Big Brother's Bigger Brother

Awhile ago I had a reader warn me that I was probably being watched because of the things I write.  If so it is a monumental waste of time for those watching for I'm just stating opinions of an elderly woman who has issues with the direction in which the country is being taken.  There are a lot of us doing the same thing.  Watching me would indicate paranoia of the highest degree.  Not that I don't think the government is paranoid!

While I don't know if or how often I'm being observed, the Brits have a whole different problem.   They have unveiled a plan to log details  of every web site you visit, every text you send, every e-mail and every letter you send and every call you make.  Wow!  What can the return on such an effort possibly be?

It was also stated that if you're worried about it you are probably a criminal or a conspiracy theorist.  Conspiracy theorist?  Just because every single aspect of my personal life is being logged and kept for a year and it's being done by the government?  How could anyone possibly think that?

The promise not to read content means that someone, authorized or not, probably will.  Talk about an entire population of paranoids!  The only question is who is paranoid about what.

I'm thinking about cost now.  Do they really have this technology and if not how much will it cost to develop?  How many people will it take to run it?  And again, how much will the country benefit?  Especially if they're not going to look at content?  What key words are they are going to use to search the data base when they deem necessary?  I would think any computer whiz worth his or her salt would figure out that one.

Here my last several posts have been complaining about drones and cattle and their effect on our water supply.  This makes that effort look like child's play.  I was worried about my privacy one time when I read about efforts to monitor the well being of the elderly in their own homes.  Cameras everywhere including the bathroom.  But this.  This takes away the last visage of privacy known to man.  You can't go outside for the drones may see you.  If you play computer games, snicker at the handicapped or bully the kid next door, Big Brother will have it on file.  Everything no matter how seemingly inconsequential to us.  Will it be to them?

I think the spontaneity of life, that which makes it worth living, is about to be snuffed out for surely if the Brits do this we will soon follow.   What's next?  They'll be reading our thoughts before we even have them.  But until then, oh yeah,  will I be thinking thoughts!

Karzai Has A Point

Now there's thought I never thought I'd have!  After listening to the stories on the news at noon about the numbers of children being tortured, yes, tortured, and killed in Syria, it brought to mind Karzai and his demands.

Once again Karzai has taken coalition forces to task for attacks on civilian enclaves.  It seems to be a weekly occurrence.  He complains so often I have to think there is something to it.  We attack and kill a targeted terrorist. Hopefully. Unfortunately the strike usually includes women and children.  Karzai complains.  We apologize.  And do it all over again.  What a way to fight a war.

I've been of the mind that war is war and there will be civilian casualties.  It's the nature of the beast.  But break down the word civilian and the whole scenario changes.  Women and children, non combatant men, the elderly.  The latest, last week, was 18. Many women.  Many children.

I don't like Mr. Karzai.  I don't believe he's an honest partner in our war against Islamic extremists and he's greedy.  On the other hand, he's tired of seeing innocent people, his people, slaughtered in the quest for often just a single individual.  So he wants all bombing of Afghan cities, towns and villages banned.  Even if coalition forces are under attack.  I see where he's coming from.  When they are shooting at us, we're all the enemy.  When we shoot at them, only scant intelligence tells us at whom we're shooting.  Sometimes the targeted person is present and sometimes not but people always get killed and it's obviously not necessarily the target.

Another argument for capturing the enemy rather than merely blowing them away.  Intelligence.  Of course a boots on the ground shooting war puts our troops in harms way and is far more difficult than using drones and other means of air attack.  It would be a good time to re-evaluate the war wouldn't it?  Are our troops and their women and children, any of their civilians, worth the end?  What is the end?  As of now it won't be victory, merely withdrawal.  If I had the money to bet, I'd bet the Taliban and al Qaeda will be out in full force before our dust has settled.

From Where Have All the Flowers Gone there's a telling verse.  "Where have all the soldiers gone?  Gone to graveyards, every one."  That's bad enough.  At least spare the children!  But then in war civilians get killed.  And that is another of the myriad of reasons I hate war.

We've Got It All Wrong!

Actually both sides have it wrong when it comes to buying information.  Yesterday I wrote about the bounties being offered for information regarding the where abouts of certain al Qaeda leaders.  Not to be out done, the Somalians have come up with their own offer for information regarding the where abouts of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton!

Ten million?  Fifty million?  No way.  Far more practical. Ten camels for Obama and twenty chickens for Clinton.  Ten hens and ten roosters, or cocks as they say.

 Does that make Hillary the better value?  I would certainly think so if you either wanted to raise chickens or produce eggs.  Unless of course, those ten camels include both male and female.  I don't know, though, how much of a market there is for camel off spring and as far as I know they don't produce a saleable product unless you consider their hair for pricey coats.  They are good pack animals and Obama is accumulating quite a bit of baggage, but then he isn't the one receiving the offer.

It seems to me if either side of this perpetual conflict knew what they were doing, the rewards would be reversed.  Thirty three million for information on top al Qaeda leaders.  Most who would have that information probably wouldn't have a clue what to do with that kind of money.  The only ones really good at handling that scope of financial windfall are the leaders themselves who use it for their own bribes.  Like exile in friendly countries should push come to shove.

Now in this country it's a different story.  We all dream of riches.  Just look at the amounts spent in casinos or on lottery jackpots just on a chance.  Know where Obama is going to be campaigning?  Done deal!  With a lump sum payment to boot!

As for the information we're seeking, we'd probably get a lot more takers if we were the ones offering the camels and the chickens.  Something any good villager could use;  food for sure, maybe even a dowry if they have such a thing.  Certainly a way to get their goods to market since most don't have cars or pick ups.

So there you go.  Those who say our leaders don't get it are absolutely right.  It's an eye opener though, to find our adversaries don't get it either.  Camels for Obama.  Come on.  Camels in any ones back yard would be sure to draw the attention of the eye in the sky drones.  Try as you might, you just can't make them look like cattle!

Money May Talk But We Don't Want To Listen

I'm reading that we've put a bounty on 7  Somali terrorists.  I didn't realize we even had a State Department 'Rewards for Justice' program.  I suppose it makes sense though considering we buy allegiance and everything else in our war on terror.  Goes to show the dollar doesn't go very far doesn't it?

This program is offering $7 million for information on the location of one man.  Five million for information on four others.  Another $3 million for additional leaders.  Some awards go as high as $25 million.  Wow. You'd think there would be a lot of squeal in that pig!  To date more than $100 million has been paid out to some 70 informants. I wonder who decides the $ value of a terrorist or if they merely shuffle a deck of cards.  A seven comes up.  Okay, $7 mil.

I can't help but wonder if the Pakistani doctor who helped us pin down bin Laden before we killed him and is now rotting in a Pakistani prison for his efforts had his eye on retiring in luxury.  Oops.

I also can't help but wonder if we'd need a system such as this if we hadn't gutted our intelligence community.  $100 million would pay a heck of a lot of salaries.

I also wonder why, when we get this information, we go after the terrorists with drones rather than making the effort to capture them. Oh, I know, it's easier.   Somehow it makes sense to me that capturing one might lead to the capture of others and an accumulation of vital intelligence along with it.

It seems at odds to say enhanced interrogation is un-American while killing people in cold blood isn't.  Somehow I see our entire war strategy as skewed. We pay who for this information?  What do we know about them?  Are they allies to our ends or traitors to their own?  Both or neither or either/or?

On the flip side of the coin we turn a deaf ear to pleas from the Syrians to help level their field in the war against their resident monster because their identity isn't clear.  That's really lame.  Think how far  $100 million would go there too.  Especially since we already know where the enemy is!

More Than A Card Game

I'm beginning to wonder just exactly who is the real Barack Obama.  The empty suit on which we imagined all sorts of wondrous things,  the protocol impaired apologist who traveled the world, the aloof naive loner or a cold blooded politician lusting after the means to hold onto power.

None of the choices thrill me but most bothersome are the means being taken to achieve the latter.

An area in which Obama has always been weak is foreign policy.  You've no doubt read about how he's trying to enhance his credentials.  His taking credit for the SEAL attack on bin Laden, the security leaks happening now that have even his own party in an uproar and the drone attacks.  He is accused of doing these things for political advantage.

Let's look at the leak about the cyber attacks in Iran where he has also linked the Israelis and one of our own national labs.  It happens to be here in Idaho.  You know Idaho, often confused with Iowa or Indiana.  We've had our share of notoriety thanks to the once plentiful neo-Nazi movement that took up residence in a town neighboring mine.  They're gone now, at least underground, yet it is the one thing most people remember when you say you live in Idaho.  I wonder if the extremists have taken note and wonder if they can recruit some kindred spirits here.  I really do wonder.  I much preferred being Iowa.  Anyway, there is the prospect of unintended consequences.

Now, too, allies are thinking we can no longer be trusted in joint covert activity.  Good thought if they're going to be outed whenever a politician needs some creds!

He also seems quite high on drone attacks.  Forget our cattle.  This is really serious business. Obama has 'evolved' from thinking the terrorists should be tried in our courts with all our rights to picking a victim from a deck of cards and taking him  out along with all who may be in the path.

There is a certain detachment that comes with using drones.  Those who operate them are thousands of miles away as is the face in a deck of cards.  But the power.  The invincibility must be like an opiate.   Why else would he order deaths rather than capture for information?  We know where they are either way.

It's chilling.  There are no stories reaching me telling of how he agonizes over the decision of who and when.  Just do it. That's cold.  Detached.  Void of emotion and I wonder, reason?

This man who hadn't even warmed up to the White House before he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.  What were they thinking?  What are we thinking?  Does he even think?