There should be little or no doubt that our government has become tyrannical, infiltrated by communists, and governed by progressive communist democrats whose goal is to achieve perpetual and enduring political power over America and Americans.

To this end, the progressive communist democrats (PCDs) have compromised and weaponized the nation’s premier intelligence and law enforcement agencies in an attack to nullify the U.S. Constitution and our constitutionally protected inalienable rights. The PCDs have embraced many of the surveillance and control mechanisms found in Communist China. The goal is to surveil the population, censor speech that does not comport with the regime’s narrative, cancel dissident voices, and build a mechanism that will seek to punish those who do not comply with the regime’s directives.

Enter Project Night Fury…

Project Night Fury began with a vision to create a sophisticated AI-based analytics tool to monitor social media and other open-source platforms that can comprehend human intentions, emotions, and more explicit indications that would allow the government to detect and investigate potential terrorist threats to the regime. Of course, the government reserved the right to expand its uses at a later date.

It appeared on the public’s radar on March 7, 2022, after being mentioned in a report (OIG-22-30) by the Department of Homeland Defense’s Office of the Inspector General…

On March 18, 2022, the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, a nonprofit law and public policy institute named after Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr., followed up with a Freedom of Information Act Request for “documents including contracts, communications, research products, and training and compliance materials relating to Project Night Fury.”

“DHS produced two contracts with the University of Alabama at Birmingham: an initial contract dated September 21, 2018, and an extension from August 27, 2019, through December 23, 2021. Though the cost is redacted, the government’s public contracting website reveals that they totaled almost $790,000. DHS also produced three versions of the privacy threshold analysis for the project, though none is dated, and it is unclear which is the final version. DHS staff conduct privacy threshold analyses to determine how a new or expanded program or system could impact privacy.” 

“The Contractor shall develop these attributes to create a methodology for developing a ranking, or ‘Risk Score,’ associated with the identified accounts. The Contractor shall develop tools to automate the identification process, documenting performance measures and metrics related to automating the identification process,” one of the documents reads. <Source>

The “Risk Score”

“Night Fury’s tasks fall into three main categories. The first involved identifying and tracking “terrorist propaganda” and “pro-terrorist” accounts on Facebook, Twitter, online forums, and “lesser social media communities” like Telegram and VK (Russia’s main social media platform) based on undefined criteria. The University of Alabama at Birmingham and DHS planned to work together to “identify relevant attributes” that would identify Facebook accounts and groups as being “pro-terrorist” by ranking them or assigning them a “Risk Score.” The university also agreed to develop methods to decide whether a Twitter account that was “linked to a confirmed pro-terrorist social media account” should itself be considered pro-terrorist, using criteria such as “keyword set comparisons.” These tasks would be completely automated, with the evident goal of minimizing any human intervention — despite research demonstrating the limitations of algorithmic analysis of social media content. Over the course of the project, the university would compile a list of accounts it identified on Facebook and Twitter, along with their postings and other related data, and provide the data to DHS. The contracts also directed the university to build models to “identify key influencers of pro-terrorist thought” whose messages spread across different forums and social media platforms.” <Source>

Dangers…

“These directives from DHS raise a host of concerns. While one of the University of Alabama’s main tasks was to identify “pro-terrorist” accounts, the contract does not define the term, vesting both the university and DHS with significant discretion in identifying the attributes that would justify the designation. There are also no apparent parameters for what would “link” someone to such a pro-terrorist account. Linked accounts could potentially include people who are far removed from the account in question or those whose interactions were limited to a single instance, such as “liking” a Facebook post or retweeting a tweet. The contract also fails to explain or define what a “risk score” would measure — whether the risk of being a terrorist, being pro-terrorist, committing a violent act, or something else — nor does it explain how automated social media analysis would be an appropriate tool to make that determination.”

Under the system contemplated by Project Night Fury, it appears that social media users could be labeled as threats in the absence of any evidence of criminal activity or planning, or based on a misinterpretation of innocuous behavior. Given the decades-long history of discriminatory surveillance by DHS and other government agencies, including on social media, there is an acute risk that the characteristics deemed relevant would disproportionately sweep in members of minority communities. <Source>

The Communist China Model…

Under the Chinese Communist Party's rule, a social scoring system -- the Social Credit System -- has been implemented. While the Chinese commies argue that it promotes social harmony and accountability, there are significant concerns regarding individual freedoms, privacy, and the potential abuse of power as your travel, purchasing power, and government approvals are based on your score.

• Loss of Privacy and Surveillance: The social scoring system in China relies heavily on mass surveillance and data collection through extensive monitoring of citizens' activities, including online behavior, financial transactions, and even social interactions.

• Restriction of Individual Freedoms: Citizens with low social scores may face significant consequences, including limitations on travel, reduced job prospects, restricted access to education and healthcare, and even public shaming. Citizens are pressured to conform to government-defined standards of behavior and ideology to maintain a favorable score.

• Lack of Transparency and Due Process: The criteria and algorithms used to calculate social scores remain opaque, making it difficult for citizens to understand how their scores are determined or how to improve them. One of the most significant dangers of a social scoring system is the lack of transparency and due process.

• Discrimination and Social Exclusion: The system's subjective nature and potential bias can lead to unfair treatment, including ostracization, based on factors such as political beliefs, religion, or associations.

• Chilling Effect on Free Expression and Dissent: Fear of negative repercussions encourages self-censorship, inhibiting open dialogue and stifling critical thinking and innovation.

• Government Abuse: With the social scoring system, the government can control and manipulate individuals, suppressing dissent and maintaining social and political conformity. This centralized control undermines democratic principles and poses a threat to individual liberties.

Bottom line…

The dangers of an automated risk-scoring system cannot be understated, and its threat to individual freedoms, privacy, and democracy cannot be ignored, especially when one considers using that tool against a large data repository such as the one the NSA has created by collecting all telephone, internet, and communications traffic for years, encrypted or not. By analyzing your data over time, probable cause and "intent" can be shown to the Court to justify almost any action the government desires to take against an individual. 

Every government surveillance system appears justified, often without critical examination and analysis, based on harm to children, terrorism, the war on drugs, or foreign election interference. Unfortunately, these programs and sophisticated tools are turned against American citizens on behalf of corrupt political actors in the governing regime or the permanent deep-state bureaucracy.

We face an unprecedented threat while governed by a demonstrably corrupt cadre of progressive communist democrats.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve