The end to presidential voyeurism

War against the presidential juggernaut

Somehow the presidential mandate in the United States cannot be accused for not putting up a robust fight in protecting the American People – whatever that means; it is an emotive appellation that deludes the group it refers to into a fall sense of security as their rights get trampled on.

Many bloggers including myself have derided vehemently the assumed untrammelled powers of the Presidency post 9-11 to abrogate legislative and judicial oversight under the premise of being the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war.

The one that has received the biggest brick-bats is the exercise of presidential privilege in the unwarranted surveillance of American citizens, the revelation of which caused stirs and the government in no mean terms condemned as unpatriotic and the most top secret activity in the war against terror.

The new un-American

The concern here is that the War on Terror has become a blanket term to separate acquiescing citizens whose complacency regarding their liberties and freedoms have been encroached upon with impunity and are assuaged with occasional coincidentally well placed security alerts from those who question the rationale behind many of those alerts and the intentions of the government.

The apologists are on the verge of calling the thinking ones un-American, time will tell if the ghost of Joe McCarthy does not return to haunt Americans, this time not on Communist activities but on trying to retain liberties, freedom and privacy over the behemoth of the State.

A timely judgement

Now, judgement has been returned in a suit filed in January 2006 by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) against the National Security Agency (NSA).

After weighing the government’s well-rehearsed mantra on state secrets, presidential war time claims of prerogative and powers as well as supposed value of the exercise against the issues of the first and fourth amendment, the separation of powers and existing laws regarding surveillance, the judge found in favour of the plaintiff.

On a broader scale, this is in favour of the sleeping majority who have allowed the machinery of government, especially this on to run roughshod over their rights which as a matter of course is enshrined in their constitution but never tested except in times of adversity.

Beyond that, it shows that the government should not take advantage of one situation (9-11) to exercise power in over other circumstances (constitutional rights) with the premise that all issues are related to some all-consuming desire to ensure national security – this is the whole aberration of the War on Terror.

For the world at large, hopefully, it would really help buttress the case of civil liberties where other governments appropriate the War on Terror and the American unconstitutional practices to clamp down on their people aspirations for the American freedoms of old.

Illegal, unconstitutional – STOP NOW!

In a 44-page judgement, the judge has declared surveillance without warrants unconstitutional and asked for them to be stopped forthwith. It is a definitely a setback for the Bush administration, but as expected, the government would appeal the ruling – this in the light of the fact that the Supreme Court has already told the President he does not have a blank cheque.

That cheque is written in the ink of the US Constitution, though pre-signed by the American People is only to the amount approved by the legislature, only then can the executive cash that cheque with the oversight in processing of the judiciary – that is the working of democracy – something we always get preached at us from the White House every time we try to catch breath.

What is strange is this landmark ruling does not to be hitting the headlines as much as other news stories like the tobacco industry getting away scot-free for deceiving customers with their advertising. How we get our priorities in a twist, at times.

All warfare is based on deception

That fateful day

Let us really break this war on terror down into its fundamentals and understand what really happened to us after the ninth day of September 2001.

A number of foreigners mostly of Saudi origin had over months before the attack been learning how to fly planes in flying schools in America, a rather expensive hobby to have but generally inconspicuous as part of a terror plan.

The important thing was that they had already gained access to America and when they regrouped, they boarded planes that were flying inter-state in America; none were intercontinental because they wanted to wreak havoc on American soil.

On that fateful morning, they hijacked four planes, two flew into the twin towers, one into the Pentagon, the fourth which probably was on its way to the Capitol or the White House crash-landed in Pennsylvania with the convenience of the talk of heroism from passengers and crew of the plane than the possible shooting down of the same on authority of the American government.

The words leading to war

This tragedy of that day left 2,973 dead and 24 declared missing a majority of who were Americans. The President first made a broadcast to the nation that day to comfort the American People, prioritise the issues of rescue, help and succour, then stressed the need to return to normalcy in families, in the federal agencies and financial markets – This was the beginning of the making of the Bush presidency.

Nine days on, on the 20^th of September 2001, the President addressed a Joint Session of Congress and the American People outlining a number of points, the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security to be run by the governor of the state where the fourth plane crash landed – Tom Ridge, he also demanded that the Taliban hand over all terrorists of the Al Qaeda clique and give Americans access to all terrorist training camps in Afghanistan to ensure they was not one terrorist left in Afghanistan. This is a thinly veiled sovereignty issue on analysis.

Picking at a the speech

The speech was a rallying call and the sounding of defiance in the light of this atrocious attack and a number of quotes stand out in the speech.

“Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen”. They are still ongoing and the cost now exceeds the number of lives lost on American soil, but that does not matter, they have been lost in foreign lands fighting terror.

“What is expected of us? I ask you to live your lives, and hug your children”. However, we would change your lives with the doctrine of fear and threat to emasculate your freedoms and liberties – thinking aloud.

“I ask you to uphold the values of America, and remember why so many have come here. We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them”. Does this cover Guantanamo Bay, Extraordinary Rendition and CIA Secret Prisons or Unwarranted Surveillance? – Thinking aloud, again.

“But this country will define our times, not be defined by them. As long as the United States of America is determined and strong, this will not be an age of terror”. Speak volumes without need for additional commentary.

A date in Kabul

It was obvious when the Taliban at first did not respond to the President’s demands on religious grounds and then vacillated about giving up Osama bin Laden and even offered to extradite him to some neutral state, they sincerity was suspect and there was no further recourse than to go to war to capture the leaders of Al Qaeda and punish the Taliban.

In general, global opinion was on the side of America to seek the annihilation of Al Qaeda and consummate regime change where the Taliban had become a totalitarian theocracy without any of the trappings of 20^th Century civilisation and a handbook of rules that would have made the Spanish Inquisition look like a kindergarten finger-painting class.

That war ended without the capture of Osama bin Laden of Al Qaeda or Mullah Mohammed Omar of the Taliban, they are still at large 5 years on, they are definitely America’s most wanted fugitives, and we have more problems in the world than to confer on them the epithet of the World’s most wanted fugitives.

Now that we’ve done Afghanistan

The main success of the war in Afghanistan is the uprooting of the Taliban regime who recently have been in insurgency leading to a call from NATO for more troops and equipment.

A fragile democracy exists in Afghanistan but that regime hardly has full control of its territorial limits and in many areas warlords run autonomous and tyrannical leadership over their local citizenry – it can hardly be called a roaring success.

Besides, the war dispersed both Taliban and Al Qaeda personnel who could have crossed into the tribal lands of Waziristan in Pakistan.

The prime objective of the Bush administration from the onset was to prevent another attack on American soil at all costs and this is how that was executed.

The American People would have required that the Taliban be defeated in Afghanistan that was accomplished, however, to be able to fight terrorists overseas rather than in America, a staging ground is required to concentrate terrorist manpower and resources.

Seeking a new terrorist haven

Afghanistan could no more be engaged as a host to that scenario, Pakistan had aligned with America in their war on terror so they were exempt, Iran had a kind of reformist regime and engaging them would have been inflammatory. However, there was unfinished business in Iraq, as it transpired the decision to attack Iraq was probably made within 2 days of 9/11.

In principle, if America were to attack Iraq on the basis of the pre-emptive war doctrine, or under the supporters of terrorism collective blanket and the weapons of mass destruction pretext, they would have carte blanche to run over the country, however, one unforeseen consequence is that it has now become a cauldron of terrorism with Americans engaged to dealing with an Iraqi insurgency and a thriving Al Qaeda murder machine.

It should then not be surprising that American soil has not been attacked since 9/11, there is no need to; the terrorists are still killing Americans as well as innocent Iraqis in Iraq. Iraqis have paid a larger price moving from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein to a pseudo-civil war where probably over 40,000 lives have been lost.

The supposed sham of a democracy that they have would require the strong arm of coalition support for years to come, the jury is out on if this experiment of democratising the Middle East would work, at least Vladimir Putin pointed said in the presence of Mr Bush in July, Russia does not want that kind of democracy. No country should aspire to that kind of democracy either.

What lies did for Iraq

Three and a half years into the war in Iraq the death toll continues to rise and this situation did not temper the resolve of America and Britain to restrain Israel from another loss of 1,000 Lebanese and 150 Israeli people due to American policies over the 5 years.

We now learn like we all knew before that Saddam Hussein had no links with Al Qaeda, no Al Qaeda operative met with any Iraqi official, there were no weapons of mass destruction, Iraq was not building a nuclear bomb and neither had they ordered yellow cake from Niger.

Mr Bush contends that Saddam Hussein was aiding suiciders (sic), let us review that issue again, suicide bombers having committed their atrocities in Israeli towns were identified, then Israel instituted a collective punishment policy of destroying the homes of property of the suicide bomber’s survivors.

In some cases, these suicide bombers owned nothing, but this punishment as a result of their act brought loss, anguish and destitution on their family and relations. There probably is a case for considering this act a deterrent, but conversely it can also be an effective recruitment tool for a new terrorist.

What Saddam Hussein did was to compensate those who had suffered loss for the actions of others and probably they were not in anyway culpable and were entirely innocent, whilst some might twist that into sponsoring terrorism, it could be argued that this was preventing the suffering of innocent people and the creation of a vengeance syndrome.

The premise of war

As Sun Tzu, the Chinese mathematician says in The Art of War on military strategy – “All warfare is based on deception” – Iraq is no less an example of how we have been lied to, cajoled, hoodwinked, robbed and disposed by evidence that turns out to be false at best and fabricated at worst.

Mr Bush and Mr Blair already have their places in history; it is unlikely they would be treated kindly when we look at the big picture of the New World Order in the 21st Century.

References

CNN.com - Senators: CIA dismissed Saddam-al Qaeda ties before war

Saddam 'had no link to al-Qaeda'

Senate: Saddam saw al-Qaida as threat

A dossier of lies to pursue the Iraqi war

They hate our freedoms

We are gathered here to fight

When President Bush addressed the Joint Session of Congress and the American People in the aftermath of the terrorist strike of September the Eleventh 2001, all the civilised world was at one with America in compassion, in sympathy and in agreement.

We all could not afford to live in a world where a threat of this sort could approach suddenly one ordinary morning and wreak so much destruction in life and the symbols of a nation’s might.

This statement then became the rallying call to go after those terrorists, hunt them down and wipe them off the face of the earth.

“Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate what we see right here in this chamber -- a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”[1]

This is what we all hold dear and I list them in order.

+ We are a democracy

+ We have freedoms

+ We have the freedom of religion

+ We have the freedom of speech

+ We have the freedom to vote

+ We have the freedom to assemble

+ We have the freedom to disagree with each other

This all constituted the galvanising force of the War on Terror that has taken troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, both of which are bordering on failed states despite the progress in democratic institutions.

The freedom to lose freedom

However, looking at the world today and the War on Terror we might find that we have become part of that target.

Nowhere is this better exemplified than in the speech that Dick Cheney gave yesterday when he condemned the press fro revealing that the US has been trawling the SWIFT for international transactions that might involve terrorists. [2]

We are given the notion that this activity lead to the capture of Hambali the notorious terrorist involved in the Bali bombings.

That itself is of some value, but if that is the only terrorist transaction that has been successfully pursued to a conclusion since 2001; albeit after the fact - then the War on Terror had already been lost and this transaction spoofing only helps to clear up the carnage - one would wonder what other means the terrorists use to move money globally.

There are many systems of moving money most especially using Western Union or Moneygram where sums running into billions would not even reflect on any spook radar.

Playing into the enemy’s hands

But, that is beside the point, Mr Cheney would have us believe that this operation was within the law of the land and was legitimate having tried without success to prevent this information from being published.

The further assertion that these secret activities of the United States government in prosecuting the war on terror from extraordinary rendition through the NSA eavesdropping to this filching or fishing through global transactions is playing into the enemy’s hands.

Bladderdash!

I would tell you what is playing into enemy hands – the fact that in a democracy we have the kind of transparency that would make the German Gestapo look like a window box.

The fact that we trumpet this who issue of freedoms and secretly ride rough-shod over these democratically assured freedoms on the premise of protecting the people from some undefined evil.

The fact that our freedom of religion and belief systems is usurped; to galvanise a political base whilst, dividing all others.

The fact that the freedom of speech in revealing clandestine operations of government in the public interest is railed against but the same people are culpable in revealing the identity of secret agents.

The fact that the democratically exercised will of the people of Palestine is ignored. They elected a government less favoured in the eyes of the West, and this has lead to their greater impoverishment.

And though we have the freedom to assemble, we do not have the freedom to disagree with the government without being called names.

Those are the things that play into the enemy’s hands and I am beginning to wonder who really hates our freedoms.

References

[1] President Declares "Freedom at War with Fear"

[2] Money-tracking leak angers Cheney

My contribution to the war on terror - suspicion

Getting on a first class coach

Suddenly, I have found that I am being subconsciously programmed into the mindset of the war on terror as subjective analysis and profiling upset my peace of mind as I travel from place to place.

On my return from Brussels, I had the unfortunate situation of not travelling light which meant I could not move between coaches that easily.

Unlike the German or French trains, the platforms for Belgian trains in the Netherlands or Belgium are not signposted to signify what part of the train has the first class carriages which are usually at one end, so one has to stand in the centre and then run either way as the train arrives to the right end.

I got on, reclined my seat and dozed off as I usually do when I get on any moving vehicle where I am not the driver.

Passengers from hell and beyond

When we got to Antwerp a group of people got on, probably eight in number all adult from middle-aged to probably pension age.

The older men had dulcet sounding tones to their conversation, the middle-aged ones were like claxons at full blast and the women were like banshees shrieking at a ghoulish congregation of fearsome festivities in a cemetery at some utterly forsaken place.

I prayed they had second class tickets, hoping the ticket conductor would move them on, but no, they had paid to be in company and be completely inconsiderate of other passengers.

Then one of their number started playing with phone tones at peak volume, at which point, I should have gotten up and shouted some abuse at them, but someone else beat me to it, it only helped the situation a little.

Crude profiling praying for action

Then all this disturbance was done in a foreign language I could not understand, it was probably Turkish or Turkic and then I suddenly had a kindred feeling with those who had two Asians thrown off a plane travelling from Malaga to Manchester and I just could not be objective about it.

If only we could get the conductor to throw these people off at the next minor train stop for not conforming to accepted first class passenger conduct and speaking a foreign language to the inconvenience of us all.

Unusual behaviour feeding suspicion

Then when going to church yesterday, some four Moroccans got on the metro and rather than sit down considering the carriage was half-empty they were walking up and down the length of the coach without any order to whatever they were doing.

That really made many of us uncomfortable, could they be planning something like a mugging on the train or some dastardly terrorist act?

Once again, I felt like calling the police to see into what they were up to and get them off the train.

What is acceptable anyway?

Why can’t people just board public transport with the modicum of decency to behave in a generally unsuspicious and civil manner?

My fear is that I am slowly getting assimilated into a mindset that suspects everything and gets weary of people if they look or act differently, the problem is I can easily fall into the category of someone who looks different, and in desperate situations would I also get betrayed on needless suspicion and by atrocious bigotry?

This war on terror does make everyone vulnerable in these uncertain and interesting times.

London - this day

What terror what horror

As so a year has passed since the carnage of terror swept through the centre of London hitting the tubes and a bus.

London has suffered onslaught from the Blitz during World War II and terrorist bombings by the Irish Republican Army, nothing could have prepared the residents, workers and visitors for those rush hour blasts.

