Institutionalized Conspiracy

By Machiavelli | Published: January 1, 2010

CIA logoIn most of its operations, the CIA is by definition a conspiracy, using covert actions and secret plans, many of which are of the most unsavory kind. What are covert operations if not conspiracies? At the same time, the CIA is an institution, a structural part of the national security state. In sum, the agency is an institutionalized conspiracy.

Information Awareness Office Logo

Official seal of the IAO, complete with Masonic eye-in-pyramid blasting a sci-fi death ray across the globe and Latin maxim, "knowledge is power."

But it’s not only the CIA. The Information Awareness Office and Information Exploitation Office were opened in 2001 with former Iran-Contra conspirator and Reagan Security Advisor John Poindexter at the helm. Their stated goal is that of “Total Information Awareness.”1 Although the IAO’s funding was terminated in a motion by Senator Russ Feingold in 2004, their projects were expressly allowed to continue, under a black budget.2 Since then, the Information Exploitation Office has renamed itself the “Information Processing Techniques Office“ and Total Information Awareness has been rechristened “Terrorist Information Awareness.”

But it isn’t only the CIA, IAO, IEO, and TIA. It’s also the NSA & CSS, GCHQ, CSE, DSD, GCSB, FSB, SIS, BND, and ISI. It’s the global ECHELON surveillance network run by the world’s most powerful governments,3 the NarusInsight supercomputing mass surveillance system available for use only by government contract,4 secret patents granted under gag order that never expire,5 and the mysterious radomes that appear on restricted areas on every continent.6

According to Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, the Pentagon “cannot track” $2.3 trillion dollars of its own transactions,7 a number which is 2.5 times larger than that year’s total estimated defense budget8 and 1.5 times larger than 2010′s entire estimated federal budget9.

Suddenly, a global conspiracy isn’t such a crazy idea. In fact, it’s a public institution paid for by your tax dollars.

  1. The original website hosted by DARPA has been destroyed, these are two mirrors. [HTML1] [HTML2] [↩]
  2. “Total/Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA): Is it Truly Dead?”, published by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. [HTML] [↩]
  3. The UK-USA alliance is an intelligence sharing community formed between five English-speaking nations of the 1st world during the Cold War. [↩]
  4. Quoted from Wikipedia’s Narus article: “[Narus] is notable for being the creator of NarusInsight, a supercomputer system which is used by the NSA and other bodies to perform mass surveillance and monitoring of citizens’ and corporations’ Internet communications in real-time, and whose installation in AT&T’s San Francisco Internet backbone gave rise to a 2006 class action lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation against AT&T, Hepting v. AT&T.” [↩]
  5. Quoted from Wikipedia’s NSA article: “NSA has the ability to file for a patent from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office under gag order. Unlike normal patents, these are not revealed to the public and do not expire. However, if the Patent Office receives an application for an identical patent from a third party, they will reveal NSA’s patent and officially grant it to NSA for the full term on that date.[12]“ The Wikipedia article gives an example for one of the NSA’s officially published patents. [HTML] Alternatively, cryptome.org hosts a number of leaked NSA documents including those regarding secret patents, such as “Ion trap in a semiconductor chip patent”, granted December 1, 2009. [HTML] [↩]
  6. Radomes are on the front page of the GCSB website.

    GCSB's got balls [↩]

  7. “The War on Waste”, published by CBS Evening News. [HTML] [VIDEO] [↩]
  8. According to page 4 of the National Defense Budget Estimates for FY 2001, published by Office of the Comptroller of Defense in 2000 [PDF], total obligational authority + total budget authority + total outlays equals approximately $888 billion. 2.3/0.888 equals 2.59 [↩]
  9. “Death and Taxes”, by Jess Bachman. [JPG] [↩]
Posted in Humanities | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

NASA Every Week

By Machiavelli | Published: December 31, 2009
Ares I rocket

Ares I rocket

NASA could open up a new wave of innovation in space exploration and terrestrial technology by lessening consequences of launch failure and making frequent launches available to engineers. If there were weekly rocket launches, there would be an astronaumical increase in opportunities for new communication, remote sensing, orbital debris mitigation, robotic exploration, photographic, and human spaceflight technology ideas to be tested. Our understanding of chemical rocketry and other, more advanced forms of aeronautic propulsion would inevitably advance and the United States government would do something inspiring for is citizens and for all the future.

I can see it now: medium-sized modern, economical workhorse rockets launching payloads three times a month, and making the once-impossible absolutely routine. After that, we’d have clusters of nanorockets flying up small probes and experiments every week. Each flavor of nanorocket would be optimized for the delivery of its own type of payload.

Weave the private sector into it! The R&D departments of Blue Chip companies, materials manufacturers, and aeronautic corporations should have stakes in every launch. Top-tier universities would have access for graduate projects and special engineering and computer science teams would be organized by NASA to help translate those project ideas into reality. Any projects that could yield results for commercial manned space travel would have top priority. Private interest will line up as soon as these weekly spots open up. NASA needs to both be a government sponsored organization, and be something valuable to business and a means of research production.

Sending tiny robots into space is not interesting to most people, but it is a fallacy to believe the road to innovation is paved by public excitement. It has never been important for citizens at large to be interested in a scientific field for research to commence; the only thing that is important is the amount of opportunity available for leaps made by single interests. A second reason why public interest does not matter is because the United States is not a democracy, funding is not dictated by citizens at large, but by the opinion of a few high-ranking individuals. Because space is not a hot button issue like socialized care, workers unions, immigration, or religion, politicians are rarely put into office based on their opinions on how funding should be delegated for space research and both major political parties in support of NASA.

Cruise ships depart from US ports daily, airliners depart every second, rail cars by the thousands are in motion, and automobiles even more so. Space travel and access to the next frontier must be made routine. By stepping up the launch rate and shaking hands with private interests, NASA can launch us into the next wave of scientific growth and technological innovation.

Lineage:  Slashdot <- NYT.

Posted in Science | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sanctioning Iran

By Machiavelli | Published: December 29, 2009

My dick is THIS long

Last week, the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a measure to put a new round of sanctions on Iran, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009. Not only are sanctions an offensive maneuver perceived as a precursor to war, but it is clear that the United States is not promoting freedom and peace in the Middle East, because any arguments for sanctions against Iran depend on the destruction of liberty.

People say Iran can’t have the bomb because of what they might do with it. Until an individual actually commits some form of aggression against another human being it is no one’s right to infringe upon another’s right to keep and bear arms. This principle applies as equally to nations as it does to individual people, so in other words, we can’t use government force against people because of “what they might do.”

Some call Iran a “rogue nation” and they can’t be trusted. This is nothing more than a disgusting cultural bias which is flatly refuted by objective reality. In the past 50 years, Iran has never invaded another country or initiated military force against anyone. Beyond the 1979 hostage crisis, they have burned a few U.S. flags and said some very nasty things about the US and Israel. Other than that, they have been content to screw up their own country and leave the rest of the world alone. In contrast, the United States has invaded countless nations. The United States has committed direct acts of war against Iran, including overthrowing their democratically-elected government and appointing their own rulers. The United States has secret prisons all over the world, military bases in 147 countries1, and while the President decries waterboarding and torture, he publicly supports extraordinary rendition2 with expansions occurring  under his leadership3. Who’s the rogue nation now?

Iran lives in a world in which many of its neighbors possess nuclear weapons. In the event of a nuclear attack against Iran, there is nothing the “international community” can do until it is too late, just as there is nothing the police can do for an individual at the moment he is attacked by an aggressor. Like any potential mugging victim, Iran is much safer armed with a deterrent than at the mercy of those who wish Iran harm.

Ron Paul writing in the Times Gazette also brings up the issue of international respect:

…[B]eing surrounded by nuclear powers one can understand why they might want to become nuclear capable if only to defend themselves and to be treated more respectfully. After all, we don’t sanction nuclear capable countries. We take diplomatic negotiations a lot more seriously, and we frequently send money to them instead. The non-nuclear countries are the ones we bomb.4

The people of Iran as a sovereign nation have all of the same rights that the people of the United States do. It is not for the United States to decide what weapons Iran possesses any more than it is Iran’s place to decide what weapons the United States possesses. One would have to employ the most convoluted logic imaginable to arrive at any other conclusion. It is time to stop playing emperor with Iran and start practicing what we preach. We cannot in any way deny Iran the right to bear arms.

Lineage: Campaign for Liberty

  1. Department of Defense. “Active Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and by Country”. December 31, 2008. [PDF] [↩]
  2. “U.S. Says Rendition to Continue, but With More Oversight”, by David Johnston, published in the New York Times on August 24, 2009. [HTML] [↩]
  3. “Renditioning Under Obama”, by Anthony Gregory, published on the Campaign for Liberty blog on August 24, 2009. [HTML] [↩]
  4. “Iran Sanctions are a Precursor to War”, by Ron Paul, on December 28, 2009 in the Times Gazette. [HTML] [↩]
Posted in Humanities | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Citrus History

By Machiavelli | Published: December 28, 2009

Orange photo
Oranges are often said to be a wholesome, natural, and tasty thing to eat. But just what is “natural?” The history of the orange and it’s acidic friends is a scientific adventure through prehistoric genetic engineering and cultural trade.

