← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel
Thread ID: 5946 | Posts: 9 | Started: 2003-04-01
2003-04-01 22:00 | User Profile
From Wired, available online at: [url=http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/view.html?pg=3]http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/v.../view.html?pg=3[/url]
The Fight to Control Your Mind
By Michael Erard April 2003
Richard Glen Boire
Should the government have the right to alter the biochemistry of your brain? Richard Glen Boire, codirector and legal counsel of the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics, says no, and he's making his case before the Supreme Court. In Sell v. US, the government argues that it can drug Charles Sell, a dentist from Missouri, in order to make him competent to stand trial. Boire, whose amicus brief argues that Sell has a right to integrity of mind, explains why cognitive liberty goes way beyond this one case.
**WIRED: What is cognitive liberty? **
BOIRE: It's the right to determine your own thinking processes, which also means resisting attempts by others, including the government, to manipulate the electrochemical state of your brain. In Sell's case, the government wants to alter his thinking by forcibly drugging him. It's a scary notion with deep implications for the modern status of freedom of thought.
The Constitution already protects freedom of thought.
That's true. What we're arguing is that the legal interpretation of the Constitution needs expanding to account for recent scientific advances in manipulating the brain.
So you think the law isn't keeping up with technology?
To adapt Marshall McLuhan's phrase, the law drives forward by looking in the rearview mirror. The law needs to be harmonized with what's going on in society today so we're not just giving lip service to freedom of thought while the thing that makes it meaningful, the autonomy of a person's brain, is being eroded.
How is it being eroded?
The law needs to account for the plethora of new drugs and technologies making it possible to augment, modulate, and surveil thinking. The question increasingly is: Who has the power to do this, the individual or the government? We contend that the power should rest with the individual.
**Charles Sell is a pretty unsavory character, particularly in his views about race. So why should we care what the Supreme Court says about his cognitive liberty? **
Protecting speech for everybody means protecting it for unsavory people. The same is true of cognitive liberty. The point is to avoid giving government the power to commit cognitive censorship, whether it's targeting people we agree with or people we don't. That's inherent in all true freedoms.
2003-04-17 16:01 | User Profile
Charles Sell is a pretty unsavory character, particularly in his views about race. So why should we care what the Supreme Court says about his cognitive liberty?
That this question was even asked says a lot about America. Soma tablet, anyone?
2003-04-18 06:33 | User Profile
Wait a second.
Info on Sell is sketchy, other than he is "a former dentist charged with Medicaid fraud but who remains unable to stand trial due to a delusional disorder."
Are Sell's views on race what's being characterized as his delusional disorder?
Please tell me there's more to this story. I didn't think it was possible for the Zionist/Rapture Bunny junta known under the trade name of "America" to scare me any more than it already has in 2003.
Tell me they're not doping him for his beliefs - please.
2003-04-18 07:23 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Apr 18 2003, 06:33 ** Wait a second.
Info on Sell is sketchy, other than he is "a former dentist charged with Medicaid fraud but who remains unable to stand trial due to a delusional disorder."
Are Sell's views on race what's being characterized as his delusional disorder?
Please tell me there's more to this story. I didn't think it was possible for the Zionist/Rapture Bunny junta known under the trade name of "America" to scare me any more than it already has in 2003.
Tell me they're not doping him for his beliefs - please. **
I hate to spoil your day . . .
[url=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/25/192512.shtml]Ether Net[/url]
This is as bad as it gets. It looks like he's another casualty in the Waco massacre - a potentially witness against the Feds who's being held without trial beyond any possible punishment for his alleged non-violent crimes. It's an outrage, and the media is silent.
The Waco massacre and cover-up took another victim who slipped down the memory hole. Could one of you internet search mavens run see if you can find anything on the apparent murder of the Waco victim's star witness in its case against the Feds, Carlos Ghigliotty. He was killed literally on the eve of his testimony. I've been unable to find anything beyond reports of his death. No autopsy results, nothing. Try [url=http://www.wizardsofaz.com/waco/carlos.html]this[/url] for a start.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Walter
American Conscience: The Saga of Dr. Charles Sell Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., and Robert J. Cihak, M.D. Wednesday, March 26, 2003 "Conscience" is a curious word. It means, literally, "to know with" or "to know together" ââ¬â far different from our normal sense of "conscience is whatever goes on inside my head."
Dr. Charles Sell is a prisoner of conscience. But in this matter, perhaps the more important conscience is and should be ours.
So, who is this Dr. Charles Sell? He's a dentist who formerly practiced in the St. Louis area and is currently a non-violent federal prisoner in Springfield, Mo. He's already spent more than five years in prison than he would be liable for, even if he were convicted of the government's Medicaid Fraud accusations.
We're writing about him and his case because his treatment by the federal government has been ââ¬â and continues to be ââ¬â unconscionable.
Let's focus on the federal government's claim that Dr. Sell is "incompetent" to stand trial.
The government wants to make him competent by forcefully giving him powerful medicine. Dr. Sell doesn't want to be medicated; he's had bad reactions to similar drugs in the past. Further, one of the medicines that the government might want to use on him is an experimental medicine that could kill him.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard his appeal on this question on March 3.
Dr. Sell has been in prison for more than 64 months, including 20 months in solitary confinement. As Justice Bye on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit noted, if Dr. Sell were convicted of the pertinent Medicaid Fraud charges against him, the longest sentence he would be given under the United States Sentencing Guidelines would be 41 months.
In other words, Dr. Sell has already been in prison 23 months longer than he could be sentenced for, if convicted on all the fraud charges.
Due to legal expenses, he's already lost his practice, his office, his home and his savings. What more does the government want? His mind?
The level of "competence" usually required for defendants to stand trial in federal court is very low. In the eyes of federal courts, a defendant is competent to stand trial if he doesn't talk to invisible people. Dr. Sell earned a perfect score on a 30-question true/false quiz used in a prison Competency Restoration Group.
The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "involuntary medication is the only way for the government to achieve its interest in fairly trying Sell." However, an amicus brief filed by the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Inc., and Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund notes the "Government's interest in drugging Dr. Sell for trial can be no greater than its interest in punishing him further, which is non-existent."
After more than five years in prison, the federal government has not yet set a trial date. Other than to mention that we're not going to address Dr. Sell's right to a "speedy trial" as required by the Sixth Amendment to our Constitution. Nor will we look in detail at several other issues, such as an episode in prison when he spat in the face of a magistrate after Dr. Sell was denied his right to have his attorney present.
Another issue is an accusation that Dr. Sell was suffering from delusions because he thought there was a government effort to cover up his personal knowledge of the government's culpability in the 1993 deaths at the Branch Davidian land near Waco, Texas.
As an Army Reservist called up to serve as an expert in forensic dentistry, Dr. Sell was on the scene the day of the tragic fire. Other issues include accusations of Dr. Sell using politically incorrect swear words.
We find forcing medication with life-threatening drugs on a presumed-innocent prisoner another form of cruel and unusual punishment.
We find it outrageous that Dr. Sell continues to be held in prison on the basis of unproven allegations that he committed a non-violent crime against complex Medicaid regulations.
Why is the federal government wasting our resources, including government lawyers' time and our taxpayers' money, instead of calling it quits and letting Dr. Sell try to rebuild his life?
In the old days, we might worry that the government was just trying to prove that it's the biggest bully on the block. But today we do worry "Who's next?"
Dr. Sell should be set free immediately to show that we are still a nation of conscience ââ¬â even in wartime!
Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., is a multiple-award-winning writer who comments on medical-legal issues. Robert J. Cihak, M.D., is a former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Contact Drs. Glueck and Cihak by e-mail at GlueckAndCihak@newsmax.com.
2003-04-18 08:15 | User Profile
Sorry; Hardy's as primary-source as I can find.
Depressing bit of irony, though, innit? The loudest voices demanding justice and/or vindication for Sell, Ghigliotty, Allard, etc are neo voices (NewsMax, Michelle Malkin, etc), themselves all too eager to run the exact same kind of interference for the Bush Admin as the "liberals" they so despise did for Bubba & Reno. Good easy-chair soldiers all.
Carlos Ghigliotty's avengers will most likely be the blindfolded cheering section for Rachel Corrie's murderers. The men and women who are championing Charles Sell's fight are the very ones agitating for open-ended Patriot Act imprisonments - without charges preferred or defense attorneys present during interrogations.
The present Administration has seemed a little too gentlemanly regarding going after the previous one, even in the easily-manipulated court of public opinion.....as if they didn't want too much attention focused on extralegal abuses of power before they got their at-bats.
Why, a fellow trying to keep up with all this in the papers might walk away with the impression that all this high-faluting blood & thunder about "freedom", "civil liberties" and "Constitutional limits" is simply a diversionary smokescreen covering up nothing more than an adolescent, ignoble intramural turf war.
2003-04-18 08:53 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Apr 18 2003, 08:15 ** Sorry; Hardy's as primary-source as I can find.
Depressing bit of irony, though, innit? The loudest voices demanding justice and/or vindication for Sell, Ghigliotty, Allard, etc are neo voices (NewsMax, Michelle Malkin, etc), themselves all too eager to run the exact same kind of interference for the Bush Admin as the "liberals" they so despise did for Bubba & Reno. Good easy-chair soldiers all.
Carlos Ghigliotty's avengers will most likely be the blindfolded cheering section for Rachel Corrie's murderers. The men and women who are championing Charles Sell's fight are the very ones agitating for open-ended Patriot Act imprisonments - without charges preferred or defense attorneys present during interrogations.
Even the present Administration has seemed a little too gentlemanly regarding going after the previous one, even in the easily-manipulated court of public opinion.....as if they didn't want too much attention focused on extralegal abuses of power before they got their at-bats.
Why, a fellow trying to keep up with all this in the papers might walk away with the impression that all this high-faluting blood & thunder about "freedom", "civil liberties" and "Constitutional limits" is simply a diversionary smokescreen covering up nothing more than an adolescent, ignoble intramural turf war. **
Yeah, it's ironic. The people of whom you speak (Malkin, Ethernet) are the upper levels of the Outer Party. They proceed on general orders to attack the Democrats and sometimes push it too far because they're not privy to the Inner Party's true objectives.
I agree that blackmail is likely in relation to the Republican administrations since Reagan (Reagan, Bush, Shrub). I suspect that MOSSAD had something on Bush Sr. (Iran Contra?) and used it in leverage to cut a longterm deal with the top gentiles of the GOP.
"Here, Ronny and George, listen to this tape. Now, let's talk." I would love to have been a fly on the wall when George explained it all to Shrub. But, the sad truth is we'll never know the full truth.
The Ghigliotty case is just bizarre. It's one of those "pinch me because I must be dreaming" moments. Here's a star witness in the case of the decade that could have crushed the Clinton presidency and on the eve of his testimony he's found dead. And predictably, the case which had been going pretty well for the Waco victims just fell apart, with the presiding judge clearly getting the message. The last report I could find on CNN was "the autopsy report will be released next week" and then SILENCE. Nothing. I mean zero follow up on an incredibly important story. (I add parenthetically one problem with the search might be that nobody is sure how Carlos spelled his name, but I tried several variants and still found nada). We're living in Orwell's Oceania.
I mean, autopsy reports are public records, aren't they? But it's just understood (and simultaneously not understood in accordance with the principles of doublethink) that no credible journalist would bother to file for a copy of the Ghigliotti autopsy report. And any crusading blogger would have to have cajones muy grandes to even file for a copy of the report, much less actually publish it on the internet.
Another "pinch me" moment for me was when Fox deleted its stories on Israeli control of our phone records shortly after 9-11. It was a story that they were pursuing with prime time broadcast time and major headllines on its internet site, and then one day it all stopped and my internet bookmarks read "deleted." The Orwellian reality of it.
The article above is a similar case. This dentist fellow was a credible witness who happened to be in Waco. He saw what actually happened, just like Carlos saw the truth on infrared. But apparently the Feds didn't like what they were about to say, and so they both went down the memory hole. And anybody who objects is branded "lunatic fringe." He's quite literally branded as a "thought criminal" and they try to subject him to psychotropic drugs.
Pinch me, Il Ragno. It really is that bad, isn't it?
Walter
2003-04-18 12:21 | User Profile
Pinch me, Il Ragno. It really is that bad, isn't it?
Allow me to respond with a wholly superfluous sidebar. When I was younger, I had a friend we'll call "Bob" who had a magical gift. Very much of a social animal, a hail-fellow-well-met type popular with the chaps and the ladies both, Bob always dropped the right names, crashed the right parties, wore the latest threads, spoke the most current slang, scored the toughest tickets, pulled the right strings, etc. A roomfull of people always brightened when he entered it. Charming. Oozed charm. But that wasn't his gift.
His gift was the ability to insult people - usually to their faces - and not have the insult register. "Hey, HERE he is! THIS is the guy,right here!" he'd greet you, gladhanding you and beaming goodwill. Happy to see you,a big smile on his face. Before you even disengaged your hand from his, he'd crack, "sotto-voce" but entirely audibly, "What a fuing dope - no wonder his girlfriend screwed me last week!" And not only would the insultee do nothing, there was never even a flicker of recognition on the guy's face.
I watched him do this so often, it became a kind of joke. He began adding a derisive giggle as a coda, almost as if he wanted to be confronted about this, and he never was. Not once. Finally I could stand no more - I had to know.
"Lookit, Bob", I said, "I realize you're probably doing it to me, too, but I don't care about that right now. HOW is it possible for you to mortally insult people to their faces without them hearing - or caring if they DO hear? OK, so you're a charming, likable guy....but plenty of charming, likable guys end up on morgue slabs, too. What's the secret? How do you DO it?"
"I really don't know", he laughed, "but what I think it is is this: if they register what I'm saying, then they have to DO something about it. They have to question everything they thought was a given: maybe I've been doing it to him for years. Maybe everybody's been doing it to him. Maybe his girlfriend IS sleeping around on him, or everybody he knows IS laughing at him as soon as he leaves the room. And if he does go postal and tries to fight me, he's causing a major scene. That means that everyone we both know is gonna take my side - cause everybody loves me - and start avoiding him like maybe he's a psychotic loose cannon attacking his friends for no reason. And I'LL never talk to the guy again, that's for sure. Suddenly he's gotta start questioning everything he once took for granted was true. But if he pretends he didn't hear it, or that I didn't say it, everything stays the same. No harm, no foul.
"It's easier to just pretend and do nothing. That way, everybody stays friends."
Yeah, I know it sounds crazy. It sounded just crazy enough that I believed him. Ol' "Bob" had a pimp's eye for human weakness - vanity, frailty of ego, the need to belong at any price, fear of complexity - to go with all that likable charm, even at 19.
Need I add that "Bob" now works for the government in a supervisory capacity?
2003-04-18 12:55 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Apr 18 2003, 12:21 ** "It's easier to just pretend and do nothing. That way, everybody stays friends."
**
Great post, Il Ragno.
I think you're on to something there.
To paraphrase Orwell, seeing what's really in front of our faces takes constant effort and a personal courage that is very rare indeed.
I've opined previously here that there's not much that we can do about doublethink, it seems to be part of our evolved mental hardwiring. Most people are hardwired to be followers, not leaders and critical thinkers. After all, our tribal ancestors needed lots more "indians" than they did "chiefs."
I've shown those deleted Fox webpages to several folks on various occasions - I mean, wham! There it is right in your face, what are you going to do about it? Usually the reaction is a sort of "ohmagosh, there it is!" look of recognition, followed by a slightly concealed flush of anger at me that I confronted them with it, and then usually it ends with a shrug of the shoulders and something like "that's strange, but I'm sure it's not what you seem to think it is, Walter" and a condescending glance as if to say "I'm so superior to you, I don't believe in conspiracy theories that everybody knows are wrong."
Sigh . . . Dealing with popular delusions is hard. The IP has a lock on our people's brains. But I do believe that the ice is slowly cracking, due to the internet, which has been a body blow to the IP's media monoploy.
Walter
2003-10-24 19:21 | User Profile
As students return to schools all across the country, perhaps a discussion about education would be appropriate. From a capitalist point of view, some would argue that the purpose of public education is to provide training to enter the work force. The basics of reading, writing and arithmetic are taught to provide a foundation of which to build on once a person graduates to on-the-job training. However, the democratic argument suggests that the purpose is to promote an informed citizenry. Therefore, an exposure to history, sociology etc benefits society as a whole because people learn about their roles and responsibilities. Obviously, both arguments merit equal consideration and should continue to be pursued. Further, no one can dispute that each and every child in this country should receive the educational services provided by the public. The most pressing question today, however, is how does government ensure the quality of educational services?
The public school system today continues to fail at educating our children both in terms of job training and citizen awareness. The most powerful country to ever exist on planet earth continues to lag behind other countries when it comes the very basics expected of this institution. The reason for this is because of the bureaucratic non-incentives consistent with government waste. Teachers are not held accountable as a unit manager would be held accountable for their unit achieving objectives in a private corporation. They are also not rewarded financially for the success of their students when it comes to test results. And the biggest benefactor of all, private enterprise is not required to reinvest in an educational system that provides free training to future employees. The time for privatization of public education is long overdue. We as a country need to finally get serious about training and educating our future citizens. It is time to use corporate property tax along with personal property tax as a means of funding schools. Educational facilities from pre-schools to colleges and universities need to be converted to entities of private enterprise whereby an education is crafted as the finest product available to United States citizens. Along with this transition would be the disciplinary environment so desperately needed in our schools today. If a co-worker or boss were struck by an employee, they would be fired and possibly jailed. The same code needs to exist in schools today. Furthermore, a greater effort needs to be made in determining where one fits in the skills and abilities matrix. Spending more time and attention to the criss-cross of what one enjoys doing with what one is good at doing would make a profound difference on our society. Education is a public good no less or important than national defense, environmental quality etc but it is the means of providing that good that most importantly needs to change.