Apocalypse Tomorrow??

I Don't Update This Enough...

2009-05-29T11:11:00.000-07:00

...but, I did find an interesting article in the New York Times online edition today:

Pentagon Plans New Arm to Wage Wars in Cyberspace

By DAVID E. SANGER and THOM SHANKER
Published: May 28, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/us/politics/29cyber.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon plans to create a new military command for cyberspace, administration officials said Thursday, stepping up preparations by the armed forces to conduct both offensive and defensive computer warfare.

The military command would complement a civilian effort to be announced by President Obama on Friday that would overhaul the way the United States safeguards its computer networks.

Mr. Obama, officials said, will announce the creation of a White House office — reporting to both the National Security Council and the National Economic Council — that will coordinate a multibillion-dollar effort to restrict access to government computers and protect systems that run the stock exchanges, clear global banking transactions and manage the air traffic control system.

White House officials say Mr. Obama has not yet been formally presented with the Pentagon plan. They said he would not discuss it Friday when he announced the creation of a White House office responsible for coordinating private-sector and government defenses against the thousands of cyberattacks mounted against the United States — largely by hackers but sometimes by foreign governments — every day.

(Click link, above, for full article.)

I find this interesting, espcially coupled with this:

U.S. Mission for Sci-Fi Writers: Imagine That
Novelists Plot the Future Of Homeland Security
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052104379.html

By David Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 22, 2009

The line between what's real and what's not is thin and shifting, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has decided to explore both sides. Boldly going where few government bureaucracies have gone before, the agency is enlisting the expertise of science fiction writers.
Crazy? This week down at the Reagan Building, the 2009 Homeland Security Science & Technology Stakeholders Conference has been going on. Instead of just another wonkish series of meetings and a trade show, with contractors hustling business around every corner, this felt at times more like a convention of futuristic yarn-spinners.

Onstage in the darkened amphitheater, a Washington police commander said he'd like to have Mr. Spock's instant access to information: At a disaster scene, he'd like to say, "Computer, what's the dosage on this medication?"

A federal research director fantasized about a cellphone that could simultaneously text and detect biochemical attacks. Multiple cellphones in a crowd would confirm and track the spread. The master of ceremonies for the week was Greg Bear, the sci-fi novelist whose book "Quantico" featured FBI agents battling a designer plague targeting specific ethnic groups.

"What if we had a black box that IDs DNA on the scene?" Bear asked a panel of firefighters and police officers. "Put a swab in the box. How long would it take us to do that? Would that be of interest to anybody here?"

"Absolutely!" said a police official from Fairfax County.

The dozen or so novelists sprinkled throughout the breakout sessions had camouflaged themselves in GS-conformist coats and ties, but they would have fit right in anyway. Science fiction writers tend to know a lot about science. And the ranks of federal and commercial R&D departments are stuffed with sci-fi fanatics.

(Click link, above, for full article.)

These two stories sparked my interest. When I first saw the Washington Post article, I thought, "How interesting; taking a page from Fahrenheit 451." But, it seems that, between asking creative minds to think stuff up and monitoring those who aren't with the program on the Internet - perhaps the last bastion of anonymity - that we are all in for more interference and surveillance from Big Brother and Big Business.

Tapped Out

2008-07-11T14:25:00.001-07:00

The following article appeared in the July 10th edition of The New York Times. Typographical editing (boldface, underlining) was done by me and did not appear in the original article. I did this to highlight important points.

WASHINGTON — The Senate gave final approval on Wednesday to a major expansion of the government’s surveillance powers, handing President Bush one more victory in a series of hard-fought clashes with Democrats over national security issues.
The measure, approved by a vote of 69 to 28, is the biggest revamping of federal surveillance law in 30 years. It includes a divisive element that Mr. Bush had deemed essential: legal immunity for the phone companies that cooperated in the National Security Agency wiretapping program he approved after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The vote came two and a half years after public disclosure of the wiretapping program set off a fierce national debate over the balance between protecting the country from another terrorist strike and ensuring civil liberties. The final outcome in Congress, which opponents of the surveillance measure had conceded for weeks, seemed almost anticlimactic in contrast.

Mr. Bush, appearing in the Rose Garden just after his return from Japan, called the vote “long overdue.” He promised to sign the measure into law quickly, saying it was critical to national security and showed that “even in an election year, we can come together and get important pieces of legislation passed.”

Even as his political stature has waned, Mr. Bush has managed to maintain his dominance on national security issues in a Democratic-led Congress. He has beat back efforts to cut troops and financing in Iraq, and he has won important victories on issues like interrogation tactics and military tribunals in the fight against terrorism.

Debate over the surveillance law was the one area where Democrats had held firm in opposition. House Democrats went so far as to allow a temporary surveillance measure to expire in February, leading to a five-month impasse and prompting accusations from Mr. Bush that the nation’s defenses against another strike by Al Qaeda had been weakened.

But in the end Mr. Bush won out, as administration officials helped forge a deal between Republican and Democratic leaders that included almost all the major elements the White House wanted. The measure gives the executive branch broader latitude in eavesdropping on people abroad and at home who it believes are tied to terrorism, and it reduces the role of a secret intelligence court in overseeing some operations.

Supporters maintained that the plan includes enough safeguards to protect Americans’ civil liberties, including reviews by several inspectors general. There is nothing to fear in the bill, said Senator Christopher S. Bond, the Missouri Republican who was a lead negotiator, “unless you have Al Qaeda on your speed dial.”

But some Democratic opponents saw the deal as “capitulation” to White House pressure by fellow Democrats.

“I urge my colleagues to stand up for the rule of law and defeat this bill,” Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said Wednesday as the outcome was all but assured.

The final plan, which overhauls the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed by Congress in 1978 in the wake of Watergate, reflected both political reality and legal practicality, supporters said.

Wiretapping orders approved by secret orders under the previous version of the surveillance law were set to begin expiring in August unless Congress acted. Heading into their political convention in Denver next month and on to the November Congressional elections, many Democrats were wary of handing the Republicans a potent political weapon.

The issue put Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, in a particularly precarious spot. He had long opposed giving legal immunity to the phone companies that took part in the N.S.A.’s wiretapping program, even threatening a filibuster during his run for the nomination. But on Wednesday, he ended up voting for what he called “an improved but imperfect bill” after backing a failed attempt earlier in the day to strip the immunity provision from the bill through an amendment.

Mr. Obama’s decision last month to reverse course angered some ardent supporters, who organized an Internet drive to influence his vote. And his position came to symbolize the continuing difficulties that Democrats have faced in striking a position on national security issues even against a weakened president. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, who had battled Mr. Obama for the nomination, voted against the bill.

Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, was campaigning in Ohio and did not vote, though he has consistently supported the immunity plan.
Support from key Democrats ensured passage of the measure.

