Law

I agree with most of the positions taken by the Institute for Justice, an organization that fights for economic rights of entrepreneurs (especially small businesses fighting ridiculous regulations designed as barriers to entry), for freedom of speech, against eminent domain abuse, and for school choice. But I don’t understand its argument against Arizona’s Clean Elections law, which strikes me as conflicting with some of its other arguments. Tim Keller, head of the Arizona chapter of the Institute for Justice, makes the following argument: ...

Police are investigating mailings of suspicious white powder, which proved to be a hoax (apparently cornstarch and wheat germ), to nineteen Church of Scientology addresses today, which led to evacuations and closures. The LAPD and FBI are both investigating. The LA Times says that “there was no evidence that Wednesday’s mailings were connected to the hacking” (“a cyber attack last week”), though I suspect the mailings were from somebody participating in the “Anonymous” “war” on Scientology. If they happen to catch the people behind the hoax, I won’t have sympathy for them. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that a married couple in Stockton were incorrectly targeted for harrassment on the belief they were pro-Scientology hackers. The Scientology main website has been moved to Prolexic Technologies, a company that sells a service to filter denial of service traffic. “Google bombing” has been used to make the Church of Scientology’s website the top Google search result for “dangerous cult” and Xenu.net the third result for “Scientology." The Economist has now reported on the battle, under the title “Fair game." The Wikipedia page on “Project Chanology” is a good place to keep up-to-date on the events of the latest Internet battles involving Scientology. ...

In a press release yesterday that cites an article I co-authored in Skeptic magazine, a group referring to itself as “Anonymous” has announced that it has declared war against Scientology. The stated justification for the “war” is the Church of Scientology’s attempts to keep a video of Tom Cruise off the net. That video, which is still viewable at Gawker.com, was made for a Scientology awards ceremony. The longer video from which it was taken is also now viewable there. Gawker.com responded to a cease and desist letter with a refusal to remove the video, which it considers to be fair use for news and comment, but I’m not so sure that it has a good legal case for putting up more than short excerpts. (In case you’re wondering about all the Scientology jargon in the Tom Cruise video, MTV has done a good job of explaining it. Actor Jerry O’Connell has also put out a good parody.) The “war,” which is described at another site under the name “Project Chanology” (a reference to 4chan, a popular message board, where most posts are made by people who don’t login and are thus attributed to “Anonymous”), calls for denial of service attacks over the Internet, prank phone calls, spam emails, and personal visits involving vandalism and harassment. Apparently Scientology’s main website was down due to denial of service for at least part of the day yesterday. The press release cites a number of web pages for further information about Scientology, the second of which is the article “Scientology v. the Internet: Free Speech & Copyright Infringement on the Information Super-Highway” which Jeff Jacobsen and I wrote for Skeptic magazine in 1995 after Scientology effectively declared war on the Internet. (A much lesser-known sequel to that article, published only on the web, is “Scientology v. the Internet: An Update and Response to Leisa Goodman.") I completely disagree with the tactics being used here–Scientology has as much right to free speech and protection of their copyrights as anyone else, though I also condemn Scientology’s habitual misuse of copyright to try to suppress fair use of information. To the extent this is a prank designed to get media attention, well done. To the extent it gets taken seriously, though, it’s something that may not end well. Read the material, watch the videos, have a laugh, and tell others about the absurdity and abuses of Scientology. But please, don’t launch attacks on their websites, harass individuals, or engage in vandalism. “Anonymous” previously received coverage for attacks on MySpace accounts on Fox 11 in Los Angeles on July 26, 2007. BTW, the press release gets its facts wrong when it claims that the alt.religion.scientology Usenet newsgroup was “shut down.” Scientology attorney Helena Kobrin issued an rmgroup message, but almost all news servers ignored it. The accurate facts may be found in Jeff’s and my Skeptic article. UPDATE: Wikinews and Xenu.net have more. ...

Today’s Washington Post reports: The FBI, which has had trouble keeping track of its guns and laptops, also has a chronic problem paying its phone bills on time, according to audit results released today. Telephone companies have repeatedly cut off FBI access to wiretaps of alleged terrorists and criminal suspects because of the bureau’s failure to pay its bills, the audit found. The report by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine also found that more than half of the nearly 1,000 telecommunications bills reviewed by investigators were not paid on time, including one invoice for $66,000 at one unidentified field office. ...

Alan Ralsky, at one time believed to be the top spammer in the world, has finally been indicted today by a federal grand jury. His home was raided back in 2005, and he’s now been charged along with ten other people in “a wide ranging international fraud scheme involving the illegal use of bulk commercial e-mailing.” Those indicted include James E. Bragg, 39, of Queen Creek, Arizona. The indictment alleges that Ralsky’s spam gang “tried to send spam” through botnets and engaged in a “pump and dump” stock scam for Chinese companies. The Detroit Free Press’s coverage reports: “Prosecutors described Ralsky, 52, of West Bloomfield, as one of the most prolific spammers in the nation. Until 2005, when federal agents raided his home and seized his computers, his operation sent tens of millions of unsolicited email messages daily to Internet subscribers, hawking everything from sexual enhancement drugs, weight loss products and worthless stock, the government said. In the summer of 2005 alone, prosecutors said, his operation generated $3 million." The DOJ press release is here. ...

(Hat tip to Scott Peterson on the SKEPTIC mailing list.) Historical Comments Einzige (2007-12-31): Brilliant, funny, and sad, all at the same time.

In a September 2007 talk, Dembski used an over-dubbed version of a computer animation of the inner workings of the cell that he took from Harvard and XVIVO, which he subsequently claimed he had downloaded from the Internet in a form that didn’t have the credits (e.g., from YouTube). Peter Irons has now shown that the content of Dembski’s latest book, Design of Life, shows that his explanation is a lie. That book includes a reference to the same video, with a link to its original location, marked as “last accessed” on January 25, 2007. Since he knew where the video came from in January 2007, he also already knew in September 2007. ERV points out the details of Dembski’s deception. (Via Pharyngula.) UPDATE (December 31, 2007): There is an entertaining exchange of letters between Peter Irons, Bill Dembski, and Dembski’s attorney John Gilmore posted at Pharyngula. ...

Chris Hedges, author of American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, has written an article about how the religious right’s support for Mike Huckabee “represents a seismic shift in the tactics, ideology and direction of the radical Christian right” in that Huckabee is a candidate who repudiates many of the core principles of conservatism in favor of populism. I’d say he’s more of a William Jennings Bryan than a Barry Goldwater. Hedges’ article correctly identifies some very serious reasons to be concerned about a Huckabee candidacy, with his ties to Christian reconstructionism and his complete ignorance of foreign policy. He concludes with a few paragraphs about Huckabee’s opposition to the HPV vaccine and his desire to quarantine AIDS patients. It’s here that Hedges gives Huckabee too much credit, when he writes that “Huckabee has publicly backed off from this extreme position.” In fact, Huckabee hasn’t backed off from the position, only from the specific words he used to describe it. Here’s what he said about it to Chris Wallace, as reported at the Huffington Post (with the accompanying video record): This morning, Huckabee first tried to deny his comments. “Chris, I didn’t say that we should quarantine,” he said. In fact, he said we “need[ed]” to isolate AIDS patients. Pressed repeatedly by host Chris Wallace, however, Huckabee relented. “That is exactly what I said. I don’t run from it, I don’t recant from it. Would I say it a little differently today? Sure, in light of 15 years of additional knowledge and understanding, I would."That’s not backing off from the position.

