A tragedy occurred in Mt. Airy, MD recently: a murder-suicide involving a husband, wife, and their 2 children.
No note was left, so the true motive will never be known, but due to the family’s economic situation, financial strain is being speculated as the cause. A decline in profits from a home improvement business and a house on the market for over a year may have lead a man to kill his family and then take his own life. I can’t imagine the unbelievable pain and anguish someone must be in to lead them to such a drastic step; but I can say with some certainty, it was unnecessary. And though it has not been absolutely determined to be the cause in this instance, there have been many similar cases where this is indeed the reason for such drastic, horrific measures. We have gotten so far from what’s truly important in life we feel our children are better off dead than living below middle-class.
In my area of Maryland, not too far from Mt. Airy, I have friends ranging from well-off to head just above water, though on all ends of the spectrum, no one seems to think they are doing well. How is this possible? According to the US Census Bureau, the median income in Carroll County in 2007 was $79,803. So, how are people making $80,000 a year in the same boat as those making $40,000? How did the American Dream make $80,000 a year the poverty line in some people’s minds? Do we truly believe a job as a school janitor, a 2-bedroom apartment, only 1 car, and food on the table is a failure? So much so, that we’d rather not live, than live without?
Our economic crisis unfolded as we all chased a fleeting image of what we felt we deserved. And when we caught it, and didn’t have the money to buy, we got in bed with the banks and let them control the situation. We accepted everything from “sub-prime” mortgages to credit cards that increased your limit anytime you came within $200. We lost control of our financial selves and when we were finally forced to stop and see what had come of it, we gasped. And then we started pointing fingers. And as the economy as a whole began to further decline, we asked the government how they were going to fix it. But, in the end, we can only blame ourselves because we are the only ones we can fix. Right now, as the realization of our monumental mistakes become clear, is the time to show our true character. Everyone talks about finding our real selves in the tough times, well that time is here. Now is the time to see what we can live without. What’s truly important can’t be paid off over time.
I’m not without fault. I’m constantly worrying how I will pay my $600 credit card payment. A payment that slowly grew over time as I tried to avoid facing my financial issues. A payment that reflects so many things I could have lived without. Some days I feel I’m at the bottom of the economic barrel, with no way out. Yet, when reality slaps me in the face, I realize, my priorities need to be readjusted. A few weeks ago, I was pulling into a Shell parking lot when I noticed a man clutching a little girl’s hand and in the other he held a baby in a carrier. The sight warmed me and I smiled. As I pumped my gas and made faces at my son through the back window, the image quickly faded from my mind. As I drove away, I noticed them, along with a dozen others, standing in front of a building next door. It was then I noticed the sign on the building, “Family Services”. And directly above the man and his children was a sign that read “Food”. Since then, I haven’t been able to shake the image of this man and his children crossing the street, to me seeming just a happy family out for a stroll, when in fact he was headed to a place to ask for food for his children. I worry about how I’m going to pay a credit card bill and he worries about how is going to feed his kids. Perspective is usually hidden in a piece of humble pie.
As I was growing up, my mother worked everywhere from a gas station to an industrial laundry mat. My dad was a laborer in a heat treating plant that left him with medical problems for the rest of his life. My parents chased the American Dream and it left them with irreparable damage to their credit. We moved a lot, sitting here now I’m counting 10 homes I lived in before my 15th birthday. Some were purchased, most rented. Of those 10 houses, 3 were foreclosed on, 1 burnt to the ground, and 1 flooded. I’m not without a story, but I never felt I was missing out. My mother planted flowers in front of every single one of those houses. And I called all of them home. Even today, when I go to my parent’s house, a place I’ve never lived, I feel at home. It’s where my parents are, their scents, their voices, their laughter, the pictures from my childhood, the knick knacks I’ve seen a 1000 times. It’s where the things that matter are.
And some may say my parents never got the American Dream. But they’ve gotten to love the same person for 40 years, raise 4 children who still speak to them regularly, spoil 6 grandchildren, and on the rare occasion they have a few extra dollars in the bank, they get a crappy motel room, no more than 20 miles from their home, and spend an evening on the beach together. If that’s not the American Dream, then perhaps we should redefine it. If my parents had decided to end it all the first time they lost everything, I wouldn’t have made it to my 2nd birthday.
Everyone’s problems are real and I don’t discount them, but in the larger view of life we have to worry about the things that matter. Could Charles Dalton have had a decent life without his business or home? Unfortunately, we’ll never know, but my thought is yes. Because a business and home don’t make you what you are. The people who love you do. Possessions can only define us if we let them and sometimes the only way to keep that from happening is to just let it go.
**Published Eldersburg Advocate 10/21/09
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
This Is America, Land of Rule Breakers
Chester City Firefighter Suspended Over American Flag Sticker
Shared via AddThis
Once again, the point is lost. This isn't about whether or not an American flag is offensive, it is about keeping others from posting offensive items. Unfortunately, in this climate of 'give an inch, take a mile', employers are forced to take an all or nothing stance.
So many people are unable to differentiate between what is and isn't OK to post in a public area, the only way to prevent it from becoming a lawsuit is to ban everything. I worked in offices for many years, some allowed personal affects, some didn't. In the offices that allowed it, without fail, there would be at least one person a week calling foul because they were asked to take down an offensive item. When I was an employee, I would do everything I could to make sure their mistakes didn't affect my ability to post my extremely necessary "Live Long and Prosper" sign. When I became a supervisor and had to be the one to address the offenders, I became very anti-personal items. There were times I would pass a desk and not notice something someone else considered offensive, just to be called out later for allowing someone to break the rules. If the rule was no personal items, then it was easier to know when I had an issue to address. With most things, the few ruin it for the many.
This firefighter's refusal to remove his flag doesn't show his patriotism, it shows his lack of respect for rules. His anger shouldn't be pointed towards those who made the rule, but rather those who forced the station to make the rule.
Shared via AddThis
Once again, the point is lost. This isn't about whether or not an American flag is offensive, it is about keeping others from posting offensive items. Unfortunately, in this climate of 'give an inch, take a mile', employers are forced to take an all or nothing stance.
So many people are unable to differentiate between what is and isn't OK to post in a public area, the only way to prevent it from becoming a lawsuit is to ban everything. I worked in offices for many years, some allowed personal affects, some didn't. In the offices that allowed it, without fail, there would be at least one person a week calling foul because they were asked to take down an offensive item. When I was an employee, I would do everything I could to make sure their mistakes didn't affect my ability to post my extremely necessary "Live Long and Prosper" sign. When I became a supervisor and had to be the one to address the offenders, I became very anti-personal items. There were times I would pass a desk and not notice something someone else considered offensive, just to be called out later for allowing someone to break the rules. If the rule was no personal items, then it was easier to know when I had an issue to address. With most things, the few ruin it for the many.
This firefighter's refusal to remove his flag doesn't show his patriotism, it shows his lack of respect for rules. His anger shouldn't be pointed towards those who made the rule, but rather those who forced the station to make the rule.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Don't Bother, It Won't Last
Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License in Louisiana
Oh, Louisiana. You make my day a little brighter. I thought I would have to be married to my husband forever, but according to a Justice of the Peace in LA, it will never last. Thank goodness, because there are days I want to kill him. I muscle through because I made a commitment, but now I know not to bother. And I was afraid my child wouldn’t have any emotional scars to blame on me, but now, NOW, he has a whopper. His complete and total ostracization from polite society because he doesn’t belong to either race, he’s a hybrid, and everyone knows how much people hate hybrids.
Judge Keith Bardwell, a JOP in Tangipahoa Parish, is refusing to marry interracial couples based on their inability to remain married for an acceptable length of time. Uh, what ruler is he using, exactly? Last I checked marriage as an institution is in the toilet. I know you’ve heard the stats, 50% of marriages end in divorce. That’s all marriages. And while I understand that some of these marriages are interracial, what of the others? Bardwell would have you believe he is being fair because he has never married any interracial couples, but if his reasoning is in fact because of the breakdown of the marriages, then wouldn’t it be fair to refuse to marry anyone. If he is, in fact trying to prevent marriages that won’t last from happening, then why is race the only factor he takes into account. Why not age or economic status? Both of which are statistically proven indicators of doomed marriages.
