Disclose or not discose?

When you download a new computer program or upgrade, you have to first agree to the terms of the contract. By clicking on “I agree.”  you are bound to its terms, though you can bow out by canceling all use of the product. Hidden in that fine print no one reads is a clause that says you agree not to use the program for unlawful purposes, a long list of which is usually spelled out. The point is, if there is illegality involved, the contract is void. In case of a dispute or lawsuit about damages yada yada yada there is usually an agreement to binding arbitration.

Business contracts often use agreements of confidentiality to protect proprietary information, patents and such. The same goes for other contracts, but here’s where it gets sticky. What if you contract with an organization that then, unbeknownst to you, engages in criminal activity? Surely you should elect to bow out to avoid culpability and liability. You could be swept up as a co-conspirator.

But what if that organization that has sworn you to secrecy is a government agency that is involved with criminal activity? Are you bound by your signature to hold to the contractual terms? That’s the dilemma faced by whistle blowers like Ellserg, Manning and Snowden who exposed the illegal activity of government agencies.

Violations of the Geneva Convention, assassinations, torture, and violations of the 4^th Amendment against unlawful search and seizure are crimes the government seeks to conceal behind the Official Secrets Act.  So for speaking out are those men criminals, conscientious citizens, traitors or heroes?

Breaking the Code of Silence

MS# 1697silence/760 words

August 12, 2013

Breaking the Code of Silence

a column by

Harley L. Sachs

If you observe a crime being committed, what is your responsibility? When we watched apparent drug deals going town in the house across the street, we notified the police. That was our responsibility. If you are a witness to a crime and refuse to speak out, you are sheltering the criminals and are complicit in their crimes. You become willing co-conspirators. Should you withhold evidence, like the two friends of the Boston bomber who threw away his laptop and backpack, you are obstructing justice and may go to prison.

Of course, if the criminals in your neighborhood are likely to kill you for speaking out,   what do you do then? Keep silent and reinforce their authority to continue to commit crimes? Or take your chances and possibly end up dead or in the Witness Protection Program, WITSEC, forced to take a new identity and live in a distance place along with an estimated 40,000 other hidden witnesses?

But what if the criminal acts you have observed are committed by your own government? Who do you turn to? That’s the dilemma faced by Manning and Snowden. Manning turned to Wikileaks. Snowden went to the press. In the days of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers in the Vietnam War, the information was turned over to the New York Times. Ellsberg went to prison.

Breaking the code of silence has consequences. If you are a Mafioso and rat someone out, your body may be found in the trunk of a stolen car abandoned in the long term lot of the airport. If you have sworn to the Government Secrets Act you may go to prison or even, possibly executed if your acr is determined to be treason.

So when is a crime not a crime? Are the victims of the Boston bombers, killed or maimed simply “collateral damage” And how are they different from the women and children killed in a house struck by a drone flying over Pakistan? In the case of the Boston bombers, they constructed and brought their pressure cooker bombs to the crowd and set them off. In the case of the drone strikes, the anonymous persons who launched the smart bombs and missiles were thousands of miles away, sitting safely on our soil.

We are not at war with Pakistan or Yemen. Their air space is sovereign territory, just as the air space over New York is ours. To fly over a foreign country and launch bombs and missiles is an act of war. To aim those weapons at approximately specific alleged targets is assassination, another name for murder.

In the case of our calling the police about the drug deals going on across the street our recourse was our dependence on law and order and the Constitution. If we had no law and order, as is the case in Iraq where those essential parts of a civilized society have broken down or are non-existent, the alternative is revenge. Hence the frequent car bombings intended to terrify and cow the neighbors into silence or submission, just as our neighborhood gang of Mafioso hope to achieve through intimidation.

So now we have Manning and Snowden who both signed the Umberto Code of Silence  known as the National Secrets Act and then observed what they interpreted as crimes. If the criminal acts are committed by your own government, who do you turn to?

Whether you believe him or not, President Obama has said he had already taken steps to reign in the excesses of surveillance by the NSA, violations of the Constitution rules against unlawful search and seizure, issues which were our grounds for the Revolutionary War against the British Empire. Obama claims Snowden’s public revelation simply hastened the changes.

The dilemma remains. Whoever fired the drone missiles and killed those innocents are removed only by miles and intent from the drunken soldier who burst into homes in the middle of the night and murdered children in their beds.  The anonymous drone “pilots” will not be charged, but they generally pay a price of guilty conscience and PTSD for what they have done. They have to live with themselves. Some cannot and commit suicide out of remorse for what they have done and the people they have killed..

But the issue remains of who do you turn to to report a crime committed by your own government? The United Nations? A complicit Congress that voted in favor like the Nazi government who passed the Nuremberg Laws that made genocide of Jews legal?

Are we all guilty for remaining silent?

A Stain on the Congress

With 90% of the American public in favor of background checks for would-be firearm purchasers, the failure of our government to pass such a requirement is a betrayal of the public interest and a stain on the integrity of our representatives.

