This is the online suicide letter authored by Andrew Stack, the man believed to be responsible for flying a light aircraft into a building in Austin, Texas. It was originally posted at Stack’s site, http://embeddedart.com/. The hosting company, T35, took the site offline per an FBI request. The note is reproduced here in its entirety.

If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn’t enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless… especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I’m not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures.

We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.

While very few working people would say they haven’t had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say.

Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it’s time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country’s leaders don’t see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It’s clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.

And justice? You’ve got to be kidding!

How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they’re responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than [sic] what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.

How did I get here?

My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early ‘80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having ‘tax code’ readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law (with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren’t steeling [sic] from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done.

The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us… Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country.

That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.

Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer.

On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I’m sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age.

The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80+ seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service, he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement. All she had was social security to live on.

In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn’t quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.

Return to the early ‘80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer… and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.

For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).

SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

(a) IN GENERAL – Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:

(d) EXCEPTION. – This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.

Note:

· “another person” is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.

· “taxpayer” is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.

· “individual”, “employee”, or “worker” is you.

Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.

During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my ‘pocket change’, and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don’t forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn’t bill clients.

After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren’t going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect.

Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.

Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the L.A. depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn’t need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement.

Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, ‘special’ facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars … as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings.

By this time, I’m thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I’ll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self-importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I’ve never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages… and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn’t give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies.

To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn’t notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice.

So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.

When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to Bill Ross, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl’s unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, Ross knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me.

This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is… well, just look around.

I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn’t it ironic how far we’ve come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.

As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.

I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn’t limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants. I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won’t continue; I have just had enough.

I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn’t so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along.

I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.

The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.

Joe Stack (1956-2010)

02/18/2010

Thursday, January 21, 2010

A woman has been convicted of murder after killing her son in an “act of mercy”. The Old Bailey, a London court, heard that Frances Inglis, 57, injected Tom, 22, with heroin and gave her a life sentence.

Tom had been injured in a street fight in July 2007 and was put in an ambulance depite his desire not to be hospitalised. The ambulance door was opened three times; the third time Tom jumped out and sustained injuries that left him in a coma. He became mute and dependant on 24-hour care. His only method of communication was to squeeze a hand.

Frances was told that if she wanted Tom to die legally then she could ask the High Court to allow his food and water to be withdrawn, so that he would starve to death. Frances told the court “I know Tom – no way would he have wanted to live totally dependent. I can remember saying I felt I would rather he go to heaven than to hell on earth. I know Tom would not want to live. He had lost his life.”

“I couldn’t bear the thought of Tom dying of thirst or hunger,” she said of the idea of food and water withdrawal. “To me that would be so cruel, so cruel. To die slowly like that would be horrible.” Instead she used the Internet to research Tom’s condition and concluded that a heroin overdose would be the most painless method available. A learning disabilities worker with no convictions, she concluded two grams was sufficient to kill and began spending time in areas she believed drugs were on sale – outside the local station, job centre and needle exchanges.

Frances was determined to release Tom from his “living hell” and said she had “no choice” in the matter. “I asked myself what I would want,” she said. “I would want someone to love me enough to help me die. That’s why I thought heroin – a painless, peaceful death.” She obtained her two grams and stole syringes from Tom’s hospital before injecting him, but he was revived by nurses and she was charged with attempted murder. She was bailed but barred from contacting her son.

Fourteen months later she obtained access to Tom by posing as his aunt and placed superglue in the lock of his door, further barricading it with an oxygen cylinder and a wheelchair. It took staff thirty minutes to break in, by which time Frances had injected one of Tom’s arms and both his thighs with heroin. This time he died.

Frances had left a letter to her family in which she talked of her concerns for her other two sons and dog, as well as the running of the house, expecting a murder arrest. On one bed she left a photograph of Tom as well as a prayer written by his girlfriend. Police also found older letter by Frances, one of which read “People keep saying Tom is not suffering. How can they know how he feels?”

She was asked if guilty of murder and attempted murder, to which she responded “I don’t see it as killing or murder. The definition of murder is to take someone’s life with malice in your heart. I did it with love in my heart, for Tom, so I don’t see it as murder. I knew what I was doing was against the law. I don’t know what name they would call it but I knew that the law would say it was wrong. I believed it would have been Tom’s choice to have been allowed to die rather than have the intervention to keep him alive.”

