Monday, November 29, 2010

Trading Freedom for Security

“The feudal system was one of hierarchy in which nobles, who were sovereign over the most valuable commodity of that time—land—ruled over peasants (serfs) who were tied permanently to the land.”Feudalism at Encyclopedia.com

“Serfdom was the enforced labour of serfs on the fields of landowners, in return for protection and the right to work on their leased fields.” – Serfdom at Wikipedia

Serfs in the Middle Ages traded freedom for security.  In return for protection by the landlord, a serf worked a parcel of land and was legally bound to the land.  One can understand why serfs centuries ago made that trade—they were born into servitude and didn’t have a tradition of liberty as we do in the US.  What’s difficult to understand is why today you can see many Americans making the same trade.

"If it’s in the interest of safety, it’s alright." - Air traveler the day before Thanksgiving.

Different Rules for Serfs and Their Rulers

“With respect to the TSA, let me, first of all, make a confession. I don't go through security checks to get on planes these days, so I haven't personally experienced some of the procedures that have been put in place by TSA.”  - President Obama speaking at a NATO summit[1]

image

TSA procedures aren’t intended for our rulers—they’re a different class of people.  At a NATO summit, President Obama acknowledged that he has not had to be virtually strip-searched or groped by TSA goons.  But the President wants us to understand that it’s important that we be groped or virtually strip-searched in the “land of the free.”  According to Obama, it’s for our own good.

Our rulers travel in style and would not allow themselves to be treated as serfs.  When asked if she would submit to a pat-down, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton (D) replied:

“Not if I could avoid it. No. I mean, who would?”[2]

John Boehner (R), soon-t0-be second in the line of succession to the Presidency, pretends to be a man of the people by flying commercial airlines, yet he bypasses security screens that we cannot.[3]  The TSA identified other rulers exempt from airport screening:

“Cabinet secretaries, top congressional leaders and an exclusive group of senior U.S. officials are exempt from toughened new airport screening procedures when they fly commercially with government-approved federal security details.”[4]

Gropes and peeping under clothing at airports are for the little people.  They’re for:

  • 61-year old Thomas Sawyer, a retired special education teacher and bladder cancer survivor, who wears a urostomy bag, and was humiliated and covered in urine after his TSA pat down.[5]
  • Cathy Bossi, a breast cancer survivor, forced to remove her prosthetic breast and show it to a TSA screener after the screener felt her prosthetic breast.[6]
  • The little boy in this video, who is frisked by a TSA agent.
  • Grand Rapids air traveler Ella Swift, reduced to tears when a TSA screener ran a hand up her crotch because she was wearing a skirt.[7]
  • Business traveler Penny Moroney, who considered the patting of her genitals by a TSA screener to be a sexual assault.[8]
  • A 23-year old woman from Amarillo, Texas who had her top pulled down by TSA agent to expose her breasts in 2008.[9]
  • Menstruating women with suspicious material lining their panties (aka panty liners) necessitating additional groping.[10]

image

TSA screeners in the “land of the free” poke and prod Americans as if they were examining slaves at a slave auction.[11]

Why do “free” Americans let them?

Serfdom Not Security

“But at this point, TSA, in consultation with our counterterrorism experts, have indicated to me that the procedures that they've been putting in place are the only ones right now that they consider to be effective against the kind of threat that we saw in the Christmas Day bombing.” - President Obama[12]

image

Obama and his family won’t go through the sexual assaults or privacy invasions that you and your family must endure.  Our constitutional law professor President tells us we must tolerate these invasions of our Fourth Amendment right to be secure in our persons while he jets off in Air Force One to yet another meeting of the G8 or a global warming conference, or the royal family takes a vacation trip to India.[13]

Pilots and flight attendants complained about being groped at airports and the TSA backed down.  Yet even as the federal government makes exceptions, the TSA still assumes it can violate our Fourth Amendment rights with impunity.  Why does that assumption go unchallenged? 

Despite what the President wants us to think, being treated like slaves will not keep us safe.  Acting like serfs brings serfdom, not security.

____________________________

[1] “Text of President Obama,” AP, (Accessed at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101120/ap_on_re_eu/eu_obama_summit_text_1 on Nov 21, 2010).

[2] “'I'd avoid them if I could': Hillary Clinton joins row over 'intimate' TSA airport pat-downs,” By Daily Mail Reporter, 22nd November 2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1331781/Hillary-Clinton-joins-intimate-TSA-pat-downs-row-Id-avoid-I-could.html on Nov 29, 2010).

[3] “No Security Pat-Downs for Boehner,” By Jeff Zelany, Nov 19, 2010, NY Times, (Accessed at http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/no-security-pat-downs-for-boehner/?partner=rss&emc=rss on Nov 24, 2010).

[4] “TSA: Some gov't officials to skip airport security,” By EILEEN SULLIVAN, AP News, Nov 23, 2010, (Accessed at http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101124/D9JM7I381.html on Nov 28, 2010).

[5] “TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine,” By Harriet Baskas, MSNBC.com, 11/20/2010, (Accessed at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40291856/ns/travel-news on Nov 21, 2010).

[6] “Cancer surviving flight attendant forced to remove prosthetic breast during pat-down,” By Molly Grantham, Nov 19, 2010, WBTV, (Accessed at http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13534628 on Nov 21, 2010).

[7] “Enhanced pat down leaves Grand Rapids airline passenger in tears,” by Phil Dawson and Christa Graban, 11/19/2010, Wzzm13.com, (Accessed at http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_story.aspx?storyid=140233&catid=14 on Nov 21, 2010).

[8] “Woman says her Lambert security screening was sexual assault,” kmov.com, Nov 18, 2010, (Accessed at  http://www.kmov.com/news/mobile/Woman-says-her-Lambert-security-screening-was-sexual-assault--109114934.html on Nov 21, 2010).

[9] “Airport staff 'exposed woman's breasts, laughed',” The Australian, November 18, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.theaustralian.com.au/travel/news/airport-staff-exposed-womans-breasts-laughed/story-e6frg8ro-1225955345734 on Nov 21, 2010).

[10] “Sanitary Towel Prompts TSA To Grope Sexual Assault Victim,” Steve Watson, Prisonplanet.com, Nov 25th, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.prisonplanet.com/sanitary-towel-prompts-tsa-to-grope-sexual-assault-victim.html on Nov 28, 2010).

[11] This gives more testimony to Jeffrey Rogers Hummel’s thesis in Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men.

[12] Text Of President Obama, Ibid.

[13] “Bomb-proof tunnel with air conditioning: Obama's security go to extraordinary measures for his tour of the Gandhi museum,” Daily Mail, Nov 6, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326962/Obamas-India-visit-security-erect-bomb-proof-tunnel-Gandhi-museum.html on Nov 21, 2010).

What?  The Obamas weren’t vacationing in India?  Was the President helping outsource more jobs there instead?

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Doublethink (Part 7)

“For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.”

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 2 Chapter 9, p. 156-7 by George Orwell.[1]

Ignorance is Strength

Applied to innovation, “Ignorance is Strength” might describe a physicist working relentlessly to prove the existence of some marvel previously considered impossible.  If you’re the physicist, your “ignorance” is a good thing for you, your refusal to accept conventional wisdom is your strength. 

Applied to the state, “Ignorance is Strength” means the strength of the rulers depends upon the ignorance of their subjects.  In that case, unless you’re a ruler, your ignorance hurts you.

