What's In A Name (or phrase)?

Just meditating on the art of words today in the wake of the GOP House resurgence.


"A Pledge To America" is the new Republican governing document, akin to an art school's manifesto. It's interesting to contrast it with 1994's "The Contract With America" as an exercise in rhetorical style and function.

*-*-*-*

In 1994, business was rushing into the dot-com boom/bubble, "The Superhighway Summit" was held at UCLA (where Al Gore spoke about the convergence of technologies exploding on the net), the Fed Funds target rate was raised hugely, Apple released the PowerPC chips, Wired was just getting hot and everything was business, business, business, so "contract" sounded all buzzwordy-happening-meme-ish, the style du jour.

The second sentence of TCWA uses the words "official evasion and posturing" and "no fine print" and then goes on to talk about "government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family"... "To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves. "

The TWCA then goes on to actually propose specific legislation on 10 major concerns; talking business, setting out the job outlines.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

I guess that was 1994 attack-dog, Art Of War- style business, getting that all up front right away, cards-on-the-table, Masters O' The Universe school. In contrast, APTA [a PTA? ACTA/APTA? at least their acronyms have gotten more refined] begins by bombastically recalling us to our 6th grade History lessons; you can hear "Stars And Stripes Forever" humming underneath; the soundtrack to a speech by His Honor The Mayor as the highlight of a Fourth of July ice-cream social.

There's no admittance of any responsibility or culpability for What Has Gone Before.


After that affirmation of principles you couldn't possibly reject without being some kind of anarchistic god-hating sociopathic terrorist child pornographer [did you involuntarily cringe or flinch just a bit when you read those trigger words?] the return of the pointy stick from 1994 (itself a kindler, gentler pointy stick than in 1992) reveals the righteous indignation of men of good character and moral grace for the government haughtily doing all these bad things to people.



This is a great phrase here:

"An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down longstanding laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people."

It says that the entire government - all three Branches - is hopelessly compromised and corrupted, and goes on to ring "thwart" "overturn" "strike(ing)" and "scorn." Dang! Those dastardly villains! I love the echoes of genteel effrontry. Pistols at dawn, Edmund?


Next we get:

"An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many."


Here's a nice swipe at science, education and knowing stuff - setting up the spectre of a cold, bloodless Atomic Brain clique and pinging the continued war on science, yet manages to insinuate ("self-elected") that these government officials were not legitimately voted into office in the first place.

"Like free peoples of the past" - I hope you kept that You Tube link active above (or I can provide one for "Lilies Of The Field" if you need one).

It then goes on for another several paragraphs strangely reminiscent of the Girl Scout Promise and Law or a conversion/coming-of-age ceremony. In contrast, TCWA perhaps implied much of this rhetoric but actually set forth what it proposed as a series of specific actions to remedy specific problems.

I also love the title-shift. It hold invocatory echoes of the Pledge of Allegiance, the current "virginity pledge movements" and Promise Keepers associated with evangelical Christians and pure old Scout humility and earnestness while managing to avoid the taint of being "big-business friendly," another one of the current disenpowerment memes ("they iz doing it to us all wrong!")


In both cases the documents imply that there has never been fairness in elections; that there has somehow been a hostile takeover of government by men of nefarious and unAmerican® persuasion; that "the people" are oppressed and calling for champions and that all current troubles can be laid at the feet of "The Government"("reclaim our government for the people").


In APTA the rhetorical style of blowsy bombast alternates with stirring echoes and references to the American Revolution, Star Wars and Spartacus. I guess the Congresscritters' cozy partnership with MediAmeriCo® pays off in being able to recycle cheezy schmaltz and outtakes from "Leave It To Beaver."


Bits and pieces:


"reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values "

"We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations "

"to whom much is given, much is expected" [Luke 12:48] and that the blessings of our liberty"

"make this pledge bearing true faith"

"we invite fellow citizens and patriots"

In Defense of SaveMe Oh [a limited-time offer!]

Probably didn't see this post coming did you? Especially if you know anything about my interactions with SaveMe over the past year and a half or so. We've tangled before.

But I logged in to SL today amidst some kind of crapstorm and spent a few hours investigating this polarizing issue.

This is the notecard I received... multiple times from multiple sources:

Hi, friends,

You may have heard that Igor Ballyhoo deleted his account on July 23, 2011 (you can still find his profile, I think it takes about six months for it to be removed). The reason for this was he could no longer endure the persistent bullying and ongoing harassment by SaveMe Oh. She has been attacking him for the past year or so, part of this has been ongoing on her blog, part of it has been at gallery openings and part of it has been via private IM.

Many of the Art groups, and also CARP, discussed earlier tonight what could be done about this. We want Igor back and SaveMe to be removed. While there is still some RL business that needs to be affirmed before any action can be taken, letters from art houses and art groups could greatly contribute and also personal letters from creaters and art lovers like you. Also we will look into steps that can be taken in RL concerning the blog where she writes her lies and harrasses innocent people.

While we realize this is not an easy undertaking, we want to move forward with our plan. SaveMe Oh has terrorized SL long enough and nothing has ever been done about it. We ask you for your support in the form of a Letter of Complaint addressed to Rhett Linden, Director of Experience, Linden Lab. Drop it in his profile. The more people show that the terrorism Saveme Oh is acting out on SL is not longer possible, the more chance there is she will be removed from SL forever.

Thank you.

[emphasis mine]

First... I'd like to address this notecard.


OMGWTFBBQ? drama


1. The use of the word "terrorism" twice in this note is despicable and unconscionable. It is the ugliest sort of hate speech imaginable given the current world situation and particularly when the Oslo shootings and bombings are still front-page news. It's irresponsible and hysterical, which is what these people accuse SaveMe of; it is pure unadulterated high-school drama.


2. It doesn't take anywhere close to six months to delete a profile.


3. SaveMe has a blog where she is free to write whatever she wants to write. If you speak to a lot of people about her, they generally will tell you "I don't bother to read her" in the same way they don't bother to read Prokofy Neva's Second Thoughts blog/site. I don't happen to like Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin's blogs either, so I just... don't bother to go there.

Mute is there for a reason. I have muted SaveMe before, after telling her I was going to. I've also muted Igor, for reasons that I will explain later.

Igor is not a helpless victim here. He is not tied up, hooded, manacled nor being shocked with bare electric wires. He doesn't have to go read SaveMe and he certainly has Mute available, as he well knows, having muted me before. So I call bullshit on this whole dramatic fashioning of little Igor's helplessness, esp when he takes great pains in this community to pass himself off as some tough-guy and is the rudest male I have yet met in Second Life after Georg the Janitor.


4. Oh, so it's definitely a witch-hunt... going after SaveMe's blog? About a problem in Second Life??? Really? I have read her blog at different times. Yeah, it's offensive sometimes; yes, it's cruel sometimes, as I have made a point of telling SaveMe before when we've had our tussles. But seriously, I have never seen anything close to libel, slander or any legally actionable offense.


5. I really love the campaign to send letters to Rhett Linden, and the thing about "removing her forever from SL." That's simply hysteria; anyone can change their MAC or log in from a dynamic IP. It's also quite as vindictive and dramatic as what these people's "protest" is about.


So this notecard being passed around, duplicated and spammed to every imaginable group just looked like exactly the same kind of crap that's being used as an accusation: pure drama and power politics.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Igor and Me

Now I guess it's time to talk about me and Igor.

The first time I met Igor was at a "tea party" at S&S Galleries with Ally Aeon, Rose Borchovski, me and then Igor dropped in. Among the first things Igor said to me were sexual comments and innuendos that I simply do not stand for in RL or in VL. This is no surprise to people who know me, or know him; it is a common mannerism of his, observed many times by many people. He thinks it's cute or tough or cynical or something. He also made belittling comments about women aimed particularly at me and my work; not critique but patronizing male bullshit and quasi-porn-actor speech.


As is my wont, I began replying wittily/teasingly. Igor didn't seem to be able to take what he dished and it swiftly turned into surliness on Igor's part and hardness on my part to not let someone acting like a high-school emo-goth slap at me repeatedly without talking back.

He also played the "my life has been tougher than your life" card... which was stupid of him, not knowing my life. Many of my friends in SL do know my life and where I have been and what I have seen, including, yes Igor, people dying in front of me (1 by bullet, 2 by OD).


At one point, I told Igor, "Unless you apologize for your rude and sexual comments, I will hear nothing of what you say." Remember, this is all in public chat in a room with other people. So I was certainly conscious of what I was saying.


Igor then decided that I had been "unforgiveable" to him and that unless I apologized to him for not listening to anything he had to say unless he apologized, I was on his shitlist. We went through a little semantic tête-à-tête as to why I blanked him in the first place, but Igor refused to understand that his sexual innuendos and brattly vulgarity were the thing I objected to and blanked him for. I was supposed to apologize to him for finding his verbal bullying offensive and asking him for an apology! So I was like, ok that won't work, Muted him and just put him on the "ignore: wallpaper" list.



However... for months afterward, when we'd be at the same show, Igor made it a point to point out he was ignoring me, and then use this opening tell the story of how I had wounded him by being rude and out-of-the-blue muting him and generally being mean and terrible. A big drama, about how I had wronged him. After that... I decided to keep Igor on Mute. It's adult. I just let him go. I didn't care what he was saying about me. I mean, wtf drama right?


I thought this was the end of it and was determined to just let him shoot his mouth off; people will realize after awhile what someone is about. Unfortunately... I started to notice that a few of the galleries which had been asking me for my work suddenly dropped me off the shelf. I also found a similar thing with certain groups in SL.


Yes, I wondered, but contrary to popular opinion, I am not always paranoid. I let things float until I was approached several months ago by two separate gallery owners, who wanted to know "what's this with you and Igor?" I was kinda baffled, having let the whole thing slide almost 8 months ago.


I learned then that Igor had been talking to at least these two owners, giving them the story of poor Igor and the mean Miso. This was confirmed by a couple other people through chat transcripts... and it fit perfectly Igor's well-known abrasive and "tough-talking" persona. What I learned was that, far from being an adult about it, Igor continued his grudge campaign for over a year.


