June 6, 2006
Is the U.S. becoming a police state? Here are the top 10 signs that it may well be the case
1. The Internet Clampdown
One saving grace of alternative media in this age of
unfettered corporate conglomeration has been the internet. While the
masses are spoon-fed predigested news on TV and in mainstream print
publications, the truth-seeking individual still has access to a broad
array of investigative reporting and political opinion via the
world-wide web. Of course, it was only a matter of time before the
government moved to patch up this crack in the sky.
Attempts to regulate and filter internet content are
intensifying lately, coming both from telecommunications corporations
(who are gearing up to pass legislation transferring ownership and
regulation of the internet to themselves), and the Pentagon (which
issued an "Information Operations Roadmap"
in 2003, signed by Donald Rumsfeld, which outlines tactics such as
network attacks and acknowledges, without suggesting a remedy, that US
propaganda planted in other countries has easily found its way to
Americans via the internet). One obvious tactic clearing the way for
stifling regulation of internet content is the growing media frenzy
over child pornography and "internet predators," which will surely lead
to legislation that by far exceeds in its purview what is needed to
fight such threats.
2. "The Long War"
This little piece of clumsy marketing died off
quickly, but it gave away what many already suspected: the War on
Terror will never end, nor is it meant to end. It is designed to be
perpetual. As with the War on Drugs, it outlines a goal that can never
be fully attained -- as long as there are pissed off people and
explosives. The Long War will eternally justify what are ostensibly
temporary measures: suspension of civil liberties, military expansion,
domestic spying, massive deficit spending and the like. This
short-lived moniker told us all, "get used to it. Things aren't going
to change any time soon."
3. The USA PATRIOT Act
Did anyone really think this was going to be
temporary? Yes, this disgusting power grab gives the government the
right to sneak into your house, look through all your stuff and not
tell you about it for weeks on a rubber stamp warrant. Yes, they can
look at your medical records and library selections. Yes, they can pass
along any information they find without probable cause for purposes of
prosecution. No, they're not going to take it back, ever.
4. Prison Camps
This last January the Army Corps of Engineers gave
Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root nearly $400 million to
build detention centers in the United States, for the purpose of
unspecified "new programs."
Of course, the obvious first guess would be that these new programs
might involve rounding up Muslims or political dissenters -- I mean,
obviously detention facilities are there to hold somebody. I wish I had more to tell you about this, but it's, you know... secret.
5. Touchscreen Voting Machines
Despite clear, copious evidence that these nefarious
contraptions are built to be tampered with, they continue to spread and
dominate the voting landscape, thanks to Bush's "Help America Vote
Act," the exploitation of corrupt elections officials, and the general
public's enduring cluelessness.
In Utah, Emery County Elections Director Bruce Funk
witnessed security testing by an outside firm on Diebold voting
machines which showed them to be a security risk. But his warnings fell
on deaf ears. Instead Diebold attorneys were flown to Emery County on
the governor's airplane to squelch the story. Funk was fired. In
Florida, Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho discovered an
alarming security flaw in their Diebold system at the end of last year.
Rather than fix the flaw, Diebold refused to fulfill its contract. Both
of the other two touchscreen voting machine vendors, Sequoia and
ES&S, now refuse to do business with Sancho, who is required by
HAVA to implement a touchscreen system and will be sued by his own
state if he doesn't. Diebold is said to be pressuring for Sancho's
ouster before it will resume servicing the county.
Stories like these and much worse abound, and yet TV
news outlets have done less coverage of the new era of elections fraud
than even 9/11 conspiracy theories. This is possibly the most important
story of this century, but nobody seems to give a damn. As long as this
issue is ignored, real American democracy will remain an illusion. The
midterm elections will be an interesting test of the public's
continuing gullibility about voting integrity, especially if the
Democrats don't win substantial gains, as they almost surely will if
everything is kosher.
Bush just suggested that his brother Jeb would make a good president. We really need to fix this problem soon.
6. Signing Statements
Bush has famously never vetoed a bill. This is
because he prefers to simply nullify laws he doesn't like with "signing
statements." Bush has issued over 700 such statements, twice as many as
all previous presidents combined. A few examples of recently passed
laws and their corresponding dismissals, courtesy of the Boston Globe:
--Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Bush's signing statement: The president, as
commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh
interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.
--Dec. 30, 2005: When requested, scientific
information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall
be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."
Bush's signing statement: The president can
tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he
decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national
security, or the workings of the executive branch.
--Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in
Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in
cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia
Bush's signing statement: Only the president,
as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed
forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in
Essentially, this administration is bypassing the
judiciary and deciding for itself whether laws are constitutional or
not. Somehow, I don't see the new Supreme Court lineup having much of a
problem with that, though. So no matter what laws congress passes, Bush
will simply choose to ignore the ones he doesn't care for. It's much
quieter than a veto, and can't be overridden by a two-thirds majority.
It's also totally absurd.
7. Warrantless Wiretapping
Amazingly, the GOP sees this issue as a plus for
them. How can this be? What are you, stupid? You find out the
government is listening to the phone calls of US citizens, without even
the weakest of judicial oversight and you think that's okay? Come on --
if you know anything about history, you know that no government can be
trusted to handle something like this responsibly. One day they're
listening for Osama, and the next they're listening in on Howard Dean.
Think about it: this administration hates unauthorized leaks. With no judicial oversight, why on earth wouldn't
they eavesdrop on, say, Seymour Hersh, to figure out who's spilling the
beans? It's a no-brainer. Speaking of which, it bears repeating:
terrorists already knew we would try to spy on them. They don't care if we have a warrant or not. But you should.
8. Free Speech Zones
I know it's old news, but... come on, are they fucking serious?
9. High-ranking Whistleblowers
Army Generals. Top-level CIA officials. NSA
operatives. White House cabinet members. These are the kind of people
that Republicans fantasize about being, and whose judgment they usually
respect. But for some reason, when these people resign in protest and
criticize the Bush administration en masse, they are cast as
traitorous, anti-American publicity hounds. Ridiculous. The fact is,
when people who kill, spy and deceive for a living tell you that the
White House has gone too far, you had damn well better pay attention.
We all know most of these people are staunch Republicans. If the entire
military except for the two guys the Pentagon put in front of the press
wants Rumsfeld out, why on earth wouldn't you listen?
10. The CIA Shakeup
Was Porter Goss fired because he was resisting the
efforts of Rumsfeld or Negroponte? No. These appointments all come from
the same guys, and they wouldn't be nominated if they weren't on board
all the way. Goss was probably canned so abruptly due to a scandal
involving a crooked defense contractor, his hand-picked
third-in-command, the Watergate hotel and some hookers.
If Bush's nominee for CIA chief, Air Force General
Michael Hayden, is confirmed, that will put every spy program in
Washington under military control. Hayden, who oversaw the NSA
warrantless wiretapping program and is clearly down with the program.
That program? To weaken and dismantle or at least neuter the CIA.
Despite its best efforts to blame the CIA for "intelligence errors"
leading to the Iraq war, the picture has clearly emerged -- through
extensive CIA leaks -- that the White House's analysis of Saddam's
destructive capacity was not shared by the Agency. This has proved to
be a real pain in the ass for Bush and the gang.
Who'd have thought that career spooks would have
moral qualms about deceiving the American people? And what is a
president to do about it? Simple: make the critical agents leave, and
fill their slots with Bush/Cheney loyalists. Then again, why not simply
replace the entire organization? That is essentially what both Rumsfeld
at the DoD and newly minted Director of National Intelligence John are
doing -- they want to move intelligence analysis into the hands of
people that they can control, so the next time they lie about an
"imminent threat" nobody's going to tell. And the press is applauding
the move as a "necessary reform."
Remember the good old days, when the CIA were the bad guys?