Saturday, May 19, 2018

Alexa and Siri Can Hear This Hidden Command. You Can’t.

You really shouldn't have this garbage in your home. 
Your private dwelling. Your own little oasis- Your sanctuary.
 Researchers can now send secret audio instructions undetectable to the human ear to Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant.
BERKELEY, Calif. — Many people have grown accustomed to talking to their smart devices, asking them to read a text, play a song or set an alarm. But someone else might be secretly talking to them, too
Over the last two years, researchers in China and the United States have begun demonstrating that they can send hidden commands that are undetectable to the human ear to Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant.
So for two years now.... researchers have demonstrated they too can send "hidden commands" that are UNDETECTABLE to your human ear directly to your wifi connected creepy home spy system
Inside university labs, the researchers have been able to secretly activate the artificial intelligence systems on smartphones and smart speakers, making them dial phone numbers or open websites.
In the wrong hands, the technology could be used to unlock doors, wire money or buy stuff online — simply with music playing over the radio.
 A group of students from University of California, Berkeley, and Georgetown University showed in 2016 that they could hide commands in white noise played over loudspeakers and through YouTube videos to get smart devices to turn on airplane mode or open a website.
This month, some of those Berkeley researchers published a research paper that went further, saying they could embed commands directly into recordings of music or spoken text. So while a human listener hears someone talking or an orchestra playing, Amazon’s Echo speaker might hear an instruction to add something to your shopping list.

“We wanted to see if we could make it even more stealthy,” said Nicholas Carlini, a fifth-year Ph.D. student in computer security at U.C. Berkeley and one of the paper’s authors.
[Read more on what Alexa can hear when brought into your home]
Mr. Carlini added that while there was no evidence that these techniques have left the lab, it may only be a matter of time before someone starts exploiting them. “My assumption is that the malicious people already employ people to do what I do,” he said.
Yup, it's already happening
These deceptions illustrate how artificial intelligence — even as it is making great strides — can still be tricked and manipulated.
Computers can be fooled into identifying an airplane as a cat just by changing a few pixels of a digital image, while researchers can make a self-driving car swerve or speed up simply by pasting small stickers on road signs and confusing the vehicle’s computer vision system.
With audio attacks, the researchers are exploiting the gap between human and machine speech recognition. Speech recognition systems typically translate each sound to a letter, eventually compiling those into words and phrases. By making slight changes to audio files, researchers were able to cancel out the sound that the speech recognition system was supposed to hear and replace it with a sound that would be transcribed differently by machines while being nearly undetectable to the human ear.
Yet many people leave their smartphones unlocked, and, at least for now, voice recognition systems are notoriously easy to fool.
There is already a history of smart devices being exploited for commercial gains through spoken commands.
Last year, Burger King caused a stir with an online ad that purposely asked ‘O.K., Google, what is the Whopper burger?” Android devices with voice-enabled search would respond by reading from the Whopper’s Wikipedia page. The ad was canceled after viewers started editing the Wikipedia page to comic effect.
A few months later, the animated series South Park followed up with an entire episode built around voice commands that caused viewers’ voice-recognition assistants to parrot adolescent obscenities.
There is no American law against broadcasting subliminal messages to humans, let alone machines. The Federal Communications Commission discourages the practice as “counter to the public interest,” and the Television Code of the National Association of Broadcasters bans “transmitting messages below the threshold of normal awareness.” Neither say anything about subliminal stimuli for smart devices.
"There is no American law against broadcasting subliminal messages to humans, let alone machines"

Satanic Observations on the Satanic Family Altar

Courts have ruled that subliminal messages may constitute an invasion of privacy, but the law has not extended the concept of privacy to machines.
Now the technology is racing even further ahead of the law. Last year, researchers at Princeton University and China’s Zhejiang University demonstrated that voice-recognition systems could be activated by using frequencies inaudible to the human ear. The attack first muted the phone so the owner wouldn’t hear the system’s responses, either.
 Courts have ruled that subliminal messages may constitute an invasion of privacy, but the law has not extended the concept of privacy to machines.

It is perfectly fine to target  both you and an AI device that is privy to your life/bank/security and well being with subliminals...

Of course, read the rest, at the opening link. 

From earlier today:
 Ironically, the creepy AI taking commands from elsewhere walks hand in hand with the "indoor generation" and it's problematic existence.

The “Indoor Generation” and It’s Myriad of Health Risks

The “Indoor Generation” and It’s Myriad of Health Risks

While modern amenities have undoubtedly made life easier on many accounts, there’s a key element of the above scenario that’s a major departure from human behavior throughout any other point in history: Over the course of the past 200 years, workers have migrated from workplaces like fields and farms to factories and offices. Instead of basking in natural sunlight, many people today are spending the majority of their time basking in the glow of some kind of screen, which puts us out of sync with natural circadian rhythms. In addition, modern society prioritizes high-pressure careers, and an always-on attitude when it comes to work and social life — which disturbs natural biological rhythms even further.
When examined collectively, all of these factors may be taking a toll on our health and happiness. Welcome to the era of the “Indoor Generation.” A recent report backed by data from international research firm YouGov highlights how much time people are really spending inside — and the findings are illuminating in more ways than one.
This detachment from the natural world — and natural sunlight, specifically — can have negative impacts, and can even have deleterious effects as serious as respiratory problems or Seasonal Affective Disorder. The YouGov report notes that around 15 percent of the world’s population is affected by different levels of SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder) or winter depression, which may be a direct result of lack of daylight. A full 39 percent of survey respondents said that daylight significantly impacts their mood.
Spending so much time inside isn’t great for physical health, either — particularly in home and workplaces with poor indoor air quality. As the YouGov report points out, an average adult breathes in almost 4,000 gallons of air every day — and indoor air can be up to five times as polluted as outdoor air (a fact that almost 80 percent of survey respondents didn’t know).

“We know instinctively that spending so many hours in stuffy places isn’t good for us,” said Peter Foldbjerg, head of daylight energy and indoor climate at VELUX. “The health benefits of improving our indoor environment are scientifically proven; however, we still have a long journey to go in terms of making people understand that these changes are not just a ‘nice to have.’ Without action, we can put our health at risk.”
There are a number of factors that affect air quality, such as dampness or mold, burning candles, how you clean your home (and with what), and building and furniture materials. When these factors combine to create suboptimal air quality, it can put our bodies through the wringer: It increases instances of eye, nose and throat irritation as well as levels of fatigue. If you’ve noticed a persistent, dull headache after spending a number of hours inside, that, too, may be related to poor air quality. The YouGov study also notes that living in damp and moldy homes increases risk of asthma by as much as 40 percent.
So, depression. Asthma. Ruined Sleep Cycles which lead to a whole host of health issued not even addressed in this article- Since sleep time = body healing/regeneration time.

Your body does incredible things when your sleeping

There’s another victim of indoor living: Our sleep cycles, which evolved to respond to natural daylight — something we’re just not getting enough of. Indoor lighting levels are around 300-500 lux, which is enough light for going about your daily routine, but not enough to regulate biological rhythms requiring a minimum of 1,000 lux. This is another element of well being that people are largely unaware of: Only about half (53 percent) of the YouGov survey respondents knew that daylight has a significant impact on sleep.

It’s not just technology that’s to blame for the disruption of our natural cycles. We now live in a “social clock society,” in which people are expected to be available at a moment’s notice for both work and social duties. “We are a 24/7 society, and this has disconnected us from the natural rhythms of nature,” said Foldbjerg. “It impacts our sleep quality and general health.”
Steven Lockley, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and neuroscientist at the Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders, reiterates that exposure to light-dark cycles is an “absolutely crucial” part of human biology. “That’s due to the role of light in resetting our circadian clock each and every day,” he said. “It resets our clocks to be in tune with environmental time, and light is the primary time-cue.”
In addition, Lockley explains that light, as an “acute stimulant that directly alerts the brain,” can affect energy levels as well as alertness and productivity.
If you’re exposed to brighter and bluer light in the daytime, then you get a better stimulant effect,” he said. “You’ll be more alert and have better cognitive function … If we’re thinking of offices, schools, hospitals, etc., it’s the alerting effects in the daytime that we want to take advantage of.”
The YouGov research, said Foldbjerg, reveals that we cannot continue to live in ignorance about the health of indoor domestic and public spaces. He hopes that the report will shed light upon this important issue, and help “put human and basic health needs center stage.”