Since the Newtown massacre of school children and their teachers there have been more then six thousand victims of firearm violence in this country. Here in Oregon we have more deaths from firearms than from automobile accidents. Think about it.

Though anyone can buy an automobile, in order to drive it off your own property you must pass a driver’s test and have a license. Yet without background checks any idiot with the cash can buy a deadly weapon. God help us.

It may not be obvious to you, but this country is the largest manufacturer and exporter of weapons in the world. The military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about has taken over. Arms companies sponsor the NRA. With their contributions to the election campaigns of our representatives it sure looks like they are owned by the gun makers. They have sold their souls in order to be reelected. The Senate is so bound up by partisan bickering and conflict that no one wants to run for office. It reminds me of the last days of Rome described by Gibbon in his “Decline and Fall.” In those days it wasn’t the weapons makers who were the cause, but the fact that people ran for the Roman Senate in order to glean all they could from the system before they were poisoned. No one worth his salt would run.

It’s time that congress stood up for the safety of Americans they represent by supporting sensible background checks for firearm purchasers. 

A cautionary tale for American Muslims

The United States has a sad history of racism and intolerance that may be repeated if we are not vigilant.
Remember, the so-called New World was colonized for two purposes: for gold and to convert the indigenous peoples to Christianity.The Spanish conquerors made every effort to obliterate all traces of the previous cultures and religions.
As the new United States expanded westward, native peoples were displaced and even slaughtered. One tribe was hunted like animals until none remained.Surviing native American Indians had their children taken from them and put in missionary schools to convert them to Christianity and eliminate their native habits, language, and religion.
When the Chinese laborers came for the Gold Rush and to build the trans-continental railway, they were eventually expelled for fear of the "yellow peril."
The United States was one of the last countries to officially abolish slavery and indentured servitude, though the latter still exists in sweat shops and aur pair girls. 
The Mormons were persecuted and had to flee to the west and settle in Utah.
At the outbreak of World War II Japanese-Americans were interred in concentration camps.
Today thousands of so-called illegal immigrants are being reported and held in camps pending their expulson.
Now, since the 9/11 attack by fifteen Muslims, chiefly from Saudi Arabia, he country is at war against Muslim extremists, using drones flying over countries we are not at war with to assassinate alleged terrorists. Each so-called "collateral damage" of innocents adds to the recruitment of others seeking revenge.
Given that history, it is essential that all American Muslims speak out against terrorism and identify potential bombers. The risk is that besides being spied upon by FBI informants, we might see an American repeat of the Nazi Nurenberg Laws.

Getting off the Grid

MS# 1696/ 614 words

June 21, 2013

 

Getting off the Grid

a column by

Harley L. Sachs

Anyone who has read my columns about surveillance over the years should not be surprised by the so-called revelations that NSA is tracking your phone calls. It’s a useful intelligence gathering method for detecting potential terrorist activity by seeing who calls who when one of the callers is a known terrorist. Like expanding ripples when a stone hits the water, the pattern reveals the center of activity. Of course, to make any sense of this you need enormous data collecting ability and super fast computers to put it all together. NSA has that in its huge complex in Utah. But you’re not a terrorist, so what do you care? Well, you might care. Here’s how:

A woman told me she was shopping in Macy’s when she got a call on her cell phone from a manikin. Seems the store models are equipped with cameras. The dummies are watching. It’s not only Indian casinos that identify your face as you walk in the door. Now some stores do it, too. Using facial recognition, the Macy’s system recognized her, where she was in the store, knew what she usually shopped for, and offered her a discount coupon on her cell phone, since that’s the department she was shopping in.

Grocery stores where you use the so-called club card know what you eat. Stores in the national Kroger conglomerate send that data to a computer in Cleveland where individualized coupons are printed up and sent to you, based on what your past buying history is. The coupons are useable only by you.

Cell phones act like a recording GPS, and can track your movements. When the Boston bombers hijacked the SUV, the escaping owner left his cell phone behind in the car. It took only minutes to locate it for the shootout that brought the incident to a blazing end. That tracking method was also used in a jewel robbery case when the cell phone records proved the movements and location of the robbers. If you have a cell phone, they know where you are.

If you value your privacy, your only hope is to get off the grid. You have to think like a spy or a criminal.  Get rid of the cell phone. No more texting. You also need to never use an ATM machine. They keep a record of who was there, with their photos, how much they withdrew, and when. Avoid them. But what about checks? No good, either, for your bank statement shows what you bought, how much you spent, and of course the sales slip lists what you paid for. Oh, and by the way: get rid of the credit cards. They track your purchases and the time and place they were used.

So: no cell phone, no credit cards, no check book, no ATMs. But there’s more: your web surfing is recorded, and all your tweets are saved by the NSA. We already knew email was screened. Best not to use a home computer connected to the web in any way. .No more internet on line shopping.  They know what sites you visit and who your Facebook friends are.

So what is left? You have to go back to a strictly cash basis. This makes it hard to buy an airplane ticket or make a hotel reservation, but if you are trying to preserve your privacy,  this demands some sacrifice. Like my son-in-law with no bank account or credit card, you live out of your pocket.

