Category: Corporatarchy

National Security and Surveillance State, Inc.

July 23, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

Even though “alternative media” has been covering the story for years, the increasingly vast, inefficient and unaccountable post 9-11 national security and surveillance apparatus is so out of control that now even war-enabling, torture denying, neocon propaganda rags are sounding alarms about it…

The Washington Post published a three part series entitled “Top Secret America”. Part 1, focuses on the explosion of government funding on surveillance and security, Part 2 focuses on the government’s dependence on profit-driven private enterprise, and Part 3 describes one particular office park filled with (privileged and out-of-touch) spys.

Here are some of the highlights of the report:

* Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.

* An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.

* In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings – about 17 million square feet of space.

* Many security and intelligence agencies do the same work, creating redundancy and waste. For example, 51 federal organizations and military commands, operating in 15 U.S. cities, track the flow of money to and from terrorist networks.

* Analysts who make sense of documents and conversations obtained by foreign and domestic spying share their judgment by publishing 50,000 intelligence reports each year – a volume so large that many are routinely ignored.

Here is a map illustrating the proliferation of public and private work locations in “Top Secret America”:

The report reveals that the situation is so out of control that even Defense Secretary Gates and CIA Director Panetta worry about it in front of reporters – they admit it is out of control. But of course their interests are not the same as the rest of the country.

One of the worst things about the situation is that this secret, inefficient bureaucracy is that it is payed for by taxpayers – in a time of starving schools and home foreclosures, it is basically a jobs program designed to help out people who specialize in surveillance, killing and propaganda services to the government.

I say “one of the worst” because the worst thing is clearly this:

Relying upon profit-driven industry for the defense and intelligence community’s “core mission” is to ensure that we have Endless War and an always-expanding Surveillance State.  After all, the very people providing us with the “intelligence” that we use to make decisions are the ones who are duty-bound to keep this War Machine alive and expanding because, as the Post put it, they are “obligated to shareholders rather than the public interest.”

Above are images from some of the “anti-deception” toys developed by private “defense” contractors.

On the left, “a thermal-imaging camera to measure changes in facial temperature, which can help determine whether a person is lying. Some data suggests that a person who is lying may register a temperature increase near the inside corner of the eye. The scientists hope to use such cameras for security screenings at airports, train stations, border crossings, stadiums or large events.”

On the right, “A computer-generated avatar is being developed to test how interviewees respond to different interviewers. Scientists at the Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment (DACA) can manipulate the avatar’s physical attributes, including hair and eye color, complexion, skull and forehead shape, and even the sound of the avatar’s voice to create an interviewer of any age, race and gender.”

This is a fruitful line of research because, they claim,  “young Hispanic males have a very difficult time lying to older Hispanic females.” So, you know, if you want to do “credibility assessment” on a young Mexican man, you should make the Avatar be a older Mexican woman.

PS: Here are some follow-ups to this story:

the lack of impact this story has had, on

G20 Toronto 2010 – Agent Provocateurs and A Dystopian Future

July 3, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

Inside a security perimeter that cost Canadian taxpayers over a billion dollars, G20 world leaders met to screw over their own most vulnerable populations.

While most of the corporate media focused on burning cop cars and protester “violence” (property damage), others suspected the real crime was what was taking place inside the meeting.

More disturbing than the “smashed windows and burned cop cars,” writes Naomi Klein, are the “smashed social safety nets and burned good jobs in the middle of a recession”:

How else can we interpret the G20’s final communiqué, which includes not even a measly tax on banks or financial transactions, yet instructs governments to slash their deficits in half by 2013. This is a huge and shocking cut, and we should be very clear who will pay the price: students who will see their public educations further deteriorate as their fees go up; pensioners who will lose hard-earned benefits; public-sector workers whose jobs will be eliminated. And the list goes on. These types of cuts have already begun in many G20 countries including Canada, and they are about to get a lot worse.

Meanwhile, outside the perimeter, people who gathered to object were subjected to the largest mass arrest in Canadian history.

The fact that the large majority of these protesters were non-violent and within their rights is obscured by the sensational property destruction by black bloc (so called) anarchists.

The actions of the black bloc are then used to justify the broad crackdown on legal dissent, and it is important to note that manifestations of the group have in the past been infiltrated by police agent provocateurs.  This is not conspiracy:  Canadian police have admitted to posing as black bloc protesters in 2007, after they were outed by a union leader on video shot at a protests in Quebec.

This tradition seems to have continued outside the G20 in Toronto, whence video has emerged suggesting black bloc agent provocateurs being protected by the police.  See, as further illustration, also this level-headed photojournalist make the case that the property destroying “anarchists” got a green light from the police:

Setting aside the issue of police agent provocateurs, the experience of some other participants is worth noting.

David Ker Thomson describes his experience and suggests that “Toronto is the World“:

We have seen the future.  This is it.  More troops, more brutality, more police pretending to be protestors and smashing whatever they want at $80/hour, more acceptance from a population that will submit to any limitation on its freedom as long as it can pay someone to make them feel temporarily safe.

And despite the presence of agent provocateurs, he goes on to challenge the bourgeois left for  being scandalized by mere broken glass:

Is there anything more smug than bourgeois people offering to be scandalized by broken glass?  The slightest disintegration of their spectacle unnerves them.  “Violence!” they cry.

…

We’re not fighting a few irritable fat cops with nightsticks anymore.  The wall is impenetrable.  We are losing.  The leaders have floated to the top as scum always does, and we are drowning.

Another participant, Matt Shultz, who was arrested for possession of paint balloons, describes in detail his experience “Inside Torontanamo” and warns of the detention center’s intended effect:

Let me be very clear on this: the point of this exercise was two-fold, first, to traumatize the activists (check), second, to normalize this kind of thing with the cops. And let me also be clear: check. Many, even most of the cops seemed totally fine with it. The casual, collaborative, efficient and impersonal sadism of it was really appealing to some of them and everyone in this country wants to ask themselves if Torontanamo is something they’d like to see more of in Canada because make no mistake, it’s in the planning stages.

And for those who are persuaded by corporate shills that the G20 protesters have no coherent target, try listening to Maude Barlow speak on the issue. And here is some more good coverage.

…and the kissing couple come from this collection of images.

BP

May 10, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

But the latest episode in a sad history of oil operations.  This current disaster will result in several disastrous and long term effects.

Democracy Now covers the important angles of this story – how the government exempted BP from environmental review despite its dismal environmental record, noting its lobbying and greenwashing campaigns as well as its  role in the 1953 overthrow of democracy in  Iran,

Nikolas Kozloff reviews the role of Obama’s secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar. (I can’t help but succumb to a flash of schadenfreude for President Centrist since this disaster comes right on the heels of this.) And here is a bit about the Halliburton connection.

One group is mobilizing for a day of protests and calling for the seizure of BP’s assets.

Yes We Can Drill Baby Drill

April 3, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

WGP_Obama_DrillingOn the heels of his pushes for so-called “clean coal” technology and guaranteed loans for nuclear power  plants, President Obama this week decided to reverse a longstanding ban on offshore drilling and “announced an expansive new policy that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of Alaska.”

This move by Obama-the-President is to be expected by now insofar as it completely reverses the position of Obama-the-Senator and Obama-the-campaigner. (See for example here, although he did begins to capitulate as the campaign wore on.)

This is the latest latest expression of Obama’s deep seated bipartisanism fetish, which absurdly seeks to curry favor with those “conservatives” who do will not cooperate with him on principle by selling out those progressives who can be taken for granted because they have no principle. But regardless of the political value of the decision, the Economist argues it is bad environmental / engergy policy:

The problem runs deeper than David Roberts’s point (“The impact on oil prices will be ‘insignificant,’ says the Energy Information Administration, and it won’t make America any less dependent on foreign oil, either”). It runs deeper than Frances Beinecke’s point (“Better running cars and more efficient use of existing oil fields can help us make the transition into the 21st century without harming marine life or marine jobs.”) It runs deeper than John Broder and Clifford Krause’s point (“Risk Is Clear in Drilling; Payoff Isn’t“). The fundamental problem is this: there is a finite amount of fossil fuel. The more of it we find and burn, the more carbon we put into the atmosphere, and the more severe the greenhouse effect becomes. Once the carbon is in the atmosphere, it stays there. If we want to limit climate change, what we have to do, one way or another, is to leave fuels in the ground wherever possible, not find and burn them.

Environmental groups are angry, of course, and kool-aid drinkers are finally waking up:

“Its like a kick in the face” says Jonathan Ruiz of Florida International University.  Jonathan campaigned for Obama for fourteen months, and now he’s livid about today’s announcement by the administration to open half the east coast to offshore drilling.

(By the way, thanks to Stephen Colbert for the title of this post.)

7th Anniversary of a Supreme International Crime

March 25, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

The current Iraq War, which has now dragged on into its 7th year, was justified by the U.S. government and mainstream news media on the basis of a series of demonstrable lies either made up or extracted by torture from people accused of terrorism by the Bush Administration.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands (perhaps a million) of people have been killed in the course of what the International Tribunal at Nuremberg would have considered “the supreme international crime“.

The 7th anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion was commemorated this Saturday by modest popular protests in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington D.C.  I attended and documented the Los Angeles event in the following video:

The L.A. march was organized by the A.N.S.W.E.R Coalition and was led by disabled Vietnam Veteran Ron Kovic (author of “Born on the 4th of July“), who was accompanied by a color guard of terror war veterans carrying the flags of war profiteering corporations.

And here is a nice essay on the anniversary by Andy Worthington.

Compromise or Capitulation?

March 22, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

H.R. 3590 was passed 219 – 212, with no Republican votes. In the end, Obama’s “bipartisanship” fetish gained nothing and lost the possibility of what he said he stood for as a Senator.

As the final vote on the Health Insurance Reform Bill in the House approached, all the “progressive” Representatives who had promised not to vote for any bill without a public option broke their pledges and voted for it anyway, clearing the way for another massive corporate giveaway in the form of a mandate to buy private health insurance policies with no meaningful regulatory agency.

(The final holdout was Dennis Kucinich, and his capitulation throws into higher relief his institutional function – something I first began to notice in 2004, when, as an anti-war candidate riding the tide of anti-war activism in the wake of Bush’s war crimes, Kucinich effectively led his anti-war supporters into the pro-war, corporatist Democratic Party and then encouraged them to vote for the pro-war Kerry / Edwards ticket.)

Senate Democrats are turning coat as well – Bernie Sanders has reversed his pledge to force an up / down vote on the public option during reconciliation – in exchange for vague assurances that there will be a vote later, a possibility for which one would be ill-advised to hold one’s breath.

These capitulations demonstrate (once again) the incredibility of threats on the part of putatively progressive Democrats to act according to principle. Not so for those on the right, whose threats are credible and therefore warrant Executive Orders which promise to limit funding for abortions.

Glenn Greenwald points out how the Democrats’ Scam is now even more transparent, and how Rahm Emmanuel’s strategy of ignoring progressives has been vindicated.

Meanwhile, right wing talk show clowns are developing a narrative that suggests I have it all wrong and that this mandate to buy corporate health insurance is really a trojan horse for delivery of a universal public healthcare system.

This line of reasoning is peddled to Tea Baggers who fear “government control of their lives”, but a slightly modified version is sold to Kool-Aid drinkers as well – that this massive public buy-in to private insurance is somehow a first step on the road to a public program, or even more absurdly, to single payer.

FireDogLake breaks down what is in the health care bill here, and what needs to be fixed here.

Watch a debate between Kucinich and Nader here; Scott Creighton berates Kucinich here.

Update: Chris Hedges concurs.

Update 2: Apparently, after Obama signs the health insurance bill into law, it goes back to the Senate for tweaking – whereupon any single Senator can offer a public option amendment.  This would not threaten the bill, and the amendment could be passed by a simple majority. Here is a petition targeting a likely candidate.

“If anyone has a better [corporate friendly] approach… let me know.”

February 10, 2010: J. Rosencrantz

WGP_better_approach

As a Senator campaigning for the Presidency, Obama called himself “a proponent of a single payer universal health care program.”

Even after being elected Obama admitted, in passing, that single payer would be the only way to insure every U.S. citizen – but moved instead to strike (not-so-secret) deals with big PhRMA and completely drop any challenge to the for-profit, private health “care” system.

This is what makes his recent State of the Union request for “a better approach” to healthcare reform so completely disingenuous:

OBAMA: “If anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses, let me know. Let me know. I’m eager to see it.”

WGP_better_approach-2Pediatrician Dr. Margaret Flowers took Obama at his word and went to the White House the next day with a letter urging the revival of the idea of  a “single payer” or a “medicare-for-all” system.

The Secret Service turned her away, but she tried to respond to the president’s request again the next day in Baltimore where she was arrested for trespassing.

Congratulations, Dr. Flowers, you are The World’s Got Problems Undersung HeroTM of the Month!

Hear her interviewed by Bill Moyers here.

PUTTING IT ON C-SPAN

August 18, 2009: J. Rosencrantz

An illustrative video on Obama’s broken promises to put healthcare negotiations on C-SPAN. In practice, he did the opposite – opting instead for secret White House meetings with representatives from the insurance and pharmaceutical industries:

DEALING WITH BIG PHARMA

August 11, 2009: J. Rosencrantz

(PhRMA = Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America)

The NYT reported that the White House struck a deal with PhRMA where the government would give up its power to negotiate for lower drug prices in exchange for PhRMA’s support for a “healthcare reform” bill.

Then PhRMA authorized its lobbyists to launch a $150 million ad campain in support of “healtcare reform” while Obama’s campaign promises to break PhRMA’s control of drug prices have been erased from the health care page at mybarackobama.com.

William Greider called the deal an outrageous concession and Robert Reich argued that such deals threaten democracy.

Now, in the face of such criticism, anonymous White House officials are denying that a such a deal was made, and as everybody knows there is nothing more trustworthy than an anonymous White House official, so there is probably nothing to see here. Move along.

UPDATE 08/13/09: No, wait, it turns out that they are liars after all. I’m so surprised.

FOR PROFIT HEALTH “CARE”

July 27, 2009: J. Rosencrantz


The basic problem with the U.S. healthcare system is as clear as can be: Private insurance companies are corporations motivated exclusively by profits for their shareholders, not by concern for the well being of their “customers”.

And while the basic facts of this broken U.S. system are impossible to hide – 43.6 million citizens are uninsured, those with insurance are routinely denied care, when insurers deign to pay for treatment, they interfere with doctor expertise – mainstream corporate media and insurance company bitches in Congress have done what they can to silence advocates of the most appropriate solution to these problems: A Universal, Single Payer system.

ABC, for example, went as far as to dis-invite Obama’s longtime former doctor David Scheiner from it’s prime-time forum. (You can hear Dr. Scheiner rail against his former patient in this spirited interview.)

Obama’s former doctor may not get to ask him questions anymore, but executives from private insurance companies get to have long private discussions with him. In another instance of CONTINUITY, the Obama White House has refused to release a FOIA request for a list of health industry executives who have been visiting the President to advise him on health reform. As a candidate, Obama promised transparency and said that he would invite C-SPAN cameras in to document the healthcare reform process. Now, he invokes Bush arguments and practices opacity.

Candidate Obama was a proponent of Single Payer, but now Mr. Yes We Can thinks it is politically impossible – despite the fact that polls suggest a majority of U.S. Americans are open to the idea.

Last Tuesday, Obama admitted that Single Payer would be the only way to cover everybody, but healthcare reform is now in the hands of Congress, where they work out the details of a “public option” that is toothless enough to protect private insurers from their overdue demise…

Here is a discussion about healthcare reform on Bill Moyers’ most recent Journal.

And here is the actor Ronald Reagan on the subject: