The UK's Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system is big brother?

This is a fairly old but highly important piece of information about ubiquitous spying being conducted by the United Kingdom upon their residents. It is a system of cameras on the roads connected to computers to automatically recognize license numbers on number plates (what in the U.S.A. we'd call license plates). Of course every car has a visible number where one use is for police to identify vehicles for various reasons. What's new is nifty computer technology advancements have included in improved image recognition capability, in this case automated image recognition is being used to automatically read out the license plate (number plate) numbers of cars passing by. With enough cameras on enough streets the system can track every bit of movement by every vehicle, enabling the government to track movements of everyone.

A pair of reports on The Register web site detail two phases of the system rollout in the UK. Described is a "24x7 national vehicle movement database" to log every trip on the UK's road system. They were building a control center in Hendon capable of processing 50 million number plates PER DAY. In 2005 they already had cameras in strategic locations on every motorway in the UK and intended to have a camera every 400 yards. The initial purpose was traffic speed enforcement, but would be expanded to other crimes later such as the use of untaxed vehicles, stolen vehicles, and generally denying criminals the use of the roads.

Eek! Every 400 yards? Just think of the budget required to build maintain this system.

Britain will be first country to monitor every car journey -- The Independent

Car license plate cameras may be illegal

DARPA's Information Awareness Office, The Total Information Awareness System; Or, Big Brother in-carnate

Links: 

Vehicle spy-cam data to be held for five years

Links: 

Gatso 2: rollout of UK's '24x7 vehicle movement database' begins

Reactions to bin Laden's death indicates this won't make much change or difference?

Late last night it was announced Osama bin Laden had been killed in Pakistan, and a first thoughts was this wouldn't make any difference. (Osama bin Laden has been killed but will it make any long term difference?) Basically the argument is the radicalization of a generation of people all over the world due to the warring over Terrorism. In yesterdays blog post I wrote about the generation of Middle East people who've seen invasion and/or occupation of several countries by Western forces, widespread death and destruction, and this has acted to radicalize those people. But it occurs to me, the radicalization also extends to Americans due to the 10 years (or more) of demonization of the Terrorists.

Listening to voices on NPR reports this morning I hear grudge-holding and an inability to move on with ones life. For example they interviewed a fellow whose fiancee had been killed in the World Trade Center collapse, and he's turned his car into a rolling billboard with pictures of his fiancee with messages to "Never Forget". As sad as his story is, as understandable it is he's done this, it's a pattern that simply re-opens the wounds over and over and doesn't proceed to healing. The kind of healing which allows you to move on with your life rather than hanging on to the wound keeping it festering inside. I don't want to go too far down this line of thinking, and some events like the Sept 11 2001 attack are just so big that it's hard to imagine having real forgiveness towards the perpetrators. Spiritual traditions over millennia such as Christianity have taught forgiveness as a key central method for achieving peace.

This was a statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in which she made it clear the efforts to stomp out the "Syndicate of Terror" would not stop. In one breath she expressed a hope that al Qaida's victims would find comfort that Justice had been Done, and then in the next breath she's saying the hunt will never stop. On the one hand Authority's role is to mete out mete out Justice in the form of prison sentences or executions. Right? On the other hand the "hunt will not stop" is a way to keep re-awakening the wounds these traumatic events have placed in our mutual psyche.

Islamists vow bin Laden death will not mute Jihad call: Contains quotes from several Islamic Jihadi message boards like "Osama may be killed but his message of Jihad will never die. Brothers and sisters, wait and see, his death will be a blessing in disguise." This is the voice of a radicalized person.

Taliban commander vows to avenge Bin Laden's death: Quotes several "commanders" in several Terrorist organizations saying this "will bring no change to jihad." It's a martyrdom situation and his value as a marketing image will not be diminished by death. Right? The article describes Osama bin Laden as "the Shiekh" as someone who inspired people all over the Middle East into fighting a "holy war (a.k.a. Jihad) against the infidels and their agents." The movement is described as having separated "ideology from leadership" in that local al Qaida "affiliate" organizations have sprung up without direct oversight by the al Qaida leadership.

