-Caveat Lector- [radtimes] # 173 An informally produced compendium of vital irregularities. "We're living in rad times!" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Send $$ to RadTimes!! --> (See ** at end.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contents: --Unarmed and unsafe --The School Of The American Empire --Poverty Among America's Poorest Citizens Worsens --Marines Develop a New Weapon --U.S. Air Force Readies Cyberwar Efforts --Making sure the laws are being followed --Globalization foes, police clash after World Economic Forum in Cancun --Mexican cops clash with protesters =================================================================== Unarmed and unsafe <http://www.townhall.com/columnists/paulcraigroberts/pcr20010228.shtml> by Paul Craig Roberts February 28, 2001 The last vestige of civilized Britain has fallen away, the unarmed British "Bobbie." For 170 years, British police functioned without guns. Since their founding by Sir Robert Peel in 1829, Bobbies walked their beats armed only with their nightsticks. Until the last few years of these 17 decades, the British public was armed. Now it is the other way around. The police have guns, and the law-abiding public doesn't. What happened? Britain has the most severe "gun control" laws in the world. Not even members of the British Olympic Shooting Team are allowed pistols. The British are reduced to registered single- and double-barreled shotguns, and the maximum permitted shell load is birdshot. According to the arguments of gun-control advocates, Britain should be safe and crime free. But, alas, violent crime and robberies have skyrocketed. Gunfights between rival immigrant gangs caused the revolution in British policing. In Robin Hood's Nottinghamshire, constables now patrol in pairs armed with semi-automatic pistols. They are backed up by armed-response vehicles (ARVs) stocked with submachine guns. If gun control makes society safe, why was it necessary to overthrow British police tradition, arm police with semiautomatic weapons and provide machinegun backup? As a test case in gun control, Britain proves it to be a total failure. The result is exactly the one predicted by the National Rifle Association: "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." In Britain, a man's home may be his castle where the king of England cannot enter without a warrant, but robbers and rapists enter at will. It is easier and less risky for a criminal to have his way with a victim in the privacy of the victim's home than in public. Gun control has made home invasion safe for criminals. In the United States, experts have proven time and again that widespread gun ownership is a deterrent to crime and prevents between 1 million and 3 million criminal acts each year. Gun ownership saves numerous lives and foils large numbers of rapes and robberies. Yet, gun controllers persist in their attempts to disarm the public. A person can't help but wonder whether gun-control advocates are uninformed fools or have a secret agenda. Once gun control enters politics, the lying makes even Bill and Hillary Clinton blush. As the 20th century came to a close, Canadian Justice Minister Allan Rock fended off criticisms of a gun-registration bill his government was pushing by giving assurances that "there is no reason to confiscate legally owned firearms." Within 10 months of the minister's assurances, 553,000 legally registered handguns were confiscated. Now, rifles and shotguns must be licensed and registered. Having learned that the only purpose of registration is to tell the government where the guns are, compliance has collapsed. Large numbers of law-abiding Canadians prefer to risk five years in prison than to register their guns. Gun-control laws dramatically reduce public safety and turn law-abiding citizens into law-breakers. Licensing and registration increase crime by devoting police resources to paperwork. Gun registration databases cannot prevent crimes or aid in their solving, because criminals do not register their guns. The people most dangerous to the public are not on the FBI's "Most Wanted List." Far more dangerous to our safety than criminals are gun-control extremists like Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sarah Brady of Handgun Control. These are the people who will leave us defenseless as they abrogate the Constitution and destroy respect for law, while promising an end to "gun violence." The American Rifleman reports that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) -- the guys who brought us Waco, are using intimidation and threats to compile an illegal registry of gun owners. BATF thumbs its nose at federal court decisions and continues to harass legitimate gun dealers and purchasers as if they were criminals. We need to ask ourselves why liberals have made gun confiscation such a priority. I think it is to distract us from the disastrous results of liberal social engineering. When high-school students shoot their classmates and workers open fire on their co-workers, the fault lies not in guns. It lies in the breakdown in self-control and moral integrity. The irrational shootings are due to the success of liberals in achieving their goals. =================================================================== The School Of The American Empire By Mumia Abu-Jamal, M A. #495 Column Written 2/10/2001 [ Get Mumia's columns by email: http://www.MumiaBook.com ] - Monday, 19 February 2001 - ..."A society that becomes accustomed to using violence to solve its problems, both large and small, is a society in which the roots of human relations are diseased." -- Ignacio Martin-Baró, O.J. It is virtually impossible for anyone to consider the horrific violence that has taken place in Central and Latin America, without accounting for the hideous roots of that violence, that grow and thrive in America. For decades, the bloody flood from murders, massacres, rapes, torture and carnage, created a trail that could be traced to the doorsteps of a U.S. military training institution known as the School of the Americas, in Fort