So let's start with that perspective. I'm upfront about it, as I try to be. I might be crazy, emotional, wrong or overexciteable but I try damned hard to be upfront, to hang with my mistakes and attempt to correct them; to be responsible for my self/avatar in my community.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

SaveMe and Me


I'd heard a lot about SaveMe Oh but never really tangled with her until a few things came up where she was interfering with someone else's performance. I understand her position and the debate; I just don't agree with her. But I neither kiss her butt in fear nor get hysterical when confronting her. At times I've Muted her; at times I've supported banning her from an area when she is disrupting someone else's performance. I've gone to see their work, not SaveMe's, and I have taken the trouble to talk with her, debate with her, express my own opinion to her.

She's made posts about me too. In my quest to understand, I read her entire blog back several years to understand her position. To me... this is nothing new; agitprop and such derivative "art movements" are at least a century old; I've participated in some myself (as when I ran all over LA "remixing" Shep Fairey's OBEY glyph, which I happened to dislike as an art work).




So... I quit reading her blog *shrug* SaveMe is completely upfront about her method, which I call the "Tar Baby Principle." The more you react to SaveMe the better she likes it; the more material there is for drama and the easier it is for her to make her point; drama is her stated métier. So I just quit reading and responding to her, in the same way I quit reading Prokofy Neva's Second Thoughts. "It's pointless to attack a Tar Baby" is the moral of that old fable; or in modern internets parlance, "please don't feed the trolls."


So... she was Muted off and on at various times... and I quit reading her blog, and told her why. I wasn't hiding my distaste for her methods or disagreement with her position. However... I was also quite willing and ready to debate with her on the merits of such an approach. When she quit slapping at me (making me part of the performance) and started talking to me (communicating) I was willing to listen; that was the condition I made clear to her.


And one thing I do know about SaveMe: she's upfront about what she's doing. I don't have to like what she's doing; her approach and theory and aim are something she has a right to do and I have the right to not agree with. I don't like her methods, but I do respect upfrontness. There's always Mute, Ban and "don't go here."

And Igor is far from the first and only person who has been treated to the SaveMe Oh Experience.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Not Buying This Pony

Of course, all of that is my opinion (except the verified chats and dialogues involving Igor). And I'm certainly no SaveMe Oh champion or syncophant. Neither do I have a particular axe to grind with Igor other than stated. He's a derp; I muted him; when I happen to run into him at some opening I just keep the Mute on and I am fine with his greyness. I don't go out of my way to be rude or nasty to him; I don't react at all; he's wallpaper. And that's my adult right. If I see something of his I honestly like, I tell people so. I don't confuse my personal distaste for Igor with his work. I don't go around slamming his work or whispering to gallery owners about my own distasteful experiences with Igor... until this point, when Igor is being painted as some kind of angelic being trammeled by the unspeakable evil that is SaveMe.



But this fracas, and particularly this notecard, is way over the line. I understand that two of the galleries pushing this notecard out, the main "organizers" if you will, have already banned SaveMe from their premises. So wtf? She can't go there and harass Igor. IMs can be muted. He can AR her if she really crosses TOS. And he is stupid to keep returning to a honeypot website which tells you right up front that it's purpose is to create drama.


My personal belief is that Igor's persona and romantic dalliances caught up with him finally, as it usually does to noobs who don't have a clue or are unable to stand by their persona, mistakes and all, and attempt to understand, grow and change in exactly the way you have to do in RL. He got his knickers in a twist and took his marbles and went home. That's his choice too. Alizarin Goldflake has been a target of SaveMe's but she hasn't deleted her profile and gone home; neither have I, nor have many other of SaveMe's victims unconsenting cast members.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

So neither person in this drama is exactly on my hit parade list. However, this campaign to "get SaveMe permanently banned from SL" using the hysterical, completely-out-of-line and morally-reprehensible "terrorism" label is so much bullshit that I'd have to rent a fleet of trucks to haul it away. The subtle plea "kill SaveMe and Igor will return!" is really pitiful. Add to that the vindictive nature of the "and we'll see about your little dog blog too" and it's just icing on this dramatic poopcake.

Watching the Wikileaks Spin

Just a little Wall Street Journal op-ed piece that spun me up today:

Why Wikileaks Is Unlike The Pentagon Papers [ WSJ]

Mr Abrams is "a prominent First Amendment attorney and Constitutional law expert who represented the New York Times in the New York Times Co. v. United States (403 U.S. 713 (1971)) Supreme Court case that established the 1st Amendment rights of Ellsberg and the NYT in publishing the Pentagon Papers."


Unfortunately it appears as if he has lost a bit of his sharpness since those days, or perhaps it's the paycheck from the WSJ that has made him swallow the Red Herring Pill. Remember, this is what I am studying: the use of weaponized art [propaganda] as a means of controlling thought and debate.

Mr Abrams spends a great deal of time in this op-ed discussing the last 4 volumes of the Papers, which contained the kind of diplomatic material Wikileaks released and was withheld from the initial publication of the Pentagon Papers on sensitivity grounds. He then goes on to build a case on the Wikileaks diplomatic cables leaks and drags in the Espionage Act to vaguely hint that Julian Assange may be a scoundrel taking advantage of our magnanimous legal code.


Ok, so it's the WSJ and you do expect them to use their op-ed pages to push their political masters' agenda; it's widely-known and long-term for them. You'd also expect such a legal beagle like Mr Abrams to be current on the legal opinion that the EA can't be used against Julian Assange (which is why they are pressuring Pvt. Bradley Manning to say that he was coerced so they can use a computer crime law against Julian). What is more interesting is that this supposed authority with the credentials of the Ellsberg case behind him is so compromised/enfeebled/decayed that he can't spot the shifting of the spotlight and debate to the cables.

Please keep in mind that an inquiry HAS been made into these allegations in Sweden against Julian and the worst that they can figure they can hold him for is punishable by a $700 fine. He hasn't been charged with anything else, nor has he even been ACCUSED of anything more. Now explain why he has a $200,000 bond and Interpol involvement. Even if you don't support Wikileaks you can see that something is wrong and there is much more involved here than meets the eye.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

The original material published by Wikileaks began with the Apache Helicopter Gunsight Film published in response to the Pentagon's stonewalling of Reuters for 2+ years in their attempt to cover up the willful massacre of two Reuters journalists and a dozen civilians in 2007. The Apache Gunsight Film was only one item in the material that was later published as the Afghan War Diary, detailing the same outright lies, mis- and disinformation, manipulation and coertion that the Pentagon Papers revealed in the buildup of the Vietnam War with the Afghanistan and subsequent Iraq police actions (to this date Congress has not officially and legally declared war on Iraq).


After the release of the War Diary is when these spurious charges of sexual misconduct were first brought to media attention by the illegal leaking of that information by a Swedish prosecutor with a craving for publicity and a willingness to front for the Pentagon© after the Australian Federal Police declined to bow to the USGOVT© and go after Julian Assange for publishing the material, sending a strong letter of support for Julian's civil rights (hey Aussies - i am admiring you muchly lately, and to your Mr Rudd: good show, good show).


When the Pentagon© and USCongressCritters© started darkly muttering about "extraordinary intervention," assassins, bounties and other heinous and deeply anti-American thuggish tactics and fishing for allies in its goal of punishing Julian Assange, Wikileaks published the Diplomatic Cables. I viewed this as a response and a warning to the Pentagon© to back off the murderous mutterings; perhaps the War Boyz didn't get the significance of the monstrous encrypted "insurance" file [archive link-1.4GB download] posted by Cryptome on the Wikileaks website early on in the release of these documents [the insurance.aes256 file is to be kept until and if Wikileaks must use the "nuclear option" in its defense; the password to this file will be then widely disseminated using all available media channels]. It is obvious from the release of the Cables that they are not what is in the encrypted file...

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

So now we are watching the shifting of the topic and subject of the debates from "WTF is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq really?" to "he (sic) shouldn't have published those cables." Mr Abrams had the NYT, Washington Post and by extension the 1st Amendment protections on free speech behind him; Wikileaks is being bad-mouthed as "not exactly real journalism" by old-skool hacks terrified of losing their deity status and expense accounts pretending to be real journalists.

Wikileaks has not released 97% of the diplomatic cables they currently have access to, and have redacted a great deal to prevent exposure of legitimate secrets like troop movements and identities of spies. That means that (a) not all of it was leaked initially, (b) portions of it may be held back for years because they would harm legitimate US national security interests, and (c) that the purposes of the leaks were to show exactly what lies the US and other governments have been telling the public, particularly in relation to the "war on terror". Many US officials from both major parties have repeatedly stated that Wikileaks dumped all the information all at once, when in fact nothing of that sort has happened. Wikileaks released the cables to five major papers to redact for sensitive and potentially-harmful revelations.


All the personal issues, attacks, innuendos and discussion about Julian Assange is smoke being used to obscure the relevant and pertinent issues that Wikileaks revealed in the real leak, the War Diary. The moral debate about Julian's motives and methods, the titillation of the charges that have already been dismissed once, the actions and reactions from the release of the Cables, the debates about 1st Amendment... every single issue being focused on by the current major media is only a sideshow. It is the Magician's misdirecting hand motion. It is The MacGuffin. In computing or audio engineering, this is known as the signal-to-noise ratio [s/n]. It is also known as the Purloined Letter Principle. It is a way to hide or obscure information in a mass of irrelevant and distractive data. Data is not information.


It is there to distract you from the War Diary. It is there to distract and drown out the information contained in the War Diary revealing deliberate lying and manipulation on the part of the USGOVT© [ particularly Dick Cheney, George Bush and their neocon buddies] in the manufacture and continuation of an illegal war for the profit and benefit of multinational corporations. The War Diary makes a farce out of the Department of Homeland Security's raison d'etre. It calls into question the reliability of the media officially sanctioned to cover this illegal war. It reveals and supports the UN and international Red Cross's findings of continued illegalities all throughout this manufactured war. It supports many ominous conclusions as to the collusion and coertion of oil money in the politics of the Middle East. It is a time bomb.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

So if you are debating these issues with friends and others, remind them that the topic of debate is not if Julian is a bad or a good man; inform them that the information available in the War Diary regarding the manufacturing of an illegal war that is destroying thousands and thousands of innocent lives and young American lives, which has bankrupted the country and thrown hysteria into the world markets, far outweighs any of the lesser debates and distractions being thrown at them to cover up and obscure the base issue. You might also bring some attention to the getting-so-obvious-it's-like-a-steven-spielberg-movie collusion of the Press© and the Pentagon© (or a movie by Barry Levinson [IMDB link]).