The jury “could not have had a more difficult case,” according to Judge Brian Barker, but he told them nobody was allowed to override the law. Ten members of the jury agreed, but two sided with Frances, leaving a conviction by majority verdict. The jury foreman was greeted by cries of “shame on you” from France’s relatives, for which they were ejected from the building. “We can all understand the emotion and the unhappiness that you were experiencing,” Barker told Frances, later adding “You knew you were breaking society’s conventions, you knew you were breaking the law, and you knew the consequences.” He ordered her to serve a minimum of nine years.

“What this case and a number of others have exposed,” said France’s eldest son, Alex, “is a need for a complete rethink of existing laws in regard to people that have been, and will be, in the same position as Tom. How can it be legal to withhold food and water, which means a slow and painful death, yet illegal to end all suffering in a quick, calm and loving way? It’s cruel, inhumane and illogical… We have a duty of care to them and we should not allow this situation to continue. It should not be left to a wife, husband, mother, father, sister or brother to have to end their suffering, and be convicted for murder.” Detective Chief Inspector Steve Collin, who was in charge of the case, flatly disagreed. “There’s no such thing as a mercy killing in law.”

“I want to say that all of the family and Tom’s girlfriend support my mum 100%. All those who loved and were close to Tom have never seen this as murder, but as a loving and courageous act,” said Alex.

Friday, January 28, 2005

New York –American manufacturing giant Proctor & Gamble (P&G) plans to acquire Gillette Co. for US$57 billion in stock. The purchase plan calls for P&G to swap 0.975 shares of its stock per share of Gillete Co. P&G also announced a stock buyback program in which they would purchase up to US$22 billion of shares over the next 18 months. Including the stock buyback program, the merger is being financed by 60 percent stock and 40 percent cash.

P&G is known for brands such as Ariel and Tide washing powder, Max Factor cosmetics, Pringles potato crisps (chips) and Hugo Boss and Lacoste perfumes.

Gillette, known for brands such as Gillette razors, Oral B dental care, and Duracell batteries, has had growing problems with the growth of private labels and price cuts demanded by large supermarkets.

After the acquisition is completed, Gillette’s CEO James Kilts will be P&G’s vice-chairman. Kilts said that he expects that this acquisition will cause additional mergers to take place.

“I believe the consumer product industry needs to consolidate,” said Kilts, “we believe we can bring these companies together and create a juggernaut.”

P&G and Gillette have a combined market capitalization of about $185 billion US, which will make it the largest in the sector.

The early morning announcement states that 6,000 employees will be eliminated. Most of the layoffs will result from reducing overlapping management positions and other supporting positions within the combined company.

Antitrust regulators in the US and Europe plan to review the acquisition, to determine whether the combined company will have too much power over pricing and shelf space.

P&G plans to provide additional details about the merger Friday morning (East Coast time) in New York.

Thursday, September 29, 2005

The US Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah is looking for a subcontractor to produce the anthrax bacillus anthracis Sterne strain in 1,500 litre quantities. The Sterne strain is not thought to be harmful to humans, but the intended use of the anthrax remains unclear, worrying anti-biological weapons activists. Other recent Dugway contracts for equipment to produce unspecified biolgical agents in 3,000 litre batches are even more concerning to activists.

The contracts were uncovered by The Sunshine Project, a group opposed to biological weapons development based in Germany. The work involved seems to cast doubts on the ability of the US to live up to its commitments to the Biological Weapons Convention. The post 9/11 anthrax attack upon the U.S. used weaponized U.S. Army anthrax [1] [2], most likely produced at Fort Detrick.

A Dugway spokesperson declined to specify what the biological agents would be used for.

Friday, July 27, 2007

The United Nations (UN) World Food Programme (WFP) raised concerns about a dramatic escalation in attacks on food aid convoys by armed bandits in the Darfur region of Sudan. WFP says the attacks constrain its ability to feed the more than two million people in the area receiving aid.

Negotiations over a UN Security Council resolution authorising a joint UN-African Union security force for the region continue but full deployment could take up to a year.

“In the last two weeks, nine food convoys have been attacked by gunmen across Darfur,” said Kenro Oshidari, WFP Sudan Representative. “WFP staff and contractors are being stopped at gunpoint, dragged out of their vehicles and robbed with alarming frequency,” he said.

“These abhorrent attacks, which target the very people who are trying to help the most vulnerable in Darfur, must be brought under control,” he added.

A WFP official told Wikinews that the attacks and robberies have occurred in all regions of Darfur, and that the blame can’t be ascribed to a particular group. “Frequently the bandits are wearing uniforms but often in one group of bandits there may be more than one uniform. Thus, we are not pointing fingers at any one group.” said Emilia Casella, WFP Spokesperson for Sudan. “We are calling on all parties to respect the neutrality of humanitarian convoys and their drivers, who are delivering food to civilians who are victims of the conflict.”

