CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by Milan Adams via Preppgroup,

The following investigation contains verified facts, classified document references, and eyewitness testimony that some readers may find deeply disturbing. We have cross-referenced all statistical claims with official government disclosures, Freedom of Information Act releases, and whistleblower documentation. However, certain programs referenced operate under classifications beyond public scrutiny, and specific capabilities described remain officially denied by the agencies named. The author has chosen to present this material without the sanitizing filter of institutional caution. Reader discretion is advised—not for graphic content, but for the psychological impact of recognizing one’s own position within the architecture described. What follows is not conspiracy theory. It is Tuesday. It is your morning commute. It is the air you breathe.

Your bedroom has been listening for years. Not metaphorically—quite literally. While you slept, while you loved, while you whispered secrets to partners in the dark, the devices you invited inside for “convenience” were recording, analyzing, transmitting. That smart speaker on your nightstand heard you breathe. Your WiFi router mapped your movements through walls. The phone charging beside your pillow tracked your REM cycles, your midnight tossing, your 3 AM anxieties. All of it flowed through fiber optic veins into climate-controlled bunkers where analysts sift through domestic lives like archaeologists studying extinct species—except you’re very much alive, still walking, still paying monthly subscriptions for the privilege of being monitored.

This is the unvarnished reality of existence in 2026: privacy didn’t merely erode—it was systematically dismantled, commodified, and fed into machine learning systems that predict your behavior before you conceive the thought.

Eight billion souls now exist beneath an invisible dome of perpetual observation, each breath monitored, each heartbeat catalogued, each flicker of dissent intercepted before consciousness fully forms it.

Let’s examine the architecture of this prison with clear eyes:

•  4.9 million CCTV cameras surveil the United Kingdom alone - one mechanical eye for every eleven humans

•  300+ times the average Londoner is captured on camera during a routine commute

•  160 million license plate reads logged annually in the United States, creating travel histories precise enough to reconstruct infidelity, political meetings, religious observance, medical visits

•  0 - the number of ways to effectively opt out

Numbness serves the system.

These figures are designed to anaesthetize, to render horror mundane through sheer scale. So consider instead the texture of living under permanent scrutiny.

Morning breaks pre-monitored. Smart mattresses—marketed innocuously for “sleep optimization”—have already transmitted heart rate variability, respiratory patterns, sexual activity frequency, and parasympathetic nervous system indicators to cloud servers before your feet touch the floor. Bathroom scales identify you by weight distribution patterns as unique as genetic codes. Toothbrushes log duration and technique. Coffee makers timestamp your caffeine consumption. Refrigerators track caloric intake and dietary restrictions. Each data point seems trivial in isolation. Combined, they construct behavioral predictions accurate enough to anticipate your mood, your destination, your risk level before you’ve consciously decided to leave the house.

By 8:47 AM, probability calculations assess your psychological state. Predictive models anticipate where you’ll travel. Risk scores fluctuate based on deviations from your statistical norms—sleeping longer suggesting depression markers, skipping breakfast indicating financial stress, checking news before social media revealing political engagement levels.

Step outside and the grid tightens. Modern vehicles contain fifty to one hundred microprocessors, three hundred-plus sensors, and mandatory cellular connectivity that transforms automobiles into mobile surveillance platforms. Event Data Recorders capture speed, braking force, seatbelt usage, steering angle, and G-forces thirty seconds preceding any “incident”—though incident remains deliberately undefined, and data retrieval requires neither warrant nor notification in most jurisdictions. Drive through a toll booth, pass a traffic camera, park in a monitored lot, and you’ve added coordinates to a permanent travel log reconstructing your movements across years.

Public transit offers no refuge. Facial recognition payment systems in Moscow, Shenzhen, and expanding “democratic” pilot programs process biometric identities faster than card swipes, logging timestamps and travel patterns into permanent archives. London’s Oyster cards create movement histories retrievable by law enforcement without judicial oversight. WiFi tracking in subway stations identifies phones despite WiFi appearing “disabled”—devices emit probe requests every forty to one hundred milliseconds, broadcasting unique MAC addresses that create location trails accurate to meters.

