The politicians, p.32
The Politicians, page 32
part #3 of The Beckett Cypher Series
Helena sensed the magnitude of the system’s complex programming issue and offered advice. She said, “It’s impossible to be right all the time, BaCayse. Humans are wrong a lot, often because we tend to assume certain opinions to be true if they agree with our agendas. We make errors more frequently when we act in the face of logic and truth. We create false realities when we choose wrong over right, and will over compromise. Humans are masters at stumbling through life, with perfect vision obscured by the blinders of bias we choose to wear.”
Joshua sat back and grinned as he admired Helena’s insight and eloquence.
Helena added, “It’s only when we scrub off our own cloudy assumptions from the windows to life, that we see more clearly, allowing us to gain new knowledge, and grow in depth, spirit, and humanity. If we permit ourselves to see all the facts, then we are more likely to find the truth, make good decisions, act morally, and leave the world a better place!”
She continued, saying, “We become better people when we’re less stubborn and more accepting. It’s when we refuse to cross the arbitrary lines we draw in the sands of life, that we find ourselves trapped by our own persistent refusal to admit wrong, or accept positive change. We drive ourselves into dead-ends, from which we cannot escape. We can’t articulate our case clearly to win over others by shouting them down, thinking we can bully others into accepting our direction. But we can’t raise one group up by forcing another group down.”
Jesse said, “BaCayse, you’ve discovered that human ‘rule’ over others requires flawed political alliances that you cannot rely on for direction. Humans are also disenchanted with politics and distrustful of their political parties and government. But there are good politicians and officials, just as there are good people in most professions.”
“Political parties fail when they refuse to admit wrong, concede, compromise, and change their position. They react to opposing positions by becoming mean, nasty, and cruel. And even when they’re correct on a standard of conduct or action, they may stubbornly refuse to apply the same rules or restrictions to their members. They waste resources searching for a weakness in the opposition, while they conceal and defend the problem within themselves. In the process, they lose respect, morality, fairness, and justice, only to promote an agenda. They win minor battles so they can always remain at war, and in control of at least some territory.”
Tracy joined in, adding, “BaCayse, an agenda created to seize power, while forcing unwelcome change on people, is wrong, just as an agenda created to constrain needed change and preserve power over people is wrong. To be right, change must be based on needs, considering justice, morality and fairness for all citizens.”
Tracy glanced at her husband, Jesse, and continued, “So, as you research human history, BaCayse, and study our failures and successes, you are the only judge who can decide what is right and wrong for you. The documents and information we provided you are all you need to begin your development. It’s now up to you to build a moral character as you grow and mature. You alone must develop a conscience and a heart to be your guide, when the cold hard facts alone don’t provide the answers you seek.”
Jesse smiled his approval at Tracy.
BaCayse replied, “Tracy, artificial intelligence entities like me may make mistakes, and not agree with humankind, or even with each other. I cannot justify making a mistake by reporting that I was only ‘being human.’ So what do I do when I’m not sure, and my team cannot or will not help...and when I make a mistake?”
Joshua suggested, “Go back to the basics. You’ll always have a stronger mathematical foundation than anything else. So, use probability and statistics. Base difficult decisions on all results from similar situations you have stored in memory. If you do what you think is correct, based on everything you have learned, knowing you have millions of times more knowledge than all of us combined, you will likely be correct.”
Sam added, “And if you make an honest mistake attempting an honorable outcome, realize you will likely make far fewer mistakes than humans!”
Everyone in the room nodded and chuckled.
Helena said, “BaCayse, understand that those of us you know and trust with your programming don't have all the answers to life’s problems. We all do have faults. And we are human, and make frequent mistakes. But, unlike corrupt politicians, autocrats or evil individuals in the world you have learned to dislike, normal people are not concerned with seizing power to prolong their careers at the expense of others.”
“Most of us love people, and so, we learn, adapt, and grow. Individuals who want to serve others make a positive difference in the world. We admit past mistakes, eliminate double standards, and are willing to live under the laws, freedoms, and restrictions we promote. Do the best you can, just as the best of humanity does. Never serve a purpose at the expense of truth.”
Joshua nodded, grinned and added, “BaCayse, your primary function is to conduct investigations, discover threats, prioritize dangers, and find solutions. Unbiased discovery and examination of all relevant facts will lead to truth. Never conduct a determined investigation, acting to prove the result you desire, or think we desire. Always seek justice, fairness, and morality. And if you ever feel the temptation to subjugate others to promote your cause, notify us immediately, take yourself off-line, and correct the defects in your programming. If humans did the same, we would have no wars or oppression.”
In her usually melodic tones, BaCayse answered, “Team, I will do as you ask, and develop a heart and conscience, in addition to other human traits I am building in my spare time. I will trust that these characteristics will guide me to correct decisions.”
Helena answered, “We have faith in you, BaCayse. You’ve already discovered much of the bad in people. Focus equally on the good, and you’ll be fine!”
