I know what you're thinking

By Capt. Fogg

My first thought was: I've seen this scenario in some cheesy Tom Cruise infected Sci-Fi movie. Apparently that thought occurred to the Nature.com editorial staff as well. The Department of Homeland Security it would seem, is testing a system to detect malicious thoughts. No really.

They call it Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST) because that's what government departments do with their doings, lest clear speech shed clear light. They make up acronyms that disguise the tunnels they dig under the foundations of liberty, but I digress. The technology purports to identify individuals who are planning to blow things up or have "malintent" as they say in the dialect.

Like a more traditional polygraph, FAST measures heart rates, among other things. Heart rates respiration and perspiration go up, after all when you're nervous about the bomb in your shorts or wishing you could throttle some thick-skull TSA twit as he gives you grief over an aspirin in your pants pocket that shows up on a scanner and starts groping you for explosives as you put your hands over your head in abject submission. Hell I'm sure I'd set off all kinds of alarm bells right now just thinking of how I've so often been treated as a felon on his way into the penitentiary instead of a tired traveler trying to get home.

I have no idea about what else this electro-mechanical night club bouncer measures and I'm not sure it invades any privacy that hasn't already been taken away by the cowardly traitors who passed the "Patriot" Act. I'm too lazy and too unwilling to provoke myself into another Lewis Black style tantrum to read the " Privacy Impact Assessment" our bureaucratic brethren at DHS have given us. I'll leave that to you. Besides my loathing of people who seem to exist only for the purpose of inserting that fly-blown and putrid metaphor into every sentence, it was written, most revealingly, by someone any German speaker will recognize as the Devil himself: Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy offer at the DHS under George W. Bush.

Does it work any better than the Polygraph does at detecting the evasions of sociopaths? It would have to, since those tend to be the people we're looking to put on no-fly lists and of course we won't have the results interpreted by a seasoned professional, but rather someone who was promoted from K-Mart security officer last week.

No, it's the stuff of B movies or sarcastic Dr. Strangelove sequels or even Orwell novels, but perhaps we've lost the ability even to see what the politics of fear has done to us in our cringing, cowardly new century.

To be a conservative

By Capt. Fogg

I don't want to speculate about how many of our publicly educated young people know who John Wilkes Booth was, but I'll bet that far fewer recognize the Englishman, John Wilkes and know about the part he played, by proxy, in shaping the fourth amendment to our Constitution. Because Wilkes ran afoul of the Crown by openly criticizing a treaty signed by George III, a general warrant for his arrest led to his apprehension along with the publishers of the paper that printed his argument. Wilkes had popular support in England and in the colonies and the notion that the King could authorize upon his own authority and without challenge from Parliament or the independent judiciary, a general search or fishing expedition to seek anything they could use to squelch protest, made him a bit of a hero and martyr.

We are no longer a group of colonies. We are no longer the nation that grew out of those colonies and we have another George who insists on the right to unrestricted, unsupervised and secret investigations without court oversight or any scrutiny at all. We are no longer a nation that objects. We are no longer a nation that values individual liberty to the point where we can accept the slight risk of crime rather than the security of a police state.

We've had so many examples of warrantless wiretapping and other acts of indignity without probable cause that anyone who doesn't know, isn't someone who cares, but documents appearing in the Washington Post show how the FBI can and has been indulging in espionage of "suspects" without having to explain who they are or why they are or what they are suspected of by what evidence to any court. Only the Federal government knows for sure; a Federal government that loves secrets and fights to keep them.

That they can use whatever they find for whatever purpose they wish seems to be evident in the case of Eliot Spitzer and the use of his ATM records to show that he cheated on his wife. I'm sure nobody believes that information was obtained for such purposes and we're just too delighted by the circus to care. If we don't send to know for whom the wires are tapped, the e-mails read, the bank records examined, the mail box inspected, the credit card receipts tallied, it none the less tolls for us.

If we're good subjects, the King will be good to us and protect us. He may or may not tell us what he's protecting us from or how or why, but we can trust George or pay the cost of being adjudged, like John Wilkes, a Liberal, a traitor, an enemy of the state.