BTW... in case you've been reading the debate about the cables and not the cables themselves, here's a few of the nuggets people have located so far that justify the release of this information:

- Bribing, threatening, and then withholding millions in aid to Ecuador and Bolivia so they'd agree to the Copenhagen Accord [but Saudi Arabia gets a free pass because we need their oil].

- DynCorp, funded by USA taxpayers, bought young male sex slaves for Afghan cops in a "batca bazzi" party.

- They're moving prisoners out of Guantanamo to foreign prisons.

- Under-reporting and misreporting deaths in Afghanistan, both civilian and military.

- Diplomats know that the Saudi Arabians are the primary donors to Al-Queda.

- The US warning Germany to keep quiet about Khalid El-Masri, kidnapped by the CIA, kept in prison for months, tortured, then dumped somewhere in Albania when they figure out he's not the one they want.

- The CIA pressured Spain into dropping investigations into the killing of José Couso [a Spanish journalist] in Iraq by American troops, dropping court investigations into the CIA's extraordinary rendition and torture at Guantanamo Bay.

- The US pushing for and manipulating support for Monsanto in Europe.

- The US pressuring Sweden to prosecute the Pirate Bay.

-Shoving USA-style IP laws onto Spain.

- The Shell Oil Company claimed it had inserted staff into all the main ministries of the Nigerian government, giving it access to every movement of politicians. Ann Pickard, then Shell's vice-president for sub-Saharan Africa boasted that the Nigerian government had "forgotten" about the extent of Shell's infiltration and was unaware of how much the company knew about its deliberations.

- China was indeed behind the attacks on Google.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

I should email a copy of this column to Mr Abrams and suggest he either stop sucking at the teat of the WSJ/Pentagon© or get a personal nurse to help him with his alleged incipent Alzheimer's. But then again... I am sure the NSA already has [ominous thunder roll] :D

The Politics of Information Part III

You might know my State of Mind installation currently being hosted by Four Bridges Project in Second Life or from the machinima by Iono Allen.


This post is intimately concerned with both the topics and the mechanisms of that installation. If you do not like politics in your art, please feel free to skip this post. I feel compelled to speak not only as an artist who examines the sociological and psychological underpinnings of people and societies but as a human being.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Julian Assange, editor-in-chief of Wikileaks, has been being made media fodder for a disinformation and smear campaign directly along the lines I engaged in State of Mind after releasing The Iraq War Logs - hundreds of thousands of SIGACT documents detailing the war and subsequent occupation of Iraq from January 2004 through December 2009.


He is being tried in the court of media, which is seeking to influence public opinion and subvert the message of the documents themselves and the mission of Wikileaks. Those documents and that mission are far too complex to go into in this post; I urge you to investigate them yourself.


My concern as a media artist and student is to examine the use of ad hominem attacks, control of the media and disinformation for political purposes, and for shutting down or marginalizing public debate about serious and life-determining issues by distraction, dissembling and targetting the messenger in order to discredit the message.


The "case" against Mr Assange has taken several bizarre twists lately. The truth of the "allegations: are as follows:


- The charges are ex post facto. Both of the women involved have admitted several times in public documents that the sex they had with Julian was consensual. and that they continued to instigate friendly contact well after the alleged incidents. Only after the women became aware of each other's relationships with Mr. Assange did they make their allegations against him. There was no drunkenness, no drugging, no forcing, no persuasion; they admit they freely had sex with him. Neither one is underage.


- Mr Assange did not "flee the country" as is being promulgated by several Large Media Outlets. The prosecutor repeatedly declined to question Mr Assange while he was in the country and approved his request to leave the country on business matters. The first time these charges were brought, the Swedish prosecutor dropped the charges.



- At this point, Mr Assange is wanted for questioning - pretty much standard operating procedures when any criminal charges are brought against an individual. He is not "wanted" for a "crime." The Swedish police informed the press of the charges against him, and identified him by name, before they had even spoken to him - which they still haven't. The Swedish prosecutors (now multiple), in contravention of (apparently) Swedish law, have been announcing "We're going to arrest Assange for rape!" and then not doing anything about it, not telling him what the charges are, and not bringing him in for questioning.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

This is not the behavior of someone who wants to prosecute a criminal in the court of justice; if they had a case, they would bring it, and Assange would go to jail for rape. This is the behavior of someone who wants to hang an innocent person in the court of public opinion.


This smear and disinformation campaign began only a few months after the release of The War Diaries and murky comments by the Pentagon alluding to extraordinary rendition and assassination of Mr Assange and the illegal shutting down of Wikileaks.


It has direct ties to yesterday's 19-0 vote by the US Senate Judiciary Committee's Combatting Online Infringement And Counterfeiting Act allowing the Department of Justice, through a court order, to order U.S. Internet service providers to redirect customer traffic away from infringing websites not based in the U.S.


