Snowdon and the secret cyber army

Although, given its functions and capabilities, secret cyber Praetorian Guard would appear to be a more historically relevant description:

With his revelations exposing the extent of potential, and actual, pervasive NSA surveillance over the American population, Edward Snowden has done a great service for the public by finally forcing it to answer the question: is having Big Brother peek at every private communication and electronic information, a fair exchange for the alleged benefit of the state’s security. Alas, without further action form a population that appears largely numb and apathetic to disclosures that until recently would have sparked mass protests and toppled presidents, the best we can hope for within a political regime that has hijacked the democratic process, is some intense introspection as to what the concept of “America” truly means.

However, and more importantly, what Snowden’s revelations have confirmed, is that behind the scenes, America is now actively engaged in a new kind of war: an unprecedented cyber war, where collecting, deciphering, intercepting, and abusing information is the only thing that matters and leads to unprecedented power, and where enemies both foreign and domestic may be targeted without due process based on a lowly analyst’s “whim.”

It has also put spotlight on the man, who until recently deep in the shadows, has been responsible for building America’s secret, absolutely massive cyber army, and which according to a just released Wired profile is “capable of launching devastating cyberattacks. Now it’s ready to unleash hell.”

Meet General Keith Alexander, “a man few even in Washington would likely recognize”, which is troubling because Alexander is now quite possibly the most powerful person in the world, that nobody talks about. 

I have little doubt that General Alexander is, within the constraints imposed upon him by the nature of his job and career path, a decent man who operates within the limits that have been set for him by his superiors, though obviously not the legal ones imposed by the U.S. Constitution.  However, it doesn’t take a superintelligence or a Roman historian to figure out where this arrangement is likely to end up as soon as a sufficiently ambitious or ideologically driven individual manages to take control of the cyberwar apparatus.

Meanwhile, Edward Snowden has safely landed in Moscow and a ship bound for Syria, rumored to be carrying American weapons for the Syrian rebels, has mysteriously cracked in two on the high seas and has been abandoned.

Curiouser and curiouser….

UPDATE: It appears Mr. Snowden is heading for Ecuador:

“The government of Ecuador has received an asylum request from Edward J.
Snowden,” Patino said. WikiLeaks said in a statement that Mr Snowden is “bound for the Republic
of Ecuador via a safe route for the purposes of asylum, and is being
escorted by diplomats and legal advisors from WikiLeaks.”

A mysterious sinking

MOL Comfort Suffers Broken Back, Sinks Off Yemen Remains Adrift Off Yemen
26 crewmembers of an MOL container ship were forced to abandon ship
Monday off Yemen after the ship suffered from catastrophic hull failure
and
reportedly sankbroke in two. The MV MOL Comfort, an 8,000 TEU-type container ship cracked in half
about 200 miles from the Yemeni coast at about 12’30″N 60′E while
enroute from Singapore to Jeddah with a load of 7,041 TEUs. All 26 crew –
made up 11 Russians, 1 Ukrainian and 14 Filipinos – escaped the sinking
ship on two life rafts and a lifeboat.

So, do the Russians have an attack sub called “Yet Unclear Reasons“? Or, as appears more likely, did one of those Russian crew members take a creative approach to ship’s maintenance? If it is true that the MOL Comfort was carrying arms intended for the Syrian rebels, it would appear that Mr. Putin has called Mr. Obama’s decision to raise the ante.

Mailvox: Mike Resnick clarifies

One of the chief targets of the SFWA pinkshirts corrects two misconceptions and explains a few things concerning Bulletingate:

A couple of corrections. I -asked- Laura not to get involved in this. I
know how much vituperation can get spewn by the hatemongers.

Also, I had nothing to do with the Campbell Award. I never created it, administered it, or won it.

For
those who haven’t read the offending articles (in which case, you have a
lot in common with the screamers): in issue #200, at the request of our
(female) editor, we wrote a very complimentary article about editors of
that gender…but we had the temerity to call them “ladies” rather than
“females”, and to state that Bea Mahaffey, who edited Other Worlds 63
years ago and died a couple of decades ago (and was a close personal
friend of mine) was beautiful. Those were sins #1 and #2. After the hate
mail began appearing, we committed Sin #3 in issue #202: we defended
our right to call Bea Mahaffey beautiful, and our (female) editor’s
right to run a generic, non-naked, non-bare-breasted warrior woman on
the cover. They’re still screaming for our deaths by slow torture. 🙂

It
got so bad that our editor, Jean Rabe, resigned, not just as editor but
as a member of SFWA. And for the record, I hired her as my assistant on
the Stellar Guild line of books 5 minutes later.