Our rulers want us to believe that democracy is a special form of government where they work for us.  Our rulers would have us all believe that in a democracy the will of the people—whatever that is—prevails.  That belief is the “ignorance” part.

“This Time It’s Different…No Really, We Mean It”

image

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor and House Republican Leader John Boehner

"This is not a time for compromise, and I can tell you that we will not compromise on our principles." – House Minority Leader and Soon-to-be Speaker of the House John Boehner (R), Oct. 27, 2010 on the Sean Hannity show (audio)

“The people have spoken” once again after the November 2, 2010 elections.  Rs picked up at least 60 seats in the US House and six in the US Senate.  Those elected and the media tout this overwhelming victory for Rs a result of voter backlash against D-supported growth of the federal government that permeates our lives.

Born two summers ago of voter outrage over healthcare “re-form,” the tea party movement grew after Ds forced Obamacare down the throats of voters last year.  The tea party made Obamacare and the failure of the $787 billion Recovery Act of 2009 the main issues of this election.  Tea party voters believe they can limit the growth of the federal government by forcing it to follow the US Constitution.

Playing to the voter anger and pro-Constitution sentiment reflected by the tea party movement, the opposition party in Congress released “A Pledge to America” on September 23, 2010.[2]  Full of pretty pictures and emotional paeans to liberty, family values, and national defense, the R-pledge (pdf) also pays lip service to the Constitution:

“We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” – Page 3 of “A Pledge to America

The party that in the last decade gave America two undeclared wars, the TSA, a $1.2 trillion Medicare Prescription Drug bill, and the $700 billion TARP banker bailout finally pledges to honor the Constitution.  Finally.  Do you believe it?

Prepare to get milked

Even a casual study of recent history shows that democracy simply means that the cows get to pick who milks them.  The state makes sure that any bulls in the herd supply prairie oysters instead of milk.

Angry voters this election opposed socialist Obamacare, but apparently forgot that Rs sponsored the socialist $1.2 trillion Medicare Prescription Drug bill and the $700 billion TARP banker bailout.  John Boehner (R) just won re-election this year in Ohio with 66% of the vote.  Ohio voters must have forgotten that Boehner voted aye for the $1.2 trillion Medicare Prescription Drug bill and voted yea for the $700 billion TARP bailout (video) during the Bush (R) administration.  They must have forgotten that John Boehner, the same guy they just re-elected, voted yea for the Bush-sponsored creation of the TSA—the monstrosity that peers under clothes and gropes the crotches of “free Americans” to keep them safe.

Now Boehner, who will soon be Speaker of the House, says Rs “will not compromise” on their principles:

“Our plan stands on the principles of smaller, more accountable government; economic freedom; lower taxes; fiscal responsibility; protecting life, American values, and the Constitution; and providing for a robust national defense.” – Page 5 of “A Pledge to America

Where were Boehner’s “limited government principles” in 2008?  Or did he just grow them?

Soon-to-be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R) of Virginia was re-elected with 59% of the vote.  If this election was a repudiation of big government, how did Cantor, who voted for the $1.2 trillion Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003, for the $700 billion TARP banker bailout of 2008, and for the creation of the TSA monstrosity, get re-elected? 

After the election, TARP-supporter and “limited government advocate” Cantor unveiled 22 pages of hypocrisy (pdf) in his campaign to become the House R-majority leader:

“I don’t think any of us ran for Congress with the idea that we could finally provide a subsidy to this industry or that, or to this community or that. Or that we would vote to continue the same federal programs and agencies that are failing our citizens and bankrupting our children and grandchildren.”[3]

One of the writers of “A Pledge to America,” congressman Paul Ryan (R) of Wisconsin, ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, knows federal government spending is unsustainable.[4]  Ryan’s “Roadmap for America’s Future” advocates “re-form” of Social Security and Medicare.  Days before the 2010 election, Ryan argued for changes to Social Security and Medicare: 

The government's own experts are telling us that our health and retirement security programs -- Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security -- are on a path to bankruptcy unless we take action soon. In addition to overwhelming the entire federal budget, the collapse of these programs will result in painful cuts for seniors and society's most vulnerable.” – Paul Ryan, Oct 16, 2010

Yet during the Bush (R) administration Ryan voted aye for the $1.2 trillion Medicare Prescription Drug bill, moving Medicare that much more toward the bankruptcy he is now so alarmed about.  Ryan himself contributed to “overwhelming the entire federal budget” when he voted for the $700 billion TARP banker bailout.  Ryan also proved he is no friend of the Constitution when he voted for the creation of the TSA monstrosity which violates the Fourth Amendment rights of all travelers to be “secure in their persons…against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

In this election of voter outrage, Ryan was re-elected this year by a wide margin with 68% of the vote.

Rs touted this election as a repudiation of big government.  If that is so, how did these three leading members of the opposition party, who supported and voted for big government when an R was President, get re-elected in 2010?

The cows have made their choices.

End the Government Takeover of Healthcare

“We offer a plan to repeal and replace the government takeover of health care with common sense solutions focused on lowering costs and protecting American jobs.” – Page 6 of “A Pledge to America

In 1965 the federal government started its takeover of healthcare with the Social Security Act of 1965 under LBJ (D).  By 2003 both Rs and Ds saw government socialized healthcare as a right for Americans: the Bush (R) administration pushed legislation to pay for Medicare Prescription Drugs that will cost an estimated $1.2 trillion through 2016.[5]

The federal government has unfunded liabilities of $200 trillion.[6]  Most of those liabilities are for Medicare and Social Security.  Nowhere in their Pledge to America (pdf) do Rs mention ending  Medicare.[7]  Rs pretend they’re the party of fiscal responsibility and that they follow the Constitution, yet they lie to themselves and the American people just as easily as the Ds.

End TARP Once And For All

“Americans are rightly outraged at the bailouts of businesses and entities that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior. We will cancel the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a move that would save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.” – Page 21 of “A Pledge to America

Like exterminators releasing pests in a home to drum up business, the Rs who voted for TARP now pledge to cancel it.

This year’s crop of the fruits of democracy yields legislators who supported the $152 billion Bush-Economic Stimulus Act and the $700 billion TARP banker bailout in 2008, but not Obama’s $787 billion Stimulus bill in 2009; who support socialist Medicare, which is bankrupting the federal government, but not socialist Obamacare, which will bankrupt the federal government.  All of these federal government programs encroach on your freedom, but double-thinking voters pretend there’s a difference between the programs.  That same double-thinking lets voters pretend that this time a difference exists between the Rs or Ds who create the programs.  (Much like double-thinking Obama supporters pretended they were voting for a change from warmonger George W. Bush.)

This election was different—at least that’s what they tell you.  The Tea Party is spontaneous they say—or it was until it was preempted by politicians.  The people are angry and will change things they say—deep down you should know better.  Rs or Ds in the US, black cats or white cats in Canada (see six minute Mouseland video [8]), there’s no real difference.

Your ignorance is their strength.  Moo.

_______________________________

[1] Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell, New American Library, N.Y., 1949, pp. 156-7.

[2] “House Republicans Unveil 'Pledge to America,' Call for Tax and Spending Cuts,” September 23, 2010, FoxNews.com, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/23/house-republicans-unveil-pledge-america-tax-spending-cuts/ on Nov. 2, 2010).

Read a Pledge to America (pdf) and remember Rs voted for the bailout (HR 1424) during the Bush (R) administration.