Benning, Georgia. Human rights activists have held increasingly swelling demonstrations at the SOA, and have dubbed it the "School of Assassins." For years the Pentagon dismissed such criticism, and defended the SOA as an elite international training academy for "counter-insurgency," or, more obliquely, for "teaching democracy." The graduates of SOA, however, constituted a kind of rogue's gallery of military despots and dictators, like Bolivia's Gen. Hugo Banzer Suárez, who brutally suppressed progressive church workers and striking tin miners; like Guatemalan dictator Gen. Romeo Lucas García (1978-82), whose rule saw over 5,000 political killings and about 25,000 civilians murdered by the Guatemalan army; and Gen. Juan Rafael Bustillo, of El Salvador, former airforce chief, who, according to a U.N. report of 1993, both planned and then covered up the massacre of six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper, and her daughter, for starters. If you mention a massacre, the chances are great that the men who either ordered or committed the deed were SOA grads. The El Mozote, El Junquillo, Las Hojas, and San Sebastian Massacres were all the work of SOA- trained "death squads." When four U.S. churchwomen were raped and murdered, when Archbishop Oscar Romero was assassinated, when union members were killed, it was SOA grads who led in the carnage. U.S.-trained and armed SOA people have been involved in so many military coups that in Latin America the school is known as the escuela de golpes-coup school. Recently, the Defense Deptartment, stung by decades of negative publicity, officially "closed" SOA, only to immediately reopen it under the name Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Co-operation (WHISC). Although not as catchy as SOA, WHISC promises to play the same game, by another name. Shortly after the Jesuit murders, U.S.-trained Salvadoran troops surrounded the office of the Catholic archdiocese, and shouted, "Ignacio Ellacuría and Ignacio Martin-Baró have already fallen and we will continue murdering communists! Ellacuría and Martin-Baró were two Jesuit priests involved in Christian base communities, where the poor learned literacy, history and how to organize for human rights in the midst of monstrous repression. Martin-Baró was a brilliant liberation theologist and psychologist, who, like the revolutionary Frantz Fanon, chose the side of the oppressed rather than the rich and powerful oppressors. For this he was targeted by the U.S.-trained terrorists of the SOA, and it is for men and women like him, who seek an end to economic and social oppression, that imperial training camps, like SOA/WHISC exist. Its name has changed, but the game remains the same. =================================================================== Poverty Among America's Poorest Citizens Worsens 27 Feb 14:00 Poverty Among America's Poorest Citizens Worsens While States Drag Their Feet on Anti-Poverty Efforts, Report Finds Contact: Lindsay Barenz, 202-842-3100, for the National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support WASHINGTON -- Millions of American families that have left welfare are worse off economically today because many state governments are not spending the federal funds intended to help them transition into work or take care of their children, according to a new report made public today. The states have failed to use more than $8 billion authorized by Congress for child care, transportation, education, job training and other efforts to help support low-wage workers and struggling families, the report found. "Millions of children and their parents are falling deeper into poverty because in too many state capitals the funds that Congress approved to help these families become self sufficient are going unspent," said Deepak Bhargava, director of the National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support. A coalition of grassroots citizens groups in 40 states, the National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support compiled and released the report, "Poverty Amidst Plenty 2001" at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. to coincide with the winter meeting of the National Governors' Association. "Despite the enormous need, 46 states and the District of Columbia are still holding huge sums in unspent Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) funds that could be paying for new or expanded programs to help poor families raise their children, find decent jobs and begin earning a livable wage," Bhargava said. According to the report by the National Campaign for Jobs and Income: -- Child poverty remains at a historic high, with nearly one out of every five children in America living today in poverty. -- In spite of the booming national economy, the average person living in poverty is poorer today than they were at the beginning of the decade demonstrating how the poor are being left behind. -- Many families that have moved "from welfare to work" are worse off financially and struggling with incomes below the poverty line. -- More than half of those who have left welfare for jobs have been unable to pay the rent, buy food, afford medical care, or keep their telephone or electric service from being disconnected. -- In spite of the pressing needs of poor families, fourteen states have actually increased their surplus of unspent Temporary Aid for Needy Families funds since 1999. -- Some states -- Connecticut, Virginia, Texas, Wisconsin and Michigan in particular -- are abusing the flexibility of their TANF anti-poverty funds to pay for tax cuts and shortfalls in other areas of their budget on the backs of the poor. In unveiling its report, the National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support called on Congress to provide additional funds to fight poverty and to ensure that the states diligently use the money. "Simply cutting the welfare rolls can't be the measure of success," Bhargava said. "Congress and the states must be held to their promise that welfare reform would lift families out of poverty, and that will require a commitment of adequate resources." The Campaign also urged Congress and the states to involve local community organizations that deal directly with low-income families in the process of drafting and implementing welfare reform laws and programs. The full report with state by state data tables is available at http://www.nationalcampaign.org =================================================================== Marines Develop a New Weapon The People Zapper This new secret weapon doesn't kill, but it sure does burn By C. Mark Brinkley, Times Staff Writer Marine Corps Times March 5, 20011 The Marine Corps is on the verge of unveiling perhaps the biggest breakthrough in weapons technology since the atomic bomb: a nonlethal weapon that fires directed energy at human targets. The weapon, named the Vehicle-Mounted Active Denial System, focuses energy into a beam of micromillimeter waves designed to stop an individual in his tracks, said Marine Col. George Fenton, director of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, in an exclusive interview with Marine Corps Times on Feb. 23. The energy, which falls near microwaves on the electromagnetic spectrum, causes the moisture in a person's skin to heat up rapidly, creating a burning sensation similar to a hot light bulb pressed against one's flesh. When used as directed - that is, briefly - the weapon causes no long-term problems, Fenton said.. The amount of time the weapon must be trained on an individual to cause permanent damage or death is classified. The directorate in Quantico, Va., was planning to unveil the technology in April after briefing Marine Commandant Gen. James Jones, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Ryan and senior Defense Department civilians, still not appointed. But plans were accelerated and much of the program declassified after Marine Corps Times learned of the story. Plans now call for an unveiling and demonstration for military and congressional leaders in March at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. The Marine Corps leads the directorate, but the VMADS project is co-sponsored by the Air Force, which has conducted much of the research and development. The technology could move into the acquisition phase of making a prototype as soon as this summer, when the project would be taken over by the Air Force's Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base, Mass., near Boston. Changing world The need for a nonlethal means for stopping an aggressor is a direct response to today's world of unknown enemies, terrorist threats, peacekeeping and other-than-war operations, where small numbers of troops find themselves facing off against large crowds of civilians. "How do you deal with that?" Fenton said. "You see commanders saying, 'Give me some other type of tool.' " Not since the advent of gunpowder and the splitting of the atom have armies seen such a leap in technology. Weapons that fire lasers, electricity and sound waves have been in development for years.. But the VMADS system is the first nonlethal, directed-energy weapon designed specifically for use against humans. Marine officials said the initial plans include mounting it atop a Humvee and using it for peacekeeping operations. An aircraft-mounted version is also on the drawing boards. Possible applications include crowd control, perimeter defense of expeditionary encampments or airfields, ship self-defense to prevent attacks like that on the USS Cole in October 2000 and other disruption of enemy activities. The weapon's range remains classified, but project officials expect it will exceed 750 meters, putting Marines operating the weapon beyond the reach of traditional small-arms fire. Marines could then engage a crowd from afar, directing two-second bursts of energy without risk of being overcome by the mob. When the beam is waved over the group, individuals would immediately experience intense pain, causing confusion and driving the crowd to disperse. Safety matters Of paramount concern to military officials and political leaders will be whether or not this weapon poses long-term health risks. Some less-than-lethal weapon developments have been scuttled because of criticism by human-rights groups that the concepts posed potentially deadly or cruel hazards, such as blindness. A few programs were stopped dead in their tracks by such complaints, including certain "dazzling" lasers that posed the risk of permanent eye damage, Fenton said. "It was OK to kill someone, but not OK to blind them. That was considered cruel and unusual," said John Pike, a longtime space and military policy analyst and founder of GlobalSecurity.org, a nonprofit organization dedicated to international peace and security. Initial studies of long-term effects on the VMADS system have been completed, but the findings have not been released publicly. Advanced studies on the effects of the weapon are ongoing. How it works By utilizing certain portions of the electromagnetic spectrum, the VMADS weapon penetrates the victim's skin - but only to a depth of about one-sixty-fourth of an inch, Fenton said. The waves, whose exact length, frequency and amplitude are classified, cause water molecules in the skin cells to vibrate. That rapidly produces heat and causes discomfort. The invisible waves can pass through clothing but somehow do not penetrate beneath the skin layer, Fenton said. The result is that the heat irritates nerve sensors in the skin but does not damage internal or reproductive organs. Fenton said the weapon's beam has no effect on electrical equipment, such as pacemakers or computers. Project officials said the human body begins to feel pain at about 113 degrees Fahrenheit, about the temperature of a hot light bulb. The VMADS system could heat a target's skin up to about 130 degrees Fahrenheit in about two seconds, Fenton said.. The beam moves at the speed of light, said Maj. Noel D. Montgomery, chief of health-effects assessments at the directorate and a certified health physicist. A target could then be acquired and zapped in seconds. Humans have been exposed more