Corrections duly noted. Although one can only imagine the shrieks of outrage when Mr. Resnick’s shockingly sexist paternalism becomes known to the pinkshirts.  I think it goes without saying that neither Jim Hines nor John Scalzi would ever be so appallingly sexist as to attempt to silence a woman’s voice in this oppressive and demeaning manner.  They’re much more inclined to hide behind, or wear, a woman’s skirt than to protect her.

Mr. Resnick, on the other hand, is sufficiently old school to wish to shield his daughter from the hatemongering pinkshirts, for which one can only commend him.  And his Stellar Guild line promises to be a significant step up for Ms Rabe from the Bulletin. The idea of publishing collaborations between established writers and their proteges is a good one and something I can fully support, having been the beneficiary of a similar collaboration with the Original Cyberpunk in the early days of my SF/F career.

It is amusing to note that despite SFWA being an organization originally founded to professionalize the relations between SF writers and SF publishers, this latter-day parody finds itself engaged in furious attacks on new model editors and publishers like Mr. Resnick and myself.  One suspects that one factor contributing to the pinkshirts’ unmitigated rage is their shattered dreams, as Judith Tarr describes in the following manner:

Now, of course, there are so many more options. Chances are the
author will still go broke–all those stories of ebook gold mines are
exceptions, not the rule, especially for authors without large
followings or very up-to-date, popular, trendy subject matter. But the
books will see the light of day as ebooks, print-on-demand books,
audiobooks, even games or graphic novels. That doesn’t help the authors of ten or twenty or more years ago who
saw their hopes crushed, their dreams shattered, and their books
rejected by the one standard that validated them in publishers’ terms:
money and sales.

It is not a coincidence that the vast majority of SFWA members who Mr. Resnick describes as “screamers” are complete nonentities in the field, most of whom have published little more than the bare minimum to qualify for membership. They’ve taken over the organization just as it has become entirely irrelevant to the wider SF/F market.

Thus am I refuted

Aliette de Bodard inadvertently makes a powerful case against my assertions of savagery in the SFWA on Twitter:

“When I was 13 or so, I stabbed boy who was bothering me with pointy end
of a pair of compasses (planted it in his hand when he reached out)”

“to be fair, I didn’t have much body strength; they barely broke skin. He was mostly surprised that I attacked…”

“Felt quite happy (still do).”

All righty then.  I stand corrected. She only stabbed him, after all, it’s not as if she dismembered and ate him or anything.  Civilization is a relative concept, is it not? But let’s not let our expectations rise too high, as the woman actually defends “death threats… made to various writers” on the grounds of them being “performance rage”.

“[B]y “performance rage”, I mean that RH doesn’t actually intend to send
minions to decapitate all white men, or to carry out the death threats
she’s made to various writers. But I’m pretty sure she’s genuinely
furious at the cultural appropriation and misogyny that is unfortunately
rife in genre; and that posts like the one I pointed out stem from
genuine anger rather than a simple desire to rile people up.”

So, death threats are acceptable so long as one is genuinely furious.  Got it. Remember, these are the very pinkshirts who claim that straight white men are full of hate, rage, and fear.

At what point does complicity begin?

AV has a question about how responsible he is for his organization’s official position contra Christianity and traditional morality.

I have a dilemma. I work at a huge [REDACTED] company that is based in [REDACTED]. The company is publicly pro-GLBT.

This week the HR dept published an internal article describing a company-sponsored pro-gay club. There was a fairly civil discussion taking place in the comments section. (Which illustrates the obliviousness of the publisher that comments would be enabled at all). Later in the day I noticed that the Christian comments were removed and others were not).

Not huge deal, the company can do whatever they want. As a libertarian, I think its fine if they only hire GLBTs and the market can determine if that’s viable.

But it got me thinking, am I participating in evil or facilitating ungodly activities? Would Paul work there?

Clearly, if my manager asked me to sign a scroll in blood denouncing Christ, I would terminate my relationship with them. Things usually aren’t that obvious. I am sure Hitler’s secretary didn’t think anything was wrong at first either.

At what point does the negative effects from associating with worldly organization outweigh the necessity to make a living? Or as good of a living; a longer commute isn’t exactly like being thrown to the lions.

I don’t think an employee is responsible for his employer’s actions.  He is only responsible for his own. And so long as one is not lying or dissembling about one’s faith and about one’s principles, as Abraham did when asked about the nature of his relationship to his wife, then I think one can continue to work in that situation.  After all, one is expected to be in the world, merely not of it.

On the other hand, the writing is clearly already on the wall.  The fact that one can, in good conscience, continue to work there now does not mean that one is wise to do so.  It is bad enough that the corporation has embraced evil and is now openly pro-GLBT, but the fact that the Christian comments were selectively deleted indicates that it will soon be entering the next stage of actively suppressing all internal dissent.

The corporation hasn’t begun the witch hunts yet, but it will almost surely begin doing so in the relatively near future.  And that is when the ritual submissions will be required, which is when AV will no longer be able to remain there in good conscience.  Given that the clock is already ticking, I would recommend that AV begin actively looking for another job while he still has his current one.

Devouring their elders

Instapundit urges support for Malzberg and Resnick and quite rightly suspects “that the real ‘radioactive aura’ is more likely to attach to the SFWA”, while Andrew Fox excoriates the recent attempt of the SFWA’s pinkshirted stormtroopers to mau-mau their feminist forebears in considerable detail:

I feel compelled to point out, or at least suggest, that a vocal and
very cyber-visible portion of the SF pro and fan community have not been
covering themselves in glory recently. In fact, they have been acting
like a mob. A cyber-mob. And a mob is an ugly thing….

Given the prevalence of academic jargon from Cultural Studies or
other Studies departments in their comments, I imagine a goodly number
of the criticizers on the SWFA discussion boards and the broader
Internet are either university instructors or possessors of an advanced
degree from one of those programs. For many individuals under the age
of forty who have been through the university system, mau-mauing may
seem normative, or at least unremarkable. They have seen it at work
through divestment campaigns of various kinds (divestment from Israeli
companies or U.S. companies which provide goods to Israel which might be
used in security operations against Palestinians, or from companies
involved in fossil fuel production, or from companies connected to
certain figures active on the Right, such as the Koch brothers) and
through shout-downs and other disruptions of speakers invited to campus
whose backgrounds or viewpoints are contrary to those favored by student
activists.

Many of the criticizers may not consciously realize that they are
mau-mauing Mike and Barry, but mau-mauing is what they are engaged in.
Some commentators have pointed out the criticism is not censorship.
True; but in this instance, rather irrelevant. Other commentators have
stated that freedom of speech does not imply a right to a paid platform
(such as that enjoyed until now by Barry and Mike with their quarterly
columns for the Bulletin). Again – true, but irrelevant. For
what the protesters either seek to do or end up abetting is not
censorship, but what can be called shunning and shaming, an application of a radioactive aura to these two men which will make not only the future editors of the Bulletin
but also editors at other periodicals and publishing houses, organizers
of conventions, literary prize juries, and media outlets shy away from
wanting any connection with these two and their works. Remember, this
story has now broken out into mainstream outlets such as Salon and the Guardian;
people who previously had never heard of Mike Resnick or Barry Malzberg
or any of their books will now have their initial (and most likely
only) impression of them branded with a scarlet “S” for “Sexist,” as
detrimental a negative label in our time as “Adulterer” was in the time
of the Puritans. As Barry himself stated in the column “Talk Radio
Redux,” the most potent form of censorship is self-censorship,
the type that occurs in a writer’s head before he or she sets fingers to
keyboard. The mau-mauers, consciously or not, are using Mike and Barry
as cautionary examples – “Look what we’ve been able to do to the
reputations of a WorldCon Guest of Honor and to a man who has written
close to a hundred novels and over 250 short stories, several nominated
for Hugo or Nebula Awards. If we could do this to them, what do you
think we could do to you if you commit ThoughtCrime?”