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the intelligence committee and helped broker the deal, said modernizing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was essential to give intelligence officials the technology tools they need to deter another attack. But he said the plan “was made even more complicated by the president’s decision, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, to go outside of FISA rather than work with Congress to fix it.”

He was referring to the secret program approved by Mr. Bush weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks that allowed the N.S.A, in a sharp legal and operational shift, to wiretap the international communications of Americans suspected of links to Al Qaeda without first getting court orders. The program was disclosed in December 2005 by The New York Times.

As Congress repeatedly tried to find a legislative solution, the main stumbling block was Mr. Bush’s insistence on legal immunity for the phone companies. The program itself ended in January 2007, when the White House agreed to bring it under the auspices of the FISA court, but more than 40 lawsuits continued churning through federal courts, charging AT&T, Verizon and other major carriers with violating customers’ privacy by conducting wiretaps at the White House’s direction without court orders.

The final deal, which passed the House on June 20, effectively ends those lawsuits. It includes a narrow review by a district court to determine whether the companies being sued received formal requests or directives from the administration to take part in the program. The administration has already acknowledged those directives exist. Once such a finding is made, the lawsuits “shall be promptly dismissed,” the bill says. Republican leaders say they regard the process as a mere formality to protect the phone carriers from liability.

Lawyers involved in the suits against the phone companies promised to challenge the immunity provision in federal court.

“The law itself is a massive intrusion into the due process rights of all of the phone subscribers who would be a part of the suit,” said Bruce Afran, a New Jersey lawyer representing several hundred plaintiffs suing Verizon and other companies. “It is a violation of the separation of powers. It’s presidential election-year cowardice. The Democrats are afraid of looking weak on national security.”

The legislation also expands the government’s power to invoke emergency wiretapping procedures. While the N.S.A. would be allowed to seek court orders for broad groups of foreign targets, the law creates a new seven-day period for directing wiretaps at foreigners without a court order in “exigent” circumstances if government officials assert that important national security information would be lost. The law also expands to seven days, from three, the period for emergency wiretaps on Americans without a court order if the attorney general certifies there is probable cause to believe the target is linked to terrorism.

Democrats pointed to some concessions they had won. The final bill includes a reaffirmation that the FISA law is the “exclusive” means of conducting intelligence wiretaps — a provision that Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House speaker, and other Democrats insisted would prevent Mr. Bush or any future president from evading court scrutiny in the way they say that the N.S.A. program did.

Troubling...

2008-02-21T16:37:00.000-08:00

We've known for a while that the U.S. economy is in trouble. One of the things that is causing the trouble is the ability to buy debt cheap and resell it for a profit. Of course, the process is much more complicated than that, as are the reasons that this is causing problems to our economy. Now, it appears that the whole practice is part of a larger scheme to integrate our country with other countries in unions that we neither asked for nor approve of.

Here is just a sample of an article that supports this. Look at the bolded line in the article description below. They are priming us for a world union. Do we want this? Do we need this? No and no. What can be done? I'm taking suggestions.

Why Wall Street rescues are failing

The financial system has become dependent on debt and the transfer of risk via convoluted debt instruments, creating a mess that will require hundreds of billions of dollars and global cooperation to fix, says MSN Money columnist Jon Markman.

Click here for the article.

Not Only Will You Do What We Tell You To...

2008-01-24T04:06:00.000-08:00

... and where to do it and with whom and when and where, but now, we are removing even the smallest semblance of control you thought you had! That's right, it all starts with making voting harder to do... machines are better at choosing the ~~most corporate compliant~~ right candidate, right? And if all else fails, you can always turn to the well-paid Supreme Court. Before you know it, you won't be able to vote at all unless you've donated more than a million ~~Ameros~~ dollars to the "appropriate" candidate.

Carded at polls: No photo ID, no vote
Voters who use mail-in ballots are not required to show photo ID

updated 12:08 p.m. PT, Wed., Jan. 23, 2008
There's the poor, 32-year-old mother of seven who says it would cost her at least $50 to vote in person. There's also the 92-year-old woman who's voted for decades in the same polling place, but now can't vote there because she let her driver's license expire when her eyesight began to fail.

These folks live in Indiana, home of the country's most restrictive photo-identification voter law. The U.S. Supreme Court is now scrutinizing whether that statute violates the first and 14th amendments, in the most contentious legal battle over voting since the high court issued a bitterly divided decision eight years ago that stopped Florida's recount and handed the presidency to George W. Bush.

If the law is upheld, voting rights advocates fear it will encourage conservative lawmakers across the country to enact equally restrictive measures. The high court's decision is expected in the summer - leaving time to impact November's general election.

Opponents, most of them Democrats, say requiring photo ID at the polls disproportionately affects the poor, the elderly and minorities - the most likely to lack photo identification.

But supporters, most of them Republicans, say such requirements are necessary to prevent voter fraud.

In states that narrowly lost fights that would force voters to produce this kind of identification, efforts are already underway to resurrect those more restrictive laws - in anticipation of a favorable ruling from the high court.

In Kansas, for example, GOP legislators announced Jan. 11 that passing such a law was a top priority for its 2008 session. The announcement came two days after oral arguments in the Indiana case.

[...]
Since Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002 - a measure designed to avoid a repeat election disaster - seven states have passed photo ID laws. Six became mired in bitter legal battles: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Missouri.

Appellate courts have upheld ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan. Court rulings are pending in Indiana and Ohio. Missouri's regulation was struck down by that state's top court.

In the seventh state, Florida, voters may present signature-bearing ID if they don't possess photo identification.

No state goes as far as Indiana's 2005 regulations, which stipulate that every voter must present an ID issued by the state or the federal government. The document must contain:

The voter's photograph.
The voter's name (which has to exactly match the voter registration record).
A current expiration date.
In Jan. 9 oral arguments, several members of the Supreme Court appeared reluctant to overturn the Indiana law.

"You want us to invalidate a statute on the ground that it's a minor inconvenience to a small percentage of voters?" asked Justice Anthony Kennedy, traditionally the swing vote between the court's conservative and liberal members.

This worries voters' rights groups. "If it's upheld, we're certainly concerned that these same issues will resurface" in other states, said Justin Levitt of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

One state where it can't resurface, unless the governor declares an emergency legislative session, is Texas.

Last year, an ugly fight over photo ID raged throughout the legislative session, complete with expletive-filled shouting matches and an ailing Democrat who promised to cast a dissenting vote while lying in a hospital gurney outside the Senate chambers. The measure died after Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst declined to force it to a vote.

The biannual legislature doesn't reconvene until next January.

Can I Have A Peek At Your E-mail?

2008-01-24T03:59:00.000-08:00

That's what the government is asking to "protect us." My question: why not just enforce our current immigration laws - which would keep terrorists out - rather than infringe on the rights of law-abiding Americans? because that's what they're doing. I have it on good authority that the government is taping our telephone conversations already (have been since - at least - the 1970s)... guess that enforcing already-present laws doesn't get the huge telecom corporations any more of our tax dollars that were supposed to be used to "protect" us. Ha.

Cheney prods Senate to extend surveillance law
Republicans block stopgap extension, instead seek immunity for telecomms

updated 7:49 p.m. PT, Wed., Jan. 23, 2008
WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney prodded Congress on Wednesday to extend and broaden an expiring surveillance law, saying "fighting the war on terror is a long-term enterprise" that should not come with an expiration date.

"We're reminding Congress that they must act now," Cheney told the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. The law, which authorizes the administration to eavesdrop on e-mails and phone calls to and from suspected terrorists, expires on Feb. 1. Congress is bickering over terms of its extension.

[...]

Seeking immunity for telecomms
Administration allies in Congress not only want the expiring law made permanent but amended to give telephone companies and other communications providers immunity from being sued for helping the government eavesdropping and other intelligence-gathering efforts.

Cheney said such providers "face dozens of lawsuits."

"The intelligence community doesn't have the facilities to carry out the kind of international surveillance needed to defend this country since 9-11. In some situations, there is no alternative to seeking assistance from the private sector. This is entirely appropriate," Cheney said.

At the White House, press secretary Dana Perino defended the proposal to protect phone companies from liability. "These are companies who helped their country right after 9-11," she said. [...]

Lawmakers may work overtime on measure
At the heart of the controversy is whether the government's wireless surveillance program violated provisions of the original FISA law that requires warrants for wiretaps whenever one of the parties involved in the communication resides in the United States.

[...]

The original FISA law requires the government to get permission from a special court to listen in on the phone calls and e-mails of people in the United States. Changes in communications technology mean many purely foreign to foreign communications now pass through the United States and therefore require the government to get court orders to intercept them.

The Protect America Act, adopted in August, eased that restriction. Privacy and civil liberties advocates say it went too far, giving the government far more power to eavesdrop on American communications without court oversight.

935

2008-01-23T14:41:00.000-08:00

Or, the number of lies told by the Bush administration to get us into a war in Iraq.

Study: Bush led U.S. to war on 'false pretenses'
Hundreds of false statements on WMDs, al-Qaida used to justify Iraq war
President Bush, seen at the White House on Tuesday, and officials in his administration made 935 false statements on Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks, according to a new study.

updated 11:30 p.m. PT, Tues., Jan. 22, 2008
WASHINGTON - A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

[...]
WMD, al-Qaida links debunked
The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

Media 'validation'
The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.

[...]

Too Much BS For Words

2008-01-19T19:50:00.000-08:00

It appears as though, in addition to keeping track of every move we make, the powers that be want to be in control of our health.

A news item on MSNBC reveals that the credit companies responsible for the FICO score on credit reports are now building a similar model for the ability to pay medical bills.

Here is the story as I read it on MSNBC.com, but I don't know how long it will stay up at that URL. Therefore, I've pasted the story below. So, whatever happened to being able to get health care regardless of your ability to pay? What about "first, do no harm?"

The doctor will see your credit now
Posted: Friday, January 18 at 04:32 am CT by Bob Sullivan
The folks who invented the credit score for lenders are hard at work developing a similar tool for hospitals and other health care providers.

The project, dubbed "MedFICO" in some early press reports, will aid hospitals in assessing a patient’s ability to pay their medical bills. But privacy advocates are worried that the notorious errors that have caused frequent criticism of the credit system will also cause trouble with any attempt to create a health-related risk score. They also fear that a low score might impact the quality of the health care that patients receive.

Fair Issac Corp., developer of the FICO credit score, is one of several investors in Healthcare Analytics, the Massachusetts start-up that is developing the hospital risk tool. Another investor is Tenet Healthcare Corp, one of the nation's largest hospital operators. Stephen Farber, who resigned as chief financial officer of Tenet in 2004, is the CEO of Healthcare Analytics.

Several published reports have described Healthcare Analytics product as a MedFICO score, computed in a way that would be familiar to those who've used credit scores. The firm is gathering payment history information from large hospitals around the country, according to a magazine called Inside ARM, aimed at “accounts receivable management” professionals. It will then analyze that data to predict how likely patients will be to pay future medical bills. As with credit reports and scores, patients who've failed to pay past bills will be deemed less likely to pay future bills.

The idea sounds ominous to Pam Dixon, who runs the World Privacy Forum, which studies medical privacy issues.

"This is a bad idea and I don't think this benefits the consumer at all," Dixon said. "And what about victims of medical ID theft? Are we going to deny treatment to these people because they have a terrible MedFICO score?"

Firm says product's not ready yet

Tim Hurley, a spokesman for Healthcare Analytics, said criticism of the firm's work is purely speculative, as its product is still in development. Even the term MedFICO is inaccurate, he said.

"MedFICO does not exist," he said, adding that the name "will very likely not be used when we bring our tools to market."

He refused to confirm other published details about the company's work, saying it was too early given the “premature nature of our product development cycle.” Farber, the Healthcare Analytics CEO, is not granting interviews to discuss the product, said Hurley. Farber did speak to a Chicago Tribune reporter earlier this year.

Hurley did say, however, that hospitals will not use the Healthcare Analytics product before patients receive medical treatment, and it will have no impact on medical decisions.

He also pointed to federal law that makes it illegal for hospitals to refuse treatment to patients in their emergency rooms, regardless of a person’s ability to pay.

The Healthcare Analytics tool will be used after patients receive care and after a bill is generated to help hospitals make better financial planning decisions, Hurley said. It will also help health care providers sort through patient records and potentially make it easier to write off some unpaid bills as charity cases, rather than delinquent accounts, which would offer the hospital some accounting benefits, he said.

The firm "is particularly focused on finding ways to help hospitals systematically allocate charitable resources, to make sure that patients who need financial assistance the most receive it on a consistent basis across the industry," he said.

Impact could reach beyond the ER

Dixon, however, was skeptical. While she didn't suspect the so-called MedFICO would be used to turn patients away in emergency situations, she said it could impact patients during follow-up visits or other non-emergency situations.

"If you had a poor score, you could be denied a hospital stay, for example," she said.

Linda Foley, who runs the Identity Theft Resource Center, also said any kind of medical risk scoring would run into a thicket of federal laws designed to protect consumers. It's not clear if such a score would be covered by the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other credit-related laws that grant consumers the right to see their own credit reports and scores. The information may also be covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which restricts the use of patients' private information.

"The problem we see is: Who is regulating this?" she said. "How do we know it will never be used before treatment?"

She also pointed to the problem of Medical ID theft, which now hits 250,000 people each year, according to the Federal Trade Commission. Identity theft victims frequently find it difficult to clean their credit reports of errors; she feared medical ID theft victims might face the same fate.

Foley also said that a health care score, even if it was initially designed only for use in post-treatment billing issues, could end up being used in unforeseen ways.

