You Are a US Government Lab Rat

We Americans have never been in such monstrous danger before. Q: Alarming? A:Yes. Q:I am being an alarmist? A:Not nearly enough.

War and Terrorism - Before 911, in the early days of the Bush presidency, it's now well documented that Cheney and his cronies were seeking a reason to invade Iraq. Before 911, the Bush administration failed to heed the clearly titled document provided him by the Clinton administration that Bin Laden was planning to use commercial aircraft as guided missles into American buildings. Before Bush was president the Congress ignored the same warning in the Senate report by Senator Daschle because the Republicans were too busy scurrying around looking at stains on a blue dress. After 911, the Bush presidency already had in hand a homeland security bill many hundreds of pages long, so within two weeks of the attack, Congress was ready to vote away the freedoms we Americans had come to take for granted. After 911, the Bush administration created hysteria that the next big threat to us was Iraq by mounting a campaign of outright filthy lies and squelching any dissenting voices such as the CIA agents who claimed they'd been ordered to alter their intelligence reports to fit the Bush agenda. After the invasion, we established a civil war in Iraq whether by blundering incompetence or by sinister design. Now we have thousands of Americans dead, tens of thousands of Iraqi's, and the wounded number in the hundreds of thousands. For the first time in our history, we waged war against a country that had not attacked or even threatened us. For the first time in our history we are the prime terrorists creating a wave of 2 million refugees from Iraq. It's our fault, whether we aided it, or merely accepted it. This is easily America's most shameful actions by our most shameless dynasty. Are we safer now from terrorists? Hell no! We've made it far worse for ourselves and the rest of world by creating a breeding ground of anger and hate in the Middle East. Perhaps the worst part of all this that we'll never be free of it now. That part of the world is home to strife stretching back thousands of years, and these are people who are never defeated. When they lose, they always come back for revenge. Now Bush has included the US in that perpetual state of war. Even Cheney admitted that was so.

Global warning - Yes, it's real. The only controversy is generated by factions in our government and within the corporate world who place immediate greed ahead of the long term welfare of our descendents. You'd think they didn't have families of their own with grandchildren who will have to suffer the consequences of their insane short sightedness. Every major industrialized country is taking this very seriously and putting into place mechanisms to stem the flow of tons of carbon into our atmosphere, with one notable exception, the US. This seems all the more outrageous when one considers the fact that we receive 5,000 times more energy from the sun than we currently need. The beauty of solar energy and it's derivatives such as wind power is that the Earth is no warmer after we use the energy than it would be if we didn't. Imagine if the State of California put out to bid a contract to cover every roof in the state and every sound wall along the freewayswith solar electrical panels, we'd see the price the panels plunge as companies fought for the low bid and used their ingenuity to make it work. Imagine if other states did the same. What about the oil companies? Who says the only use for oil is burning it? We're talking about a resource of immensely complex hydrocarbons that are useful for a mind boggling array of uses as material, rather than fuel. What about the coal companies? Who says we must burn it? Imagine turning all that raw carbon into carbon fibers, bucky balls and fullerenes to create an inexhaustible source of building materials.

Bio Tests on Citizens - You would lie awake at night in a cold sweat if you looked at our government experiments on its citizens in the past, and then realize that history isn't over. You can bet your shorts, they're still at it. We now know about the experiments at Tuskugee University deceiving black men infected with syphyllis that they were receiving treatment, when in fact they were not, so that the progress of the disease could be observed unchecked over a long period of time. During the cold war, our CIA gave LSD to unsuspecting people to learn how to use it to manipulate, brainwash, and derive information from their investigation targets. Some of those led directly to innocent people going mad and committing suicide. In a way, Timothy Leary saved a generation by getting young people to experiment with it, and to know it, so it could not be used against them. The FDA has been approving alterations to our food supplies in one of the most massive experiments ever made upon a population, using such techniques as bovine growth hormone in milk, genetic alterations to basic foodstuffs such as our grains, and approving a plethora of mind altering drugs to pacify everyone's emotions and turn them into drones willing to accept the ripping asunder of American traditions, and shredding the constitution. The latest leak on government messing with our minds is a synthetic pheromone known on the street as F-9, terribly addictive through its direct effect upon our most intimate emotions of sexuality.