The virtually thoughtless piling on is perhaps the most appalling.
So many of the criticizers whose comments I have come across admit they haven’t even read the columns in question. Once the ball of shunning and shaming
got rolling, hundreds of onlookers, alerted by social media, jumped on
the bandwagon, attracted by the enticing glow of participating in shared
moral outrage. Moral preening is on overload; industry professionals
and would-be professionals frantically signal to each other that they
are right-thinkers. According to the mau-mauers, Mike and Barry did not
merely misspeak (miswrite?); they did not have decent-enough intentions
which were ruined by Paleolithic habits and blinkered upbringings; they
are morally suspect, malign and vicious and evil. It’s burn the witch! all over again, but this time on a pyre of blog posts and Tweets.

I mentioned before that I completely understand the vehemence of
Barry’s reaction to all this. One sadly ironic aspect of this brouhaha
is that Barry is a lifelong man of the Left. He was staunchly antiwar
during the Vietnam era (see early stories such as “Final War”), and his
dream president was (and remains) Eugene McCarthy. I fully believe,
based on his writings about Alice Sheldon and Judith Merril, that Barry
considers himself a feminist, and an avid one. Condemnation from one’s
“own side” always burns hotter in one’s craw than condemnation from “the
other guys,” which can be easily rationalized away; just as criticism
(especially when viewed as unfair) from one’s own family hurts much
worse than criticism from relative strangers. Forty years ago (and in
all the years since), Barry was a fierce advocate of the New Wave in
science fiction, whose practitioners (with the sole exception of R. A.
Lafferty) were all politically aligned with the Left, as opposed to
old-timers such as John W. Campbell and Robert Heinlein. Now Barry must
feel as though the children of the Revolution are eating their elders
(as so frequently happens, it seems).

The amusing thing about this is that the SFWA folks involved, from Scalzi on down, genuinely believe that it was Mike and Barry making the organization look bad.  But they’re doing a fabulous job of doing that all on their own and they just keep digging the hole deeper… especially in light of the recent announcement of a 5-Year 4-Step Plan in which the SFWA Bulletin has been put on hiatus for up to six months while the pinkshirted task force ideologically cleanses redefines the “goals and mission of the magazine.”

As for devouring their elders, Fox may not realize quite how literally that has been true.  Although, to be fair, if Laura Resnick has not deigned to publicly defend her father, she has at least refrained from throwing in with the pinkshirted maenads.

More haircuts on the way

I’m a little surprised at Mr. Evans-Pritchard’s dismay.  What else did he expect?

Another shameful day for Europe as EMU creditor states betray South.
So much for the denials. The Cyprus “template” for banking crises is to be eurozone policy for other countries after all.

Don’t be complacent if you’re on the other side of the Atlantic.  The same “bail-ins” are coming to the USA too.  In fact, two have already taken place there, compared to the one in Cyprus.  It’s already been determined by the courts that “your” money in the bank is not yours, it is merely an unsecured loan you have made to the bank… for what is effectively a negative interest rate.

Offended by silence

This story of internecine offense-taking should be educational for those who believe that if only they remain are sufficiently nice to people and avoid saying anything negative, they will avoid giving offense to the permanently – and in some cases, professionally – offended:

Two state legislators are accusing former Congressman Anthony Weiner of displaying a “lack of moral courage” in the face of what they slammed as a “homophobic, misogynistic slur” made by a voter referring to their chosen candidate: City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. And they want him to apologize.

The offense occurred in The Washington Post, which published a lengthy story Thursday on the mayor’s race that included this scene that described Mr. Weiner’s interaction with a voter on the campaign trail:

    “You a registered Democrat?” he asked an elderly woman wheeling a shopping cart by him.

    “I am,” she said. “And I’m not voting for uh, what’s her name? The dyke.”

    “Okay. I just need you to sign the petition to get me on the ballot,” said Weiner, who then noticed the incredulous reaction of a reporter and added, “and you really shouldn’t talk that way about people.”

    “Oh, I’m sorry,” the woman said.

    “It’s okay,” Weiner responded. “It’s not your fault.”

The response left Assemblywoman Deborah Glick and State Senator Brad Hoylman–who have both endorsed Ms. Quinn’s campaign–seething.

“We are appalled by the account in the Washington Post of Anthony Weiner’s unacceptable response to a prospective voter’s homophobic, misogynistic slur in reference to Christine Quinn,” they wrote in a statement Thursday. “Weiner’s response to this blatant display of homophobia is completely inappropriate and extremely alarming. There is nothing ‘okay’ about homophobia and it’s never ‘okay’ to condone bias-based slurs or hate speech of any kind.”

