Friday, January 30, 2004
Big Brother really is watching you
It sounds like a sci-fi thriller: a super computer program that gathers dossiers on every single man, woman and child — everything from birth and marriage and divorce history to hunting licenses and car license plates. Even every address you have lived at, on down to the color of your hair. Unfortunately, it's not science fiction. It exists, and (ironically) it's called MATRIX. The people of Utah in the US are the unwitting guinea pigs in this experiment - they were signed up to it by former Governor Mike Leavitt. Unfortunately, he didn't bother to tell anybody what he was doing, and the proverbial is only just starting to hit the rotating blades.
So what is MATRIX? The initials stand for Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange. It's an intranet database regarded as the nation's largest cyber-compilation of personal records. The program essentially cross-references government records from both public and private databases, putting together a dossier on individuals for use by law enforcement. It is touted as an efficient crime-fighting tool that allows agencies to access information with just a nimble fingertip.
Searchable databases allow law enforcement agents to probe for people using Social Security numbers, dates of birth, addresses, property records, motor vehicle information and credit history. The information is collected by states and forwarded to a database in Florida, where a private company, Seisint Inc., builds and manages the database.
Now, right there, warning bells should be sounding. A private company managing the most sensitive of personal data? Wooeee! Knowing how private companies sell mailing lists at the drop of a dollar bill, I have severe reservations about how private this stuff will remain, let alone the rights and wrongs of government being able to collect so much data on me. (Okay, I don't live in the USA, but I use the Internet extensively, and I would be most surprised if I'm not well detailed somewhere in the bowels of a US database.)
This is only one of a number of major Big Brother projects being developed which are using the need to combat terrorism as a huge excuse to destroy civil liberty. Another is CAPPS II, which could be operating in US airports as soon as next month, the Washington Post reports. This is the long-threatened system that will, as you check in for a flight, take your full name, home address and telephone number, date of birth and travel itinerary and check it against a set of existing government and private databases to see if you are (probably) who you claim to be and if you have any known connection to bad guys. See here for a fuller rundown on what's going on.
It sounds like a sci-fi thriller: a super computer program that gathers dossiers on every single man, woman and child — everything from birth and marriage and divorce history to hunting licenses and car license plates. Even every address you have lived at, on down to the color of your hair. Unfortunately, it's not science fiction. It exists, and (ironically) it's called MATRIX. The people of Utah in the US are the unwitting guinea pigs in this experiment - they were signed up to it by former Governor Mike Leavitt. Unfortunately, he didn't bother to tell anybody what he was doing, and the proverbial is only just starting to hit the rotating blades.
So what is MATRIX? The initials stand for Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange. It's an intranet database regarded as the nation's largest cyber-compilation of personal records. The program essentially cross-references government records from both public and private databases, putting together a dossier on individuals for use by law enforcement. It is touted as an efficient crime-fighting tool that allows agencies to access information with just a nimble fingertip.
Searchable databases allow law enforcement agents to probe for people using Social Security numbers, dates of birth, addresses, property records, motor vehicle information and credit history. The information is collected by states and forwarded to a database in Florida, where a private company, Seisint Inc., builds and manages the database.
Now, right there, warning bells should be sounding. A private company managing the most sensitive of personal data? Wooeee! Knowing how private companies sell mailing lists at the drop of a dollar bill, I have severe reservations about how private this stuff will remain, let alone the rights and wrongs of government being able to collect so much data on me. (Okay, I don't live in the USA, but I use the Internet extensively, and I would be most surprised if I'm not well detailed somewhere in the bowels of a US database.)
This is only one of a number of major Big Brother projects being developed which are using the need to combat terrorism as a huge excuse to destroy civil liberty. Another is CAPPS II, which could be operating in US airports as soon as next month, the Washington Post reports. This is the long-threatened system that will, as you check in for a flight, take your full name, home address and telephone number, date of birth and travel itinerary and check it against a set of existing government and private databases to see if you are (probably) who you claim to be and if you have any known connection to bad guys. See here for a fuller rundown on what's going on.