So go to bed tonight and try not to have nightmares, since as our fat headed political commentators like to say, you're living in the best country on Earth. Remember the Beatle's song, "...and I will sing a lullaby, Boy!, you're going to carry that weight a long time."

The Power of the Kiss

Touch is our most primal sense, a part of our body contacts something else, often someone else, and we experience texture, temperature, moisture and pressure resulting in feelings of pleasure or pain and many other feelings in between. Practically every living thing shares the sense of touch to some form or degree. Although the sense of touch permeates the body, most of our awareness of it is in our skin. What part of our skin is doing the touching, and what it touches creates a huge range of emotional responses. Keeping in mind these physiological axioms, kissing deserves special contemplation, especially if we stipulate setting aside the simple tokens of respect or affection, and confine our considerations to the intimate kiss of one person's lips with another's.

Our sense of sight, hearing, smell, and balance center our awareness of our mind's inside our heads. Our lips are the one part of our head that can reach out in order to touch, and so join with these other senses. When our lips touch the lips of another person, a sensory mirror occurs in which both people experience the other's awareness. We also are deep inside the other person's comfort zone, where we can see, hear and smell every little detail about them and inhale their pheromones in their full intensity, and they in turn every little detail about us. If both people surrender to the experience, their two minds flow into each other and it becomes a single experience shared by both. This is the essential experience of a romantic kiss.

When a woman and a man kiss, the dynamic of it is the union of opposites. Whatever one lacks, the other brings.

When both are the same gender, the dynamic of it is the joining of forces. What each has is added to the same in the other.




Men who prefer women usually have difficulty surrendering to the experience of kissing another man, and strongly react negatively to merely seeing other men kissing each other. On the other hand, women who prefer men, can more easily surrender to the experience of kissing another woman, and can react positively to seeing men kissing each other.

Why is this so? It's too simplistic to toss judgements around like it's a male pride thing, or women are naturally more sensual, or it's natural or unnatural, or blessed or if you're totally brain dead stupid condemned by some god.

On this night of the Oscars, when a fully out lesbian is welcomed and appreciated as the awards host, when a woman composer can accept her Oscar acknowledging the love and support of her wife, I must ask how much longer the strangling yoke of Puritanism will stonewall our enjoying being what we are? If Hollywood people are politically influential it's because we put ourselves into the shoes of others, and see what it would be like to be them. The acceptance of all people as valid humanity must be permitted to grow in our cultural soil. As a movie maker, I am committed to ending the obligatory treatment of gay characters as always tragic, terrible or trivial. Let's get over it, grow up, and get on with making meaningful lives for ourselves.

2,000,000 Refugees

It's positively dumbfouding how weak is the outcry, how little is the outrage, that we have engineered a human tragedy, a disaster of Biblical epic proportions. TWO MILLION refugees fleeing Iraq!

If we weren't the culprits, we'd be demanding our country act quickly to stop the bloodshed. Why aren't you mad as hell? Why aren't you writing your president, your congress people, the United Nations, the Red Cross, the World Court, demanded that the invaders be pushed back, and a peace keeping force put in place by the UN to quell the civil war? Are you so wrapped up in who's the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby?* Are you too absorbed in American Idol? I'm trying to understand whether Americans are either too absorbed in the corporate news fluff predicted by "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley and explained by "Understanding Media" by Marshall MacLuhan, or have Americans been so overexposed to tragedies and disaster that we've become numb, or have Americans become so poorly educated through home schooling and attacks on public schools by the right wing that they don't get what's going on in the world?

Now our administration announces we are accepting 7,000 refugees from Iraq, a fact that has to make us pause to wonder how can we trust them to screen out Al Qaeda secret operatives?




*After you clink on this link, be sure to try some of the links on that page.

Hello Tecnorati People

Technorati Profile

The Nature of Life

We live in a heady time of rapid discoveries in biochemistry, biophysics and biocybernetics. From the origin of life, to the reproduction of life our insights into the nature of life are growing into useful working knowledge. In light of that, it is all the more amazing that we have not yet agreed upon a fundamental definition of what life is. What is the essential difference
between non-living and living things. It may be totally Terracentric to assume that life as we know it here is the only kind of life possible, and it may be so, however, there may be other kinds of life not based on our chemistry, physics and cybernetics.

I would like to pose the question, if we someday encounter something from somewhere other than Earth, how do we determine whether or not it is alive. It may not have DNA, proteins, or even a carbon base.

I offer a modest proposal to look to Newton's second law of thermodynamics regarding entropy. "Entropy is defined as a measure of unusable energy within a closed or isolated system (the universe for example). As usable energy decreases and unusable energy increases, "entropy" increases. Entropy is also a gauge of randomness or chaos within a closed system. As usable energy is irretrievably lost, disorganization, randomness and chaos increase." from All About Science.

I propose to define life thus; life is the activity of matter which decreases its own entropy by increasing entropy in its environs. This is a small scale definition, in that on a larger scale the average entropy of a volume of space is constant. However, if you consider the mid scale between life and the cosmos, a paradox arises. The large scale surface of entropy is smooth. When life is overlaid the same volume of space, entropy becomes full of holes like swiss cheese.

(~~~ the above painting is "Lifeform" by Ursula Freer ~~~)

The holes are living things. So, if life causes the surface of entropy to have definable features then that is an increase in information, and thus life is decreasing the entropy of space itself. Unless of course, there's some other principle that balances that principle, which is in itself a decrease in entropy. Such an infinite regression is the heart of paradox, so maybe my definition is hugely flawed. I've talked this out with friends and acquaintances over time, and so far, it has held its own as a functioning definition of life.




I'd be very pleased to hear my readers reaction to this idea.

Silver-Made Images Are Golden

Painting "Craftsman" by Ras Ishi

In my lifetime I’ve watched the struggle between excellence and mediocrity, each driven by its own forces. Too often I’ve felt that mediocrity won the day. There are people who devote considerable energy going to the limit of the possible, sharpening tools to enhance the product, and nuancing every detail to coax out the best. These people are driven to whatever lengths may be necessary to attain ever higher standards of excellence, even if, as a consequence, the tendency is for them to become a small intense group. On the other hand, there are also people who seek to spread accessability by lowering standards, doing the expedient, and knowing when enough is sufficient. These people see virtue in broadening the user base to include the maximum number of participants.

In some fields of endeavor, the lone artist can polish a work or skill to perfection, but in other fields of endeavor the infrastructure required to sustain creation inherently limits the creator to those resources which are available. A violin maker, working alone, can produce a marvelous instrument, and a composer, working alone, can write timeless music, and a musician, working alone, can practice a performance of that music on that instrument until the effect is breath-taking. These succeed because, beyond talent and determination. the resources necessary for excellence may be had in small quantities. Other fields of endeavor can succeed because the resources are readily available, often because the component parts are required in a variety of uses. For example, the audiophile can pursue the holy grail of the perfect musical reproduction system because the components making up a musical system can be formed of basic electronic parts produced en masse for the electronic industry.

Motion pictures, however, occupy a unique place in our culture in that they are both a mass medium, and a medium highly reliant upon a specialized manufacturing process that is so high tech that very few companies in the world can manage it. There are probably more companies in the world capable of making rockets that can successfully fly into space, than there are companies that can manufacture motion picture film. There is a strong buzz among some in the entertainment industry to shift us away from motion picture film to electronic production and exhibition. Digital video camera are smaller, easier to use, and make better pictures than older video equipment. Digital video projectors are much brighter, sharper and more colorful than the old cathode ray tube projectors. Certainly the advances in electronic imaging technology are real improvements over what we had before, but just as certainly the technology of film imaging is advancing by at least the same degree. It is so ridiculous and patently uninformed, when video makers add phony scratches and dirt to a video image believing that is the "film look." By that reasoning, a malfunctioning old TV showing a stretched VHS tape is the "video look." I recently saw "The Good Shepherd" screened at the Lucas Digital Center in San Francisco's Presidio. There in the center of the digital cinema kingdom, we were treated to the perfection of 35mm projection which was positively marvelous.

The weakness of electronic imaging is that the entire system must upgrade to upgrade the end result. Today’s video technology is tomorrow’s junk. Changing to high definition TV means everything in the studios and everything at home must be tossed out and replaced with more expensive equipment. Changing theaters to digital projection means throwing out perfectly good projectors for equipment likely to be obsolete before the year is out. If digital video were already superior to film imaging, perhaps we could live with that little problem, but alas it is not so. On the other hand, film techology is very stable, even while constantly under improvement by manufacturers like Kodak and Fuji. My 30 year movie camera takes better pictures today than when it was new because the film negative is so much better now, and I gained all that improvement without making any changes whatsoever to the camera.

In a very real sense, the marvel of movie film springs from the fact that mechanically it is so low tech. Astonishing improvements may be had by simple means. Slit the film twice as wide to 70mm and the screen detail improves by a factor of 5, and that becomes improved by a factor of 3 times 5 in a horizontal IMAX format. Improve the sensitivity, resolution, gray scale, and color response of camera film , and every movie camera gets better by the same amount. Improve the quality of the print rawstock, and every projector automatically shows a better picture. Add registration pins to the projector aperture, and the image is as stable as a computer image. Multiply the frame rate as in Showscan and the grain disappears and the action on the screen seems more fluid and life-like. None of these changes require a massive reworking of the entire system. They have all been done, and there are more that can be done, all simply and reliably.

I am discouraged when film students are sent out with video cameras instead of Super 8’s, because they will miss the chance to see the kind of beauty they can create with film, a sacrifice for the sake of cost and expediency. I am discouraged when people with a stake in cost cutting for themselves try to force theaters to switch to digital projection. I am encouraged when I see the proliferation of IMAX theaters, and a virtual flood of films made in the process. I am encouraged when a MicroSoft exec can restore a Cinerama Theater in Seattle, or the restoration of the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood, or the Australian company shooting a new film in Cinerama, 40 years after we all thought it had died forever. I am encouraged by the people who passionately restore 70mm or VistaVision films from the past so that modern audiences don’t miss out on the experience only those films can provide. I am encouraged by the number of independent film-makers who can see the difference and care enough to do the hard stuff.

Let’s face it. If the broad base of demand for a product is lost, we shall also lose the high end because it will not of itself be sufficient demand for the manufacturer to continue. If we lose film as a mass medium, we shall not only lose the beauty of the mass art, but also the special venues, and the independents. Before we lose it, sit in an auditorium with an audience, and watch a film, any film, any gauge, and see the medium itself for itself. The wonder of it is that although you’re just watching a movie, you are looking at a truly great art form. Watch a 35mm Panavision brand new release, watch a 70mm restoration of a classic, treat yourself to an IMAX film, or pull out your 8mm home movies your dad shot in the sixties and see once again how beautiful are those images. Let us not make a mistake. Let the mass medium also be the most excellent medium. Before we lose it, act.

Most of my life I've seen cinema technology constantly striving to improve the image quality, the sound quality, as well as the quality of the acting and cinematography. Now, there's an entropic force to lower expectations, to accept poorer images, and adopt lazy attitudes about the whole process of making movies. First I must question why don't you respect your audience enough to give the best you find possible, and second why don't you respect your own work? I liked the California Dairy Council ad with Vincent Price, when he held up a box of margarine and said, "One thing you'll never hear us say, is butter tastes just like margarine." How about it? Can film look just like video, and why would you want that?

Fox News Channel Is Dead

Abraham Lincoln, arguably our country's favorite president but certainly the 16th, said "It is true you may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can't fool all of the people all the time." The fortieth president Ronald Reagan said "Fortunately, we can fool enough of the people enough of the time." Thus was born the driving philosophy of the ultra conservative schemers who have dominated the media for over a generation. It is no minor co-incidence that the fairness doctrine that attempted to keep public airwaves politically neutral, was killed by the Reagan administration. Likewise, he began the dismantling of media ownership limits under the guise of freeing up the broadcast market, but knowing full well that his cash rich supporters were ready to monopolize that market.

That fun loving guy Keith Ruper Murdoch has been watching the Comedy Channel with a growing, fiery envy of the comedy channel. "Here's this upstart John Stewart doing a half hour of satire on the news, Murdoch said, "Hey, who do they think are trying to edge into my territory? I constantly push my producers to make the funniest shows on TV, but those morons out there think it's "real news" and "fair and balanced". What? Isn't Sean Hannity the best comic since Lou Costello? I even found that Colmes guy, the perfect Bud Abbott. I put lots of pretty faces up for people, especially the guys to enjoy. I covered the ladies too, and yanked Bill Hemmer away from CNN. Don't you love it when the "news anchor" biffs and bimbos stare down earnestly at a screen pretending they are at the heart of news central!!! The most brilliant thing my writers came up with was never letting their liberal guests complete a statement. We run our show on sound bites, those dems come off looking so weak, because they can only speak in sentences and paragraphs. One of my personal favorite insider jokes is ordering all the news people to say "homocide bomber" instead of "suicide bomber." Here at Murdoch headquarters we get a lot of laughs reading letters aloud from angry families complainiing we're not giving their children credit for blowing themselves to smithereens. And if all that wasn't enough to seal the deal of Fox as the funniest channel on our dish, we've given you the perfect joke, the ultimate buffoon, the baboon of babel, Bill O'Reilly. Our private joke at Fox is that Bill thinks what he does is serious, now that's a true bozo." I wish we could have gotten Rush Limbaugh in his heyday, but his ship has sailed, and besides we couldn't afford to support his habits and keep his ass out of jail."

I'm reporting all this now, in honor of President's Day, actually I'm not. This is a review of the Fox News Channel's new show "The Half Hour News Hour". If you set aside for the moment the fact that everything in the show is a lopsided, extreme right wing propaganda ploy, and if you set aside for the moment the fact that the material is absent of any sign of intellect, and only look at the quality of the humor, you realize you've been had. There's no humor in this show. Adolescent teenage boys make funnier jokes any day of the week. So why make a show that's so bad that even the performers showed extreme discomfort with their lines, and a total lack of delivery style. The story goes they've only scheduled two shows, which I'm sure the anchors are breathing a sigh of relief. They may be able to salvage their careers yet. It's possible that since their news shows and commentary ranters are so laughable, they thought to try the opposite and make a satire show that's not satire. Now if we go back to the points we set aside, we find its propaganda as naked as in the book "The Third Reich" and every bit as racist and bigoted, and we find not one shred of throught provoking insights. Making an attempt at pun by turning Obama's name into "BO" (oh, duh, I get it...body odor!) is stupid and beneath contempt. Their concept of edgy is to use racism and homophobia, and attack those who defend individual liberty and fight government fraudulent use of power. Even the laugh track sounded phony, just some control board lackie turning up the knob labeled dull roar. I must conclude that Fox set out to do a news satire show that's completely unlike the very funny, intelligent, and entertaining John Stewart and "The Daily Show." Congratulations guys, you succeeded!

P.S. Why do I say Fox News Channel is Dead? Easy, they are described in the book idolized by George Bush's faith, "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. (Mathew 23:27 KJV)