[3] “Eric Cantor lays out 22-page game plan,” By Jake Sherman, 11/3/10, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44641.html on Nov. 4, 2010).

Another snippet from Cantor’s plan:

“We came to Washington to eliminate the deficit, to tear down barriers to job creation, and to reform a government that has grown out of touch with the governed.”

[4] “Republicans unveil Pledge to America, but where was Paul Ryan?” By Linda Feldmann, Christian Science Monitor, September 23, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Election-2010/2010/0923/Republicans-unveil-Pledge-to-America-but-where-was-Paul-Ryan on Nov. 2, 2010).

[5] “Medicare Drug Benefit May Cost $1.2 Trillion,” By Ceci Connolly and Mike Allen, Washington Post, Feb 9, 2005, (Accessed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9328-2005Feb8.html on Nov 9, 2010).

[6] “U.S. Is Bankrupt and We Don't Even Know It,” By Laurence Kotlikoff, Aug 10, 2010, Bloomberg Opinion, (Accessed at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-11/u-s-is-bankrupt-and-we-don-t-even-know-commentary-by-laurence-kotlikoff.html on Nov 9, 2010).

[7] From Page 6 of “A Pledge to America”:

“Of course, Americans remember that President Obama argued his government takeover of health care was the single most important thing we could do to address our growing debt crisis. This notion has since been thoroughly discredited: we now know the new health care law will mean more financial pain for seniors, families, and the
federal government. We offer a plan to repeal and replace the government takeover of health care with common
sense solutions focused on lowering costs and protecting American jobs. We will enact real medical liability reform; allow Americans to purchase health coverage across state lines; empower small businesses with greater purchasing power; and create new incentives to save for future health needs. We will protect the doctor-patient relationship, and
ensure that those with pre-existing conditions gain access to the coverage they need. We will permanently end taxpayer funding of abortion and codify the Hyde Amendment.”

[8] In the video, the lone mouse on the pipe is really a cat in a mouse suit.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Doublethink (Part 6)

“On each landing, opposite the lift-shaft, the poster with the enormous face gazed from the wall. It was one of those pictures which are so contrived that the eyes follow you about when you move. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption beneath it ran.”  

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 1 Chapter 1, p. 5 by George Orwell.[1]

Feds Store Body Scans; US Marshalls Save 35,000 Images

Millimeter wave body scanner images

“One by one they passed in front of me, teachers, friends, others, all those I had been afraid of, all those I once could have laughed at, all those I had lived with over the years.  They went by, fallen, dragging their packs, dragging their lives, deserting their homes, the years of their childhood, cringing like beaten dogs.

“They passed without a glance in my direction…

“‘When is our turn coming?’ I asked my father.”

Elie Wiesel describes the move of his Hungarian neighbors from a Jewish ghetto to a Nazi death camp in 1944.[2]

Our Turn Is Coming

During the Bush (R) administration we heard a lot about the prisoners at Guantanamo.  During the Obama (D) administration we hear little about overseas renderings of Islamic persons and the assassination of US citizens—they’re labeled Moslem fanatics, so it’s ok.  Most Americans today are preoccupied with Obamacare, home foreclosures, and their next paycheck, and don’t pay much attention.

The National Security Agency (NSA) goes overboard with warrantless searches, but most Americans rationalize that they’ve got nothing to hide and ignore the stories.  Besides, we have a Constitutional Law Professor for President and he agrees with the policy.  Three days after assuming office in 2009:

“The Obama administration fell in line with the Bush administration Thursday when it urged a federal judge to set aside a ruling in a closely watched spy case weighing whether a U.S. president may bypass Congress and establish a program of eavesdropping on Americans without warrants.”[3]

Something most Americans can’t ignore as easily are the intrusions of the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA), the bureaucracy created in a knee jerk response to the 9/11 blowback of 2001.

By mid-September 2004, during the Bush administration, the TSA put in place a policy of “physical frisking” of selected airline passengers before they boarded an airplane.  Immediately after the policy change there were complaints by women who had been “physically frisked” at the airport:

  • Singer and actress Patty Lupone described an airline security screener who demanded that LuPone remove her shirt. After protesting, LuPone complied, “revealing a thin, see-through camisole.”  According to Lupone, the screener "was all over me with her hands," touching areas including her groin and breasts.
  • Advertising executive Lu Chekowsky said, "routinely, my breasts are being cupped, my behind is being felt."
  • “Nancy Jackson, president of a global company in New York that sells interior finishes…has also learned not to express her objections.  ‘If you do,’ she said, ‘They really feel you up, and then check every section of your wallet and every item in your carry-on, including your makeup and toiletries; it's disgusting.’"[4]

imageBackscatter X-ray Body Scanner Images

TSA Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) Program

By 2007 the TSA introduced two types of Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) airport body scanners at Phoenix Sky Harbor airport to use as a secondary screen on passengers arbitrarily selected for secondary screening: X-ray backscatter scanners and millimeter wave scanners.[5][6]  X-ray backscatter scanners use low-energy X-rays to snoop beneath passengers' clothing.  Millimeter wave scanners  produces images using radio waves, not X-rays.  A smiling TSA bureaucrat demonstrated the backscatter scanner and the virtues of a full body scan: no more groping frisks as the TSA keeps us all “safe.”

On Christmas Day 2009, after the "underwear bomber" intelligence failure, the Obama administration accelerated the deployment of new airport scanners to look beneath travelers' clothes to spot weapons or explosives.  A $215 million proposal by the Obama administration called for the purchase of 500 more machines in addition to the 450 already purchased.[7]  Half of the machines would be X-ray backscatter scanners and the other half would be millimeter wave scanners.

According to TSA plans, by late 2011, nearly 1000 body scanners will be looking under airline passengers' clothing in nearly half of US airport checkpoints.  Across the US, two out of every three passengers will be “asked” to step into one of the new machines for a six-second head-to-toe scan before boarding.

Safety Concerns about X-ray Backscatter Scanners

Most Americans willingly walk through airport scanners, trusting that the federal government has their best interests at heart.  Most air travelers don’t ask about safety and what testing has been done on the scanners—they trust Big Brother.  The state wouldn’t knowingly hurt civilians would it?[8]   

As body scanner usage becomes widespread at airport and public facilities, scientists at Columbia University question whether the risks of skin cancer have been adequately studied.  Scientists at the University of California also questioned “the extent to which the safety of this scanning device has been adequately demonstrated.”  They called for more study of the X-ray body scanners in an April 6, 2010 "Letter of Concern" (pdf) to John Holdren, the president's science adviser:

"The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high.”[10]

The UC letter asked for a more thorough look at the risks of exposing millions of people to X-ray body scanners, and listed concerns about x-ray testing:

  • increased risks to people over 65
  • increased risks to fraction of females more likely to develop breast cancer
  • increased risk for sperm mutagenesis
  • increased risk of cancer to immune-compromised individuals
  • risk to unborn when scanning pregnant women
  • risk of radiation emission to children and adolescents
  • unknown effects of the radiation on the cornea and thymus
  • potential for equipment malfunction delivering increased radiation doses.

Don’t worry, Big Brother says the X-ray body scanners are safe: it meets the guidelines of the American National Standards Institute for the amount of radiation emitted.  What Big Brother doesn’t tell you:

“…guess who was on the committee that developed the guidelines for the X-ray scanners? Representatives from the companies that make the machines and the Department of Homeland Security, among others. In other words, the machines passed a test developed, in part, by the companies that manufacture them and the government agency that wants to use them.”[11]

Who Watches the Watchers?