than 6,000 times in testing, all inside the laboratory, Fenton said. No long-term effects have been detected. The dangers of electromagnetic waves for humans have been studied for years, and federal laws are in place to protect the public from being blasted by radio towers, television stations and the like. The health threat varies according to body type and length of exposure, according to the Kansas-based Radiofrequency Safety International Corp., which helps civilian companies comply with the federal rules. Certain waves are virtually harmless to the human body, such as visible light, while microwaves are now used to cook food. A team of scientists from across the country is being pulled together by Penn State University to study the technology and the human effects of research conducted by the directorate, Montgomery said. Exceeding specs According to unclassified briefing documents obtained by Marine Corps Times, many of the components used to develop a demonstrator for the weapon exceeded the specifications of the design. Details, however, were classified. The weapon is powered by electricity and ultimately would be powered by the modified Humvee on which it would be mounted. Keeping the weapon "loaded" would be as simple as filling the truck up with gas. Demonstrator production began in 1998 but slipped behind in 2000 after the superconducting magnet at its core was delivered late and an output window on the radio frequency source was broken, according to the documents. The program was thrown off by eight to 10 months. Now, a demonstration model is out of the lab and into the New Mexico desert, mounted above a standard shipping container and being calibrated for a series of public tests in March..The success of those tests could determine whether the program survives. Fenton said the Corps could have a Humvee-mounted prototype within two years. The Defense Department has spent nearly $40 million over 10 years to develop the technology. Budget predictions from last year obtained by Marine Corps Times show another $26 million could be needed for development over the next five years. The primary contractor for the project is Raytheon Missile Systems, with an award of nearly $16 million spread across several years for system integration on the demonstrator and prototypes, according to budget documents. Raytheon officials declined to comment until a public announcement is made by the Marine Corps, which the company expected to be Feb. 26. What critics might say Pike, the space and military policy analyst, said new weapon technologies are likely to face skepticism when they're unveiled before the public. The burden will be on the Pentagon to prove it's safe, he said. "The tricky part is coming up with something that is annoying enough that people will skedaddle, but not so annoying that you would kill them," said Pike, who tracked space and military policies for more than 20 years at the Washington-based Federation of American Scientists before launching his Web site. "That is a pervasive problem with all crowd-control devices. ... Is it simultaneously effective and nonlethal?" Some critics are likely to suggest that the new technology could be adopted or adapted by civilian police forces. An Internet search for "RF weapon" yields a host of Web sites saying the government is already experimenting on humans with the technology and that the government's ultimate aim is to use it as a way to control its own people. "It does have a kind of science fiction, phasers-set-to-stun ring to it," Pike said of the new technology. "It sure sounds like that, right?" "There's certainly a sub-population of people who believe the government is using microwaves for mind control. I get calls from them about once a week." Fenton said he personally had been exposed to the beam - so he knows how much it can hurt, he said - and added that his directorate's legal team has been exploring the human-rights implications of the new weapon even as scientists have been exploring its human effects. "I have nothing to hide," Fenton said. "This is a good news story. Our American public needs to understand that we have done our homework. "We are really into the 21st-century way of doing business, and we are asking the right questions because we have learned from our past and we are making sure that we are moving forward." =================================================================== February 28, 2001 U.S. Air Force Readies Cyberwar Efforts Exclusive Report in Aviation Week & Space Technology Seeks To Turn Information Warfare, Offensive Computer Warfare and Manipulation of Intelligence into Combat Weapons to Avoid Conflict During the first six months of this year, the U.S. Air Force will be making a series of quiet but fundamental organizational changes designed to utilize cyberweapons for maximum effect, according to an exclusive report in the February 26 issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology. The result could be new tools to deter hostile threats before bombs start falling. Pentagon "planners believe the intensive exploitation of intelligence, the use of new technologies such as offensive computer warfare, and clever but closely controlled technological demonstrations of force might deflect aggression aimed at the U.S. and its allies," according to the magazine. The reorganization is timed to offset a projected increase in the likelihood of a cyber-attack against the U.S. and its allies. It will shift intelligence, information warfare and reconnaissance operations into combat units, giving planners the ability to go to war as an experienced, integrated team. "A closer relationship allows us every day to work on predictive battlespace awareness and to respond to planning requirements. We could work out a lot of (tactical problems) before the first aircraft is launched," said Maj. Gen. Bruce Wright, Commander of the Air Force's Air Intelligence Agency in AW&ST. "The Air Force's vision encompasses roughly three objectives," reports the magazine. "The first is to know better what the foe is doing, perhaps by