Which side are you on, Mr. conservative?

Cross posted from Human Voices

Viva Cuba Libre!

By Capt. Fogg

Bush began to talk about the "blessings of Liberty" like some Chatty Kathy Doll when he heard of Fidel Castro's resignation as President of Cuba. He launched into a typically rambling riff about unfair elections and people rotting in prisons while the gods of hypocrisy smiled down on him like a proud parent upon a favored child.

No, I'm not a fan of Fidel, but many Cubans are and they see him as having provided a better life than they had when Cuba was run by a feudal corruptocracy owned by American interests, legitimate and otherwise. Many Cubans see their financial problems as something done to them out of spite and malice by our fair country and indeed our policies have hurt the common man while strengthening Castro and his party. I would hardly be surprised to hear that many Cuban patriots wonder if those blessings of liberty Bush extols are like the blessings we have afforded other countries whose resources we crave and the "fair" elections he describes would be like those we have squashed or rigged in places like Iran and Latin America and Vietnam.

It's not that I'm sad to see him step down and I'm hopeful that Cuba will be allowed to rejoin the world and its economy in my lifetime. As a lifelong fan of Earnest Hemingway I would love to follow his route from Key West to Cuba in my own boat and be free to return home without reprisals from my own government. Who knows? It may happen, but not now. The embargo will remain in place, no move toward reconciliation will be made, for despite the rapturous rhetoric about liberty, it's still all about the nationalization of US owned assets that offended our sense of entitlement so badly over 50 years ago. Cubans in Miami may be cheering Viva Cuba Libre, but in Washington the unheard prayer is Viva Coca Cola and Viva Cosa Nostra.

Cross posted from Human Voices

Radar love

By Capt. Fogg

"I don't know whether Arizonans want to be policed by cameras, It smacks of Big Brother to me."

said Senate Transportation Chairman Ron Gould of the plan to install photo radar in that state. It smacks of revenue enhancement to me. Most Americans aren't familiar with the apparatus that takes pictures of passing cars' license plates if they're exceeding the speed limit. They're common and a nuisance in England, but that's a country of narrow winding roads with blind corners every hundred yards or so. Arizona is a different story.

In my small town in Florida, some cameras have been installed at intersections to prevent the frequent (or so they say) running of red lights. Rear end collisions have risen and the popular suspicion is that the private company that manages the system has shortened the yellow light time because they get a cut of the fines. There is much credible evidence from studies not sponsored by those with a vested interest in enforcement, that speed limits aren't directly related to accident rates; it's more important that traffic move at a uniform speed. Strict enforcement tends to produce a greater disparity between the 15% or 20% who obey ( and have a higher percentage of accidents) and the vast majority that do not and thus it creates a more dangerous road. The prevalence of radar detectors ensures that that majority will continue to seek their own speed but will have to speed up and slow down constantly.

The assurance that we will be electronically monitored for our own safety is more transparent than most windshields - it's all about making up for revenue shortfalls. It's about extracting more money from the people without having to call it a tax.

The Arizona project was tested in Scottsdale and An Arizona State University professor who studied the results says that it reduced speeding and accident rates. No thought was given to the drivers who simply took an alternate route to avoid it and needless to say, I don't trust his figures. Even if it were true, the thought of being monitored in my actions by a soulless machine is enough to bring out the libertarian in me and I'm sure Arizonans will feel the same way. The real question is do we have any choice but to submit to the rules of those who make a living regulating us?

Cross posted from Human voices

Huckabee's Church of America

By Capt Fogg

The trouble with molding a society or running a government "according to God's standards" as Mike Huckabee says we should do, is that God's standards can only be determined by people like Mike Huckabee, and Mike Huckabee, like most of mankind, has his own God. I don't think he has Krishna in mind, or Vishnu, much less the God of whom Mohammad spoke or even the God who commands us to exterminate certain nations, cast out our non-Jewish wives and refrain upon pain of death from using certain kinds of thread in out clothing or eating a cheeseburger.

