Mephistopheles dental floss, or Toe Jam

I am at a loss for the bolts falling off our so called society, so I counter the irrational fervor with a good serving of word salad.  You try putting "Mephistopheles dental floss" into google image search and see what you get.

All sorts of shit is going on now and it is getting a little weird.  What troubles me is not that I think that all of these things will pass, but what sort of world would exist if they did, and what sociopath would push for such a dream?  Quick bullet point list:

• Defunding Planned Parenthood
• Defunding PBS (ok, I get defunding Elmo...)
• Defunding NPR
• Whatever the fuck is going on in WI: War on unions (rather, those who did not suck Scott Douchbag Walkers ass), teachers, universities and other  non-trolls
• Tearing down Social Security
• Significant Defunding of many state schools
• Authorizing the assassination of medical providers (see prev post)
• And So Much More!

On the other hand, the same federal congressional brain trust voted to continue having the US Army spend more than $7 million a year to sponsor NASCAR Sprint Cup driver Ryan Newman and several million more as part of a partnership with NASCAR.  Since I lack many of the essential social boundaries that lubricate our "normal" interactions, I will indeed ask: what did Ryan have to do to who to get such an excellent contract???

This is life in new america folks.

If you are not in, you are out in the cold of some sort of Dicken's novel.  Except without any hope of a good ending.  Just a cold angry fearful place.  Just in case I am planning on re-reading The Handmaiden's Tale for homework.

As an antidote to the bile that I have been choking down, I offer you this:

For the first time in a while I am actually proud of the people who live here.  Tens of thousands of people have gone down to the capitol building for days now to protest the absurdity of our current state governor.  The mighty Mrs. set.element and I are dragging thing1 and thing2 down there to provide a little demonstration of participatory democracy.   Now that makes me happy.

s.e.

HB1171: codifying abortion provider killing

I have blovated at length about the world spinning down and the continuing war against Reason and decency.  I have scooped up a big stinking pile of shit and waited for the mushrooms to grow.  And still I wait.  So here in this happy place I discovered a new low.  Go figure.

HB1171 is a bill currently in play in South Dakota which redefines justifiable homicide in such a way as to make it legal to shoot abortion providers in cold blood.  No doubt it will not make it out of committee, but that kinda misses the point.

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to expand the definition of justifiable homicide to provide for the protection of certain unborn children.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. That § 22-16-34 be amended to read as follows:

22-16-34. Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person while resisting any attempt to murder such person, or to harm the unborn child of such person in a manner and to a degree likely to result in the death of the unborn child, or to commit any felony upon him or her, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person is.

Section 2. That § 22-16-35 be amended to read as follows:

22-16-35. Homicide is justifiable if committed by any person in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband, wife, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant, or the unborn child of any such enumerated person, if there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished.

If you have the stomach, read more in a Mother Jones about this.  I am going to lose my shit for a moment.

This bill is sponsored by Rep. Phil Jensen a "committed" foe of abortion rights.  He is just another chickenshit doushbag from the religious right.  He lacks the fucking stones to actually say what he means - he says "This simply is to bring consistency to South Dakota statute as it relates to justifiable homicide" which is bullshit.  What a bastard.  Every one of these people acts like this - a fucking refusal to step up and actually own the consequences of their actions.  These fans of "personal responsibility", these baby jebus loven' freedom hating spoiled shits get the wingnuttery all riled up then sit around and have the gall to stare blankly into a camera and say they had NO IDEA that thirty years of increasingly violent hate speech would somehow be a problem after people start being killed.

I am not better now, but if I do not stop I might write something that is ALL IN CAPS and FULL OF THINGS THAT MIGHT GET ME IN TROUBLE.

Looks like the bill made it out of committee and will be on the floor of the state house.

By the way if you see the beautiful Mrs set.element today, please give her a hug cause today is a hard one.  Also I apologize to Spiros for the terrible violence I have committed against the english language.

Peace

quick amendment - the delightful Mrs set.element just pointed out the creepy master/mistress/servant language.  WTF?  These people are so many damned layers of creepy I just want to take a shower after reading this.

Another day where my head slowly spins...

In order to keep everyone as informed (and depressed) as possible, I am going to post quite a bit more for a while.  Pointless I assure you.

So todays irritant involves the collective activities of google (you know them?) as well as the Connecticut AG in a change of attitude about some activities involving privacy and data collection.

A moment about google - I acknowledge (and even embrace) the irony of using a "free" public blog hosted under google services while I call them names.  I know (as do you) that if you are not purchasing a product from a company that in fact you are the product.  And yes, Soylant Green is made of people.