Arrive at work and enter the observation laboratory. Keycard entry logs timestamps and precise locations. Computer systems record keystroke dynamics—typing rhythms as identifying as handwritten signatures. Corporate networks proxy all traffic through monitoring systems capturing URL visits, message content, download activity, duration metrics. Video analytics perform gait analysis, identifying individuals by walking patterns even when faces remain obscured. Elevator weight sensors combined with camera footage determine occupancy and identity.

Lunch breaks generate surveillance gold. Mobile payment apps—Venmo, Cash App, Apple Pay—create financial surveillance networks exceeding any tax authority’s historical capabilities, documenting transactions, social networks, relationship intimacy levels. Location data harvested from apps with “background refresh” capabilities reveals restaurant choices, duration of stays, table companions, subsequent destinations. Pharmacy visits trigger health condition flags. Political rally attendance generates risk score adjustments.

Return home to observation posts you installed voluntarily. Smart doorbells—Ring, Nest, Arlo—record four hundred million video clips monthly, creating neighborhood surveillance networks accessible to 2,014 police departments through “partnership” agreements requiring neither warrant nor homeowner consent. Amazon’s Neighbors app encourages residents to flag “suspicious” individuals—often coded language for racial profiling—feeding machine learning systems training data on human suspicion patterns.

Domestic spaces have transformed into comprehensive sensor networks. Smart speakers record ambient audio during “wake word” activation, with documented cases of accidental activation and human contractor review of private conversations including intimate moments and medical discussions. Smart thermostats track occupancy patterns, energy usage revealing daily schedules. Smart locks record entry and exit patterns shared with “authorized partners” including law enforcement. Smart appliances monitor usage patterns and “anomalous behavior.”

Television watches back. Samsung, LG, and Vizio models collect viewing habits, search queries, voice commands, and in documented cases transmit screenshots of displayed content every second. Streaming services build psychological profiles from consumption patterns—depression indicators from binge-watching metrics, political orientation from documentary selections, cognitive patterns from pause and rewind behaviors.

Even sleep provides no darkness. Trackers monitor REM cycles, apnea episodes, restlessness. Smart home systems adjust temperatures based on detected occupancy. Security systems log movement patterns. And in classified facilities processing daily harvests, quantum computers decrypt yesterday’s “secure” communications, correlate metadata patterns, construct association maps linking you to contacts of contacts, predict behaviors not yet conceived.

The smartphone remains surveillance engineering’s crowning achievement. Sixty-three percent of humanity carries tracking beacons exceeding anything totalitarian regimes of previous centuries imagined. GPS provides location within three meters. Accelerometers reveal physical activity, health status, emotional state through movement patterns. Gyroscopes map spatial orientation. Barometers calculate altitude changes identifying building floors. Microphones activate remotely without indicator lights—Snowden’s disclosures confirmed this capability. Cameras prove similarly accessible. Bluetooth scans identify nearby devices creating social network maps. WiFi mapping enables indoor positioning accurate to one to two meters.

Apps transform these sensors into comprehensive surveillance tools. Weather apps sell location permissions to data brokers. Flashlight apps access cameras and microphones as documented malware vectors. Social media harvests contact lists, message content, photo metadata. Navigation apps log every destination, route, duration, speed. Dating apps reveal intimate preferences, location patterns, communication content. Fitness apps transmit health data to insurance providers and employers. Banking apps create financial surveillance networks. Every “free” service monetizes behavioral prediction.

Encryption offers theater, not protection. PRISM and upstream collection programs—XKEYSCORE, TEMPORA, MUSCULAR—operate at infrastructure levels tapping fiber optic cables, compelling corporate cooperation through National Security Letters (gag-ordered demands preventing disclosure), and storing encrypted communications for future decryption when quantum computing renders current standards obsolete. Utah’s NSA Data Center processes yottabytes—storage capacity so vast it could contain all human communication for millennia.

