Congress’ Treachery, the FBI’s Double-Crossing and the
American Citizenry’s Cluelessness: With Friends Like These, Who Needs Enemies?
By John W. Whitehead
May 31, 2016
“The evil was not in bread and circuses, per se, but in the willingness of the people to sell
their rights as free men for full bellies and the excitement of the games which
would serve to distract them from the other human hungers which bread and
circuses can never appease.” — Admiral Ben Moreell (1892 – 1978), chief of the
U.S. Navy’s Bureau of Yards and Docks and of the Civil Engineer Corps
As the grandfather of three young ones, ages 5 to 9, I
get to see my fair share of kid movies: plenty of hijinks, lots of bathroom
humor, and an endless stream of slapstick gags. Yet even among the worst of the
lot, there’s something to be learned, some message being conveyed, or some
aspect of our reality being reflected in celluloid.
So it was that I found myself sitting through The
Angry Birds Movie on a recent Sunday afternoon, doling out popcorn,
candy and drinks and trying to make sense of a 90-minute movie based on a cell
phone video game that has been downloaded more than 3 billion times.
The storyline is simple enough: an island nation of
well-meaning, feel-good, flightless birds gets seduced by a charismatic green pig
and his cohort who comes bearing food, wine and entertainment spectacles (the Roman equivalent of bread circuses).
Ignoring the warnings of one solitary, suspicious “angry” bird that the pigs
are up to no good, the clueless birds eventually discover that the pigs have
stolen their most precious possessions: their eggs, the future of their entire
society. It takes the “angry bird” to motivate the normally unflappable Bird
Nation to get outraged enough to do something about the violation of their
trust by the pigs and the theft of their personal property.
While one would be hard-pressed to call The
Angry Birds Movie overly insightful, it is, as The Atlantic concludes,
a “feather-light metaphor for our times… The film functions, effectively, as a fairy tale: It
uses its status as fantasy to impart lessons about reality.”
It turns out that we’re no different from the
wine-guzzling, food-noshing, party-loving Bird Nation. We too are easily fooled
by charismatic politicians bearing gifts. And we too are easily distracted as
those same politicians and their cohorts rob us blind.
Case in point: while Barack Obama winds down his
presidency with a flurry of celebrity-studded events that is causing the media
to hail him as the “coolest” president, and the presidential candidates continue
to distract us with spectacular feats of chest-thumping, browbeating and
demagoguery, the police state continues its steady march onward.
Nothing has improved or changed for the better.
There has been no real reform, no significant attempts
at greater transparency, no accountability, no scaling back of the government’s
warrantless, illegal domestic surveillance programs, and no recognition by
Congress or the courts that the Fourth Amendment provides citizens with any
protection against unreasonable searches and seizures by government agents.
In fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the
American People, we’ve been subject to even more obfuscation, even more
lies, even more sleight-of-hand maneuvers by government agencies determined to
keep doing what they’re doing without any restrictions on their nefarious
activities, and even more attempts by government agencies to listen in our
phone calls, read our emails and text messages, monitor our movements, and
generally imprison us within an electronic concentration camp.
Writing for the New Yorker, investigative
reporter Maria Bustillos concludes, “the machinery of our government seems to have taken
on an irrational life of its own. We live in a surreal world in which a
‘transparent’ government insists on the need for secret courts; our President
prosecutes whistle-blowers and maintains a secret ‘kill list’; and private
information is collected in secret and stored indefinitely by intelligence
agencies.”
Yes, you read that correctly.
The government is planning to push through secret legislation that would magnify its ability to secretly spy
on us without a warrant.
After three years of lying to us about the real nature
of the government’s spying program, feigning ignorance, dissembling, and
playing at enacting real reforms, it turns out that what the government really
wants is more power, more control and more surveillance.
A secret provision tacked onto the 2017 Intelligence Authorization Act will actually make it easier for the government
to spy on Americans’ emails as well as their phone calls.
If enacted, this law would build upon the Patriot Act’s authorization of
National Security Letters (NSL)
which allows the FBI to secretly demand—without prior approval from a judge and
under a gag order that carries the penalty of a prison sentence—that banks,
phone companies, and other businesses provide them with customer information
and not disclose the demands to the person being investigated or even indicate
that they have been subjected to an NSL.
As if the FBI didn’t have enough corrupt tools in its
bag of tricks already.
NSLs—in existence since the 1970s—empower FBI
operatives to delve into Americans’ most personal affairs based only on the
say-so of an agency that has come to be known as America’s Gestapo, or secret
police. Incredibly, all the FBI needs to assert in order to justify such a
search is that the information sought is relevant to a
national-security investigation.
Nicholas Merrill can tell you all about NSLs. The head of a
web-hosting company, he challenged the FBI’s unwarranted request for
information on one of his customers and its companion gag order. Only after the
FBI withdrew its request and a subsequent court-ordered lifting of
the gag order was
Merrill able to share his experiences. As Merrill recounts:
It was not a warrant. It was not stamped or signed by
a court or a judge. It was this letter demanding this information from me. And
it also told me that I could never tell anyone that I had gotten the letter. It
said that I could tell ‘no person.’ The amount of information that the government
can get with one of these letters can paint an incredibly vivid picture of all
aspects of a person’s life — from the professional, to the personal, to the
political, to their religious beliefs, to invading the privacy of their
marriage, to being able to figure out what their sexual preference is.