Thursday, January 29, 2004
Marriage is slowly dying in Scandinavia
"A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock. Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood. The Nordic family pattern--including gay marriage--is spreading across Europe. And by looking closely at it we can answer the key empirical question underlying the gay marriage debate. Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has."
This is the opening paragraph of an important article by Stanley Kurtz in The Weekly Standard. It's highly relevant both in New Zealand and the USA/Canada/UK, where homosexual marriage (or its near-relative, Civil Unions) are being legislated. In New Zealand, 44% of children are now born outside marriage. There are some strong warnings for what will happen.
"A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock. Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood. The Nordic family pattern--including gay marriage--is spreading across Europe. And by looking closely at it we can answer the key empirical question underlying the gay marriage debate. Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has."
This is the opening paragraph of an important article by Stanley Kurtz in The Weekly Standard. It's highly relevant both in New Zealand and the USA/Canada/UK, where homosexual marriage (or its near-relative, Civil Unions) are being legislated. In New Zealand, 44% of children are now born outside marriage. There are some strong warnings for what will happen.
Wednesday, January 28, 2004
The Thought police are out in force
Here are some more examples:
France has taken the step, unprecedented in all of Europe, of adding Jewish and Muslim holidays to the calendar for state schools. It’s seen as a trade-off to balance a decision banning Muslim girls from wearing headscarves to school, or the wearing of Jewish skullcaps and Christian crosses.
The Belgian parliament has published a list of “cults�. It includes Amish, Quakers, Pentecostals, Assemblies of God, and 21 groups of evangelical Christians.
A charity Christmas CD was banned from distribution because it mentions the baby Jesus. The decision by the Royal Hospital for Sick Children in Edinburgh, Scotland, was instituted because of fears it could offend people who belong to a faith other than Christianity.
Progressive MP Matt Robson called last year for New Zealand to replace the parliamentary prayer with a statement reflecting the secular status of the House and the "diverse and multicultural" nature of New Zealand. The prayer has been read at the beginning of each sitting since 1854.
James Lord, a senior at Dupo High School in Dupo, Illinois was suspended for one month from his daily news broadcast after signing off his December 17th broadcast with the sentence: "Have a safe and happy holiday, and God Bless." Lord said the school principal told him that the use of the words "God Bless" was inappropriate and suspended him from the broadcast for one month.
Six Canadian mayors were convicted for refusing to proclaim Gay Pride Week in their cities. Mayors had to pay fines of up to $10,000. One mayor had to pay $70,000 in legal expenses.
After Toronto print-shop owner Scott Brockie refused on religious grounds to print letterhead for a gay-activist group, the local human-rights commission ordered him to pay the group $5,000, print the requested material, and apologize to the group's leaders. British Columbia's extremely broad hate-speech law prohibits the publication of any statement that "indicates" discrimination or that is "likely" to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt.
Harry Hammond, a street-corner preacher in the UK was found guilty of “harassment� for standing on a Bournemouth corner and holding a sign that said saying "Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism". He was fined £300 with £395 costs. The magistrates ordered that his placard be destroyed
In Tupelo, Missouri, school administrators methodically purged all Christmas carols of any religious content - and then led the children in a chant of: "Celebrate Kwanzaa!"
At Lynn Lucas Middle School, school administrators snatched three students' books with covers displaying the Ten Commandments, ripped the covers off, threw them in the rubbish, and told the students that the Ten Commandments constituted "hate speech."
In Queens, New York, Andrea Skoros is suing the New York City public school system because it would not allow her child's nativity scene to be part of its holiday display, though it allowed a menorah and an Islamic crescent. Christmas is becoming a common battleground over religious expression. Fort Lauderdale County in Florida would not permit Calvary Chapel to display the sign “Jesus is the Reason for the Season� in a city parade. The Chapel took the case to court and won. The American Centre for Law and Justice says it was beseiged with cases where students were forbidden from saying "Merry Christmas" or even wearing red or green.
