Friday, 14 June 2013

20 Examples Of How America Is Rapidly Going Down The Toilet


 


20 Examples Of How America Is Rapidly Going Down The Toilet

Posted: 13 Jun 2013 06:23 PM PDT

Toilet - Photo by Tenzinx3Deep corruption is eating away at every level of American society like cancer.  We can see this in our families, we can see this in our businesses, and we can especially see this in our government.  We have the highest rate of divorce in the world, we have the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the world, we have the highest rate of obesity in world, and nobody has higher rates of cancer, heart disease and diabetes than we do.  The suicide rate is soaring and our economy is falling apart.  Meanwhile, our politicians seem absolutely clueless and we have piled up the biggest mountain of debt that the world has ever seen.  Has America ever been in such bad shape before?  The following are 20 examples of how America is rapidly going down the toilet…

#1 Why do so many members of the media have family members that work for the White House?  Is this one of the reasons why the mainstream media is so soft on Obama?  Just check out the following list which was recently compiled by the Washington Post

The list of prominent news people with close White House relations includes ABC News President Ben Sherwood, who is the brother of Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, a top national-security adviser to President Obama. His counterpart at CBS, news division president David Rhodes, is the brother of Benjamin Rhodes, a key foreign-policy specialist. CNN's deputy Washington bureau chief, Virginia Moseley, is married to Tom Nides, who until earlier this year was deputy secretary of state under Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Further, White House press secretary Jay Carney's wife is Claire Shipman, a veteran reporter for ABC. And NPR's White House correspondent, Ari Shapiro, is married to a lawyer, Michael Gottlieb, who joined the White House counsel's office in April.

#2 Why are IRS agents training with AR-15 rifles?  Exactly who do those IRS agents expect to be using those weapons against?

#3 The city of Detroit is on the verge of declaring the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history, but a 41-year-old city worker is about to starting drawing a $96,000 annual pension

Matt Schenk isn't your average retiree. He's 41, works full-time and collects $194,000 a year at the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department.

But as soon as next month, he'll start collecting an estimated $96,000 annual pension, courtesy of an early retirement incentive offered to Wayne County appointees.  It had no age restriction.

#4 The number of sexual assaults in the U.S. military is up 35 percent since 2010.

#5 The suicide rate for Americans between the ages of 35 and 64 rose by close to 30 percent between 1999 and 2010.  The number of Americans that are killed by suicide now exceeds the number of Americans that die as a result of car accidents.

#6 The United States has the highest rate of obesity on the planet by far.  The U.S. also has the highest rate of cancer, the highest rate of heart disease and the highest rate of diabetes.

#7 An illegal immigrant brutally raped and killed a 9-month-old girl in Richland, Washington recently, but you won't hear anything about it from the big mainstream news networks because it might hurt the immigration bill being pushed through Congress.

#8 Even though the United States has been able to fully secure the border between North Korea and South Korea for the past 60 years, U.S. Senator Check Schumer says that it would take "years and years and years" to secure the border between the United States and Mexico.

#9 All over America illegal immigrants are turning pleasant communities into crime-infested cesspools.  The following is what Doug Hoagland says is going on down in California…

Three decades ago, before past amnesties opened the flood gates to illegal criminals, all of the farming communities mentioned in this report were thriving small towns with low crime rates and an extremely pleasing quality of life. Now, every single one of these once fine little towns are cesspools of crime, infested with drug smugglers, anchor baby welfare trolls, where decent people can no longer walk the streets at night. According to the latest census report Selma is, like most of California's invaded cities, 78 percent Hispanic….and likely half of them illegal.

Also cited in this same report is the tragic fact that the local jails are so full these criminals must be turned out early to make way for the next fresh batch of arrestees. The Chief of Police lamented the fact that the "criminal early out" program allows the newly released criminals to go out and commit more crime.

During my entire 22-year Air Force career I always dreamed of retiring to my sedate and peaceful little town where I grew up. Then I came home, took a look around, saw the gangsters and the prolific graffiti that graces every street in town and decided to dwell elsewhere.

#10 The U.S. family is rapidly breaking down.  100 years ago, 4.52 were living in the average U.S. household, but now the average U.S. household only consists of 2.59 people.

#11 The NSA spies on virtually everything that we do, but the Obama administration has banned U.S. law enforcement officials from spying on Islamic mosques without special permission.

#12 Why is the University of Chicago removing pews from an 88-year-old chapel in order to make room to accommodate Islamic prayer rugs?

#13 Barack Obama has decided to allow the sale of the Plan B One-Step abortion pill to girls under the age of 17 without a prescription.  So now young girls will be able to go to the drug store and pick up these pills at any time and their parents might not ever find out about it.

#14 The United States has lost more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities since 2001, and millions upon millions of good paying jobs have been shipped out of the country.  But Barack Obama is secretly negotiating even more "free trade" agreements which will destroy our economic infrastructure even further.

#15 The state legislature of California has just passed a law that allows boys to shower with girls in the public schools if that is more "consistent" with their gender identity.

#16 Why is Barack Obama strongly against a measure that is being proposed in Congress that would protect the "religious liberty" of American service members?

#17 In the United States today, the government treats military veterans like human garbage.  Back in 2009, the number of veterans that had been waiting for more than a year to have their veteran benefits approved was 11,000.  Today, that number has soared to 245,000.  While they are waiting, the federal government is glad to provide them with "end of life" literature that helps them to determine when their lives are "no longer worth living".

#18 Today, the U.S. ranks only 51st in the world for life expectancy even though we spend far more on health care than anyone else on the planet does.  Sadly, our health care system has become a giant money making scam that is not really concerned about whether most of us live or die.

#19 The level of government dependence in the United States is at a level that we have never seen before.  Back in 1960, the ratio of social welfare benefits to salaries and wages was approximately 10 percent.  In the year 2000, the ratio of social welfare benefits to salaries and wages was approximately 21 percent.  Today, the ratio of social welfare benefits to salaries and wages is approximately 35 percent.

#20 The U.S. national debt is now $16,738,704,836,178.59, and it is being projected that it will increase by another 106 trillion dollars over the next 30 years.  Of course that will never happen.  The truth is that the financial system of America will totally collapse long before we ever add another 106 trillion dollars to our debt.

Flushing Toilet

You are subscribed to email updates from The American Dream
Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Re: Suddenly, white people care about privacy incursions

What BS. Target those who are committing acts of Terror.......Muslims......if "white" people whoever they might be start committing therse acts then add them to the list. It's absolutely ridiculous to ensure that no targeting take place that little old ladies in wheel chairs get the same scrunity as a Moslem student who has overstayed his visa and disappeared into the bowels of American society. Give me a break....look at the money being spent on watching out for little old ladies and not being spent on hunting down capturing that former Student and deporting him. Very few Moslems should be allowed into the USA until they, the Moslems get their act together and root out these terrorists in their own home countries. Japan has the right idea and look no problems because there a few if any Moslems there.
 
In a message dated 6/14/2013 3:28:20 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, majors.bruce@gmail.com writes:
You think you are being clever by pointing out hypocrisy 

But the bigger truth is Obama and the Democrats want to treat everyone in America like a black man in a 40s small town ruled by the Klan 

On Friday, June 14, 2013, Chris Gambrell wrote:
 

Thursday, Jun 13, 2013 09:25 AM PST

Suddenly, white people care about privacy incursions

For many, government surveillance has been a regular part of life, especially since 9/11. So, why the outrage now?

By

As a result of the recent revelations about National Security Agency surveillance, a fierce debate about privacy and the powers of security services has been raging. But in light of the fact that such an approach has long been taken toward a segment of Americans, one might ask why it required this latest series of developments to spur discussion.

Mounting domestic and international pressure against the PRISM surveillance program has forced the Obama administration to concede that the revelations have sparked "an appropriate debate." Concern – and in some cases, outrage — at these measures has been expressed by general members of the public and politicians, many of whom made no secret of their anger or mistrust toward them. Given the seriousness of the allegations, the outrage expressed at such a situation is obviously justified; the courage of the leaker and those taking the fight to government, commendable.

But what, it must be asked, is driving all the outrage?

If one follows the debate on this issue, we are told it's simply due to the fact that rights to privacy are being effortlessly contravened, the rule of law is being undermined (yet again), transparency has reached an all-new low, and that worst of all, this is all happening to innocent people. This is true no doubt, and anger at such facts is warranted and reasonable. But is any of this actually new?

There appears to be a discrepancy in our anger and protest against such measures. For years now, and well before the discovery of these leaked documents, we have been complacently living with the public knowledge of certain truths. Rights to privacy have been systematically and openly violated for years, without much fuss. The rule of law has been suspended indefinitely, in places like Guantánamo Bay, for example, with barely a peep. Lack of transparency? We've gotten used to it in certain cases, it seems. Severe violations of these and other rights targeted against innocent people have become so normalized, that we now discuss them simply in terms of efficiency, stripped of any considerations for legal protections.

Welcome to the world of the Muslim, post-Sept. 11.

There is an elephant in the room that needs to be addressed in this discussion, one that will no doubt cause much backlash and reap accusations of all sorts and from the best of people, as such elephants often do. It is difficult to raise this issue due to its sensitive nature, and particularly at such a sensitive time – which is precisely why it is so important to do so.

In spite of this sensitivity, let me outline the case: The issue of excessive surveillance is not new – the only new aspect here is that it now encompasses a larger population; specifically, white America. It needs to therefore be asked as to whether this is the real reason for all the spontaneous outrage of late.

Since the events of Sept. 11 and the proliferation of anti-terror laws enacted around the world, Muslims have been subjected to the very violations that are now the scene of such fierce protest globally. These tactics of surveillance and control have been carried out with much disclosure and in public knowledge. They have been publicized, discussed, justified and ultimately accepted as – at the very least – "necessary evils." As early as 2001, then-President George W. Bush made no secret of these draconian powers when signing the Patriot Act: "This new law that I sign today will allow surveillance of all communications used by [suspected] terrorists, including e-mails, the Internet, and cell phones."

This same legislation being used today to justify the PRISM surveillance powers, which the Obama administration is now considering revising as a result of these protests, has already been explicitly in use against Muslims for over a decade. The extent of surveillance used against Muslims in that time is nothing short of disturbing. Director of Muslim Advocates, a U.S. legal advocacy organization, Farhana Khera, sums it up well:

Today, the FBI can show up at your work, unannounced, to interrogate you about an article on political events you post on Facebook, or seize information about your phone calls, e-mails, internet activity and medical and banking records — all without a shred of evidence that you've engaged in criminal activity.

On the 10-year anniversary of the legislation, Khera's organization published a report detailing the loss of liberty Muslims faced due to the Patriot Act. The details are unsettling. Between the years of 2001 and 2005 alone, almost 500,000 Muslims were interviewed by the FBI, with none of these interviews leading to information that might detect or prevent terrorist attacks, thus suggesting unwarranted suspicion. Unsurprisingly, this means that today, "it is difficult to find an American Muslim who has not had one of these encounters with law enforcement, or knows someone who has." As of the date of the report, 2011, the FBI had an astounding 15,000 spies and informants, mainly targeting the Muslim community, and as many as 45,000 "unofficial" informants. The main task behind these operations is intelligence-gathering and surveillance, of the sort now being opposed.

The difference between these surveillance tactics used against Muslims, and the ones causing today's controversy, are not as great as they may seem. The form might be slightly different, but the reality remains the same:  They both contravene fundamental rights to privacy, undermine the rule of law in the same manner, lack the basics of transparency, and, as seen above, do not require reasonable suspicion (the fact of being or looking Muslim appears to be suspicion enough). Phone, email, even library borrowing records are not simply collected, as is the fear currently, but are then used to build a case for prosecution. The ongoing surveillance of Muslims is thus not simply a matter of a lack of privacy, but can result in severe curtailment of liberties, and in extreme cases, death.

And these powers have since evolved – as was inevitable – well beyond the simplicities of mere surveillance to include deliberate cases of FBI entrapment, which have resulted in innocent people being sentenced to decades in prison. In one case in 2009, four young Muslim men were sentenced to 25 years in prison each, after the FBI created a fake terror plot and offered to pay them for assistance in carrying it out. In the United Kingdom, the government has been busy revoking the citizenship status of Muslim Britons on national security grounds, with two such ex-citizens then killed by drone attacks.

And this is only what is happening on home soil, ignoring the extremities of Guantánamo Bay, or the recent assassinations of four American citizens by their own government, all of which are based on the same tactics of intelligence-gathering and spying causing this week's anger. These violations against Muslims, however, have not caused the same uproar as we today witness.

To be fair, there have been some protests, by the likes of Glenn Greenwald, who now leads the charge against this latest case of security services gone wild. Greenwald and certain others cannot be faulted therefore on consistency.

However, the intensity and popularity of these current protests are entirely disproportional to the revelations faced when compared to their prolonged use against Muslim and other communities. People are now outraged at the potential that their private conversations are being watched. Well, let me again welcome you to the world of a Muslim, where that fear is not a fear but a common reality.

Muslims do not simply fear that they are under surveillance; they know it – and even when it's not true. The psychology induced by the fear and knowledge of being constantly watched is crippling. It produces a modality of submission to the violence of authority and acceptance of the excesses of state power, of the sort now being protested by many. This is no doubt difficult for those with a privileged status to understand, but for many minority groups it will sound all too familiar, as will the accusations of derailing the conversation that will no doubt ensue.

Indeed, many minority communities have long ago lost their supposed "right" to privacy, and have lived with the daunting specter of excessive surveillance and over-policing for a prolonged period. The extreme over-representation of people of color in prison systems and crime statistics is clear testament to this inconvenient fact.

One must ask then: On what basis is this outrage being justified now if this has been a common occurrence for numerous other communities?