A moment about what google did.  Short version - in order to have a better idea about who is exactly where when they use the google location services.  As part of the street view program (where they drive around and take pictures of streets, houses and whatnot) they hoovered up wireless data from unsecured wireless installations instead of just the id of the transmitter.  After denying that they did this (a profoundly dicky thing), they acknowledged the act and threw the programmers under the bus since that it what management does.

So who really gives a shit?

Former Attorney General Richard Blumenthal last December in response to Google's 'accidental' collection of payload data from WiFi networks had the following to say:

 “Verifying Google’s data snare is crucial to assessing a penalty and assuring no repeat. Consumers and businesses expect and deserve a full explanation, as well as measures shielding them from future spying. We will scrupulously safeguard the confidentiality of information we review.

“We will fight to compel Google to come clean–granting my office access to improperly collected materials and protecting confidentiality, as the company has done in Canada and elsewhere.”

I like this for many reasons including the simple fact that it is the right thing to do.

Enter new Attorney General George Jepsen, who is now saying:

Jepsen said Friday that his office will enter into settlement negotiations with the company without reviewing the pilfered data, which Google has steadfastly refused to share with it. Under the terms of the deal between the two, Connecticut will drop the civil investigative demand it was using to force Google to produce the data at issue here, and Google will stipulate to collecting and storing it. It will also stipulate that the data collected included confidential and private information like “partial or complete e-mail communications.”

Note that google does not have to get rid of the data that it has.

So why, good readers am I so pissed off?  We are living after all in a Business Friendly universe now.  There is a second press release which says in part:

For Immediate Release FRIDAY JAN. 28, 2011 

HARTFORD – In recognition of Data Privacy Day, Attorney General George Jepsen Friday advised Connecticut residents to protect their personal and communications data by encrypting their own wireless Internet networks. 

The recommendation stemmed from Connecticut’s investigation into Google Inc.’s collection of payload data being transmitted over unsecured business and consumer networks. That investigation led to a stipulation with Google that will avoid the need to go to court as settlement negotiations continue. 

“Google’s collection of payload data demonstrates that others may be watching your Internet activity without your knowledge,” Jepsen said. “Consumers should know that the wireless routers they purchase from the store are not automatically encrypted, and they need to activate the encryption feature to ensure better protection,” Jepsen said.

So it is the users fault. So think of it like this.  Google goes around the neighborhood and tries all the doors.  If it is unlocked they write down your address, take a picture of your house and walk in and copy any sort of mail or paperwork that happens to be sitting around by the door.  Then they leave.  They are asked about it, and deny it.  A month later they say that they were actually doing this and sorry, we were only planning on trying the doors and writing down the addresses!  The AG asks to see what sort of personal correspondence was copied and is told to go fuck himself.  Later a new AG says that the correspondence is more or less irrelevant and that people need to have done a better job of locking their doors and keeping their bills in order.

This is why I am slowly going mad.

Another day where my head slowly spins...

In order to keep everyone as informed (and depressed) as possible, I am going to post quite a bit more for a while.  Pointless I assure you.

So todays irritant involves the collective activities of google (you know them?) as well as the Connecticut AG in a change of attitude about the activities.

A moment about google - I acknowledge (and even embrace) the irony of using a "free" public blog hosted under google services while I call them names.  I know (as do you) that if you are not purchasing a product from a company that in fact you are the product.  And yes, Soylant Green is made of people.

A moment about the offense (since there seems to be no real suggestion that they did not in fact do this I remove the usual 'alleged' qualifier).  Short version - in order to have a better idea about who is exactly where when they use the google location services.  As part of the street view program (where they drive around and take pictures of streets, houses and whatnot) they hoovered up wireless data from unsecured wireless installations instead of just the id of the transmitter.  After denying that they did this (a profoundly dicky thing), they acknowledged the act and threw the programmers under the bus since that it what management does.

So who really gives a shit?

Former Attorney General Richard Blumenthal last December in response to Google's 'accidental' collection of payload data from WiFi networks had the following to say:

 “Verifying Google’s data snare is crucial to assessing a penalty and assuring no repeat. Consumers and businesses expect and deserve a full explanation, as well as measures shielding them from future spying. We will scrupulously safeguard the confidentiality of information we review.

“We will fight to compel Google to come clean–granting my office access to improperly collected materials and protecting confidentiality, as the company has done in Canada and elsewhere.”

I like this for many reasons including the simple fact that it is the right thing to do.