In a public school in St. Louis, a teacher spotted fourth-grader Raymond Raines, bowing his head in prayer before lunch. The teacher stormed to Raymond's table, ordered him to stop immediately and sent him to the principal's office. The principal informed the young malefactor that praying was not allowed in school. When Raymond was again caught praying before meals on three separate occasions, he was segregated from other students, ridiculed in front of his classmates, and finally sentenced to a week's detention.
Here are some more examples:
France has taken the step, unprecedented in all of Europe, of adding Jewish and Muslim holidays to the calendar for state schools. It’s seen as a trade-off to balance a decision banning Muslim girls from wearing headscarves to school, or the wearing of Jewish skullcaps and Christian crosses.
The Belgian parliament has published a list of “cults�. It includes Amish, Quakers, Pentecostals, Assemblies of God, and 21 groups of evangelical Christians.
A charity Christmas CD was banned from distribution because it mentions the baby Jesus. The decision by the Royal Hospital for Sick Children in Edinburgh, Scotland, was instituted because of fears it could offend people who belong to a faith other than Christianity.
Progressive MP Matt Robson called last year for New Zealand to replace the parliamentary prayer with a statement reflecting the secular status of the House and the "diverse and multicultural" nature of New Zealand. The prayer has been read at the beginning of each sitting since 1854.
James Lord, a senior at Dupo High School in Dupo, Illinois was suspended for one month from his daily news broadcast after signing off his December 17th broadcast with the sentence: "Have a safe and happy holiday, and God Bless." Lord said the school principal told him that the use of the words "God Bless" was inappropriate and suspended him from the broadcast for one month.
Six Canadian mayors were convicted for refusing to proclaim Gay Pride Week in their cities. Mayors had to pay fines of up to $10,000. One mayor had to pay $70,000 in legal expenses.
After Toronto print-shop owner Scott Brockie refused on religious grounds to print letterhead for a gay-activist group, the local human-rights commission ordered him to pay the group $5,000, print the requested material, and apologize to the group's leaders. British Columbia's extremely broad hate-speech law prohibits the publication of any statement that "indicates" discrimination or that is "likely" to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt.
Harry Hammond, a street-corner preacher in the UK was found guilty of “harassment� for standing on a Bournemouth corner and holding a sign that said saying "Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism". He was fined £300 with £395 costs. The magistrates ordered that his placard be destroyed
In Tupelo, Missouri, school administrators methodically purged all Christmas carols of any religious content - and then led the children in a chant of: "Celebrate Kwanzaa!"
At Lynn Lucas Middle School, school administrators snatched three students' books with covers displaying the Ten Commandments, ripped the covers off, threw them in the rubbish, and told the students that the Ten Commandments constituted "hate speech."
In Queens, New York, Andrea Skoros is suing the New York City public school system because it would not allow her child's nativity scene to be part of its holiday display, though it allowed a menorah and an Islamic crescent. Christmas is becoming a common battleground over religious expression. Fort Lauderdale County in Florida would not permit Calvary Chapel to display the sign “Jesus is the Reason for the Season� in a city parade. The Chapel took the case to court and won. The American Centre for Law and Justice says it was beseiged with cases where students were forbidden from saying "Merry Christmas" or even wearing red or green.
In a public school in St. Louis, a teacher spotted fourth-grader Raymond Raines, bowing his head in prayer before lunch. The teacher stormed to Raymond's table, ordered him to stop immediately and sent him to the principal's office. The principal informed the young malefactor that praying was not allowed in school. When Raymond was again caught praying before meals on three separate occasions, he was segregated from other students, ridiculed in front of his classmates, and finally sentenced to a week's detention.
Good question, bad answer
The Sunday Telegraph reports that "One of British medicine's most senior advisers on medical ethics has provoked outrage by claiming that infanticide is 'justifiable.'" Professor John Harris said,
The Sunday Telegraph reports that "One of British medicine's most senior advisers on medical ethics has provoked outrage by claiming that infanticide is 'justifiable.'" Professor John Harris said,
"I don't think infanticide is always unjustifiable. I don't think it is plausible to think that there is any moral change that occurs during the journey down the birth canal. People who think there is a difference between infanticide and late abortion have to ask the question: what has happened to the foetus in the time it takes to pass down the birth canal and into the world which changes its moral status? I don't think anything has happened in that time."