And frankly, his ill conceived belief that mixed children aren’t accepted in either culture is hog wash. There are so many different races in schools today many mixed children aren’t even identified by white or black. Some are mistaken for Hispanic or Middle Eastern. Believe me, I have more to worry about when my kid enters school than how he will be judged for his heritage. I’ve got to watch out for 6-year-old cub scouts bringing utensils to school.
As with most racists, the judge is sure to point at his “piles and piles” of black friends, friends he allows to use his bathroom. And he’ll marry them, as long as they don’t get high and mighty and start wanting to marry outside of their socially acceptable pool of mates. Racism isn’t just about disliking a race as a whole, it is judging any person about anything based solely on their race. The fact that he holds this antiquated view that interracial couples aren’t able to make their marriages work makes him a racist. The fact that he is a sitting judge who openly allows his racism to sway his judicial responsibilities is a sign of how far behind the south actually is in race relations.
Regardless of Judge Bardwell’s true intention, whether it is as he says or it’s the very real fact that he is a racist, the point is moot. He agreed to uphold the rights of his citizens when he became a judge. He does not get to pick and choose which laws he upholds; he is required to uphold them all. If he is unable to do that, then perhaps he should find a career where picking and choosing your beliefs is allowed.
Oh, Louisiana. You make my day a little brighter. I thought I would have to be married to my husband forever, but according to a Justice of the Peace in LA, it will never last. Thank goodness, because there are days I want to kill him. I muscle through because I made a commitment, but now I know not to bother. And I was afraid my child wouldn’t have any emotional scars to blame on me, but now, NOW, he has a whopper. His complete and total ostracization from polite society because he doesn’t belong to either race, he’s a hybrid, and everyone knows how much people hate hybrids.
Judge Keith Bardwell, a JOP in Tangipahoa Parish, is refusing to marry interracial couples based on their inability to remain married for an acceptable length of time. Uh, what ruler is he using, exactly? Last I checked marriage as an institution is in the toilet. I know you’ve heard the stats, 50% of marriages end in divorce. That’s all marriages. And while I understand that some of these marriages are interracial, what of the others? Bardwell would have you believe he is being fair because he has never married any interracial couples, but if his reasoning is in fact because of the breakdown of the marriages, then wouldn’t it be fair to refuse to marry anyone. If he is, in fact trying to prevent marriages that won’t last from happening, then why is race the only factor he takes into account. Why not age or economic status? Both of which are statistically proven indicators of doomed marriages.
And frankly, his ill conceived belief that mixed children aren’t accepted in either culture is hog wash. There are so many different races in schools today many mixed children aren’t even identified by white or black. Some are mistaken for Hispanic or Middle Eastern. Believe me, I have more to worry about when my kid enters school than how he will be judged for his heritage. I’ve got to watch out for 6-year-old cub scouts bringing utensils to school.
As with most racists, the judge is sure to point at his “piles and piles” of black friends, friends he allows to use his bathroom. And he’ll marry them, as long as they don’t get high and mighty and start wanting to marry outside of their socially acceptable pool of mates. Racism isn’t just about disliking a race as a whole, it is judging any person about anything based solely on their race. The fact that he holds this antiquated view that interracial couples aren’t able to make their marriages work makes him a racist. The fact that he is a sitting judge who openly allows his racism to sway his judicial responsibilities is a sign of how far behind the south actually is in race relations.
Regardless of Judge Bardwell’s true intention, whether it is as he says or it’s the very real fact that he is a racist, the point is moot. He agreed to uphold the rights of his citizens when he became a judge. He does not get to pick and choose which laws he upholds; he is required to uphold them all. If he is unable to do that, then perhaps he should find a career where picking and choosing your beliefs is allowed.
You mean, I have to pay for this?!