December 12, 2007 The Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV, Chairman The United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Washington, DC 20510 The Honorable Silvestre Reyes, Chairman The United States House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Washington, DC 20515 Dear Chairman Reyes and Chairman Rockefeller: As retired military leaders of the U.S. Armed Forces, we write to express our strong support for Section 327 of the Conference Report on the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, H.R. 2082. Section 327 would require intelligence agents of the U.S. government to adhere to the standards of prisoner treatment and interrogation contained in the U.S. Army Field Manual on Human Collector Operations (the Army Field Manual). We believe it is vital to the safety of our men and women in uniform that the United States not sanction the use of interrogation methods it would find unacceptable if inflicted by the enemy against captured Americans. That principle, embedded in the Army Field Manual, has guided generations of American military personnel in combat. The current situation, in which the military operates under one set of interrogation rules that are public and the CIA operates under a separate, secret set of rules, is unwise and impractical. In order to ensure adherence across the government to the requirements of the Geneva Conventions and to maintain the integrity of the humane treatment standards on which our own troops rely, we believe that all U.S. personnel - military and civilian - should be held to a single standard of humane treatment reflected in the Army Field Manual. The Field Manual is the product of decades of practical experience and was updated last year to reflect lessons learned from the current conflict. Interrogation methods authorized by the Field Manual have proven effective in eliciting vital intelligence from dangerous enemy prisoners. Some have argued that the Field Manual rules are too simplistic for civilian interrogators. We reject that argument. Interrogation methods authorized in the Field Manual are sophisticated and flexible. And the principles reflected in the Field Manual are values that no U.S. agency should violate. General David Petraeus underscored this point in an open letter to the troops in May in which he cautioned against the use of interrogation techniques not authorized by the Field Manual: What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight. . . . is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect…. Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk;” however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact, our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees. Employing interrogation methods that violate the Field Manual is not only unnecessary, but poses enormous risks. These methods generate information of dubious value, reliance upon which can lead to disastrous consequences. Moreover, revelation of the use of such techniques does immense damage to the reputation and moral authority of the United States essential to our efforts to combat terrorism. This is a defining issue for America. We urge you to support the adoption of Section 327 of the Conference Report and thereby send a clear message - to U.S. personnel and to the world - that the United States will not engage in or condone the abuse of prisoners and will honor its commitments to uphold the Geneva Conventions. Sincerely, General Joseph Hoar, USMC (Ret.) General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.) General Charles Krulak, USMC (Ret.) General David M. Maddox, USA (Ret.) General Merrill A. McPeak, USAF (Ret.) Admiral Stansfield Turner, USN (Ret.) Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn, USN (Ret.) Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy, USA (Ret.) Lieutenant General Donald L. Kerrick, USA (Ret.) Vice Admiral Albert H. Konetzni Jr., USN (Ret.) Lieutenant General Charles Otstott, USA (Ret.) Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster, USA (Ret.) Major General Paul Eaton, USA (Ret.) Major General Eugene Fox, USA (Ret.) Major General John L. Fugh, USA (Ret.) Rear Admiral Don Guter, USN (Ret.) Major General Fred E. Haynes, USMC (Ret.) Rear Admiral John D. Hutson, USN (Ret.) Major General Melvyn Montano, ANG (Ret.) Major General Gerald T. Sajer, USA (Ret.) Major General Antonio ‘Tony’ M. Taguba, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General David M. Brahms, USMC (Ret.) Brigadier General James P. Cullen, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General Evelyn P. Foote, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General David R. Irvine, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General John H. Johns, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General Richard O’Meara, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General Murray G. Sagsveen, USA (Ret.) Brigadier General Anthony Verrengia, USAF (Ret.) Brigadier General Stephen N. Xenakis, USA (Ret.) The bill in question has passed in the House. It still needs to pass in the Senate. Bush has threatened to veto the measure. UPDATE (December 20, 2007): Notes on a few of the above–Taguba did the investigation of Abu Ghraib. Guter and Hutson were Judge Advocates General (i.e., the top Navy-Marine Corps lawyer). Turner was former Director of Central Intelligence (i.e., head of the CIA).

Gives you some idea of the local demographic and economic conditions (or at least what the people behind these signs believe it to be).