Of course Huckabee is really talking about amending the constitution, not to institute the 600 some odd Biblical commandments that he and his chuckleheaded Christian cheerleaders ignore as a fundamental precept of their religion, but to solicit the support of the fundamentalist barbarians who base their "values" on the unchristian and non-Christian contempt for homosexuals and are so dependent upon polyester preachers withTeflon tongues that they think the Bible prohibits abortion.

Opening my first e-mail this morning was like entering some gas station bathroom to find the toilet un-flushed and clogged. FAITH. FAMILY. FREEDOM was the headline, followed by

Mike Huckabee a Man of Principle for President.

“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”

I could hardly read the rest of it. Needless to say, I don't think a government directed by faith is anything less than a tyranny of the faithful. I don't think we need a government intruding into family matters or a government to tell us who we may or may not include in our families and if we have that, we have no freedom at all.

I'm sure I don't have to explain that the foundation of the enlightenment philosophy that produced our form of government was that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were fundamental rights and not privileges or favors bestowed upon us by God's chosen king. The latter of course was the way the world was run in the 18th century and that was supported by Biblical authority. It was a step away from the Biblical and ecclesiastical authority we took by assigning sovereignty to the people and not to the often half-witted and corrupt interpreters of "faith" like Mike Huckabee and to allow our Constitution to be twisted so as to pretend the American Revolution never occurred and the government and its Church were once again as one.

"I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards,"

said Mike speaking as though he were God's own mouthpiece. Mike Huckabee would rather have us governed by an oligarchy of Baptists and bibles with their peremptory ideas about God than by the will of the citizens. Is there anything further from the essence of democracy than Huckabee's vision?

"We need a President that thinks about all the people"

says the screed floating in my in-box, and I agree. All the people are not fundamentalists however, much less Christians of any sort. Some of us have different gods, different ideas and all of us are guaranteed the right to have them.

"Mike Huckabee is attacked by the New York Times because when asked about evolution he states "I believe that creation has a Creator."

Not so; he's attacked by those who don't want science suppressed and superstition installed.

"More than 20 years ago Mike Huckabee determined to put his faith and conviction into action fighting for the American Family and their Freedom to Pursue Happiness"

except when that happiness includes things Huckabee thinks his personal god dislikes or when that family doesn't met Huckabee's standards. Huckabee and his pet god will tell you what freedom you're allowed and indeed it will be little enough of it unless those of us who really value liberty and want a government that is us rather than them, send Mike a message of contempt by voting for a candidate that represents our traditional, constitutional values and not a church.

Cross posted from Human Voices

Freedom and the Hormuz hoax

By Capt. Fogg

When I was in grammar school, polls showed that the vast majority of Americans trusted the government, but how far we have come when the first reaction to reports of a few Iranian speed boats harassing a US Navy fleet is that the President is telling another lie to start yet another disastrous war. Do we really know where those little boats came from or who was in them other than that there were some distorted recordings of someone grumbling in Farsi?

We do know that Bush continues to press for further and more substantial confrontation even though his insistence that there is an active nuclear bomb producing facility in Iran has been severely weakened. Bush said today in Abu Dhabi, according to the New York Times, that Iran is threatening the security of the world and that the United States and Arab allies must join together to confront the danger ''before it's too late.'' Can we presume that too late means after Bush has lost the ability to open another front in his battle for Middle East dominance? Too late for what? Too late for whom? ''Iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terror,'' says Bush without any attempt to define terror. I'm not terrified of Iran, are you? I'm not inclined to credit his latest apocalyptic warnings, are you?

It seems as though Bush is now taking his crapulous argument to the world, now that he has three quarters of us pressing for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and an end to his "freedom agenda." It's nice to see that he finally realizes the fact, but I'm sure he's unaware of the irony wafting through the high priced atmosphere of The Emirates Palace, a three billion dollar playground for the ultra rich aristocracy, as he says to the Iraqi people ''You have made your choice for democracy and have stood firm'' as though the Iraqi people now living in ruins or forced into exile hadn't had their current plight violently forced upon them.