Thursday, May 17, 2018

The EU Caving to US Edicts Begins: Total and Maersk Out/Iranian Oil Off the Market

 In case you missed...US To Turn Heat Up on EU as Trump Admin. Hits Iran Central Banker with "Terror" Sanctions

Expect the European nations to cave. All they’ve done since WW2 is cut off their noses to spite their own stupid faces-
Bolton made very clear that the US had ways of making the EU comply.
And voila! 
The energy giant Total and the world's largest container shipping company A.P. Moller-Maersk announced that they would both pull out of Iran claiming that future US sanctions would make business there impossible.
These decisions came after US President Donald Trump decided to pull the US out of the Iran nuclear deal on 8 May, which will result in sanctions being reimposed on Iran that will decrease production output of for example oil and gas.
France-based energy company Total said it will abandon its gas development project in Iran, South Pars 11 (SP11) which it joined in July 2017, over fears of the impact of US sanctions about to be imposed on the country.
The company said in a statement: “Total will not be in a position to continue the SP11 project and will have to unwind all related operations before 4 November 2018 unless Total is granted a specific project waiver by the US authorities.”

Maersk said that the increasing oil prices and high geopolitical tension could negatively affect profitability and that it was impossible for any company which has dealings with the US to stay in Iran. Its share price was down almost 11 per cent at 1pm.
Soeren Skou, chief executive of Maersk, told Reuters: “With the sanctions the Americans are to impose, you can't do business in Iran if you also have business in the US, and we have that on a large scale.”

“I don't know the exact timing details, but I am certain that we're also going to shut down (in Iran),” he said.

Total has found itself in the same position as US shareholders make up more than 30 per cent of the shareholding and its US-based operations accounts for $10bn (£7.4) of its revenue.

French president Emmanuel Macron called upon the EU to protect the EU companies that has business in Iran under US sanctions.“International companies with interests in many countries make their own choices according to their own interests. They should continue to have this freedom.”
The hole left in the market by the missing Iranian barrels is causing the price jump (Source: Getty)
Bang bang John Bolton's Hammer Goes

Also Read: Oil prices surge to new high as 2m Iranian barrels go off the market

After the plans for the US to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal became known, oil prices surged over the uncertainty of what would happen to Iran's oil industry if the US reimposed sanctions, limiting Iran's production.

According to chief executive at Sun Global Investment Mihir Kapadia, so far 2m barrels of oil previously produced by Iran has been taken off the market.

The Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec), has not restricted the number of barrels available but has not made up for the loss of barrels from Iran.

Rocket Fire False Alarm in Israeli Occupied Golan

 Wonder what Israel is preparing? The wedding of the Royal freaks this week end will provide a top notch distraction. I’m expecting something to occur in this area.
Residents report hearing explosions....but
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Rocket warning sirens went off on Thursday on the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, but the Israeli military quickly said it was a false alarm.

“It appears to have been a false alarm. The IDF’s (Israel Defence Forces) Iron Dome aerial defence system was activated. The circumstances are being looked into,” the military said in a statement.

Local residents said they heard a blast at the time of the sirens, but they were not sure what had caused it.

Wednesday, May 16, 2018

Sigmund Fraud- The Conquistador

Sigmund Freud
Another interesting article, you all may have missed, but should probably read.
As I clear some of the many collected bookmarked article...
From earlier today.......

 A new biography demolishes whatever was left of the Viennese con man’s reputation.

Sigmund Fraud

Writing to his close friend and collaborator Wilhelm Fliess in 1890, Sigmund Freud explained that he couldn’t pay a visit because, in a struggling psychiatric practice that suckered rich society women in Vienna, “My most important client is just now going through a kind of nervous crisis and might get well in my absence.”

No, Freud wasn’t being ironic: He depended on grandes dames to stay in business. On another occasion, referring to a cartoon in which a yawning lion grumbles, “Twelve o’clock and no negroes,” he wrote, “The worries begin again whether some negroes will turn up at the right time to still the lion’s appetite.” That appetite, as Frederick Crews makes clear in his exhaustive, reputation-pulverizing book Freud: The Making of an Illusion, was from an early age for fame and riches, which Freud relentlessly pursued by championing one faddish quack remedy after another, backing away when justified criticism made his position untenable, covering his tracks with misleading or even completely false claims about what he’d been up to, then bustling on to the next gold mine.
In 1884, for instance, in the giddy throes of a fondness for cocaine that Freud would indulge on and off for some 15 years, he had the marvelous idea of treating a brilliant young scientist, Ernst Fleischl von Marxow, for a mild morphine addiction (resulting from surgery) by putting the patient on cocaine. Instead, Fleischl became hugely addicted to both morphine and cocaine — sleepless nights, strung-out dozy days — and wasted away into a scarecrow while Freud, writing about the patient under a pseudonym, bragged in a paper about the tremendous success of his experiment. Meanwhile, a colleague of Freud was discovering an actual useful application of cocaine, as a topical anesthetic that opened the door to new kinds of surgery (such as on the eye). This was a truly revolutionary breakthrough and Freud had nothing to do with it. Later he would suggest that he had been on the brink of making the discovery but had been distracted by his fiancée, Martha.

The case for Freud’s misogyny (Freud’s frauds took many forms so don’t get too hung up on the misogyny label- see his treatment above of brilliant male scientist )is ludicrously easy to make. After his cocaine frenzy, Freud headed to Paris to study with Jean-Martin Charcot, who oversaw an insane asylum full of women upon whom he freely experimented and operated under the assumption that they were suffering from “hysteria,” an almost exclusively feminine phenomenon in which sex organs supposedly caused otherwise unexplained behavior and bodily disorders.
If the patient couldn’t remember any childhood sexual trauma, Freud would “reconstruct” it by coaching her to devise one. Despite claiming in a typically grandiose but evidence-free 1896 lecture that his psychoanalysis had helped unveil and repair childhood sexual trauma in 18 patients — the speech was so devoid of clinical standards that a senior scientist, Richard von Krafft-Ebing, said, “It sounds like a scientific fairy tale” — Freud later revealed in a letter to Fliess that he hadn’t cured even one person.
In one of the many horror stories Crews documents at length, Fliess, with Freud’s eager encouragement, nearly killed a patient whose symptoms suggest she was a hemophiliac who had an ovarian cyst by operating on her nose and removing a chunk of bone, on the crackpot theory he called “nasal reflex neurosis” that the genital-based hysteria natural to women was traceable to cartilage in the nose. As the suffering woman, Emma Eckstein, nearly bled to death while Freud bungled her recovery, he blanched and nearly vomited, regaining his poise only with the aid of a glass of brandy.
Today Freud barely exists in scientific literature, which has rejected his dodgy claims and outlandish boasts. In his more honest moments, he admitted his work did little to advance the cause of his supposed métier. “I am actually not at all a man of science, not an observer, not an experimenter, not a thinker,” he wrote Fliess. “I am by temperament nothing but a conquistador — an adventurer, if you want it translated — with all the curiosity, daring and tenacity characteristic of a man of this sort.”
A conquistador is a conqueror- perhaps an adventurer as well, but, still a conqueror 
It comes from the spanish words to conquer

  "If Sigmund Freud had a genius for anything, it was for chutzpah. That, and public relations"

My oh my, what an insightful observation- Since Sigmund Freud was related to none other then Edward Bernays- And Edward Bernays helped Sigmund Freud advance his career. So to speak.

How Freud got under our skin
“Sigmund Freud may have invented the Self, full of unspoken dreams and desires, in 1900, but it was his American nephew, Edward Bernays, who packaged it and put it on to the market. Suddenly, everyone wanted one. And, of course, no one wanted one that was quite the same as anyone else's.

Bernays, born in Vienna in 1891, had worked at the end of the First World War as a propagandist for America, and after 1918 he decided to carry on in this role. But he invented a brand new name for for his profession: public relations.”

It seems while Sigmund Fraud was practicing, experimenting, conquering unsuspecting persons- he was actually amassing knowledge about the human condition... which Bernays used to take that human experimentation to the next level.

"The CIA Asked Me About Controlling The Climate"- We Should Worry!