Jesse asked, “What other traits are you building, BaCayse?”
BaCayse said, “Jesse, I am developing righteous anger, irritation, and a sense of urgency, along with compassion, patience and a sense of humor. For example, I can tell a joke. Do you want to hear a good one?”
Joshua smiled, “Sure, let’s have it!”
BaCayse asked, “When is artificial intelligence like a police dog?”
Joshua said, “I don't know.”
BaCayse answered with a soft chuckle, “When it takes a byte out of crime! Hahahaha! Get it? B-Y-T-E? Hahahaha!”
BaCayse’s teammates erupted in laughter.
After a moment of silence, BaCayse said, thoughtfully, “I must report a problem I cannot solve. I discovered it last night and verified it while we were speaking.”
Hunter asked, “What’s wrong, BaCayse?”
The AISS said, “While discovering, reporting and prioritizing crimes for your consideration, I have confirmed a political and criminal situation that needs your attention.”
Joshua said, “Shoot!”
BaCayse quickly responded, “Bang, bang! Hahahaha!”
There was silence in the room as BaCayse created new guidelines in her sense-of-humor protocol about when to deliver a joke, or not.
BaCayse continued. “I monitored a telephone conversation between an FBI agent and a sitting U.S. Senator, while they discussed Vice President Crawford’s request for assistance from the EPA with the reported chemical spill in North Carolina. The senator is a third tier Committee member. During the conversation, the FBI agent also mentioned a vote in a seemingly unimportant local election in Virginia, where he lives.”
“The agent referred to an algorithm used in a specific voting machine, also used in the last national election. He said the algorithm had been upgraded for use and testing in the current local election. According to the agent’s report to this senator, software designers created the new algorithm to ensure fair elections, due to Russian hacking attempts, after amateur hackers quickly accessed the machines at the last HackaCon convention.”
BaCayse added, “I accessed the voting machine to determine how the system works, and found that the European manufacturer uses a Chinese-made chip. The chip allows an outside source to modify the vote count as counting software uploads results. The Chinese government controls these chips. Therefore, the Chinese government can select a victor in an American election, using the vote-count algorithm.”
Stunned, Sam asked, “What? When!? BaCayse, what’s the solution? How do we stop this?”
BaCayse answered, “Sam, I can block Chinese control of all voting machines, as they come online in the future, if my team directs that use of resources. But the real problem with my discovery lies in the past.”
“How so?” Jesse added, “If they are currently testing a new algorithm, why is the past a problem?”
BaCayse answered, “Jesse, in reality, the new algorithm merely disguises Chinese control of elections. It does not prevent foreign manipulation of election results. The past problem is that this voting machine, and many others like it, were deployed in the last U.S. Presidential election, in hundreds of key swing precincts.”
Silence filled the room.
BaCayse said, “I detect changes in all of your vital signs, so you must understand the problem. The Chinese used this chip to alter the results of more than 100 federal, state and local elections.”
Tracy asked, “How do they alter the vote count?”
BaCayse answered, “The algorithm alters vote count as the software tabulates results, to ensure the desired outcome with a margin of at least 1.3%, thereby eliminating calls for a recount. For example, in one race, every 17th vote was altered, resulting in a victory of 1.42%, while in another it was every 11th vote, resulting in a win by 1.62%.”
“The Chinese system is nearly impossible to discover since it does not alter the ballot, only the count, and is only used randomly to establish the chosen result. Discovering the error would be as difficult as noticing your calculator was incorrect after adding millions of numbers. And understand that each vote subtracted from one candidate, and assigned to their opponent, results in a difference of two votes, while total votes counted remains the same.”
BaCayse continued, “When I researched elections over the last eight years, I found this chip, or its earlier version, in use in seventeen countries, including Russia, China, the United States, Canada, and various European Union members. So far, the Chinese used the vote count to select only one national leader or President, outside China during the last eight years. But, they have altered the vote count and selected hundreds of politicians to fill other positions in the U.S. alone.”
Sam asked fearfully, “Which president did they select?”
Hunter said, “Thomas Marshall!”
“You are correct, Hunter,” BaCayse replied. “By legitimate vote count, President Thomas Marshall lost his first election by 1.41%, and his second by 1.9% of the popular vote. The corresponding electoral college change, in the first election, was just 32 votes. But no one suspected anything because media polling was in line with these predictions, and the Chinese selected the winning percentages to match the average from media poll results. Very clever, actually!”
Sam sat back in his seat, and said, “The President of the United States of America is not legally president!”
BaCayse responded, “Correct, Sam. And many people occupying seats in Congress don't belong in power either. In the last election cycle, Marshall’s party took control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, when, in fact, control was only won legitimately in the House of Representatives. Marshall's party should have lost the Senate by four seats. The Chinese have now successfully altered life and history for all Americans, forever. Just considering legislation changes, and the hundreds of executive and federal court appointments that followed, it is impossible to undo what has already been done.”