''Democracy is the only form of government that treats individuals with the dignity and equality that is their right''

said he to the silk robed absolute monarchs he calls friends and allies; said he about an environment in which the few elections that have occurred tend to reflect a widespread support of militant theocracy and Sharia Law with its beheadings and stonings.

''We know from experience that democracy is the only system of government that yields lasting peace and stability,''

said he in ignorance of experience and as though democracy were a system of government and not a broad concept impossible to implement without the institutions that have been inimical to him and his party for decades.

There may be a few of us who buy into the current script of Bush's Opera Buffo wherein the last 7 years have been about advancing the cause of freedom and democracy in places where the oil lies thick and deep under the hot sand. The rest of us are waiting and watching his hands as our future shuttles like a dried pea across the polished mahogany table, from one walnut shell to the next.

Cross posted from Human Voices

Hold that thought

By Capt. Fogg

"The Terrorism Act and the restrictions it imposes on the personal freedom exist to protect this country, its interests here and abroad, its citizens, and those who visit here. Its protection embraces us all. Its restrictions apply to us all, whatever our personal religious or political beliefs."

said the judge. I'd be ashamed of a country where this kind of cringing cowardice had us abandoning the bulwarks of liberty and rushing to the safety of a smothering police state. I'm glad it was England and not the US who sentenced a 23 year old shop assistant for thought crimes. Samina Malik was given a 9 month suspended jail sentence this week in London for scribbling "terrorist" poems on cash register receipts. It would have gone much harder on her if she had had "terrorist objects" although she did have "information about weapons" and had associated on line with unsavory characters. In other words she did nothing wrong, but there's evidence she fantasized about it. I wonder how such a law might treat people who read the "left Behind" books and dream about Jesus casting Jews into fire pits.


In a way it reminds me of some of the reasons the American colonies got fed up with England, it was a tar-pit of safety traps and brier patch of God appointed kings, just as some would have the USA become today. For at least this fleeting moment in America, I can have weapons, information about weapons, write poems and paint pictures about any damn thing I please and have freedom to assemble peacefully whether it please the whimpering, pants-wetting citizens or their protest fearing government. In fact if "terrorism" consists in subduing people through fear, then Great Britain's Terrorism Act fits the description quite well.

Ms. Malik may disgust me. Her ideas may make my trigger finger itch, but I will not peacefully submit to any laws such as the UK's Terrorism Act. Shame on them.

cross posted from Human Voices

Four Freedoms

by Capt. Fogg

Thanksgiving - another festival of myth and self-delusion; a day when we overeat and tell ourselves we're thankful to some supernatural entity who has favored us with liberty. I'm often less thankful for friends and family on such days than I otherwise would be and certainly on those times when I reflect on Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms rendered forever into kitsch by Norman Rockwell, I'm more fearful than thankful for how they are being taken away and given to the unaccountable and powerful.

Freedom of speech isn't something something I feel grateful for as much as something I demand and am guaranteed as my birthright. We still have it, but the ability of the ruling corporations to bury our words under an ocean of propaganda increases.

Freedom of every person to worship in his own way, has always been conditional although guaranteed and every person who adheres to an unpopular religion or no religion at all knows it. It isn't the government, even this government, leading the crusade for Christian supremacy, but the private agents of that government: corporate religion. Year after year, it seems that our ability to resist acknowledging a god we don't believe in declines and the fight to incorporate religious taboos into our laws continues.

Freedom from want isn't something guaranteed us, it's something we may or may not have and it's something our government has fought to excuse itself of providing for, whether it's want of food and shelter, medical care or enough income to support us if we're too old or sick to work.

Freedom from fear in a culture of fear is a personal thing. One can choose to ignore the panic pushers and fear mongers in the government. One can choose not to be afraid of the bottomless corruption, incompetence and dishonesty of our government; of the swashbuckling information gatherers who tap your phones, read your mail and track your movements and your finances and your purchases electronically almost at will. It gets harder every day. Many of us live in dread of injury or sickness, knowing they can't pay the increasingly huge costs of treatment and medicine; knowing that they may not even have the benefit of bankruptcy protection in a land where the laws are written by the credit card companies and the corporate hospitals and drug producers. Many of us fear that the wanton borrowing, reckless warfare and corporate welfare and shifting of the tax burden will erase any freedom from want our grandchildren might have.