“Millimeter wave uses electromagnetic waves to generate an image based on the energy reflected from the body. It passes harmless electromagnetic waves over the human body to create a robotic image...

“Passenger privacy is ensured through the anonymity of the image: The officer attending the passenger will not view the image, and as an additional precaution, the officer viewing the image will be remotely located and the image won't be stored, transmitted or printed, and deleted immediately once viewed. In fact, the machines have zero storage capability.”  TSA press release November 14, 2008[12]  

According to TSA pronouncements to the public, millimeter wave body scanners make unrecognizable “robotic images” of travelers.  According to the TSA, your privacy is protected because:

  1. The “robotic images” aren’t recognizable because of a privacy filter.  The TSA doesn’t tell the public that they can change the settings of the privacy filter, but the TSA wouldn’t change the settings to show more detail would it?
  2. And if the images were recognizable—which they aren’t of course, because the privacy filter makes them “robotic images,” and the TSA wouldn’t change the privacy filter settings—the TSA officer looking at them won’t be in the same room to see the person scanned.
  3. And if the images were recognizable—which they aren’t because the TSA wouldn’t change the privacy filter settings after they demonstrated how “robotic” the image is to the news media—the image can’t be stored. 
  4. And if the images were recognizable and stored—both of which, according to public announcements by the TSA, cannot happen—it’s only on one machine, and it’s a “robotic image”—the machines aren’t networked, so the images can’t be transmitted.
  5. And if the images were recognizable, stored, and networked—which of course they aren’t and can’t be—remember, it’s only a “robotic image” because of the privacy filter.

Thus “passenger privacy is ensured” by the TSA.

At least that’s what the TSA wants you to think.  They want you to ignore the evidence that body scans are “virtual strip-searches” as AIT scanners record full-frontal nudity (video).  Introduction of the scanners in Great Britain raised concerns that the scanners violated child pornography laws there by making images of naked children.[13]

In America, Big Brother lies about privacy concerns to willing double-thinkers.  Introducing the AIT scanners at JFK airport on October 21, 2010, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declined to demonstrate a “robotic image” of her package in one of the devices, and you can be sure she wasn’t frisked either.  That didn’t stop her from chanting the TSA litany for all the robots who would be stepping through the machines:

"Those who read the images are not actually physically at the gate, so they cannot associate an image with an individual person at all…

"And the machines are set so that no image is retained."[14]

In the Daily News video embedded with the online article about Napolitano at JFK, TSA Assistant Administrator for Security Operations Lee Kair regurgitated the other part of the TSA litany by noting that the image is “more like a chalk etching, not like a photograph,” because of the privacy filters built in to the scanner.

The TSA has repeatedly claimed that the scanners are incapable of storing or transmitting the naked images of scanned travelers.  The TSA website on Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) states:

“Advanced imaging technology cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image is automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer.” 

Why would an image need to be “automatically deleted” from the system if the system can’t store the image?

What the TSA Doesn’t Tell You

According to TSA public announcements, the millimeter wave body scanners create a “robotic image” and have zero storage capability for that image.  The US Marshall service uses the same device and admits it stored 35,000 images on a body scanner used at a Florida courthouse checkpoint.[15]  A letter from the TSA to the Congressional chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security also contradicts the “zero storage capability” public statement:

“AIT has the ability to store and transmit data; however, the only locations where the functionalities of storage and data transmission are enabled are at the testing and development sites: TSIF, TSL, and TML.” - February 24, 2010 letter (pdf)  from the Acting Administrator of the TSA to the Congressional chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Page 5 of the 70-page TSA procurement specification (pdf) for the scanners states that the scanner must "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide a mechanism for "high-speed transfer of image data (raw and reconstructed)" over the network.

Page 5 of the specification (pdf) also states that the scanners shall have “a means to multiplex images, allowing up to 64 IOCPs (Image Operator Control Panels) to receive images from up to 64 WBI (Whole Body Imager) systems utilizing the network requirements set forth in section 3.1.1.3.6.”  Section 3.1.1.3.6 is titled “Network Interface.”  Does any of that sound like the scanners can be networked to you?

Page 5 of the specification (pdf) also says that the scanner will have "image filters to protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger."  These filters create the “robotic image” or the “chalklike etchings.”  The specification also states that “Enabling and disabling of image filtering shall be modifiable.”  Why does the TSA tell the public about the privacy filter, but neglect to mention they can change it?

But don’t worry about all of those details.  They’re Big Brother’s concern.  What the TSA wants you to remember is:

“…all full-body scanners have ‘strong privacy protections in place’ and are delivered to airports ‘without the capability to store, print or transmit images.’"  Anonymous TSA official[16]

What they do not want you to notice is that Janet Napolitano wouldn’t step into one of the new AIT scanners to demonstrate it.

The US Constitution Doesn’t Apply

Worried about your 4th Amendment protections from unreasonable search and seizures?  Relax, according to the Big Brother there’s no need to concern yourself.  The federal government maintains that body scanning is perfectly constitutional:

“Such searches are prophylactic in nature and designed to advance the vital goal of protecting the public, rather than being focused on criminal law enforcement and directed at apprehending specific suspects; they do not require either a warrant or individualized suspicion.” – Pp. 5-6 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).[17]

According to Big Brother, your 4th Amendment protections don’t apply.  The TSA is searching everyone indiscriminately—"prophylactically.”  If they violate everyone’s rights, they’re not discriminating.  It’s ok!  And don’t forget, the TSA performs a “crucial function”:

"The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible, while still performing its crucial function of protecting all members of the public from potentially catastrophic events." – P. 9 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

To further reassure yourself, keep in mind that the “TSA respects the fundamental values of individual autonomy and privacy” and will “allow” you to have your crotch groped by a TSA official if you don’t want to walk through a body scanner when asked:

“Furthermore, TSA respects the fundamental values of individual autonomy and privacy by allowing individuals to request an alternative method of screening (a pat down search) if they choose to do so, and by ensuring – contrary to petitioners’ assertion – that AIT images will not be stored, transmitted or otherwise misused.” – P. 6 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

What are the watchers up to while they’re watching over you?  Among other things, they’re robbing you as they rifle your luggage, ogling you if you have large breasts or a small penis, and otherwise sexually and physically harassing you.[18]

But Big Brother wants to put your mind at ease.  The TSA is keeping you safe from all of those terrorists who hate your freedoms.

Freedom is Slavery

Some people, insufficiently cowed, refuse to be virtually strip-searched.  Some “voluntarily comply” by “choosing to be frisked,” so the TSA has responded with a new palms-down policy for frisking to discourage anyone from refusing a body scan before boarding an airplane.

One victim of the groping described it this way:

“It was extremely invasive. This was a very probing-type touching - not just patting over all your areas, but actually probing and pushing and seeing if I was concealing something in my genital area.”[19]

Now air travelers can “freely choose” to stand in front of X-ray backscatter scanners of questionable safety, or millimeter wave scanners to be virtually strip searched, or instead have their privates fondled with the new palms-down frisking policy, all in the name of keeping us safe.

The state prosecutes sexual assaults by subway gropers and peeping toms for violating the rights of individuals.  But we’re supposed to thank the state as it sexually assaults air travelers and says it’s for the traveler’s own good.[20]  Drone-like, Americans say, “Yes, fondle my wife’s breasts—or take a picture of my daughter’s.  And thank-you for protecting the hive.”

This constant monitoring isn’t unique to airports.  Our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches are violated practically every time we leave our homes.  It’s happening with scanners at bus stations (video), metal detectors at government buildings and public events, and cameras on street corners.  Unfortunately, frightened Americans now think it’s reasonable to empty their pockets when they walk into buildings, and to be groped or virtually strip-searched at the airport by any federal agent in a uniform.

What’s particularly intrusive about body scanners and frisking is both practices push the limits of state control to the point where the state owns even our right to be clothed to protect the privacy of our own bodies.  What do we own if not our own bodies?  With body scanners, the state arrogates the right to strip and grope you whenever it wants.

There’s no hiding when Big Brother is watching you.

What’s Next?

“If it keeps us safe, I’m all for it.” – An American sheep responding to questions about the latest federal incursion (pick one) on his/her liberties.

Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano wants air travelers watched around the world.  At a Montreal meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), she urged other countries “to move to the next stage of screening”:

The U.S. Homeland Security chief will urge 190 nations today to improve aviation security with body scanners and other innovations to stop terrorists from carrying plastic and powdered explosives onto airplanes.[21]

What other innovations does Napolitano refer to?  Plastic gloves for checking rectums now that terrorists carry explosives there?

Americans already willingly spread their legs, raise their arms in surrender, and submit to virtual strip searches and real gropes.  When Big Brother asks, most double-thinking “free” Americans won’t give it a second thought before they bend over.

________________________________

[1] Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell, New American Library, N.Y., 1949, p. 5.

[2] Night, Elie Wiesel, Bantam Books, Inc., 1982, pp. 14-15.

[3] “Obama Sides With Bush in Spy Case,” By David Kravets, Wired, January 22, 2009, (Accessed at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/01/obama-sides-wit/ on Oct. 19, 2010).

[4] “Many Women Say Airport Pat-Downs Are a Humiliation,” By JOE SHARKEY, NY Times, November 23, 2004, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/business/23grope.html?pagewanted=print&position= on Sept. 27, 2010).

[5] “Revealing X-ray machine set to scan Sky Harbor fliers,” Ginger D. Richardson, Arizona Republic, Feb. 23, 2007, (Accessed at http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0223backscatter0223.html on Oct. 22, 2010).

[6] “Full-Body Scanner Begins Tests at Phoenix Airport,” October 11, 2007, AP, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301160,00.html on Oct. 21, 2010).

[7] “Airport-security plan calls for 500 body scanners in '11,” By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY, 2/3/2010, (Accessed at http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2010-02-02-body-scanner_N.htm on Oct. 4, 2010).

[8] Would the federal government knowingly hurt people?  They’re not like the Nazis who experimented on concentration camp prisoners are they?

Consider:

[9] “U.S. Apologizes for Syphilis Tests in Guatemala,” By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr., NY Times, October 1, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/health/research/02infect.html?_r=1&th&emc=th on Oct. 2, 2010).

[10] “Scientists Question Safety Of New Airport Scanners,” by Richard Knox, May 17, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083 on July 21, 2010).

[11] “Are Scanners Worth the Risk?” By SUSAN STELLIN, NY Times, September 7, 2010, (Accessed at http://travel.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/travel/12prac.html on Oct. 3, 2010).

[12] “TSA Launches Millimeter Wave Technology in Richmond,” TSA Press Release, Nov. 14, 2008, (Accessed at http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2008/1114.shtm on Oct. 24, 2010).

[13] “New scanners break child porn laws,” Alan Travis, Guardian, 4 January 2010, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/04/new-scanners-child-porn-laws on Oct. 24, 2010).

[14] “Body scanners unveiled at JFK Airport; Homeland Security Sect. Janet Napolitano doesn't volunteer,” BY Christina Boyle, DAILY NEWS, October 22nd 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/22/2010-10-22_body_scanners_unveiled_at_jfk_airport_homeland_security_sect_janet_napolitano_do.html on Oct. 27, 2010).

At 1:50 in the Daily News video, the woman Image Operator (IO) operating the scanner inadvertently shows the ability of the machine to show more resolution when she scans over the left foot of the scanned image for an instant.  (This capability is more apparent in this video.)  She immediately moves the cursor as this capability contradicts Asst. Administrator Kair’s statements.

[15] “Feds admit they stored body scanner images, despite TSA claim the images cannot be saved,” NY Daily News, BY Aliyah Shahid, August 4th 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/08/04/2010-08-04_feds_admit_they_stored_body_scanner_images_despite_tsa_claim_the_images_cannot_b.html?obref=obnetwork on Oct. 22, 2010).

[16] “Body scanners can store, send images, group says,” By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, CNN, January 11, 2010, (Accessed at http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/11/body.scanners/  on Oct. 24, 2010).

[17] “Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images,” by Declan McCullagh, CNET, August 4, 2010, (Accessed at http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html on Oct. 3, 2010).

[18] In Florida: “TSA Screener Cited "Torture" In Scanner Case; Arrestee's genitalia was exposed by "full body" device,” Smoking Gun, (Accessed at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/tsa-screener-cited-torture-scanner-case on Sept. 24, 2010).

In Philadelphia: “Another flier's run-in with the TSA,” by Daniel Rubin, The Inquirer, June 14, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/96273368.html?&subscribe=y&listID=1782 on Oct. 22, 2010).

In Seattle: “Former TSA supervisor admits stealing luggage,” Aug. 16, 2010, Huffington Post, (Accessed at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100816/us-tsa-supervisor-theft/ on Oct. 22, 2010).

In Great Britain: “Airport Worker Pervs Over Woman In Body Scanner: ‘I Love Those Gigantic Tits’,” Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com, March 24, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.prisonplanet.com/airport-worker-pervs-over-woman-in-body-scanner-look-at-those-gigantic-tits.html on July 21, 2010).

In Nigeria: “Now showing at MMIA: Nude images of passengers; Security officials gather and giggle at naked travelers in body scanner,” By Chinedu Eze , 09.20.2010, (Accessed at http://odili.net/news/source/2010/sep/21/232.html on Sept. 30, 2010).

“They use the machines, installed in the wake of the Farouk AbdulMutallab affair, to watch the naked images of female passengers for fun.

“The controversial body scanners have been dubbed "e-stripping" in advanced countries because of the way they expose the nakedness of those being screened.

“THISDAY discovered that during off-peak periods, the aviation security officials, who are trained on the use of the scanners, usually stroll from the cubicle located in a hidden corner on the right side of the screening area where the 3D full-body scanner monitors are located.

“They do so to catch a glimpse of some of the passengers entering the machine and immediately go back to view the naked images, in order to match the faces with the images since the faces are blurred on the monitors while passengers are inside the machine.

“The face that appears on the scanner's monitor is usually blurred so that the operator viewing the full body will not recognise who passes through the machine.

“But by coming out to see the passenger in person and then going back to see his or her image, the objective of protecting the privacy of the passenger has been defeated.”

[19] “New Logan searches blasted TSA tests frisky frisking policy,” By Donna Goodison, Boston Herald, August 21, 2010, (Accessed at http://bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1276131 on Oct. 20, 2010).

