Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Our Disappearing Chances To Get Rid Of Bad Leaders

Some Native Americans told me a story that made a big impression on me. The story was about a tribal chief who got too egotistical and bossy. He forgot that he was a servant of the people. He even seemed to start thinking that the people were his servants. 

He ordered everyone around and was generally mean and disagreeable. The rest of the tribe were all getting pretty tired of it. They began grumbling a lot, giving him dirty looks, and whispering and becoming quiet when he came near them.

One morning the chief woke up and noticed it was very quiet. Too quiet. He went outside. There was nobody there. The entire tribe had left in the night and he was alone. 

That story reminded me of the poster they used to have around a while back. The poster said, "What if they had a war and nobody came?"

Our leaders can not lead without our cooperation, at least not yet. They are working on changing that. 

Our world is not doing too well now. Neither is the human race. I still run across egg-crate-cushioned people who do not know this, but I don't believe too many people like that are left. I think most people know that we have a problem with how things are going for both the world and those in it, including humans.

If we want a chance to decide what will happen to us and to the rest of the world, we don't have long to act on it. I am going to post things that tell about how our chance to decide for ourselves is disappearing.

This is about Benetton company implanting microchips into their clothing which will keep track of where they are even after customers take them home and wear them.

The following quote is about possible consequences of people being tracked by chips carried on them or implanted. I think that is an optimistic idea of what would happen. 

"Still, implanting RFID chips could vastly increase the potential for police surveillance of ordinary citizens. Conceivably, every wall socket could become an RFID reader that feeds into a government database.

Critics contend that if tagging gets out of control, the day will eventually come when the cops will be able to trace junk thrown in a public trash can back to the person who tossed it. [Google Alice's Restaurant lyrics.]
"Do you want the people in power to have that much power?" Albrecht asked rhetorically. "The infrastructure obstacle has been overcome. It is called electricity and the Internet." end"

Perfect people are rare. If we have chips implanted with computers keeping track of where we are every second we are open to blackmail. That includes our government people and our judges and police. That means someone else can tell them what to do. The same could happen to you.

Even worse than that, is that an Al Qaida lieutenant was remotely tracked by his cell phone. A drone was sent to the cell phone and blew him up. This could happen to anyone. 

Unmanned, or computer controlled drones, in other words, have been deployed for some time now. The USA has recently decided to add nuclear power to these unmanned drones so that they can stay up longer without more fuel. 

This means that someone could decide they object to something you are doing and push a button to blow you up. 

Between the Patriot Act signed by President Bush, and the National Defense Authorization Act signed by President Obama, we are much closer to this happening. Those acts allow us to be detained indefinitely without a warrant, or have military force used against us. That would include exploding drones.

In case you are very flexible about bending over and putting your head in dark places, here is a quote by the ACLU:

"On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA’s dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president — and all future presidents — to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield. "

For those who consider the ACLU to be a left-wing radical organization, here is a quote from "Forbes", 
"We’re talking about the stripping away of our most basic freedoms. We’re talking about a potential state that can call me a terrorist for writing this blog post and then lock me up and throw away the key."

My apologies for such a long post. I am not really finished, however. Feel free to stop here if it bothers you, since this is already more than twice as long as my usual posts.

Here is an easy to understand analysis of the language in the NDAA:

Here is a quote from that article:

"As everyone who studies history well knows, the Patriot Act already establishes an "existing authority" that anyone suspected of being involved in terrorist-related activities can be arrested and detained without trial. If you don't believe me, just Google it yourself. This is not a debated issue; it's widely recognized.

Furthermore, President Obama already insists that he has the authority to kill American citizens merely by decree! As Reuters reported on October 5, 2011, a "secret panel" of government officials (who report to the President) can decide to place an American citizen on a "kill list" and then murder that person, without trial, without due process, and without even being arrested. (

As you can see, the end of the part of the article I quoted has other articles quoted in it. You can follow up on those if you like.

There is a lot more that I am not including here. Some examples are articles that I read in the newspapers during President Bush's tenure. They mentioned that retarded adults and seniors with Alzheimers had been GPS microchipped, "for their own protection".  

There were also articles about a controversy over Prince Charles wanting to microchip his sons "for their own protection", in case they were kidnapped. It was decided not to do this because royal families have historically murdered each other over succession to the throne. Mentions were made that Prince Charles will never succeed to the throne because he has offended Queen Elizabeth with Camilla scandals. It was also mentioned that the men in his family do not have long lifespans, unlike the females. This was considered relevant to the situation because the Queen could easily outlast Prince Charles and then retire to allow her grandsons to succeed her.

I do not know whether all of the above was true and am too tired to check it all, and too poor to spend a lot of money on archived news. The relative lifespans of the men versus the women among the UK royals is easy to see. The history of Borgia-style behavior among royals is pretty well known. I have no personal knowledge of how murderous or not the current crop of royals are. I think I would especially object to a GPS implant if I were a royal, however.

I am developing an aversion to carrying a cell phone even as a private citizen. I am afraid this blog post will get me blown up any time. Now who do I really dislike? Maybe I could offer them a nice used cell phone....

No comments:

Post a Comment