Bin Laden, Gaddafi and Modern Warfare: On the Highway of Death

By John W. Whitehead
May 2, 2011

“Now thou art come unto a feast of death.”—Shakespeare, 1 Henry VI 4.5.7

War is not about territories. War is not about oil. War is not even about winners and losers. In the end, all that can really be said is that war is about killing. It is about the taking of human life.

“No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main,” wrote John Donne. “Any man’s death diminishes me because I am involved in Mankind…” If this is so, then we belong to a race of human beings that has been greatly diminished over time. In fact, one “atrocitologist” estimates that roughly 174 million people died in the 20th century alone due to acts of war, genocide and tyranny.

War is also about the loss of humanity—a loss that has become an inherent part of modern-day warfare. And with every new death, civilian or otherwise, we lose yet another piece of our humanity and regress toward our primitive, animal instincts. This is what we must grapple with in the wake of the reported assassination of Osama bin Laden and the NATO airstrike said to have claimed the lives of leader Muammar Gaddafi’s 29-year-old son and three young grandchildren. Whether or not it was actually bin Laden or Gaddafi’s relatives who were killed, as some have questioned, is not the issue. As CIA Director Leon Panetta remarked, “Bin Laden is dead. Al-Qaida is not.”

In other words, while Americans may be celebrating the death of “the most infamous terrorist of our time,” seeing it as a fitting act of retribution for the innocent lives lost on 9/11, the war effort is far from over. Indeed, America’s military response to 9/11 has spawned such blowback in the Middle East that we now find ourselves in a permanent state of war.

As a result, the war machine will continue unimpeded and the civilian death toll will rise higher with every passing day. All the while, most Americans, comforted by expressions of patriotism and pride in their military, distracted by mindless entertainment, technological gadgets and materialistic pursuits, and relatively insulated from the devastation being wrought overseas, seem to be unconcerned about the escalating costs of war—in dollars and lives. Even as these endless wars drag America to the brink of bankruptcy, both financially and morally, most Americans continue to live in a state of denial about the part we have played—are playing—in this bloody tragedy.

Modern technology totally dehumanizes warfare and, in the process, totally dehumanizes us as human beings. While it allows us to wage battles from afar, modern technological warfare also reduces the act of killing human beings to nothing more than targeting blips on a screen—a macabre video game with faceless victims and no danger of someone shooting back. And when an American drone annihilates innocent civilians in some far-away land, this is simply written off as yet another technological blip.

I was an infantry officer in the Army from 1969 to 1971. Men in my platoon who had served time in Vietnam told me many stories—but none more chilling than the one from two helicopter pilots. They told me how they would shoot the “friendlies” on their way back from reconnaissance missions just so they could empty their ammunition before returning to base. The “friendlies” were South Vietnamese women and children, helpless victims in a war they did not understand. But to the American pilots, they were simply dots on the ground.

This is what warfare does to so-called civilized people. Unfortunately, these “joy killings” are not isolated instances. Take, for instance, a U.S.-led attack that occurred during the Gulf War on the night of February 26–27, 1991, after Saddam Hussein announced a complete troop withdrawal from Kuwait in compliance with U.N. resolutions. 

On a 60-mile stretch of road from Mutlaa, Kuwait, to Basra, Iraq, a convoy of more than 2,000 vehicles and tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians were fleeing. These were people who were putting up no resistance, many with no weapons, leaving in cars, trucks, carts and on foot. The American armed forces bombed one end of the main highway from Kuwait City to Basra, sealing it off, then bombed the other end of the highway, sealing it off. They positioned mechanized artillery units on the hill overlooking the area and then, both from the air and the land, massacred every living thing on the road. Fighter bombers, helicopter gunships and armored battalions poured merciless firepower on those trapped in the traffic jams, backed up as much as 20 miles. One U.S. pilot reportedly said, "It was like shooting fish in a barrel." That fateful stretch of road has since been dubbed the "Highway of Death."

A report submitted to the Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal stated that those killed were Palestinian and Kuwaiti civilians trying to escape the siege of Kuwait City and the return of Kuwaiti armed forces. The report claimed that no attempt was made by U.S. military command to distinguish between military personnel and civilians.

