How to Respond to Terrorist Threats

BY JOHN CLEESE

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events inLibya , Egypt, and Syria and have therefore raised their securitylevel from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may beraised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The Englishhave not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea suppliesnearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome"to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "BloodyNuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the SpanishArmada.
The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let'sget the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is thereason they have been used on the front line of the British army forthe last 300 years.
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised itsterror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levelsin France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise wasprecipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flagfactory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.
Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly"to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain:"Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."
The Germans have increased their alert state from "DisdainfulArrogance" to "Dress in Uniforms and Sing Marching Songs." They alsohave two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbor" and "Lose."
Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the onlythreat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .
The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready todeploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the newSpanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
Australia , meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries"to "She'll be alright, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain:"Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and"The barbie is cancelled." So far, no situation has ever warranteduse of the final escalation level.

A final thought: Greece is collapsing, the Iranians are getting
aggressive, and Rome is in disarray. Welcome back to 430 BC.

Freedom Fries: And Other Stupidity......

It's a long video - about 50 minutes, but a worthwhile documentary.

This documentary relates in an interesting way to a quote from a book I just finished: Cocktail Hour Under the Tree of Forgetfulness by Alexandra Fuller.  A different war on a different continent...:

"We accepted the war as one of the pieces that had to be paid for Our Freedom, although it was a funny sort of Freedom that didn't include being able to say what you wanted about the Rhodesian government or being able to write books that were critical of it.  And for the majority of the country, Freedom did not include access to the sidewalks, the best schools and hospitals, decent farming land or the right to vote.  It now seems completely clear to me, looking back, that when a government talks about "fighting for Freedom" almost every Freedom you can imagine disappears for ordinary people and expands limitlessly for a handful of people in power." (p 29).

It's the main problem with knee-jerk nationalistic fervor.  It's fine to like your country, but, as with most other things, a critical eye is important to avoid blindly accepting everything we're told.

Undefended Border Crossings? Not Any More.

With the prospect of several days of rain in the forecast, we inexplicably decided it would be a good time to take a short road trip to explore a bit more of Washington, a small area just south of Trail.  We rationalized that if it did rain the whole time, we had the camper, the furnace worked, the beer would be cold, the chips crunchy and we had lots of books to read.

Accordingly, we loaded up with reading material and headed south.

The first little surprise was getting stalled at the crossing south of Salmo.  This is a small, presumably pretty quiet crossing, and we've been through it many times in the past few years.  This time, however, after the usual questions about where and for how long (camping, about 2 days, and no we don't have a specific campground in mind....I've started to wonder if everyone they see who intends to camp knows exactly which campground they plan to stay at....are they unfamiliar with the concept of exploring?...), we get questions about possible recent medical tests, do we have any old gauges on board (like from an old airplane)....?  Huh???

Apparently one of their sensors picked up something, and for the next hour, we waited around while they held some kind of detector to us and our vintage Big Horn camper van, trying to find out .... well, we're not really sure, but I gathered that they were looking for radio-isotopes, possibly?  I had a ceramic tile saw in the van.  Maybe something from the tiles???  Who knows?  In any case, after they completed some paperwork, and apparently not finding anything interesting, we were allowed to proceed.  So, was this a case of some new toy to play with?  A training exercise?  Some equipment gone amuck?  They weren't exactly forthcoming but since they let us in, I'm assuming we were considered to be safe....  (At no time on our trip did I see the van glowing in the dark....).  I did hear the agent mention some isotope of Thorium....

One interesting sidebar: we were asked twice to keep our hands out of our pockets since the agent in question "...didn't know what was in our pockets".  (Ummm...my wallet and a dirty hanky....but I guess you can't be too careful....).

After a couple of days of reading, crossing Sherman Pass in a blizzard, finding one sunny morning for a short bike ride, we headed back north.  As we approached the border south of Christina Lake (BC), we noticed that there was a gauntlet to pass just to leave the Republic and return to our Socialist homeland.  Departing vehicles were being lined up so they could be X-Rayed.  So we had to get out, go hang out by the fence  while a truck drove up and down along the line of vehicles.  Our van is of early 1980s vintage, so I hope they spotted the rust, the joint arthritis and other artifacts of our van's old age.  I was tempted to ask, but given the small army of guys there in bullet-proof vests and guns, I decided that they might not appreciate my attempt at levity.  Who says I don't know when to keep my yap shut??

Thinking back, I do recall other minor annoyances crossing the border in past years, but one is tempted to put them down to individual crankiness or authority-wielding overkill.  I'm starting to wonder, however, if what we're seeing is a crescendo of paranoia, where everyone is to be treated like a potential enemy, out to cause harm.  I also wonder, though, if the inevitable result of treating everyone like a potential enemy eventually results in not having any friends.

Closer to home, I would have to say that as we see signs of our government ratcheting up its own level and brand of paranoia and fear, it's in our best interests to demand better.  Our traditional (?) low-key behaviour at home and around the world seems much less likely to attract trouble.  Harassing the ordinary, traveling public seems quite likely to result in more questions about your sanity, and intimidation tactics probably don't make anyone feel much safer.

Mr Speaker....

‎"Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order to make a procedural argument concerning the omnibus nature of this piece of legislation... I really would like to call the attention of the Chair to the nature of this particular bill and to urge the Chair to re-examine a practice we have fallen into. The particular bill before us ... is of an omnibus nature. I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that you should rule it out of order and it should not be considered by the House in the form in which it has been presented... Mr. Speaker, I would argue that the subject matter of the bill is so diverse that a single vote on the content would put members in conflict with their own principles.
First, there is a lack of relevancy of these issues. The omnibus bills we have before us attempt to amend several different existing laws. Second, in the interest of democracy I ask: How can members represent their constituents on these various areas when they are forced to vote in a block on such legislation and on such concerns?
We can agree with some of the measures but oppose others. How do we express our views and the views of our constituents when the matters are so diverse? Dividing the bill into several components would allow members to represent views of their constituents on each of the different components in the bill. The bill contains many distinct proposals and principles and asking members to provide simple answers to such complex questions is in contradiction to the conventions and practices of the House.
As well this will cause fairly serious difficulties in committee. This bill will ultimately go to only one committee of the House, a committee that will inevitably lack the breadth of expertise required for consideration of a bill of this scope. Furthermore, the workload of that committee will be onerous and it will be very difficult to give due consideration to all relevant opinion."

-- Steven Harper, 1994.