A National Security State Lexicon

After some serious postings, I thought we should take a break, have some fun.

In today's increasingly complex (and dangerous) world where enemies lurk around every corner, it's ever so important to have a vocabulary to express our nation's need to conquer and control just about everything in sight. Today's National Security State requires a complicated lexicon that can be used to completely mystify the citizenry while making people believe that our nation's leaders have everything under control. It's all about euphemisms, doublespeak and propaganda.

So, welcome to National Security State Vocabulary 101. When you finish, you will be the talk of the cocktail party circuit. Impress your friends and family. Nail that next job interview (at NSA or Raytheon). However, you may not want to use some of these terms while going through airport security; you might just end up in the back room suffering all manner of indignities.

This small list is just a start; there are scores of bizarre words and phrases out there. If you think of any other interesting words or phrases (I still don't have anything for the letters V, X or Z), click on the "comments" link at the end of this posting and share them. If you are stumped by any of these, just type them in to your search engine and see what comes up. Have fun!

Next time, back to the serious stuff,

Leonard

A is for Aggressive Isolationists, although it could also be for ATM (what our government apparently represents to “defense” contractors
B is for “Bring ‘Em On” and Ballistic Missile Defense (the ultimate "Faith Based" Program)
C is for Coalition of the Submissive, er Willing, Collateral Damage and Campus Crusade for Christ Military Ministry, and lest we forget the Constitution (the document that has been figuratively shredded over nearly eight years)
D is for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Disruptive Technology Office (DTO) and Data Mining
E is for Extraordinary Rendition, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, Empire and U.S. Air Force's Eagle Eyes program
F is for Full Spectrum Dominance, Faith Based Programs
G is for Guantanamo, Global War on Terror and Global Diplomacy (that’s a good one)
H is for Homeland Security
I is for Information Awareness Office
J is for Joint Interrogation Operations
K is for K Street Project
L is for Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (think Halliburton lining its pockets)
M is for Mission Accomplished and Military Tribunals
N is for “Nucular” Weapons (what GW says Al Quaida wants to get their grubby hands on) and Network Centric Warfare
O is for Offshore Prisons and Outsourcing
P is for Preemptive Strike and Patriot Act, Private Contractors (can you say Mercenaries), Project Bioshield and Prompt Global Strike
Q is for Quaint (what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales called the Geneva Convention)
R is for Reliable Replacement Warhead
S is for Space Control
T is for Total Information Awareness (TIA) Program and Terrorism Information Awareness Program (what they renamed TIA after adverse media reaction)
U is for Unipolarity
V
W is for Warrantless Wiretapping and Western Hemispheric Institute for Security Cooperation (think School of the Americas re-branded)
X
Y is for “You’re either with us or against us.”
Z

Racism in America: Ignorance is NOT Bliss

The writer, Willaim Faulkner once said, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." The New York Times used Faulkner's aphorism as it applies to "The Last Lynching", a documentary that aired on the Discovery Channel last night. According to the Times review, "Ted Koppel weaves Senator Barack Obama’s presidential nomination into the same social fabric as some of the best-known events of the civil rights era and some of the country’s least examined acts of violence." The last lynching in America took place only 27 years ago, and it seems that many of the lessons of that era have yet to be learned.

Recent events associated with the upcoming election indicate that there may be more simmering bigotry and racial hatred lying just beneath the surface in America than we realize (or are prepared to admit). After Sarah Palin's remark at a recent rally that, "I'm afraid this [Barak Obama] is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country", someone yelled, "Kill him!" The Washington Post reported that at another Palin rally (among other things) a "Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man and told him, 'Sit down, boy.'"

Now that's scary! Sarah Palin has been taking lessons from the President's (Fear 101) playbook. If we are going to be "afraid" of anything, it should be just this sort of fear mongering that seems to have pervaded America for nearly eight years (and has created an atmosphere of fear, distrust and animosity). One could argue that whipping crowds into this sort of froth isn't that far removed from the techniques used during the height of the Lynching era when literally thousands of white people would show up for the spectacle of an African American man being strung up.