Of deeper concern is the fact that these terrorists were homegrown and lived in cities North of England and for chance or circumstance had developed such a hatred for their lives and those of others who due to their actions either died or were seriously injured.

Much analysis and commentary has gone into the menace of homegrown terrorists, the effects on the lives of victims and survivors and the changes to the landscape of our freedoms, liberties and interests.

Exactly two weeks after the first bombing there was another attempt but it all failed, however, in the process all participants in that scheme were apprehended, till a easy-going member of the public was chased down and mauled to pulp with at least 6 gun shots to the head.

Losing our heads could lose lives

Yes, the police would be jittery and prone to erroneous apprehending of suspects, but the "Shoot to kill" policy was a bit of an extreme reaction to a situation we later found out to be poorly assessed and reviewed.

So Jean Charles De Menezes of Brazil became the picture of what terror had brought to the city - people would have been in a quandary as which was the greater danger and fear - that of terrorists or that of policemen who are yet to do some serious thinking about their plans.

Then just about a month ago, two young men were assailed with one shot in a terrorist raid that brought up zilch - the brothers were released and it was not till the brothers had a news conference that the police found the magnanimity to offer an apology.

If there is one thing that appears to be lost after that terrorist attack, it is the ability for our law enforcement services to keep a level head, open mind and conduct calculated, determined and well-thought through operations to nab suspected terrorists.

Sometimes, the Muslim community must draw on reserves of goodwill and forbearance not to feel under siege.

Tough on the causes of terrorism

Finally, in 1994, Tony Blair promised to be tough on crime and the causes of crime, which offers an important premise to prevent prospects from becoming criminals, to this would should add the War on terror and the causes of terrorist acts.

These delve into deep social, economic, religious issues that would take a visionary leader to direct and bring to a place of confidence. The war on terror does not half begin to address the reasons for terrorism - the more we understand the better we would be able to anticipate, or even, the safer might become in our world.

London lives and breathes, scared by terror but rejuvenated like a phoenix rising from the ashes; we live in the hope that the city would never be visited again by such carnage.

To all who died and those suffered great pain - This is London and you will never be forgotten.

Ahmedinejad-Bush coming to your television

Looking at a rather smart Iran

I can only wonder who is making brisk business selling seats for the debate of the Century, two presidents of states that are arch-enemies squaring up against each other to discuss world affairs.

Having now proved to all that precision weapons are not that smart enough to disarm a guerrilla movement through their proxy in Lebanon and commissioned a heavy water reactor plant for Uranium enrichment, Iran is playing a rather deft diplomatic hand that is leaving the United States rather flat-footed.

I can pointedly note that Condoleezza Rice has not been able to set foot in the Middle East having brought forth through the serious birth pangs of a New Middle East a baby that would spit out milk that comes from America.

In fact, it is now left to Kofi Annan and the UN to clean up the debacle of that inconclusive 34-day war.

Let us talk to the world together

So, as we await Iran’s response to proposals of hypocrisy that aim to preclude Iran from the enrichment of Uranium on suspicion of dual-use intentions that could lead to a nuclear bomb; Dr Ahmedinejad who only the day before in a released statement about a letter to Angela Merkel sent in July about the Holocaust being a debilitating hoax to hamstring Germany, has now challenged Mr George Bush to a live television debate.

This challenge would obviously be dismissed as expected by the White House as a diversion from global concerns about Iran’s nuclear weapons.

But then I ask whose concerns exactly? Apart from those of the privileged nuclear world whose main actors surround Iran on all sides with wars and unrest whilst sponsoring opportunities for insurrection within Iran.

I think both presidents do have something to say and it is time that those presidents met and thrashed things out rather that employing megaphone diplomacy and railroading the UN into precarious resolutions that bring more trouble into an already troubled world.

It is also poignant to note that Laura Bush took the podium in New Orleans at the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina; Mr Bush’s ratings do not put him in any reckoning apart from accepting more faults and responsibility for the poor management of the Katrina aftermath.

New ideas needed

North Korea however is probably busy planning another sabre-rattling missile fly-past over Japan as they beat their chests over having nuclear weapons and getting away with it all, the whole concept of nuclear deterrence has failed and new ideas with safeguards that even-handedly address global issues for security, energy and military might need to be debated on an equality and partnership forum.

It is now not enough for some countries to hijack the debate to meet ulterior ends whilst purporting to act on behalf of the world, those arguments which have been played back a broken vinyl record no more excite the resonance of ground-breaking, inspired or worthwhile points – rather they all look like ways of getting at that axis-of-evil.

A high wooden horse

It is now time for America to climb down from their high horse and begin to do the anathema, address the causes of terrorism, address the problems in the Middle East from the occupied lands to the support of tyrannical regimes and worst of all, maybe it is time to talk to Osama bin Laden, because this mad war on terror is doing nothing for peace on earth and goodwill to all men.

On a final note, would this war on our liberties, freedoms and privacy masquerading as the war on terror have any bite if we all knew that Osama bin Laden were dead?

Setting democracy ablaze with gas

Terror – an evil pre-occupation

Hardly 48 hours have past into the year 2006 and a number of uncomfortable developments are now taking place which threaten a lot more of our freedoms and liberties than the inordinate if not evil pre-occupation with the war on terror.

As usual our leaders are caught napping as their firm gaze on one issue distracts them from a bigger global picture that could creep upon us like a rolling cloud of mustard gas and envelop us like a nuclear mushroom canopy from which we have no escape.

Impossible expectations

The more obvious one is gas; this is a little battle of wills and integrity between Russia and Ukraine where hardly a week ago Ukraine was threatened with the loss of gas supplies which heretofore had been subsidised or discounted and now is to be hiked fourfold in price.

That deadline passed on New Years Day as pressure was then reduced in the gas pipelines in order to starve Ukraine of gas.

The paradox is that Russia’s gas supply network feeds most of Europe but for now passes through Ukraine where Ukraine is supposed to ethically and honestly allow gas to pass through their land to Europe even when they might be subject to privations in economy and well-being.

To expect to hold Ukraine up to a standard of international rectitude that one would hardly find examples of anywhere on earth is not only unconscionable but really laughable because Ukraine can as well close off the complete gas network and somebody somewhere will be left wanting in reputation, reliability and credibility.

Meanwhile a new pipeline is being built to bypass Ukraine into Europe through Germany where the ex-chancellor has been tapped for chairmanship of the organisation providing that service - nepotism does not become Europe just as Mr Shroeder is Mr Putin's good friend.

This is not a little local flare

This little squabble between these ex-Soviet partners is however affecting a lot more than Ukraine and Russia; countries west of this fracas are already suffering a degradation of supplies, noting that their reserves might not be sufficient enough to see through an extended gas famine.

Industries first and then probably households would be affected, and then some organisations could be asked to switch to oil which is greater pollutant than gas with its environmental consequences.

Economies would be on the wobble as gas futures reckoning for shortage could exert inflationary pressures on the European economy as a whole, whilst logistics are put in place to research for alternative gas supplies and transportation systems.

Democracy a hostage

Democracies can be put under undue pressure leading to social unrest and an unmanageable polity such that governments might not just collapse but the countries are in danger of becoming failed states from the exertion of this kind of energy starvation muscle. Classic how to create disorder.

It can be said that Ukraine is being punished for exercising their democratic right to choose who they want rather than who has been imposed from afar.

We have had strongly worded commentary from the United States State Department; however, Russia as the prospective chairman of the G-8 group of advanced economies is being appeased rather than upbraided.

The force of democratic dissent to such abuse of power reminiscent of either the Stalin times or the US 1970’s foreign policy pertaining to Central America is more a whimper and a wail than a wallop with a resounding wham!

Winning the wrong war

Here we are, winning the war on terror by preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, arresting acts money laundering and trampling on civil liberties amidst the hysteria of saving lives and promoting patriotism as a more benign enemy is destabilising the life-blood of our industries, economies, comforts and democracies.

Amusingly, only little Netherlands has self-sufficient gas supplies in the whole of Europe and what is left over does not compensate for the possibility of a catastrophic weather breakdown from this Siberian ill-wind.

This is just gas, but by the time China decides to call in the loans that underpin the United States bloated budget deficit, would the death of democracy herald another world order?

The possible unexpected

You might shake your heads and say this will not happen, however, I can just see how this can be diplomatically achieved just as we have made so much progress in North Korea, Iran, Zimbabwe, Sudan (Darfur), Russia and Ukraine.

For now, our freedoms, principles and liberties are threatened more by the realities of what Russia, China and Oil-producing countries can wield than the ideologies that emanate from Al-Qaeda adherents. It is however unlikely that this would excite the attention of our ever so astute leaders.

Every Vote Counts and Matters

The World Expects...

Once again we come to the cross-roads of democracy where the government of the people, for some people by fewer rich people is decided by many people who should realise that it affects all people.

Once too often I have heard of a group of people called the American People a constituency that the Presidency represents by adopting a theocratic resolve on all social issues and blinding stubbornness oblivious of the realities of the Iraqi quagmire.

However, let us get to the issues starting with a simple analogy and its unfortunate lack of correlation.

This Security Issue

For instance, if I had a security firm that signed a long-term contract to offer services to protect life, property and security and then within the first year of the contract, we suffered loss of life, property and security, would I be renewing that contract or seeking better services?

Then after the catastrophic losses, the security firm resurfaces as a reborn firm with a new mission statement, new vision and probably a lot of restrictions to my freedom and access to my associates whilst chasing after the known people who make me suffer such loss, for a while I am content with all that activity.

Afterwards, the security firm decides to go after persons who had no relationship to the original perpetrators of the serious crime on the premise that a relationship might develop between these persons and the persons who caused us such great harm - I think I should be a bit suspect of this whole idea. What about the guys who did all the damage, who is going after them?

The retort comes back, that most of their employees are imprisoned on some secluded island out of reach of the law and reason. Really?

Fine, than news comes back from a number of auditors that the security firm was lax in many aspects that could have prevented the loss, that the decision to divert resources to un-associated issues was neither necessary nor useful in pursuing the aim of capturing the original perpetrators.

We are now left with a bigger contract bill and a greater loss of life, property and security and no particular idea of how to extricate ourselves from any of the issues in which we have embedded ourselves with such optimism but pessimistic realities.

The truth of the matter

• When was American attacked?
• Who was in charge when America was attacked?
• Following the analogy, if this not a case of bolting the doors after the horses has bolted, what is?
• The horses are lost but the stable is secure, fine, but what was the stable built for?
• Was Iraq implicated in the September 11th attacks?
• Should not the war on terror first have dealt with Al Qaeda before looking further afield to prosecute other ideological aims?
• Is it really worth all that has now been lost?

Probable answers

America was attacked on September the 11th in the year 2001 during the term of President George W. Bush who happens to be the head of the security firm that was supposed to be protecting the full interests of the American people - life, property and security.

Surely, the presidency of George W. Bush was energised after the attack, but it is now on record that the guard was dozing off at the sentry leaving America vulnerable to the attack it suffered.

More so, his 8 months in office had produced landmark issues of isolation, tax cuts, pandering to special interests and so on - meaning he could have done something about security and putting Al Qaeda in the cross-hairs.

Any security guard would sound tougher and act tougher if caught to have failed on the job, unfortunately the horses that bolted are completely lost, to suggest you have not been attacked again does not preclude that fact that you are attacked on his watch.

A security guard should be up to the job from the first day and through out the term of the contract - this one failed.

The war on terror should first and always have been the war on that terrorist Osama bin Ladin and his Al Qaeda organisation. Iraq could have come a lot later with better reasons. But would a second term yield a war in Iran and North Korea which are fledging nuclear powers?

Oh yes! Go after the terrorists in their backyard and you can only sponsor that with a bigger deficit and definitely the return of the DRAFT. The draft Bush, Cheney and Clinton so successfully avoided, by playing the system. People who have not experience of the horror of war and prosecute wars are reckless as best and plain tyrannical at worst.

Just the numbers would do, over $120 billion, over 1,000 dead American sons and daughters, over 29,000 wounded soldiers, over 100,000 dead Iraqis, a 52 card deck of former Iraqi officials, one free Osama bin Laden, one free Mullah Omar of the Taliban regime, one terrorist den of Iraq, one greatest opium exporting country of Afghanistan, 2 emerging nuclear powers of North Korea and Iran and one weaponless Libya.

All for almost 4,000 dead Americans, the twin towers and 3 lost airplanes?

At one time someone should start counting the cost and that is NOW.

The World Really Expects...

Americans need to look beyond the local issues, "Act Local but Think Global", this election is a world election, we need someone the rest of the almost 6 billion people of the earth would feel comfortable with, who would promote both national and international peace without infuriating others who take an opposing view - a diplomat.

The world needs a strong American economy with sound principled economic policies grounded making for a surplus rather than an unprecedented budget deficit that leaves the unborn already saddled with debt.

That used to be the forte of third-world impoverished and indebted Bantustans - an economics.

The world needs a leader of the United States that sees the US as uniting the people and not in the context of "us and them", polarising every opinion that comes into the public debate - a leader of great persuasion.

Every American who can vote should and must vote for one of the persons vying for Presidency and every vote counts. Ralph Nader is not running for Presidency, he is not on enough state ballots to seize any electoral seats of any significance. That would be a wasted vote.

In fact, Ralph Nader and his supporters should vote for one of the proper Presidential candidates, either George W. Bush or John Kerry.

We cannot afford more of the same, nor can we afford a more aggressive more of the same for another four years, we probably need change and good change at that, regardless of the some inkling that the alternative is not as persuasive as he should be.

Get out and vote and do it right - the world expects and your conscience expects.

Musharraf cannot fool us again

Guns to the rule

That Pakistan is caught in the throes of those who wield power through the comfort and support of the barrel of the gun rather than popular political mandate is an unfortunate development.

However, that would not have mattered to me because the regime of General/President Pervez Musharraf has thrived on the basis of America and the West putting the war on terror above real democratic reform in Pakistan.

Despite that, there is still trouble in Afghanistan; Osama bin Laden still sends us videos of home life and the Northwest of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan is still as ungovernable as it ever was – terror has visited the main cities as self-interest amongst the leading politicians leaves carnage in their wake.

General Musharraf believes that imposing emergency rule which is in fact martial law in everything but name would stop Pakistan from committing suicide.

We would be fools no longer

Regarding Pakistan, we have been taken for fools for a long time and this would have been believable if Musharraf had just come round to clean out a seething mess, but he is the one who has presided over Pakistan over the last eight years and to pretend he is not only instrumental and central to the problems of today is dishonest to say the least.

To then address the world and contend that our expectations of democracy in Pakistan are too lofty since the democracies in the West have had centuries to mature is to pull the wool over our eyes – Is India’s democracy not the same age as the time Pakistan got its independence?

Pakistan, Bangladesh (East Pakistan until 1971) and India used to be part of the same entity of the British Empire – British India - up until the independence in 1947; India has made the greatest progress in democratic maturity whilst the other two countries have vegetated into quasi-religious militancy with fragile political frameworks that pander to the cult of political dynasties.

General Musharraf has no answers to the problems in Pakistan and egregious exercise of military-backed executive remit in dismissing judges who contend with how the constitution is being abused; the arresting of political minds who would question this power-grab and the suspension of the constitution are only going to make matters worse.

Accepting the unacceptable

Unfortunately, the war on terror would prevent a proper condemnation of these extra-constitutional developments and it sets no template by which other military juntas around the world can be de-politicised.

The people of Pakistan would have to rise up and demand that they be given the right to decide who presides over their nation; it is unlikely that General Musharraf in his uniform or Mr. Pervez Musharraf in a Taliban tunic would win any popular support.

History and case studies all around the world where soldiers have marched rough-shod over the yearnings of real democratic reform show that they only have the terrifying effect of the fear of gun-borne retribution; they bring nothing of political progress to their countries, rather, they entrench corruption, impunity and human-rights abuses.

That is not to say democracy has all the answers, but Pakistan does need to be put back on the road to real representative democracy without some tin-pot General trying to lecture us on government having lost all credibility as a leader that can be trusted.

The sham of civilian government we are told still exists when the political leadership have been placed under arrest, restrictions exist on news reporting and the usurpation of powers that belong to the judiciary and legislature leaves much to be desired – as any government without a popular mandate always finds itself at variance with the judiciary that it tries either to subsume or emasculate that branch of government.

At no time has it become so necessary for General Musharraf to seek political asylum in some far-flung land and allow for Pakistan to be delivered from the throes of suicide that he and him only has created and fostered.

A large body count with no ease as war ceases

The seeds of war

Just over a month ago when hostilities started with some Hamas faction seizing an Israeli soldier killing two others and the Hezbollah seized two Israeli soldiers killing eight, we now have a body count for the number that have perish in this senseless war. Does anyone remember Gilad Shalit? No, he has become an irrelevance in the whole scheme of things.

Gilad Shalit - refreshing your memory.

First of all, ostracising a duly and popularly elected Hamas by denying them funding when we all know that Palestine has no other means of income generation, in order to either force Hamas to abdicate the platform on which they were elected or create unrest to topple that government was definitely not the smartest thing to come out of the West.

Occupation is the problem

There are reasons why Israel finds little legitimacy in the Middle East, much of which stems from the occupation of Arab lands and the lack of progress towards the two-state solution of Israel and Palestine – that would remain the sticking point till a kind of grand solution is proffered that is acceptable to all – it would not be far from the 1967 lines and anything different would continue to fuel the extremism that seeks the destruction of Israel.

As the Palestinians seemingly crumbled under the onslaught of Israeli belligerence, Hezbollah launched their own raid which resulted in a large scale destruction of Lebanese infrastructure as well as the loss of innocent life.

This situation could have been arrested, but there is not politician presently in the world of the stature that can really bring the kinds of ideas that would command the respect of all affected parties.

The sad thing is, this war turned into a proxy war where America supplied sophisticated weaponry to Israel and Iran offered some weaponry and even men to Hezbollah turning Lebanon into the grass trampled on as a result of two elephants fighting.

The solution is not military

If there is any lesson to be learnt about this reckless gamble with human life in the quest for a military solution to a political and diplomatic puzzle, it is that guns might kill people but they cannot kill the aspirations of a people.

Hezbollah has been called every unprintable terrorist-linked name under the sun, they are however, victors in the eyes of their people, and they now garner a lot more support amongst Arabs than they ever did – they might have been curtailed but definitely not subdued.

Lumping Hezbollah together with the elements of Al-Qaeda is disingenuous at best and really a scandalous propaganda which should heap derision on America because their involvement in this war has earned them no plaudits from either Arabia or a good deal of the non-religiously biased world view of Israel’s status.

New occupations is not the answer

We now have a ceasefire or sorts, but we are still with the selfsame problem that has bugged the Middle-East for close to two generations – Israeli occupation of land that is not theirs.

The guns have stopped but Israel is in Lebanon up to the Litani River, this peace just cannot hold, neither would it hold if the Israelis are replaced with a UN peacekeeping force. The way forward is the legitimate return of lands to their proper owners, this affects Palestine – Gaza and the West Bank in its entirety; Syria with the Golan Heights and Lebanon with the Shebaa Farms.

The occupations must stop, if Israel then wants to build walls, the walls must only be built within the confines of the legitimate state of Israel.

The Middle-East in a nutshell

The Economist of August the 5^th, sums up the Middle-East problem in these topics – The bomb in Iran; the future of Iraq; the isolation of Syria; the Hezbollah state within Lebanon and the unrequited cause of the Palestinians – the amazing thing about these situations is that all this is linked up with the resolution of the Israeli-Palestine question.

This does even begin to address the issue of authoritarian religious governments, absolute monarchies with democratic trimmings and dictatorships.

The Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979 was a counter-reaction to American influence in the corrupt monarch of the Shah of Iran as well as the non resolution of the Palestinian cause. The Iran “bomb” which only really exists as an American suspicion rather than a North Korean reality takes up more diplomatic energy than more pressing issues of greater importance.

America backed Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war; however, Iraq went on to support Palestinian causes in supporting families of suicide bombers – hence, the ability for American government to link Iraq with terrorism.

Syria is isolated for its involvement in Lebanon, however, they were also instrumental in getting Israel out of Lebanon, and their support for Hezbollah is mutual, in the sense that Israel still occupies Syrian and Lebanese land whilst the unanimously adopted UN Resolution to return those lands languishes in the dormant basket.

Hezbollah has always justified its existence on the basis of the occupation of the Shebaa Farms, their legitimate purpose for bearing arms would be diffused if that land is returned as they are also already part of the political and democratic process in Lebanon.

No one dares take bold decisions

Land for peace would be the core requirement for peace in Israel, it would involve removing settlements in the West Bank regardless how they read their religious tomes, the world order should be a secular acceptance of the civilisation of man and the dispensing of justice for the good of all including that contentious division of the Mandate of Palestine into the state of Israel and the state of Palestine.

America must come in for sound criticism and condemnation for letting this war carry on for so long and for literally goading Israel into doing their dirty work of hopefully eliminating Hezbollah – we now know the better of this wishing thinking and drunken gamble.

The devaluation of human life

After the loss of about 4,000 lives in the World Trade Centre, America has become a blood-thirsty marauder that has have done much to foment war and done little to sue for peace. The value of human life has depreciated to basic collateral damage, we see much for damaged buildings than for loss of innocent life.

America has lost so many soldiers in Iraq we have literally stopped counting, this war on terror is prosecuted in a way that terrifies all and brings little in gains to preserve our freedoms and way of life, it would appear world leaders could not really care less for how humanity suffers in the quest for their radical and unconscionable goals.

We do need strong leadership but not of the kamikaze sort which is what we experienced in this Israeli-Lebanon pseudo-war.

Blood on many hands

And there was no man to bring us the grand solution to the Middle-East problems, the life blood of terrorism as we are taught to know it. Great is the tribulation we suffer because they would rule are soaked in blood and like King David of old, that blood, even if shed in legitimate caused prevented him from building a temple for the Lord.

If no one values human life, thankfully, God up there does count human blood for something, good guy and bad guy alike. The religious guys had better listen up; you cannot fully participate in honouring God if you are complicit in shedding blood.

The body count – Israel 163, UN 4, Canada 8, Lebanon 1,000 and Nigeria 2 for 3 living Israeli soldiers and 10 dead ones. ‘Nuff said.

References

Hamas Isolation on Israeli recognition

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701

Lebanon's middle class is disillusioned with America

Hezbollah leader a hero to many Arabs

To King David – You are not to build a house for me

Israeli-Lebanon Body Count

Being fooled out of my liberty for temporary safety

Hating our freedoms

Each time I hear that mantra about terrorists hating our freedoms, I look at how we have systematically moved beyond what terrorists might have intended with how we have curtailed our own freedoms in the quest for safety.

In the Netherlands, until about a year ago, it was OK to walk around with a photocopy of your identity like passport and offer the real thing when specifically asked at a later date.

For people who are not Dutch citizens, their identity is really kept in their passports and they have to carry that around with them amidst the clamour about illegal immigrants and crime, nobody has thought about the additional consequences of the loss of such important documents – they just want to see your identity, no other questions asked.

Air Travel Gloom

Months ago, I spelt the end of the joy of air travel with those outrageous restrictions predicated on people who were going to blow up trans-Atlantic flights that they would probably have boarded without passports, tickets and by mixing baby milk and toothpaste, scenting it with some celebrity piss water.

We now have uniform European regulations about what you can carry on board a flight; my advise, check it all on, forget the hand baggage stuff, they even take my cane off me so that I can hobble through the screening machine.

Besides, considering the Islamophobia that surrounds some of these benign rules, we pay homage by having to take off our shoes, just as if I were entering a mosque.

Now my bank

Nothing really got to me more than when I got this letter in the weekend requiring me to visit a branch of my bank within 10 working days to show my identity and give my signature to be recorded in some secure system – probably available to some secret service personnel anywhere in the world.

The fact is, if the data is collected, no matter the assurances at collection, it can be unscrupulously accessed, laws can change granting untrammelled access to the data on the premise of protecting our security.

The veiled threat, even though I have run the account for about 7 years and it has probably handled transactions that total over half a million Euros, is, they will be forced to block my account with the comforting statement – We naturally assume that this would not be necessary.

The kind of statement you can expect if the matron at Guantanamo Bay called round to pat your head, or maybe, give you a dunking.

Identity card flawed logic

This follows the premise that having an identity card prevents terrorism, as if the document has a bleeper that indicates a terrorist is in the vicinity.

The other thing would be if banks have been offered a watch list such that you walk into the bank and before you know it, truck loads of armed personnel are shooting down the door to cart you away a cadaver victim of excitable but suspect intelligence.

None of this stuff bodes well for our civil liberties and we are lead like helpless sheep to the slaughter of all was won and blood spilt for in the last century.

Fooled out of liberty

I should now expect a visit to the bank that handles my mortgage, then one to the bank that handles my credit card, I wonder if I have to go to Brighton to get certified to use my American Express card – where would all this end?

Then, I suddenly, I wonder if I am deserving of my freedom or liberty as our parliamentarians allow the politics of fear, the lifeblood of the war on terrorism to obliterate the essential context of Benjamin Franklin’s words of over 250 years ago.

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” – What do we have left of our liberty and how safe do we feel?

Beyond that, I would give Abraham Lincoln the last word on this matter, in the midst of all that is being done to ensure we are no more caught unawares by terrorist, are we being fooled or taken for fools?

“You may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all the time”

Bush learnt that lesson last week; hopefully, more people would refuse to be fooled anymore by this phoney war of power trips and marauding police states in Western democracies, in the name of the war on terror.

References

Liquid Bombers Prove: “They hate our freedoms”

Freedom, the prison of civil society