Your future is what the EU says it will be

We discuss many things on this site, and I try hard not to hone in on single issues in reaction to press reports as many other bloggers do, but to try and develop the bigger picture for you, to put issues into perspective within the larger EU environment, and this one is no different.

Over the past week, as the result of being passed some high level academic reports in the field of technology and ICT reasearch, I have been doing my homework, researching the claims made in the documents, and looking for corroborating EU documentation.

I have found that the intended practice and use of this technology by our political masters as outlined in those documents to be totally accurate, that all the links exist and are currently working, and that the 500 million people that make up the 27 member states of the EU have not a clue as to what the EU have in store for them.

Welcome to the EU empire, ruled by technology, which they call The Grid.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am a huge fan of technology, I have been involved with it all my working life, and advanced programmes such as this have the potential for an enormous amount of good, but as with all technological advances they can be put to both good and bad uses, but as you will see in the posts that are to follow, the use of this technology as currently being constructed by the EU and its host of followers is not for your benefit, it is to create and control the new European Empire.

The first report was written because the author was concerned that there is no public debate, that this is all hidden in plain sight (documents are there.. if you can find them), and where presented, where it does show itself in the public realm it is presented in such benign ways that it is a total distortion of its real aims and objectives.

His document is therefore not solely a warning of what is to come, but an attempt to create public awareness and debate at the lowest level, rather than at the organised levels only.

This is how the author describes the overview:

In the Working Documents: ‘Science, society and the citizen in Europe’ / and the 2001 ‘Science and Society Action Plan’ – published following the Lisbon summit of March 2000, the European Commission laid out its vision for the foundations of the new ‘Information Society’. With the Commission firmly at the helm – “new connections would be forged [through the deployment and use of these new, sophisticated information and communications technologies – ‘ICTs’] between citizens, scientists and policy-makers”. A wide range of interrelated programmes would thus be set in motion to encourage a greater co-operation and transparency between all parties. In addition, through educational programmes, arts and cultural events, and with the co-operation of a sympathetic media, the Commission would also seek to orchestrate a new, closer, understanding between the citizens of Europe, governance and science*.
This is no traditional science however – the science of test-tubes, notebooks and microscopes. Instead, what the European Commission had planned, was the specific development of new ICT tools – including Grid computing, to be used by governments for the collection and handling of vast amounts of digitised data on their citizens – their attributes, complex movements, financial dealings and interactions with institutions and other people – on a scale far beyond anything seen in history – a new form of science*. Grid computing (Grids) is a specific form of distributed computing. Distributed computing in turn is considered to be a science* – able to solve large problems by giving small parts of those problems to many computers to solve and then combining the solutions for the parts into a solution for those problems. The employment and development of Grids is now everywhere in the public sector in the United Kingdom.

This has all been undertaken with public money, away from the prying eyes of the general public. This is why those who seek information using FOI are so often thwarted with responses of ‘commercial confidentiality’. For until it was ready, the public must not know, until it is too late, after the event and with so much public money having already been spent, then it would be incumbent upon others to justify taking it apart.

The author Ian Dent is an Oxford academic, but more than that he is a technologist who has been working on this new technology, not just creating it but also building and deploying it, so yes, he does know what he is talking about.

To put it into perspective in monetary terms, these technological advances have so far cost the taxpayers £470 billion, the second biggest EU budget item after CAP (excluding the cost of Eurocrats themselves), with even more billions of €funds being made available under the current FP7 programme.

But the cost and extent of this technology is secondary when you consider the impact that it is going to have on you the individual, your life, your privacy and your rights.

Here, let the author explain.

Human beings are also, alarmingly, being re-categorised in this new ‘Information Society’ as [computing term] ‘objects’ – biological economic devices – able to be continuously tracked and mobilised – alongside computer programs, ICT hardware and evolving forms of complex data, for the benefit of this new super-economy.

A biological economic device.  That’s YOU. A device whose importance in society will be governed by its worth, whose entitlements to state services will be governed on your economic value.

That statement alone raises many human rights questions, what of the old, of the infirm or of those in society who suffer mental illnesses and cannot make that economic input. It also raises many political ones, such as is this just communism/communitarianism using technology, employing the same Keynesian economics where the State IS the economy, you are just the biological economic device, the worker. That the Unions are part of the decision making process in this EU empire tells us much.