Ah, but what about that scene in Macy’s? With no cell phone, you can’t be offered that in store coupon. This gets us down to the facial recognition program. We have to do something about your face. Maybe wear a burka?

Changes in Food Choices

1695foods/ 728 words

April 18, 2013

                                                        Our Changing Foods

a column by

Harley L. Sachs

Food choices have changed drastically over the years. During the Great Depression of the 1930’s the typical restaurant menus offered, besides steak and pork chops,  liver and onions, chicken and dumplings in a white sauce,  meat loaf, half a roast or fried chicken, scalloped potatoes and various generic soups like chicken noodle or tomato. You could find ham or pot roast.  Hamburgers were White Castle sliders or Wimpy, inspired by Popeye’s burger gulping pal. You could order a grilled cheese sandwich,  egg salad or a hot dog.  Fish? Well, there was perch or cod.

Outside of cities where there were large Jewish populations, there was no such thing as a bagel. You had to find a delicatessen to get a pastrami sandwich with an authentic kosher dill pickle.  Only Jews heard of lox and bagels with or without a schmere of cream cheese.. Only in places like New Jersey did anyone ever hear of something called pizza. Even chili was relatively new, an import from the Southwest. There were occasional Chinese restaurants serving not authentic Chinese foods, but American chop suey and chow mien. How much has changed since then!

I never heard of a taco until I visited Bob, my best friend from high school, who had moved to California in 1949. A taco was ethnic Mexican food and didn’t reach the Midwest until later. He also introduced me to giant prawns at a restaurant near the Salton Sea.

Today there are bagels in every grocery store, though the New York aficionados will deny that they are authentic unless boiled first. They come in all flavors, plain blueberry, whole wheat, and “everything.” Now, of course, prawns and similar shellfish of all sizes can be had frozen in the big grocery stores. Tacos are everywhere, and MacDonald’s and Burger King, Wendy’s and other burger joints compete  with upcoming Subway which cries “eat fresh,” a comment on the places where burgers  may sit, waiting for customers, until their company-designated expiration time runs out.

My first exposure to pizza was in Newark, New Jersey in 1953 when I visited a roommate from college while on my way to Germany and army service in Heidelberg. That pizza was a memorable, milestone meal. Now they are everywhere, in all sizes with your choice of toppings.

Today you would be hard pressed to find liver and onions on the menu of most restaurants. There are occasional meatloaf offerings, and chicken is Southern fried, dipped in batter. KFC dominates the Southern Fried Chicken business and is all over the world.

We have become foodies. Portland, Oregon, for instance, has become the foodie capital of the world with literally hundreds of ethnic food carts clustered wherever there is sufficient foot traffic. A food cart, being on wheels, is taxed only as a vehicle, so there is no property tax, much to the chagrin of real restaurant competitors. At least, those offer dining indoors. 

Those early Depression days of basic meals are over. We have become epicureans. Now, thanks to the post Vietnam War influx of immigrants, we have Thai, Indian, and Vietnamese dishes in additional to previous waves of immigrants with their ethnic foods like Poles, Germans, Russians, etc. The English bought us fish and chips.  The food carts offer just about everything you can take away.  Sampling a different place every day you could indulge literally for years.

It’s all about choices, but if you long for a dish of liver and onions or chicken and dumplings, you may have to look a long time. As for fish, thanks to depleted stocks, cod has almost disappeared. Now we ubiquitous farmed seafood: salmon, steelhead, tilapia, prawns, and hush puppies grown in ponds and pens. They are crowded together in water polluted with their own excrement. To counteract the bad effects of swimming in their own filth they are fed antibiotics which we get to absorb second hand.

In those early days of the Great Depression we ate locally grown foods. Now my menu includes melon from Costa Rica, bananas from Central America, tilapia from Thailand, pineapple from Indonesia, various foods from China, even lamb from New Zealand (when I can afford it!). The list goes on and on. To paraphrase Dorothy, when it comes to food  we aren’t in Michigan any more. Our stomachs are world travelers and we don’t even have to leave town.

Premise of the Second Amendment

The Premise of the Second Amendment

a letter by

Harley L. Sachs

All this imbroglio about gun control and gun ownership justified by the Second Amendment misses the essential condition: “In order to establish a well-regulated militia…” None of those gun owners are members of a well regulated militia. The Second Amendment was created at a time when memories of colonists under an oppressive foreign government were still fresh and there was a need for resistance. This has been extrapolated by the NRA into a fear that our own government will take away our guns.

Some will argue that the states already have a militia, which is the National Guard under the control of the governors, but the Federal Government has the authority to mobilize the National Guard, and has sent our state armies to foreign lands to fight. The National Guard, then, cannot be construed as a militia to protect us from our own government.

What the Constitution appears to enable is a home guard. We have no home guard, and we have no well regulated militia. Being part of the official militia should be a condition for ownership of military-style firearms.