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Paradise definitely lost!
"They lie! They cheat! They'll do anything to win!" intones the approving golden voice over shots of nubile girls and guys leaving little to the imagination. It's a trailer for what TV hopes will be one of the prime time hits of this season in New Zealand, Paradise Hotel, another in the burgeoning breed of "reality" TV shows.
Fox’s latest reality show is more disturbing for its premise and rules than for what we actually see on TV once the show is edited. Eleven single men and women are recruited to live together in an exclusive resort in Hawaii. Since the number of males and females is uneven, contestants have to choose a partner to room with for a week. Whoever is left without a roommate has to pack their bags and leave Paradise forever. The vacancy is filled by an audience member of the opposite sex of the departing guest. The last remaining couple wins the as-of-yet-unannounced grand prize. The rules of the game are changed at the whim of the producers to create tension, heighten drama, and manipulate the contestants so that the original guests don’t hold an advantage over the newcomers.
Contestants are required to share a room with attractive singles of the opposite sex to stay in the game. Although contestants have the option of sleeping in separate beds, many of the participants have jumped at the chance to share their beds. One couple had sex a short time after meeting. As with most reality shows, the foul language on Paradise Hotel is completely unrestrained.
Apart from the onscreen activity, the most disturbing aspect of this is the approval that the trailer gives to the whole scenario. Cheat - lie - stab every person in the back - have sex with anyone and everyone - it's all okay in order to win the grand prize. In fact, let's cheer them on, and set up fan clubs for whoever does it best.
Hasn't anybody stood back and asked, just what's going on here? Is this the high goal to which our western culture is aspiring? Is this the legacy I want to hand on to my own sons and daughter?
And if this is okay, so what's left? Where can television go to from here? Just about the only depths we can plumb a bit further are, maybe, snuff movies (you know, where the victim is really killed onsceen by a real bullet). Perhaps that will be next season's prime TV offering. And again we'll clap and cheer and think, "what great entertainment!"
"They lie! They cheat! They'll do anything to win!" intones the approving golden voice over shots of nubile girls and guys leaving little to the imagination. It's a trailer for what TV hopes will be one of the prime time hits of this season in New Zealand, Paradise Hotel, another in the burgeoning breed of "reality" TV shows.
Fox’s latest reality show is more disturbing for its premise and rules than for what we actually see on TV once the show is edited. Eleven single men and women are recruited to live together in an exclusive resort in Hawaii. Since the number of males and females is uneven, contestants have to choose a partner to room with for a week. Whoever is left without a roommate has to pack their bags and leave Paradise forever. The vacancy is filled by an audience member of the opposite sex of the departing guest. The last remaining couple wins the as-of-yet-unannounced grand prize. The rules of the game are changed at the whim of the producers to create tension, heighten drama, and manipulate the contestants so that the original guests don’t hold an advantage over the newcomers.
Contestants are required to share a room with attractive singles of the opposite sex to stay in the game. Although contestants have the option of sleeping in separate beds, many of the participants have jumped at the chance to share their beds. One couple had sex a short time after meeting. As with most reality shows, the foul language on Paradise Hotel is completely unrestrained.
Apart from the onscreen activity, the most disturbing aspect of this is the approval that the trailer gives to the whole scenario. Cheat - lie - stab every person in the back - have sex with anyone and everyone - it's all okay in order to win the grand prize. In fact, let's cheer them on, and set up fan clubs for whoever does it best.
Hasn't anybody stood back and asked, just what's going on here? Is this the high goal to which our western culture is aspiring? Is this the legacy I want to hand on to my own sons and daughter?
