Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice
of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly
repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens
and creates a country where everyone lives in fear. --Harry S.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only
exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess of the
public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates
promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that
a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by
a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been
200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage
to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to
liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness
to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from
dependency back again to bondage. --Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1742-1813)
Scottish jurist and historian
"Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the
voice of opposition . . ." Does this ring a bell? How about the name
Joe Wilson - does that name sound a bell? What about Valerie Plame - any bells
yet? General Shenseki?
Where do Americans find themselves in Sir Alex Tytler's cycle? The United States
can boast a 230-year history so our actions and the time factor would bring
us well into the "apathy-dependency" stage. If this is true, the return
to the "bondage" stage is not far off - as witnessed by world events
- especially those of the last 5 years. However, the "apathy" stage
of our self-destruction cycle seems to be in "fast forward". One would
have to search American history with an extremely fine-toothed comb to find
a comparable period where apathy played such a major role in the individual's
life and that of his government. Even if one were to successfully separate normal
political corruption from apathy, he would still have a hard time finding a
comparable era in our history where the theoretical "opposition party"
in the Congress apparently watches the Executive Branch with "eyes wide
open" and still refuses to acknowledge or act to restrict even the most
blatant abuses of power by the Executive. Congress not only refuses to acknowledge
malfeasance in the actions of the Executive, but also seems determined to abet
whatever excesses the Executive wants to heap upon the country.
One could argue forever about whether poor education breeds apathy or apathy
breeds poor education. The same can be said of complacency and apathy. However,
the "chicken and the egg" arguments are not pertinent to the discussion
at this point.
These points become a preface to a topic which is now crowding other
subjects "off the radar screen" in all forms of mass media. American's
attention is now being focused on the White House wire tapping of citizens without
regard for the law. The topic becomes a bonanza for blaring headlines and sniping
between the two political parties. However, the real threat to Americans lies
buried under layers of apathy and total ignorance of the extent of our government's
progress toward TOTAL surveillance of its citizens within the United States
and through cooperation and coercion of other governments, the surveillance
of Americans and foreigners on a global scale. This surveillance is not being
designed to monitor only citizen movement on a global scale, but is also being
designed to lay open to the various governments ALL personal and private matters
of finance, health, political affiliation, and religious preferences, electronic
communication and on, and on, and on.
The following information is not something torn from the pages of Franz Kafka
or Orson Well's 1984. The information presented here is taken from an April
2005 report made by The International Campaign Against Mass Surveillance (ICAMS)
(Pdf). (Refer to References and Notes below).
The programs described below were designed before 9/11; since 9/11 these programs
have been put on steroids. The world in which these programs are being constructed
is one in which "individuals are presumed guilty, detained and not told
the charges against them, denied the right to face their accusers, denied the
right to know the evidence against them and the criteria by which they are being
judged and given no legal recourse and no one to advocate for them". 
Please note, this does not refer to the present definition of terrorist or enemy
combatant. These programs apply to AMERICAN CITIZENS as well as the citizens
of the global network of countries being brought together to form an unparalleled
net of surveillance, arrest, detention, torture and indefinite detention - either
with or without formal charges - and finally death. (This could have served
as an agenda for The New World Order).
For one who sits idly in front of the television and watches the nightly
news- reader tell about another Guantanamo prisoner (terrorist) being held for
an indefinite period without any of our democratic safeguards, the "news"
doesn't even register on the listener's Richter Scale. Little does the American
know that the prisoner's plight being presented may be merely a prelude to his
own plight under the plans presently being secretly refined and expanded by
the global community under coercion and intimidation by the United States.
To bring these programs into focus and allow the reader to glimpse a portion
of their scope and the progress being made in their implementation, signposts
of program characteristics will be shown as well as the myths being created
to conceal the progress of this global cancer. (The following may bring more
meaning to the fact that the KBR arm of Halliburton has recently been awarded
a contract to build a 385 million dollar detention center to set up temporary
detention, processing and deportation facilities in case of a sudden influx
First Signpost: The Registration of Populations. 
1. Mass Detentions of Muslim Immigrants and Registration
2. US-VISIT and the E.U. Visa Information System a) Biometric
visas. b) Linkage of biometric information to a global web of databases. c)
U.S. acquisition of domestic and foreign databases.