The report is stuffed full of facts, events, technology and insights into the future that is planned for you.

Now I know that many many readers are lazy, they never click through the links to read the source material, that they never open pdf attachments, and so I have contacted the author (01/10/10 still awaiting reply) to gain his permission to republish his report in full, because quite honestly if you never read anything ever again, you should read this report, because your future is being shaped, whether you want it or not, by the host of unelected bodies in the EU, with the full collusion of our own government, and at the very least you should know about it.

If you want a copy of this report, let me know.

When you have read the report, suddenly you will understand the real meaning behind the governmental push for digital TV and super-fast Broadband and will comprehend the deception in the new BT broadband advert, where shafts of light descend from the sky…

I will be following this post with many more over the next few days, with information from other reports showing clearer examples of how this technology is already being introduced, and how in some cases you are already using it. This is just a taster.

The Author makes clear, and I concur with his view:

This document is clear to argue that none of these intended developments may actually be “wrong” – only that without true open, parliamentary and public debate using common language, the control and exercise of those changes could be open to serious abuse – both by successive UK governments (whatever the colour) and by the partner private sector – particularly in the areas of civil liberties and privacy.

I concur because? The use of technology can be an enormous benefit to people, society, nations, but its misuse can be a pure evil. At this time the very nature of the hidden agenda, the secrecy in which it is conducted, can only lead one to believe that this will not be done with the consent of the people, but will be imposed, from the centre, and the full weight of the EU security industry machine will be brought to bear to enforce it.

It also makes sense and puts into perspective the emphasis and absolute fear that our political masters have to the news reports of sun spots, solar flares or air burst nuclear devices, which have the potential to at least disrupt, or worse totally incapacitate the technological nightmare that is being built, with your money but without your knowledge, and their planned new laws to create another body to protect their information society (their information, not yours), a Regulation to strengthen and modernise the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA).

The debate must happen, and it must be open to all.

update: OK, am having trouble keeping up with email requests for report document. so have made it available to download here. (12mb pdf), or by clicking the graphic on the right hand toolbar.


About IanPJ

Ian Parker-Joseph, former Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, who currently heads PDPS Internet Hosting and the Personal Deed Poll Services company, has been an IT industry professional for over 20 years, providing Business Consulting, Programme and Project Management, specialising in the recovery of Projects that have failed in a process driven world. Ian’s experience is not limited to the UK, and he has successfully delivered projects in the Middle East, Africa, US, Russia, Poland, France and Germany. Working within different cultures, Ian has occupied high profile roles within multi-nationals such as Nortel and Cable & Wireless. These experiences have given Ian an excellent insight into world events, and the way that they can shape our own national future. His extensive overseas experiences have made him all too aware of how the UK interacts with its near neighbours, its place in the Commonwealth, and how our nation fits into the wider world. He is determined to rebuild many of the friendships and commercial relationships with other nations that have been sadly neglected over the years, and would like to see greater energy and food security in these countries, for the benefit of all. Ian is a vocal advocate of small government, individual freedom, low taxation and a minimum of regulation. Ian believes deeply and passionately in freedom and independence in all areas of life, and is now bringing his professional experiences to bear in the world of politics.
This entry was posted in European Union and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Your future is what the EU says it will be

  1. Henry North says:

    Time to emigrate to San Marino then….

  2. Abdullah says:

    This is essential! I look forward to what more information to come on this topic. thanks

  3. Sue says:

    Could I have a copy please Ian? You have my email address.

    Thanks 🙂


  4. WitteringsfromWitney says:

    Have linked Ian.

  5. blind steve says:

    Go ahead, delete my comment correcting your distortion of the facts, see if I care.

    • Your comment is not being deleted, it remains in moderation whilst its contents are being checked.

      You claim that no EU document contains the words biological economic devices, that is some claim.

      Ian Dent if you recall used that phrase in the context of “as [computing term] ‘objects’”, and so is likely only to appear in technical documentation or in technical meeting notes, and is unlikely to appear in any political or committee documentation which is public facing.