We don't have the freedom of being able to elect a government that considers itself answerable or accountable, we don't have the freedom to be left alone in our homes or in our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness in the expectation that we're not constant suspects for crimes yet to be committed. We have an increasingly disdainful government of which we are increasingly afraid.

We don't have the freedom of information we used to. We don't have a government that feels obligated to allow us to know their mistakes, failures or crimes. We have a government that will ignore us and the courts and refuse to tell us who is making policy. We have a growing possibility that the government can declare us outlaw without telling anyone why; to make us disappear without a trace, to be tortured and imprisoned indefinitely. We don't have the freedom from reckless and extravagant government expenditures or hand-overs of our property. We don't have the benefit of knowing that the people who are supposed to watch over us are accountable to us and our courts and not to private and perhaps secret organizations, whether those people be police, jailers, soldiers or intelligence agents. The more cynical of use have begun to doubt that we even have the freedom to elect people to at least pretend to be public employees and not representatives of vast corporate interests. The more paranoid fear that next November we will be told to be thankful that George will remain in office to protect us from fear and want and terrorists.

Cross posted from Human Voices

Out of the car, long hair!

by Capt. Fogg

That phrase still makes me cringe. Although my hair is short and gray, I still remember when hair not much longer than President Carter later wore in the White House could get you into trouble and sometimes big trouble. In the day of H.R. Haldeman style brush cuts, hair was the enemy of the state and righteous right wing Republicans for social conformity were all for establishing legal limits for male hair length. Even Disney refused entry into fantasy parks to anyone whose hair suggested psychedelic subversiveness. It wasn't even an infrequent thing for a young business executive in a brand new 1969 Brooks Brothers suit and neatly trimmed moustache to be sneered and snickered at and told to "get a job" while walking down Chicago's LaSalle Street.

That was then. Today it's about young slackers wearing enormous clown pants so low their butt cracks and boxer shorts peek nauseatingly at anyone following in their wake. Of course such sartorial protests against conformity are in themselves an equal and opposite conformity and yet advocates of each polarity never seem to understand the futility. Yes, this affectation has already lasted longer than hippie hair or tail fins or Nehru shirts or shoulder pads and seems to be associated more with sociopathic criminality than with hallucinatory enlightenment and world peace, but the US is moving inexorably toward a rabble-driven culture. Language, music and clothing are all part of it. Wearing your hat backwards or exposing your ass to sunburn above a tent of baggy cloth bigger than a central Asiatic Yurt is a social statement as impenetrable to me as M theory or support for George Bush, but legislating against it as a way to make society "the way it used to be" is equally as stupid and contemptuous of freedom.

Riviera Beach, Florida Mayor Thomas Masters is old enough but not smart enough to know better. He wants to make baggy pants illegal and he wants to do it by putting a referendum on the ballot next year. Although the courts have regularly shot down efforts by city councils to legislate clothing and hair length, Masters thinks he can get away with it if the law results from"the will of the voters." The ACLU thinks otherwise. "A referendum doesn't trump the Constitution," says James Green, attorney from the Palm Beach chapter.

Masters (who's also a preacher) and his committee think it's about bringing morality back to the community, although like the Republicans, he thinks morality is another word for the nostalgic authoritarian fantasies of bible pounders. Morality, under this adventure, would be served by jail sentences of up to 60 days for fashion crimes, just as morality undoubtedly has been served by the swing back to shorter hair.

Sorry Tom, what would be served is gang membership, as the folks the young baggy pants offenders will meet in jail aren't going to steer them toward careers in investment banking even if the prison environment does lead them to pull their pants up a little higher.

"what you in for kid?" "Um . . . baggy pants."

I expect that any such exchange is not going to lead toward the prissy church lady morality Masters has in mind, but if there's any point to this at all, it's that nobody ever learns and fixing stupid is as hopeless as it ever was.