Second Signpost: The Creation of a Global Registration System.
Third Signpost: The Creation of an Infrastructure for the Global Surveillance
of Movements. 
1. U.S. demands for sharing passenger name records (PNR).
2. Surveillance expansion to other transportation systems.
Fourth Signpost: The Creation of an Infrastructure for the Global Surveillance
of Electronic Communications and Financial Transactions.
1. Mandatory data detention.
2. Expansion of ECHELON.
In 1948, the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand created a program
under which they trawled the world's telephone communications to spy on
each others' countries and to share information on each others' citizens
that could not be obtained by their own officials under domestic laws. Since
the early 1980s, this program has been called ECHELON, and has been expanded
to intercept e-mails, faxes, telexes, electronic transactions and international
telephone calls carried via satellites.
3. Mandatory information-gathering and reporting for financial
Fifth Signpost: The Convergence of National and International Databases.
The extent of the characteristics of this signpost is very extensive and
a complete listing is past the scope of this paper. However, in countries
known for their oppressive regimes, the extent to which an integration of
functions and information sharing with the US has been occurring is probably
the greatest. Countries like Georgia, Indonesia, Egypt, Malaysia and Uzbekistan
are sharing information suspects, and in some cases intelligence and military
operations, with the US.
Sixth Signpost: Data Mining.
The use of computer models to assess masses of data for selected criteria.
The masses of data being scanning make human interface and interpretation
impossible. This amounts to having one's actions and motives interpreted by
Seventh Signpost: The Loss of Sovereignty Checks and Balances.
When all the signposts or initiatives described above are viewed together,
what emerges are the "contours of a vast, increasingly integrated multinational
registration and surveillance system, with information floating more or less
freely between subsystems.
As this system emerges, the police, security, intelligence and military operations
of many nations are becoming deeply integrated with US operations. National
governments are giving up sovereignty and throwing aside national checks and
balances in favor of an integrated security system that is largely being designed
and controlled by the US.
Eighth Signpost: The Corporate Security Complex.
For the government security/intelligence community, the "war on error"
offers an unprecedented opportunity to increase its investigative surveillance
powers by tapping into the possibilities offered by new information technologies.
Ninth Signpost: The Expropriation of the Democratic Principles.
Governments have been able to make these changes in democracy in democratic
countries by declaring a state of crisis. But, the "war on terror"
is a war without end, so the state of crisis is permanent, not temporary.
As a result, democratic societies are in grave danger of being turned, over
time, into surveillance societies -- or worse, into police states.
Tenth Signpost: A loss of Moral Compass - Rendition, Torture, Death.
It is now clear that the U.S. and other countries participating in the global
surveillance project are engaging in torture, inhumane treatment, and indefinite
detention . . . in their own facilities, as well as sending suspects to third
countries where they face torture, inhumane treatment, and indefinite detention.
The worst that individuals have to fear from the global system of mass surveillance
is something far darker than "mere" loss of privacy, civil liberties,
freedom of movement, or loss of democratic patrimonies. (They face indefinite
detention in a global gulag).
At this point the reader may be convinced he is reading something from a science
fiction book. But this is not science fiction. This is what is being planned
and constructed in real time - our time. Of these 10 signposts, the one most
identifiable in today's mass media coverage is Rendition and Torture. Even the
most hardened cynic would be forced to admit there is at least a coincidental
association between the Rendition and Torture being discussed in the media and
that presented here as a glaring warning signpost to all Americans of a global
trend being sponsored by the United States. For those who say that "all
is well" and we merely need to trust our government, please take the time
to read these ten signposts again - slowly and carefully. After a second reading,
take the time to read and absorb the following myths about your safety as an
Myth No. 1: We are merely being asked to sacrifice some
of our privacy and conveniences for greater security.
Myth No. 2: These initiatives facilitate travel.
Myth No. 3: If one has nothing to hide, one has nothing
to worry about.
Myth No. 4: The technology being used is objective and reliable.
Myth No. 5: Terrorist watch lists are a reliable product
of international cooperation and consensus.
Myth No. 6: If one is mistakenly caught up in the global
surveillance net, one's government can protect one.
Myth No. 7: Governments want to implement these systems
to protect their citizens from terrorists.