Pictures taken after the attack show charred and dismembered bodies. Some of these photographs can be viewed by clicking on the link for Peter Turnley’s photo essay, “The Unseen Gulf War.” Ramsey Clark, a former U.S. Attorney General under Lyndon Johnson, suggested the carnage could only have resulted from the use of napalm, phosphorus or other incendiary bombs—anti-personnel weapons outlawed under the 1977 Geneva Protocols.

The killing did not stop with the Gulf War. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the American government dispatched its arsenal of deadly weapons to Afghanistan to quash Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaida network—but to no avail. And once again, there were reports of the indiscriminate killing of civilians by American forces where entire villages were wiped out and women and children lay dead on the cold earth of Afghanistan. Then the American military industrial complex trained its sights on Iraq, once again unleashing its awesome war machine. And the carnage continued, made even worse by horrifying reports of Iraqi prisoners being tortured, raped and subjected to all manner of other abuses at the hands of U.S. soldiers.

Most recently, reports and photos have surfaced of a so-called “kill team” comprised of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan who murdered innocent civilians, mutilated their corpses, and then photographed the kills. As Rolling Stone reported, “The photos, obtained by Rolling Stone, portray a front-line culture among U.S. troops in which killing Afghan civilians is less a reason for concern than a cause for celebration. ‘Most people within the unit disliked the Afghan people, whether it was the Afghan National Police, the Afghan National Army or locals,’ one soldier explained to investigators. ‘Everyone would say they're savages.’ One photo shows a hand missing a finger. Another depicts a severed head being maneuvered with a stick, and still more show bloody body parts, blown-apart legs, mutilated torsos. Several show dead Afghans, lying on the ground or on Stryker vehicles, with no weapons in view.”

Despite the rising death toll among the military and civilians, despite the cost to the economy (the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone have already cost more than $1 trillion), despite the fact that the American military, acting as an international police force, is spread dangerously thin, despite the fact that Congress has yet to actuallydeclare war against most of the countries in which America ismaking war (thus undermining the one thing that stands between us and tyranny—our Constitution), the American government continues to bang the war drums.  And when all is said and done, after all the blather about national security and fighting terrorism and defending freedom abroad have died down, if these endless wars amount to anything at all, it is nothing less than the utter destruction of every decent and noble ideal for which America is supposed to stand.

The fact that modern technological warfare is turning human beings into non-feeling killing machines should cause us to tremble. It should give us reason to pause and question how we could let ourselves travel so far down the road to perdition. We have placed others on the highway of death. In the end, however, it is we who are traveling the highway of death. May God help us all.

WC: 1400

Private Bradley Manning: A Victim of the Military Empire?

By John W. Whitehead
March 7, 2011

“It is indispensable to our success in this war that those we ask to fight it know that in the discharge of their dangerous responsibilities to their country they are never expected to forget that they are Americans, and the valiant defenders of a sacred idea of how nations should govern their own affairs and their relations with others—even our enemies.”—John McCain, “Torture’s Terrible Toll”

Depending on your view of the endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and America’s role in them, Pfc. Bradley E. Manning, the 23-year-old Army soldier who is accused of “aiding the enemy” by leaking classified military and diplomatic documents to the anti-secrecy website, Wikileaks, is either a courageous whistleblower or a traitorous snitch. Manning is alleged to have leaked over 250,000 United States diplomatic cables, as well as footage of an American Apache helicopter airstrike in Baghdad from July 12, 2007, in which 18 people were killed, many of them civilians. Two of those killed were Reuters journalists. If convicted, Manning could face the death penalty.

There can be no doubt that Manning’s inhumane treatment by the U.S. government is intended to send a clear warning to all those who would challenge the military empire—“DON’T EVEN CONSIDER IT.” Manning, a slight, 5’2”, 105-pound intelligence analyst, has been held in maximum solitary confinement (his escape would supposedly pose a national security risk) at the Marine Corps Brig in Quantico, Virginia, since July 2010—treatment normally reserved for the most violent or dangerous of criminals.

As Glenn Greenwald of Salon observes, Manning has been “subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America’s Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything. And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.”