“Incidental collection”—the euphemism for capturing domestic communications during foreign surveillance—creates permanent records subject to “minimization procedures” requiring neither deletion nor notification. FBI “backdoor searches” of Section 702 collection data numbered 3.4 million queries in 2021 alone—warrantless searches of content collected without warrant.

Stingray devices—cell site simulators deployed by law enforcement nationwide—mimic cellular towers forcing all phones within range to connect and reveal International Mobile Subscriber Identity numbers, location data, communication metadata. Baltimore police admitted using Stingrays 4,300 times without warrants. The FBI requires agencies signing nondisclosure agreements before receiving devices—secrecy prioritized over constitutional protections.

Predictive policing algorithms—PredPol, HunchLab—claim to forecast crime locations. In practice, feedback loops emerge: policing data from over-policed neighborhoods trains algorithms predicting crime in those same neighborhoods, justifying continued over-policing. Risk assessment scores determine bail, sentencing, parole—algorithmic calculations of “dangerousness” based on demographic correlations rather than individual behavior, encoding systemic bias into mathematical objectivity.

Social media operates as voluntary confession on industrial scale. Facebook’s 2012 “emotional contagion” experiment manipulated 689,003 users’ news feeds to study mood alteration. Twitter creates influence maps identifying “disruptors.” Instagram’s image recognition catalogs objects, locations, relationships. TikTok’s data collection—including keystroke patterns and clipboard content—raises national security concerns while demonstrating surveillance capitalism’s global reach.

The “Internet of Things” completes domestic colonization. Smart mattresses, toilets, mirrors, windows—all feeding data streams into centralized processing. DNA testing services—23andMe, AncestryDNA, GEDmatch—have provided law enforcement access to genetic profiles of millions who never consented to law enforcement use. Familial searching creates genetic surveillance networks implicating entire family lines. China’s compulsory DNA collection from Uyghur populations represents ethnic surveillance at the genomic level.

Financial surveillance operates through Suspicious Activity Reports requiring banks to report transactions exceeding $10,000 and increasingly patterns below thresholds. The Bank Secrecy Act and PATRIOT Act created financial tracking infrastructure monitoring every significant transaction. Cryptocurrency exchanges now require identity verification linking blockchain to real identities. The “war on cash” promotes digital payments creating comprehensive spending records.

Biometric databases expand relentlessly. India’s Aadhaar contains 1.3 billion citizens’ fingerprints, iris scans, facial photographs. China’s national biometric database integrates facial recognition, DNA, voiceprints, gait analysis. The FBI’s Next Generation Identification contains 117 million fingerprints, 52 million facial images.

Historical “conspiracy theories” proved insufficiently paranoid. Documents confirm: MKULTRA’s mind control experiments (1953-1973) involving unwitting subjects. COINTELPRO’s surveillance and disruption of political organizations (1956-1971). Operation CHAOS’s CIA monitoring of domestic anti-war activists. The FBI’s blackmail of Martin Luther King Jr. The NSA’s LOVEINT—analysts using surveillance to stalk romantic interests.

Neuroweapons research explores “remote influencing”—microwave auditory effects (the “Frey effect”), electromagnetic field manipulation, directed energy systems. Whether deployed or merely researched, such capabilities blur boundaries between physical and psychological warfare.

Corporate-state fusion creates totalitarian infrastructure without totalitarian intent. Data brokers—Acxiom, Experian, LexisNexis, Palantir—compile thousands of data points per individual, selling comprehensive profiles to government agencies, employers, insurers, political campaigns.

Opting out proves functionally impossible. Living without identification excludes participation in financial systems, housing, employment, healthcare. “Dumb” phones still connect to cellular networks providing location tracking. Cash transactions face increasing restrictions.

Psychological impacts manifest regardless of awareness. Self-censorship becomes automatic when surveillance is assumed. Creativity requires risk, experimentation, deviation—precisely behaviors flagged by predictive algorithms. Intimacy requires privacy; privacy requires confidence in unobserved space.