Passengers shocked by new touchy-feely TSA screening,” By Donna Goodison, Boston Herald, August 24, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view/20100823passengers_shocked_by_new_touchy-feely_tsa_screening/srvc=business&position=also on Oct. 21, 2010).

“Airline passengers from coast to coast are decrying the Transportation Security Administration’s more aggressive body searches, calling screeners’ new front-of-the-hand, slide-down technique not only invasive but an example of Big Brother run amok.
"Rob Webster said he was subjected to a head-to-toe body search that ‘did not miss an inch’ and even included a “probing and pushing” of his genital area when flying home from Las Vegas to Seattle last week.
“’If anybody ever groped me like that in real life, I would have punched them in their nose,’ the 50-year-old said. ‘It was extremely invasive. This was a very probing-type touching - not just patting over all your areas, but actually probing and pushing and seeing if I was concealing something in my genital area.’”

[20] “Breast Exams at the Airport: Do the New Security Measures Go Too Far?” By SHERRY F. COLB, Findlaw, Dec. 01, 2004, (Accessed at http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20041201.html on Sept. 27, 2010).

“The hunches of security personnel (the reliability of whose hunches is nowhere evident) are now enough to subject people to what would otherwise constitute a sexual assault, that is, a nonconsensual touching of breasts and/or groin, as a condition for innocent non-suspects traveling freely around the country and internationally. ”

[21] “Napolitano pitches plan for air security to 190 nations,” By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY, 28 Sept. 2010, (Accessed at http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-09-28-1Anapolitano28_ST_N.htm on Sept. 30, 2010).

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Doublethink (Part 5)

“Actually, as Winston well knew, it was only four years since Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.”    

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 1 Chapter 3, p. 31-32 by George Orwell.[1]

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld (R), then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan (R), in Baghdad on December 20, 1983 (video).

“Yet, while we condemn what has happened in Afghanistan, we are not without hope. To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom. Their courage teaches us a great lesson -- that there are things in this world worth defending.

“To the Afghan people, I say on behalf of all Americans that we admire your heroism, your devotion to freedom, and your relentless struggle against your oppressors.”

President Ronald Reagan (R) on March 21, 1983 praising Afghan freedom fighters, now known as al Qaeda, in their fight against Russian invaders in Afghanistan.[2]

What changed Reagan’s “freedom fighters” to terrorists? 

The War Moves to Eastasia…

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a world of continual war with changing alliances and enemies.  A nation always at war has no time for liberty, much like the US as it transforms itself to a surveillance state with the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act to “protect” the nation from its enemies. 

Nineteen Eighty-Four’s Ministry of Peace “concerned itself with war” analogously to the US Department of Defense concerning itself with offense—aka preemptive war and invading foreign nations. 

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Oceania’s enemy continually changes between Eurasia and Eastasia, just as the US continually changes enemies and allies, and which country it occupies in the Middle East:

  • In 1953 during the Eisenhower (R) administration, the CIA helped overthrow Iranian Prime Minister Mosaddegh and install the Shah—Iran had been an enemy, after 1953 it became an ally.
  • In 1959 during the Eisenhower administration, Saddam Hussein was part of a failed “CIA-authorized six-man squad” to assassinate then-Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim.  Hussein was an ally to the US and worked with the CIA.
  • In July 1979, the Carter (D) administration National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski had the brainstorm to fund al Qaeda in Afghanistan and lure the Soviet Union into war there—al Qaeda was an ally, but they were called the mujahideen.  The CIA-funded program, Operation Cyclone, used Pakistan’s ISI to funnel money and arms to the mujahideen.
  • During the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US-supported Shah was overthrown, the US embassy was overrun, and the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-1981 made Iran an enemy and Iraq an ally of the US.
  • From 1981 to 1988, the Reagan (R) administration continued Operation Cyclone to support the mujahideen, and supplied aid to Pakistan, too.  President Reagan dedicated the space shuttle Columbia to the “Afghan freedom fighters” trying to force Russian invaders out of Afghanistan (video).
  • The Reagan administration supported Iraq in its war against Iran with chemical and biological weapons, military training, and military support—Iran was still the enemy.  During this time the US military shot down an Iranian Air A300 passenger plane, mistaking it for an F-14 Iranian fighter.  Hussein was still a US ally (video).
  • From August 20, 1985 – March 4, 1987, the Reagan administration shipped arms to Israel for transfer to Iran in an attempt to improve relations and to gain the release of six hostages held in Iran—Iran was an enemy, but the US supplied them with weapons in their nine-year war against our “ally” Iraq.
  • During the George H. W. Bush (R) administration, the US with UN help, "liberated” Kuwait by embargoing Iraq in August 1990, and attacking Iraqi forces in Kuwait in February 1991—Iraq was the new enemy and Hussein was the new Hitler.
  • From 1993 through 2000, the Clinton (D) administration continues the Iraqi embargo, as does the George W. Bush (R) administration until 2003—Iraq remained the enemy.  Hussein was still evil.
  • In 2001 during the George W. Bush administration, the US invades Afghanistan—the Taliban and al Qaeda (mujahideen) become the enemy—they’ve always been the enemy—get your memory under control.
  • In 2003 during the Bush administration, the US invades Iraq—Iraq was the enemy—Iraq always was the enemy.
  • In 2009, the Obama (D) administration moves the focus of the war against terrorism back to Afghanistan—al Qaeda is still the enemy—they always have been.
  • Recently the Obama administration moved its war to Pakistan with drone strikes and men on the ground, and into Yemen, too.[3][4]  Al Qaeda is the enemy.

…and “Collateral Damage” Moves With It

Since the endless US “war on terrorism” supposedly started because of US civilians killed on 9/11, shouldn’t we expect more trouble to result if the US itself kills civilians?  Isn’t it reasonable to expect that people in other countries will get very angry if their children are slaughtered?  Wouldn’t one expect moving US military activity to Pakistan and Yemen to increase antipathy to the US?  

The December 25th, 2009 underwear bomber  from Nigeria:

“Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, charged with the attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Airlines flight 253, told FBI agents there were more just like him in Yemen who would strike soon.”[5]

Or after the attempted Times Square bombing in N.Y.:

“The man who attempted to detonate a truck filled with explosives in Times Square told a judge that the C.I.A. drone campaign was one of the factors that led him to attack the United States.”[6]

Here are reports of recent drone attacks in Pakistan:

When Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was asked about the civilian deaths from drone strikes in Pakistan, she rivaled former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in callousness:

“Asked repeatedly about the drones, a subject that involves highly classified CIA operations, Clinton said only that ‘there is a war going on.’”[7]

Albright (video) infamously said the estimated 500,000 civilian deaths in Iraq during the US-sponsored embargo of that country before 9/11 were “worth it.” 

On June 24, 2010, the US Congress approved sanctions on Iran (video) similar to the 13-year embargo on Iraq before the US invasion in 2003. 

Is Iran the next Eurasia?

If you hated the Bush wars and voted for Obama, do you still pretend that voting for Obama made any difference?

“War prisoners apart, the average citizen of Oceania never sets eyes on a citizen of either Eurasia or Eastasia, and he is forbidden the knowledge of foreign languages. If he were allowed contact with foreigners he would discover that they are creatures similar to himself and that most of what he has been told about them is lies. The sealed world in which he lives would be broken, and the fear, hatred, and self-righteousness on which his morale depends might evaporate.”

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 2 Chapter 9, p. 162 by George Orwell.

________________________________

[1] Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell, New American Library, N.Y., 1949, p. 31-2.

[2] “Message on the Observance of Afghanistan Day,” March 21, 1983, (Accessed at http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/32183e.htm on Oct. 6, 2010).

On March 21, 1983, President Reagan said the following:

“Today, March 21st, is New Years Day in much of the Moslem world. New years, of course, should be an occasion for celebration. But for the Moslem people of Afghanistan, whose country was attacked and is occupied by the Soviet Army, it is a bitter reminder of a national calamity that befell their nation more than 3 years ago. To focus the world's attention on this crime against an innocent and brave nation, we observe today the second annual Afghanistan Day.

“In Afghanistan, tens of thousands of people have been killed, millions have lost their homes and their livelihood. Others have been subjected to torture and other atrocities, and many have been victims of the grisly chemical and biological weapons, including yellow rain -- weapons the Soviets have used in violation of solemn international agreements. The consequences of this calamity extend to Pakistan, which has assumed the burden of sheltering and feeding nearly 3 million refugees.

“Yet, while we condemn what has happened in Afghanistan, we are not without hope. To watch the courageous Afghan freedom fighters battle modern arsenals with simple hand-held weapons is an inspiration to those who love freedom. Their courage teaches us a great lesson -- that there are things in this world worth defending.

“To the Afghan people, I say on behalf of all Americans that we admire your heroism, your devotion to freedom, and your relentless struggle against your oppressors.

“The Soviet people have known great suffering -- more than other people. They should be able to sympathize with the terrible suffering of the Afghan people. To the Soviet leaders, I urge you in the name of humanity to end the bloodshed so that an independent Afghanistan can again take its place in the community of nations. The West has no designs upon Afghanistan. We do not threaten you there or anywhere on the globe. All we seek is the restoration of peace and freedom for a noble and brave people whom we remember today.”

Note: The President's message was taped at 11:12 a.m. in his study adjoining the Oval Office at the White House.

[3]  “U.N. Report Highly Critical of U.S. Drone Attacks,” By CHARLIE SAVAGE, NY Times, June 2, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/world/03drones.html?pagewanted=all on Sept. 24, 2010).

[4] "Obama Says Al Qaeda in Yemen Planned Bombing Plot, and He Vows Retribution," By PETER BAKER, NY Times, January 2, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/us/politics/03address.html?th&emc=th on January 3, 2010).

[5] “Abdulmutallab: More Like Me In Yemen,” By BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO, ABC News, Dec. 28, 2009, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/abdulmutallab-yemen/story?id=9430536&page=1 on October 3, 2010).

[6] “C.I.A. Steps Up Drone Attacks on Taliban in Pakistan,” By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITT, NY Times, September 27, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/world/asia/28drones.html?_r=1&th&emc=th on Sept 28, 2010).

[7] “Pakistanis confront Clinton over drone attacks; Clinton confronted by Pakistanis over Predator drone attacks _ 'executions without trial',” ROBERT BURNS, AP News, Oct 30, 2009, (Accessed at http://wire.antiwar.com/2009/10/30/pakistanis-confront-clinton-over-drone-attacks-6/ on Sept 24, 2010).

Monday, October 4, 2010

Doublethink (Part 4)

“The songs, the processions, the banners, the hiking, the drilling with dummy rifles, the yelling of slogans, the worship of Big Brother — it was all a sort of glorious game to them. All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals.”   

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 1 Chapter 2, p. 24 by George Orwell.[1]

Remembering 9/11

On September 11th, 2010 across the US, Americans commemorated the anniversary of 9/11  with US flags, speeches, flowers floating in reflecting pools, and patriotic songs.  The President spoke at the Pentagon, and his wife, with her predecessor, spoke at Shanksville, Pa.  There was also the obligatory anti-Moslem controversy over the mosque at the World Trade Center site, and the pastor who wanted to burn the Koran.[2]

Our rulers can’t let us forget “the day America changed forever” because they use the terror of that day to justify invading two nations and seizing more power here at home by tightening the chains on American citizens.  The US government, like Orwell’s Big Brother, keeps its citizens’ “ferocity… turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals.”

US is in a State of National Emergency

With the remembrances of the victims comes the continual reminder of an evil that killed nearly 3,000 US civilians.  The US has been in a state of National Emergency since September 14, 2001 because of it.  President Obama quietly extended the state of National Emergency for its 10th year.  He conveniently notified Congress on September 10th, when most Americans are distracted with upcoming September 11th memorials.[3] 

If anyone even chanced to notice the quiet departure of more of our liberties amidst all the patriotic memorializing of the nearly 3,000 Americans victims, who would dare question the President?

Be Afraid

Our rulers want us to “rally round the flag” while looking outwards for foreign enemies.  They want us terrified so that we ignore, or even support, their removal of many of our freedoms  over the last nine years.  Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano marked the ninth anniversary of 9/11 in New York vowing to keep up the fight against terrorists:

“We can’t guarantee there won’t be another successful terrorist attack.  The threats we face are evolving, and enemies like Al Qaeda and its affiliates are determined. … Today, on the eve of the ninth anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in our nation’s history, I can pledge to you this: We will do everything in our power to prevent attacks and to prepare ourselves.”[4]

They need us to be afraid.  They need us to stay fearful and support wars in foreign countries:

  • They need us to support the war in Afghanistan which Obama escalated to fight al Qaeda terrorism
  • They need us to support the war as they move it to Pakistan
  • They need us to support it as they try to move it to Iran.
  • They need us to be afraid despite CIA chief Leon Panetta’s estimate that there are no more than 100 al Qaeda members in Afghanistan.[5]

Terrorism vs. Collateral Damage

Why do you think we’re repeatedly reminded of the nearly 3,000 US civilians killed on 9/11, but not that the US military killed more than 3,000 civilians in Afghanistan in the first six months of what is now a nine-year war to avenge the deaths of 9/11?[6][7]

Why is it that when Americans civilians are killed, they’re victims of terrorism and when foreign civilians are killed, they’re merely collateral damage?

Is it possible that people who lose family members to “collateral damage” might get angry enough to become “terrorists”?  Who then fathers terrorism?

12-year old Ali, an Iraqi victim of US rockets in 2003, wasn’t terrorized, just damaged collaterally.[8]

Can you see a difference between terrorism and collateral damage?  If you can, you’re on your way to understanding doublethink as well as Syme, a character in Nineteen Eighty-Four

“'Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like “freedom is slavery” when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking — not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.’

“One of these days, thought Winston with sudden deep conviction, Syme will be vaporized. He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly. The Party does not like such people. One day he will disappear. It is written in his face.”

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 1 Chapter 5, p. 47 by George Orwell.

________________________________

[1] Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell, New American Library, N.Y., 1949, p. 24.

[2] “On Sept. 11 Anniversary, Rifts Amid Mourning,” By ANNE BARNARD and MANNY FERNANDEZ, NY Times, September 11, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/nyregion/12sept11.html?_r=2&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=all on Sept. 24, 2010).

[3] “Letter from the President on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Certain Terrorist Attacks,” Sept. 10, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/10/letter-president-continuation-national-emergency-with-respect-certain-te on Sept. 24, 2010).

September 10, 2010

Dear Madam Speaker:    (Dear Mr. President:)

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. Consistent with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register the enclosed notice, stating that the emergency declared with respect to the terrorist attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, is to continue in effect for an additional year.

The terrorist threat that led to the declaration on September 14, 2001, of a national emergency continues. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue in effect after September 14, 2010, the national emergency with respect to the terrorist threat.

                       Sincerely,

                       BARACK OBAMA

[4] “Janet Napolitano vows to keep up fight,” By MIKE ALLEN, 9/10/10, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41967.html on Sept. 24, 2010).

[5] “New Estimate of Strength of Al Qaeda Is Offered,” By DAVID E. SANGER and MARK MAZZETTI, NY Times, June 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/world/asia/01qaeda.html on Sept. 25, 2010).

Apparently if 50-100 al Qaeda is an acceptable justification for escalation of the war in Afghanistan, Panetta estimated 300 al Qaeda in Pakistan to justify US drones in Pakistan.  (Shades of Cambodia and Laos in the 1970s…)

If you’re ready for triple-think:  “The Imperial Anatomy of Al-Qaeda. The CIA’s Drug-Running Terrorists and the ‘Arc of Crisis’ Part I,” by Andrew Gavin Marshall, Global Research, September 5, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAR20100905&articleId=20907 on Sept. 24, 2010).

[6] “Tighter Rules Fail to Stem Deaths of Innocent Afghans at Checkpoints,” By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr., NY Times, March 26, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/27/world/asia/27afghan.html?_r=1 on September 21, 2010).

[7] “US forces 'kill 8 children' in night raid on village in Afghanistan,” Scotsman, 31 December 2009, By JEROME STARKEY in KABUL, (Accessed at http://news.scotsman.com/world/US-forces-kill-8-children.5947753.jp on Sept. 21, 2010).

[8] “Blood Brothers,” By TOM NEWTON DUNN, The Sun, 03 Apr 2010, (Accessed at http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/2919198/Victims-of-Iraq-war-meet-amputee-British-soldiers.html on Sept. 30, 2010).

Then twelve year old Ali, is now 19 and adjusted to his life without arms.  His doctor thought he would die within weeks after the rocket attack that killed most of his family (his aunt survived).  I’ve quoted liberally from the article in the New Yorker as I’m sure it will be instructive in distinguishing the vast difference between victims of terrorism and those who are merely “collateral damage”:

    “Dr. Saleh stopped to talk briefly with three European doctors from Médecins Sans Frontières, the nongovernmental organization that had been in Iraq for several weeks, assisting Iraqi doctors.

    “One of Dr. Saleh’s assistants, a young woman, had pulled some images up on a computer screen in his office. Dr. Saleh invited me to look at them with him. The first image the assistant showed us was of a boy lying naked in the emergency operating theatre. A catheter and tube was attached to his penis. The child’s legs were smooth, but his entire torso was black, and his arms were horribly burned. At about the biceps, the flesh of both arms became charred, black grotesqueries. One of his hands was a twisted, melted claw. His other arm had apparently been burned off at the elbow, and two long bones were sticking out of it. It looked like something that might be found in a barbecue pit.

    “The child’s face was covered by an anesthesia mask. ‘This is Ali,’ Dr. Saleh said. ‘He is twelve. He was wounded in a rocket attack the night before last in the southeastern part of Baghdad, about fifteen minutes from here. Ali lost his mother, his father, and his six brothers and sisters. Four homes were destroyed; in one of them, the whole family was killed, eight people.’

    “It was hard to imagine that the person in the photograph could be alive, but Dr. Saleh said that Ali was still conscious. ‘I don’t think he will survive, though,’ he said in a flat tone. ‘These burned people have complications after three or four days; in the first week they usually get septicemia.’ His assistant was pulling up new images on her monitor. They showed Ali again, on the same bed and in the same position as before, but this time without his charred appendages. Both arms had been amputated, and the stumps were wrapped in white bandages. His torso was covered in some kind of clear grease. The mask had been removed from his face, and he appeared to be sleeping. He had a beautiful head, with the feminine features of a prepubescent boy. In another picture, Ali was awake, staring at the camera with large, expressionless eyes.

    “Dr. Saleh’s assistant breathed in sharply and put one hand over her mouth. Then she brought up some images of Ali’s family just after the bodies had arrived at the hospital’s morgue. It was difficult to make out what had once been human beings. Cloth stuck to the bodies, bits of bold red-and-green fabric with flower designs. There seemed to be some straw mixed in, and I asked Dr. Saleh if they had been farming people. He said yes, and pointed out Ali’s mother. Her face had been cut in half, as if by a giant cleaver, and her mouth was yawning open. In other pictures, which Dr. Saleh said were of Ali’s father and a younger sister, all I could see was a macabre collection of charred body parts and some red flesh. The body of his brother was all there, it seemed, but from the nose up his head was gone, simply sheared off, like the head of a rubber doll. His mouth, like that of his mother, was open, as if he were screaming.

    “‘Have you seen enough?’ the assistant asked me quietly. I didn’t say anything, so she showed me more pictures. After a few minutes of this, Dr. Saleh said, ‘O.K. This is just part of the tragedy.’ He asked me if I wanted to see Ali.

    “I followed Dr. Saleh to the burn unit, where some men helped us on with green smocks, face masks, gauzy hair nets, and shoe coverings. Then we walked down a bare and quiet hall that reminded me of a prison corridor. The only thing on the walls was a framed portrait of Saddam Hussein. Dr. Saleh opened a door and we went into a small room where an older woman in a black abaya, Ali’s aunt, was sitting in a chair. A tiny window in the far wall of the room let in some sunlight. The aunt was sitting next to a bed on wheels that had a hooplike structure over it. Dr. Saleh carefully pulled back a coarse gray blanket, and I saw Ali’s naked chest, his bandaged stumps, and his face. His large eyes were hazel, flecked with green. He had long eyelashes and wavy brown hair. I didn’t know what to say.

    “Dr. Saleh asked Ali how he felt. ‘O.K.,’ he said. Wasn’t he in a lot of pain, I said to Dr. Saleh, in a whisper. I spoke in English. ‘No,’ he replied. ‘Deeply burned patients don’t feel much pain because of the damage to their nerves.’ I stared at Ali, who looked back at me and at Dr. Saleh. His aunt got up and stood behind the head of the bed. She said nothing.

    “I asked Dr. Saleh to ask Ali what he was thinking about. Ali spoke for a moment in Arabic, in a boy’s soft, high-pitched voice. ‘He doesn’t think of anything, and he doesn’t remember anything,’ Dr. Saleh said. He explained that Ali did not know that his family was dead. I asked Ali about school. He was in the sixth grade, he said, and his favorite subject was geography. As he spoke, his aunt stroked his hair. Did he like sports? Yes, he replied, especially volleyball, and also soccer…

    “…Dr. Saleh rubbed his eyes and cleared his throat several times. We went back to his office, and he washed his face in a sink. ‘So it’s untrue what they say about doctors being able to suspend their emotions,’ I said.

    “He looked at me. His eyes were pink. ‘We are human beings,’ he replied. He explained that Ali knew that he had lost his arms, but that he had not acknowledged it yet: ‘He is conscious. He can see the stumps.’ Ali would likely die within three weeks.”[9]

[9] “Letter from Baghdad, War Wounds; Bombs fall and the lights go out” by Jon Lee Anderson, New Yorker, April 14, 2003, (Accessed at http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/04/14/030414fa_fact1?currentPage=all on Oct 1, 2010).