Myth No. 8: Western democracies are defending democracy
and human rights around the world.
Myth No. 9: These initiatives make us safer.
Myth No. 10: Guaranteeing security is the paramount responsibility
Myth No. 11: At least, these initiatives are better than
For any American to have read this far and not have at least a twinge of unease
about the direction and intentions of his government, is impossible. If any
American has even the remotest contact with or interest in the true condition
of today's world, there has to a twinge of unease by this point. If any one
of these 11 myths is in any degree false, then any global citizen should be
extremely worried and any American should be terrified because Americans have
more to lose than the citizens of any other country in the world.
The International Campaign Against Mass Surveillance (ICAMS) was founded by
the American Civil Liberties Union, Focus on the Global South, the Friends'
Committee on National Legislation, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring
Group and Statewatch.
ICAMS was launched on April 20 2005 in London, Manila, Ottawa and Washington.
Full credit for the information in this article is given to the April 2005
ICAMS report. References from ICAMS April 2005 Report:
 Page 39.  Page 5 
Page 8  Page 12  Page 14 
Page 18  Page 33  Page 35 
Page 38  Page 39
The myths quoted are taken from the same report.
The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think
things out...without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost
inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is
dishonest, insane, intolerable. --H. L. Mencken
Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from
the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance.
The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power,
not the increase of it. --Woodrow Wilson
In today's world we have been dumbed down through our government educational
system, television and Hollywood's interpretation of history and current events
to the point where no one seems to have the faintest inclination to study and
examine, with a critical eye, what our political parties fob of on us for the
truth. How many in the Republican Party view their party as dishonest, insane,
and/or intolerable? When Clinton was in power, how many Democrats were able
to see that selling our defense secrets to the Chinese for campaign contributions
was dishonest, insane AND intolerable? We apparently assume that anything said
by our government - especially the President - is true and needs no examination
or comment. For the most part, even a cursory examination of anything a politician
says can be found to be false and is presented for his/her own reason(s).
The myths surrounding our dealings with the government's avowed purpose of
"protecting" us needs more objective scrutiny than almost any other
scam politicians have to inflict upon us. "Scam" is a harsh word,
but as one examines the true nature of the programs for mass surveillance of
global populations it will be seen that "scam" is a word far too benign
to truly describe the programs presently underway. The programs, under the sponsorship
and goading of the US intelligence community, are truly terrifying in scope
and content. The insidious part of this "racket" is that it continues
to grow irrespective of which party is in power. Each administration hands its
"rogue baton" to its successor that in turn builds upon the foundation
being handed it. After all, what politician has ever been guilty of reducing
the size and scope of government? In essence, this succession is exemplified
by Clinton's domestic and global surveillance system being handed to Bush who
was "honor" (sic) bound to embellish whatever Clinton had in place.
Bush's embellishments have been Orwellian in scope and stature - especially
after 9/11. For each embellishment that has been unearthed, there has had to
be a myth created to soothe the uneasy electorate. The following popular myths
will be examined to see what is behind the facade of deceit for each mass surveillance
program presently under development.
Myth No. 1: We are merely being asked to sacrifice some of
our privacy and convenience for greater security:
Why is this a myth? Because like most myths, it doesn't examine any of the
ramifications that would allow the citizen to analyze the pros and con's in
order to arrive at a rational conclusion. Like most myths this one sounds
so good that anyone wanting to argue the premise must be a "terrorist
In the first place, we aren't being "asked" anything. The scheme
toward global surveillance is being pursued with the utmost stealth by all
the government entities participating in the programs. Secondly, "some"
is not in the development lexicon. We are talking here of the sacrifice of
TOTAL individual privacy. This is a program development necessity because
the programs are being built with an objective of "risk assessment".
Risk assessment for the most part is concerned with the analysis of huge blocks
of data to determine trends or patterns. Most of the analysis is done without
human interface so it is up to computers to determine the trends. Fourth,
this data sharing is done without regard to which government or governmental
agency sees it or uses it. This means that while a citizen may be living within
the laws of a particular country, his shared data can put him in grave danger
under the laws of some other country that may be examining his "dossier".
Myth No. 2: These initiatives facilitate travel:
Facilitating travel is the least of "Big Brother's" objectives.
"Brother" is more interested in creating a record of passengers'
private information. Passenger information is being stored for data mining
purposes to identify risk patterns.
"There are no legal avenues of redress to challenge one's risk "score".
Those who are pulled over as moderate or "unknown" risks will miss
flights. Those who are flagged as high risk may be "rendered" by
the United States and other countries without any kind of due process, to
third countries where they may face torture, arbitrary detention and even
Myth No.3: If one has nothing to hide, one has nothing to
Again we have a "flag and apple pie" myth created by the bureaucracy
to disguise the 800-pound gorilla watching television in the living room.
The key inaccuracy here is in not asking "nothing to hide from WHOM"?
The problem is that the data that is stored and data-mined is shared with
any and all agencies with which the US cooperates in this burgeoning global
surveillance network. Therefore, one can never be sure who will be looking
at and analyzing one's particular personal data. As previously stated, if
a computer decides your data "score" isn't correct, there is no
appeal to the totally impersonal system under which your score was calculated
because the data hasn't been touched by human hands. Thus, the only variable
for a security score unsatisfactory to some computer will be: is the victim
to be tortured and killed in the area where his "score" was found
to be unsatisfactory, or will one be rendered to some other country for "special
Myth No. 4: The technology being used is objective and reliable:
"First, the factual base on which the technology rests in unreliable.
The 'best information available' on which data mining or risk-scoring technology
depend is often inaccurate, lacking context, dated or incomplete. It might
even be 'dirty' information - extracted by torture, or offered by an informant
who is vulnerable or is acting in bad faith.
None of the data mining programs contains a mechanism by which individuals
can correct . . . or object to the information that is being used against
them, or even know what it is. Indeed, these systems are uninterested in this
kind of precision. They would be bogged down if they were held to the ordinary
standards of access, accuracy and accountability. Operating on a precautionary
principle, they are not really concerned with the truth about individuals:
they are meant to cut a broad swath". 
Myth No. 5: Terrorist watch lists are a reliable product of
international intelligence cooperation and consensus.
Again, how can "mere" citizens quarrel with such a premise? Who
would think their government is operating a flawed system that isn't designed
for his/her protection? The reality is that there is no central, planned criteria
for determining whose name goes on the list(s) or why. Various governments
and intelligence entities establish their own criteria for establishing the
"Equally troubling is the fact that "there is no due process afforded
individuals or groups to allow them to challenge the inclusion of their names
on a list. And, once the "terrorist" label is fastened to them,
actions are taken against them without normal legal protections being afforded
(protections such as presumption of innocence the right to know the evidence
and allegations against one and to respond, the right to remain silent, and
habeas corpus). This is the essence of the risk assessment model: it treats
as intolerable risks the very legal protections that are fundamental to free
and democratic societies". 
Myth No. 6: If one is mistakenly caught up in the global mass
surveillance net, one's government can protect one:
The fact is that once a citizen of any country is caught in this international
surveillance web, there is little his government can do to protect him.
Myth No. 7: Governments want to implement these systems in
protect their citizens from terrorists.
Who would be so foolish as to argue with such an obvious, lofty goal? Answer,
anyone who is even remotely aware of the manner is which the mass surveillance
systems operate. The agreements between governments are many times irresponsible
and do not have adequate controls concerning the sharing of information.
There is also the economic factor involved. Some countries, to gain information
on foreign citizens, freely use various forms of economic coercion. For example,
the United States has the lever of withholding landing rights to force airlines
to hand over passenger information. Threatened withholding of foreign aid
by the US and the EU is also used as a bludgeon to force countries to acquiesce
on sharing personal information on their citizens.
Myth No. 8: Western Democracies are defending democracy and
human rights around the world.
Do the following examples of "justice" sound as though Western
Democracies are interested in defending human rights?
1. The UK allows the CIA to operate one of its extraterritorial
detention centers on the British island of Diego Garcia.
2. Sweden has allowed US, UK and German agencies to question
suspects held in Sweden and have cooperated in the rendition of asylum applicants
from Sweden to Egypt for torture and imprisonment.
3. In Italy, US intelligence agents kidnapped an Islamic
militant and sent him to Egypt where he was tortured.
4. A German is alleged to have been seized by Macedonian
police, hel d for weeks incommunicado, striped and beaten, flown to a jail
in Afghanistan controlled by US agents where he was held and tortured for
five months before being dumped in Albania.
5. The governments of Austria, Canada, Germany, Sweden,
Turkey, and the UK have themselves sought to deport terrorist suspects to
countries where torture is used.
Myth No. 9: These initiatives make us safer:
Another illusion from the masters of "illusion". The oceans of
data mined by the various governments using faulty logic and conceived biases,
yields outrageous number of errors. For the statistically large number of
people misidentified, the consequences can be dire. What is required is good
information about specific threats, not crude racial profiling and useless
information on the nearly 100 percent of the population that poses no threat
Myth No. 10: Guaranteeing security is the paramount responsibility
If this myth is true, why did 9/11 happen? The point here is that the various
US intelligence agencies DID receive generalized warnings from several sources
that an attack on the US using civilian airplanes was being planned, but no
increased security measures were taken to safeguard the country. "Three
years after the attack, 120,000 hours of recorded telephone calls had yet
to be translated by the FBI". So how then could the oceans of data that
are now being made available for computer analysis have averted an attack?
The United States security apparatus did not need, before 9/11, the ocean
of general irrelevant information they are now collecting and would very likely
have drowned in it altogether.
Myth No. 11: At least, these initiatives are better than doing
Nothing could be further from the truth. Besides the fact that these initiatives
are robbing the American people of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by our
Constitution and Bill of Rights, they are doing much more harm than good to
the goal of increasing domestic security. Resources are being diverted from
more useful projects and in their present form and application these initiatives
are not effective deterrents to terrorists.
The fallacies of these myths are apparent after even a cursory glance at what
they conceal and evade. The "slope" they represent is not even a slippery
one - it is a cliff over a disaster. Once these initiatives are in place and
affecting the governments of many countries around the world having different
laws, different values and different agendas, the genie is truly out of the
bottle and free to run wild around the globe creating a myriad of unforeseen
consequences. The genie can never be put back in the bottle.
One of the more sinister aspects of what the United States in unleashing on
the world is the fact that these programs are being done with utmost stealth
and with no oversight and safeguards for the citizens of any country. For repressive
regimes, the rulers can always point to acting in cooperation with their "friend",
the United States. For countries having varying degrees of democracy, the despotic
urgings of the US can be used to justify the persecution of their own citizens.
For we totally unsuspecting Americans, the totalitarian aspect of these programs
is truly alarming. We have worked 230 years to build a nation with a constitution
that would safeguard us against the actions of a government doing exactly what
this Administration is doing now. All this is being done under the cloak of
hysteria created after we were attacked in September of 2001. These things are
being done by a government that tries to keep its every action hidden from the
people. In the eyes of our present government, it is we Americans who are the
enemy. "Terrorists" are only a handy tool to be used against America
and its founding principles.
We Americans still have time to stop our headlong fall into totalitarianism,
but at this late hour it is going to take a very concentrated effort to overcome
the gravity of the lack of information and apathy acting to pull us into disaster.
Americans must put their democracy to the test by contacting their elected representatives
and demanding that they become conversant with these initiatives. For every
program approved there must be an active oversight program. Congressional representatives
must be called upon to investigate these programs and weigh them against our
Constitution. Any program that jeopardizes the individual or collective "American
Rights" under our Constitution must be stopped. There must be no blind
acceptance of "Executive Privilege". Executive Orders must be examined
and challenged when necessary for the preservation of our democracy - even as
badly damaged and fragile as it is.
Reference: The International Campaign Against Mass Surveillance (ICAMS) was
founded by the American Civil Liberties Union, Focus on the Global South, the
Friends' Committee on National Legislation, the International Civil Liberties
Monitoring Group and Statewatch.
 ICAMS April 2005 Report pdf file, Page 14; 
Page 24;  Page 32;  Page 48.
Nolan K. Anderson is a retired engineer and a veteran
of Korea who was once a "conservative" until he found there was nothing
left to conserve and as a veteran hates to see a tour in Korea go to waste.
(He may be reached at email@example.com ).
Read from Looking Glass News
A Global Infrastructure for Mass Surveillance . . . Part 3