This is not a case of trying to capitalize on a popular movement in order to highlight a particular cause. As mentioned, the fight against the pervasive powers of security services is a commendable one, and one that ought to be supported. Rather, this is about acknowledging the underlying, unwitting racism fueling such causes and thereby suppressing the causes of those less-privileged. It is about recognizing our present reality, which many activists, such as Martin Luther King Jr., realized long ago: namely, that the cause of justice may only proceed when white interests are being threatened.

The outrage in this case appears to be less about the fact that rights are being trampled, and more to do with the fact that "normal" people are now also subject to their trampling. This suggests an acceptance of the suspicious nature of Muslims and other minority groups, but outrage at the fact that innocent "average Americans" could suffer the same fate. Perhaps it's time we remember that, in the face of government power, we are all as secure as our most oppressed. It's only a matter of time.

Mohamad Tabbaa is a PhD Candidate in Criminology & Law at The University of Melbourne.

All you have to do is see how many of any given race or group are in federal prisons. If your black, American Indian, foreign born or speak out for any cause whatsoever, you are spied on, profiled and eventually charged with a crime even if you do not do anything except speak out or join a protest. Now they have the capability to profile and charge anyone, even those who do nothing to deserve the attention.  Welcome to 1984. 

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:
    .....the forum for free & fair debate, Everyone welcome. Hate Obama's health care plan, tell us!
    .

    __,_._,___

    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
     
     

    Here’s a headline I bet you never thought you’d see: ‘Cross dressers arrested at Saudi Gay Wedding’





    BareNakedIslam posted: "Saudi Arabia's religious police raided a party involving more than 80 young men who had come in women's dresses and wearing make up to mark the wedding of a man to another man, on Thursday. Emirates 24/7  Members of the Commission for the Promotion of Vi"

    New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

    Here's a headline I bet you never thought you'd see: 'Cross dressers arrested at Saudi Gay Wedding'

    by BareNakedIslam

    Saudi Arabia's religious police raided a party involving more than 80 young men who had come in women's dresses and wearing make up to mark the wedding of a man to another man, on Thursday. Emirates 24/7  Members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, backed by other police men […]

    Read more of this post

    BareNakedIslam | June 14, 2013 at 6:10 pm | Categories: Laughing at Islam | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-UFB

    Comment    See all comments

    Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

    Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
    http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/06/14/heres-a-headline-i-bet-you-never-thought-youd-see-cross-dressers-arrested-at-saudi-gay-wedding/




    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
     
     

    Fwd: The Insomniac Libertarian:Tap It: The NSA Slow Jam (featuring @goremy)



    --------
    Post: Tap It: The NSA Slow Jam (featuring @goremy)
    Link: http://insomniaclibertarian.blogspot.com/2013/06/tap-it-nsa-slow-jam-featuring-goremy.html

    --
    Powered by Blogger
    http://www.blogger.com/

    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
     
     

    Fwd: It's good to live in Michigan



    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From:
    Date: Friday, June 14, 2013
    Subject: It's good to live in Michigan
    To: Pred544@aol.com, Postherguy@aol.com, FKerogen@aol.com, paul_dunk@msn.com, num1mema@aol.com, mcmast@aol.com, jmills9786@aol.com, massud.tejaratchi@gmail.com
    Cc: oldpolitico@cs.com, majors.bruce@gmail.com, beau@gcbussu.com, d3869@sbcglobal.net, onepocketplayer@gmail.com, colony14@gmail.com, boldsaber@gmail.com, predatorbc@aol.com, lascoti@aol.com, anakahamon@ritternet.com, gregory@hisholychurch.org, evedemian@verizon.net, earn4462@aol.com, anneteresa1@aol.com, pasharabit@verizon.net, sherrydawn06@aol.com, glendahjessop@hotmail.com, jreed62254@aol.com, finedude01@aol.com, microdhses@gmail.com, ladywindsor1@aol.com, helbigdennis@gmail.com, hwy2800@aol.com, stevenshamrak.e@gmail.com, churi1001@gmail.com, rgellar000@yahoo.com, ducky4817@comcast.net, scorpi0lady1@aol.com, carpbear@sbcglobal.net, whatnowgop@yahoo.com, sergeantfreedom@hotmail.com, harleymanfl@cox.net, algae5636@aol.com, geriohmy@aol.com, vbboyd123456@yahoo.com, sweetpea88mlc@aol.com, audiolaw@aol.com, ez4u2cme@aol.com, advancedstudiesca@gmail.com, apassaro@crosslink.net, sergeantalvarez@gmail.com, rockysma1@msn.com, sirguy2003@ameritech.net, lfeverest@yahoo.com, echos70@aol.com, maximus475@cox.net, tdietlin@sbcglobal.net, michelle.seltzer@yahoo.com, twelve43@comcast.net, trggerhppy13@aol.com, jimmybug@rocketmail.com, laurenickysdad@aol.com, phayes9402@comcast.net, mccloediii@dslextreme.com, chasnemo@aol.com, mckinneyhunter@aol.com, stephengoldbergmba@mail.com, bullfrogsnavy@aol.com, wilemd@aol.com, hillbillytrailer@aol.com, mccarthyemc@aol.com, gunner847@aol.com, kidwell18@comcast.net, vandoran.heather@yahoo.com, elliajt@aol.com, ellisjohn792@aol.com, davidw1235@aol.com


    After several years as the #1 most dangerous city in the US, Detroit finally dropped to #2.  Lucky for us Michiganders, Flint, MI took over the #1 spot.  Its good to be Numero Uno still!!

