Tools of conquest

"The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts... attitudes... prejudices. To be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill, and suspicion can destroy, and the thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own for the children, and the children yet unborn. And the pity of it is that these things cannot be confined to The Twilight Zone."

Closing narration by Rod Serling from The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street. Read it again, and hear Rod Serling's voice and delivery.

The story? From here, in brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm.

Suddenly his car — and only his car — starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man’s lights go on.

As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced.

An "alien" is shot — but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help.

The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials are seen, manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there’s no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, "they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it’s themselves."

It was written in 1960. It could have been written today.

Just in case you were wondering...

The problem with allowing a big cheese like our President to flout the law of the land (all for the good of Americans, you understand) is that it sets a pattern of behavior.

It seems Hewlett-Packard has seen fit to follow suit.

Fox News
and
LA Times
so far

Did it ever occur to you that those laws were there for a reason?

Feel safe and secure yet?

Instead Of?

According to a just read headline (NYTimes):

"Going into a critical pre-election stretch, Congressional Republican leaders will concentrate on national security issues instead of immigration."

Um... I thought a lot of the immigration hoopla was based on security concerns. You know, all those nasty terrorists coming in over our unsecured borders, that kind of thing.

Er....

How Can We Make America SAFER?

We can't.

We can require identification to be shown at every state border we cross, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could require people to check in with their local officials if they want to leave their neighborhood, letting the officials know where they're going and why, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could embed RFID chips in all visitors to our citites or states so they could be tracked, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could record every phone call, email, text messaage or other electronic transmission sent anywhere, to make sure we catch any potential terrorists, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could set up anonymous hotlines where neighbor could report on neighbor, reporting any suspicious activity, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could have government enforcers randomly stop people on the street, in their cars, or in their places of work, and ask for proof the person is a citizen, but
-we wouldn't be America any more.

We could require everyone to prove they never spoke with anyone who might be a terrorist, prove they are in no way related to anyone who might be a terrorist, prove they aren't related to anyone in a country that has terrorists, but not only would we not be America any more, but everyone would be suspect -- and without even going as far as six degrees of separation.

We could ban the sale of any product for which it is believed it might ever be used in any way, in any combination, to terrorize people, and live in a kindergarten-safety-scissor world. I'm not sure if we'd be America any more, but we sure as hell wouldn't like it.

We could allow the President to suspend the right to habeas corpus, allowing us to arrest anyone suspected of or accused by their neighbors of terrorism, citizen or not, without having to bring them to trial,
-as long as the President says it is done in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could allow the President alone to decide which electronic communications to monitor without resorting to warrants,
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could allow the President alone to define what consititutes being an enemy combatant, or an unlawful enemy combatant, without stating the definition of these terms,
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could allow the President alone to decide to export persons in American custody to foreign countries where they can be "vigorously questioned,"
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could allow the President alone to decide which actions are "state secrets" and therefore not subject to judicial reivew, or any review at all,
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could allow the President alone to choose whether he will enforce laws passed by Congress, choose how to define "enforce" and choose to change that definition randomly and without explanation,
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could change airline baggage requirements without advance notice, whenever someone reports any method for damaging planes, without checking the validity of the method,
-as long as the President says it is in the name of protecting the security of Americans.

We could do all those things. We have done and are doing some of those things.

As long as people are allowed to move around without checks, as long as people are allowed to carry things with them without checks, we will be unsafe.

How far do we go in the name of safety before we stop being Americans?

When the CIA invests in software...

When the CIA invests in a company that makes identification software, one begins to wonder why. Then again, maybe we don't need to wonder why.

From an eweek article, found at

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2004323,00.asp
The following is just a segment of the entire article. It's a short read.

Initiate Systems' IdentityHub software uses a variety of identification protocols to determine whether records stored under similar names in different databases refer to the same or different patients. It also uses such demographic information as birthdays and address to match records to people who have used different names.

The software helps companies find stored information about clients or patients in real time, and it also helps to identify and delete duplicate records. It has also been used to quickly find prescription information when patients enter the emergency department.

. . .

"Working with In-Q-Tel allows us to provide the intelligence community with already proven technology that directly addresses national security needs. The exposure within the intelligence community that we have already experienced as a result of In-Q-Tel's involvement has been tremendous,". . .

The NSA has stated it can't handle all the data coming in from the warrantless wiretapping. The NSA can't correlate it all. It's too much data. Well, this little program may solve that.

Privacy pundits fear RFID because "THEY" will be able to track every move we make. With this correlation software, we can be traced by the tracks we leave in the electronic economy.

Trades

George W. Bush is trying to give us the illusion of safety in trade for allowing him to violate international treaties, our own Constitution, and the laws and judgments of our own government.

Some prices are just too high, no matter how much you may want the prize. The one thing you cannot trade for your heart's desire is your heart.
      ---Miles Vorkosigan, Memory

On the subject of safety

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin, 1759

I originally had a long post on this. But Ben Franklin's statement really needs no additions. You either get it, or you'll get it far too late.