Burlington Coat Factory Riot
Shared via AddThis
It’s a crisp fall day as you are perusing the racks of a local Burlington Coat Factory. You notice a commotion and ask what is going on. Someone breathlessly tells you there is a woman in the store who has won the lottery and she is paying for everyone’s purchases up to $500. What is your reaction? Do you continue shopping and ignore the craziness? Or do you make a mad dash for the closest rack of clothes and grab everything? Things you may or may not need, shoes that aren’t even in your size, anything close enough for you to get your hands on.
I just can’t imagine what would go through someone’s mind that would make them start grabbing everything off the racks because some person they’ve never met says they will pay for it. Why isn’t the first thing you think about “umm…I’m gonna need a bank statement first”? I know I’m supposed to be railing against the crazy lady that came in and lied about winning the lottery, but frankly, that’s the obvious. Of course she’s a whack job, but what about customers who began stripping the store of all of its merchandise and then trashing the place when they were asked to pay for it? Or the ones who managed to make it out of the store with stolen goods? Some mental case you’ve never laid eyes on before tells you she’ll buy you stuff and when she doesn’t make good, you think you’re still owed the booty.
I’ve never understood the concept of looting and rioting. People would have you believe they are trying to make a point, but whatever message they are trying to send gets lost in the rubble. You can’t expect people to listen to you or champion your cause if you’ve just caused them thousands of dollars worth of damage.
As with most things, greed is the motivator here; it can turn upstanding citizens into criminals, from Wall Street down to Burlington Coat Factory. Not one of those customers thought they would be walking into that store getting their purchases for free (well, with the exception of a possible shoplifter or two), yet each one walked out feeling they had been robbed of something they deserved. In deplorability, this is a case where the effect far outweighed the cause. The woman was wrong for what she did, but the customers overshadowed her by a long shot. Her actions were to grab attention (possibly due to a mental condition); theirs displayed a true lack of character.
I don’t subscribe to the theory that no one is owed anything. I believe we all have basic human rights that we are owed; a roof over our heads, food on our table, and the ability to seek medical care are all things I think everyone should have, regardless of their economic condition. Nowhere on that list will you ever find discount coats.
Shared via AddThis
It’s a crisp fall day as you are perusing the racks of a local Burlington Coat Factory. You notice a commotion and ask what is going on. Someone breathlessly tells you there is a woman in the store who has won the lottery and she is paying for everyone’s purchases up to $500. What is your reaction? Do you continue shopping and ignore the craziness? Or do you make a mad dash for the closest rack of clothes and grab everything? Things you may or may not need, shoes that aren’t even in your size, anything close enough for you to get your hands on.
I just can’t imagine what would go through someone’s mind that would make them start grabbing everything off the racks because some person they’ve never met says they will pay for it. Why isn’t the first thing you think about “umm…I’m gonna need a bank statement first”? I know I’m supposed to be railing against the crazy lady that came in and lied about winning the lottery, but frankly, that’s the obvious. Of course she’s a whack job, but what about customers who began stripping the store of all of its merchandise and then trashing the place when they were asked to pay for it? Or the ones who managed to make it out of the store with stolen goods? Some mental case you’ve never laid eyes on before tells you she’ll buy you stuff and when she doesn’t make good, you think you’re still owed the booty.
I’ve never understood the concept of looting and rioting. People would have you believe they are trying to make a point, but whatever message they are trying to send gets lost in the rubble. You can’t expect people to listen to you or champion your cause if you’ve just caused them thousands of dollars worth of damage.
As with most things, greed is the motivator here; it can turn upstanding citizens into criminals, from Wall Street down to Burlington Coat Factory. Not one of those customers thought they would be walking into that store getting their purchases for free (well, with the exception of a possible shoplifter or two), yet each one walked out feeling they had been robbed of something they deserved. In deplorability, this is a case where the effect far outweighed the cause. The woman was wrong for what she did, but the customers overshadowed her by a long shot. Her actions were to grab attention (possibly due to a mental condition); theirs displayed a true lack of character.
I don’t subscribe to the theory that no one is owed anything. I believe we all have basic human rights that we are owed; a roof over our heads, food on our table, and the ability to seek medical care are all things I think everyone should have, regardless of their economic condition. Nowhere on that list will you ever find discount coats.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Exxon, Pillar of the Community
Exxon Mobile appeals $150 million award
Jacksonville, MD is a town located in Baltimore County, about 20 miles NE of Baltimore. Jacksonville is populated with about 10,000 people and has a median income of approximately $100,000. The number of people who rent in this community is almost non-existent. People move to this town to put down roots, looking for a place to call home. And for many families that’s what they thought they found, until a grave error made by a major corporation changed all that.
In 2006, Exxon Mobil Corp contacted the Maryland Department of the Environment to inform them of a leak. This was no ordinary leak, though; this leak produced 15 feet of gas in just one well. This leak spilled about 4 tankers full of gas into the community’s ground water. This leak caused a mess that could take as long as 10 years before it is ever truly cleaned up. Exxon managed to allow this leak to go on for a 37-day period without investigating, even after the station had to receive extra shipments of product and some $2,000 worth of gas went unaccounted for each day. Obvious negligence on the part of Exxon caused this catastrophe, yet 3 years later, they still don’t want to take responsibility.
For many people, $150 million may seem like a lot of money. However, split between 89 families, the enormity of that amount dwindles. This was the total awarded to families affected by the oil leak that went undetected by an Exxon Mobil station for 5 weeks. For 5 weeks these families had 26,000 gallons of gas seeping into their lawns and ground water. For 5 weeks, their children were drinking tainted water. For 5 weeks, this service station wreaked havoc on people’s lives, havoc that will resonate for a lifetime. They will always have in the back of their minds the possibility that physical damage was done. When they have a headache, they will wonder. When their child complains of a stomach ache, their hearts may, for a brief moment, seize with fear. Each time they put a glass of drinking water to their lips, they’ll hesitate. And if they decide it’s too much to bear and they want to uproot, they may have to take a loss on the sale of their homes to do so.
At the beginning of the trial, the defense attorney promised that his clients “want to make it right”. Yet, instead of Exxon Mobil Corp. stepping up and doing the right thing, they forced these families to muddle through the court systems and be awarded their justice through a jury. And even after a jury saw fit to give these families a little of what they deserve, Exxon is still planning to appeal. They have already asked the judge to lower the sum, and except for a few minor legal adjustments to the amount, the judge agreed with the jury. Yet, Exxon’s lawyer says he is disappointed. Disappointed? Let’s talk about disappointment. Disappointment is a major company allowing this to go to trial, a company who brought in $44 million in profit, a record for the corporation, in 2008, a year when many companies were struggling to keep their head above water. Allowing these families, who have already been through so much, to have to sit and listen to this mega company provide excuses for their lack of consideration for everyday people. The victims were forced to hear an email, written by an Exxon Mobil project manager, discounting their pain and suffering, referring to it as “just another notch in the tree of life”. During his closing remarks, the defense attorney further ridiculed the plaintiffs, calling the families’ fears, about potential health risks, unsubstantiated. Even though, the effects of a long-term presence of MTBE, a gasoline additive, are not fully understood.
Exxon is letting their true colors show, exposing them for the greedy corporation they are. For me, it seems only yesterday we were hearing how this company had to be forced to take responsibility for a far more major catastrophe in Alaska. In 20 years they still haven’t learned community conscientiousness. They still aren’t accepting responsibility for their actions. When will this company see that they can’t railroad the little people? They can’t brush their mistakes under the rug and pretend they didn’t happen. Their mistakes affect the community in which they are made and they need to step up and repair the damage, and not just the physical damage. They need to reach in where it really hurts, the pocketbook. They need to stand up and accept their punishment for these egregious errors. Only then will they have made it right.
Jacksonville, MD is a town located in Baltimore County, about 20 miles NE of Baltimore. Jacksonville is populated with about 10,000 people and has a median income of approximately $100,000. The number of people who rent in this community is almost non-existent. People move to this town to put down roots, looking for a place to call home. And for many families that’s what they thought they found, until a grave error made by a major corporation changed all that.