Legal protections lag technology by decades. The Third Party Doctrine holds that information conveyed to third parties receives no Fourth Amendment protection. Geofence warrants request location data for all devices in specified areas. Keyword warrants identify users who searched specific terms.

International frameworks offer no protection. The Five Eyes alliance shares intelligence while circumventing domestic restrictions. The 14 Eyes expands this network. Bilateral agreements create global surveillance networks.

Resistance strategies—encryption, anonymity networks, secure systems, Faraday cages, cash, offline communication—provide partial mitigation but fail against comprehensive surveillance. Metadata defeats content encryption. Device compromise defeats endpoint security.

Trajectory points toward total integration: central bank digital currencies enabling complete transaction monitoring; biometric ID requirements for internet access; AI-powered pre-crime prediction; social credit scoring integrating financial, social, political metrics; brain-computer interfaces creating direct neural monitoring.

What remains? Perhaps only recognition that surveillance stalking represents not aberration but essence—the logical culmination of technologies enabling observation, bureaucracies requiring information, power’s eternal expansion. Horror lies not in the watching but in the watched trading privacy for convenience, security, connection, entertainment. The panopticon’s genius was never the tower’s visibility but prisoners’ internalization of surveillance.

Somewhere in data centers humming with cooling fans and quantum processors, your profile grows more detailed, your predictions more precise, your autonomy more illusory. The cage was built while you slept. You woke inside it. You may never leave.

AND NOW… YOU ARE MARKED. PERMANENTLY.

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

The Houthi threats to shipping in the Red Sea and its chokepoint, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, have forced at least one oil tanker carrying Saudi crude to Asia to choose the much longer route through the Suez Canal, the Mediterranean, and around Africa.

The supertanker Olympic Luck, partially laden with Saudi crude at Yanbu on the Red Sea, transited the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean late on Sunday, according to shipping data monitored by Bloomberg.

The U-turn from Bab el-Mandeb indicates that some tanker owners aren’t willing to risk crossing southward into the Arabian Sea on the much shorter route to Asia, as the Iran-aligned Houthis have threatened – and struck – Saudi tankers in the Red Sea in recent days.

The Greece-flagged Greece-owned Olympic Luck is signaling an unspecified location in Asia, according to shipping fixtures seen by Bloomberg.

Other tankers continue to transit the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, but in numbers that are the lowest in months, various ship-tracking services showed this weekend.

Traffic through Bab el-Mandeb has materially slowed, and some vessel owners have their tankers move northward in the Red Sea toward the Suez Canal. The Suez-Africa route to Asia makes the journey about a month longer than if tankers travel through Bab el-Mandeb.

Last week, a Denmark-flagged oil and chemical products tanker, the Torm Innovation, turned away from Bab el-Mandeb and moved north toward the Suez Canal. The tanker, which had loaded products at Yanbu, was in the East Mediterranean early on Monday, shipping data on MarineTraffic showed.

Despite the reduced traffic through Bab el-Mandeb, “Saudi crude has not stopped moving. It has bifurcated,” maritime intelligence firm Windward said on Sunday.

“Yanbu port has transitioned to entirely AIS-dark tanker operations at berth as vessels shield against a Houthi hit list,” it added.

Saudi Arabia has established a working alternative export route via the SUMED pipeline in Egypt and around the Cape of Good Hope in Africa, adding cost and voyage time but demonstrating the market’s adaptability, Windward noted.

Chinese-linked cargo continues transiting Bab al-Mandeb under the Houthis’ established carve-out, the firm said.

By Herman Trabish of UtilityDive,Last month, protesters angry over high electricity costs disrupted a Las Vegas conference of executives for the nation’s biggest investor-owned utilities — a vivid example of growing public outrage that has forced the industry to again defend their legally guaranteed profit margins. 

As affordability concerns increase political pressure, several states have taken steps to lower utilities’ return on equity, either through regulatory or legislative action. Consumer advocates say these measures are long overdue, while utilities say suppressing their ROE could impact their credit rating, which would carry over into higher customer costs. 