Movie Magic

Movie magic is no more than a magicians's trick. The phrase "moving picture" is a lie. Pictures don't move. {It might be interesting to go beyond collage in art, to finding ways to animate the elements of an image, in contrast to kinetic art which is sculpture rather than images.} We need this magic, because it resolves a tension in our minds that begins the moment we first pick up a Crayola Crayon™ and scribble. No matter how hard we scribble, the scribble lays before us static. Our scribbling becomes more refined with practice, until we are capturing the shape of a house, a flower, the sun, a cloud, a person, a bycicle, and so on without any hint of perspective or shading.
{Perhaps after the artistic success of South Park, it might work to do a cartoon totally in the style of children.} Some of us progress beyond our childlike drawings to varying degrees of drawing ability yet still may find artistic value in childhood technique. Some artists are truly amazing creatures. Computer drawing software has allowed many people without hand drawing skills create imaginitive images with software instead of camel hair. Some contemporary artists use both. In all that time, none of our pictures moved, unless we first folded them into paper airplanes. Ancient cave paintings appear to be attempting to show animals running by multiplying their legs in a fan shape. I believe, then, that a moving picture seems all the more magical the more we are aware that we are tricking our brains into perceiving motion and flow of time. Moving pictures happen in our visual cortext, not on the screen, nor in our persistence of vision in our retinas. The screen only presents a sequence of still images. Persistence of vision prevents us from seeing the flicker of dark between the images. It's the visual cortex that puts it all into motion for us sitting here centered in our prefontal lobes.

Movie magic is also the movie magic we talk about when we're talking special effects in the movies. It's perfectly fitting that one of the first genuinely creative use of early motion pictures was a professional French magicianGeorges Melies. Magicians use all sorts of contrivances to create some of their illusions, and so it's not surprising he saw in this new inventon, another kind of magic trick for his act. He had, in effect, invented the special effects department. One of my favorite Lumiere background stories is that he needed exact composition for his special effect shots, but there was no reflex viewing at that time, and only simple viewfinders. His solution was to tie strings from the camera to walls of the set, so the actors could tell when they were in frame. One more silent movie trick, I loved was Buster Keaton's "Sherlock Jr." where he blurred the line between the audience in front of the screen, and the action on the screen, by stepping from the stage into the moving picture on the screen. The trick was so well done, it's as if he's challenging you to figure out how he did it.

Movie magic shares a magic traight of that part of the human brain involved in storytelling, like the Magic Theater of Herman Hesse's Steppenwolf. When someone read us stories as children, we learned to accept that the familiar face and voice could represent other faces and other voices. The actor uses acting skills to impersonate another person, and a really fine actor can persade us that the character we're watching now is the real one, but the audience brings skills to the performance sometimes called the willing suspension of disbelief. That's an excessively fancy way of saying everyone plays the game of pretend, not just children.


Movie magic empowers us to slip inside another person's timeline of life, for a limited period of time. We can come away from that vicarious experience more insightful and more understanding of the diversity of humanity. In real life our point of view can only subjective, and what we think another persons point of view may be is conjecture. It's awesome to think about this on a crowded street,we are only vicarious with ourself, and we experience other peopleNormally, we only experience the timeline of other people, we know just walking a crowded street, everyone we pass was born some time ago, had all kinds of life experiences, and they currently have a reason to be passing by this very moment, on their way into the rest of their life.

Movie Magic is also the name of my favorite screenplay writing software.

Fool or Felon?

2002

HJ 114 RHUnion Calendar No. 451
107th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. J. RES. 114
[Report No. 107-721] To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
October 2, 2002
Mr. HASTERT (for himself and Mr. Gephardt) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations
October 7, 2002
Reported with amendments, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
[Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert the part printed in italic]
[Strike out the preamble and insert the part printed in italic]
[For text and preamble of introduced joint resolution, see copy of joint resolution as introduced on October 2, 2002]
JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;
Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;
Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;
Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;
Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';
Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;
Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);
Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677';
Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable';
Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be itResolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.
SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.
The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that-
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
(c) War Powers Resolution Requiremets-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.
(a) REPORTS- The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).
(b) SINGLE CONSOLIDATED REPORT- To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.
(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- To the extent that the information required by section 3 of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of such resolution. Union Calendar No. 451












2007


(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and
(2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on Jan. 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq

Bobby Chase Deserves Being a Winner

I must have 40 to 50 story ideas for movies in my writing notes that range from a single line description to fully written screenplays. They are unfinished because they didn't have enough internal depth to keep me fascinated over a long period of time. Taking a story idea to a finished feature film is a long difficult process and so it must have power to fascinate over a long period of time. Fascination comes from discovering new things in the idea that were not apparent when it first occured. "The Supremacy Project" shows every sign of being one of those stories that can be explored indefinitely. It began with a simple question to myself on the street one day, "How would I react if I met someone, and learned they are a human clone?" That question led to the screenplay for "Drones, Clones and Pheromones", which led to seeing the story through to two sequels and the need for a TV anthology to make room for all the story possibilities. The wonderful part of it is seeing others get involved in this story and begin exploring it themselves. Over time I wish to introduce the people who are already on board to getting this film made.
I'll start by introducing Bobby Chase, a senior at Southern Methodist University in his final year of studying film and video production. Working on "Drones, Clones and Pheromones" will be his first experience with feature film making and I'm extremely glad he's enthusiastic to work on it. I've seen some of his student work, and he is talented and blessed with a fresh way of seeing movies. He's also one of the nicest men I've met. He's not afraid to show people that he likes them and receives love in return in an open and honest way.
I'm speaking of a man who is completely sincere in his relationships, something you can probably attribute to the warm sincerity of his parents, his two brothers and a perfectly charming grandmother. Bobby is also amazing for another reason. He's a star wide receiver for the Southern Methodist Mustang football team who made national news last year when he caught the winning touchdown in the final seconds of the final game of the year.
As much as we'd love to have Bobby working with us, it's likely his other dream will come true first, that of playing for the NFL. With his drive to succeed, and determination to excel, Bobby proved himself in college football, and with that drive and determination I expect to see him recruited this Spring. So, Bobby Chase, we all wish you success in the NFL draft. Bobby, you know I love you. Thank you for your love.

The Chemistry of Love

LOVE...
For the moment let's set aside meanings of the word denoting affection, compassion, extreme liking, etc. and focus only on the romantic or intimate use of the word. How many songs have been written about love? It's easily the number one subject of popular music. How many books, novels, short stories, self help books? The feeling of love is inextricably intertwined with sexuality. All of this is Mother Nature's little joke on us, since it carries us to extreme heights of passion and sublime inner peace, but can quickly become complicated beyond our ability to cope with it, and it's loss counts as among the most devastating experiences we can know. Here's the deal, you can have the wonder and joy of intimate companionship, but you must accept the inescapable separation that must one day occur. We do accept the deal, and we have 6.5 billion human beings to prove it.

We have puzzled over the mystery of to whom we are attracted, and with whom we fall in love, and explaining it as fate, or deity intervention in our lives, or sometimes we often said "It's chemistry". It should come as no suprpise as science teases out the secrets of our physiology to discover that indeed chemistry plays a big role. Internally, we are driven by hormones, this is nothing new, except for identifyiing the chemicals in our brain that cause the feelings of euphoria and bonding. What's new is learning that we are not different from other animals, but communicate our feelings to one another through chemicals called pheromones. We produce chemicals that sexually attract others. Pheromones don't create compulsions, but act more like the music in a love scene, enhancing the feelings of what is already happening. Lower mammals recognize about 1500 pheromones with the vomeronasal organ inside their nostrils, but we lack that organ. However, our olfactory epithelium has phermomone receptors for about 500. Whereas the sense of smell connects with the primitive brain stem, the pheromone sense connects with the amygdala, which is seat of emotions located behind our pre-frontal lobes. We feel pheromones, rather than smell them.

Whereas most pheromones are common among us, we have a personal pheromone we produce on our upper lips, that has encoded on it, the MHC of our DNA. MHC is our multihistocompatiblility complex, those genes that create our immune system. We are attracted to people whose MHC's are much different from our own, probably so that our offspring have a broader immune response. This is so specific that we can react to an MHC in the air from someone in a crowded room and find our way to them in spite of being in a virtual pheromone fog from everyone else. For a short while after child birth, a woman's MHC reverts to wanting to be with those similar to her own. A woman on birth control pills also has her attraction preference switched to similar MHC's rather than different. Some early research in fact has shown that relationships begun under the influence of the pill, tend be be shorter than otherwise. There is evidence that gay people produce and react to some of the same pheromones, but also some specific to homosexuals, which may help explain "gaydar".

