Here's an item about the Feds banning certain types of biological
research. More evidence that government is flexing its muscles to
interfere in research it has decided is not acceptable...or that it
is not controlling for its own purposes. I wonder what Thomas
Jefferson, a noted amateur scientist, would have thought of the
federal government raiding labs and subpoening records when it
decided it wanted to? His cryptography research, for example? So much
for the real spirit of the First and Fourth, amongst others.
(Note: I realize, for you lawyers, that the Fourth was technically
met, in that a valid court order was issued for the subpoenas and
raids. It still sucks, though, to use a nonlegal term. Warrants and
orders are issued freely. Fishing expeditions is what they really
are. There's not a single one of us who could not have our
possessions and papers sifted through if one of tens of thousands of
prosecutors and investigators decided they wanted to. So much for
"secure in one's papers and possessions" and "a man's home is his
castle.")
I'll include a few paragraphs, marked with << >> enclosers.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/010709/usnews/clone.htm
<>
Comment: So, someone who _says_ they are interesting in human cloning
can face a subpoenaing of records and documents. Interesting. So much
for free scientific inquiry.
And what's the significance of the "secret lab" language? Was it just
the "U.S. News" reporter's take on the situation, or does having a
"secret lab" enter into the gubment's case?
How long before we see _crypto_ treated the same way? For example:
"For Joe Cypherpunk, developing digital money isn't just good
science, it's an imperative. Not surprising, Washington disagrees. A
federal grand jury in Sunnyvale, CA has subpoenaed telephone records
and other documents. FCC, SEC, and FBI agents visited the secret lab
recently and ordered any digital money experiments to cease. Says one
official: "There's a timeout in force.""
(Oh, so now we have "timeouts" for banned research? So much for
another of the rights enumerated in the BOR, the right to a trial.
Yeah, I know about temporary injunctions and restraining orders,
given exigent circumstances, blah blah. This sounds more like the
harassment and road block issue, though. A "crackdown," as the
reporter notes below.)
<< The crackdown marks the first time that investigators have
uncovered a secret lab tied to human cloning in the United States,
government sources say. >>
Oooh, scary! A "secret lab"! What, all labs are supposed to be
public, registering with the government? (There is no evidence the
lab is using more dangerous chemicals than are normally found in any
hardware store, for example, so "public safety" cannot be a
justification.)
The article goes on to talk about Clonaid and how they are not
violating any laws, but how they plan to leave the U.S. to avoid this
kind of "raid" harassment.
<< The federal investigation was prompted by statements Boisselier
made this spring, when she said Clonaid was just weeks away from
being ready to clone a human being. On March 27, Boisselier received
a letter from the FDA, warning that the company might be in violation
of FDA regulations. A similar letter was hand-delivered to the office
of Panayiotis Zavos, a fertility expert from Lexington, Ky., who also
says he plans to clone a human.>>
Yeah, and if I "claim" that I am "just weeks away" from being ready
to release a digital money system, can I expect a raid? Is there no
consideration of common sense, or are prosecutors just flunkouts in
science who can't separate speech acts from actual violations of the
law?
I can see there may be public safety issues in cases where, for
example, a credible group--leave the definition of credible aside for
now--makes a claim that they are weeks away from completing their own
privately-funded atomic bomb, for example. Or weeks away from
completing a batch of nerve gas.
Some variants of libertarians and anarchists would disagree even with
this, but at least the point is arguable. The issue of whether human
cloning research is so intrinsically sensitive or dangerous that it
requires preemptive raids and fishing expeditions is a topic worth
discussing. For now, I'm pointing out some of the disturbing
constitutional issues.
<< UFOs. But it was the Raelians who really got the FDA's attention.
For months, Boisselier has told reporters that she has three
scientists and a physician trying to resurrect an 11-month-old
infant-the deceased son of a former state legislator, whom the
Raelians refuse to identify-through genetic regeneration. >>
Again, science flunkouts are running the investigations.
<< Clearly, the agency is trying to flex its regulatory muscle and
show Congress that it hasn't been asleep at the switch. FDA
investigators have been knocking on the doors of people like Richard
Seed, a Chicago physicist who made headlines three years ago when he
announced his intention to clone a human. "I think their purpose was
to frighten me, and they did," says Seed. >>
Yep. So much for the rule of law, and of valid laws.
Consistent with crypto actions, as when NSA agents told Jim Bidzos
that if he didn't play ball and adopt Big Brother's plans, they could
just have him run over in his parking lot.
(Threats like this, which are credible and violent threats, are not
prosecuted. Meanwhile, Keith Henson faces a year in prison for a
joking remark about a "Tom Cruise Missile" aimed at a Scientology
compound. Some country we live in, eh?)
<< ... Alex Capron, professor of law and medicine at the University
of Southern California told Congress last month. Capron points out
that the FDA is charged with regulating safety concerns only. >>
Indeed, and banning research or raiding "secret labs"--especially
those with access to classified UFO data from the Greys living in
Area 51!--is NOT a function of a regulatory agency devoted to the
efficacy and safety of drugs and foodstuffs.
<< Even if a law were passed in the United States, it could prove
difficult to enforce because cloning operations are easy to hide.
Zavos, for example, says he knows of at least two other groups
quietly trying to clone a human. Would-be cloners need only basic lab
equipment. "It's not like it's a magical, secret thing," says Mark
Westhusin of Texas A&M University, who works on cloning animals. A
ban may also simply encourage scientists to pursue their work abroad,
as Boisselier plans to. Zavos says his team has already set up two
clandestine labs overseas. >>
Yep. All predictable trends. Blacknet has had an active human cloning
special interest section for several years.
--Tim May
--
Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California
Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon
Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go
Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns