The land of the no longer free
Published: 08 September, 2011, 21:34
Edited: 09 September, 2011, 15:26
New York : The Statue of Liberty is seen on September 13, 2009 in New York Harbor. (AFP Photo/Don Emmert)
TAGS: Anniversary, Politics, Human rights, Terrorism, Law, USA, Katerina Azarova
As terrorists struck New York on September 11th, the United States vowed to fight back and protect their country, their people and their freedom. But 10 years on, it seems that freedom is just an illusion, and the US is becoming an Orwellian state.
When George W Bush spoke about the necessity of “protecting the homeland of our country”, he probably thought that the homeland was literally just that – a land that one calls home. And while most people focused on the fact that the then US president had once again made a grammatical blunder, many saw a hidden danger in his statement – not only because of the Big Brother-type security changes ahead, but also because of the very nature of the word “homeland”.
Merriam-Webster defines “homeland” as “a state or area set aside to be a state for a people of a particular national, cultural, or racial origin.” Now, that really doesn’t apply to one of the youngest countries in the world, which has no shared cultural or racial origin. Dig a little deeper and many linguists will tell you of the word’s decidedly Teutonic origin. A blend of two proto-Germanic words “kham” (home) and “landan” (land), a homeland does not unite people by ideas or beliefs. It ties them firmly to the land. It is a concept that has little to do with patriotism – despite the fact the words do share common Greek roots – and, ironically, it was used ad nauseam by the US government in the post-9/11 world. Ironic because it’s patriotism that is more applicable to the concept of the United States as a nation – one where people of all cultures and backgrounds come together for shared ideas, opportunities and beliefs. And one of the key ideas that most people chose to make the US their home was one much propagated by President Ronald Reagan. The idea of freedom.
Reagan once said that “above all, we must realize that no arsenal or no weapon in the arsenals of the world is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have.” But 20 years after Reagan was sworn in, the terrorist attacks of September 11th happened – and George W Bush decided that there are weapons more appropriate than freedom.
Because freedom – that greatly advertised American concept – was effectively taken away from the people, with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Under the new Patriot Act, The Federal Bureau of Investigation began probing almost every second of every life in the country and when people wanted to leave the country, the Transport Security Administration probed them. The Big German-sounding Brother was fully established, the people living in the ‘land of the free’ under surveillance at all times.
The Patriot Act is probably one of the most controversial pieces of legislature in American history. An acronym that, for all the old and new security bureaus, Provides Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism. But the tools included in the bill weren’t – and still aren’t –considered appropriate by many. Wiretaps and electronic surveillance were legalized. Arrests were made on a daily basis. When the number of those detained reached 1200, officials stopped counting. Personal records no longer remained personal – and that was only the domestic beginning.
What followed – and still continues today – may be labeled by politicians as a ‘war on terror’ or ‘defense of their people’, but really it is just shy of a full-scale military offensive on multiple countries.
While the Department of Homeland Security watched over the land of the no-longer-free, the Central Intelligence Agency, together with the Department of Defense, took the war on terror overseas. The result? Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and multiple ‘black sites’ across Europe, where prisoners and suspected terrorists were tortured, abused and killed. Since 9/11, more than 600 men have been brought to Guantanamo Bay prison alone – and only one has so far been charged.
Many will argue that this is in fact proof of the Patriot Act’s success. But there is a logical issue. The act’s objective is to prevent attacks on America by bringing terrorists under state control – not to investigate or prosecute past cases. Therefore, any evaluation of the Patriot Act requires the disproving of a negative. If there have been no further Al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, it may mean that the act has done its job. But if there are no attacks, how does one prove they were “prevented” by the Patriot Act?
Numerous statements by US politicians have strived to provide some believable data. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, an avid supporter of the act, dismissed doubts and claims of freedom violations as “hysteria” and claimed no less that “3000 foot soldiers of terror have been incapacitated” since the act’s implementation. No matter that no group or person had independent access to basic information about these alleged terrorists and their alleged plots.
Officially, 1200 special interest detainees were held and investigated under the Patriot Act. The Justice Department examined more than 700 of them, and none was ever linked to any terrorist group or plot. Nevertheless, upon his resignation in 2004, Ashcroft’s letter stated that “The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved.” This should have meant the end of the Patriot Act, for it included a “sunset” provision, to expire in December 2005. Seven years later, it’s still in place and regularly being enforced…not necessarily for a war against terror.
Statistics show that the so-called sneak-and-peak, a search warrant that can be executed without prior warning, is mostly used for drug-related crimes. Between 2006 and 2009, 1618 delayed-search warrants were issued for drugs, 122 for fraud – and only 15 (!) for terrorism.
All this is being done in the name of protection of American soil and citizens. Of protecting their most valued asset, freedom. George W Bush claimed that the war on terror was necessary “for the freedom of the homeland”. But instead of inspiring faith, he only intensified the fear residing within every American citizen since 9/11, for his words sounded a lot like those of another historic leader.’
"What we have to fight for…is the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may be able to fulfil the mission assigned to it by the Creator." – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf.
Katerina Azarova, RT
08.09.2011, 21:31
1 comment
‘9/11 landed US in never-ending war’In just a few days the US will be marking its greatest tragedy in half a century - the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Professor Paul Rogers says the US missions in Iraq and Afghanistan which followed were appallingly disproportionate. 9/11 tragedy |
Yaroslavl mourns Lokomotiv ‘family’People of Yaroslavl in central Russia have been flocking to its central church all day to pay tribute to the victims of Wednesday’s plane crash. A member of the Lokomotiv team who did not take the fatal flight is shocked with the loss - and his luck. Hockey plane crash |
I often wondered what caused Germans to follow Hitler into Fascism as I was growing up. After all, the country was rated first in the world in literacy at the time, so it bewildered me that so many educated people were willing to forfeit their freedom to a madman. Now I think I know what happened. When people are constantly barraged with tales of threats to their security, when militarism becomes the primary focus of government, when crushing government debt can be attributed to foreign sinister forces, when wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of the privileged few, when proxy wars deflect attention from one's more important considerations such as survival, one becomes easy prey for jingoistic ubernationalism and eagerly surrenders liberty.
I am old enough to remember the day President Kennedy was killed. I would later learn through alternative sources that about 200 Americans would die shortly afterwards, whose deaths were NOT reported by the mass media. I would later learn that soon after Kennedy was killed many of the policies he had in place would be reversed. One of those policies was allowing a small select group of U.S Special Forces soldiers to fight the conflict in Vietnam with indigenous troops they had trained. And they were winning! The leaders of the Communist insurgents were identified and were being systematically eliminated. Without enraging the Vietnamese population at large or unduly disturbing their everyday lives. You need only remove the leadership, and the opposition ceases to function. This did not sit well with the military/industrial complex, among others. Plus, President Kennedy had plans for the Federal Reserve Bank and a few more thorns in America's side that needed removal.
The truth is, a very similar type of "leadership removal" in this country that had proven effective in Vietnam is possible....and that scares the fascist oligarchs here. One must realize, that America's fascism is not like that of Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy. Then, the political leaders controlled the corporate leaders. In American fascism, the corporate leaders control the political leaders. Your government is THEIR show. While Americans blame government policy for troubles, most politicians of both parties really work for their corporate bosses. Going to the polls and switching out Democrats and Republicans has almost zero effect in the end. Get rid of the puppetmasters, and the puppets stop dancing their tune.





With less than 5% of the world's population and a quarter of the world's prison population, we're the furthest nation in the world from fitting the description "land of the free".