And if this is okay, so what's left? Where can television go to from here? Just about the only depths we can plumb a bit further are, maybe, snuff movies (you know, where the victim is really killed onsceen by a real bullet). Perhaps that will be next season's prime TV offering. And again we'll clap and cheer and think, "what great entertainment!"
Paradise definitely lost!
"They lie! They cheat! They'll do anything to win!" intones the approving golden voice over shots of nubile girls and guys leaving little to the imagination. It's a trailer for what TV hopes will be one of the prime time hits of this season in New Zealand, , another in the burgeoning breed of "reality" TV shows.
Fox’s latest reality show is more disturbing for its premise and rules than for what we actually see on TV once the show is edited. Eleven single men and women are recruited to live together in an exclusive resort in Hawaii. Since the number of males and females is Paradise Hoteluneven, contestants have to choose a partner to room with for a week. Whoever is left without a roommate has to pack their bags and leave Paradise forever. The vacancy is filled by an audience member of the opposite sex of the departing guest. The last remaining couple wins the as-of-yet-unannounced grand prize. The rules of the game are changed at the whim of the producers to create tension, heighten drama, and manipulate the contestants so that the original guests don’t hold an advantage over the newcomers.
Contestants are required to share a room with attractive singles of the opposite sex to stay in the game. Although contestants have the option of sleeping in separate beds, many of the participants have jumped at the chance to share their beds. One couple had sex a short time after meeting. As with most reality shows, the foul language on Paradise Hotel is completely unrestrained.
Apart from the onscreen activity, the most disturbing aspect of this is the approval that the trailer gives to the whole scenario. Cheat - lie - stab every person in the back - have sex with anyone and everyone - it's all okay in order to win the grand prize. In fact, let's cheer them on, and set up fan clubs for whoever does it best.
Hasn't anybody stood back and asked, just what's going on here? Is this the high goal to which our western culture is aspiring? Is this the legacy I want to hand on to my own sons and daughter?
And if this is okay, so what's left? Where can television go to from here? Just about the only depths we can plumb a bit further are, maybe, snuff movies (you know, where the victim is really killed onsceen by a real bullet). Perhaps that will be next season's prime TV offering. And again we'll clap and cheer and think, "what great entertainment!"
"They lie! They cheat! They'll do anything to win!" intones the approving golden voice over shots of nubile girls and guys leaving little to the imagination. It's a trailer for what TV hopes will be one of the prime time hits of this season in New Zealand, , another in the burgeoning breed of "reality" TV shows.
Fox’s latest reality show is more disturbing for its premise and rules than for what we actually see on TV once the show is edited. Eleven single men and women are recruited to live together in an exclusive resort in Hawaii. Since the number of males and females is Paradise Hoteluneven, contestants have to choose a partner to room with for a week. Whoever is left without a roommate has to pack their bags and leave Paradise forever. The vacancy is filled by an audience member of the opposite sex of the departing guest. The last remaining couple wins the as-of-yet-unannounced grand prize. The rules of the game are changed at the whim of the producers to create tension, heighten drama, and manipulate the contestants so that the original guests don’t hold an advantage over the newcomers.
Contestants are required to share a room with attractive singles of the opposite sex to stay in the game. Although contestants have the option of sleeping in separate beds, many of the participants have jumped at the chance to share their beds. One couple had sex a short time after meeting. As with most reality shows, the foul language on Paradise Hotel is completely unrestrained.
Apart from the onscreen activity, the most disturbing aspect of this is the approval that the trailer gives to the whole scenario. Cheat - lie - stab every person in the back - have sex with anyone and everyone - it's all okay in order to win the grand prize. In fact, let's cheer them on, and set up fan clubs for whoever does it best.
Hasn't anybody stood back and asked, just what's going on here? Is this the high goal to which our western culture is aspiring? Is this the legacy I want to hand on to my own sons and daughter?
And if this is okay, so what's left? Where can television go to from here? Just about the only depths we can plumb a bit further are, maybe, snuff movies (you know, where the victim is really killed onsceen by a real bullet). Perhaps that will be next season's prime TV offering. And again we'll clap and cheer and think, "what great entertainment!"
