May 24, 2007 - Issue 231

What if there’s a time bomb ticking?

Tick, tick, tick… what if a time bomb were ticking? So did Brit Hume posed the question while speaking with a panel of would-be Emperor-Presidents. But like so many public spectacles and mediated diversions, inquiries and discussions about the other bombs, real and imagined, metaphorical and figurative, never arose. Thus, I try here, to draw your attention to the ubiquitous sounds of tick, tick, tick.

For torture and terrorism!?

In May, during the second media event (wrongly-named a debate), some of the self-named Republicans declared their commitment to terrorism – i.e. their willingness to order underlings to terrorize others. As offered by a cheerleader for war, lies, and torture, Brit Hume of Faux News, presented a hypothetical:

“after suicide attacks in several U.S. cities, a group of attackers believed to know about further strikes was [sic] captured off the coast of Florida and taken to Guantánamo. How aggressively would you interrogate ... ?”[1]

I shall ignore the impropriety of Mr. Hume implying that any of these men, in the role of Emperor-President, would actually dirty their hands – I trust they understood Hume to ask, “what orders would you give?”

The responses of Giuliani and Romney were stunning. Giuliani said that he would tell the interrogators to use “every method they could think of,” including waterboarding.[2] To justify his orders to torture (which is inconveniently illegal under U.S. law) and which only results in the extraction of lies and expanding the war-machine (how convenient), Giuliani made reference to 9/11 saying, “I’ve seen what can happen when you make a mistake about this.”[3] By “this” I guess Giuliani is telling us that he knows more about 9/11 than he lets on. Apparently, Giuliani witnessed some non-torture-based interrogation of people who were in on the 9/11 attacks – prior to the events.

Imitating John Kerry (“I can make a bigger and bloodier war than Bush”), Mitt Romney, explained that torture is needed for torture’s sake. Romney give the line, “some people have said [that] we ought to close Guantánamo, [I say that] we ought to double Guantánamo.” Romney added that he liked the idea of holding suspects [sic] in Guantánamo because “they don’t get the access to lawyers they get when they’re on our soil.”[4]

Of the 10 white men invited to appear on national television in South Carolina, only the war-criminal/torture recipient, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), insisted that torture is always wrong. McCain said, “It’s not about the terrorists, it’s about us. It’s about what kind of country we are.”[5]

What kind of nation are we Mr. McCain? Are we a nation of torturers, where millions vote for war-criminals, where members of patriarchal churches celebrate the idea of compelling innocent men to lie as they say anything to stop the torture? At least we are a nation where millions of so-called Republicans and current government officials say, with a straight face, that Clinton lied about sex (recall Clinton claimed not to have had “sexual relations”), but that they do not authorize torture (though they have authorized beatings, rape, waterboarding, sodomy with glow sticks and other objects, no-touch torture, sensory deprivation, mock executions, etc.).

But perhaps those who advocate “aggressive interrogation” (when someone else does the bloody work), are right. But why limit torture to the terrorists? Why choose to detain only a few hundred people without access to the minimum standards developed since 1215 through the Magna Carta? There is a ticking time bomb…

Who is driving the car?

Someone is driving over the speed limit … tick, tick, tick.

With no time to waste, when hypothetical lives are at risk, save any that might be in the wrongfully speeding car, there is no recourse, but for the police to use aggressive methods. Just ask Victor Harris. He might just answer with a blink or a nod. Victor is a quadriplegic.

In March 2001 (before 9/11, but after Bush and Cheney planned to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam), a 19 year-old Mr. Harris sped past a cop car. Harris was clocked at 73 mph in a 55 zone. Instead of pulling over, Harris drove away from police with flashing lights.[6] After eluding them in a parking lot scene equivalent of a Keystone Cop’s routine, one squad car driver, Timothy Scott “took him out.” (You can hear the police use this language on the video they provided to the U.S. Supreme Court.)[7]

That is, instead of just tracking Harris, following him via helicopter or using radios to communicate with state troopers or county deputies, Scott escalated the conflict. As soon as Scott rammed the back of the car Harris drove, Harris spun out, and his car flipped over in a ditch. Roughly 10 seconds after other officers approached the burning vehicle with guns drawn, they were waving for help to rescue a boy who would be in a wheelchair for life. tick, tick, tick…

Although Harris sued, alleging that the police used excessive force to stop someone who was not suspected of committing a capital crime (police are not even supposed to use deadly force to capture a fleeing criminal suspect or a known felon, see the 1985 case of Tennessee v. Garner)[8], the Supreme Court, ruled 8-1 (yes Clarence Thomas sided with the cops, again) that because the police alleged that Harris endangered the safety of others on the road (though he hit no civilians, injured no one, and caused no other accidents due to his driving), it was reasonable for the police to continue the chase and ultimately force Harris into a life-threatening crash.[9]

The Supreme Court has already given police carte blanche to stop non-white people who want to avert a confrontation with whites driving in a Black neighborhood, declaring that anyone who runs from armed, plain-clothes officers, riding in unmarked cars creates a reasonable suspicion that the runner is a criminal. (See Illinois v. Wardlow, 2000). Now the cops can kill you in the name of “preventing” harm to others.

There are more excuses for the use of force … mere words

What does it mean to write an essay?

I once heard the great writer, novelist, and thinker, Gore Vidal, define an essay. He said that an essay is a commentary written for the self, a piece of self-expression, a way to organize and present thoughts and arguments. In this context, I have come to realize that across the United States, within our schools, millions of bombs are ticking. Explosions manifest on paper. What must good people do in the face of such mental firepower?

Allen Lee, a High School senior in suburban Chicago looks like any other East Asian (non) American. With short hair, eyeglasses, a 4.2 GPA (on a 4.0 scale), and a desire to be a Marine, he fit the mold. Lee’s creative writing teacher heard a strange ticking …(do I need to tell you that she is white?)

In response to a free-writing assignment, where he was told not to edit and not to censor, Lee produced 340 words which reflected his thoughts.[10] In following the directions of his teacher, the teenager took images and words from his experience, his music, his video games, and the news. Lee’s macabre opus looks like the foundation for a Stephen King novel or that of Anne Rice or Thomas Harris (the creator of Hannibal Lecter). At worst, the ramblings fit the profile of a soul wounded by war, tied to a brain besieged by images of war, diseased by depleted uranium and other neurotoxins.

tick, tick, tick

As the Chief of police for Cary, Illinois, Ron Delelio insisted:

Because the Chief moonlights as a Civil Liberties attorney and Book Burner in the Ministry of Propaganda, Delelio has wonderful insights on American jurisprudence. According to Delelio, disorderly conduct, which normally applies only to public actions and pranks such as pulling a fire alarm or calling EMS without cause, also applies when someone's writings disturb an individual. "The teacher was alarmed and disturbed by the content," said Delelio.[12]

Curiously, when I asked them, officials from Lee’s school district saw no problem with the fact that they have a police officer on-duty during the school day who would normally screen all student essays (when asked) and make determinations as to whether such are criminal acts – even though the police officer has no legal training in First Amendment jurisprudence. As I was told, being arrested for writing is NOT a free speech issue. They are correct. It is a police-state issue. Just ask Allen Lee.

Lee released a public comment to explain his essay. In his conclusion, Lee wrote:

When a straight A student uses, with all sincerity, and without a sense of irony, the euphemism “to defend the country” to mean, join the U.S. military and kill people instead of protect civil liberties as embodied in the Constitution, I think that I hear some ticking.

It is a ground swell, from the South

I recently had the pleasure of visiting a number of places beside the interstate freeway as I drove across the American South. When I reached the Heart of Dixie (that’s Alabama for those of you without a sense of history or geography), and being a cynic, I expected that some gas station/restaurant would sell all sorts of memorabilia that celebrated the ideology of white Supremacy, lynching, and violence. The kind that would harken back to a time when good Southern, Traditional, and Christian values were honored by the appearance of Strange Fruit.

At the first diner/gas station, I was delighted to learn that my children will never have to speculate about the vile nature of white Supremacy, the cowardice and insecurity of white people – of the past. At this particular establishment, it was like living in 1863, 1913, and 1963 at the same time. One could buy a nice four inch-square replica of the flag of the Confederate States of America, to be placed on a car window or bumper for all to see.

When I approached the woman working at the check out counter, and expressed by dismay and disgust, noting that the flag was about hate and the righteousness of slavery and that she should be ashamed to work where such is sold, she paused and said, “We sell those all the time.” (Do I need to say, she was white?)

What came first, the hatred, the war, or the push for a violent police-state?

Of course, those CSA flags sell like hotcakes. Why not sell such a symbol? Our troops need to be rallied. We are under attack. How did the dear, friendly and likeable Dr. Falwell put it?

More recently, Limbaugh and O’Reilly fret over immigration and illegal immigration and Mexicans and Spanish-speaking people who will reduce the relative size of the white population of the United States.

Yes, they are out there, they need to be sent to Gitmo! Where is Emperor Mitt to save us from the evil-doers?

That flag, whether it be displayed on the capital grounds in South Carolina, or on the front of an 18-wheel truck, or on a car bumper, says a lot about our way of life … Just as much or more than the new Age Conservatives who see a terrorists in every pot and who insist that having faith in torture (like their faith in creationism) is more important than evidence showing its lack of efficacy.

To give a little credit to the war criminal McCain, we should ask, “Who are we?” And what shall we do when and because these bombs are ticking?

There is a bomb coming …

tick, tick, tick

Sources

[1-5] Washington Post. 2007. A Question of Torture. Excepting John McCain, Republican candidates for president seem to favor it. Thursday, May 17; A16

[6] Sherry F. Colb. 2007. The U.S. Supreme Court Condones Paralysis of a Speeding Driver: Taking the Reasonable Out Of Reasonable Seizures. Findlaw, May. 14.

[7] supremecourtus.gov (See Recent Opinions, Scott v. Harris)

[8-9] Colb.

[10] See the essay and Lee’s explanation.

[11-12] Jeff Long and Carolyn Starks. 2007. Student writes essay, arrested by police. Chicago Tribune, April 26.

[13] Act Up NY

BC Columnist Dr John Calvin Jones, PhD, JD has a law degree and a PhD in Political Science. His Website is virtualcitizens.com. Click here to contact Dr. Jones.

Your comments are always welcome.