Terrorists

War! What is it Good For?

War! What is it Good For? (10/19/2011)

I have been traveling lately so my ability to tune to the news has been limited. However, it appears the United States is currently in the process of creating another “Gulf of Tonkin” event to justify an attack on a sovereign nation. It is hard for me to believe I would make such an accusation, but history repeats itself and desperate politicians will do anything to maintain their power. Let’s take a quick look at the facts.

First, President Obama continues to slide week after week in the public opinion polls. His own party is currently turning against him and with regularity Hilary Clinton’s name is floated, via trial balloons, as a possible nominee or Biden replacement. This is a President, and party, who cannot accept the downward slide and has been working toward re-election, not governance, since January 2009.

Second, the administration has lost control of several stories and will use diversions to deflect the outcome – a classic maneuver confirmed by Hollywood in the movie “Wag the Dog.” Today the administration is being investigated for two significant, impeachable events: “Fast and Furious” and “Solyandra.” The diversion playbook is far easier to play from than truthful acceptance of responsibility.

Third, questions are currently rising around the alleged plot to kill the Saudi envoy to Washington. Additionally, the world does not recognize the right of the sovereign nation of Iran, a former war ally, to build its own nuclear program. Senator Diane Feinstein over the weekend affirmed her own skepticism regarding the plot by the Mexican used-car dealer to assassinate the Saudi; however she feels after her intelligence briefing there is a case. She did continue to comment this is not the time for war with Iran and America appears to be on an unavoidable collision course.

Personally, I believe Ahmadinejad to be a ruthless dictator who should not possess nuclear weapons. However, we must draw a line and avoid a possible fifth war (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Libya) as an attack on Iran has the potential to escalate to a nuclear event. President Obama has assured the world Iran would face the “toughest possible sanctions” for its part in the assassination plot. I suggest if there were no personal gain for his administration the President would back-channel his responses and leave pleas for public opinion out of the spotlight; quiet and decisive action is more effective than loud self-serving posturing. “War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothin’!” – Norman Whitfield.

Changeling

Changeling

My family and I recently watched the moving “Changeling” with Angelina Jolie. The movie itself was entertaining and focused on the efforts of a 1920’s woman to recover her missing son. The issue at hand was the corruption of the Los Angeles Police Department after receiving bad press and their attempts to cover up shoddy police work. As we watched I found myself angered over the blatant misuse of authority. For example, when Jolie’s character challenged the police department they had her committed to an LA psychological hospital; a warrantless incarceration without trial. Once behind the walls of the hospital it was nearly impossible for her to plead her case.

Watching the movie caused me to challenge my kids to compare the situation to events of today and instantly they commented on perception of law enforcement corruption and intimidation. Of course, the most obvious example is TSA’s violation of the 4th Amendment at airport security check points and intimidation of people like Aaron Toney who was detained for 90 minutes, without arrest, by TSA on December 31 at Richmond, Virginia’s airport when he removed his shirt and displayed the 4th Amendment on his chest.

In Philadelphia gun owner Mark Fiornio was nearly shot, detained and harassed for lawfully openly carrying a gun. A new FBI Advisory circular, “Communities Against Terrorism: Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities Related to Military Surplus Stores” advises store owners to keep records of customers making lawful purchases but fitting a profile of self-preparedness.

In London two weeks ago government officials required Amazon.com to stop selling self-defense weapons while authorities simultaneously allowed riots to “run their course.” Thus, the citizens lost the right to protect themselves in their own homes. Similarly, San Francisco authorities shut down cell-towers within the Bart system to prevent a possible riot from developing, but also leaving law abiding citizens with no mechanism for protection.

Regardless of examples I provide I must wonder when intimidation will stop and the rule of law will prevail. The movie “Changeling” highlighted corruption I could not believe existed. Ultimately, the 1930’s Courts found in favor of their “own”, but yet the corruption was known and documented. Like the Gestapo, TSA, police departments, and the National Guard will be asked to turn on citizens instead of protecting those, they are here “To Serve and Protect.”

Soldiers vs Winehouse

Soldiers v Winehouse (8/3/2011)

This past week I was riding with my daughter Haley talking about events of the week when I asked her if she knew who Amy Winehouse was. About two weeks ago Amy Winehouse died of an overdose and I had never heard of her, you probably haven’t either. What intrigued me more was the amount of media coverage her death received. I watch the NBC Nightly News and they gave at least three minutes to this celebrity, focusing on a lifestyle of degradation wrought with drugs and alcohol. My daughter impressed me with her next question, “did you see the Facebook post about this?”

I asked her to explain as I had no idea what she was talking about. Haley went on to share a girl had posted about Amy Winehouse versus the soldiers who died in the same week. Essentially, this is the same issue bothering me. Receiving no media coverage were the U.S. soldiers who gave their lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya.

Since 2002 thousands of soldiers have died fighting in our Presidents’ war on terror. These are funded by, but not declared wars by Congress and in my opinion Bush and Obama along with the entire Senate and House can be blamed for these deaths. Prior to Obama’s Presidency the major networks would publish the names of the soldiers who died each day and give coverage to the IEDs and bombings taking the lives of our sons and daughters. Part of Obama’s election platform was the withdrawal of troops and shutting down the wars, but the opposite has happened with as many lives lost on his watch as Bush’s.

I puzzle why we have U.S. soldiers dying on foreign soil and speculate the following: Iraq – to install democracy, Afghanistan – to stop Al Queda, Libya – to remove Qhadaffi, and Yemen – to protect human rights. All of these theaters are U.N. sanctioned and fought without a declaration of War by the Congress. Therefore, our soldiers are policeman, not upholding the Constitutional premise of protection against enemies foreign and domestic, especially since Osama Bin Laden was killed and the mission accomplished.

The Gulf of Tonkin taught us politicians will lie to create wars. I must now questions the policies of our government, and more personally I wonder if I would allow the government to send my sons to a questionable war. Of most concern is the media stopped questioning the reason for these wars and it now appears a meaningless, drugged up 27-year old British citizen deserves more coverage than our youth fighting a politicians’ war.

Can I Wear My Shoes Now?

Can I wear my Shoes Now? (5/4/2011)

Sunday night I was on my way home from Atlanta tuned in to CNN when I heard the President planned an unprecedented press conference around 10:40pm. My wife and I speculated on possibilities, “what could be so important?” Jokingly I offered maybe Osama bin Laden was dead, but that certainly was not worth a late night press conference. Of course, if your poll numbers have fallen to historic lows and your re-election campaign was prematurely announced weeks ago then this could be the much needed booster shot.

I argue, “who cares?” Eight or nine years ago the death of Osama bin Laden may have had material impact. For nearly 10 years we have been given the boogeyman of threat, Bin Laden and his minions trying to harm us. Of course, Orwell would not have given up his government boogeyman, Emmanuel Goldstein, because he was the necessary fuel for the government machine. Bin Laden, like Goldstein, is a necessary enemy of the state; serving to distract, unit e and focus the people away from the true issues. Bush brought as bin Laden, a desperate politically troubled president has eliminated him. Reminding us how important it is not to piss off our enemies, the United States is treating Osama bin Laden’s body in “accordance with Islamic practice,” a White House official says. If this man was our enemy I assert his body be publicly hung in Times Square and treated to a ticker tape parade, unless of course, no body exists and this is a diversion.

So, the real question the next time I board an airplane is, “can I wear my shoes now?” If Bin Laden is dead I assume this means we can pull out of Afghanistan this week and bring our troops home since we spent billions of dollars chasing this idiot through caves, not unlike Bill Murray and the “Caddyshack” gopher. Sadly, the media was quick to report ramped up security efforts, more scanning, and began fear-mongering possible Al Qaeda retaliation attacks. Give me a break, Goldstein (I mean bin Laden) is dead and now the threat level is pushed to imminent. I expect more money will have to be spent to assure Al Qaeda terrorism is minimized. I expect much focus on the White House this week, defining our President as a world-wide hero who saved humanity from an evil man, with the media acting like teen-age girls at a “Teen Beat” cover shoot. Osama bin Laden is dead; can I wear my shoes now?

Land of the Free

Land of the Free (4/27/2011)

Our national anthem brings pride unto ourselves when we quote the famous lines, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” Sadly, since that fateful night at Fort McHenry I would offer the founding fathers fight against royal tyranny for liberty and our forefathers shedding blood for future generations has been usurped by complacency. Examples abound in our current society of both the loss of freedom and lack of bravery.

A December 4, 2006 column in the Russian paper, Pravda, makes reference to “A record 7 million people – or one in every 32 American adults – were behind bars, on probation or on parole by the end of last year’, and when these figures are added to the estimated 1 million prisoners of war held by the United States, all around the World, the once great American Nation has now become the greatest jailer of human beings the World has ever known.” Laws such as “Three Strikes” have increased our incarceration rate for even the pettiest of crimes. Even the truly law-abiding are not free. Consider random traffic stops to check your license and insurance, TSA airport searches, security screenings to enter a public event, and proof of identity requirements for job applications and opening bank accounts. Exacerbating the situation is claims these freedoms are taken in the name of liberty.

Ironically, even bravery has been eroded out of fear of consequences. Questioning TSA regarding the 4th amendment and basis for searching six-year olds will prevent you from flying. Publicly videotaping law enforcement creates a fast path to court with criminal charges. My favorite example occurred two weeks ago: Juror 799, an Asian woman in her 20s, when asked to name three people she least admired on her juror questionnaire, wrote: “African-Americans, Hispanics and Haitians.” In the land for the free and home of the brave the woman was sentenced to indefinite jury duty by Federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis – a unilateral decision with no crime committed.

I challenge you to listen carefully to political demagoguery and proposals to “make you safer.” Blood was shed September 3, 1814 to capture freedom and liberty for future generations whilst Francis Scott Key watched the fight and immortalized his feelings. Sadly, our former enemies in Russia watch our freedoms erode and write about it, but the timidity bred into our generations of children makes them blind to the blood given for their liberty and they will not stand bravely for themselves.

Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy (03/30/2011)

I consider hypocrisy to be the most appalling and disgusting action someone can take. I believe examples abound like politicians campaigning for family values then engaging in affairs, organized religious leaders looking away from rape by their clergy, preachers wrapped in wealth, or global warming followers driving jets and SUVs. Many on the right are struggling with the hypocrisy of the press; their basis of accusations of liberal bias against the mainstream media. Out of fairness, our media has never been held accountable for any reporting, no matter how inaccurate. With the Libyan conflict though it appears a “wink-wink” of approval has been made to the current administration.

In December 2007, Senator Obama said: “[the] president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” Shortly thereafter Senator Obama was supported by Senator Joe Biden who pledged to start impeachment proceedings against President Bush if Iran were attacked without congressional approval. Ironically, we find ourselves with the hypocrisy of our President and Vice President doing exactly what they accused Bush of doing. On March 19, 2011 President Obama stated, “Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world.”

Hypocritically the question must be raised as to how Obama could make such a statement, and ignore his prior assertions of Presidential authority. Over the last several weeks uprisings have occurred throughout the Middle East, starting with the self-immolation of a fruit stand worker in Tunisia. Each of the middle-eastern governments has turned on its citizens: Tripoli, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya, and of course our oil-rich ally Saudi Arabia. While the President had psychic-like success with his NCAA basketball picks his reason to start a war with a meaningless dictator remains a mystery. Whether or not I agree with Mohammar Qhaddaffi, Libya is a sovereign nation entitled to manage her affairs, or the same principles shall apply to China, Korea, Venezuela, and most of the middle-east. Protected by our media it is easy to see the quick dismissal of the hypocrisy of the situation, as a lover will always look away. “Hypocrisy is a fashionable vice, and all fashionable vices pass for virtue,” – Moliere (1622-1673).

Cairo – Do Americans Riot?

Cairo – Do Americans Riot?

Several weeks ago uprisings in Tunisia dominated the evening news and daily papers. Most Americans are quick to dismiss such events, and why not? Steven Tyler’s performance on “American Idol” or the choosing of 20-something millionaires to play in the Super Bowl delude the masses; appearing far more important than citizens risking their lives for freedom. I too have felt the challenge to understand, but in college I watched Chinese students challenge communist regime and ultimately give their lives in Tiananmen Square to demonstrate the human rights violations of their government. Growing up I knew the communists of the U.S.S.R. regularly violated individual freedoms and imprisoned citizens behind the iron curtain. Through Hollywood movies I learned more about the fight after World War II and my history classes tried to explain the actions of authoritarianism and dictatorships.

Although many arguments about the cause may be made, the issues in Cairo this week are driven by 30 years of authoritarian rule under President Hosni Mubarak and a discontent youth rebelling against his authority. But the recent riots are not new, and by no means ultimately represent the underlying problems in a country desirous of democracy but operating with an ancient mentality. On November 24, 2010 a Christian was killed, 100 arrested and 3,000 demonstrators protested the razing of a new Christian church built without a permit. Under Ottoman law a permit is required to build a Christian church, in contrast Mosques are built easily and regularly without review of a state authority. Today many assertions are being made in the media that the riots are religious in nature, but local reporting and blogging, held an opposite view. Instead, the riots are the result of 30 years of oppression and dictatorship and inspired by the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.

As the World’s policeman the American citizenry believes our own government is above such actions and the riots we watch overseas could not occur here. My wife and I had a conversation this week about Americans and whether riots would take place here. Coincidentally I am reading a book, “The Emerging Police State” by William Kunstler and together we watched “Battle in Seattle,” chronicling protests against the World Trade Organization. Skeptically I listen to the outrageous conspiracy claims of Alex Jones and wonder if any truth inspires. As I learn more though I have discovered striking parallels between the radical claims of the left and the right; the common thread leading to a questioning of our government’s actions. Uprisings have occurred on our soil, and many are similar to Egypt: spurred by youth and ideological believers desperate for change and an opportunity to be heard. Sadly, like Egypt, death has come upon those who question the United States government or the corporations profiting and seeking protections through the rule of law.

Kunstler’s book is a compilation of speeches made through the years and inspired by his battles for justice. In my opinion it is easy to condemn the actions of those we do not like, but it is more important to defend the application of justice when we like it least. From a speech in 1971, with memories of Kent State fresh, long forgotten to the annals of time and unknown to anyone under age 40 today, he indicts the government for condoning the slaughter of unarmed students, using the law to fabricate evidence and justify its actions. In the most disgusting example, the Grand Jury which is supposed to provide protection from the law, but serves as an agency of the government, found the National Guard justified in shooting, although no student sniper existed and it was a Major’s discharge of his sidearm that prompted spraying the crowd with bullets. Furthermore, the Grand Jury recommended .22-caliber bullets should be used against future student demonstrators instead of the larger, more harmful caliber M-1.

Forty years later, in the summer of 2010, Pittsburg was shut down and noise suppression cannons were used to hold off G-20 demonstrators. No one was killed, but our government has mechanisms to slow and prevent demonstrations. Likewise, the movie “Battle in Seattle” shows the offensive measures police and National Guard took against WTO protesters in 1999. Since then “Exclusion Zones” have been created and are defined as “areas where protesters are legally prohibited.” A quick read of the Bill of Rights contradicts this as the Congress was prohibited from passing any law interfering with the right to peacefully assemble. Without protest though, we have sheepishly allowed court rulings to support the establishment of Exclusion Zones and Free Speech Zones, often located miles from the desired protest site and set behind concrete barriers, fencing, and razor wire.

Watching from a distance this past week I am concerned our government and media does not condemn Egypt’s actions to shut down the internet and communications. With bi-partisan support the Senate is prepared to again introduce legislation to create an “Internet Kill Switch.” In Egypt stopping communication has become necessary to thwart organizing by protesters. I believe many Americans view such actions as part of their perception of safety, but I counter it is another step in the incremental destruction of our freedoms. When challenged, a congressional white paper on the measure said the proposal prohibits the government from targeting websites for censorship “based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.” Ironically, the same language is used in the Patriot Act.

Our country is radically changing, not in terms of Democrat versus Republican, but government and corporations versus citizenry. Each of the Amendments of the Bill of Rights has been usurped over the last 40 years to protect the state and corporation. Meanwhile we have sat idly by accepting, like children, the supposed safety created in exchange for liberty. We have watched legislation pass that punishes minorities and the indigent in greater numbers. Currently the mainstream populace finds itself victim to the banking, mortgage, and credit fraud perpetrated by the elite few and legitimized by Congress. I challenge you to understand why youth in Egypt are risking their lives against oppression, question why Icelandic people rioted to avoid the indebtedness of the banks, why 170,000 TSA employees have the freedom to ignore the Fourth Amendment, and why both sides of Congress support legislation to cut communications via the Internet. From the comfort of our homes it is safer to let others protest and not put ourselves at risk. I think the answer to my wife’s question about whether Americans riot is easy, “the passionate due, the idle don’t.”

Together We Thrive?

Together We Thrive?
We must remember Rahm Emanuel’s words, “never let a good crisis go to waste” when examining our President’s speech last week. It is amazing the office of the President, for purposes of offering condolences to the families of six murder victims and 14 injured, could exploit the opportunity to start the 2012 Presidential campaign. Can you imagine planning a speech for a country dealing with a heinous massacre and yet giving thought to producing 13,000 Tee-Shirts with the political slogan, “Together we Thrive”? I am concerned so many feel willing to give the political establishment a pass, in fact admire them for tactless, grotesque behavior so obviously filled with self promotion over those they govern. I remain steadfast in my opinion that leader’s rise naturally by supporting and promoting their followers; not seeking the glory of the limelight or by utilizing and politicizing opportunities. What are the odds Congressman Giffords opened her eyes after President Obama’s visit, leaving him to announce it to the country? The news was delivered like a Sunday morning preacher telling his flock what they want to hear and consumed without suspicion regarding this questionable coincidence.

Sadly, the politicization of Tucson was unavoidable, and I am too young to make comparisons to similar assassination attempts like Reagan, Ford, Wallace, King, Kennedy, Malcom X, Truman, Long, Roosevelt F., Roosevelt T., McKinley, or Garfield. The reporting of such events prior to Kennedy was primarily via radio and newspaper, and Kennedy’s assassination brought us the immortalized words of Walter Cronkite, but without opinion and speculation. The common theme in all of these attacks trends as a mentally deranged individual acting independently, seeking attention and lashing out at society. Last week, there was no need for the President’s call to examine the discourse of self-governance, or to repeatedly mention a need to prompt reflection and debate. In short, a single, mentally ill man, Jared Lee Loughner killed six people and the wheels of justice will run him over and serve the appropriate sentence. In the meantime, the reporters and trusted news pundits should be held accountable for inaccurate reporting and we should be disgusted by the President’s abuse of a sad event. We the people should encourage our elected officials to steer clear of the politics and calls for limits on free speech and restrictions on guns; instead understanding there are sick individuals among our 300 million and the actions of one do not represent groups, beliefs, or politics.

Ants and Grasshoppers

Ants and Grasshoppers

I dictated this column ten days ago when the TSA backlash was first starting. Since 9/11 I have been questioning the policies of George Bush and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. In October 2002 I had a letter published in the News-Journal predicting new airport security measures were similar to Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Removing shoes came next, I tried to resist but after being placed on the “TSA Watch List” and threatened by TSA I ultimately acquiesced and felt alone trying to stop this intrusion. TSA demonstrated its stupidity with its policy on liquids, watching me drink a bottle of Dasani water, clear and pure; requiring its disposal because it will explode.

Several weeks ago I saw a Tampa television station dutifully reporting about a multi-jurisdictional task force at the Greyhound bus station where FHP, TSA, and Border police were checking papers and searching passengers. The week before an Atlanta television station likewise reported about a comparable task force stopping trucks inbound on I-20 to pass through full size X-ray machines, check papers, and be searched. Sadly, Americans willfully reported they were glad to experience the inconvenience and felt safer, and no one seemed to question the right of the government or the warrantless search performed in direct contradiction to the Constitution, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

This issue has moved beyond the requirement for airline security. Bush’s moves after 9/11, in the name of fighting terrorism, stole freedoms from Americans, undoing over 225 years of liberty: the Patriot Act created unprecedented warrantless spying, Homeland Security employees over 200,000 with a budget of $52 billion, and the relatively unknown support of the Courts to establish “Constitution Free Zones”. While you watch your elderly mother, wife, or teenage daughter undergo an intrusive, pat-down search, ask yourself by what authority has the government asserted this right.

The current fight is about the Ant and the Grasshopper, and the general failure of Americans to understand their Constitutional rights. We, the ants, are trying to resist the government grasshopper. If we succeed, we undo years of authoritarian success by the grasshopper.