"That’s happened with credit scores. Now they are being used for all kinds of things like setting auto insurance rates. What else could a MedFICO be used for?" she said. Perhaps an employer might access the scores and use them to predict which workers might be expensive to insure, she speculated.

Since the invention of the credit score in the 1980s, risk scoring has become a valuable tool in many industries. Auto insurers have created their own scoring system, for example. Many Web sites buy software that assesses the risk that any individual credit card purchase may be fraudulent.

A crowded field

Meanwhile, Fair Issac's core business of selling credit scores to lenders has recently become a more crowded field. Some banks now use their own formulas to generate risk scores, and the nation's three main credit bureaus have developed their own scoring formula.

Scoring risk in the health care industry could be a valuable business, given the rising rate of unpaid bills. American hospitals face $40 billion in unpaid bills every year and 47 million Americans did not have health insurance last year. Others face rising out-of-pocket costs.

That means hospitals need more tools for collecting debts from private individuals, Hurley said.

"Hospitals have historically worked primarily with insurance companies and government programs like Medicare to arrange for payment," he said. "It is a recent trend that individual patients, including insured patients, have assumed significant individual responsibility for paying for care."

Fair Issac did not immediately return a request to be interviewed. A spokesman for Tenet directed all questions to Healthcare Analytics.

While published reports said the new patient scoring system could be in place by this spring or summer, Hurley denied that, saying the firm didn't even have plans to test the system for another six months and it wouldn’t be sold commercially until the end of the year.

More Info On America's National ID Cards...

2008-01-11T13:45:00.000-08:00

I've mentioned before about how, in May of this year, the goverment is requiring states to re-issue millions of driver's licenses to comply with a Congressional bill for the Department of Homeland Security. While the following article from the Associated Press claims that they've re-thought the computer chip in the ID card idea, I wouldn't put it past them to say that they aren't going to require it, and then do it anyway.

Another thought: aren't the states in this country supposed to be pretty much "self governing?" I mean, they make their own laws, right? Why not just give Big Brother the ol' middle finger on this? I am glad to see, however, that my state is one issuing complaints... although, it's about money, not the fact that the government will be able to track Idaho's citizenry anywhere at a distance.

The article is located at MSN.com as I read it, and as I have copied it here, in part:

17 states stuck in license showdown
By DEVLIN BARRETT

WASHINGTON - Residents of at least 17 states are suddenly stuck in the middle of a fight between the Bush administration and state governments over post-Sept. 11 security rules for driver's licenses _ a dispute that, by May, could leave millions of people unable to use their licenses to board planes or enter federal buildings.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who was unveiling final details of the REAL ID Act's rules on Friday, said that if states want their licenses to remain valid for air travel after May 2008, those states must seek a waiver indicating they want more time to comply with the legislation.

Chertoff, as he revealed final details of the REAL ID Act, said that in instances where a particular state doesn't seek a waiver, its residents will have to use a passport or a newly created federal passport card if they want to avoid a vigorous secondary screening at airport security.

[...]

Chertoff spoke as he discussed the details of the administration's plan to improve security for driver's licenses in all 50 states _ an effort delayed due to opposition from states worried about the cost and civil libertarians upset about what they believe are invasions of privacy.

Under the rules announced Friday, Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years.

[...]

The American Civil Liberties Union has fiercely objected to the effort, particularly the sharing of personal data among government agencies. The DHS and other officials say the only way to ensure an ID is safe is to check it against secure government data; critics such as the ACLU say that creates a system that is more likely to be infiltrated and have its personal data pilfered.

In its written objection to the law, the ACLU claims REAL ID amounts to the "first-ever national identity card system," which "would irreparably damage the fabric of American life."

The Sept. 11 attacks were the main motivation for the changes.

The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license."

By 2014, anyone seeking to board an airplane or enter a federal building would have to present a REAL ID-compliant driver's license, with the notable exception of those more than 50 years old, Homeland Security officials said.

The over-50 exemption was created to give states more time to get everyone new licenses, and officials say the risk of someone in that age group being a terrorist, illegal immigrant or con artist is much less. By 2017, even those over 50 must have a REAL ID-compliant card to board a plane.

So far, 17 states have passed legislation or resolutions objecting to the REAL ID Act's provisions, many due to concerns it will cost them too much to comply. The 17, according to the ACLU, are: Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington state.

Among other details of the REAL ID plan:

_The traditional driver's license photograph would be taken at the beginning of the application instead of the end so that if someone is rejected for failure to prove identity and citizenship, the applicant's photo would be kept on file and checked if that person tried to con the system again.

_The cards will have three layers of security measures but will not contain microchips as some had expected. (Ed: emphasis mine. AT) States will be able to choose from a menu which security measures they will put in their cards.

Over the next year, the government expects all states to begin checking both the Social Security numbers and immigration status of license applicants.

[...]

A few states have already signed written agreements indicating they plan to comply with REAL ID. Seventeen others, though, have passed legislation or resolutions objecting to it, often because of concerns about the cost of the extra security.

Didn't I Tell You This Was Coming???

2007-11-01T04:16:00.000-07:00

I know I mentioned a few months ago about how the government already has a law enacted that will require those with a driver's license to have a radio frequency computer chip in said driver's licenses by May 2008.

I think I also mentioned how the technology so far isn't even secure. And I also told you how they would package this shit up as a security measure or even a modern convenience.

I hate being right:

Shell station customers 'pay by touch'
By LAUREN TARA LaCAPRA, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK - Chicago drivers have a new way to pay for gasoline: with their fingertips.

Ten Shell gas stations in the Windy City are testing biometric systems that let consumers walk up to the pump, scan their fingertips on a device and fill up their vehicles. The systems, also installed at Shell convenience stores, are directly linked to customers' checking or credit-card accounts for payment.

"When we talk to customers, they're always looking for ways to make buying gasoline quicker and easier, and always looking for ways to make their transactions faster and more secure," said Chris Susse, Shell's manager of global refueling innovations. "They don't want to carry more cards, kits and keychains, and they want it to be free."

Customers will be able to initially scan their fingerprints at a kiosk inside the gas station and can link payment information either at the store or online.

The biometric devices, made by a San Francisco-based company called Pay By Touch, are one part of a technological trifecta Shell is rolling out at its gas stations.

Shell has partnered with Fuelcast Media International LLC to offer local news, weather and sports on digital screens at the pump. Fuelcast pays Shell for the ability to display advertisements along with the content from local NBC stations. The monitors are installed at 300 Shell stations across the U.S.

In addition, gas station attendants are testing hand-held wireless devices that allow full-service customers to pay electronically at their car window.

The high-tech push is a multi-prong initiative to build customer loyalty, stay ahead of competitors on the technological curve and gain revenue from the Fuelcast deal. Shell said it is the first brand to launch the biometric systems, though expansion hinges on whether its customers take to the futuristic finger scanners.

Brandon Wright, spokesman for the Petroleum Marketers Association of America, said he had not heard of any gas stations using biometrics, but wouldn't be surprised if they were featured on the "next generation of pumps" as consumers demand quick, convenient payment methods.

Shell, which is part of Royal Dutch Shell PLC, has not yet promoted the systems, so uptake has been minimal, Susse said.

Sunflower Market, a Chicago grocery store, also has Pay By Touch systems installed. About 2 percent of its customers signed up for the payment option, said the store's manager, Debbie Britton.

"I think it scares people," Britton said. "They're more confused about the whole system. Some of them say, 'Well, now the FBI can find me.'"

Shoppers who consider signing up for such systems should find out whether their information is shared with affiliates or third parties, said Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

Shell said it will not share personal information of Pay By Touch customers with third parties, and it still offers traditional forms of payment for those uncomfortable with the system.

Shell officials note that the system is less susceptible to identity theft since it's impossible to duplicate or steal a fingerprint. Alternatives like cash, credit cards and keychain payment cards with radio-frequency identification chips can be stolen and used by others.

Industrywide adoption depends on whether gas station owners will be willing to pay for new pumps, which can cost "thousands to tens of thousands of dollars," the PMAA's Wright said.

Shell is uncertain of how much the high-tech initiative will ultimately cost or how the devices will be received, although the pilot program is not a major expense, Susse said.

Nonetheless, the Houston-based company is betting that making its brand distinct from other gas stations will make customers come back.

"We'd like to see an increase in customer loyalty because we're the only gas retailer offering this service," Susse said.

Y'all Hear About This? No? Didn't Think So...

2007-08-21T15:26:00.000-07:00

It never ceases to amaze me what is kept out of our public consciousness. With a few words from a gatekeeper, real news is kept out of the mainstream and left on the periphery for us "crackpots" to latch on to and look like, well, crackpots.

Anyway, it turns out that a guy has figured out how to power things with saltwater:

Can water fuel world?
Man looking for cancer cure hopes to solve energy crisis
Posted: May 30, 2007
5:00 p.m. Eastern
By Joe Kovacs
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Is the solution to America's energy needs as simple as a trip to the beach?

The idea is a fascinating one as a Florida man searching for a cancer cure may have stumbled onto a virtually limitless source of energy: salt water.

John Kanzius, 63, is a broadcast engineer who formerly owned several TV and radio stations, before retiring in Sanibel Island, Fla.

Five years ago, he was diagnosed with a severe form of leukemia, and began a quest to find a kinder, gentler way to treat the disease compared to harsh chemotherapy.

In October 2003, he had an epiphany: kill cancer with radio waves. He then devised a machine that emits radio waves in an attempt to slay cancerous cells, while leaving healthy cells unharmed.

His experiments in fighting cancer have become so successful, one physician was quoted as saying, "We could be getting close to grabbing the Holy Grail."

But in the midst of his experiments as he was trying to take salt out of water, Kanzius discovered his machine could do what some may have thought was impossible: turning water into fuel.

"On our way to try to do desalinization, we came up with something that burns, and it looks in this case that salt water perhaps could be used as a fuel to replace the carbon footsteps that we've been using all these years, i.e., fossil fuels," Kanzius said.

If it's for real, the possible ramifications of the discovery are almost mind-boggling, as cars could be fueled by salt water instead of gasoline, hydroelectric plants could be built along the shore, and homes could be heated without worrying about supplies of oil.

"It doesn't have to be ocean salt water," Kanzius said. "It burns just as well when we add salt to tap water."

Kanzius has partnered with Charles Rutkowski, general manager of Industrial Sales and Manufacturing, a Millcreek, Pa., company that builds the radio-wave generators.

"I've done this [burning experiment] countless times and it still amazes me," Rutkowski told the Erie Times-News. "Here we are paying $3 a gallon for gas, and this is a device that seems to turn salt water into an alternative fuel."

Kanzius has been told it's actually hydrogen that's burning, as his machine generates enough heat to break down the chemical bond between hydrogen and oxygen that makes up water.

"I have never heard of such a thing," Alice Deckert, Ph.D., chairwoman of Allegheny College's chemistry department, told the Times-News. "There doesn't seem to be enough energy in radio waves to break the chemical bonds and cause that kind of reaction."

Thus far, Kanzius' work has not received extensive national publicity, but has been featured on several local television news programs, including WPBF-TV in West Palm Beach, Fla., WSEE-TV in Erie, Pa., and WKYC-TV in Cleveland.

"We discovered that if you use a piece of paper towel as a wick, it lights every single time and you can start it and stop it at will by turning the radio waves on and off," Kanzius told the Times-News as he watched a test tube of salt water burn.

"And look, the paper itself doesn't burn," he added. "Well, it burns but the paper is not consumed."

Kanzius said he hasn't decided whether to share his fuel discovery with government or private business, though he'd prefer a federal grant to develop it.

"I'm afraid that if I join up with some big energy company, they will say it doesn't work and shelve it, even if it does work," Kanzius told the paper.

Online skeptics are throwing cold water on the idea, saying the laws of science pose some problems:

# "It takes more electricity to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen than you get back in energy by burning the hydrogen and oxygen to recreate water and get the heat. So there is no new 'source' of power, since you are just converting electricity into a lesser amount of energy. You could get more heat energy out of electricity by running it through a blow dryer and THAT is not considered a 'new' energy source."

# "Basic chemistry: the amount of energy required to free the hydrogen from the oxygen in H2O is more than the energy released when the hydrogen and oxygen recombine and burn. The flame is clearly the color of ionized sodium from the salt. Whatever the actual specific explanation, which they don't bother to approach in the video, water and salt don't burn without puting more energy into the reaction than you get out. Turning a lot of radio energy into a little heat and light is no breakthrough."

# "Using RF energy, or any other energy to first break down the hydrogen and oxygen water molecule into its constituent H2 and O2 molecules, and then burning the products is old technology. ... However, if the RF H2O cracking method can be developed such that it is a superior way over current methods used to produce H2, which can subsequently be used in H2 fuel-cell automobiles for example, then THAT might be of value as well."

"Virtually limitless" might be an overstatement, but this sort of thing would, at least, tide us over on our oil comsumption until those high and mighty corporations release the free energy devices they've purchased from inventors (Note where, at the end of third paragraph where the poster talks about corporations buying his inventions and what he's used the money for), or some other inventor is brave enough to stand up to the government and corporations and release a device independantly... of course, if this mythical inventor tried to do that, he'd end up like this guy, probably. Or, we'd never hear about it....

Too many gatekeepers with an agenda, I tells ya.