It is possible the combination of how vital electricity has become in the 21st century and its rising cost in the 2020s could lead to a turning point at this moment in the acceptable level of utility profits, experts told Utility Dive.

In a potentially pivotal and soon-to-be-decided Maryland rate case, utility executives said the matter should be left to state regulators, while consumer advocates said regulators should lower the utility’s profits closer to its costs for serving its customers. 

Utilities in the hot seat

Affordability has become a more pressing issue as national average electricity prices have outpaced inflation, and many people blame utilities. A March Pew Research poll found 85% of respondents saw utilities “wanting to make more money” as a reason for increased home energy prices. 

The impact of profits is not only a matter of public perception. According to a series of reports from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, prices charged by investor-owned utilities, which represent about 70% of national electricity sales, are higher and have risen faster compared to public utilities without strong profit motives.

The reports also found that IOU revenue requests are higher than they have been in decades – totaling $18 billion last year – and that over the past five years, regulators have approved, on average, 64% of the dollar value of these increases, compared to an average of 52% over the previous two decades. 

Energy affordability concerns have also merged with popular backlash to data centers and their huge resource demands. The resentment has stirred up a large, receptive audience for consumer advocates questioning the regulated utility profit model.

Utility profit margins are set by regulators around the country and averaged 9.7% in 2025, while fluctuating from 9% to 10.5%, according to Synapse Energy Economics. Unregulated economic sectors have ROEs within, far above, and far below that range, but do not have the obligation to serve and are not required to seek approval for their profits like regulated utilities, according to the Regulatory Assistance Project’s 2016 Guide. 

ROEs are a matter for state utility regulators, said Dani Marx, spokesperson for the Edison Electric Institute, the trade group for U.S. investor-owned utilities and utility holding groups.

“Independent state regulators work through open and transparent proceedings to evaluate infrastructure needs,” Marx said. 

Utility infrastructure often includes “an equity component, including a return on equity, to attract sufficient investment to fund these projects,” she added.

In December, California regulators lowered the ROE for its three largest investor-owned utilities by 0.3 percentage points each. Several states, including Pennsylvania, are weighing legislation to tie utility ROE to 10-year Treasury bonds, among other reforms.

ROEs get political

Some states, like Maryland, have begun chipping away at utility returns by passing laws requiring power companies to join regional transmission organizations in order to do away with so-called adder – additional ROE the company earns on transmission for being a voluntary member. 

Meanwhile, state leaders in Virginia, New Jersey and Pennsylvania have asked regulators to consider rate requests carefully, signaling they may take more direct action in rate cases. 

The issue has also gained momentum in Congress. Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, has gathered more than 20 cosponsors for the Lowering Utility Bills Act (H.R. 8568). The bill would require a utility to “calculate the return on equity at the lowest return on equity in an established range of reasonableness” determined by its regulators.

Reducing utility profits “saves all electricity users money on their bills,” said Mark Ellis, a former chief of strategy and economics with Sempra who now works as an independent consultant. 

In his opinion, today’s utility profits are “an unjust enrichment of utility investors at the expense of customers,” he added.

Utilities argue their profit margins must be set high enough to attract capital at low interest rates, which saves their ratepayers money in the long run while allowing utilities to maintain grid reliability.

If a utility’s authorized returns “are below those of comparable utilities, its ability to attract capital is at risk,” said Robert Leming, vice president of regulatory policy and strategy for Pepco Holdings, which is now engaged in a regulatory debate over profits at the Public Service Commission of Maryland.

Utilities need that capital “to provide safe and reliable service for customers,” he told Utility Dive in an interview.

An ROE case study

Some say the AI boom has introduced bottlenecks that are forcing utilities to consider alternatives to building, but others worry that the opposite is happening, and the hype cycle is fueling ill-conceived spending that will be on ratepayer bills for decades.

The current Pepco rate case offers an illustrative example of the state of the debate. The utility has proposed an ROE of 10.5%, an increase from its current 9.5% allowed ROE. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel has proposed 7.7%.

The head of the OPC, David Lapp, told Utility Dive that many of the utility’s recent infrastructure investments could have been deferred. 