That same article has an interesting paragraph indicating a hatred towards al Qaida by regular folk in the Middle East.

For many years, the Sheikh had been isolated, his organisation disrupted not only by US kill teams and lethal drone attacks but also by general Muslim apathy and outright hostility to the organisation. For most of the victims are Muslim: not only Shia Muslims and Sunni moderates and seculars, but also bystanders who have committed the deadly sin of buying vegetables while one of those holy warriors decides to fight his battle and start his ascendance to the hereafter.

Osama bin Laden's death resonates in Rochester area: Has a range of reactions in the Rochester NY area. From "The only thing I can say is: it’s about time. I would’ve liked if we could’ve taken him alive and put him on trial. Then, a lot more people would understand the role that he played on 9/11." To "It’s probably not going to last very long, but that’s what they’re fearing right now: repercussions." To "It's about time and I'm glad we got him. Getting these guys is good. We are doing something and we are getting them." To "I don't think killing anyone is a good thing. People like bin Laden certainly need to be taken out of circulation, but I don't think killing is the best way to do it. I'm glad he will not bother anyone anymore, but there are probably plenty more like him." To "I felt a sense of relief. It’s been a long time since that day. It’s not going to bring Rich back." To "It’s a mixed feeling because you don’t want to celebrate someone being murdered, but it does give us a sense of security." To "I’m thrilled he’s captured and killed. It’s sad to me that we’re solving this awful crime with a killing." To "It’s great news. It’s been a long time. I feel like that means the war is finally over." To "It's outstanding, but I don't think it changes much for us in Afghanistan. "We still have the Taliban to contend with and we obviously have to finish what we started."

Beyond bin Laden: Is a post on the "Shadow Government" blog at ForeignPolicy.com which describes itself as being "written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition" so we should take this with a grain of salt in that it might be skewed towards ObamaSlander. In any case it's an interesting article. They start with saying the person who "emerges as the leader of al Qaeda will be enormously consequential for the movement's direction and appeal throughout the Muslim world." A supposedly likely successor, Ayman al Zawahiri, "has repeatedly emphasized Egypt as the centerpiece of al Qaeda's quest to re-establish a caliphate in the heart of the Islamic world." And: "Protracted wars are not decided on the outcome of any individual episode. Rather, they turn on the progressive attrition of the adversary's sources of power. Similarly, this conflict will not end in a single battle or campaign. Rather, al Qaeda and its extremist vision will be defeated through the patient accumulation of quiet successes. Victory will include discrediting extremist ideology, creating fissures between and among extremist groups, and reducing them to the level of a nuisance, groups that can be tracked and handled by local law enforcement groups."

Osama bin Laden has been killed but will it make any long term difference?

A long nightmare is over? The leader of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, has been killed in northwest Pakistan. I suppose it's not a surprise he was there, except that he wasn't in the mountains but in Abbottabad, in the far north next to the border with Kashmir. According to statements on BBC World Service right now, he was living in a Mansion in a medium sized city, just a few hundred yards from the police station, and one assumes it wasn't exactly a secret he was there and there must have been some cooperation with the Pakistani government that he could be living there. But my question is whether this will make any real difference. UPDATE: For a followup see Reactions to bin Laden's death indicates this won't make much change or difference?

It's been nearly 10 years since the Sept 11 attacks which made bin Laden so famous and supposedly the number one target of the war on Terror, but in recent years it seemed that US leadership forgot the reason for that war (What happened to al-Qaeda?, Smoking gun on Bush's failure to catch Osama bin Laden?).

In the 10 years the US turned from hunting down al Qaeda in Afghanistan to invading Iraq - a country wholly unaffiliated with al Qaeda (at the time) - rather than concentrate on the actual perpetrators. (see Background material for the second Gulf "War", How many revealed lies is this going to take?, How to tell when George W. Bush is lying, More leaked memo's in Britain, US Invasion of Iraq officially FRAUD, War justifications relied on informants that the CIA had already dismissed as liars., Perle admits invasion was illegal: Say what?, The "case" for War)

Nowadays what's going on is a whole generation of people growing up with the U.S. and Western forces having invaded the Middle East. Many have been radicalized by these invaders (that is, "us") and I think most of the fighting is an effort to evict occupiers rather than people in ideological cahoots with al Qaeda.

In the prosecution of the U.S. led War on Terror many innocents were killed. Sometimes it was weapons going astray, killing innocent bystanders. Sometimes it was mistaken targets. Sometimes it was bogus intelligence. And there was this issue with the invasion of Iraq, resulting in the death of a hundred thousand or more Iraqi's, based on bogus illegal U.S. policies. Radicalization is quite understandable to a people who suffered the pain inflicted upon them by the U.S. led war.

As I write there are thousands of people gathered outside the White House celebrating, even though it's after midnight. And indeed it is wonderful to hear this news, that the supposed leader of al Qaeda, that supposedly is responsible for the murder of thousands of people, that Osama bin Laden has been killed.

But I question whether this will make any difference. Will the radicalized generation give up the hatred of the U.S. engendered in them by U.S. actions?

Threat remains after bin Laden killed by U.S. forces: Suggests that most of the recent attacks on the West were the responsibility of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), not of bin Laden himself.

Al Qaeda No.2 Zawahri most likely to succeed bin Laden: Suggests that the death of bin Laden just means a rearranging of the al Qaeda leadership.

In President Obama's remarks (below) he said "Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must –- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad." In other words, the War on Terror is not over. We can expect reprisal attacks and a continuing of the war.

Obama clearly wouldn't be willing to say the things I just said about a radicalized Middle East, but essentially we're saying the same thing, just through different lenses.

Remarks by the President on Osama Bin Laden

East Room

11:35 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory -- hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child’s embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together. We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood. We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country. On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda -- an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we’ve made great strides in that effort. We’ve disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense. In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support. And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda’s leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies. The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda.

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must –- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad.

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not –- and never will be -– at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was. That is what we’ve done. But it’s important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding. Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.

Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts. They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations. And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.

The American people did not choose this fight. It came to our shores, and started with the senseless slaughter of our citizens. After nearly 10 years of service, struggle, and sacrifice, we know well the costs of war. These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded.

So Americans understand the costs of war. Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed. We will be relentless in defense of our citizens and our friends and allies. We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al Qaeda’s terror: Justice has been done.

Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who’ve worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 that we have never forgotten your loss, nor wavered in our commitment to see that we do whatever it takes to prevent another attack on our shores.

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11. I know that it has, at times, frayed. Yet today’s achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

The cause of securing our country is not complete. But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to. That is the story of our history, whether it’s the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place.

Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

END 11:44 P.M. EDT

Links: 

Osama Bin Laden's Compound Already Mapped on Google

Links: 

Remarks by the President on Osama Bin Laden

Change starts "here"; Change starts with "you"; Change starts with "me"

We have problems galore ecological, environmental, climate, energy supply, rise of corporate fascism and more. As a result many voices are calling for change, change in how "we" do things. When an oil spill or nuclear meltdown occurs a call goes out to stop doing that dirty stuff. It's an environmental disaster, yes, that threatens to harm all of us, yes, and perhaps it should be stopped. I've watched (or listened to) dozens shows recently reacting in horror to the nuclear catastrophy, or to natural gas fracking, or to last years oil spill, and vehemently calling for those operations to stop. I hear them say this, and while I agree, I scream at the radio or podcast asking them if they themselves have stopped using the products of those technologies?