According to WFP, in 2007 so far, 18 WFP convoys have been attacked – “shot at, looted, drivers robbed and/or injured”. Four vehicles were stopped and the drivers and passengers robbed. Six vehicles were stolen, where the gunmen drove away with the WFP staff members still inside, though they were later released. “There were no major physical injuries, but naturally such experiences are very traumatic,” said Casella. “These incidents have occurred in all three of the Darfurs, in areas controlled by various groups or the government.”

In the week of July 15-21, there were five incidents in South Darfur, during which a total of seven trucks were looted of approximately 10.5 tonnes of food assistance.

The Darfur operation is the WFP’s largest humanitarian mission, with about 790 staff working to feed more than two million people every month.

The WFP indicated that it has been difficult to hire and retain the commercial trucking companies used to move food and supplies throughout the region due to the risks involved in the service. WFP Public Affairs Officer in Washington D.C. Jennifer Parmelee told Wikinews that “hiring reliable transport in other insecure environments, [such as] Afghanistan and Somalia, is extremely challenging.”

Air service is employed for remote locations and where delivery by road has become too dangerous.

Parmelee told Wikinews that the “increasing insecurity will almost certainly further constrain [WFP’s] ability to operate in Darfur – it already has.” WFP Spokesperson for Sudan, Emilia Casella, indicated that “humanitarian access is likely to be increasingly difficult due to insecurity.” However, the situation has not prevented all aid delivery. “Despite insecurity and access problems, WFP food assistance reached about 2.6 million people in Darfur last month,” said Casella.

A UN resolution on the deployment of a hybrid African Union (AU) and UN force of 26,000 troops is working its way through the UN. Britain and France presented revisions to the draft, which dropped a threat of “further measures” against Sudan for obstructing peace efforts, though Sudan’s ambassador, Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem, has objected to the revisions.

A deadline of December 31 exists to transfer authority in Sudan’s Darfur region from the AU to the proposed AU-UN force. Full deployment of all 26,000 troops would take up to one year.

The draft resolution would allow the use of force to protect the mission’s personnel and humanitarian workers and would “protect civilians under threat of physical violence”.

Jennifer Parmelee of the WFP suggests that the deployment of the hybrid force under such a mandate would be a positive development in the aid agency’s ability to carry out their humanitarian assistance. “Sure an expanded AU/UN peacekeeping force would help.” said Parmelee. “As it is, AU is stretched very very thin, and…is unable to accompany most of our convoys.”

According to WFP, there are approximately 12,000 humanitarian workers in Darfur, which is a drop in numbers even though the need for aid workers has increased.

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

According to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the termination of a natural gas contract between Egypt and Israel is a business matter and not a political issue between the two counties. Netanyahu’s statement on Monday backs away from other officials’ earlier responses to the action.

Egyptian Natural Gas Company announced Sunday, April 22 that it will stop supplying Israel with natural gas over a disagreement about payments. The company’s leader claims the other side is in “breach of contract” as Gasco has not been paid for what has already been delivered.

In 2005, Israel and Egypt, under former president Hosni Mubarak, signed a 15-year trade deal whereby Egypt would supply natual gas at a discounted rate to the Israelis. Tensions between the two countries have made Israel cautious about relying on Egypt for its energy. Since the 2011 Egyptian revolution, the pipelines for transporting natural gas from Egypt to Israel have been damaged up to 14 times.

When this decision was broadcast on Sunday night in Egypt, commentators for Egyptian news services discussed whether this decision was a blatant contractual infringement, a necessary commercial move, or an attack on the original peace treaty between Egypt and Israel made at Camp David in 1978.

In Israel, Yuval Steinitz, the finance minister, said, “This is a dangerous precedent that diminishes the peace treaty [between the two countries].”

Avigdor Lieberman, foreign affairs minister, had called on Egypt to reverse the decision and prevent the contractual dispute from escalating into a political issue. Since Netanyahu’s more recent comment, Lieberman has also backed away from characterizing the issue as a political dispute.

Egypt’s natural gas exports once made up 40 percent of Israel’s natural gas reserves, but Israel has looked for other options as the political atmosphere in Egypt changed. Israel is developing its own offshore fields, and it has begun to import other types of “dirty fuels,” like gas and diesel. As a result, Israeli consumers have seen a nine percent increase in electricity costs and Israel is preparing for the possibility of blackouts.