They argued that such language was indicative of the larger challenges faced by female and openly gay political candidates.

“The voter’s use of the term demonstrates the challenges women candidates and lesbians in particular face, and Weiner’s failure to swiftly and firmly condemn her language demonstrates his lack of moral courage,” they added. “We demand an immediate apology from Mr. Weiner on behalf of LGBT and women New Yorkers.”

The fascist pinkshirts are not merely speech police, they are totalitarian thought police.  They are the very sort of people of whom George Orwell warned.  It’s not enough to leave them alone, because if you merely happen to show insufficient public enthusiasm for causes they consider morally imperative, they will attack you even more ferociously than those who openly oppose them.  They are the enemies of free speech, and more than that, they absolutely loathe the very idea of human freedom.

The reason the pinkshirts are always seeking apologies is because they view them, correctly, as public rituals of submission.  This is why it is a massive mistake to ever apologize to the monsters or to give them any ground whatsoever.  Stand your ground and they will fade away for the time being, (although they will lurk around and strike again the moment they detect any weakness), retreat and they will press forward with alacrity.

Remember that is always about power with these people.  It concerns power and nothing else. Note how not even being a high profile member of Team Clinton, (which those who know anything about DC are aware is not exactly unsympathetic to dykes), is enough to protect the left-wing Weiner from attacks on this front.  Being offended, or better yet, falsely claiming to feel threatened, is nothing more than a rhetorical tactic for these people, and therefore is best met with a rhetorical response.

Showcase

The Original Cyberpunk introduces SHOWCASE, which will feature free access to some of the stories by the authors being published in STUPEFYING STORIES magazine.

Welcome to Issue #2 of SHOWCASE, the free weekly webzine companion to STUPEFYING STORIES magazine and the STUPEFYING STORIES PRESENTS anthology series. Each week in SHOWCASE
we’ll be offering up previews of coming attractions, samples of what
we’re working on, reviews and comments, and of course,
new stories by some of our favorite authors—and
we hope, by writers who soon will become some of your favorite authors, too
If you saw Issue #1, you’ve no doubt already noticed some big changes
for Issue #2. We’re still working on the banner—and as of the time I’m
writing this, I still don’t know whether the new banner will be ready in
time for tomorrow’s release—but most importantly, with this issue SHOWCASE moves to it’s new permanent home,
StupefyingStoriesSHOWCASE.com.

Let’s face it, any publication that features a story entitled “Elves are Douchebags” more than merits a look-see.

Spontaneous automotive combustion

The LAPD quickly rules out foul play in the fiery demise of Michael Hastings, investigative reporter:

The Los Angeles Police Department said there appears to be no foul play in the one-vehicle accident that killed journalist Michael Hastings.

The Los Angeles County coroner on Thursday
positively identified Hastings as the driver of a Mercedes that crashed
on Highland Avenue near Melrose Avenue on Tuesday morning. Hastings’ involvement with hot-button stories has led to a
variety of conspiracy theories arising on the Internet over his death.
But LAPD officials said the incident appears to have been an accident
and that no other vehicles were involved. Officials are trying to
determine whether there was a mechanical problem with the car. The
sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because the case was
ongoing….

Hastings was best known for a 2010 Rolling Stone profile that led to the resignation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Hastings was a contributing editor to the magazine.

In related news, the Federal Security Service announced that it suspects no foul play in the recent series of Russian emigrant deaths in the United Kingdom.  Has anyone informed the LAPD that it is only in the movies that Mercedes automobiles explode on impact?

Steve Sailer, who lives very close to the scene, appears to have a few doubts himself:

Nothing to see here, folks, move along, nothing to see here. It’s just
the top investigative journalist of his generation charbroiled in his
new Mercedes, so keep moving. Hey, did you hear about Kim Kardashian?
Now, that’s what I call news.

I wonder if Matt Taibbi is considering a move to Hong Kong?  First Breitbart, now Hastings.  At the very least, he should stay away from Los Angeles.

UPDATE: One of the witnesses said: “It sounded like a bomb going off.  The house shook; the windows were rattling.”