It speaks directly to me as someone who lives and breathes the net and believes in informed public debate, access to all information so that I may make up my own mind and in the principles of the men who founded this country and are given lip service while being subverted for political and profit motives. It concerns my home and what is important in my life, which is what art is supposed to be about.

So please accept my apologies if you think this post has no place on an "art blog" or you do not care to know about such problems. I know it's uncomfortable and unfashionable. This hurts and frightens me. As with State of Mind, I felt I must speak or just start screaming.

I leave you with two excellent letters recently published by Mr Assange's Swedish and US attorneys in the firm belief in combatting propaganda with information. I urge you to make up your own mind about these tactics, this story and the role that art/information/media/influence and propaganda play in your own thoughts and ideas.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

[added emphases mine - M]


LONDON, 2pm Thursday November 18, 2010

Mark Stephens of law firm Finers Stephens Innocent said today, “On the morning of 21 August 2010, my client, Julian Assange, read in the Swedish tabloid newspaper Expressen that there was a warrant out for his arrest relating to allegations of “rape” involving two Swedish women.

However, even the substance of the allegations, as revealed to the press through unauthorized disclosures do not constitute what any advanced legal system considers to be rape; as various media outlets have reported “the basis for the rape charge” purely seems to constitute a post-facto dispute over consensual, but unprotected sex days after the event. Both women have declared that they had consensual sexual relations with our client and that they continued to instigate friendly contact well after the alleged incidents. Only after the women became aware of each other’s relationships with Mr. Assange did they make their allegations against him.

The warrant for his arrest was rightly withdrawn within 24 hours by Chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who found that there was no “reason to suspect that he has committed rape." Yet his name had already been deliberately and unlawfully disclosed to the press by Swedish authorities. The so called “rape” story was carried around the world and has caused Mr. Assange and his organization irreparable harm.

Eva Finne’s decision to drop the “rape" investigation was reversed after the intervention of a political figure, Claes Borgstrom, who is now acting for the women. The case was given to a specific prosecutor, Marianne Ny.

The only way the accused and his lawyers have been able to discover any substantive information regarding the investigation against him has been through the media. Over the last three months, despite numerous demands, neither Mr. Assange, nor his legal counsel has received a single word in writing from the Swedish authorities relating to the allegations; a clear contravention to Article 6 of the European Convention, which states that every accused must be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him”. The actions by the Swedish authorities constitute a blatant and deliberate disregard for his rights under the Convention.

We are now concerned that prosecutor Marianne Ny intends to apply for an arrest warrant in an effort to have Mr. Assange forcibly taken to Sweden for preliminary questioning. Despite his right to silence, my client has repeatedly offered to be interviewed, first in Sweden before he left, and then subsequently in the UK (including at the Swedish Embassy), either in person or by telephone, videoconferencing or email and he has also offered to make a sworn statement on affidavit. All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate. Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate. This action is in contravention both of European Conventions and makes a mockery of arrangements between Sweden and the United Kingdom designed to deal with just such situations. This behavior is not a prosecution, but a persecution. Before leaving Sweden Mr. Assange asked to be interviewed by the prosecution on several occasions in relation to the allegations, staying over a month in Stockholm, at considerable expense and despite many engagements elsewhere, in order to clear his name. Eventually the prosecution told his Swedish lawyer Bjorn Hurtig that he was free to leave the country, without interview, which he did.

Our client has always maintained his innocence. The allegations against him are false and without basis. As a result of these false allegations and bizarre legal interpretations our client now has his name and reputation besmirched. Thousands of news articles and 3.6million web pages now contain his name and the word “rape”. Indeed, three out of four web-pages that mention Mr. Assange’s name also now mention the word “rape”—a direct result of incompetent and malicious behavior by Swedish government prosecutors. My client is now in the extraordinary position that, despite his innocence, and despite never having been charged, and despite never receiving a single piece of paper about the allegations against him, one in ten Internet references to the word “rape” also include his name. Every day that this flawed investigation continues the damages to his reputation are compounded.”

-ENDS-
Mark Stephens is contactable on 0207 344 7661 or his cell 07831 115000

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Letter from Swedish Counsel Bjorn Hurtig to English co-Counsel for Julian Assange.

Note Neither Mr. Assange nor Counsel, nor WikiLeaks have ever received a single written word, at any time, in any form, from Swedish authorities on the Swedish investigation against our editor.

From: Björn Hurtig
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 12:43 PM
To: Jennifer
Subject: SV: Our client

Dear Jennifer,

Enclosed You will find a copy of the documents that I have would like to send to the prosecutor. I have not been able to have the document translated in detail, but I will now tell You the most important things in it.

First of all I comment the ongoing investigation and tell the prosecutor that I have asked her several times that they should hear my client so that we can be aware of the accusations. They have said no to this initially (and by this I mean for several weeks). Furthermore I remind her that I several times have asked her to give me the evidence in the case. She has said no to this also. I then tell her that I have asked my questions informally and in writing and tell her about a formal request that I made 14 of September 2010. This formal request has not yet been formally answered, which I find to be a breach of Swedish law (23:18 Rättegångsbalken). I also tell her that Sweden has not followed art 6:3 of The European Convention of the 4 november 1950, because Julian has not been informed of the accusation in detail and in his own language. Neither has he been informed of the documents in the case in his own language. This is an incorrect behavior.

I then tell her that Julian is indeed willing to participate in a hearing. But I remind her that I asked her in writing (14 of September) if he was free to leave Sweden for doing buissines in other countries and that she called me and said that he was free to leave. This is important because it means that Julian has not left Sweden in trying to escape the Swedish justice. Then I reminds her that Julian and I several times have tried to give them dates when he could come to Sweden and participate in a hearing, for example I spoke to the second prosecutor Erika Leijnefors during week nr 40 and told her that Julian could participate in a hearing the 10 of October (a Sunday) or some day the following week. The prosecutor in charge (Marianne Ny) said no to this. Other times Marianne Ny has said no to our proposals due to that one of her police officers were sick or because the time did not suit her. This is also important because it shows that Julian has tried but Marianne Ny has said no. I go on remembering her that Julian has suggested that he could participate over a phone line and from an Australian Embassy. She has said not to this also. Then I tell her that Julian is willing to participate through a videoconference or to make a written statement over the accusation and the questions they may have. This is of utmost importance, since it shows his willingness to participate. I remind her of a ruling from our Highest Court; NJA 2007 s.337, in which the court did not put a man in custody although he was abroad and did not come to Sweden to participate in a hearing. It was not proportional to do such a thing, since he left Sweden rightfully (just like Julian) and thus did not try to escape the Swedish justice, he was willing to participate via phone or in writing and so forth.

In the second last section of the letter I tell the prosecutor that she should think of the damage that Sweden already has done to Julian by letting his name in public. I tell her that I have heard that there is a police investigation going on about the first prosecutor who let Julians name out In public, which shows that it is a serious matter. If the prosecutor now goes forward with a request of Julian being put in custody it is my opinion that the damage could be enormous; whatever the outcome of the trial may be. Therefore I urge her to come back to me with a proposal of when and where we could have this hearing instead of her dragging Julian in to court.

In the last section I tell her that if she proceeds with her plans of a custody trial, I want all documents. This I say because I do not trust them to give me everything.

So Jennifer, this is the main things in my letter. I hope You understand what I am writing. If not, please call me. I will not be able to take Your calls today though, since I will be busy the rest of the day. If You do not call med, please let me know a s a p if I can send the letter to the prosecutor. I would like to send it first thing tomorrow morning. You may tell med by mail.

Best regards

Björn Hurtig

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

So come and get me, Department of Mental Security, Ministry of Truth. Put me on a Watch List. You can hurt me, you can make me sick to my stomach, you can make me despair; you can make me ashamed of my own country before the face of its fathers. But you cannot take my liberty of mind. I am a free person.

Iono Allen's State of Mind machinima

State of Mind machinima by Iono Allen

Iono Allen has made a beautiful and evocative machinima for my "State of Mind" installation. He has captured the rising tension and the feeling of suffocating in information which is an integral part of the installation. His use of the sound materials is masterfully supportive of the visuals; Iono has truly listened to State of Mind and realized it in this most perfect machinima. Please go to see it and let Iono know what a great job he's done and what a beautiful piece of work the machinima is in its' own right.


UPDATE: Iono's machinima made the swedish blogs! Yay!

And thanks to

Apollo Manga's Second Life Examiner review

Soror Nishi's blog




Further meditations on State of Mind

Yes, there is a lot of information in State of Mind. There are cross-connections between small, seemingly-isolated events, laws and trends. It takes a lot of time to understand these connections, these trends.

I am a researcher; a librarian; a datamouse. I understand the amount of time it takes to be current and to follow these issues. Too much for most people, who have a life to be involved in.
I keep up with these issues. When you try to talk to people about them, about what they mean to their lives; about what is really going on and how it does and will affect their free choice (like their choice and availability of music, movies, artworks and internet service) they think you paranoid.


That is why I needed to lay out State of Mind for my own mental health. I read perhaps 2-4 hrs. a day on the technical aspects of these issues, from technical forums; how the technology isn't secure; how it doesn't work as advertised, how it is misused by corporations to profile, how the idea of the "infallibility of computers" is used to disguise and cover an astonishingly large rate of failure/false positives...

We call it security theatre in the profession; in discussions among the people who actually install, set up and program these things. This is not "armchair philosophy" or politics. All of this... "think of the children" stuff is straight propaganda and deliberate manipulation and falsification of information.



Why It Matters

I live on the net. Anyone reading this is involved with the net and with information. These issues concern us all; our freedom to read and write our thoughts, and our freedom to think our own thoughts; our freedom to access information and make up our own minds, which is the foundation stone of democracy and freedom.

Orwell's Ministry of Truth or Brazil's bureaucratic, totalitarian government did not NEED to monitor every single person's thoughts; it was enough to influence them to monitor and censor their own thoughts. The point of propaganda is self-censorship and self-editing. It is a much simpler, easier and cost-effective way to control people than guns, bars, walls, barbed wire or Men In Black. You can rule great masses of people (take a look at China, South Korea and so on and etc) with much less trouble and effort, only needing your Influence Squads Corrective Thinking Trainers on the truly unprogrammable.


Yes, it is more comfortable to turn the mind away from these issues; it's much more comfortable to believe waterboarding is the equivalent of a "college hazing" than it is to actually view the uncensored photographs and material from Abu Ghraib. It's a lot easier to believe that these measures supposedly being introduced to keep you and your children safe are real efforts to protect you when in fact they are lies, mistruths and propaganda.




Thanks to the modern internet, we have access to a lot of information (although there is a debate current now that the positive glut of non-vetted and unverified information is a device to to hide by obscurity and overwhelming data; the Purloined Letter trick). It takes time and effort to research, as it always has, and to gather the information one needs to be able to have an understanding of these crucial and critical issues and make an informed judgement. It's just so... time-consuming! What's a mother to do?!?!


And yet... people will spend a great deal of time and effort puzzling out clues to the just-as-involved plotlines of television shows like "Lost," "Heroes" and their favorite soap opera than the actual, real things happening around them which affect their daily lives.



Such is the State of my Mind these days. I am not alone, and I am in distinguished company; that of Thomas Jefferson, Shulamith Firestone, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin and many others who have given their time, effort and work so that I may enjoy the freedoms I have today (for now).



The links, the propaganda and the answering arguments and statistics are all in the installation. Laid out physically, with real links to verified documents, I am comforted in knowing that I am not paranoid. We were warned by Orwell and many others. The linkages and trends are real and happening now.

The STATE is now the Corporatocracy; the Plutocracy. Government is a brand; the flags are only advertising logos.

Since last March, the US vote can now be bought. The Disney machine continues to destroy and lock up our common cultural heritage by distorting and manipulating copyright for its own gluttony. Laws are being twisted to spy on schoolchildren in the name of protecting them; the drumbeat of fear is being used to encourage submission to the profiteers.

Our personal data is bought and sold without our knowledge and consent; banks entrusted with that information treat it with less security than you treat your car keys, and place the blame and expense on their customers, which results in cost to you for their lax and cavalier handling of your security... if they don't outright sell it to anyone for 35$USD (yes... google a bit; you'll find many such offers from these supposedly-legitimate banks).

Yet we let it go on. You trust people you shouldn't trust and give them your freedoms inch by inch. A little research would show you the truth, or at least enough information to make up your own mind about these issues.


I did State of Mind so I wouldn't start screaming.

M.I.A. - Born Free

Here's some work i think worth promoting/distributing (and that slides right in with my installation State of Mind ) -

'Born Free' is a song from M.I.A. leaked on internet on April 23rd which is being used for the soundtrack of a Romain Gavras' (son of political filmmaker Constantinos "Costa" Gavras) -directed short film, itself a promo-teaser for his forthcoming "Redheads" - a feature-length film on the same themes as the Born Free video. It's the first single off her upcoming third studio album which will be released in US on June 29, 2010.


I've liked M.I.A. for awhile - a lot of her rhymes are really catchy and remind me of jumprope-skipping cants ('Paper Planes') until you actually listen to the lyrics and get with her head; the awesome sonic work in her material is also way-good and deliciously interesting to the ear. She's consistently kept her work digging, despite her popularization, and 'Born Free' is a real hit to the brain - it's swimming in the zeitgeist next to 'District 9' and 'Children Of Men'. I am really looking forward to the release of 'Redheads.'


Be informed: the video is "difficult" and certainly mature. It's unnerving and raw and probably upsetting. It's also hot and street-real.


The YouTube video is behind an "adults-only" rating, so you'd have to either signup or login with your username to see it. Better to get the widescreen full version straight from MIA's site:

M.I.A. - Born Free @ Miauk.com

Go, girl. Props out.

Whooo!
Yeah man made powers
Stood like a tower higher and higher hello
And the higher you go you feel lower, oh
I was close to the end staying undercover
staying undercover
With a nose to the ground I found my sound

Got myself an interview tomorrow
I got myself a jacket for a dolla
.............
and the car doesn't work so I'm stuck here
yeah i don't wanna live for tomorrow
I push my life today
I throw this in your face when I see ya
I got something to say
I throw this sh!t in your face when I see ya
Cause I got something to say

I was born free (born free)
I was born free (born free)
(bo-bo-born free ....)

You could try to find ways to be happier
You might end up somewhere in Ethiopia
You can think big with your idea
You ain't never gonna find utopia
Take a bite out of life make it snappier yeah
Ordinary gon super trippyer
So I check sh!t cause I'm lippyer
And split a cheque like slovakia

Yeah i don't wanna live for tomorrow
I push my life today
I throw this in your face when I see you
I got something to say
I throw this sh!t in your face when I see you
Cause I got something to say

I was born free (born free)
I was born free (born free)
I was born free (born free)
(bo-bo-born free ....)
ooooh

I don't wanna talk about money, 'cause I got it
And I don't wanna talk about hoochies, 'cause I been it
And I don't wanna be that fake, but you can do it
And imitators, yeah, speak it

Oh Lord? whoever you are, yeah come out wherever you are
Oh Lord? whoever you are, yeah come out wherever you are
and tell em!

Born free (born free)
I was born free (born free)
I was born free (born free)
(bo-bo-born free ....)

lyrics ©2010 M.I.A.