It is commonly accepted that there are four founding species of the citrus genus:

  • Lime (Citrus aurantifolia)
  • Pummelo (Citrus maxima)
  • Citron (Citrus medica)
  • Mandarin (Citrus reticulata)

The citron was the first of the citruses to be known in Europe. Having been introduced to Europe by Alexander the Great’s armies, it was used first as a perfume and then as a food. The lime was introduced to Europe during the crusades. The pummelo was introduced at about the same time, and the mandarin was last to be introduced to Europe, in the 19th century.

These fruits were commercially grown in China for thousands of years, then introduced to Europe through trade. But three of the most popular citrus plants today are all plants that were invented by humans through hybridization:

  • Lemon, Citrus limon (citron × lime, invented in India)
  • Grapefruit, Citrus paradisii (pummelo × orange, invented in Barbados)
  • Orange, Citrus sinensis (pummelo × mandarin, invented somewhere in Southeast Asia)

Portuguese, Spanish, Arab, and Dutch sailors planted lemon trees along trade routes to prevent scurvy. On his second voyage in 1493, Christopher Columbus brought the seeds of oranges, lemons and citrons to Haiti and the Caribbean. Oranges and lemons were introduced to Florida in 1513 by Juan Ponce de Leon, and were introduced to Hawaii in 1792.

Barbados map

Island of Barbados

In the early 1700s Captain Shaddock invented the grapefruit on the island of Barbados by mixing the Jamaican sweet orange with the Indonesian pomelo plant. The “Shaddock” over time became the “grapefruit,” an allusion to the clusters of fruit on the tree, which often appear similar to grapes. In 1929 the red grapefruit was invented after a single red grapefruit was found growing on a pink variety tree. Over time this variety was bred into commonality and patented.

Conjoined twins

The conjoined twin of the navel orange, seen bottom right.

But by far the most interesting story of human invention regarding the citrus is the story of the navel orange. Navel oranges are one of the most common and easily recognizable types of fruit, due to the fact that it is actually two oranges living in one shell. Every navel orange contains a conjoined twin inside it. The bump created by this conjoined twin bears resemblance to a human navel.

From a single mutation in 1820 in an orchard of sweet oranges planted at a monastery in Brazil came the navel orange. Every navel orange plant in existence today has been genetically cloned from the original 19th century tree.

Because the delicious and interesting mutation left the fruit seedless, and therefore sterile, the only means available to cultivate this variety is to graft cuttings onto other varieties of citrus tree. Grafting is the process of cutting part of a living organism off and transplanting it to the open wound of another organism, fusing them together. Two cuttings of the original tree were transplanted by ship to Riverside, California in 1870.

Today, navel oranges continue to be produced via cutting and grafting. Every navel orange has exactly the same genetic makeup as the original two hundred-year-old tree. They are clones, and in essence are all the fruit of a single tree. When you bite into a fresh navel orange, grapefruit, lemon, or even if you are fortunate enough to be eating a lime outside of China, realize that you are eating something entirely of human invention.

Lineage:

Posted in Humanities, Science | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

Pleasing Everybody

By Machiavelli | Published: February 27, 2009

I was just reading the GNOME Human Interface Guidelines, which tell computer application developers how to make their applications integrate well into GNOME, and the internationalization section closes with a list of some common things to avoid:

  • Pictures of flags or money
  • Maps showing political boundaries or contentious location names
  • Lists of countries or cities in non-alphabetical order (unless specifically requested or required by the context)
  • Icons depicting animals
  • Icons depicting only hands or feet

Alright, I get it— somebody from New Guinea may not be familiar with an animal that an application developer on the other side of the world sees every day, right? But hands and feet? Are you kidding me!? Most of us are BORN with hands and feet, so not understanding what a foot is could be a problem. It would have to be something offensive or impolite.

As I understand it, Islam forbids any iconography (especially of Mohammed), which is why traditional Muslim art and architecture is characterized by intricate geometric designs and scrolls.

You really can’t get less iconographic or symbolic than Libya’s flag:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Flag_of_Libya.svg/800px-Flag_of_Libya.svg.png

That would account for the avoidance of animal icons, as well as against the hands and feet. Some Arabs can be offended by body language involving hands and feet. For instance, it is considered impolite to point the sole of your foot or shoe at another person. So just to be on the safe side, it might be best to avoid any depictions of hands or feet.

Place irony here.

Oh, the irony.

I suppose using a penis as a symbol for a function on the computer to “make new things” would not be acceptable in Western culture (it would be perfectly acceptable in others), but O Allah!, why should some gesture or even body part be insufferable to one race, and acceptable to another? Are we, as the humans, that narrow minded? And we are letting something as petty as this influence the way we build computer systems? If we cannot look at a picture of a foot, or any other body part for that matter, how will we ever communicate as humans without hostility?

Lineage: PF

Posted in Humanities | Tagged , , | 2 Comments