Imprisoned in a windowless, 6 x 12 foot cell containing a bed, a drinking fountain and a toilet, Manning has been kept under Suicide and/or Prevention of Injury (POI) watch during his incarceration, largely against the advice of two forensic psychiatrists. Under suicide watch, Manning has been confined to his tiny cell for 24 hours a day and stripped of all clothing with the exception of his underwear. His prescription eyeglasses were taken away, leaving him in essential blindness except for those limited times when he is permitted to read or watch television, at which time his glasses are returned to him. A guard is stationed outside Manning’s cell at all times. In a thinly veiled attempt to harass the young man, guards check on Manning every five minutes, asking if he is ok. He is not allowed to have a pillow or sheets, but he currently has a mattress that has a built-in pillow and two blankets.

Things are not much better for Manning under POI watch. As his attorney, David Coombs, points out, he is forced to remain in his cell for 23 hours a day. He is not allowed to have personal items in the cell, and is only allowed to have one book or one magazine at any time to read in the cell. He is not allowed to exercise in his cell and if he attempts to do push-ups, sit-ups or any other form of exercise, he will be forced to stop by the brig guards. He gets one hour of exercise outside of his cell daily, so his exercise routine consists of him walking around in figure eights in an empty room for an hour. When he goes to sleep, he must strip down to his underwear and surrender his clothing to the guards. If he falls asleep with a blanket over his head or curled up toward the wall, the guards wake him up.

Most recently, it was revealed that Manning was stripped and left naked in his cell for seven hours, after which time he was made to stand naked outside his cell during an inspection—allegedly part of an effort by the government aimed at pressuring Manning to identify others involved in the WikiLeaks case. The tactic is certainly not a new one. Indeed, as one investigative news source pointed out, the forced nudity recalls “how the Bush administration used nudity and other abusive tactics to break down ‘war on terror’ detainees. In 2004, the CIA told President George W. Bush’s lawyers how useful forced nudity was for instilling ‘learned helplessness’ in prisoners.”

The American government, of course, insists that such treatment does not rise to the level of torture. In fact, Col. T. V. Johnson, a Quantico spokesman, characterized charges that Manning has been mistreated as “poppycock.” After all, Manning is not being starved, beaten or waterboarded. He’s merely been denied human interaction and the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment. Yet as surgeon Atul Gawande points out in a 2009 article for the New Yorker, solitary confinement rises to the level of torture: “A U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned from imprisonment in Vietnam, many of whom were treated even worse than [John] McCain, reported that they found social isolation to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered.”

There was a time in our nation’s history—long before the abuses at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib and before we were reprogrammed to think of such practices as waterboarding as benign forms of legalized torture—that even solitary confinement was frowned upon. The United States Supreme Court even came close to declaring it unconstitutional in 1890 and went so far as to compare it to “[t]he rack, the thumbscrew, [and] the wheel” in its 1940 decision in Chambers v. Florida. Unfortunately, that perception of solitary confinement as torture changed with the rise in popularity of American supermax prisons, designed specifically for mass solitary confinement, in the late 20th century. As Gawande writes:

Public sentiment in America is the reason that solitary confinement has exploded in this country, even as other Western nations have taken steps to reduce it. This is the dark side of American exceptionalism. With little concern or demurral, we have consigned tens of thousands of our own citizens to conditions that horrified our highest court a century ago. Our willingness to discard these standards for American prisoners made it easy to discard the Geneva Conventions prohibiting similar treatment of foreign prisoners of war, to the detriment of America’s moral stature in the world. In much the same way that a previous generation of Americans countenanced legalized segregation, ours has countenanced legalized torture. And there is no clearer manifestation of this than our routine use of solitary confinement—on our own people, in our own communities...

Which brings us back to Bradley Manning, a young man who hoped to “change something” by exposing what he saw as widespread government corruption. Whether or not Manning is shown to be the source of the leaks, there can be no denying that the information made public by Wikileaks has painted a damning picture of a U.S. government operating in a way that is completely at odds with everything this nation once stood for.

Yet the key here is that Manning, an American citizen entitled to every protection afforded by the U.S. Constitution, has yet to be convicted of anything, which makes his pre-trial incarceration that much more troubling. Moreover, not only does such cruel, unusual and inhumane treatment violate a long list of international human rights treaties, but as Greenwald points out, “[s]ubjecting a detainee like Manning to this level of prolonged cruel and inhumane detention can thus jeopardize the ability of the U.S. to secure extradition for other prisoners, as these conditions are viewed in much of the civilized world as barbaric.”