All of us who enjoy the fruits of modern energy technologies are in part responsible for the existence of oil wells, coal mines, tar sands strip mining, mountain top destruction, nuclear power plants, and all the rest. The freedom to leave a light running without thought is a gift brought to us by those facilities. (And, yes, I had three lights still on even though it's mid-day, and I just turned them off)

At the other end of that light bulb is an electricity generation plant most likely burning coal or natural gas. Here's a couple videos I recorded about this:

The pattern is one of pointing at others such as the government demanding that "they" do something about this mess. Right? Why does the government allow the oil companies to keep drilling for oil? Why is the government ignoring environmental laws and allowing nuclear plants to be built on top of earthquake faults, or allow oil drilling to happen when the oil industry has no effective tested method to stop blowouts, etc? Why are "they" allowing "that" to happen?

Okay, there's some truth to these questions .. but the real question is, what are you (and I) going to do to change our own habits?

These companies doing the oil drilling or coal mining etc aren't in it because of evil intent to purposely trash the planet. It's just a means to the end of running a profitable business, a business that provides a service to paying customers. You, me, everyone. I have a gasoline powered car sitting outside which in a few hours I'll drive to a place 20 miles away to visit with a friend. A hundred years ago, before the age of oil really kicked in, that journey would have taken all day. Today it's a 30 minute drive.

That freedom was gifted to me by the oil companies and oil wells and I am in part responsible for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster last year. And so are the rest of us who enjoy the gift of oil derived fuels.

There's a two way street of responsibility. Yes, "they" are responsible for operating their machines in a wise and safe manner, and "they" are failing at doing so. But more importantly "we" are responsible for wisely choosing the products we buy, the services we enjoy, and our lifestyle. "We" are also failing at responsible wise product choice and seem instead to be collectively intent on buying cheap poisonous crap.

If we as individuals or collectively change our habits I firmly believe that "they" will (eventually) take notice. It won't be easy because of entrenched investments "they" will want to defend and therefore act to keep "us" tied to the habits "they" have given "us". We must be strong in making wise and responsible choices to change our way of life.

See also:

Stand up for Real Change

This world doesn't have to become an uninhabitable nuclear radiation poisoned wasteland

Higher Purpose: Japans earthquake and nuclear crisis asks us what we really want

The Catholic Church control over the definition of "miracle"

What happens when a miracle occurs? You know, someone prays, and then something miraculous happens which nobody can explain. When this happens within the context of the Catholic Church the Church Authorities step in and assert what I think is a fiction, namely that miracles require an intercessor to channel Gods Magnificence to help us poor pitiful humans. The fiction is that humans are unable to have any divinity, unable to access God directly, and must instead depend on Church Authority for access to God.

I wrote some time ago about this (see: Establishing control over a society) and a story on todays Morning Edition (NPR's daily news show) seems to exemplify this to a T.

The story is that a young boy developed a dreadful disease of the sort Doctors say is normally fatal. It was a particularly ravenous fast moving form of the disease. The boys family made some contacts and pretty quickly crowdsourced a legion of people around the world praying for the boy's health. The doctors told the parents the boy would probably die, and a Priest came in and read him his last rights.

The intercession of Kateri Tekakwitha?

The story then becomes connected with Kateri Tekakwitha, a Mohawk who converted to Catholicism and who was beatified in 1980. Kateri happened to have similar health conditions to the boy's, making for three analogous conditions between this boy and Kateri: "Number one, we're talking about two young people," Sauer says. "Number two, we're talking about two people who come from Native American ancestry. And number three, we're talking about a person who herself suffered from a disease that disfigured her face."

A representative of the Society of Blessed Kateri visited the boy and gave his mother a relic of Kateri. On that day his illness changed course. That day was described as "breathtaking" and the surgeon is quoted saying: "All of a sudden, to have this infection stop is almost like a geyser coming out of the earth with this great roar — and all of a sudden it just stops. And there's silence. And everybody's just a little bit stunned by it being over."

It does seem rather miraculous, especially when the medical doctor guy is stunned and cannot explain it.