Enter new Attorney General George Jepsen, who is now saying:

Jepsen said Friday that his office will enter into settlement negotiations with the company without reviewing the pilfered data, which Google has steadfastly refused to share with it. Under the terms of the deal between the two, Connecticut will drop the civil investigative demand it was using to force Google to produce the data at issue here, and Google will stipulate to collecting and storing it. It will also stipulate that the data collected included confidential and private information like “partial or complete e-mail communications.”

Note that google does not have to get rid of the data that it has.

So why, good readers am I so pissed off?  We are living after all in a Business Friendly universe now.  There is a second press release which says in part:

For Immediate Release FRIDAY JAN. 28, 2011 

HARTFORD – In recognition of Data Privacy Day, Attorney General George Jepsen Friday advised Connecticut residents to protect their personal and communications data by encrypting their own wireless Internet networks. 

The recommendation stemmed from Connecticut’s investigation into Google Inc.’s collection of payload data being transmitted over unsecured business and consumer networks. That investigation led to a stipulation with Google that will avoid the need to go to court as settlement negotiations continue. 

“Google’s collection of payload data demonstrates that others may be watching your Internet activity without your knowledge,” Jepsen said. “Consumers should know that the wireless routers they purchase from the store are not automatically encrypted, and they need to activate the encryption feature to ensure better protection,” Jepsen said.

So it is the users fault. So think of it like this.  Google goes around the neighborhood and tries all the doors.  If it is unlocked they write down your address, take a picture of your house and walk in and copy any sort of mail or paperwork that happens to be sitting around by the door.  Then they leave.  They are asked about it, and deny it.  A month later they say that they were actually doing this and sorry, we were only planning on trying the doors and writing down the addresses!  The AG asks to see what sort of personal correspondence was copied and is told to go fuck himself.  Later a new AG says that the correspondence is more or less irrelevant and that people need to have done a better job of locking their doors and keeping their bills in order.

This is why I am slowly going mad.

The Grey

It has been approximately a year since I felt like there was time to sit and write out my frustrations to the world.  Well, there is even less time than before, but I am tired and need to get a few things off my chest.

I am sitting in my office overlooking a city composed from this perspective completely of muted grey, browns and white.  A single red pipe sticking up from the new construction across the way composes the only primary color in view.  The two things, the Grey and the Tired, are probably not unrelated and in part seem to be kept in check by the miracle of Modern Pharmaceuticals for which I am happy.

In reading the interwebs the other day I run across this little gem -

DOJ seeks mandatory data retention requirement for ISPs ; Joins police chief organization in calling for law to bolster enforcement efforts to fight child porn, other online crime

John Douglas, chief of police in Overland Park, Kansas and a representative of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, echoed similar concerns (PDF).  "Clearly, preserving digital evidence is crucial in any modern-day criminal investigation," Douglas said in his prepared testimony for the House subcommittee. On occasion, law enforcement has been able to use existing legal processes to get ISPs to preserve data in connection with specific investigations, he said.

However, because of widely varying data retention policies, sometimes law enforcement requests for protecting data are made too late. "There are cases where we are not able to work quickly enough -- mostly because a 'lead' is discovered after the logs have expired or we are unaware of the specific service provider's protocols concerning data retention time periods," Douglas said.

What is being asked for is that ISP's retain data about online activity for a period of two years.  The form of the data that is being asked for has not been fully described but any form of this retention represents a significant erosion of the notion of privacy.  In the more full bodied version, providers would be required to keep full session information (think of this in terms of all your "web traffic").  Two years is a long time.

Now this strikes me as a little stinky.  There is almost no discussion of privacy concerns except perhaps:

A discussion about data retention is also not about whether the government should have the ability to obtain retained data. Retained data is held by the provider, not the government. Federal law controls when providers can disclose information related to communications, and it requires investigators to obtain legal process, such as a subpoena or court order and in some cases with a search warrant, in order to compel providers to disclose it.

Any way, the same DOJ jokers who currently break the law and abuse the system will just get another tiny speed bump put in place to see whatever you have been doing on line for the past couple of years.

This is by no means a suggestion that it will be used by unethical folks for illegal actions, but really people give me a fucking break.

In a larger perspective we can look back on the NSA coercing telecommunication companies into allowing them to engage in warentless surveillance.    I have gone on and one about this in the past so, this will be short and to the point.  From one of my favorite sites:

Senator Barack Obama, desperate for some traction against Hillary Clinton in the fight for the Democratic nomination for president announced (via) he would support a filibuster if it contained retroactive immunity, but in the end he supported it. The phone companies were off the hook (har) and no one had to find out anything.