In fact, John McCain, who experienced torture and solitary confinement during his imprisonment in Vietnam, noted in a 2005Newsweek editorial, “We are American, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world—a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad... It is indispensable to our success in this war that those we ask to fight it know that in the discharge of their dangerous responsibilities to their country they are never expected to forget that they are Americans, and the valiant defenders of a sacred idea of how nations should govern their own affairs and their relations with others—even our enemies.”

Sadly, we in America have conveniently forgotten that we once stood for something more than a warring military empire. Indeed, in our once-stalwart defense of human rights, our adherence to a moral code that was rooted in a respect for human life, and our willingness to lead the world by example through innovation and progress in science and the arts, we were the antithesis of all that America—now the largest international exporter of weapons and war—has come to stand for today.

When Liberals Try to Imitate The Tea Party

As a former resident of Wisconsin before retiring in Florida, and still a proud "Cheesehead," I can write this piece with a sense of pride and high degree of understanding. I have family living in the Milwaukee area and am able to keep current on all the political news, although for the past several years, the topic of conversation has revolved mostly around “man-made” global cooling. For the benefit of the global warming alarmists, there is no global warming in Wisconsin.

 

The recent success of the Green Bay Packers brought everyone in the state together. There was a feeling of pride and good will. However, that euphoria soon turned into the shocking scenes we are now observing in Madison and other parts of Wisconsin, where thousands of people are angrily protesting a legislative bill addressing the budget cuts necessary in order to keep the state government afloat.

 

Republican Governor Scott Walker has taken a much needed stand against the unions in identifying the state's budgetary insanity, created by past Democrats, in bankrupting the state. Newly elected Republican leaders said they expected Wisconsin residents would be pleased with the savings the bill would achieve — $30 million by July 1 and $300 million over the next two years to address a $3.6 BILLION budget shortfall.

 

A sense of urgency by voters and much needed reforms for responsible fiscal direction are the reasons Republicans changed the political landscape in Wisconsin. For the first time in decades, Republicans control the executive and both legislatives branches of government.

 

So what's the rub, Wisconsin Democrats?

 

You got trounced in the last election and are now whining that you're being picked on unfairly. You blame all of the economic problems on others without accepting any responsibility ... never mind you were in charge all those years and despite having been warned that Wisconsin's economic house of cards was unsustainable.

 

Now, you are sending thousands of protesters to clog the hallway outside the Senate chamber and line the streets around the capitol building beating on drums, holding hateful signs deriding Governor Walker and pleading for lawmakers to "kill the bill." Several protesters also demonstrated outside the homes of some lawmakers, disturbing their right to privacy.

 

A large portion of the protestors are teachers, who think nothing of going AWOL from their teaching jobs. Some are using their “sick days.” Excuse me, but when I went to school, teachers taught their students not to lie. Several Wisconsin schools have closed during the course of this week's demonstrations, with some teachers dragging their students along with them to Madison. My son David, who decided   to attend the protest on Thursday, asked several of the students why they were there. They had no clue, but nevertheless seemed to enjoy the day off from school.

 

When confronted by thousands of unruly and hateful demonstrators around him, David, one of the original Naples Tea Partiers before moving back to Wisconsin last month, had a great answer when a television reporter asked him if he felt outnumbered. He said, "I have nothing to fear ... I'm a Marine ... 25,000 to one ... I like my odds."

 

David witnessed first hand some of the hateful rhetoric by many of the protestors. I find it truly ironic that just a few short weeks ago, and since the tragedy in Tucson, President Obama and other liberal pundits self-righteously lectured conservatives that hate speech had no place in America if civility is to become the new standard for political discourse.

 

"Violent political rhetoric comes almost exclusively from the Right," proclaimed Eugene Robinson, as he made the rounds on the national talk show circuit. Bill Maher spoke of love and said, "the Right-wing loves ... wouldn't it be fun to kill the people we disagree with. Left-wingers don't talk that way."

 

Oh really? What happened on the way to Madison?

 

David reported that it was common to see signs with Governor Walker's face in cross hairs, along with pictures of Walker dressed and disguised as Hitler. He was hung in effigy by one person. Slogans like "Walker Needs To Die" and "Don't Retreat ... Reload" were proudly displayed.

