Month: January 2016

I watched a documentary about North Korea which explained how the government there assigns a score to each citizen, based on how large a threat to the regime s/he is perceived to be. When I lived in Taiwan under a military government years ago, such a number was encoded into every national ID card. Those citizens every interaction with the government and police force was shadowed by those scores.

Same as in 21st century post-Constitutional America.

Even as our nation learned more about how our daily lives are cataloged by the National Security Agency, a new generation of technology is being used by local law enforcement that offers them unprecedented power to peer into the lives of citizens. Ominously, software that is part of such systems, assigns each citizen monitored a Threat Score, allegedly to alert cops enroute to a crime scene of what to expect of the once-innocent-until-proven-guilty citizen they will encounter.

Continue reading “Police Are Calculating Your ‘Threat Score’ To Decide How To Treat You”

Oxymoron: a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.” (Dictionary.com)

The way we use words matters – a lot. When words begin to lose their meaning or get distorted, the things we say begin to mean something entirely different…perhaps even expressing a sentiment opposite to the original intent. This is not unlike the term “doublespeak” (a concept highlighted in George Orwell’s 1984, where war is peace and peace is war). An important thing to note is that words do not change their meaning overnight…rather, it’s more often a case of “meaning creep;” the more often red is called orange, it will eventually come to be considered so. While this may not matter much for colors, it matters immensely in the world of war, peace, and foreign policy. Ideas form words, and action follows from ideas. When war is falsely called “defensive” or “humanitarian,” the words provide a vehicle for the public at large to silently (or openly) condone violent, immoral action against other humans. Let’s take a look at some of the common phrases bandied about modern American foreign policy, and assess whether they mean what they say…or something entirely different.

Department of Defense: It used to be called the Department of War, which was a lot more appropriate. Take, for instance, the Merriam-Webster definition of defense: “the act of defending someone or something from attack.” By definition, the word ‘defense’ implies that an attack is occurring, or perhaps even imminent (which is another of those words that has been twisted beyond recognition). In reality, the Department of Defense manages fighting forces that have a presence in dozens upon dozens of countries around the world. Even the “National Guard” is deployed in support of numerous engagements; just last week, the Wisconsin Guard sent 65 members to Iraq and Kuwait.

Continue reading “American Foreign Policy Oxymorons”

Why did the US fly a B-52 over South Korea yesterday? Was it a sign of superiority…or insecurity? North Korea tested some sort of nuclear device last week and the fly-over was part of a multi-pronged US response to the test. Today on the House Floor a bill strengthening sanctions against North Korea is likely to pass overwhelmingly. There is no shift in US thinking over the past 60 years. But if you think about it, even Kim Jong-Un’s foreign policy is more rational that Obama’s: in response to the threat posed by US troops in South Korea and strong rhetoric from Japan, North Korea has developed an effective nuclear deterrent. North Korea does not practice “regime change” overseas, it does not attempt to invade its neighbors. It merely has developed a deterrent to a threat. More on ineffective US foreign policy toward North Korea in today’s Liberty Report:

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

The execution of Shi’ite cleric Nimr al-Nimr and 46 convicted al-Qaeda members by the Saudis triggered a still-unfolding crisis between the Kingdom and Iran. Protesters in Tehran set fire to the Saudi embassy, and the Iranian government threatened that the Saudis will face “divine” revenge.

Riyadh responded by severing diplomatic relations and ordering Iran’s ambassador to depart the Kingdom, followed by the cutting off of all commercial ties with Iran. Saudi allies Bahrain, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates made formal diplomatic protests to Iran. Additional acts of retaliation in a region that embraces the concept will no doubt follow, likely inside the Saudi-Iranian proxy war in Yemen or Syria. There will be blood.

But why execute al-Nimr now?

The cleric has been a vocal critic of Saudi Arabia’s ruling royal family for some years. In 2009 he went as far as threatening Shi’ite secession, provoking a government crackdown in the minority’s eastern heartland. The Saudis have had al-Nimr in custody since 2012, and he was sentenced to death in 2014.

Continue reading “What’s the Real Story Behind Saudi Arabia’s Execution of Shia Cleric al-Nimr?”

President Obama should be given props for the progress made in thawing US-Cuban relations, but there’s a piece of unfinished business that he could – and should – still attend to: returning the US Naval Base in Guantanamo to the Cuban people. In doing so, he could also solve another dilemma that has plagued his administration: closing the Guantanamo prison.

In November 2015, CODEPINK brought 60 delegates to the city of Guantánamo for an international conference about the abolition of foreign military bases. To explore the impact of the Guantánamo naval base on the Cuban people, we took a trip to Caimanera – a small town of 11,000 people that abuts the US Naval Base on the southeastern coast of Cuba.

Caimanera is hot and humid. Small, colorful but dilapidated houses pack the narrow town streets. There are crowded sidewalk cafes where highly coveted WiFi is available. In the middle of town there’s an impressive central plaza, decorated by statues of Cuban revolutionary heroes, surrounded schools, a community cultural center, Committee of the Defense of the Revolution offices, and more.

Continue reading “Alli McCracken Says ‘Send Obama to Gitmo’”

Cries of glee must have emanated from the military-industrial complex and the Beltway think tanks as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un made another of his periodic pleas for global attention. The nuclear detonation is looking less likely as powerful and thus significant than the North Korean government initially claimed, but that is not stopping vested US interests in playing up the threat. To some, like Donald Trump, it’s all China’s fault. To others, like Jeb Bush, it’s all the fault of the Obama/Hillary foreign policy. To the think tankers, more policy papers are being feverishly crafted all calling for more of the same to produce different results. More military spending and more sanctions!

But the North Korean “problem” is a direct result of US interventionism and the uncertainty it produces. After all, the Libyans gave up their nuclear program and not long afterward were “regime changed” by Washington. No one thinks a similar attack on North Korea is imminent. So as a deterrent, North Korea’s nuclear policy actually works well. Why would anyone expect them to change? Perhaps taking away the incentive for such a deterrent would be more successful? Don’t count on new thinking among the entrenched elite. Instead, turn to the Ron Paul Liberty Report:

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.