Although human pheromones have been only recently identified, research has already begun in creating synthetic versions using recombinant DNArecombinant DNA splicing into common human gut bacteria. Perfumers are especially interested in more powerful human sexual attractors, and there are occasional rumors of secret government projects to determine if they have military value, not unlike the disastrous MK-Ultra experiments in the 1950's with LSD conducted by the CIA on American citizens. Government watch groups are especially concerned over leaked reports about a highly addictive synthetic human pheromone called on the streets "F9" by its unfortunate addicts.

As a country we are engaged in a debate over gay marriage. Somehow the idiotic voices spewing nonsense that gay people have an agenda to destroy marriage have been featured on news media as if they made sense. Actually, the Christian Church during the Middle Ages had marriage rites for same sex couples.
Contrary to foolish statements that gays don't have children, there are in fact a large and growing number of families with gay parents. If marriage is a sacrament, then it's a religious rite, rather than a legal right, and should not be part of of our laws. Let the states establish unions or domestic partnerships, and let religious organizations marry or refuse to marry whomever they please. "Why shouldn't I be able to marry my dog?" Now that's about as stupid an argument as I've ever heard.

Who Will Be Homoperfectus Felix?

The movie "Drones, Clones and Pheromones" and its sequels is an epic story of Felix, a cloned human who is so radically enhanced that he may well be Homoperfectus, our species' successor. Whereas previous stages in our evolution happened through random mutations and natural selection, Homoperfectus is the creation of the ingenuity of Homosapiens. Although a new type of human such as Felix will still be subject ultimately to the test of time, he will benefit from the fact that we are already disrupting natural selection through our advances in medical science.

When our story begins, Felix is a senior in high school trying to get along with his peers. He lives among a tribe of clone families at the Human Destiny Foundation, and has been raised by one of his creators, Dr. Victor Darwin. His other creator Ricardo has abandoned him, even though he is the prototype for the boy. Felix's innate abilities make him attractive, full of vitality, athletic, and the level of his soaring intellect cannot be determined by conventional IQ measurements.

And so, the casting of an actor to play Felix has requirements that will be difficult to meet in full. In addition to physical beauty, he must be athletic. In addition to articulate and natural speech, he may also have a good singing voice although that is not a requirement. He has to look the right age, but he must be old enough not to change radically over the course of several years of producing three films. Above all, he must have charisma to appeal to a broad spectrum audience, while creating a wholly new character in the cinematic cosmos. Felix will be a memorable character for the ages. I have been looking at up-and-coming talent to play Felix, although it would make a lot of good sense to have an unknown actor so that he carries no emotional baggage to our audience. The future as seen in our story has grown beyond mindless sexual bigotry and heterosexism, and entered an age of a more fluid sexuality, (pun recognized but not intended). The bigotry that will show its face is not in the gender of lovers, but in the relationships between regular humans and cloned humans. We are using homophobia as the model for clonophobia, which then will say something about homophobia to our audience.

First thought would beJustin Long , currently seen in the Apple Computer commercials as "Hi, I'm a Mac". Although he had been in films like Jeepers Creepers" ", it was in Dodgeball"" I first paid attention to him because he was fresh, funny, and extremely likable. Since our story is set 20 years in the future, it may make sense to Apple to sponsor his role in the film, because their logo seen all over the film would show Apple as the dominate computer company in the future.

Another direction I would like to go, would be to find an even newer face, but with demonstrated ability to appeal across the board. I would consider a talent like Jay Brannan, who appeared in and indie feature film "Short Bus" in 2006, and is a rising star in the realm of song writing and performing. His music is personal, thoughtful, and heartfelt. His melodies stay with you and he has a marvelous voice. At times he sounds a little like James Taylor but mostly its purely his own persona. His lyrics have the power of a Joni Mitchell or Van Morrison. He currently is performing in clubs in New York and Los Angeles, and if you get the chance to see him, you'd thank me for alerting you to him. He has his own website, he has a page on YouTube, and a page on My Space.

Otherwise, if you know of someone that meets the role requirments for Felix, please tell him about "Drones, Clones and Pheromones and leave a comment in my guestbood please.