      Therefore I will take time to check to see where exactly this phrase does appear, and please remember that all project work commissioned for, and paid for, by the EU is EU OWNED.

      However, that your dismissal of Ian Dent’s work was so quick, and specific to a particular phrase, makes me suspicious of motive. Do you have an interest to declare?

      • blindsteve says:

        Ian Dent if you recall used that phrase in the context of “as [computing term] ‘objects’”, and so is likely only to appear in technical documentation or in technical meeting notes, and is unlikely to appear in any political or committee documentation which is public facing.

        Or he might just have pasted it straight out of Wikipedia :

        Yup, he did. So please don’t bother to go hunting through EU documents for this.

        What was that you were saying to me about Google again ?

        • What kind of idiot are you? So you have found the Wikipedia description of Object Orientated Programming. It is used extensively every day by a whole host of companies, organisations, governments and researchers.

          It is however for the programmers, or their development teams and managers to find descriptions for the objects in those programmes being built, managed or tracked.

          Ian Dent’s concern, a concern I share indecently, is that the EU are leading, in their FP7 programme & the Commission Research Area (ERA) and by many of the research organisations feeding into those areas are using, extensively, the term biological economic device to refer to human beings as the descriptive term in its OOP.

          Again, I note that you are trying to shoot the messenger and not addressing the message.

  6. JP says:

    Just as a side note, I met a person about a month ago who does extremely complicated computer systems engineering and programming and he told me of a contract he worked on many years back which was for a top secret government agency here in the US and the goal of the project was to develop integrated databases using the powerful Oracle software to be able to feed information, news stories actually, and public relations type releases, and through the program it would make certain that pre-programmed agenda, the output of the processing, would insure that there be complete conformity across all departments that the output information, which came as the final version of whatever news story was input, would be air-tight among all stories passing through the system – so that whatever the intended result was, to achieve in the readers’ minds, the programming would insure this was the case – for everything run through it. He got extremely well paid for this top secret project and he now believes it is in use by governments, not just in the US but elsewhere, where conformity to a stated “truth” must be maintained among all “news” releases issued. This might tie in with EU as certainly they must keep their bundle of lies constantly presented as “truth” no matter what – and if one is fighting this monster, one might take into account, this is not human beings one is resisting, but a coordinated computerized network designed to misinform and make sure that all “news” releases become conformed propaganda pieces with no tell-tale gaps, holes or leaks in them that would tip anybody off they because of incongruities. Just saying, someone for sure who was/still-is a highly paid computer systems design/architect level person told me this story recently in a conversation about how governments today seem to be pulling off this technocratic authoritarianism and making it air-tight, no dissimilarities between stories, the party-line always coming through, to a tee.

  7. JP says:

    As a side note to the side note, this conversation happened to take place in San Francisco, California and Oracle’s world headquarters is but 20 miles to the south. This was someone who is back again doing Oracle contract work for government agencies as an Oracle employee. It wasn’t someone just making it up but being factual in his telling of it. A lot of bad things begin in San Francisco, where a lot of money has been injected in coming up with ways to take away freedom and liberty and replace it with a communistic approach, which openly communist party members run for, and win, elections in cities all across the San Francisco Bay area, which also adds some veracity to what he did tell me.

  8. Vicky Davis says:

    “Biological economic device” – brilliant description. You should know that it’s not just Europeans who will be biological economic devices. The systems are global. I’ve spent nearly all of the last decade in the U.S. tracing and documenting these systems, and trying to explain the horror of the technocratic future that awaits the children and grandchildren of Americans. My friend working on the UK side of the problem sent me this link. What we are facing is a global technocratic tyranny unlike any tyranny in the history of the world.

  9. Pingback: Human beings NOT classified by the EU as ‘biological economic devices’ « Blind Cyclists' Union

  10. I fear that this commenter (blind steve from blind cyclists union) protests WAY too much and is more intent on shooting the messenger than have people digest and discuss the message, something that the author specifically wanted in writing his paper.

    For the purpose of clarification, I received the document from the office of Henry Porter, and you can find Ian Dent’s source download site at the end of his document.

  11. Pingback: Now Hear This | The Albion Alliance presents

  12. Pingback: Your future is what the EU says it will be | The Albion Alliance presents

  13. Ian,

    thank you for your hard work. This is very important information.

    • Thanks TT.

      I agree with the author, this needs opening up, discussing and commenting on. It needs to be talked about amongst friends, in pubs, clubs and the office.

      There are still far too many people who still believe that their own governments would not do this to them, and so simply dismiss it out of hand.

  14. Pingback: Tweets that mention Your future is what the EU says it will be | IanPJ on Politics --

  15. cpcorruption says:

    Good stuff, Ian!

  16. Anon says:

    Ian Dent’s response to blind steve’s blog post :

    Ian Dent, on October 2, 2010 at 01:06 Said:

    For all his short-sighted rantings, the aptly named ‘blind’steve is nevertheless correct about the purpose of the discussion document ‘Beyond Broadband’; the true cost of Digital Britain by Cambridge researcher, Ian Dent.

    This document, produced by Ian Dent, has been orchestrated so as to stimulate the beginnings of a much needed public debate – to raise questions about decisions currently being made over our future, solely by ICT experts and the European Commission with NO active public debate in a common language.

    These are technical, complex and largely ‘un-soundbite-able’ issues. So a few references may help readers to investigate for themselves in a more measured and balanced way:

    The European Commission on the use of RFID technologies as part of a vision for an ‘Internet of Things’:

    “Radio Frequency IDentification (RFID) is a technology that allows automatic identification of objects, animals or people by incorporating a small electronic chip on its “host”. Data is stored on this chip and can then be “read” by wireless devices, called RFID readers.
    The concept is similar to traditional barcodes. A barcode represents information in a condensed format (usually lines) that takes little space and can be read by a machine.

    Compared to barcodes, RFID tags are “smarter”: the information on the micro-chip can be read automatically, at a distance, by another wireless machine. This means RFID is easier to use and more efficient than barcodes: there is no need to pass each individual object/animal/person in front of a scanner to retrieve the information contained in each tag”.

    and . . the ‘public sector information market’:

  17. johnnyrvf says:

    As worrying as this all seems, there are many things that can and WILL go wrong, the tighter the powers try to grip, the more apparent the flaws become, I am not too concerned, even if the “chip” me, I will find a way to disable it; and whilst they may have made provisions for this in the end the system will be so vunerable to any number of failures that it will eventually be abandoned.

  18. Jeremy Robert Poynton says:

    I assume you are aware of the INDECT project? – “Intelligent urban environment observation system”

    • JRP, yes. It is a subject I have posted on in the past, but will be returning to again shortly.

      Thank you for bringing it up again in the context of Ian Dent’s work, it is all part and parcel of the technological empire being constructed.

  19. Robert Arvanitis says:

    A critical distinction: Having worked on these sorts of initiatives we must recognize how government will surely get it wrong.

    In the private sector, predictive analytics are fine, because the exchanges are voluntary — “Buying cheese? Care for some crackers with that?”

    But when government makes decision, they are involuntary — “Left-handed, over 60 years old and nearsighted? No medicine for you then…”

    • I agree, they will get it wrong, but unfortunately as history shows us well, they will then act to cover up those errors, more rules and regulations as sticking plaster and compound the mistakes even further.

      The public suffers as a result..

  20. FaustiesBlog says:

    An excellent piece of work, Ian. Now facebooked.

    Predictably, the Tory Party proudly announced in conference today their plans for a ‘smart’ grid, dressed up as a means to help people out, to make life more convenience and affordable. The conference lapped it up.

    What ever happened to critical thinking in this country? Why do people just accept the clap trap spouted by their favoured politicians?

  21. Pingback: Be very scared at what EU has in store | IanPJ on Politics

  22. Pingback: Be very scared at what EU has in store | Centurean2′s Weblog

  23. Pingback: Your future is what the EU says it will be | Centurean2′s Weblog

  24. eddie says:

    we all need to rise up to this communitarian oppressive social control, first of all expose all of common purpose and its subversive masters, then the seditional backstabbing traitors past and present from within our goverment, and publicly exercute every last one of them, and let it be known for future server,s that the power belongs to the people of our free indipendent loveing nation, quod me infermat modo me fortiorem faciat, to diminish me will only make me stronger.

Comments are closed.