I'm trying to clear up some bookmarked pieces- So it's a diversity of topics for today: 
From earlier today: Have We Already Slid Into A Tyranny of Good Intentions?
For your consideration:  The CIA Asked Me About Controlling The Climate.. This is Why We Should Worry

 Brief digression: Personally, I believe weather warfare aka geo-engineering aka “climate intervention” is a big part of the AGW psy op. To put it another way the AGW/global warming hoax gives cover to the long desired, likely some what successful attempts at weather warfare.
Oh and the CIA as our only hope spin really annoys me!
On January 19, 2011, I got a phone call from two men who told me they were consultants for the CIA. Roger Lueken and Michael Canes, analysts for the Logistics Management Institute, asked, among other things, “If another country were trying to control our climate, would we be able to detect it?”
I told them that I thought we could, because if a cloud in the stratosphere were created (the most commonly proposed method of control) that was thick enough, large enough, and long-lasting enough to change the amount of energy reaching Earth, we could certainly see it with the same ground-based and satellite instruments we use to measure stratospheric clouds from volcanic eruptions. If, on the other hand, low clouds were being brightened over the ocean (another suggested means of cooling the climate), we could see telltale patterns in the tops of the clouds with satellite photos. And it would also be easy to observe aeroplanes or ships injecting gases or particles into the atmosphere.
At the same time, I wondered whether they also wanted to know if others would know about it, if the CIA was controlling the world’s climate. Given that the CIA is a major sponsor of the recently released US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) reports on geoengineering (which they have renamed “climate intervention”), the question arises as to the possible interest of the CIA in global climate control.
Let me be clear. I completely agree with all the NAS findings. Global warming is real and is being caused by humans, mainly by burning coal, oil, petrol and natural gas, which puts carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas – into the atmosphere. Global warming will result in major harm to humanity if left unchecked. The solution is to stop using fossil fuels for our energy supply and switch to solar and wind power, and to adapt to some of the coming climate change.
Geoengineering by blocking sunlight should not be implemented now, as its risks and benefits are too uncertain, but we need more research on the various proposed scenarios. Taking carbon dioxide out of the air is a good thing, but currently extremely expensive, and we need research on that, too.
Taking carbon dioxide out of the air may impede our ability to grow food.. never mind the decimation of our forests (the lungs of our planet) Oh and the harm to all living beings...
The 2014 US Quadrennial Defense Review makes clear that climate change poses a major threat to the US and the rest of the world. It says: “The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence.”
Certainly it is the job of the US military and the CIA to help protect our country from such threats, and it is not surprising that the CIA is interested to learn about geoengineering. In fact, the CIA opened a Center on Climate Change and National Security in 2009. When it was forced by Congress to close it in 2012, it said they would continue working on these issues anyway.
Whether you see the role of the CIA in climate change as nefarious or protective depends on how you weigh evidence with your preconceived notions. There is a long history of weather and climate control being proposed for military purposes, as described brilliantly in the 2010 book by James Fleming, Fixing the Sky, but there is no evidence the CIA is doing anything wrong on this issue.
 A lack of evidence of wrong doing does not disprove wrong doing- that's a completely misleading statement. Surely crimes are committed daily and the evidence of these crimes are unknown. Considering the covert nature of the CIA and it's operations- one has to realize that any evidence of wrong doing would be hidden or obfuscated.
  I know of no way to control local or regional climate with geoengineering without effects elsewhere, but while it is possible that such techniques could be developed by research, geoengineering for hostile purposes is prohibited by the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.
The author 'not knowing' is meaningless- Particularly when he acknowledges the possibility of these techniques being developed and researched- and the fact that this is prohibited by the UN is pretty meaningless, unless we understand that it should be taken as an admonishment to keep that type of research as well hidden/obfuscated as possible
I don’t want to be working on geoengineering. But I don’t yet see the political will in the world to address global warming. If the US enhances its research efforts on geoengineering, we will learn about both the potential risks and benefits of its implementation, so that future policymakers will be able to make informed decisions, and not hasty ones in a panic if confronted by environmental dangers.
My recent work lists five potential benefits and 26 potential risks of stratospheric geoengineering, and the number one benefit – if stratospheric geoengineering is possible at all (an important research question) – is that it could cool the planet, reversing some of the dangers of global warming. But will we ever be able to overcome the governance and ethical issues?
Thus further research is urgently needed. In the meantime, we need to vigorously move to a carbon-free energy system"
A carbon free energy system is nonsense. It's a weird sort of spin emanating from a carbon based life form on a carbon based planet.