“Pepco is investing too much too fast and not in things that are cost effective and needed going forward,” Lapp said.

Pepco Holdings’ Leming disagreed. “Maryland’s ambitious climate and electrification goals require investment to modernize and upgrade the system,” he said.

Ellis, Lapp and others see high utility ROEs as a perverse incentive because it biases utilities toward expensive investments that add to a utility’s base of financed costs that earn ROEs and increase rates.

In addition, Lapp argues Pepco’s ROE is “inflated” by a financial strategy called ”double leveraging,” involving Exelon Utilities, Pepco’s parent corporation and only investor.

OPC contends that Exelon’s lower cost debt is being used by Pepco as higher cost equity, allowing it to borrow more lower cost debt.

Double leveraging “is not illegal if regulators approve it,” Lapp said. But if Pepco counts Exelon’s debt as equity in its capital structure, it raises the total ROE and, as a result, customer rates, he added.

“Exelon’s role does not change Pepco’s ROE needs,” Pepco consultant Adrien McKenzie told Maryland commissioners. Equity to support Pepco operations “must be raised in the capital markets,” based on returns competitive with “risk-comparable alternatives,” he added.

If Exelon debt to be paid back in 10 years is invested by Pepco in 50-year assets, Exelon would not be reimbursed soon enough to meet its debt, Pepco’s Leming added.

To justify the proposed 10.5% ROE, McKenzie presented multiple quantitative analyses and “a proxy group of risk-comparable electric utilities.” Credit ratings for Pepco of Baa1 from Moody’s and A- from S&P were central to his conclusion, McKenzie testified.

“Rating agencies and potential debt investors tend to place significant emphasis on maintaining strong financial metrics,” McKenzie told the commission. And this emphasis on financial metrics and credit ratings is shared by equity investors, he added.

Pepco’s Leming told Utility Dive he is focused on utility operations.

“Affordability is one of Pepco’s top priorities right now,” he said. Recent rising rates are linked to investments that have made Pepco highly ranked for customer satisfaction, he added.

But Pepco must be adequately funded to meet today’s “unprecedented” demand with new infrastructure, Leming continued. “That underscores the importance of having a competitive ROE to attract capital,” he said.

Lapp said his focus is customers.

“Everyone agrees investors in utilities should have the opportunity to earn the same return as an entity with a comparable level of risk,” he said. “But Pepco’s proposed 10.5% ROE is unfair to customers because its cost of equity is not just a little bit less, but significantly less.”

A ruling on Pepco’s ROE is expected in August.

Finding solutions

Reducing ROE can in fact impact a utility’s credit quality. Several Connecticut utilities, including Eversource and Avangrid, saw their credit ratings downgraded by credit agencies citing an inconsistent and unsupportive regulatory environment.

But that impact can be offset, Ellis said. “Increasing the equity portion of the debt-equity ratio and lowering the ROE produces ratepayer savings” without significantly altering the utility’s credit ratings, he added.

Ellis is a proponent of “competitive direct equity” as the “structural and political solution,” he said. “It would replace administratively set ROEs with a supply and demand-determined cost of equity through a competitive auction that would fundamentally change the utility incentive structure,” he explained.

In today’s rate cases, ROE determination “is a charade that is not calculated consistently or accurately,” Ellis continued. “The utility says it should be 11% and the consumer advocate says it should be 9% and the regulators compromise at 10% and move to the next proceeding.”

Utilities are accustomed to obtaining satisfactory ROEs through rate cases adjudicated by their state regulators and have no widely proposed alternative political solution. They warn regulators that reducing working capital puts reliability at risk.

But utilities’ rate case filings, like Pepco’s, typically include complex formulas for calculating ROE that overwhelm regulators and conclude that the utility needs an ROE increase, said Karl Rabago, a former Texas utilities commissioner and a frequent rate case intervenor on behalf of consumers.

“The original focus on balancing cost-of-service and earnings anticipated regulators would substitute for the forces of competition, and that has been lost,” Rabago said.