The Catholic Church process of approving a Miracle

The story goes on to explain that seemingly miraculous events are not enough for the Catholic Church. And that's a good thing because honestly spiritual practitioners have a way of simply believing things without taking a rational look at things. Taking a rational look, however, does not necessitate always denying the action of spiritual forces unlike many skeptics would have us believe. My experience of the skeptic crowd is they have their own rigid dogma to defending, that spiritual action is always a bogus lie.

As I see it the truth is neither that miracles or other spiritual effects require an intercessor, nor that spiritual effects are bogus lies.

Instead that we all have innate access to spiritual gifts, and that we all can (and do) participate in the creation of spiritual effects.

The book these Christian people profess to believe even says so. The teacher, Jesus, is quoted saying that we would have all the gifts he demonstrated, and more.

Standing in heaven before the throne of God

Turning back to the NPR report - they describe the reasoning behind the Catholic Church designating some people with Beatification or Sainthood: "That means we have received assurances that this person now stands in heaven before the throne of God," he says. And historically, "one of the evidences of that has been miracles of healing."

The report describes a litany of people scrutinizing the recovery of this little boy. They want to determine whether it was an actual miracle, or simply luck of modern medical practice, or what. And while I like the idea of scrutinizing and studying spiritual effects, the whole story reeks of Authority stepping in and Asserting Control and Asserting their Dogma.

Is this situation an example of an intercessor who "now stands in heaven before the throne of God"? Or does this situation demonstrate the power of prayer? Especially the power of a legion of people praying together? Perhaps the miracle did not occur via the intercessionary power of Kateri Tekakwitha, but because hundreds of people joined together in prayer.

And while the NPR story discussed two points of view, it did not discuss this third point of view. The NPR piece described the Catholic Church viewpoint (miracles require intercessors), and for balance brought in a professional skeptic who writes for the Skeptical Inquirer to tell us that all spiritual practices are bogus lies and that this boy received great medical care. They did not bring in someone to discuss whether or why intercessors are required for spiritual effects to occur.

Hence, NPR is in this case acting to preserve two of the existing dogmatic -isms controlling our society without giving even the slightest lip service to a third point of view.

I wonder what others think of their story in light of what I've just written. The boxes below offer a convenient way to leave comments.

See: A Boy, An Injury, A Recovery, A Miracle?

You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.

Corporate take-over of American cities and Republican led authoritarianism (Rachel Maddow)

Last night Rachel Maddow's show led off with a powerful piece using Benton Harbor Michigan as an example of authoritarian big government Republicans trampling on local government and overturning Democracy. The issue is a recent law passed by the Michigan state legislature giving their Governor the power to dissolve local governments that are in financial crisis, and replace the local government with a corporate-run management team.

While many such as myself has been pointing at corporatism as an abstract danger, this is a concrete example of corporate power replacing government power.

Her piece asks us to recall the Biblical phrase, "By their fruits ye shall know them". The Republicans have an ideological bias towards small non-intrusive government and personal freedom, but when they have official power they tend to become overbearing authoritarian neo-fascists.

There is an existing industry of Emergency Financial Managers who step in to governments in financial crisis. For that matter this has an analogue in corporate governance where there are people and organizations who specialize in corporate turnaround or dissolving corporations in the final throes of bankruptcy. Some people specialize as being the CEO of flailing companies. So, if there's a city who is in a similar near-failure case it would be useful to have people and organizations that specialize in assisting the financial turnaround of a flailing government.

But this is a little different. Taking cue from the "By their fruits ye shall know them" line, their first action under the emergency financial managers law is a doozy. Benton Harbor is a relatively poor predominantly black city neighboring a relatively rich predominantly white city, both straddling a river along the Lake Michigan shore across the lake from Chicago. Benton Harbor is slated to be the site of an exclusive Golf Course and high priced home development targeted at rich persons. The development is meant to encompass Benton Harbor's shore-side city park. The golf course enclave is obviously not going to benefit the citizens of Benton Harbor, and with their city government out of the way there's almost certainly zero defense against the planned development slated to take over land currently owned by the city.

