The 10th Anniversary of 9/11

Today is the 10th anniversary of what some have called the "worst attacks on US soil in history". The 3000 people that died on that day and the hundreds of thousands of innocents that have been killed in the name of that day deserve a day of remembrance. I fear though, that most Americans use the day as a way of reigniting their anger about that day rather than a somber tribute to the dead and affected.

When I was growing up, I remember watching a 15 minute daily news program at school (when I would stay awake for it), called Channel 1. This was a brief look at current events around the world. One of the events that they covered was the Israel/Palestine situation. I remember back in those days, each week it seemed like there was new hope for peace between the two entities. There seemed to be constant talks involving the president (at the time, Bill Clinton) with new ideas about how to make peace work. I didn't understand much about the conflict, but I do remember taking away an idea about war and peace... at this point, neither side can remember who struck first, because each incremental strike only brings more death and destruction that ruins lives and families and creates more individuals hungry for death and destruction. I remember thinking this at the time and to get back to my original point, it was my first thought as I was watching the buildings coming down on live television 10 years ago.

On that day, as a freshman in my first semester away at college (3 weeks in, nonetheless), I was not very involved in politics. I did, however know enough to know that you can't depend on a politician to be even-handed and reasonable. I hoped against hope that our response to this disaster would be reasonable and well thought-out.

Of course, that's not how things worked out.

I can understand and excuse the mentality of the average US citizen crying for blood. However, it is the job of our elected representatives to hold the line and be the voice of reason, to make decisions that are good for the country, not good for our retribution. As a result of those attacks 10 years ago, we have endured a decade of politicians from both sides taking every opportunity to use them as an excuse for greed, spreading fear and paranoia upon the people that they are controllin... I mean representing, and justification for further bloody conflicts across the globe for a means of achieving their goals of imperialism, resource mining, or corporate interest (imagine the US fighting wars on behalf of a corporation!). Needless to say, the country (I almost typed company... quite the Freudian slip!) is only worse off as a result of almost every decision that has been made from 9/11/01 to 9/11/11.

It's time to take the country back from the elite and greedy. We have more millionaires in government than we have ever had before. Now, if I may ask, how is it possible that a millionaire is the best possible representation for people that on average, make $35,000 a year and are barely scraping by with the essentials to live in this country?

We are supposed to be a government of the people, for the people, by the people but we are quickly becoming a country of the people, for the wealthy, by the wealthy.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that for anything to change, we, the average joes need to rise up and run for public office. We cannot allow the system to be corrupted beyond help. You can already see all across the country, particularly at the local level, steps being taken to make it more difficult for the average person to run for office. If federal politics infects local policy, America as we know it truly is over.

I will remember today for what it has always represented for me; a squandering of an opportunity to take this country in a new, peaceful and enlightened direction, in lieu of the elite using it as an opportunity to make a shit load of money and pay back the US population in the blood of the foreigners.

On this day I am grateful that I was not one of those people in the buildings or planes, having global atrocities carried out in my name.

Reality Check

Every once in a while, while walking through this world something will come along that will serve as a marking post of where we are in society. Sometimes it comes in the form of reaching a new marvel in science (like the moon landing for example); other times it comes in the form of a tar baby.

This week, United States Representative Doug Lambourn of Colorado was on a local talk radio show when he referred to working with President Obama as (in a disgusted tone) ugh, a "tar baby". (Hear audio here) As appalling as it is to think that one of our sitting elected representative congressmen is referring to the president (or any black person) as a "tar baby", it didn't really shock me. Well, not in the traditional sense of the word. I'm realistic. I realize that there are people out there that ooze contempt for all kinds of people that are different from them; people they can marginalize, put down or otherwise degrade for their own personal benefit or self-esteem. What I wasn't ready for was the reaction of the radio host that delivered this story.

In Cleveland, there is a local morning show (that is syndicated to other cities) called "Rover's Morning Glory". In general, Rover portrays himself to be the voice of reason, and self-proclaims his even-handedness (which I suppose is about as close to "liberal" as you'll get on the radio these days). Rover's reaction to the news story is actually what jarred me. The talk show host (Rover) brought up the story obviously knowing what he was going to say off the bat and immediately launches into a DEFENSE for this person. Apparently this man is capable of reading and found that the original defintion related to a "situation that is impossible to break away from".

