"This is John Galt Speaking"

Well, not really, but a high school student may have invented a device that may someday rival Galt's mythical motor from Atlas Shrugged.

The student, Jonathon Soli, from Southeastern Minnesota, created a device that uses hydrogen and oxygen as a partial replacement power source in engines. To date, Soli has tested his device only in lawnmower-sized engines...but hopes to test it on larger motors in the near future.

American Tourism Boom

I'm sure a lot of foreigners will want to come to America after the Department of Homeland Security unveils its newest tracking tool - the 72 hour registration program!

Couched in the usual argument that the program will enhance border security and deter terrorists from boarding airplanes, the Department of Homeland increased its original registration deadline from 48 to 72 hours.

I feel safer, how about you? At least now terrorists will be required to register before blowing themselves up.

With so many new "anti-terrorism" mechanisms in place, I shudder to think what's in store for the citizenry should another attack occur. The cynical side of me thinks these measures were never designed to deter attacks in the first place; rather, they were implemented so as to ensure citizens remain docile in the face of authority. After all, in a time of war, who are we to question the intentions of our fearless leaders?

Fool Me Twice...

A disturbing article from Antiwar.com about Vice President Dick Cheney's shenanigans in thrusting the Bush Administration's assertion that Iranian Quds forces supply Iraqi insurgents with armor-piercing Explosively Formed Projectiles (EFPs) into mainstream news coverage.

It's no secret Cheney is the engine driving the war machine towards endless conflict. The article chronicles how Cheney was able to use a willing puppet (General David Petraeus) to sell his lies to the media about Iranian involvement in killing American soldiers only days after Petraeus took over as Commander of American Forces in Iraq.

It seems that, for better or for worse, the one person who has been immune from Iraq War criticism (save for moveon.org) has been General Petraeus. Regardless of public sentiment--hot, cold, lukewarm--on America's "mission" in Iraq, it appears the media is happy to paint General Petraeus as the next Dwight Eisenhower.

Of course, knowledge of such facts hasn't created a split within different sects of the Bush Administration. Departments previously at odds with the Executive Branch (namely Defense and State) now happily hum along to the tune of the Cheney/Bush drumbeat for war, and the caesar-esque Petraeus continues to make periodic appearances in front of the Senate and House adding new lyrics to what should by now be a worn-out tune.

Fallon Toes the Party Line

In an interview with CNN - his first since stepping down (being fired) from Central Command - Admiral Fallon discussed the reasons for the change of command.

Repeating that "Bush doesn't want war with Iran," Fallon attributed his resignation to his concern over generating the perception that he doesn't support the Chain of Command or intend to follow the orders of the President. Towards the end of the interview Fallon asserts that the most important thing we can do now is "retain the high confidence we have in General David Petraeus and his team out there."

The military's obsession with perception has bothered me from the moment I was introduced to it in 1997. My introduction to the military's mantra "perception is reality" came during a lecture on sexual harassment, and throughout my tenure in the Navy the slogan was applied to other situations as well. That Admiral Fallon all but repeated the above line of reasoning as his excuse for departure from CENTCOM only underscores the severe lack of cognitive dissonance within military ranks.

Military personnel swear to defend the Constitution of the United States, not to maintain the perception they are loyal to the President or the country's policies. If the President issues orders that circumvent the Constitution (like, say, invading Iraq) it is the military officer's solemn duty to protest and disobey those orders.

I liked the fact that Admiral Fallon was seen as the 'last line of defense' between Bush's lust for war with Iran and the hope that rational heads would prevail in staving off additional conflict in the region. Sadly, based on the text of his interview, it appears our last line of defense was nothing more than a house of cards built upon a foundation of sand...easily washed away by the high tide of perception.

"You've Got to Jar Them Emotionally"

A Southern California High School experienced an all-too-real brush with death last week when a police officer visited several classrooms and declared 36 of the high school students dead as a result of drunk driving accidents. The police officer was operating in conjunction with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to raise student awareness towards the dangerous involved in getting behind the wheel while drunk.

MADD's mission is to stop drunk driving, support victims of violent crime, and to prevent underage drinking. Officer Eric Newbury of the California Highway Patrol administers the program--called "every 15 minutes"--at local high schools.

