- For the first time in American history, average citizens are worrying about being targeted by their own government—not from police looking down the barrel of a gun, but from bureaucrats sharing intelligence from a computer or illicit wiretap.
- Thanks to satellites and an Interpol-on-steroids mindset, personalized data collected on every conceivable subject can be transmitted worldwide in seconds. The only data we can’t seem to transmit is that on illegal immigration, which passes through a Swiss-cheese “fence,” protecting less than half the Southern border. Unfortunately, many of our nation’s leaders consider illegal immigration an asset to their careers, if not necessarily the inhabitants of their respective states.
- The presumption is made that people who have nothing to hide won’t mind a bit of bureaucratic overkill in the name of security. The nothing-to-hide argument implies the freedom to opt out. In practice, of course, there are repercussions for refusing. The 2007 $9.75 million lawsuit brought by law student Stephen Dunne against the Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court dramatically highlighted the nature of these repercussions, just as the lawsuit against the TSA by former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura demonstrated that refusal is not an option.
- The trouble with curriculums like “conflict resolution,” which dates back to the late 1970s, is that young students failed to understand that some people don’t want their grievances resolved. When educators mentioned this at all, they labeled such people “mentally ill.” But, as the various terrorist organizations have shown us, their “sickness” is one of spirit. They have not lost their mind, they have lost their conscience. Unfortunately, the same students whose attitudes were shaped by those conflict-resolution courses in high school sit as national security and foreign policy decision-makers.
- Read more in the upcoming book: Agenda Games
Add Comment In case you were tempted to disregard the Nov. 1 release of testing results by the Education Dept. and move on: Don’t. Boasting “significant progress” with a mere 1- or 2-percent percentage-point difference, when there is already a 3% margin of error takes guts, after all. But what will really rile you is the Department’s failure to mention the items that make up the largest part of testing content — in the name of diversity and tolerance. See it here, just published: http://thenewamerican.com/culture/education/9625-new-education-dept-statistics-beg-questions-on-race-ethnicity . | AuthorBeverly K. Eakman is a speechwriter and research-writer, author of six books and scores of feature articles covering education policy, data-trafficking, science, privacy, mental-health, and political strategy. ArchivesMay 2013 CategoriesAll |
RSS Feed