The
amount of information that comes out of a national security letter is just so
invasive. The fact that the government has been treating it so casually, and
essentially going out on mass fishing expeditions and gathering the data of potentially millions
of Americans without any suspicion of wrongdoing is very upsetting to me as
someone who was raised on ideas about American exceptionalism and the belief
that our system of government — with its built-in checks and balances and
safeguards against abuse — were what made our country different from other
countries.
Clandestine requests. Broad powers. Minimal insight.
Intimidation tactics.
That’s how the FBI’s use of NSLs are described, but it can easily be applied to the
government-at-large and its voracious quest for ever-greater powers without any
real accountability to the citizenry or any adherence to the rule of law.
Even after being called on the carpet for abusing its
information-gathering powers, the FBI continued to flout the very laws put in place to keep government
abuses in check.
Now, here we are, eight years later, and we’re still
being treated like the gullible birds in The Angry Birds Movie, easily
pacified with bread, easily distracted by circuses, and easily robbed of our
most precious possessions—our freedoms, our privacy and our right to have a
government that abides by the rule of law and answers to us.
There are many ways of reacting to this latest news
about the government’s treachery.
You can subscribe to the simplistic, head-in-the-sand
routine and do as one of my so-called Facebook “friends” suggests and just obey
the law, hoping that it will keep you out of the government’s clutches, but
that’s no guarantee of safe passage. Of course, that will mean knowing the
law—federal, state and local—in all of its convoluted, massive, growing
permutations, understanding that overcriminalization has resulted in the average person unknowingly
committing three crimes a day.
You can insist that such concessions to security are
making us safer, even though facts suggest otherwise.Barring a few notable exceptions, the politicians are
singing the same tune: security at any cost. The NSL provision sailed past the
15-member Senate Intelligence Committee with only Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
dissenting. In a joint statement that underscores the ease with which the Republicans
and Democrats work together in order to sell us out, Chairman Richard Burr
(R-NC) and Vice Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) declared the expanded
powers necessary to “keep America safe” and “vital” in order to “provide intelligence
agencies with all the resources they need to prevent attacks both at home and
abroad.”
This whole line of reasoning, as Nicholas Merrill explains,
is hogwash. As he points out, the terrorist attacks in Paris were carried out
by individuals “communicating without the use of any type of security or
encryption. They were speaking in Facebook groups and using regular text
messaging on their phones, without taking any steps to cover their tracks or
make it harder to listen in on what they were doing. To me this proves that the whole dragnet surveillance
system that we’ve built is actually useless, because it didn’t help us at all to prevent that
type of attack.”
In other words, government spying isn’t making us
safer, but it is making us less free. “In the end we’ve lost part of our freedom that
maybe we’ll never get back.
We’ve lost some part of what makes our system great, but in the end we’ve not
really gained the security we thought we would get in the tradeoff for the
freedom that we’ve given up.”
You can cast your ballot for one of the many
slogan-spouting politicians who are long on lies and short on loyalty to their
constituents. At the end of
the day, these people work for the government and their primary purpose is to
remain in office, living the kind of rarefied, pampered, privileged life that
the average American only gets to dream about. Every one of the members of the
Senate Intelligence Committee who voted for this legislation is a traitor to
their oath of office and should be booted off that committee. What’s more, any
member of Congress who votes for this legislation should be sent packing back
to where they came from. As Brewster Kahle, another recipient of an NSL who successfully
challenged the government’s gag order, reminds us, “The government is not one
monolithic thing. It’s a bunch of people, thinking they’re
doing their jobs.” It’s our job to make them toe the line when their thinking
goes awry.
Or you can stop drinking the happy juice, stop
believing the politicians’ lies, stop being so gallingly gullible and out to
lunch, and start getting angry. In our politically correct, feel-good, play nice
culture, anger has gotten a bad rap, but there’s something to be said for
righteous anger acted upon in a nonviolent, effective fashion. It’s what Martin
Luther King Jr. referred to as “military nonviolent resistance.” It means
caring enough to get off your caboose, get on your feet and get actively
involved in holding government officials accountable to the simple fact that
they work for “we the people.”
It’s not an easy undertaking.
The government has been playing fast and loose with
the rules for too long now, and its greed for power and riches is boundless.
Still we are not powerless, although the government’s
powers grow daily. We have not yet been altogether muzzled, although the acts
of censorship increase daily. And we have not yet lost all hope for restoring
our republic, although the outlook appears bleaker by the day.
For the moment, we still have some small allotment of
freedoms by which we can express our displeasure, push back against injustice
and corruption, and resist tyranny. One Texas man, outraged at being fined $212
for driving 39 in a 30 mph zone, chose to pay his fine with 22,000 pennies. It was a small act of disdain in the face of a
government machine that tolerates little resistance, but it was acts such as
these that sowed the early seeds of resistance that birthed this nation.
As revolutionary patriot Samuel Adams observed, “It
does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority,
keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
WC: 2478
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.