I remember similar programs from my high school days. A group of student volunteers would go from classroom to classroom, selecting one student from each class and designating them "drunk driving casualties" and removing them from class. A rose was placed on the missing student's desk and a brief eulogy was read before the remaining students. All students were corralled into the gymnasium after the morning's "eulogies" were read and we were lectured about the dangers of drunk driving by a local police officer.

Today, however, it's not enough to lecture students about the dangers of drunk driving. According to Officer Newbury, "Standard speeches don't get the desired reaction."

And how, pray tell, Officer Newbury, do you reach today's student?

“If I sit there and lecture somebody in a nice way, it's going to go in one ear and out the other,” he said. “In today's world, where they have all sorts of gore and fantastic things that kids can access on the computer, if you want to compete with that, you have to jar them emotionally.

“I want them to be an emotional wreck. I don't want them to have to live through this for real.”

I want them to be an emotional wreck. This is coming from a police officer, someone who's supposed to be a leader in a community? Yikes.

The author's sycophantic defense of Officer Newbury and MADD's policies of scaring the you-know-what out of high school students only make matters worse. Since when is it acceptable for someone in position of authority--like Officer Newbury--to outright lie to a captive, easily-influenced audience like a group of high school students?

This morning I heard two radio personalities arguing over the merits (or lack thereof) of programs like these achieving their desired goals. One of the personalities defended the program, comparing it to the "scared straight" program, now known as the Juvenile Awareness Program. I'm not positive about this, but I remember the scared straight program involving teenagers who had already been identified as having trouble with the law. In other words, "Scared Straight" was not offered to broad swaths of the high school population.

Regardless, at issue here is the State using fear, lies, and intimidation to coerce high school students into remaining submissive. When a police officer such as Eric Newbury is allowed to lie to a group of students in order to prove his point--and is celebrated for it in the press--there should be widespread outrage. Unfortunately, based on the feedback I've read/listened to, the majority of people agree with Officer Newbury: in order to reach today's student, you've got to 'jar them emotionally.'

...And the Neocons rejoice

I'm certain that, over the next few days, we can expect the neoconosphere to be giddy about recent reports showing May, 2008, having the lowest death toll (19) of US military personnel since the war began.

It's frustrating to me to hear such "successes" linked with the Bush/Petraeus "surge" policy from January 2007. To define success by "less fatalities" is to miss the point completely - since when is success defined by less failure?

To draw a poor analogy, consider a baseball team in the midst of a season-worst losing streak. The team is repeatedly outplayed, and loses every night by at least five runs. Suddenly, one night, the team plays better, and they only lose by two runs. Using the logic from the above article, losing by two runs is considered success.

Headlines and analysis touting fewer fatalities as a success story serves only to distract the public from the real issue at hand. American military forces had no business invading Iraq in the first place - therefore the premise of the article is flawed. One fatality was too many.

Extraordinary Rendition

I stumbled across this September, 2006 blog post from David Corn today while doing some research on "extraordinary rendition" (or torture when such practices are applied to John McCain). The pictures pretty much speak for themselves - what an ugly, inhuman, barbaric way to treat another human being.

Corn's analysis is dead-on; namely, the purpose of torture is not necessarily to extract critical information from prisoners. Rather, torture is administered in order to coerce prisoner confessions.

We're constantly being told by the media and the Bush Administration that "extraordinary rendition" is a necessary tactic in fighting the War on Terror, but where's the proof that any of these techniques actually save lives? I think Jonah Blank says it best when he describes his photos as follows:

Bottom line: Not only do waterboarding and the other types of torture currently being debated put us in company with the most vile regimes of the past half-century; they're also designed specifically to generate a (usually false) confession, not to obtain genuinely actionable intel. This isn't a matter of sacrificing moral values to keep us safe; it's sacrificing moral values for no purpose whatsoever.

Today, the United States has captured over 80,000 "suspects" in fighting the War on Terror, with upwards of 14,000 people subjected to torture. From prison ships to CIA-run secret "black bases" the United States' steadfast commitment to de-humanizing the people we desire to conquer remains intact. With the world's largest prison population and a seemingly insatiable appetite for war and destruction, is it any wonder the United States is willing to sacrifice moral values for no purpose whatsoever?