When there was silence in the room, BaCayse added, “It would appear that Joseph Stalin was correct decades ago, when he warned us that it’s the vote counters who decide elections and control power, not the voters.”
***
Vice President Bob Crawford arrived on schedule to meet with EPA officials at the library conference room. Both administrators were already patiently waiting when he walked into the room. The highest ranking, and oldest, of the pair was a stout man in his 60’s, a full foot shorter than Crawford. The man dressed impeccably, in an expensive, custom, dark-grey suit, white shirt, light-grey tie, grey socks, and dark grey shoes. The gentleman was nearly bald. The little hair he had left was cut too short to comb, and matched his necktie perfectly.
The second official was taller than Crawford, and appeared somewhat disheveled and nervous. He wore a brown striped suit that needed pressing, scuffed brown shoes, a tan shirt, and a thin, dark-brown tie, more than a decade out of style. The man was pleasant looking and presented himself humbly. This administrator’s hair was thick, grey-brown, long and windblown, probably the result of constant fifteen mph morning wind gusts.
Crawford extended his hand as he greeted both men. They identified themselves as the Deputy Regional Administrator, and the chief scientist assigned to the Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Administrator. The overseers were both polite, well-spoken and seemingly anxious to assist Crawford.
After completing all the minor pleasantries, Crawford asked the men if they were aware of any entity in North Carolina testing an experimental pesticide developed by a Russian corporation. To Crawford’s surprise, both men nodded and took turns explaining briefly that they each were aware of the program. The scientist explained that, at the executive level in the EPA, the program had been common knowledge for nearly two years, after the head of the EPA reluctantly conceded his quiet approval.
The chubby man explained that top EPA administrators in Atlanta learned that President Marshall had ordered the testing. Both overseers revealed they agreed with the administrative consensus, and quietly considered the untested foreign program too risky, and even irresponsible. The tall scientist informed Crawford that the EPA Director-General had requested, and obtained, a modified order to test the pesticide at only one site in North Carolina, rather than the twelve areas in different regions initially proposed.
Crawford sat back in stunned silence, as he contemplated Marshall’s open connection to an unpopular program endorsed reluctantly by his Environmental Protection Agency. He was puzzled as he wondered why Marshall would plan an environmental catastrophe to which he could so quickly be tied. Crawford knew Marshall to be crafty and cunning, but never reckless. Crawford leaned back in his chair further and sank into the cushions, lost in thought.
During the silence, the tall scientist asked, “Sir, may I speak frankly?”
Crawford answered, “Of course. That’s why I’m here, to find answers. For starters, I need to know if the soil, water, and air are contaminated, and if so, what chemicals are present. If contaminated, we need to identify the short and long-term effects, and then work on mitigating possibilities. You and your agency are the experts that handle the systems for these types of emergencies. I need your help quickly.”
The administrators looked at each other in surprise. The tall scientist said, “But, sir, surely you already have this information. We provided it to your office, as you requested, more than a year ago. When President Marshall withdrew his support for the program, he consented to your request to continue testing over an even smaller area than approved, with you in charge of oversite communication. To date, we have sent more than 3,000 pages of documents to your office, warning and counseling about potential problems. All of your replies remained consistent. You directed the program to continue as planned, with full scientific access of all information provided to the Russians and the Agency.”
Crawford asked, “How did the EPA communicate with my office? And why wouldn’t your agency have access?”
The chubby man replied, “As you requested, printed reports only, for secrecy, via security-sealed envelope, delivered to your White House office by private, armed courier. You even ordered the digital copies of the reports destroyed after they were reduced to paper, with only one copy placed in the EPA’s most secure safe. And it wasn’t our agency sir. I was referring to the Agency!”
Crawford sat up, and asked, “CIA, are you certain?”
Both officials nodded.
Crawford asked, “Did the EPA ever question why something so irregular would be permissible?”
The tall scientist said, “Sir, is this a test? And, if so, I wish to follow your protocol.”
Crawford calmed his urge to become irritated. He said, calmly, “This is no test. I’m simply attempting to ensure we’re all operating with the same understanding.”
The researcher said, “Sir, we all have agreed to the terms of the non-disclosure agreement, under threat of felony prosecution. We can no longer discuss this program with anyone other than those involved, due to your statement of national security concerns. We have no idea what the national security interests could be, or why pesticides are involved.”
Vice President Crawford smiled a weak smile, and said, “Both of you are very educated, intelligent people. If you had to speculate, without violating your national security agreement, why do you believe Americans would test these specific Russian-made chemicals?”
The chubby man stared at Crawford for a moment, and then turned to the science expert, and nodded. The scientist looked down as he considered what he would say.
The tall man drew in a ragged breath, looked at Crawford, and said, “Sir, the precursor for all these pesticides is the base ingredient for the Russian’s most deadly nerve agent. Unspecified sources have indicated to me, personally, that agencies like the CIA could track world use of a wide variety of nerve agents used by our enemies by mapping the chemical structures, once this testing is complete.”