Blatant Warnings Will Go Unnoticed

2007-08-21T14:07:00.000-07:00

A headline from this morning's MSN.com homepage got my attention:

Dean weakens over Mexico, eyes oil fields

Winds drop to 85 mph after hitting coast, but storm could grow again

Associated Press

FELIPE CARRILLO PUERTO, Mexico - Hurricane Dean slammed into the Caribbean coast of Mexico on Tuesday as a roaring Category 5 hurricane, the most intense Atlantic storm to make landfall in two decades. It lashed remote Mayan villages as it raced across the Yucatan Peninsula to the heart of Mexico’s oil industry.

Nuclear plant hit by storm
By 1 p.m. ET, Dean had weakened to a Category 1 hurricane with winds of 85 mph. It was about 45 miles southeast of Campeche and was moving west at 18 mph, according to the National Hurricane Center.

Dean’s path takes it directly through the Cantarell oil field, Mexico’s most productive, with dozens of oil rigs and three major ports. All were shut down just ahead of the storm, resulting in a production loss of 2.7 million barrels of oil and 2.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day. The path also veers toward Mexico’s only nuclear plant, where a state official said 2,000 buses were brought in to evacuate personnel if necessary.

The Laguna Verde nuclear plant, which is more than 20 years old and has endured other severe weather with no problems, implemented emergency procedures and remains online, said Estefano Conde, spokesman for Mexico’s Federal Electricity Commission. “I can assure you that everything is well taken care of,” he said.

Therefore, even though Hurricane Dean might not ever touch the nuclear power plant or the oil fields, expect your energy bills to increase this fall, probably exponentially more than normal with winter weather.

Since we have control of all that Iraqi oil, why aren't our energy costs going down? I know it's been asked before, but does anyone have an answer?

Pagans & Homer: This Ain't No Odyssey

2007-08-21T13:50:00.001-07:00

In what has to be at once the most brilliant and most baffling marketing strategy ever, advertisers for the "film" The Simpson's Movie, have taken an ages-old chalk drawing in the rolling hills of England and updated it with the visage of Homer Simpson.

From The Sun:

PAGANS have pledged to perform “rain magic” to wash away cartoon character Homer Simpson who was painted next to their famous fertility symbol - the Cerne Abbas giant.

The 17th century chalk outline of the naked, sexually aroused, club-wielding giant is believed by many to be a symbol of ancient spirituality.

Many couples also believe the 180ft giant, which is carved in the hillside above Cerne Abbas, Dorset, is an aid to fertility.

A giant 180ft Homer Simpson brandishing a doughnut was painted next to the well-endowed figure today in a publicity stunt to promote The Simpsons Movie released later this month.

It has been painted with water-based biodegradable paint which will wash away as soon as it rains.

Ann Bryn-Evans, joint Wessex district manager for The Pagan Federation, said: “It’s very disrespectful and not at all aesthetically pleasing.

“We were hoping for some dry weather but I think I have changed my mind. We’ll be doing some rain magic to bring the rain and wash it away.”

She added: “I’m amazed they got permission to do something so ridiculous. It’s an area of scientific interest.”

She also expressed fears that the painting of Homer, from the animated television series The Simpsons, would cause a mess as it washed away.

During the Second World War, he was disguised to prevent the Germans from using him as an aerial landmark.

Since then he has always been visible, receiving regular grass trimming and a full re-chalking every 25 years.

A few things strike me about the whole thing: one, how did the movie studio get permission to put up something like that? I mean, really look at it. It appears as though Homer Simpson is playing ringtoss with a donut and an ancient dude's penis. Two, since it's pretty obvious that the movie studio did get permission, who was the idiot who approved it? This thing's frickin' OBSCENE. Third, who the hell are these people who are "outraged" that a "pagan fertility symbol" has been degraded? Seriously people. Do you think that ancient people didn't have a sense of humor? That they didn't razz each other? That this huge chalk drawing wasn't a joke on Aethelred over the hill, who had a small penis and was kind of a wuss? Seriously. Just look at the frickin' thing! It has got to be a joke... the same kind of joke that we see on water towers in today's era... you know, "Joe blows goats" spray painted on an overpass, complete with crude drawings to illustrate. Fer crap's sake. I mean, look up "pagan" in the dictionary! The word "pagan" comes from a Latin word that merely means "non-Christian or Jew." It isn't a religious descriptor. You can be pagan and not subscribe to any religion.

Dufii.

ARRRR! iPatch!!!

2007-08-21T13:44:00.000-07:00

On July 31st, Apple Computers released 48 patches for its OSX, most of them related to the iPhone, specifically, security patches for the iPhone.

For a company that built its reputation on a seemingly low risk of being able to be hacked or get viruses, 48 patches for your software seems extreme. For that many problems to be getting fixed at once, you'd just about have to bet that some of the issues have been around for a while, piling up. Then, Apple releases iPhone, problems erupt, and suddenly, here's all the code to fix your OSX. Bah.

Elitists.

The Tangled Web Grows...

2007-08-21T13:11:00.000-07:00

A virtually unnoticed news item from July 17, 2007 circulated through small groups of bloggers to not much notice. It was the same old story of hackers getting into government computers, including a database mainframe for the Department of Transportation. The full story appears below from the Reuters wires; the original story as I saw it on Yahoo! has been removed:

Hackers steal U.S. government, corporate data from PCs
By Jim Finkle
Tue Jul 17, 7:22 PM ET

BOSTON (Reuters) - Hackers stole information from the U.S. Department of Transportation and several U.S. companies by seducing employees with fake job-listings on advertisements and e-mail, a computer security firm said.

The victims include consulting firm Booz Allen, computer services company Unisys Corp, computer maker Hewlett- Packard Co and satellite network provider Hughes Network Systems, a unit of Hughes Communications Inc, said Mel Morris, chief executive of British Internet security provider Prevx Ltd.

Of the list, only Unisys acknowledged that viruses had been detected and removed from two PCs, saying no information had been leaked. A Department of Transportation spokeswoman said the agency could not find any indication of a breach and a spokeswoman for Hughes said she was unaware of any breaches.

The other parties either declined comment or did not respond to requests for comment.

Prevx said the malware it identified uses a program named NTOS.exe that probes PCs for confidential data, then sends it to a Web site hosted on Yahoo Inc. That site's owner is likely unaware it is being used by hackers, Morris said.

He believes the hackers have set up several "sister" Web sites that are collecting similar data from other squadrons of malware. It was not clear whether the hackers used any information stolen from more than 1,000 PCs.

The hackers only targeted a limited group of computers, which kept traffic down and allowed them to stay under the radar of security police, who tend to identify threats when activity reaches a certain level.

"What is most worrying is that this particular sample of malware wasn't recognized by existing antivirus software. It was able to slip through enterprise defenses," said Yankee Group security analyst Andrew Jaquith, who learned of the breach from Morris.

Security experts say such crimes occur frequently because hackers have access to software that allows them to build undetectable malware that security firms are unable to fight.

In this case, the malware had not been flagged as dangerous, although security firms put out updates identifying it as such on Monday night after Prevx sounded the alarm.