    2. Detroit, Mich.
    > Violent crimes per 100,000: 2,122.6
    > Population: 707,096
    > 2012 murders: 386
    > Poverty rate: 40.9%
    > Pct. of adults with high school degree: 77.4%

    Detroit's murder rate of 54.2 per 100,000 residents was the second highest in the country last year. The homicide rate in Detroit, which included 386 criminal murders and an additional 25 justifiable homicides, reached the highest level in nearly 40 years. In addition, the city's aggravated assault rate of 1,320.8 cases per 100,000 people was also the second highest in the United States, although this was an improvement from the 1,333.6 cases per 100,000 residents in 2011. Detroit has struggled economically in recent years. The city's 2012 unemployment rate was a whopping 18.6%, much higher than the 8.1% across the nation last year. The median household income of $25,193 was less than half the national median for 2011.

    Also Read: The Best Cities for High Tech Jobs

    1. Flint, Mich.
    > Violent crimes per 100,000: 2,729.5
    > Population: 101,632
    > 2012 murders: 63
    > Poverty rate: 40.6%
    > Pct. of adults with high school degree: 82.9%

    With a staggering 2,729.5 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, no city had a higher violent crime rate than Flint. The city of just 101,632 people had 63 total murders and 1,930 aggravated assaults, both the highest relative to the city's population. Flint also had nationwide highs in burglary rates and arson per 100,000 people. The sheriff of Genesee County, where Flint is located, proposed a plan to create a violent crime mobile response unit that would cost $3 million. However, Governor Rick Snyder rejected the plan because he believed resources would be better "integrated into the ongoing efforts to make Flint safer." Like Detroit, Flint has suffered economically in recent years. The median household income was just $23,380 in 2011, the second-lowest of all 555 cities measured by the U.S. Census Bureau.

     
    Our voice is best heard when Power yields, then whispers to Liberty – Strength. And when Liberty stands under Heaven and shouts to Power – Freedom.

    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
     
     

    Suddenly, white people care about privacy incursions

    You think you are being clever by pointing out hypocrisy 

    But the bigger truth is Obama and the Democrats want to treat everyone in America like a black man in a 40s small town ruled by the Klan 

    On Friday, June 14, 2013, Chris Gambrell wrote:
     

    Thursday, Jun 13, 2013 09:25 AM PST

    Suddenly, white people care about privacy incursions

    For many, government surveillance has been a regular part of life, especially since 9/11. So, why the outrage now?

    By

    As a result of the recent revelations about National Security Agency surveillance, a fierce debate about privacy and the powers of security services has been raging. But in light of the fact that such an approach has long been taken toward a segment of Americans, one might ask why it required this latest series of developments to spur discussion.

    Mounting domestic and international pressure against the PRISM surveillance program has forced the Obama administration to concede that the revelations have sparked "an appropriate debate." Concern – and in some cases, outrage — at these measures has been expressed by general members of the public and politicians, many of whom made no secret of their anger or mistrust toward them. Given the seriousness of the allegations, the outrage expressed at such a situation is obviously justified; the courage of the leaker and those taking the fight to government, commendable.

    But what, it must be asked, is driving all the outrage?

    If one follows the debate on this issue, we are told it's simply due to the fact that rights to privacy are being effortlessly contravened, the rule of law is being undermined (yet again), transparency has reached an all-new low, and that worst of all, this is all happening to innocent people. This is true no doubt, and anger at such facts is warranted and reasonable. But is any of this actually new?

    There appears to be a discrepancy in our anger and protest against such measures. For years now, and well before the discovery of these leaked documents, we have been complacently living with the public knowledge of certain truths. Rights to privacy have been systematically and openly violated for years, without much fuss. The rule of law has been suspended indefinitely, in places like Guantánamo Bay, for example, with barely a peep. Lack of transparency? We've gotten used to it in certain cases, it seems. Severe violations of these and other rights targeted against innocent people have become so normalized, that we now discuss them simply in terms of efficiency, stripped of any considerations for legal protections.

    Welcome to the world of the Muslim, post-Sept. 11.

    There is an elephant in the room that needs to be addressed in this discussion, one that will no doubt cause much backlash and reap accusations of all sorts and from the best of people, as such elephants often do. It is difficult to raise this issue due to its sensitive nature, and particularly at such a sensitive time – which is precisely why it is so important to do so.

    In spite of this sensitivity, let me outline the case: The issue of excessive surveillance is not new – the only new aspect here is that it now encompasses a larger population; specifically, white America. It needs to therefore be asked as to whether this is the real reason for all the spontaneous outrage of late.

    Since the events of Sept. 11 and the proliferation of anti-terror laws enacted around the world, Muslims have been subjected to the very violations that are now the scene of such fierce protest globally. These tactics of surveillance and control have been carried out with much disclosure and in public knowledge. They have been publicized, discussed, justified and ultimately accepted as – at the very least – "necessary evils." As early as 2001, then-President George W. Bush made no secret of these draconian powers when signing the Patriot Act: "This new law that I sign today will allow surveillance of all communications used by [suspected] terrorists, including e-mails, the Internet, and cell phones."

    This same legislation being used today to justify the PRISM surveillance powers, which the Obama administration is now considering revising as a result of these protests, has already been explicitly in use against Muslims for over a decade. The extent of surveillance used against Muslims in that time is nothing short of disturbing. Director of Muslim Advocates, a U.S. legal advocacy organization, Farhana Khera, sums it up well:

    Today, the FBI can show up at your work, unannounced, to interrogate you about an article on political events you post on Facebook, or seize information about your phone calls, e-mails, internet activity and medical and banking records — all without a shred of evidence that you've engaged in criminal activity.

    On the 10-year anniversary of the legislation, Khera's organization published a report detailing the loss of liberty Muslims faced due to the Patriot Act. The details are unsettling. Between the years of 2001 and 2005 alone, almost 500,000 Muslims were interviewed by the FBI, with none of these interviews leading to information that might detect or prevent terrorist attacks, thus suggesting unwarranted suspicion. Unsurprisingly, this means that today, "it is difficult to find an American Muslim who has not had one of these encounters with law enforcement, or knows someone who has." As of the date of the report, 2011, the FBI had an astounding 15,000 spies and informants, mainly targeting the Muslim community, and as many as 45,000 "unofficial" informants. The main task behind these operations is intelligence-gathering and surveillance, of the sort now being opposed.

    The difference between these surveillance tactics used against Muslims, and the ones causing today's controversy, are not as great as they may seem. The form might be slightly different, but the reality remains the same:  They both contravene fundamental rights to privacy, undermine the rule of law in the same manner, lack the basics of transparency, and, as seen above, do not require reasonable suspicion (the fact of being or looking Muslim appears to be suspicion enough). Phone, email, even library borrowing records are not simply collected, as is the fear currently, but are then used to build a case for prosecution. The ongoing surveillance of Muslims is thus not simply a matter of a lack of privacy, but can result in severe curtailment of liberties, and in extreme cases, death.

    And these powers have since evolved – as was inevitable – well beyond the simplicities of mere surveillance to include deliberate cases of FBI entrapment, which have resulted in innocent people being sentenced to decades in prison. In one case in 2009, four young Muslim men were sentenced to 25 years in prison each, after the FBI created a fake terror plot and offered to pay them for assistance in carrying it out. In the United Kingdom, the government has been busy revoking the citizenship status of Muslim Britons on national security grounds, with two such ex-citizens then killed by drone attacks.

    And this is only what is happening on home soil, ignoring the extremities of Guantánamo Bay, or the recent assassinations of four American citizens by their own government, all of which are based on the same tactics of intelligence-gathering and spying causing this week's anger. These violations against Muslims, however, have not caused the same uproar as we today witness.

    To be fair, there have been some protests, by the likes of Glenn Greenwald, who now leads the charge against this latest case of security services gone wild. Greenwald and certain others cannot be faulted therefore on consistency.

    However, the intensity and popularity of these current protests are entirely disproportional to the revelations faced when compared to their prolonged use against Muslim and other communities. People are now outraged at the potential that their private conversations are being watched. Well, let me again welcome you to the world of a Muslim, where that fear is not a fear but a common reality.

    Muslims do not simply fear that they are under surveillance; they know it – and even when it's not true. The psychology induced by the fear and knowledge of being constantly watched is crippling. It produces a modality of submission to the violence of authority and acceptance of the excesses of state power, of the sort now being protested by many. This is no doubt difficult for those with a privileged status to understand, but for many minority groups it will sound all too familiar, as will the accusations of derailing the conversation that will no doubt ensue.

    Indeed, many minority communities have long ago lost their supposed "right" to privacy, and have lived with the daunting specter of excessive surveillance and over-policing for a prolonged period. The extreme over-representation of people of color in prison systems and crime statistics is clear testament to this inconvenient fact.

    One must ask then: On what basis is this outrage being justified now if this has been a common occurrence for numerous other communities?

    This is not a case of trying to capitalize on a popular movement in order to highlight a particular cause. As mentioned, the fight against the pervasive powers of security services is a commendable one, and one that ought to be supported. Rather, this is about acknowledging the underlying, unwitting racism fueling such causes and thereby suppressing the causes of those less-privileged. It is about recognizing our present reality, which many activists, such as Martin Luther King Jr., realized long ago: namely, that the cause of justice may only proceed when white interests are being threatened.

    The outrage in this case appears to be less about the fact that rights are being trampled, and more to do with the fact that "normal" people are now also subject to their trampling. This suggests an acceptance of the suspicious nature of Muslims and other minority groups, but outrage at the fact that innocent "average Americans" could suffer the same fate. Perhaps it's time we remember that, in the face of government power, we are all as secure as our most oppressed. It's only a matter of time.

    Mohamad Tabbaa is a PhD Candidate in Criminology & Law at The University of Melbourne.

    All you have to do is see how many of any given race or group are in federal prisons. If your black, American Indian, foreign born or speak out for any cause whatsoever, you are spied on, profiled and eventually charged with a crime even if you do not do anything except speak out or join a protest. Now they have the capability to profile and charge anyone, even those who do nothing to deserve the attention.  Welcome to 1984. 

    __._,_.___
    Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
    Recent Activity:
    .....the forum for free & fair debate, Everyone welcome. Hate Obama's health care plan, tell us!
    .

    __,_._,___

    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
     
     

    Re: Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden

    Although I have no clue what we are still doing in Afghanistan,  any sound bite caught from RT is highly suspicious and not at all credible.

     

     


    On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:43 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:
    a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for
    decades.
    ---
    I've been seeing a tv show promo about some some soldiers in
    Afghanistan.
    One of the soundbites for the promo shows a soldier saying ... 'we're
    fighting for each other.'

    US soldiers in Afghanistan are not fighting for their country or their
    flag, but rather for each other, war reporter and filmmaker Sebastian
    Junger told RT.
    "What I realized in the five months that I spent at this little
    outpost at the Korangal Valley in eastern Afghanistan -huge amount of
    combat, very isolated place – what I realized is that the guys were
    not fighting for flag and country," he said. "They may have joined up
    for those sorts of reasons, but once they were there, they were
    fighting for each other and there was a completely kind of fraternal
    arrangement that had very little broad conceptual motivations behind
    it."
    Not many American soldiers in Afghanistan take their time to reflect
    on why they are fighting this war, they are just fighting it, Junger
    said.
    "They did not debate why are we in Afghanistan very much," he said.
    "It is like, well, 9/11, 3000 Americans were killed by attacks coming
    out of Afghanistan and we had to go to that country and fix it and
    find the people who killed our American brothers and sisters, and that
    is about the extent of their analysis."

    On Jun 14, 12:44 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
    > Ilana Mercer:"'Thank You For Your Service, Mr. Snowden'" is my current column, now on WND. It ends thus: "Come every Memorial Day – more aptly called 'Dying For Nothing Day' – we direct a commonplace saying at members of a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for decades. It is, however, to a young man such as [Edward Snowden] that we should say:
    > "Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden." Read the other 1080 words @http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/thank-you-for-your-service-mr-snowden/"Come every Memorial Day -- more aptly called "Dying For Nothing Day" -- we direct a commonplace saying at members of a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for decades. It is, however, to a young man such as this that we should say:
    > ""Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden.""RETURN TO REASONThank you for your service, Mr. Snowden'Let us prove ourselves worthy of his sacrifice'14 June 2013
    >  Ilana Mercer
    > A heroic American whistleblower chooses, oh-so wisely, to expose Uncle Sam's usurpations to the veteran reporters of the British Guardian and not to the partisan hacks of the American press. This fact tells you all you need to know about U.S. presstitutes.
    > Confirmation of the degree to which American media have been co-opted by power came on June 10, again, via a British newspaper. The Mail Online divulged that Edward Snowden had "first approached the Washington Post with his leaks, but the newspaper refused to comply with his publishing demands."
    > You see, the Washington Post had to hotfoot it back to Big Brother Obama before it would do its journalistic due diligence. "The Post broke the story on PRISM two weeks later, on Thursday, after consulting with government officials,"confirmedthe Mail Online.
    > Even after being scooped by the Guardian, the Obama embeds at the Washington Post saw fit to inform their readers about PRISM on a purely need-to-know basis, "reprinting only four of the 41 PRISM PowerPoint slides" and generally misrepresenting the nature of the program known as PRISM. The manufactured-in-America version of PRISM thus contradicts the "internal NSA documents" leaked to the Guardian.
    > According to the guardian of American freedoms at the Guardian, reporter Glenn Greenwald, the 41-slide PowerPoint presentation he acquired from Snowden has been authenticated as a document "used to train intelligence operatives on the capabilities of the program." The presentation,pictorials with captions, handed out by the National Security Agency, boasts of having "direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, PalTalk, YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL, and other servers."
    > Contrary to what you're being told, "the world's largest surveillance organization" can and does "obtain targeted communications without having to request them from the service providers and without having to obtain individual court orders." And it is contrary to the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, in particular. It specifies that "warrants shall issue" only "upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
    > Tellingly, the tools of Big Media and big government are not apprising you of these facts. Like a tortoise in its shell, they've retreated from the watersheds that are theAP,theIRSand the NSA scandals, informing you only of what New York and Northeast elites think is important:"Most of you still like Obama."
    > In light of "the disclosure that the federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation," the Gray Lady endeavored, fleetingly, to shake off a flea or two and adopt a slightly less reverential tone toward the godhead Obama. The New York Times quickly lay down with dogs again; the paper rushed to restore Obama's bona fides the following day.
    > As to other "nimble" minds in media:Andrea Tarantula,one of the interchangeable females on a Fox News idiot's extravaganza called "The Five," said that, "If they are competent with my information; they can have it. If not, let me have my freedoms back."
    > To Andrea (who is, admittedly, not as invincibly stupid as the statist Dana Perino), the inviolable "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" is subject to the efficiency of a naturally illicit search.
    > Not for Greg Gutfeld are arguments from principle. Sitting in for Bill O'Reilly, Gutfeld declared that "this" was not about surveillance but about a progressive government that could not be trusted. The majority of Americans are equally adrift, oblivious to the individual liberties American Constitution makers bequeathed them. The individuals questioned by the polling professionals at the Pew Research Center were inclined to approve of the phone-call tapping of millions, if conducted by the party for which they voted.
    > Lawrence O'Donnell and his entourage at MSNBC -- Alex Wagner and Chris Hayes, the most enthusiastic Obama bobbleheads on TV -- acted all surprised about rudderless America, never implicating their daily, partisan promotionals in the process. The hosts harped on the fact that no harm had come from the NSA PRISM program. And, after all, was Obama not obligated to continue the incursions into liberty begun by Bush?C'est la vie. Wagner did display a modicum of remorse for her cover-up. She admitted that Obama had gone beyond the call of duty in expanding counterterrorism and state surveillance.
    > Neoconservatives such as Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and radio talker Hugh Hewitt all pronounced the NSA data sweep a non-scandal. Another neocon, Charles Krauthammer, saw Obama's infractions as a vindication of Bush's. The columnist invited Democrats now excusing Obama to pardon Bush and … party on.
    > Snowden came forth, in his words, "to reveal criminality." But Fox News' Megyn Kelly chose to mine crime from the ore of virtue. Kelly summoned a two-bit profiler, allegedly from the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit -- who sounded like she'd been plucked from the set of"Criminal Minds"-- to expose "this guy." Not to be outperformed by Kelly, the profiler unloaded terms like "loser" and "drop-out" on a man who has held many responsible positions within the intelligence community in his young life.
    > Yet another Fox News personality, Neil Cavuto, went on to compare Snowden to celebrity seducer Roman Polanski, who, in 1978, sought asylum in France after being convicted of sleeping with an American minor. Chimed Cavuto, "We don't know why [Snowden] did what he did."
    > Oh yes we do. Contra Cavuto, Snowden forsook creature comforts and worldly possessions to speak truth to power -- and not to any power. The 29-year-old NSA contractor has gone up "against the world's most powerful intelligence agencies," as he stated soberly. Snowden understands his chances of prevailing are not good. "[T]ey're such powerful adversaries that no one can meaningfully oppose them. If they want to get you, they will get you in time."
    > In Snowden's poignant words, "You can't wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realized that leadership is about being the first to act." "I'm neither traitor nor hero. I'm an American," he summed-up so simply.
    > Yes, we need fewer personalities like Cavuto and more men of character like Snowden.
    > Those who're not suspended in the moral abyss with mainstream media already know that Edward Snowden is the best of America. Let us prove ourselves worthy of his sacrifice.
    > Come every Memorial Day -- more aptly called "Dying For Nothing Day" -- we direct a commonplace saying at members of a military that has not defended authentic American liberties for decades. It is, however, to a young man such as this that we should say:
    > "Thank you for your service, Mr. Snowden."http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/thank-you-for-your-service-mr-snowden/

    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



    --
    --
    Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
    For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
     
    * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
    * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
    * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
     
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.