In 2006, Exxon Mobil Corp contacted the Maryland Department of the Environment to inform them of a leak. This was no ordinary leak, though; this leak produced 15 feet of gas in just one well. This leak spilled about 4 tankers full of gas into the community’s ground water. This leak caused a mess that could take as long as 10 years before it is ever truly cleaned up. Exxon managed to allow this leak to go on for a 37-day period without investigating, even after the station had to receive extra shipments of product and some $2,000 worth of gas went unaccounted for each day. Obvious negligence on the part of Exxon caused this catastrophe, yet 3 years later, they still don’t want to take responsibility.
For many people, $150 million may seem like a lot of money. However, split between 89 families, the enormity of that amount dwindles. This was the total awarded to families affected by the oil leak that went undetected by an Exxon Mobil station for 5 weeks. For 5 weeks these families had 26,000 gallons of gas seeping into their lawns and ground water. For 5 weeks, their children were drinking tainted water. For 5 weeks, this service station wreaked havoc on people’s lives, havoc that will resonate for a lifetime. They will always have in the back of their minds the possibility that physical damage was done. When they have a headache, they will wonder. When their child complains of a stomach ache, their hearts may, for a brief moment, seize with fear. Each time they put a glass of drinking water to their lips, they’ll hesitate. And if they decide it’s too much to bear and they want to uproot, they may have to take a loss on the sale of their homes to do so.
At the beginning of the trial, the defense attorney promised that his clients “want to make it right”. Yet, instead of Exxon Mobil Corp. stepping up and doing the right thing, they forced these families to muddle through the court systems and be awarded their justice through a jury. And even after a jury saw fit to give these families a little of what they deserve, Exxon is still planning to appeal. They have already asked the judge to lower the sum, and except for a few minor legal adjustments to the amount, the judge agreed with the jury. Yet, Exxon’s lawyer says he is disappointed. Disappointed? Let’s talk about disappointment. Disappointment is a major company allowing this to go to trial, a company who brought in $44 million in profit, a record for the corporation, in 2008, a year when many companies were struggling to keep their head above water. Allowing these families, who have already been through so much, to have to sit and listen to this mega company provide excuses for their lack of consideration for everyday people. The victims were forced to hear an email, written by an Exxon Mobil project manager, discounting their pain and suffering, referring to it as “just another notch in the tree of life”. During his closing remarks, the defense attorney further ridiculed the plaintiffs, calling the families’ fears, about potential health risks, unsubstantiated. Even though, the effects of a long-term presence of MTBE, a gasoline additive, are not fully understood.
Exxon is letting their true colors show, exposing them for the greedy corporation they are. For me, it seems only yesterday we were hearing how this company had to be forced to take responsibility for a far more major catastrophe in Alaska. In 20 years they still haven’t learned community conscientiousness. They still aren’t accepting responsibility for their actions. When will this company see that they can’t railroad the little people? They can’t brush their mistakes under the rug and pretend they didn’t happen. Their mistakes affect the community in which they are made and they need to step up and repair the damage, and not just the physical damage. They need to reach in where it really hurts, the pocketbook. They need to stand up and accept their punishment for these egregious errors. Only then will they have made it right.
I'm watching you...
iWatch, Government Community Watch
A summit among big city police chiefs was held in Denver to discuss the specifics of a new program called iWATCH, an anti-terrorism community watch developed by the LAPD. The basis of this program is similar to that of a neighborhood watch, but on a much larger scale. The police are hoping that everyday citizens can help put the kibosh on terrorists by reporting suspicious behavior in areas such as government buildings, mass gatherings, schools and public transportation. They are asking citizens to look for unusual indicators such as smelling chemicals or fumes, someone wearing baggy clothing, or someone purchasing supplies or equipment that could be used in bombs. There are a total of 9 suspicious actions to look for and 12 places you should look. So basically, keep your eyes peeled for anyone doing anything, any time you are in public place.
Smelling chemicals and fumes is a regular occurrence on public transit and if I had to call every time I saw some teenager wearing clothes 14 times bigger than him, I’d start sending my cell phone bill to the government. And aren’t the only people who know what everyday items are used to make a bomb, the people who are making the bombs. I mean how many 70-year-old grandmas had to be told why their cold medicine could only be purchased after asking the pharmacist’s permission, presenting your ID and having your retina scanned by infrared? The only people who knew you could make meth with Sudafed were the people making meth. So with such broad indicators, how are we to determine who is a terrorist and who simply tends to run cool on a summer day? If we’re being honest, then we all know the answer. It will be the color of their skin, the accent in their voice, or the language they speak. Let’s face it, if I’m purchasing a large amount of conditioner, a cashier is going to assume I’m having a bad hair day. (This is just an example, of course, because I have no idea if you can make a bomb with conditioner.) People are not going to walk around all day checking whether people are emitting fumes; those who will participate in iWATCH, are those that will judge a terrorist suspect based on the criteria with which they are comfortable. And that certainly won’t be their size 42 pants.
The founders of this watch group claim they will educate callers who are reporting people based solely on their ethnicity or race. But will this prevent those people that have been reported from having their privacy invaded? Are you seriously telling me a person calling in a claim about an Arab-American at the court house, walking around in a winter coat in October, is not going to be investigated? We live in a racist society. Over the years the prejudice changes from minority to minority, but the foundation is still there. Fear those who look different. Fear those who look similar to others who have caused harm. And the only way to really know what we are looking for in the form of terrorists is to look to those who have terrorized before. America is full of imperfect citizens who make imperfect decisions. And as an American it is our right to make those decisions, but it is also our right not to be figuratively stripped searched based on the accusation of one of our imperfect brethren.
The police chiefs endorsing this program would have you believe it is your civic duty to protect our nation. But is it not also our civic duty to allow our fellow Americans to do as they wish when not harming others? When does civically responsible individual and nosy busybody collide? For years, police have set up tip lines to assist in solving crimes; but they are usually preceded by a release of information about the crime, a description of the suspect, the date, place, and time of the event, or even a description of the crime that was committed. iWATCH is being hailed as something similar to neighborhood watch groups, but those neighbors know what they are watching for, they know who doesn’t belong in their neighborhood. What is being asked of our citizens with this anti-terrorist watch is more along the lines of playing a game of I Spy. Give us some clues and send us to see if we spot anyone fitting that vague description. The possibility of guesses is endless. How can this possibly help prevent terrorism?
America is a fear based society and when anyone questions the propaganda being fed to us under the guise of keeping our country safe, we are told we live in a post-9/11 world. (Just as previous generations were told it’s a post-Pearl Harbor or post-Vietnam society.) When will that excuse no longer wash? When we will we realize that we can never make up for what happened that day? No matter how many “suspects” we turn in, no matter how many prisoners we torture, no matter how many neighbors’ homes we search, we can never make up for what happened on 9/11. Because that’s what iWATCH, and all of the other Patriot Act’esque operations, seems to be trying to do; relieve the guilt we feel over not being able to stop the Twin Towers from falling.
Perhaps we should try a different approach, though, because this one feels very “been there, done that”. iWATCH is a wash from the start; from one side of the mouth they are saying, look for terrorists, but from the other they are saying terrorists could be anyone, anywhere, looking anyway. Asking the citizens of our nation to spend their time looking for terrorists suspects who may or may not exist in their general vicinity, is like asking a 2-year-old to spot the difference between a cookie and a low-fat, low-calorie, gluten free alternative. We don’t know what we are looking for and the vague description, given by those who comprehend what they are looking for, serves as little more than a false security blanket that we are helping to serve and protect, when really, we’re probably just turning in an innocent bystander. As with many far reaching programs, this one is doomed to fail, or at least be a long and arduous process that lends to few, if any, real leads. Have we learned nothing from our “No Fly” list?
A summit among big city police chiefs was held in Denver to discuss the specifics of a new program called iWATCH, an anti-terrorism community watch developed by the LAPD. The basis of this program is similar to that of a neighborhood watch, but on a much larger scale. The police are hoping that everyday citizens can help put the kibosh on terrorists by reporting suspicious behavior in areas such as government buildings, mass gatherings, schools and public transportation. They are asking citizens to look for unusual indicators such as smelling chemicals or fumes, someone wearing baggy clothing, or someone purchasing supplies or equipment that could be used in bombs. There are a total of 9 suspicious actions to look for and 12 places you should look. So basically, keep your eyes peeled for anyone doing anything, any time you are in public place.