In other words - the first official use of this law is to negate a local city government to make it easier to build an exclusive rich persons enclave and deny public access to yet another stretch of beach.

By their fruits ye shall know them.

What do you think? Let me know in the comment boxes below.

An earlier corporate take-over piece with video from Maddow's show: Corporations are not human, that's why we have government (Rachel Maddow)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Summary of the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act Process

http://www.michigan.gov/treasury/0,1607,7-121-1751_51556-198770--,00.html

Step One: If one or more conditions indicative of probable financial stress in a local government exist, the State Financial Authority (State Treasurer or Superintendent of Public Instruction) may conduct a preliminary review, after providing the unit of local government with specific written notification of the review.

Step Two: The State Financial Authority must inform the Governor within 30 days of commencement of the preliminary review whether or not probable financial stress exists.

Step Three: The Governor must appoint a review team if the State Financial Authority informs the Governor that a preliminary review has been conducted and a finding of probable financial stress was made.

A review team consists of the State Treasurer (or his or her designee), the Director of the Department of Technology, Management, and Budget (or his or her designee), a nominee of the Senate Majority Leader, a nominee of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and any other State officials, or other persons with relevant professional experience selected by the Governor. The Superintendent of Public Instruction (or his or her designee) also is a member if a school district is involved.

Step Four: Unless the Governor specifies an earlier date, or grants a 30-day extension, a review team must report to the Governor within 60 days of its appointment and indicate whether specific statutory conditions exist or are likely to occur which constitute no or mild financial stress, severe financial stress, or financial emergency:

• (a) No or mild financial stress exists in the unit of local government if any of the following occur:
• -- The review team reports that none of the specified statutory conditions exist or are likely to occur.
• -- The conditions may occur, but will not threaten the capability of the unit of local government to provide necessary governmental services.
• (b) Severe financial stress exists in the unit of local government if any of the following occur:
• -- The review team reports that one or more of the specified statutory conditions exist or are likely to occur.
• -- The chief administrative officer of the unit of local government recommends that the unit of local government be considered in severe financial stress.
• (c) A financial emergency exists in the unit of local government if:
• -- The review team reports that two or more of the specified statutory conditions exist or are likely to occur within the current fiscal year that threaten the future capability of the unit of local government to provide necessary governmental services.
• -- The unit of local government failed to provide timely and accurate in-formation to the review team.
• -- The unit of local government failed to comply with one or more financial plans.
• -- The unit of local government materially breached the terms of a consent agreement.
• -- The unit of local government is in a condition of severe financial stress and a consent agreement was not adopted.
• -- The chief administrative officer of the unit of local government recommends a financial emergency be declared and the State Treasurer concurs.

Step Five: Within 10 days after receipt of the review team report, the Governor must make one of the following determinations:

• (a) The unit of local government is not in a condition of severe financial stress.
• (b) The unit of local government is in a condition of severe financial stress, but a consent agreement containing a plan to resolve the severe financial stress has been adopted.
• (c) A local government financial emergency exists and no satisfactory plan exists to resolve the emergency.
• (d) The unit of local government entered into a consent agreement containing a continuing operations plan or recovery plan to resolve a financial problem, but materially breached the consent agreement.

Step Six: If the Governor determines that a financial emergency exists, he or she must provide written notification to the chief administrative officer of the unit of lo-cal government who may request, within seven days after receiving notice, a hearing conducted by the State Financial Authority or his or her designee.

Step Seven: After the hearing or, if no hearing was requested, after expiration of the opportunity for a hearing, the Governor must either confirm or revoke the determination of a financial emergency.

Step Eight: A local government, with a two-thirds vote of its governing body, may appeal the Governor's determination to Ingham County circuit court. The determination may be set aside only if found to be either:

• (a) Not supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record.
• (b) Arbitrary, capricious, or clearly an abuse or unwarranted exercise of discretion.

Step Nine: If the Governor confirms the determination of a financial emergency, the Governor is required to declare the unit of local government in receivership and appoint an Emergency Manager who serves at the pleasure of the Governor.

Step Ten: Upon being placed in receivership, the governing body and chief administrative officer of the unit of local government are prohibited from exercising any of their powers of offices without written approval of the Emergency Manager, and their compensation and benefits are eliminated.

Step Eleven: Within 45 days of appointment, an Emergency Manager must develop a written financial and operating plan.

In addition to other powers, an Emergency Manager may reject, modify, or terminate collective bargaining agreements, recommend consolidation or dissolution of units of local government, and recommend bankruptcy proceedings.

Step Twelve: A unit of local government is removed from receivership when the financial conditions which were the basis for the underlying financial emergency are corrected in a sustainable fashion as determined by the State Treasurer in accordance with the Act.

Corporations are not human, that's why we have government (Rachel Maddow)

Last nights Rachel Maddow show ended with a powerful piece covering the ability of Corporations to commit evil, while the show started with a piece covering Corporate influence in skewing some politicians to benefit corporate interests.

There is a fiction in this country called "Corporate Personhood". That Corporations have various rights of persons and it's been skewing the United States ever since the late 1800's when this fiction was created. You look at a corporation and it's hard to see it as a person, but try driving down the highway and look at the cars on the road and also see that it's a human driving the car. We talk about that stupid car that cut us off almost causing an accident, when it's really the person who's operating the car. We also talk about evil corporations or stupid corporations or corporate influence on politics, without recognizing that there are humans operating the corporations. We also talk about overbearing, abusive or stupid government, when again there are humans operating those governments.

It seems true that when you gather enough humans into an organization, that the organization takes on a life of its own. The people operating the corporation are following certain rules which govern corporate livelihood. These rules include:

• the pyramid shaped command-and-control paradigm allowing the board of directors and executive team to hold near dictatorial powers over the actions of their employees (or should we call them serfs?)
• the laws of accounting, bookkeeping, finance, securities, investment, and so on
• employee rights, marketing, etc

In other words - successful corporations behave within certain parameters. One of the parameters is cutting costs to have the best chance at causing profit. That ideal taken to extremes means cutting so many corners it endangers safety.

In Maddow's piece last night she showed a rapid fire sequence of pictures, airplane crashes, nuclear meltdown, exploding oil drilling rigs, and so on. She was incited by the owners of the exploding oil rig, Transocean, whose Board decided that due to their exemplary safety record (in a year where their oil rig blew up killing 11 workers) they'd award bonuses. This is an extremely shocking fact but the truth is the operators of corporations do stuff like this all the time. They're often able to keep it quiet because corporations are dictatorships with a shroud of secrecy surrounding them, and what's different about Transocean is the scrutiny they're under due to the exploding oil rig.

One of the big challenges of our time is Corporations, operated by people but driven by inhuman rules of corporate behavior, trouncing over all of us.

The history of Corporations has shown time and again that they are willing to sell crap poison products as food, that they are willing to screw everyone, commit any felony, any crime against humanity, in order to make their all-holy profit margin.

The cure Maddow proposes is one I largely agree with. That government has to be there to rein in corporate excesses. If corporations are going to be powerful, then the government which should be reining in corporate power should be as powerful as the corporations.

But ... there's a long rabbit hole of conversation which follows on from that thought, which is best left for another day, or for the comments boxes below the videos. Let me know what you think, below.

This first video dives into the political battle in Wisconson, a state suffering from leadership who's doing the will of corporate backers in trying to destroy unions.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This second video goes over some of the political leadership in Wisconson, the conservative mantra that "government is the problem", and hence their hatred of government, and asking what happens when government hating conservatives get their hands on a government.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This third video is the one mentioned earlier, going over Transocean and their idiotic safety record. The prior videos are great contextualization of this video.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This fourth video was referred to from the previous video. The Transocean announcement awarding bonuses for their exemplary safety record in the year when their corporation killed 11 of their employees when their oil rig blew up, that announcement was sent on April 1. No fooling.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy