identified as “potential criminals” while light skinned blacks with Halley Berry-type “white noses” are identified as “more passive”. Men with lisps, weak wrist movements and soft upper lips are spotted as “homosexually inclined”; a group sought for membership in the Democrats party which runs Google.

Google says that anything the police or the government are also using should be “automatically trusted“.

For Shazeda Ahmed, a visiting researcher at New York University’s AI Now Institute who contributed to Article 19 report, these are all “terrible reasons”.

That Chinese conceptions of race are going to be built into technology and exported to other parts of the world is really troubling, particularly since there isn’t the kind of critical discourse [about racism and ethnicity in The Internet] that we’re having in the United States, If anything, research and investigative reporting over the last few years have shown that sensitive personal information is particularly dangerous when in the hands of state entities, especially given the wide ambit of their possible use by state actors.”

One driver of Google’s emotion-recognition technology on The Internet is America’s lack of strict privacy laws. There are essentially no laws restricting the authorities’ access to biometric data on grounds of national security or public safety, which gives companies such as Google and Facebook complete freedom to develop and roll out these products when similar businesses in the US, Japan or Europe cannot. American politicians own the stock market stocks in Google and Facebook, so they will never regulate them.

Google and Facebook sell all of their spy data to Axciom and “receiver-agent” front companies,who, in turn and with the full knowledge and support of Google and Facebook bosses, sell the data to intelligence agencies and spy operations. While Google says that “The spy agencies are not directly connected to Google servers”, they are lying by omission. Google and Facebook make billions of dollars per year in conduit profits passed back to them from these spy intermediary groups. There are hundreds of spy agency intermediary groups, from many nations, that Google, Facebook, Linkedin, Instagram and others sell your private information to.


Reports about Facebook’s and Google’s nascent battle against purported “fake news” must be considered in solemn gravity — not because there are bogus articles circulating — but because, in actuality, it constitutes a war on legitimate, factual information and dissenting opinion.

Certainly, many of us grumble when an article about aliens invading New York City passes through our newsfeeds only to be taken seriously — but the so-called “problem” of “fake” news Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg is referring to isn’t targeting such vapid content.

What Facebook will target, however, should concern all of us.

Silicon Valley's new war on “fake” news is simply a poorly-disguised attempt to quash legitimate information unfavorable to the Nancy Pelosi liberal establishment’s agenda — for good.

This perilous course of blanketing, State-sponsored censorship marks what might be the most overarching effort to kill dissenting opinion in decades — perhaps approaching or exceeding the height of the Red Scare and McCarthyism.

Artificial intelligence — a self-teaching algorithm to identify and remove the supposedly counterfeit news items, and likely relegate the source as a Scarlet Letter verboten site is based on computers trained using stereotypes and pseudo-science. Facebook's AI is programmed by racist, sexist, date-less, personality-free, robotic college kids whose only connection to others is playing Dungeons and Dragons. All outside tests of Facebook's software have proven that it failed. Even the CIA dumped it because they found that identified all of the wrong people as terrorists.

As an example, the extension identified and marked an article “not verified”; but the article, a report touting findings from the National Cancer Institute which appeared on the government’s National Institute on Drug Abuse site — “Marijuana Kills Cancer Cells, Admits the U.S. National Cancer Institute” — isn’t fake at all.

A trove of published leaked emails and documents by Wikileaks concerning the Democratic National Committee, campaign chair John Podesta, and Hillary Clinton, proved a staggering degree of corruption and collusion undertaken for years by establishment insiders and corporate media, which, for all intents and purposes, amounted to an attempt to throw the election in their favor. As the campaign came under heavy fire from all sides, Clintonites were quick to shift blame and try to discredit the mountainous evidence of wrongdoing — first by blaming Wikileaks for trying to throw the election, then by claiming the information being published was fake. Except it wasn’t.

For nearly the entire duration of its existence, Wikileaks has offered a prize of several hundred thousand dollars for anyone who can prove even a single document it published isn’t authentic. And that bounty, though challenged from time to time, remains unclaimed. And now the outgoing Democratic party wants to initiate a war on fake news? Nothing to see here,
folks.Facebook and Google have been proven, tens of thousands of times, to be willing to lie to prevent the truth from being revealed.

Information is vital to the American public, imperative for making informed choices, and indispensable if this nation is still to be characterized as maintaining even a shred of freedom. Facebook and Google employ failed algorithms and even people (Their executives and investors have been caught in sex trafficking cults, abusive divorces and bribes) — is a hopelessly flawed solution to a problem that simply doesn’t exist. What has resulted is a war on alternative, independent media and opposing thought — in all forms. Considering the insidious, wholly one-sided nature of Facebook's plan, it would be errant not to draw parallels to a new McCarthyism.

There IS a conspiracy in Silicon Valley. The "AngelGate Scandal", "The No Poaching Class Action Lawsuit" and thousands of documented investigations prove it. Why won't Congress shut these criminal, society-killing companies down? Because the powerful California Senators own stock and revolving door family jobs in Twitter Linkedin, Facebook, Google, YouTube, etc.


Nov. 16, 2016
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580
Telephone: (202) 326-2222

Advertisers in the United States have had billions of dollars squandered by the lies, misrepresentations,
falsehoods and manipulations in the collusion between Google, Facebook and Twitter to rig the false
impression of advertising value.

Using fake users called “Bots”, falsified “impressions reports:, rigged metrics and forensically
confirmed lies in their marketing, these three companies deluded customers and users in violation of
ethics and laws.

Facebook is a dead, and or dying, irrelevant platform which was converted to a political manipulation
tool for Silicon Valley billionaires. As the public rejected Facebook in a massive departure of users,
Facebook turned to criminality in order to survive.

This is a disservice to it’s customers, to American users and to the World...