Ok.... let's take a breath. So, the definition for this word actually does exist. I suspect though, that for just about anyone that is reading this, or heard this story, this is a surprise. To me, the only times I have ever heard "tar baby" used in conversation was a derogatory reference to "them blacks".

Of course, this isn't the main issue, is it? I could sit here and try to convince you that Rep. Lambourn, Rover and everyone else knows exactly what is going on here and that it is blatant accepted racism. It'd be a losing fight though, because especially in this day and age, if there is an ounce of doubt (at least for the privileged), blame cannot be cast.

Instead, I'm going to highlight this fact... racism is not only alive, it has launched into version 2.0. It is institutionalized. Rover is on a Clear Channel station (WMMS, sigh). Clear Channel is a media conglomerate that owns over 900 radio stations across the country. That means that they own almost 10% of the TOTAL radio market. But even that isn't the whole story. I'm sure that I don't need to tell you who Clear Channel is because they probably own the radio station that you listened to when you were a kid and the most popular one in your town (regardless of what kind of music they play). In Cleveland alone, they own 5 different stations (CBS Radio owns 4). Purely personal experience, but these 9 stations comprise AT LEAST 90% of the listening audience in Cleveland. In fact, these 9 stations occupy 9 of the top 11 stations in Cleveland.

So where is this going? What is the point?

I've made the point before. Media conglomerations are dangerous. They have the ability to spread mass (dis)information at an incredible speed and spread; but also, they have the ability to inflict minor mental changes over time for the purveyors of their content. It's how culture is shaped. Shows like Rover are given talking points (or "suggestions") of show content by corporate executives in the name of ratings, but what they are really doing is pushing an agenda. Even the afternoon show on the same station (one that I listen to and enjoy, actually), the host calls himself a "liberal faggot" on a regular basis, pushing the idea that his ideas are very liberal when in fact, they are what I would describe as "21st century center" (which is 20th century center-right). This assists in moving the conversation further and further to the right. When those that are sold as "liberal" are pushing conservative ideas (look no further than the president himself), any truly liberal ideas sound completely radical.

Ok, ok but we've heard this all before and most of this is just conjecture and editorializing. What's my point!?

WTAM 1100, the most popular station in Cleveland is a news talk radio station. Since I was a kid, I can remember listening to Indians games on this station. I remember hearing local news on that station. They are now a Clear Channel station. The highlights of their lineup include Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Fox News Radio updates every 15 minutes or so. I have no delusions. I understand that Clear Channel is a company that most likely cares about the bottom dollar more than they care about pushing an agenda. However, if you are an objective-thinking person, you have to view anyone that would give liars like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Fox News a place to spread their disinformation as exercising an agenda of some sort.

So, just to make sure that I can't be labelled as a "whiny liberal" who is pissed off that the most popular media in his city is conservative-ideology based... I feel the need to say this:

I don't hate conservative ideas. I don't hate conservative people. I don't hate racists (I actually feel for them). I hate LIARS. I hate MANIPULATORS. And most of all, I hate people or companies that will look the other way while our society is degraded by lies and manipulation in the name of profit. We live in a country where ethics are openly disregarded in the name of capitalism. It's exactly the type of thing that gives capitalism a bad name, and makes many like myself feel so far removed from the notion of free enterprise. I would love to start a business in this country, go after the "American Dream" (you have to be asleep to believe it); but I'm not willing to mortgage my ethics in order to be successful. Why are so many business leaders neo-conservatives? It's because oligopolys, unethical behavior, shady dealings, manipulation and mass corruption that exists in government and business helps their natural inclination toward greed.

Of course, I'm just one guy standing in a crowd yelling "the end is near".

So... Everything Can Go Back to Normal Now, Right?

Osama Bin Laden is dead. Big news. If you're an American living in America for the last decade it surely has some degree of personal meaning for you.

For those of us who remember what it was like living in a pre-911 America however, this only symbolizes the end of the beginning of the end. It is often said that "we can't go back to what the world was like before September 11th, 2001" and unfortunately I agree, though for not the same tired cliche notions that are bandied about by the flag waving mouth-breathers that are the "heart" of this country. This death sentence is a self-imposed one, and there is no appeal.

A decade is a long time. We have had almost an entire generation move from childhood to adulthood in that time being indoctrinated into believing that they need to be afraid of boogeymen in the night that hate us for our "freedom". These people will never know what it was like to live in an environment where dying in a plane crash due to pilot error was (and still is) far more likely (1000s of times more likely, in fact) than dying in a plane crash due to terrorist attack. In talking with the younger generation (and even my cohorts) about their fears regarding terrorism, it is apparent that sensationalism takes the front seat and objectivity takes the back seat (♪Which one should I take?♪) And NOT just on Friday. Facts and statistics get pushed to the side in lieu of pathos-based inclinations, and to be honest, looking at the state of propaganda in this country, it's hard to blame them.

I'm going to be up front about this, I was too young to remember the propaganda of the cold war. I wasn't even born until it was winding down. I imagine that the rhetoric was largely the same. However, with the new boogeyman, the stakes have been raised and I fear, that the infrastructure put in place in the last 10 years using Bin Laden as the justification will never be reversed.

THE TSA

The TSA with their aggressive patdowns moved slowly enough that a frog/hot pot of water reference is certainly suitable here. Immediately after 9/11 the security gates were moved so that anyone that went into the gating area (where you board the plane) needed to be run through security. This, combined with enhanced security screening tactics resulted in long lines and all travelers needing to get to the airport HOURS ahead of time (whereas the status quo prior to this was as little as 15 minutes). While seemingly minor, this small change was the first inconvenience to be thrust upon the traveling public. It is my contention that this small psychological toll applied in a repeated and concerted manner upon the American public has led to us now being RAPE scanned and molested at every airport in the country (and coming soon to a train, bus, and sporting event near you). The TSA is most certainly not going away, even amidst a large backlash against these more recent developments. Videos where children are being molested by known sex offenders in uniform resound only with those that prioritize liberty above security (or the theatre thereof).

DHS

The Department of Homeland Security is the umbrella under which the TSA, INS and several other governmental organizations reside. I theorize that though we have not seen much day to day activity from the DHS in the last decade, that they will play a huge role in the next phase of the agenda of political elite. It is well-known in the political underground that FEMA (another part of DHS) has been contracting Halliburton to build mysterious empty prisons around the country for the last decade. In addition to this, the visibility of DHS has been increasing. DHS cars and presence at public events just started becoming commonplace within the last year. I would expect that much like the frog in the boiling water, the heat is going to be turned up on this soon. The term "police state" is used far too often, but it is hard to ignore when the federal government shows up at a midwest city's Christmas tree lighting ceremony.

WAR/Military/World Police

The Constitution is very clear that declaring war is the job of Congress, and that no act of war shall be committed without their consent. It is nothing new that the powers that be have disregarded this important premise. With the advent of the CIA, American leaders were able to exert their will throughout the world in a covert manner; overthrowing foreign leaders, inciting civil unrest and rebellion, assassinating world leaders and running drugs are just a few of the things that the CIA has been doing for the last 60 years. However, as bold as these actions are, they were all carried out within the shadows. Any agent caught carrying out these violations of international law were disavowed and left to face their own consequences if caught so as to preserve the (supposed) integrity of the United States. In the late 90s, actions taken in Somalia, Yugoslavia and Iraq all constituted as psued0-acts of war and were sanctioned (unofficially) by congress. Frog again. By the start of the new millenium, limited actions in Afghanistan (in response to 9/11) were authorized by congress. 10 years later, we are still in a war there. In 2003, in the face of governmental lies presented to the American public regarding a dire need to attack Iraq lest we be attacked first, Congress was once again coerced into approving an emergency measure to allow limited action in Iraq. 10 years later, though we are now allegedly pulling our troops out, we have army bases that are bigger than some cities strewn throughout the country, with no intention of emptying them. Actions in Pakistan, Yemen, and Libya without congressional authorization have all taken place in the ensuing years under Bush and Obama. The American public now accepts our role as world police, lest the "terrorists" get a foothold.

These actions and organizations cost the American taxpayer trillions of dollars over the last decade. Worse yet, they cost America its soul. We can no longer say we are land of the free and home of the brave. What is so free about a government official in uniform feeling up children? What is so brave about attacking someone because we're afraid they will attack us if we don't? We have reverted back to the playground and we are the ugly, overweight bully that if he didn't pick on other people, he'd get picked on.

Osama Bin Laden is dead. Forgive me if I don't jump for joy.