Smelling chemicals and fumes is a regular occurrence on public transit and if I had to call every time I saw some teenager wearing clothes 14 times bigger than him, I’d start sending my cell phone bill to the government. And aren’t the only people who know what everyday items are used to make a bomb, the people who are making the bombs. I mean how many 70-year-old grandmas had to be told why their cold medicine could only be purchased after asking the pharmacist’s permission, presenting your ID and having your retina scanned by infrared? The only people who knew you could make meth with Sudafed were the people making meth. So with such broad indicators, how are we to determine who is a terrorist and who simply tends to run cool on a summer day? If we’re being honest, then we all know the answer. It will be the color of their skin, the accent in their voice, or the language they speak. Let’s face it, if I’m purchasing a large amount of conditioner, a cashier is going to assume I’m having a bad hair day. (This is just an example, of course, because I have no idea if you can make a bomb with conditioner.) People are not going to walk around all day checking whether people are emitting fumes; those who will participate in iWATCH, are those that will judge a terrorist suspect based on the criteria with which they are comfortable. And that certainly won’t be their size 42 pants.
The founders of this watch group claim they will educate callers who are reporting people based solely on their ethnicity or race. But will this prevent those people that have been reported from having their privacy invaded? Are you seriously telling me a person calling in a claim about an Arab-American at the court house, walking around in a winter coat in October, is not going to be investigated? We live in a racist society. Over the years the prejudice changes from minority to minority, but the foundation is still there. Fear those who look different. Fear those who look similar to others who have caused harm. And the only way to really know what we are looking for in the form of terrorists is to look to those who have terrorized before. America is full of imperfect citizens who make imperfect decisions. And as an American it is our right to make those decisions, but it is also our right not to be figuratively stripped searched based on the accusation of one of our imperfect brethren.
The police chiefs endorsing this program would have you believe it is your civic duty to protect our nation. But is it not also our civic duty to allow our fellow Americans to do as they wish when not harming others? When does civically responsible individual and nosy busybody collide? For years, police have set up tip lines to assist in solving crimes; but they are usually preceded by a release of information about the crime, a description of the suspect, the date, place, and time of the event, or even a description of the crime that was committed. iWATCH is being hailed as something similar to neighborhood watch groups, but those neighbors know what they are watching for, they know who doesn’t belong in their neighborhood. What is being asked of our citizens with this anti-terrorist watch is more along the lines of playing a game of I Spy. Give us some clues and send us to see if we spot anyone fitting that vague description. The possibility of guesses is endless. How can this possibly help prevent terrorism?
America is a fear based society and when anyone questions the propaganda being fed to us under the guise of keeping our country safe, we are told we live in a post-9/11 world. (Just as previous generations were told it’s a post-Pearl Harbor or post-Vietnam society.) When will that excuse no longer wash? When we will we realize that we can never make up for what happened that day? No matter how many “suspects” we turn in, no matter how many prisoners we torture, no matter how many neighbors’ homes we search, we can never make up for what happened on 9/11. Because that’s what iWATCH, and all of the other Patriot Act’esque operations, seems to be trying to do; relieve the guilt we feel over not being able to stop the Twin Towers from falling.
Perhaps we should try a different approach, though, because this one feels very “been there, done that”. iWATCH is a wash from the start; from one side of the mouth they are saying, look for terrorists, but from the other they are saying terrorists could be anyone, anywhere, looking anyway. Asking the citizens of our nation to spend their time looking for terrorists suspects who may or may not exist in their general vicinity, is like asking a 2-year-old to spot the difference between a cookie and a low-fat, low-calorie, gluten free alternative. We don’t know what we are looking for and the vague description, given by those who comprehend what they are looking for, serves as little more than a false security blanket that we are helping to serve and protect, when really, we’re probably just turning in an innocent bystander. As with many far reaching programs, this one is doomed to fail, or at least be a long and arduous process that lends to few, if any, real leads. Have we learned nothing from our “No Fly” list?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