Why dredge up this ancient history? Because it sent the message to the business community that if the government comes calling it is best to go along. There is no downside to cooperating, apart perhaps from some anxiety while the pretty theater in the capitol plays out. There is a definite downside to pushing back, though.

This scenario appears to be repeating, this time with Internet companies. Twitter just received a subpoena for user data along with a gag order preventing it from telling the targets. To its enormous credit, it fought back, challenging and quashing the gag order. WikiLeaks - the target of the investigation - raised the entirely reasonable question of whether, say, Facebook and Google have received similar orders. What assurance can anyone have that their data is being protected from US government surveillance?

Honestly compared to this, the NSA buildout in various telcos is totally kids stuff.

Just another day in The Grey.

Compelling Necessity

I have been digesting this for a few days now.  Since no amount of "digestion" seems to help, I will just get it off my chest in the usual way.

On 8,  Sept the 9th Circuit ruled that the state secrets doctrine bars a court action for torture.  That means that you (yes you, citizen!) can be dragged away in secret, held for years without charges, tortured etc etc and if the government wants to call their own law breaking a secret (meaning that there are "state secrets" involved) there is not fuck all that you can do.  Full stop.

This case requires us to address the difficult balance the state secrets doctrine strikes between fundamental principles of our liberty, including justice, transparency, accountability and national security. Although as judges we strive to honor all of these principles, there are times when exceptional circumstances create an irreconcilable conflict between them. On those rare occasions, we are bound to follow the Supreme Court’s admonition that “even the most compelling necessity cannot overcome the claim of privilege if the court is ultimately satisfied that [state] secrets are at stake.” United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1, 11 (1953). After much deliberation, we reluctantly conclude this is such a case, and the plaintiffs’ action must be dismissed. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 

From the Jeppesen Dataplan suit.

This is a big deal in that the same branch of the government that is breaking all these international laws, is the same one that defines what should be kept secret in the name of national security.  You do the math.

You can not tell me that the current administration is somehow innocent of this as well - they have pushed for a growth of executive privilege and pledged to ignore the self admitted crimes against humanity from the previous administration.

The ACLU’s Ben Wizner on the decision:

This is a sad day not only for the torture victims whose attempt to seek justice has been extinguished, but for all Americans who care about the rule of law and our nation’s reputation in the world. To date, not a single victim of the Bush administration’s torture program has had his day in court. If today’s decision is allowed to stand, the United States will have closed its courtroom doors to torture victims while providing complete immunity to their torturers. The torture architects and their enablers may have escaped the judgment of this court, but they will not escape the judgment of history.

I need a fucking drink.

The tendency of a principle to expand itself to the limit of its logic.

In reading (whatever the hell I manage to read in my spare time), ran across this.  More to say about it, but want to get it down now.

Korematsu was born on our soil, of parents born in Japan. The Constitution makes him a citizen of the United States by nativity, and a citizen of California by residence. No claim is made that he is not loyal to this country. There is no suggestion that, apart from the matter involved here, he is not law-abiding and well disposed. Korematsu, however, has been convicted of an act not commonly a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.

Even more unusual is the series of military orders which made this conduct a crime. They forbid such a one to remain, and they also forbid him to leave. They were so drawn that the only way Korematsu could avoid violation was to give himself up to the military authority. This meant submission to custody, examination, and transportation out of the territory, to be followed by indeterminate confinement in detention camps. . . .

A military order, however unconstitutional, is not apt to last longer than the military emergency. Even during that period, a succeeding commander may revoke it all. But once a judicial opinion rationalizes such an order to show that it conforms to the Constitution, or rather rationalizes the Constitution to show that the Constitution sanctions such an order, the Court for all time has validated the principle of racial discrimination in criminal procedure and of transplanting American citizens. The principle then lies about like a loaded weapon, ready for the hand of any authority that can bring forward a plausible claim of an urgent need. Every repetition imbeds that principle more deeply in our law and thinking and expands it to new purposes. All who observe the work of courts are familiar with what Judge Cardozo described as “the tendency of a principle to expand itself to the limit of its logic.” * A military commander may overstep the bounds of constitutionality, and it is an incident. But if we review and approve, that passing incident becomes the doctrine of the Constitution. There it has a generative power of its own, and all that it creates will be in its own image. Nothing better illustrates this danger than does the Court’s opinion in this case.

Justice Jackson, wrote this in his dissent from Korematsu v US (starting on page 322 US 243).