Sunday, May 18, 2008

An HIV-positive man was sentenced to 35 years in prison Wednesday, one day after being convicted of harassment of a public servant for spitting into the eye and open mouth of a Dallas, Texas police officer in May 2006. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that no one has ever contracted HIV from saliva, and a gay-rights and AIDS advocacy group called the sentence excessive.

A Dallas County jury concluded that Willie Campbell’s act of spitting on policeman Dan Waller in 2006 constituted the use of his saliva as a deadly weapon. The incident occurred while Campbell, 42, was resisting arrest while being taken into custody for public intoxication.

“He turns and spits. He hits me in the eye and mouth. Then he told me he has AIDS. I immediately began looking for something to flush my eyes with,” said Waller to The Dallas Morning News.

Officer Waller responded after a bystander reported seeing an unconscious male lying outside a building. Dallas County prosecutors stated that Campbell attempted to fight paramedics and kicked the police officer who arrested him for public intoxication.

Prosecutors said that Campbell yelled that he was innocent during the trial, and claimed a police officer was lying. Campbell’s lawyer Russell Heinrichs said that because he had a history of convictions including similarly attacking two other police officers, biting inmates, and other offenses, he was indicted under a habitual offender statute. The statute increased his minimum sentence to 25 years in prison. Because the jury ruled that Campbell’s saliva was used as a deadly weapon, he will not be eligible for parole until completing at least half his sentence.

The organization Lambda Legal (Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund), which advocates for individuals living with HIV, says that saliva should not be considered a deadly weapon. Bebe Anderson, the HIV projects director at Lambda Legal, spoke with The Dallas Morning News about the sentence. “It’s been 25 years since the virus was identified, but there are still lots of fears,” said Anderson.

The Dallas County prosecutor who handled the trial, Jenni Morse, said that the deadly weapon finding was justified. “No matter how minuscule, there is some risk. That means there is the possibility of causing serious bodily injury or death,” said Morse. Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins stated: “If you look at the facts of this case, it was clear that the defendant intended to cause serious bodily injury.”

A page at the CDC’s website, HIV and Its Transmission, states: “HIV has been found in saliva and tears in very low quantities from some AIDS patients.” The subsection “Saliva, Tears, and Sweat” concludes that: “Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV.” On Friday the Dallas County Health Department released a statement explaining that HIV is most commonly spread through sexual contact, sharing needles, or transfusion from an infected blood product.

The time is 21:00 (UTC) on Saturday January 6, 2007, and this is Audio Wikinews News Briefs.

[edit]

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

The government of the United Kingdom has banned the export of the ADE 651, which is advertised by the manufacturer, ATSC Ltd., as a hand-held “remote portable substance detector.” However, critics say it is just a “glorified dowsing rod.”

In a statement, the Department for Business said, “Tests have shown that the technology used in the ADE651 and similar devices is not suitable for bomb detection. As non-military technology it does not need an export license, and we would not normally need to monitor its sale and use abroad.”

The statement went on to say, “However, it is clearly of concern that it is being used as bomb detection equipment. As soon as it was brought to the attention of the Export Control Organisation and Lord Mandelson we acted urgently to put in place export restrictions which will come into force next week. We will be making an order, under the Export Control Act 2002, banning the export of this type of device to Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Adding, “The reason the ban is limited to these two countries is that our legal power to control these goods is based on the risk that they could cause harm to UK and other friendly forces.” The statement closed by saying, “The British Embassy Baghdad has raised our concerns about the ADE651 with the Iraqi authorities.”

Meanwhile, the Avon and Somerset Police have arrested the managing director of the manufacturer, ATSC, 53-year old Jim McCormick on suspicion of fraud. McCormick is a former police officer from Merseyside. He has been released on bail.

These two events come after an investigation by the BBC’s Newsnight program where they tested and revealed the device as a fraud.

The device, manufactured by ATSC Ltd. which operates from a former dairy in Sparkford, Somerset, contains an antenna attached to plastic hand grip which is attached to black box. It requires no battery or other power source, and is supposedly powered solely by the user’s static electricity, the manufacturer claims. It can supposedly detect minute traces of explosives, drugs, human bodies, money, and even elephants provided it has the right card.

The black box of the device is intended to read “programmed substance detection cards” that are supplied with the device. The device supposedly works on the principle of “electrostatic magnetic ion attraction”.

Newsnight brought the device to Sidney Alford, a renowned explosives expert who advises all branches of the UK military. Alford opened up the card reader of the device which was empty. Alford said, “Speaking as a professional, I would say that’s an empty plastic case.” Alford believes that the selling of the device is “absolutely immoral”. He added, “It could result in people being killed in the dozens, if not hundreds.”

They then brought the “programmed substance detection cards” to the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory. The cards were examined by Dr. Markus Kuhn. When the layers of the card were peeled away, it was found that cards contained nothing but RFID security tags.

“There is nothing to program in these cards. There is no memory. There is no microcontroller. There is no way any form of information can be stored,” said Kuhn. Adding, “These are the cheapest bit of electronics that you can get that look vaguely electronic and are sufficiently flat to fit inside a card.”

The device along with several others has been previously tested by Sandia National Laboratories in the United States. The test concluded that “none have ever performed better than random chance.” The United States Department of Justice has warned law enforcement agencies against buying the device.

The device first came to light in November of 2009, by The New York Times after an increasing amount of car bomb attacks were occurring in Iraq, including the devastating bombing on October 25, 2009, that killed 155. The bombers drove through checkpoints that were equipped with the ADE 651. However, the American magician and skeptic James Randi has been skeptical of the devices since at least October 2008. He offered a $1,000,000 prize if someone could prove the device worked.

Despite what was brought to light by the Times, the Iraqi Interior Ministry stood by the device. Major General Jehad al-Jabiri, who is the head of the Ministry of the Interior’s General Directorate for Combating Explosives, said, “Whether it’s magic or scientific, what I care about is it detects bombs.”

In response to the tests by Sandia Labs and the warning from the Justice Department, “I don’t care about Sandia or the Department of Justice or any of them. I know more about this issue than the Americans do. In fact, I know more about bombs than anyone in the world,” the general said.

Even after the Newsnight program earlier this week, the Interior Minstry still stands by them, “We conducted several tests on them, and found them successful. In addition, we have a series of achievements officially documented by the Baghdad operations centre, from all the provinces, which establish that these devices detected thousands of bombs, booby-trapped houses and car bombs, and we’ve noticed a reduction of bombing activities to less than 10 per cent of what it was,” said General al-Jabiri.

Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani even chimed in saying, “The thing is, the instrument is being operated by a user. Not all those who use the instrument are fully trained, the user needs to be alert and adept at using it.” The interior ministry has spent over $85 million on the devices, which cost from $40,000 to $60,000, much higher then price given by ATSC, $16,000, despite being warned by the ministry’s inspector general, Aqeel al-Turaihi.

“There was corruption associated with this contract and we referred to this and submitted our report to the Minister of the Interior,” al-Turaihi told Reuters. He added, “We said that the company which you made a contract with is not well-regarded internationally in the field of explosives detectors, and the price is very high and not commensurate with the abilities of this device.”

Meanwhile Iraqi Members of Parliament have called the Iraq Security Forces to stop using the devices. Hussain al-Falluji, a Sunni MP, said, “I proposed to parliament the withdrawal of these machines from service, the formation of an investigative committee and that Iraq recover its money.” Others in parliament are backing his suggestion.

Iraqi citizens are also criticizing the devices. Aqeel Yousif Yaqoub, a 39 year-old man who was caught in the October 25th bombing, said, “If they were effective, how did the suicide car bomb reach this area?” Another man, a perfume salesman named Malik Farhan, noted in June 2009 that the device was attracted to his perfumes.

Farhan said, “They stop us every time. There’s nothing we can do.” Jasim Hussen, an Iraqi Police officer, said, “The vast majority of the people we stop, it’s because of their perfume.” Another officer, Hasan Ouda, added, “Most people now understand it’s what gets them searched, so they don’t use as much.” McCormick said in email, “cheaply manufactured perfumes and some cosmetics” contain trace amounts of the explosive, RDX.

Other police officers have been doubtful of the device. “I didn’t believe in this device in the first place. I was forced to use it by my superiors and I am still forced to do so,” said one police officer who spoke anonymously to the New York Times because he was not authorized to speak. Another officer blamed corruption: “Our government is to be blamed for all the thousands of innocent spirits who were lost since these devices have been used in Iraq.”

McCormick still stands by the device, saying, “I have tested it in practice and it works effectively and 100% reliably.” McCormick also talked to the The Times of London saying, “We have been dealing with doubters for ten years. One of the problems we have is that the machine does look a little primitive. We are working on a new model that has flashing lights.” However, an associate of ATSC, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of possible retaliation, said, “Everyone at ATSC knew there was nothing inside the ADE 651.”