reading his e-mail or searching his computer data banks for classified data. "The second would be to try deterring enemy moves by quickly mounting a demonstration -- for example, by shutting down the country's electrical power or manipulating television broadcasts. "Finally, a new array of tools would be turned to finding key command, control and communications nodes as well as moving targets -- including mobile air defenses and ballistic missiles -- and destroying them with a minimum of collateral damage and loss of life to U.S. forces or enemy civilians." According to a Pentagon official, "We're near the point where we can manage the perception of an enemy. We want to influence the adversary to act in our interests without knowing they've been acted upon. We want (lethal) weapons to become a much smaller element of our national security capability." Cyberwarfare was first used in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, but was limited to reading the e-mail of Iraqi commanders. The tools were much more sophisticated in the 1998 Kosovo air campaign, when false messages and targets were injected into Yugoslavia's complex computer-integrated air defense system. The advent of cyberwar has not been without its internal struggles. In the Gulf War, "battles raged between the Pentagon and the national intelligence agencies about where the lines of authority were drawn between the military and intelligence-collectors. Finally, the military was ordered to stop intercepting the Iraqi messages. Later, Air Force planners were frustrated because they were allowed to destroy communications and command nodes with bombs, but not to attack them with computer tools because of intelligence agency fears that cyber-weapons effects would cascade into international computer systems. After a decade of wrangling, the differences (between the agencies) are smaller, Pentagon officials say, but not completely resolved," reports AW&ST. ---- Aviation Week & Space Technology is the world's leading aviation and aerospace industry magazine, covering technology, business and operations in the commercial, military and space markets for more than 100,000 paid subscribers (360,000 readers) in 130 countries. It is the cornerstone of the Aviation Week division of The McGraw-Hill Companies. With nearly 50 products and services and an audience of more than 1 million professionals and enthusiasts, Aviation Week is the largest multimedia information provider to the global aviation and aerospace industry. AviationNow.com expands the company's extensive web presence by delivering the most comprehensive real-time news, professional information and e-business Internet portal in the global aviation/aerospace industry. Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE: MHP) is a global information services provider meeting worldwide needs in financial services, education and business-to-business information through leading brands such as Standard & Poor's, BusinessWeek and McGraw-Hill Education. The Corporation has more than 400 offices in 32 countries. Sales in 2000 were $4.3 billion. Additional information is available at http://www.mcgraw-hill.com. Editors Note: Interviews and additional information on cyberwarfare are available from AW&ST Senior Military Editor David Fulghum. Text of the articles is available at http://www.aviationnow.com. CONTACT: Aviation Week & Space Technology David Fulghum, 202/383-2300 =================================================================== Making sure the laws are being followed SCAN THIS NEWS 2.24.2001 From: "ScanThisNews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> When it comes to the question of police road blocks (a.k.a. license or sobriety check points), you most likely fall within one of three possible categories, you either: (a) appreciate them because the small amount of time a person is detained is well worth it if only one life is saved; (b) you don't really have an opinion one way or another because you're not politically inclined and besides you feel like, if a person is not doing anything wrong they should not be agitated or concerned; or, (c) you resent police road blocks at the core because you feel like, in a free country, innocent people should not be subjected to the same sort of treatment as criminals receive. I personally am a type "c". Last night, my wife, daughters and I were driving home from a family outing when we happened upon and were stopped at one of the now-common license check/road blocks last night. It was about ten o'clock on a remote stretch of rural Alabama highway. We waited impatiently until it was our turn to meet with our inquisitor. The officer (one of several there on the scene) asked to see my wife's license and proof of auto insurance (while he was obviously surveying the inside of the vehicle to make sure everyone was wearing a seatbelt and that no contraband was evident). As she handed over her license, I asked what was the nature of the stop. The officer responded, "Just making sure the laws are being followed." Although this may have been the answer I anticipated, it is not the answer for which I hoped. Being rather "old fashioned" in my concept of "rights and liberty," I had hoped the officer might say that they were looking for some escaped criminal or bank robber, in which case I would have accepted the inconvenience. This officer, however, on this occasion, was not looking for any specific criminal; he was looking instead for someone he could make into a criminal. Now days, everyone is a potential criminal, everyone a suspect. New recruits are taught that it is up to them to discover what laws the public is violating. Of course, they are taught that it is for the good of society. While I searched in the dark for the certificate, the officer circled the vehicle, checking the registration plate, looking at the tread on the tires, and making sure all the lights were working. Sure enough, it was not long before this officer discovered just what kind of criminals we were. Apparently, we did not have our current "proof of insurance" certificate on us (at least we could not find it in the dark). Now comes the part they love. Now they have complete control and you are at their mercy -- and they let you know it. They have discovered what law you are breaking -- you did not produce the certificate upon demand! I was doing the talking (though my wife had been driving). My daughters sat quietly and patiently in the back. I commented that I didn't appreciate being stopped for no specific reason other than to be investigated. I said, "You don't go snooping through people's houses to make sure no laws are being violated there do you?" I continued, "Why do you think it is alright to systematically stop people in their travels and investigate them on the roads?" The officer's impatience with my musings was becoming readily apparent. He answered that driving is a privilege and they are authorized to make sure the laws are being followed. I countered that to travel is a RIGHT but that it, like many other rights, has been perversely converted into a pseudo-privilege by way of departmental policy and practice. (I knew I was treading dangerously close to the edge. Under these conditions speech is, after all, also becomes a privilege you know. Furthermore, not only are officers taught that everyone is a suspect, the are also taught that everyone is a potentially dangerous suspect and it doesn't take all that much talking to cause the guns to come out. One officer told me, on another similar occasion, that he would "screw a 9mm into my ear" if I didn't shut up). The officer said that they are "authorized" to stop people and investigate them, and that he was only doing his job. To which I responded with the obligatory reference to Germany, Hitler and the Gestapo, stating that they too were "authorized" to do what they did. (Actually, I find that law officers generally don't seem to resent this analogy, neither did this one on this occasion.) So here we are, late at night, far out in the country side without our requisite "proof" that we are indeed otherwise "law-abiding" citizens. We would like to be on our way home. The officer comments, "You know, I can give you a ticket... or not... it's largely dependant upon your attitude!" So now it all boils down to my attitude and his control over it! In other words, if I would "act" the way he intended, he would leave us alone and let us proceed. (Yes, he so much as stated this.) Finally, digging around in the dark of the glove compartment I was able to produce an insurance certificate -- albeit an expired one. After several reiterations about his being able to ticket us if he so desired, we were finally allowed go. ('Though I'm certain this was only because the officer had become convinced, with our assurance, that we did indeed have current insurance and the fine would probably be dropped upon our later proof.) Is this the America we want? An America where we are constantly compelled to prove that we are not breaking this law or that law, and constantly under investigation? Not me. In a supposed attempt to determine a person's overall perspective on life, the question is often asked whether the person views a glass as "half full" or "half empty". It's all a matter of perspective. Consider, however, that if at one time your glass was "full of freedom" and someone took half of it, you might appropriately view the glass as "half empty," with emphasis being placed upon what is missing rather than what is left. As another example, if a slave finds satisfaction in having all of his basic needs provided, and views the demands made upon him as acceptable, then he may, with perfect contentment, consider his glass "half full." Taking this a step further, since this is the only life the slave has ever known and the only "container" with which he can relate, he may conclude that the life of a slave is all there is and that his glass is completely full (i.e., "this is all there is"). Others, who understand what the slave is missing out on -- or what he could have with a little effort on his part -- may look upon him with pity. Some people will continue to blissfully focus on what remaining freedoms we have left in America -- right up to the end. The majority of present-day Americans have been conditioned to view their situation from this "half full" perspective. The consequence is that, as the contents (in this case "freedoms and rights") are gradually removed from the container (America), we continue to attempt to cast the most positive perspective on our situation and look at the positive side of our predicament (thankful for the freedoms we have left). The problem arises when the next generation comes along and this diminished point-of-reference becomes their new standard by which they gauge their freedom. Their knowledge and understanding of freedom is drawn from what we privately think of as our "half full glass". That which the former generation looked upon optimistically as "half full" now becomes to the next generation the new "whole container" (this is all there is or ever was). Now, when half is again removed from their "full glass", (leaving what would be only one-forth of the original amount) the new generation is again conditioned to view their situation from the same rosy "half full" perspective. The disheartening part is that the majority of Americans today want law enforcement to act this way -- to set up road blocks and to investigate everyone. The majority of Americans fall in to either class "a" or class "b" as described earlier. They insist on a "pro active" police force. They want to be protected from everything, and they want government to do it for them. In fact, they insist on it. Imagine a national emergency in today's America, Americans would demand that government act swiftly to implement whatever measures it deemed necessary to protect them and their lifestyle -- even if it means immediate institution of a totalitarian state. Absent the national emergency, it will simply take a little longer to get there. You ARE a suspect, make no mistake about it. And you ARE breaking SOME law. It just so happens that your caliber of "law-breaker" is much less dangerous (and much more profitable to apprehend) than real criminals. Real criminals are dangerous! They don't generally have that much money to confiscate, and they are hard to catch. You, on the other hand are not dangerous; you are ready, willing and able to pay up; and you are real easy to catch! When I was a kid, whenever I saw a police officer stopping someone I thought the person must have done something wrong and they were in trouble. What do kids today think about seeing a police officer detaining someone and questioning them? Do they think the officer is making the person "act right" or "behave" or "follow the law," which the kids perceive as being their job? I suspect they do. Of course, when I was the age my daughters are now (some thirty-odd years age) it was not a crime to drive without proof of insurance, there were no mandatory seatbelt laws, and my parents were never once stopped at a police road block. I suspect that kids today typically do think it is the job of government to make people act a certain way. Government is in the process of assimilating the tools it needs to make you act in ways that are most beneficial to it. In the near future you'll be investigated and surveiled in ways you can only imagine now. A couple of key programs are presently being implemented with the sole long-range purpose of providing government with the mechanisms it needs for complete and total control over our every action. Two of the most important of these programs are the "Deadbeat Dad" laws, and driver licensing/registration. Most people still do not understand the ultimate goal of the deadbeat dad laws. Enacted under section "666" of USC title 42 -- using the social security number as its primary tool for "locating and tracking" -- these laws are being used to establish a network of interconnected governmental and private databanks that will eventually and ultimately be used to track not only deadbeat dads but EVERY suspected lawbreaker (i.e., the public at large). The other tool is driver licensing and registration programs where every productive American is compelled to register themselves (under the false pretense of driver certification) into government computers which identify us individually by use of social security numbers and digital photographs. These vast storehouses of identifying information are being assimilated with the full intent of using them to investigate the population as a whole. The most recent "pilot program" (experiment) in the use of digital photos for control was at the 2001 Super Bowl game where it was reported that the face of every attendee was digitally photographed, cataloged and screened in a (claimed) effort to look for _potential_ terrorists. But wake up America, this was not a test of their newly installed digital cameras, nor was it an evaluation of their computer screening system used to filter through the photos. The primary, if not sole, purpose of this highly-(after-the-fact)-publicized event was conditioning of the populace. Just think: out of the thousands of sports fans who attended the game, not one was reported to have complained about being "shaken down," without their knowledge or consent, in this obscure fashion. But the real conditioning process took place with the after-the-fact reporting. The clear message was that Americans might as well get used to being treated like criminal suspects; they had better act they way government tells them to act; and they better have the right attitude about it. What concept of freedom will we leave the next generation? If we as a society will not complain when we are detained and investigated, how much resistance do you suppose the next generation will offer up when the investigation methods become completely electronic and totally clandestine? How far will society allow government to go in "making sure the laws are being followed" before we say: Enough! =================================================================== Globalization foes, police clash after World Economic Forum in Cancun CANCUN, Mexico, Feb 27 (AFP) - Several people were injured and others were arrested as globalization foes shed their clothes and clashed with police at the end of a two-day meeting of the World Economic Forum in this popular resort. The clashes took place as Mexican President Vicente Fox closed the international gathering of bankers and industrialists with a call for a "democratization of markets" so that globalization should benefit everyone, not just a chosen few. Red Cross officials reported eight people were injured in the clashes, while organizers put the number at 30. Several of the protesters had dropped their pants before they tried to force their way through a police barrage set up to prevent demonstrators from heading toward the luxury hotel hosting the meeting. A further 30 protesters were arrested after taking their clothes off on a beach in front of the hotel. About 500 people had initially participated in the demonstration, but the majority of them dispersed after police in full riot gear halted the protest. As the protesters chanted slogans against globalization, Fox called for a more socially responsible international economic system. "We see globalization as an opportunity, but we want a globalization with human quality and environmental quality," he told the 450 forum participants. This, he said, entails "a democratization of markets so the opening of the new international economy be accessible to all, not only a chosen few." He urged the international community to adopt ethical norms to ensure "that not only the fundamental principles of our economies are in order, but also that the fundamentals of a just and human society should be in order. "Let us convert the economy and development in a way not only to produce more, but to live better," he said. He said this could not be left entirely to the markets, and that a good measure of "active public policies" was also needed. "We cannot close our eyes to the million of people in the world and in Mexico who live on less than a