The underlying world view that we are superior to others gives us permission to generalize, demonize and reduce people to a subhuman category by virtue of factors like their skin color, language, customs or place of birth. Once we have done that, we can justify (in our own minds) just about any behavior, no matter how heinous. But in doing so we, ourselves, become less human. Those hideous word's, "Kill him" remind me that Faulkner was right, the past is (sadly) not past at all, and it does not take much to bring out that which still haunts us from our ugly history.

Most of the talk I have heard on TV and radio has focused on racism and the way it is being dealt with in the context of the election campaign, but could this be a far more systemic problem than we would care to admit. A woman at a recent McCain rally said that "Obama is an Arab", to which McCain replied, "...he's a decent family man, citizen..." Senator McCain's response indicated (to me) an underlying racism towards Arabs; does he believe that Arabs are not "decent family men"? And doesn't the woman's statement indicate tremendous ignorance about people of the Arabic world?

Ignorance of others facilitates the creation of a state of fear, which makes it easy to lead people down the road of hate.

Like the Rogers and Hammerstein song from South Pacific:

You have to be taught to hate and fear,
You have to be taught from year to year,
It has to be drummed in your dear little ear,
You have to be carefully taught!

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!

It's an ages old story and, as with so many stories, it's time to change this one. The best thing we (who try to develop compassionate understanding) can do is to educate those who have a lack of understanding of those who are different; whether by skin color or nationality or other differences. We can have an impact in our homes, our workplaces and public meeting places. One by one we can chip away at the ignorance that is at the root of the problem. Through our collective efforts perhaps we can ensure that although this particular past may never be dead, it can, indeed, be past.

Read more about "The Last Lynching", and when it will be shown again at the Discovery Channel.

Towards Peace,

Leonard


Further Resources on Racism and Lynching in America
Modern-Day Racism Masks Its Ugly Head , an Op/Ed piece from the Los Angeles Times, September, 11, 2000
Lynchings in America, from Long Island University (Warning! This Web page contains some graphic photos of lynchings)

The Fate of the Constitution; It's in Our Hands.

Yesterday's Los Angeles Times article that described "routine monitoring of personal calls between Americans overseas and their families back home and monitoring of the communications of workers with the Red Cross and other humanitarian organizations" was just another bit of evidence at the tip of the iceberg regarding Constitutional abuses by representatives of our [United States] government, and particularly the President.

Salon.com reported (in 2006) about how communication's giant AT&T worked secretly with the National Security Agency (NSA), the same agency involved in the L.A. Times story, to route much, if not all, of its domestic and international Internet traffic to the NSA in what could be the largest example of warrant less wiretapping in history.

But these are just two examples of what has been a horrific shredding of the Constitution of the United States. In nearly eight years, President Bush has done more to undermine the Constitution and expand Presidential powers than any president in history. Just a few other notable examples:

1) Claiming the authority to ignore or disobey hundreds (over 750 as of 2006) laws through the use of "Signing Statements". (Boston Globe article)

2) The authorization of water boarding (and other torture techniques) that not only served to threaten the safety of U.S. personnel overseas, but violated both domestic and international laws.

3) The doctrine of "first-strike" or "pre-emptive" war against another nation that does not pose an imminent threat against our nation (National Security Strategy of the United States issued in 2002).

One has to wonder how the Congress has gone this long without bringing impeachment proceedings (even though Dennis Kucinich and others have talked until blue in the face) against the President (as well as the Vice President). The abuses of power are so blatant that there is no excuse for Congress not to exert its duty and authority to impeach. It is, essentially, a question of accountability, and that is a word that people in Washington, D.C. seem to have forgotten these days. Indeed, accountability of all governmental officials is an obligation, not a convenience.

Beyond the issue of impeachment is the more important question of the fate of the Constitution, the document that has taken a terrific thrashing over nearly eight years of abuse by the Executive Branch of government. The next President of the United States will have many tasks before him, but a central issue will remain; regaining trust in the Executive Branch by reversing every abuse of the previous administration.

When we go to the polls in November we will be casting one of the most important votes in the history of our nation. We face incredible challenges going forward in a wide range of areas, but in terms of the next administration it will be largely a question of "accountability", accountability to the people of the United States (also referred to as "We the People"), accountability to the rest of the world, and of course accountability to the Constitution.

Before you pull the lever, ask yourself, "Who will be most accountable???"

Peace,

Leonard

Further Reading

WHAT’S A PRESIDENT TO DO? INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION IN THE WAKE OF BUSH ADMINISTRATION ABUSES, from the Boston University Law Review.

The full text of the Constitution of the United States at the National Archives.

STOP Violence Against Women

Did you know that while Sarah Palin was Mayor of Wasill, Alaska, her administration cut funds that paid for rape kits (used for evidence collection in suspected rape cases) and then "shifted the burden onto the victims"?(1) That's right folks; they charged the victims of sexual assault for rape kits! AND, that's a lot of victims! That same article cited some alarming statistics (from Amnesty International) - that "one out of three women in the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused in her lifetime", and that "in the United States, a woman is raped every 6 minutes." Just one more thing; the Alaskan rape rate is 2.5 the national average. Whoa!

I'll spare you any more about Sarah Palin. I'll leave the serious commentary on Palin to real experts like John Stewart, Stephen Colbert and the comedic think tank at Saturday Night Live . We need to discuss an issue of real importance - Violence Against Women. The statistics above tell a serious story, a story of a world in which women still do not have an "equal" place at the table. And while we in the United States seem to think we are more advanced than so much of the rest of the world, the problem of violence against women in our own nation is significant.

Although much of the conversation about violence against women has surrounded domestic violence, there is another systemic form of violence against women that has only started to get the attention it deserves - sexual violence against women in the military. It's one thing to sign up for military service knowing one could be injured or killed in combat, but should rape by a fellow soldier be a consideration? A recent ABC News story quoted Congressional Representative Jane Harman as saying that "Women serving in the military today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than be killed by enemy fire in Iraq",(2) and recent investigations by the Government Accountability Office bear this out.

Beyond the risk of sexual assault of female military personnel, civilian spouses are also at risk, and based on the phenomenal rate of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) coupled with the inculcation of the use of violence and dehumanization occurring in soldiers that will (if they have not already) return home, there is a huge potential for physical and/or sexual assault of their partners.

So long as people are indoctrinated to see other human beings as something "less than",they can justify whatever they choose to do to them; it gives "power over" others and "provides the common thread between military campaigns and assaults against women" according to Lucinda Marshall.(3) It's a story as old as time, and it is high time to create a new story. It is time to take a stand against violence, and particularly the violence connected with militarism that translates into so many other forms of violence, including violence against women.

Although it will be a long struggle to stem the tide of militarism that grips our nation, we can still take important steps to reduce violence against women at home and abroad.

TAKE ACTION: You can join the Stop Violence Against Women Campaign at Amnesty International. While you are there, consider advocating for the International Violence Against Women Act currently being considered by Congress (and introduced by Senator Joseph Biden).

Peace,

Leonard

References
(1) "A Culture of Violence Against Women: More Than Rape Kits", http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/16-8
(2) "Sex Assaults Against Women in Military 'Epidemic'' http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5491514&page=1
(3) "The Connection Between Militarism and Violence Against Women http://www.awakenedwoman.com/marshall_militarism.htm

Weapons in Space? Watch Out Below!

Ah, the wonders of space. Remember the first Sputnik, that cute little Soviet satellite that shocked America . Launched on October 4, 1957, Sputnik was the first man made object to orbit the Earth. The United States, whose space program was having problems getting off the ground (literally), responded with a number of subsequent satellite launches as it ramped up its space program.

Although the American space program has always been portrayed as a civilian program intended to fulfill humankind's need to explore space, the military has always lurked in its shadows; it has always been a dual use program. Military satellites spy on every part of the world and provide communication and coordination of military operations to an extraordinary degree. Those precision guided munitions and pilot less drones would be history without those satellites.

You might have missed the Chinese test in January 2007 where they successfully used a missile to destroy an orbiting satellite. The United States destroyed one of its malfunctioning satellites in February 2008 as a "safety measure" as the government was concerned that a canister containing 1000 pounds of hydrazine might have survived the re-entry of the crippled spy satellite. What a convenient situation to test missile "defense" systems.

One might not get too worked up over shooting down a satellite, except for the fact that it can (depending on its orbit) produce lots of debris that remains in orbit and can put other orbiting craft in danger. Beyond that, there are major implications for the free (and peaceful) use of space by all nations. President Bush authorized a sweeping new space policy in 2006 that intends (among other things) to "ensure that space capabilities are available in time to further U.S. national security, homeland security, and foreign policy objectives" and "enable unhindered U.S. operations in and through space to defend our interests there." Whoa!

Coupled with U.S. Space Command’s Vision for 2020, which coined the phrase, "full spectrum dominance" - perhaps some estrogen in the Pentagon's drinking water fountains would help - it seems pretty clear that we are planning to control space lock, stock and elliptical orbit. Aside from the fact that this is a really dangerous strategy, it is sucking up billions of dollars of our tax dollars that should be better spent on peaceful purposes (things like education and health care).

One of the concerns of the current Washington administration is the ability to quickly strike people anywhere in the world in short order should our government deem them a national security threat. The problem is that some countries aren't particularly keen on our using their soil as a base for aircraft that could make such strikes. The solution? The "Common Aero Vehicle", which could take off, boost into orbit, and deliver its deadly payload anywhere in the world within an hour (more estrogen please).

GET INVOLVED: What can we do about the continued militarization of space? Learn more about the issue and get involved at the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, which also sponsors Keep Space for Peace Week from October 4-11 (THIS WEEK!). It won't be easy to stop the militarization of space, but we can have an impact by lobbying Congress to zero out funding for new systems; we have had recent successes with nuclear weapons (the Reliable Replacement Warhead) so we know we can do it!

Peace,

Leonard

Click here to read the 2006 Space Policy.

Cick here to read to read Space Weapons: Now, There's a Dumb Idea, an article by Frida Berrigan, a senior research associate at the World Policy Institute’s Arms Trade Resource Center.

The graphic accompanying this posting is from a Scientific American article titled "Space Wars - Coming to the Sky Near You?". Click here to read the full article.

You Can't Shake Hands With a Clenched Fist

President Dwight Eisenhower once said, "I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that the people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it." It would seem that the United States government has recently done little (if anything of substance) to promote real, lasting peace in the world. It seems that the people we elect (and the people they appoint) just don't understand what real peace is (let alone how to get there).

Fortunately there are people outside our government who do understand the word PEACE and the difficult but necessary path we must walk to get there. They understand that one cannot make peace at the point of a gun or clenched fist. As the poet Carl Sandburg put it:

Choose.
The single clenched fist lifted and ready,
Or the open hand held out and waiting.
Choose.
For we meet by one or the other.

Two days before the presidential debate (in which the candidates argued whether and under what circumstances they might meet with Iran's leadership) the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) facilitated a two-day meeting of U.S. peace and religious leaders with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Based on the initial feedback from participants and constituents, Leila Zand (who directs FOR’s Iran program) said, "While I am still disappointed about his [Ahmadinejad's] comments on several topics, I believe there has been progress and that this shows the importance of increased communication between our countries.”

The delegation at last week's meeting presented President Ahmadinejad with a gift, a framed work of calligraphy with a verse from the Koran written in classical Kufi script. The FOR Website said that, A paraphrase of the Sura might be understood to remind us that “it is good to begin each day with a reflection on how we will personally advance the cause of peace and justice in our lives and work." Perhaps President Ahmadinejad will look at his gift on occasion and reflect on that verse.

The meeting with Iran's president was not a breakthrough event, but a step along the way of building bridges rather than burning them. Genuine peace will be (to quote President John F. Kennedy) "the sum of many acts", and this was one such act. The only dissapointment for me is that it was not our government (that should represent the people) initiating the dialogue. But then, perhaps Eisenhower's statement was prophetic; the people need to rise to the challenge of peace.

FOR, an organization that began with a pledge "to find a way of working for peace even though their countries were at war" (quote from FOR Website), has (for nearly a century) been a constant voice for peace in a world constantly at war. It is even more important to listen to such voices at times such as these, and therein lies the rub; we need to really listen or the voices of peace are drowned out by the all the noise.

GET INVOLVED: If you are not already an FOR member, consider it. Check out their Website at forusa.org; you will be amazed at all they do and have done. And when you get up each day, don't forget to (and I paraphrase) reflect on how you will personally advance the cause of peace and justice in your life and work.

Peace,

Leonard

Author's Note: The photo of the presentation of the gift to President Ahmadinejad is from the Fellowship of Reconciliation Website.