"The sophistication is really far out there. There is no way security companies are going to catch up," said Rick Wesson, chief executive of Support Intelligence, a San Francisco firm that helps companies and government agencies detect and fight attacks on their computer systems.

Wesson said his company is monitoring three other campaigns that are currently ongoing, but declined to discuss them, saying that could hamper counter-intelligence efforts.

WAKE-UP CALL

Many large organizations -- including government agencies -- do not use all the bells and whistles in their security software, security experts say.

For example, organizations can choose to only let employees run programs on a list of safe software, but most take the opposite approach, banning programs listed as dangerous.

Also, sensitive information on PCs is rarely encrypted. Doing so makes stolen information useless to hackers, but requires extra work by employees who access the data.

A researcher with a large security firm said the attack disclosed by Prevx is "a wake-up call."

"We try to strike a balance between usability and protection. It's a delicate balance. But organizations need to lean more toward the protection side than the usability side," said the researcher who declined to be identified.

What is unusual about the case publicized by Prevx, security experts say, is that the firm named the victims.

Prevx CEO Morris said he did so to bring attention to vulnerabilities in security systems protecting sensitive government data.

Hackers use security tools to help them determine whether their malware will be able to get past corporate and government defenses. For example, a Web site called virustotal.com lets users upload files to see if they are safe. Hackers use it to see if their malware will make it past security systems.

Morris said he had downloaded the data from the Web site used by the hackers and provided it to investigators from the FBI's Law Enforcement Online, or LEO, program.

An FBI spokesman declined comment.

(Additional reporting by Eric Auchard in San Francisco, John Crawley in Washington, Georgina Prodhan in Frankfurt.)

Considering the fairly recent admission by the government regarding the theft of a laptop belonging to the Department of Veteran's Affairs that contained the personal information of millions of veterans, at first, this article seemed like little more than a report on our government's continued carelessness with data in this Age of Information.

Belch.com says:

So what kind of information would be important within the DoT that hackers would want access to? Probably configuration information for the network so the attacker can gain wider access- but more importantly, access to security information about highways, bridges, railways, trucking and other critical infrastructure information.

But, then, a scant 15 days later, a bridge in Minnesota collapses. Coincidence? Maybe. But we'd all be delusional to simply write it off as such, especially considering that bridge plans were on the DOT database. And what is the FBI doing? Busting a Chinese software pirate, OF COURSE!

Once again, the web of deception and distraction grows and is revealed to us, and most of us simply don't notice. We're so distracted by what they want us to see that we can't see what's right there.

He who is usually on the giving end of reamings...

2007-07-20T12:14:00.000-07:00

Must now "take it up the buns":

Yes, yes. I know. Colonoscopies are very serious, and they are very needed indicators of colon health and overall health. Everyone should get one. But this was irresistable.

Treason? HA! I Laugh In The Face Of Such Claims!

2007-07-19T12:21:00.000-07:00

There was a time in this country when treason was a very serious crime, especially for those in political office. I mean, did we learn nothing in elementray school regarding the treasonous Benedict Arnold? Is Arnold's name not synonymous with lying, cheating, and backstabbing?

No more. You can go ahead and commit treason if you like, I guess.

Popular Media Strives To Kill Millions Women/Girls By Promoting Anorexia

2007-07-17T09:54:00.000-07:00

...at least, if some of the Photoshopped pictures of celebrities are any indication.

I've seen a lot of these kinds of "before and after" galleries of models on the beach, trying to sell swimwear to Middle American soccer moms who haven't even thought seriously about a bikini since the eighth grade.

At any rate, you don't often see these "before and after" things featuring celebrities. Which is why this Photoshopping extravaganza of Faith Hill on the cover of Redbook is particularly of interest. We all know that skinny celebrities are "in." We also know that young girls are very impressionable by celebrities and, by extension, their skinniness. So taking a good-looking celebrity and making her even skinnier and more up to the impossible standards of modern media and anorexia machine is completely nauseating. What say you?

Kinda like a sex change...

2006-10-05T01:55:00.000-07:00

Except different. Apparently, Fox News decided that it just didn't seem right that a Republican congressman could be involved in underage, homosexual, sexual harassment. So, they changed his party affiliation! How convenient! In screenshots of Rep. Tom Foley, the Republican congressman was identified as a Democrat... three times. Once, you could almost forgive as an oversight or mistake. But three times? Sounds like something sinister, especially when you consider the upcoming election battles for seats in congress. Republicans could easily lose control of both houses of congress this upcoming November, in what is seen by many to be the ultimate goal: giving Democrats enough seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate to take control of congress and put an end to the rubber-stamp initiatives by the Bush regime.

It almost makes one wonder...

You know how we were all told by THE MEDIA and THE GOVERNMENT that we were attacked by 19 guys on planes with box cutters who flew planes into buildings? Is it possible that we were lied to? I mean, if people actually just believe anything that is seen on television, is it possible that they were able to orchestrate what we thought and continue to think about what happened on 9/11? If manipulating the American citizenry is as simple as changing a graphic to say that some guy is Democrat when he is actually a Republican, how much harder, then, would it be to give us sound bites and pictures ONLY that support the agreed-upon version of events, leaving out the stuff that blows the "official version" out of the water?

Honestly, I don't want to believe that our government could do something so heinious to us, either by letting it happen or by making it happen. But, really. It wouldn't be too hard to pull off, what with the media controlled by big businesses. Seriously. Think about it. Most of us in America watched what happened on 9/11 on television. We saw the horrible images, over and over and over. Seeing it made us angry. We all agreed that something had to be done. But what if that something that had to be done was actually not retaliation, but aggression? What if, because we believed what the "fair and balanced" media told us about what was happening, we agreed to a war that was never designed to get the "perpetrators" of 9/11?

A while back, I read a list by someone who detailed who all would have to be "in on" a conspiracy of this order. They listed firefighters and police officers. But that really isn't the case. Who would really have to be "in on" it? Well, the president, the vice president, and a few select members of the administration. A few key individuals in the military (high-ups). A few key members of the media. Perhaps a couple of leaders of foreign countries. And a guy we trained and armed in the 1980s, who would be put up in a super-secret location (or killed), to take the fall for everything. Anybody else who figured it out could be bought off, mostly. I mean, firefighters and police officers wouldn't be "in on" it; many of them were killed or injured. Why would they, if they knew about it, go ahead and go through with it, knowing they would die? It don't make sense.

What are you willing to reveal...

2006-09-25T03:35:00.000-07:00

... to strangers about yourself?

I've been aware for some time about the recent news of RFID chips - electronic devices the size of a grain of rice that are intended to be implanted under a person's skin for identifications purposes. What I didn't know regarded the recent passing of a bill by the United States congress that requires all states to participate in an program called RealID, which is a national database of persons living in the US with driver's licenses or state-issued IDs.

Seriously. Please take a few moments to look at the links I'm providing below. All are from mainstream news sources; no blogs, no "conspiracy theory" level sources; just the standard news sources that you might see on TV, or hear on the radio, or read in a newspaper, or see in a mainstream Internet news feed. Real News. No B.S.

Here is a WikiPedia article on the topic...

This makes it pretty clear-cut what the system is designed to do. And, on the surface, it looks like it could be a good thing. However, and I say this with the sternest possible pixels here, what does this set us up for in the future? And it's not even SECURE. And, more importantly, Do we REALLY want to trust our - pretty obviously - lackadaisical government with such sensitive PERSONAL INFORMATION, when they seem to be so PRONE to LOSING stuff?!?!?! And losing it who WHOM!?!?!?!

Excerpted from CNET.com article
What does that mean for me?
Starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United States, you'll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take advantage of nearly any government service. Practically speaking, your driver's license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards. (Read entire article

A Google video about where this technology comes from

Read a Time magazine article about a national ID card

An article from privacy.org

An article from EPIC.org

An old article from DrudgeReport.com

Perhaps the most "radical" of the news sources, but... UnRealID.com

So, I implore you, whether you consider this "old news" or not, please take a moment and read this crap, understand it, and then REPOST it. I know, it's not some lame survey, and it's not promising that if you DON'T repost it that a ghost is going to murder you in your sleep, and it's not promising a MySpace visitor tracker, but it is important you and your friends and your neighbors and your family and complete strangers to you are INFORMED about what is going on. Information is power. Those who have the information, have the power. If you're comfortable with people who don't know knowing every shittin' thing about you, just move on and pretend that this doesn't matter. BUT! If you don't want to have to present your microchipped arm to buy groceries, if you don't want to be questioned and ordered to present your card whenever you take your kids to the park... pass this information along.

REMEMBER, this is supposedly a government Of The People, By The People, and FOR The People. If you have the INFORMATION about what's happening, and you Don't frickin' like it, then you can use the POWER of that INFORMATION to CHANGE it. Tell everyone you know.

That is all.

Copyrights & Farts

2006-08-27T10:03:00.000-07:00

No, I am not talking about stopping people from copying your flatulent masterpieces. However, there is slightly disturbing news coming out of Washington D.C. via US News & World Report. According to USN&WR via The Boston Globe, our Illustrious Leader (aka The Juvenile Deliquent) likes to fart in front of new aides just to see their reactions. Indeed, apparently, he lifts a leg and lets one rip just to see the disgusted looks on their faces. The epitome of childish behavior, no?

In a completely unrelated article in the New York Times, there is word that the mysterious "funtwo," he of guitar virtuosity fame, has, at last, been identified. I know that you'll be able to sleep at night now. I know I will. At any rate, the article asks what ramifications to copyright law the virulent spread of copycat work will have. Indeed, the writer questions the very future of copyright laws worldwide, mostly because this "funtwo" character, who is best known for his rendition of Pachibel's "Canon in D Major" in Steve Vai/Joe Satriani/Ywingwe Malmsteen style (aka "Sweep Picking," "Shredding," unnecessary notes, et cetera), that famous piece of music so popular at weddings and as a cell phone ringtone... which was rendered in the guitar virtuoso style by another Korean character who goes by the Internet name of JerryC. Read the whole article here.

My point is... I really don't understand the need for copyright laws. I mean, if you found something cool that someone else did, would you seriously want to claim that you did it? It would seem to be self-defeating to claim that something was your work when you didn't do it. Furthermore, doesn't it seem that you would be only lowering yourself to a certain level of success and not giving yourself a bigger chance at creating something that is wholly your own? I mean, I write a book. I know that every word in it is mine, and that makes me proud of myself. I have written more than 800 songs. I know that every lyric and every note and every melody is mine and mine alone and I am very proud of that. I've done paintings and designed games and designed graphics and web sites and I know that each and every element is something that is mine. I would never even consider claiming someone else's work as mine. I always give credit for anything that I borrow. And yet, there seems to be a whole group of people out there who think that it's a good idea to find something relatively obscure on the Internet or in an old book or wherever and then claim it as their work. Doesn't that just reek of ass... like Dubya's farts, I guess.

I am glad that there are copyright laws to protect me and my work, but I really wish that people would just rely mostly on their own creativity and less on the pilfering of the works of others.

Advertising: Barf & Eggs

2006-07-21T01:31:00.000-07:00

An MSN.com article reveals that US Airways is planning to sell advertising space on their barf bags. The idea's not bad, sure, but what kind of company would actually advertise on barf bags? I suppose roller coaster theme parks could. You know, something along the lines of, "If you thought this plane ride made you sick, come check out Upchuck Amusement Park, St. Louis, Missouri." Or, maybe, a company selling castor oil? "This bag is for when you don't want to puke. We're there for when you do."

In a related story, CBS is planning to advertise their upcoming fall TV lineup on egg shells. While I can almost applaud the move as brilliant marketing, I have to wonder about the consumer who is O.K. with eating eggs with advertisments laser-printed on them.

Bush Gropes German Chancellor

2006-07-18T23:29:00.000-07:00

HuffingtonPost.com has an interesting article today, involving, once again, our illustrious leader and his Spring break antics at the G8 summit. Apparently, Mr. Bush gave an affectionate shoulder rub to the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel. The pictures kinda look like either her Kaopectate kicked in, or she really didn't appreciate the Liar-In-Chief's hands on her.

Your call.

My opinion? This may just be the thing we've been looking for to get Bushie out of office. I mean, it worked for getting Clinton impreached, right?

The Cursed Cursing President

2006-07-18T01:29:00.000-07:00

Apparently, according to a recent MSN article, our, um.... fearless leader got caught on tape curing about Syria and recent attacks on Israel. His other comments to the world's other leaders were almost as brilliant, and covered such pressing topics as his preference for Diet Coke and a gift from British Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

Kenneth Lay like Jesus?

2006-07-13T23:41:00.000-07:00

In a recent CNN.com article regarding the memorial services for recently deceased shyster, Kenneth Lay, who died while vacationing in Colorado following a conviction six weeks earlier for shafting hundreds of thousands of energy customers.

You know how everybody, for a while there, was wearing those "WWJD" (What Would Jesus Do) bracelets? After reading this, it makes me wonder just what, in fact, Jesus would do upon hearing this news. Probably nothing, but my wild imagination makes me think that, perhaps, Jesus would get on his knees and pray, "Dear Lord, please remove this loathsome thing, and striketh him from my presence."

And then this huge lightning bolt would come down and incinerate the guy who said it.

But maybe it's only me who would laugh like crazy about it.

Welcome

2006-07-13T23:32:00.000-07:00

Hey, 'Net-izens,

I'm using this blog to wax philosophical on the stupid, weird, and ridiculous things that happen in the world, and I hope you enjoy the ride.

You don't have to agree with me. In fact, I hope you DON'T agree with me.