 

Here, take a look if you don't believe David. Go to:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71gsnLfsbbM

 

The unions are saying that the bill they are protesting would prohibit public employees from the collective bargaining process. Wrong! Unions still could represent workers, but could not seek pay increases above those pegged to the Consumer Price Index, unless approved by a public referendum. Also in the bill, unions could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized. In exchange for bearing more costs and losing bargaining leverage, public employees were promised no furloughs or layoffs.

 

Now we see the problem. Along with the unions, teachers and other public workers are not willing to accept responsibility in order to fix what they have created ... an unsustainable nightmare of entitlements and retirement benefits. With a liberal, it is always a problem of someone else’s selfishness. It is all about the union and maintaining power over their workers, and through them, the populace. The new union motto should be ..."Join the union ... lose your individuality ... don't be responsible."

 

Here is the really disgusting part of this whole scene in Wisconsin: In attempting to put a halt to the legislation being proposed, Democrat state Senators have fled Wisconsin in order to avoid voting on the measure. How brave of them! Shirking the Constitutional duty that they swore to uphold means nothing to a Democrat any longer. To a progressive, any means to a justified end is apparently acceptable.

 

As I write this, the demonstrations in Wisconsin are still going strong, while the Wisconsin State Police are trying to hunt down the Democrat politicians in hiding. Even President Obama is encouraging them not to surrender to the “assault on unions.” Such a mockery of our form of government has never before reared such an ugly head. But, you know what Mr. President? Wisconsin is a microcosm for the grim financial straits that exist in almost every state in America. Which state will be next? Your home state of Illinois might be next. How are you going to deal with it? Your days of rewarding the unions’ gluttony, failure and irresponsibility might come to a screeching halt if the Tea Party has anything to say about it. But, rest assured. Our demonstrations will not be a bit like the tumultuous farce now taking place in Wisconsin.

 

Barry Willoughby

Naples Florida Tea Party

Sex Trafficking: There's More to the Super Bowl Than Sports

Infecting suburbs, cities and towns across the nation, sex trafficking has become America's dirtiest secret. Unfortunately, as John Whitehead shares in this week's vodcast, it's also one of the star attractions at this year's Super Bowl.

The Identity Ecosystem: Obama's Plan for Internet Control

By John W. Whitehead
January 18, 2011

"Today the tyrant rules not by club or fist, but disguised as a market researcher, he shepherds his flocks in the ways of utility and comfort."—Marshall McLuhan

The Obama Administration has yet to come up with a plan to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which are draining our economy, prevent the continuing mortgage meltdown, get more Americans back to work, or do away with pork-barrel spending and government corruption, to name just a few of the overriding concerns plaguing our nation today. Instead, purportedly motivated by a desire to make our lives easier, the president wants to implement a universal internet ID that would eliminate the need for multiple usernames and passwords.

For those inclined to view government as a benevolent institution, this can be viewed as a considerate gesture in a time of economic and social unrest. However, for those who would take seriously John Adams' warning "to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty," this latest move is nothing short of a Trojan Horse attempt to sidestep privacy concerns and institute a national ID, all the while giving the government even greater access to our most personal information.

Under the stated goal of achieving internet security and consumer convenience, the Identity Ecosystem, as the program has been dubbed, would supposedly streamline the process of doing business online by replacing the various login names and passwords currently used to access personal accounts and information on various websites with a universal internet ID. However, as Curt Hopkins points out in the New York Times, "a user would have one, 'verified' ID, which would be known by the government, and a set of large corporations. Given the periodic outbreak of governmental and corporate shenanigans, we fail to see the benefit of such a system."

And who has the president entrusted with being the gatekeeper of our most sensitive online transactions? Not the Department of Homeland Security, which spent a year masterminding the strategy, nor the National Security Agency, which carries out the government's warrantless eavesdropping program. Rather, the Identity Ecosystem will supposedly be overseen by the Commerce Department—a move clearly intended to assuage fears that the government would improperly make use of such highly personal information. Yet in the wake of 9/11, information sharing between government agencies has become so commonplace that it would be naïve to think that the DHS and NSA, both of which have been jockeying for control of the nation's cybersecurity, won't have easy access to the information.

Still, if the American people refuse to accept a universal internet ID as a way of life, then does it really matter who oversees the program? In its typical Orwellian fashion, the government has come up with a way around that potential hurdle, as well. Touting the internet ID's convenience and so-called ability to enhance online trust and privacy, the Obama Administration essentially plans to push its Identity Ecosystem as a way to cut through the government's bureaucratic red tape at the federal, state and local levels. Private corporations will eventually follow suit, making it all but impossible for the average American to avoid using the ID.

Considering the degree to which Social Security numbers have come to be relied on by those outside government circles for identification purposes (everyone from cable television and credit card companies to hospitals and utility companies), it would not take much for a universal internet ID to become a de facto national ID, and the consequences could be devastating. Why?

First, such a system will give the government unprecedented access to Americans' internet activities—something it has sought for years. Indeed, last fall, the New York Times reported that the Obama administration was preparing to submit legislation to Congress that would make it easier for the government to wiretap the internet. As Charlie Savage noted, "Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications—including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct 'peer to peer' messaging like Skype—to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order." This would inevitably lead to governmental agencies, in cooperation with the mega corporations, knowing virtually everything about our lives. And privacy as we have known it will be no more.

Second, it will eventually allow the government to have control over all internet activity, e.g., acting as a clearinghouse for who can and cannot access the internet and the extent to which they can do so. As Curt Hopkins notes, "the 'Identity Ecosystem' sounds strangely like the national intranet the Chinese government has been working on, as an alternative to the Internet as a whole, and more controllable." Control is the key word here, and total control is the government's objective.

Third, it would enable the government to better monitor Americans' internet activities—another long desired goal. For example, in 2009, under the guise of combating child pornography, lawmakers proposed the "Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth Act of 2009" which required that all internet users' online surfing habits be retained for two years. The danger, of course, is that the information could be used by corporate entities and law enforcement agencies alike. Although that legislation stalled in committee, the underlying mindset has not changed—namely, that the internet and its users need to be monitored.

Fourth, it would empower the government in its quest to regulate not only internet activity but also the content of expressive activities. In fact, in the wake of the Tucson shootings, FOX News Channel host Greta Van Susteren voiced her support for an identification system for web users seeking to post and comment at online venues in order to "tone down the viciousness on the internet."

Finally, a single internet ID would make Americans that much more vulnerable to security breaches. Just consider some of the more egregious security breaches that have occurred over the past five years:

In 2005, ChoicePoint, a commercial data-broker that provides identification and credential verification services, announced that more than 160,000 consumer records, including names, addresses, and identification numbers, had been stolen. For the federal government, which is barred by the 1974 Privacy Act from forming a database, commercial database brokers like ChoicePoint have become the government's own private intelligence agencies.

In 2006, 26.5 million veterans had their personal information—names, birth dates and Social Security numbers—jeopardized after a Veterans Administration employee took the data home, only to have it stolen when his home was burglarized.

In 2007, more than 146,000 user IDs and passwords, e-mail addresses, names, phone numbers, and some basic demographic data were stolen from the online job database used by the United States Office of Personnel Management.

In 2008, the U.S. State Department announced that a security breach in its records system, which contains personal information, including Social Security numbers, may have left hundreds of passport applicants open to identity theft.

In 2009, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management once again suffered a security breach in which sensitive data on applicants seeking government jobs was stolen.

In December 2010, just a few days before Christmas, an e-mail spam attack disguised as a White House Christmas Card captured data from numerous government agencies. It was the second such reported attack in a year, aimed at accessing not only government secrets, but also financial data, including sites such as eBay, MySpace and Microsoft, as well as online-payment processors, PayPal and e-gold.

The last bastion of democracy is the internet, and the government is well aware of this. For years now, government agencies have lobbied for greater access to our personal internet activities. In fact, back in 2005, John Ashcroft, George Bush's Attorney General, urged the FCC to require that internet communications be easier to wiretap. As a result, the Bush Administration came under fire from the media and civil liberties groups alike for seeking to expand the government's online surveillance powers. Unfortunately, many of those who were quick to lambast Bush for his civil liberties violations have been less vocal in their public criticism of Obama, despite the fact that when it comes to civil liberties, Obama is no better and may, in fact, be worse. Case in point: if Congress falls in line with the Obama Administration's dictates, all online communications services—including communications sent using texting platforms, BlackBerries, social networking sites, and other "peer to peer" communications software such as Skype—will be required to use technologies that would make it easier for the government to collect private communications and decode encrypted messages that Americans send. That doesn't sound like any kind of "change we can believe in" to me.

When all is said and done, it doesn't really matter what party controls the White House or Congress, because the objective of our bureaucratic government remains the same: total control—of the nation, of the internet, and ultimately of you and me.

WC: 1487

"I'm 63 and I'm Tired"

by Robert A. Hall


I'm 63.  Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce and a six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I've worked hard since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in 50-hour weeks, and haven't called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, there's no retirement in sight, and I'm tired. Very tired. 

I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to earn it. 

I'm tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to "keep people in their homes." Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I'm willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the left-wing Congress-critters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them with their own money.

I'm tired of being told how  bad America is by left-wing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood Entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers.  In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the economy of  Zimbabwe , the freedom of the press of China   the crime and violence of Mexico , the tolerance for Christian people of Iran , and the freedom of speech of Venezuela .

I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family "honor"; of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because  they aren't "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls;  of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for "adultery";  of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and Shari'a law tells them to.  

I'm tired of being told  that "race doesn't matter" in the post-racial world of Obama, when it's all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and in the appointment of U.S. Senators from Illinois.  

I think it's very cool that we have a black president and that a black child is doing her homework at the desk where Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclamation. I just wish the black president was Condi Rice, or someone who believes more in freedom and the individual and less arrogantly of an all-knowing government. 

I'm tired of a news media that thinks Bush's fundraising and inaugural expenses were obscene, but thinks that Obama's, at triple the cost, were wonderful; that thinks Bush exercising daily was a waste of  presidential time, but Obama exercising is a great example for the public to control weight and stress; that picked over every line of Bush's military records, but never demanded that Kerry release his; that slammed Palin, with two years as governor, for being too inexperienced for VP, but touted Obama with three years as senator as potentially the best president ever. Wonder why people are dropping their subscriptions or switching to Fox News?  Get a clue. I didn't vote for Bush in 2000, but the media and Kerry drove me to his camp in 2004. 

I'm tired of being told  that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and mandrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in America , while no American group is allowed to fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love and tolerance. 

I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live. Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore's, and if you're greener than Gore, you're green enough.  

I'm tired of being told  that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do.  Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses while they tried to fight it off?  I don't think Gay people choose to be Gay, but I #@*# sure think druggies chose to  take drugs. And I'm tired of harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I never tried marijuana. 

I'm tired of illegal aliens being called "undocumented workers," especially the ones who aren't working, but are living on welfare or crime. What's next?  Calling drug dealers, "Undocumented Pharmacists"?  And, no, I'm not against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic, and it's been a few hundred years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion.  I'm willing to fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person, who can speak English, doesn't have a criminal record  and who is self-supporting without family on welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military.... Those are the citizens we need. 

I'm tired of latte liberals and journalists, who would never wear the uniform of the Republic themselves, or let their entitlement-handicapped kids near a recruiting station, trashing our military. They and their kids can sit at home, never having to make split-second decisions under life and death circumstances, and bad mouth better people than themselves. Do bad things happen in war? You bet. Do our troops sometimes misbehave? Sure. Does this compare with the atrocities that were the policy of our enemies for the last fifty years and still are? Not even close. So here's the deal. I'll let myself be subjected to all the humiliation and abuse that was heaped on terrorists at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, and the critics can let themselves be subject to captivity by the Muslims, who tortured and beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, or the Muslims who tortured and murdered Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon, or the Muslims who ran the blood-spattered Al Qaeda torture rooms our troops found in Iraq, or the Muslims who cut off the heads of schoolgirls in Indonesia, because the girls were Christian. Then we'll compare notes. British and American soldiers are the only troops in history that civilians came to for help and handouts, instead of hiding from in fear.  

I'm tired of people telling me that their party has a corner on virtue and the other party has a corner on corruption. Read the papers; bums are bipartisan. And I'm tired of people telling me we need  bipartisanship. I live in Illinois , where the " Illinois   Combine" of Democrats has worked to loot the public for years. Not to mention the tax cheats in Obama's cabinet.  

I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught. I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor. 

Speaking of poor, I'm tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes, color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn't have that in 1970, but we didn't know we were "poor." The poverty pimps have to keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing.

I'm real tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination or big-whatever for their problems. 

Yes, I'm #@*% tired.  But I'm also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I'm not going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for my granddaughter. 

Robert  A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the Massachusetts State Senate.

A Black man's point of view.

A BLACK MAN, THE PROGRESSIVE'S PERFECT TROJAN HORSE

As millions of my fellow Americans, I am outraged, devastated and extremely angry by the democrat's unbelievable arrogance and disdain for We The People. Despite our screaming "no" from the rooftops, they forced Obamacare down our throats. Please forgive me for using the following crude saying, but it is very appropriate to describe what has happened. "Don't urinate on me and tell me it's raining." Democrats say their mission is to give all Americans health care. The democrats are lying. Signing Obamacare into law against our will and the Constitution is tyranny and step one of their hideous goal of having as many Americans as possible dependent on government, thus controlling our lives and fulfilling Obama's promise to fundamentally transform America .. 

I keep asking myself. How did our government move so far from the normal procedures of getting things done? Could a white president have so successfully pulled off shredding the Constitution to further his agenda? I think not. 

Ironically, proving America is completely the opposite of the evil racist country they relentlessly accuse her of being, progressives used America's goodness, guilt and sense of fair play against her.. In their quest to destroy America as we know it, progressives borrowed a brilliant scheme from Greek mythology. They offered America a modern day Trojan Horse, a beautifully crafted golden shiny new black man as a presidential candidate. Democrat Joe Biden lauded Obama as the first clean and articulate African American candidate. Democrat Harry Reid said Obama only uses a black dialect when he wants. 

White America relished the opportunity to vote for a black man naively believing they would never suffer the pain of being called racist again. Black Americans viewed casting their vote for Obama as the ultimate Affirmative Action for America 's sins of the past.

Then there were the entitlement loser voters who said, "I'm votin' for the black dude who promises to take from those rich SOBs and give to me."

Just as the deceived Trojans dragged the beautifully crafted Trojan Horse into Troy as a symbol of their victory, deceived Americans embraced the progressive's young, handsome, articulate and so called moderate black presidential candidate as a symbol of their liberation from accusation of being a racist nation. Also like the Trojan Horse, Obama was filled with the enemy hiding inside. 

Sunday, March 21, 2010, a secret door opened in Obama, the shiny golden black man. A raging army of democrats charged out. Without mercy, they began their vicious bloody slaughter of every value, freedom and institution we Americans hold dear; launching the end of America as we know it. 

Wielding swords of votes reeking with the putrid odor of back door deals, the democrats landed a severe death blow to America and individual rights by passing Obamacare. 

The mainstream liberal media has been relentlessly badgering the Tea Party movement with accusations of racism. Because I am a black tea party patriot, I am bombarded with interviewers asking me the same veiled question. "Why are you siding with these white racists against America 's first African American president?" I defend my fellow patriots who are white stating, "These patriots do not give a hoot about Obama's skin color. They simply love their country and oppose his radical agenda. Obama's race is not an issue."

Recently, I have come to believe that perhaps I am wrong about Obama's race not being an issue. In reality, Obama's presidency has everything to do with racism, but not from the Tea Party movement. Progressives and Obama have exploited his race from the rookie senator's virtually unchallenged presidential campaign to his unprecedented bullying of America into Obamacare. Obama's race trumped all normal media scrutiny of him as a presidential candidate and most recently even the Constitution of the United States .. Obamacare forces all Americans to purchase health care which is clearly unconstitutional. 

No white president could get away with boldly and arrogantly thwarting the will of the American people and ignoring laws. President Clinton tried universal health care. Bush tried social security reform. The American people said "no" to both president's proposals and it was the end of it. So how can Obama get away with giving the American people the finger? The answer. He is black.

The mainstream liberal media continues to portray all who oppose Obama in any way as racist. Despite a list of failed policies, overreaches into the private sector, violations of the Constitution and planned destructive legislation too numerous to mention in this article, many Americans are still fearful of criticizing our first black president. Incredible. 

My fellow Americans, you must not continue to allow yourselves to be "played" and intimidated by Obama's race or the historical context of his presidency. If we are to save America , the greatest nation on the planet, Obama's progressive agenda must be stopped.

Lloyd Marcus (black) Unhyphenated American, Singer/Songwriter, Entertainer, Author, Artist & Tea Party Patriot

2010 Lloyd Marcus - All Rights Reserved

SHARE THIS WITH AMERICA ! ! ! !

Lloyd Marcus is one of the strongest voices in the Tea Party movement.