dollar a day ... We cannot continue along a path that privileges a few and condemns many to marginalization," he said. Earlier in the day, moderate anti-globalization militants who distanced themselves from the more radical students, accepted an invitation to debate their views with members of the forum. During the two-hour debate at a luxury hotel, one side claimed poverty was on the decrease, while the other, armed with an arsenal of statistics and sarcasm, said globalization further impoverished the poor. Former Costa Rican president Jose Maria Figueres, who chaired the forum meeting, said one of the crucial benefits of globalization was the economic growth provided by an international market economy. But speakers at the other end of the table ridiculed the notion, saying only the rich benefited from the current economic model. "Things are going well for capital and its interests, but they are going badly for the people and their interests," said Gustavo Codas of the Workers' Center of Brazil. =================================================================== Mexican cops clash with protesters <http://www.msnbc.com/news/537000.asp> Police in resort town charge anti-globalization demonstrators CANCUN, Mexico, Feb. 28 Injured protesters were loaded into ambulances and tourists strolled past bloodstained streets in this beach resort after police charged a group of anti-globalization demonstrators, kicking and beating those they could catch. THE MELEE, WHICH LEFT about 19 people injured, came Tuesday after a three-hour standoff that blocked the peninsula's main highway and brought much of the resort's traffic to a halt. Hundreds of protesters had been holding two days of marches against the World Economic Forum's Mexico meeting, where business and political leaders gathered at an upscale hotel to discuss the country's economic future. President Vicente Fox, who gave the meeting's closing speech, seemed to answer protesters' calls, saying his government would provide more educational and social services for the poor. He also called on the private sector to help put a "human face" on globalization. "Wealth without distribution is not sustainable or human," he said. "We can't close our eyes to the millions of people in the world and in Mexico who live on $1 a day." But shortly after he finished his speech, police several miles away charged through a barricade and surprised protesters, many of whom were talking with friends or lounging in the shade. Several, sweating in the midday heat, had taken off helmets and gas masks that they brought in case the demonstration turned violent. Rocks flew from both sides, and police beat fleeing demonstrators and fired tear gas to disperse them. The federal Notimex news agency reported late Tuesday that at least 19 people, mostly demonstrators but at least three reporters, were injured. Reporters saw some of them bleeding heavily. State police told Notimex that 60 people were arrested, some for offending public morals by stripping nude in front of officers before the police charge. As he chased demonstrators through one of the city's main intersections, one policeman shouted, "Come back, dogs!" Afterward, protesters ripped up manhole covers and scattered debris across the streets. One tourist from Philadelphia, Gil Smith, chased after the retreating officers shouting "Fascists!" Smith and his wife took part in anti-globalization protests last April in Washington, and he said they happened to come to Cancun for vacation during the protests here. They were eating lunch when the demonstrators marched by. "We quickly gulped down our food and followed them," Smith said. "We realized these people needed protection" in the form of unofficial international observers. Limping back to the protesters' camp with a bloody nose, Daniel Meiners, 22, said the police action was an example of "the state of oppression in which we live." Meiners said he saw an officer throw a rock that hit him in the face, and he pulled up his shirt to reveal scrapes on his back where he said he had been kicked. Miguel Hernandez, another protester, called Fox's speech ironic, adding that it "totally contradicts reality." Opponents of globalization have been staging large protests at major economic conferences worldwide since December 1999, when they contributed to the collapse of the World Trade Organization talks in Seattle. =================================================================== "Anarchy doesn't mean out of control. It means out of 'their' control." -Jim Dodge ====================================================== "Communications without intelligence is noise; intelligence without communications is irrelevant." -Gen. Alfred. M. Gray, USMC ====================================================== "It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society." -J. Krishnamurti ====================================================== "The world is my country, all mankind my brethren, and to do good is my religion." -Thomas Paine ====================================================== " . . . it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds . . . " -Samuel Adams ====================================================== "You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no results." -Gandhi ______________________________________________________________ To subscribe/unsubscribe or for a sample copy or a list of back issues, send appropriate email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. ______________________________________________________________ **How to assist RadTimes: An account is available at <www.paypal.com> which enables direct donations. If you are a current PayPal user, use this email address: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, to contribute. If you are not a current user, use this link: <https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=resist%40best.com> to sign up and contribute. The only information passed on to me via this process is your email address and the amount you transfer. Thanks! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