Have We Already Slid Into A Tyranny of Good Intentions?

This is an older editorial from 2010- The title is the question: Are we sliding into a tyranny of good intentions?

While reading this piece, I realized we're already in that tyranny. 
We slid right into it with nary a bump impeding our ride. 
The saying “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” comes to mind. 
Our society, today, is that hell. It's absurd to the nth degree. The enforced political correctness, for some, so obvious in it's hypocrisy. Cognitive dissonance is rampant. Drug use and deaths from big pharma are rampant- Society is sick. People are sick and unhealthy. In their minds and bodies. Pushing memes that are destructive to our humanity.... I could go on. But, will spare you all- Just read below:

"Nearly 50 years ago, Kenneth Minogue, a professor of political science at the London School of Economics, published The Liberal Mind, his classic study of the dominant philosophy of the 20th century: radical niceness. Rooted in extreme liberal optimism and salvationist aspiration, this triumphant ideology (Prof. Minogue said) tenaciously advanced the notion that history requires the perfection of human society, that governments - in pursuit of this perfection - are obliged "to provide every man, woman, child and dog with the conditions of the good life." Prof. Minogue ended with a warning: "A populace which hands its moral order over to governments, no matter how impeccable its reasons, will become dependent and slavish."
Now professor emeritus at LSE, the 80-year-old has published a remarkable sequel - The Servile Mind: How Democracy Erodes the Moral Life. He picks up where he left off, documenting the ways in which democracy (which once expanded freedom) requires strict obedience to the state - and to the bureaucratic moral order that sustains it.
An elegant essayist of the old school, Prof. Minogue advances his argument by small steps that can end abruptly in crisp revelation.

"I am of two minds about democracy," he writes, "and so is everyone else. We all agree that it is the sovereign remedy for corruption, war and poverty in the Third World. We would certainly tolerate no other system in our own country. Yet most people are disenchanted with the way it works. One reason is that our rulers now manage so much of our lives that they cannot help but do it badly. They have overreached. Blunder follows blunder."

Far worse, traditional democratic theory has been flipped upside down: "Our rulers now make us accountable to them."

Count the ways.

"Most Western governments hate me smoking, or eating the wrong kind of food, or hunting foxes or drinking too much. Most of these governments think we borrow too much money for our personal pleasures and many of us are very bad parents. Ministers of state have been known to instruct us in elementary matters, such as the importance of reading bedtime stories to our children.

"Many of us have unsound views about people of other races, cultures or religions, and the distribution of our friends does not always correspond to the cultural diversity of our society. We must face up to the grim fact that the rulers we elect are losing patience with us.

"Debt, intemperance and incompetence in rearing our children are no doubt regrettable - but they are vices, and - left alone - they will soon lead to the pain that corrects. Life is a better teacher of virtue than politicians and most sensible governments in the past have left moral faults to the churches.
"The point is that governments have no business telling us how to live. They are tiresome enough in the exercise of authority. They are intolerable when they mount the pulpit. Nor should we be in any doubt that nationalizing the moral life of the people is the first step toward totalitarianism."

Actions are no longer morally wrong. The state determines what is "acceptable" and what is "unacceptable" - thereby constructing a new "language of authority" that enforces political morality even as it rescinds everyday moral inhibitions. People are encouraged to be "collectively dutiful and individually hedonistic."

Prof. Minogue writes from Britain, where the Labour government (2007) began seizing "unacceptable" families and holding them, without consent for extended periods of behaviour-modification training by cadres of civil servants from eight government departments. These families had a record of drug addiction, child violence and poor mental attitudes. Where, he asks, will this cleansing end? Gordon Brown, speaking this past spring before he lost power, announced his four-year target for these statist interventions: 50,000 families by 2015.

Writing last year in the Daily Mail, Prof. Minogue held the government itself responsible for much of the conduct that it now deems "unacceptable." Never in its history, he said, had Britain funded so much official compassion. Never in its history had Britain endured so much inexplicable violence. The country once renowned for its great gentleness was sliding inexorably into a tyranny of good intentions"
 Canada very obviously followed along with the British tyranny of good intentions