The Right to be left alone: In Defense of the Right to Privacy and Humanity
I refer to the provocative and lucid article of Naomi Wolf, “How the US uses sexual humiliation as a political tool to control the masses” which appeared on the Guardian overwhelmingly disparaging and heavily criticizing the outrageous ruling of the US supreme court.
As she stated:
“Believe me, you don't want the state having the power to strip your clothes off. And yet, it's exactly what is happening”.
The crux of the matter is as follows:
“In a five-four ruling this week, the supreme court decided that anyone can be strip-searched upon arrest for any offense, however minor, at any time. This horror show ruling joins two recent horror show laws: the NDAA, which lets anyone be arrested forever at any time, and HR 347, the "trespass bill", which gives you a 10-year sentence for protesting anywhere near someone with secret service protection. These criminalizations of being human follow, of course, the mini-uprising of the Occupy movement.
“Is American strip-searching benign? The man, who had brought the initial suit, Albert Florence, described having been told to "turn around. Squat and cough. Spread your cheeks." He said he felt humiliated: "It made me feel like less of a man."”
One of those jurists who voted for the majority, justice Anthony Kennedy explained “that this ruling is necessary because the 9/11 bomber could have been stopped for speeding. How would strip searching him have prevented the attack?”
Wolf’s retort is so logically instructive:
“Did Justice Kennedy imagine that plans to blow up the twin towers had been concealed in a body cavity? In still more bizarre non-logic, his and the other justices' decision rests on concerns about weapons and contraband in prison systems. But people under arrest – that is, who are not yet convicted – haven't been introduced into a prison population.”
Further she firmly asserted the: “Our surveillance state shown considerable determination to intrude on citizens sexually.”
Worst, this sexual exploitation and sexual dehumanization was also used to a massive degree to the “militants, the terrorists and Al Qaeda”. Who would forget those brutal pictures of sexual brutality and extreme inhumanity in the Abu Ghraib?
In Guantanamo prison, “where young female guards stood watch over the forced nakedness of Muslim prisoners, who had no way to conceal themselves.”
And then there's the sexual abuse of prisoners at Bagram, where American GI’s exploited and oppressed those detainee as if they are human beings but like toys and mere objects! Who would forget the photos of the dogs, while those US soldiers are torturing systematically those prisoners while at the same time they are having their animalistic and bacchanalian orgy in a grand and utterly disgusting manner?
Yes, I concur to Ms. Wolf that:
“Believe me: you don't want the state having the power to strip your clothes off. History shows that the use of forced nudity by a state that is descending into fascism is powerfully effective in controlling and subduing populations.
“The political use of forced nudity by anti-democratic regimes is long established. Forcing people to undress is the first step in breaking down their sense of individuality and dignity and reinforcing their powerlessness. Enslaved women were sold naked on the blocks in the American south, and adolescent male slaves served young white ladies at table in the south, while they themselves were naked: their invisible humiliation was a trope for their emasculation. Jewish prisoners herded into concentration camps were stripped of clothing and photographed naked, as iconic images of that Holocaust reiterated.”
Then, she talked about the issue of “patted down”. This is nothing more than a “sexually perverse intrusiveness of the state during an airport "pat-down", which is always phrased in the words of a steamy paperback ("do you have any sensitive areas? … I will use the back of my hands under your breasts …").”
This is a sham judgment, indeed a frivolous ruling! Undeniably, this pronouncement of the court is the heights of absurdity and idiocy!
They have the guts and the balls to call their land the land of the free! Shame on them! They are now the empire of the slaves! The world as a whole must stand up as One to counter this attack upon Man!
The central substantive issue here is the Humanity of Man and his inherent rights as against the enormous and overwhelming powers of the state.
Ms. Wolf also offered us a grim analysis of this ruling. She said that:
“The most terrifying phrase of all in the decision is justice Kennedy's striking use of the term "detainees" for "United States citizens under arrest". Some members of Occupy who were arrested in Los Angeles also reported having been referred to by police as such. Justice Kennedy's new use of what looks like a deliberate activation of that phrase is illuminating.”
It seems to me and there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the conservative faction in the US Supreme Court not only raped the constitution but undeniably violated viciously all their magnificent jurisprudence defending the constitutional and human rights of the citizens, including the foreigners.
This stupid and detestable ruling of that bloody moronic court completely demolished and destroyed the constitutional rights of the citizens as embodied and enumerated in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
It is my fervent contention and firm position that the government has no rights whatsoever to invade the privacy of the individual neither to crush his physical rights over his body.
Each individual is a part and parcel of the sovereign whole. Hence, it follows that the moment the state violated and dishonor a citizen’s body, that government is also violating and tearing the whole body politic.
I refer to the provocative and lucid article of Naomi Wolf, “How the US uses sexual humiliation as a political tool to control the masses” which appeared on the Guardian overwhelmingly disparaging and heavily criticizing the outrageous ruling of the US supreme court.
As she stated:
“Believe me, you don't want the state having the power to strip your clothes off. And yet, it's exactly what is happening”.
The crux of the matter is as follows:
“In a five-four ruling this week, the supreme court decided that anyone can be strip-searched upon arrest for any offense, however minor, at any time. This horror show ruling joins two recent horror show laws: the NDAA, which lets anyone be arrested forever at any time, and HR 347, the "trespass bill", which gives you a 10-year sentence for protesting anywhere near someone with secret service protection. These criminalizations of being human follow, of course, the mini-uprising of the Occupy movement.
“Is American strip-searching benign? The man, who had brought the initial suit, Albert Florence, described having been told to "turn around. Squat and cough. Spread your cheeks." He said he felt humiliated: "It made me feel like less of a man."”
One of those jurists who voted for the majority, justice Anthony Kennedy explained “that this ruling is necessary because the 9/11 bomber could have been stopped for speeding. How would strip searching him have prevented the attack?”
Wolf’s retort is so logically instructive:
“Did Justice Kennedy imagine that plans to blow up the twin towers had been concealed in a body cavity? In still more bizarre non-logic, his and the other justices' decision rests on concerns about weapons and contraband in prison systems. But people under arrest – that is, who are not yet convicted – haven't been introduced into a prison population.”
Further she firmly asserted the: “Our surveillance state shown considerable determination to intrude on citizens sexually.”
Worst, this sexual exploitation and sexual dehumanization was also used to a massive degree to the “militants, the terrorists and Al Qaeda”. Who would forget those brutal pictures of sexual brutality and extreme inhumanity in the Abu Ghraib?
In Guantanamo prison, “where young female guards stood watch over the forced nakedness of Muslim prisoners, who had no way to conceal themselves.”
And then there's the sexual abuse of prisoners at Bagram, where American GI’s exploited and oppressed those detainee as if they are human beings but like toys and mere objects! Who would forget the photos of the dogs, while those US soldiers are torturing systematically those prisoners while at the same time they are having their animalistic and bacchanalian orgy in a grand and utterly disgusting manner?
Yes, I concur to Ms. Wolf that:
“Believe me: you don't want the state having the power to strip your clothes off. History shows that the use of forced nudity by a state that is descending into fascism is powerfully effective in controlling and subduing populations.
“The political use of forced nudity by anti-democratic regimes is long established. Forcing people to undress is the first step in breaking down their sense of individuality and dignity and reinforcing their powerlessness. Enslaved women were sold naked on the blocks in the American south, and adolescent male slaves served young white ladies at table in the south, while they themselves were naked: their invisible humiliation was a trope for their emasculation. Jewish prisoners herded into concentration camps were stripped of clothing and photographed naked, as iconic images of that Holocaust reiterated.”
Then, she talked about the issue of “patted down”. This is nothing more than a “sexually perverse intrusiveness of the state during an airport "pat-down", which is always phrased in the words of a steamy paperback ("do you have any sensitive areas? … I will use the back of my hands under your breasts …").”
This is a sham judgment, indeed a frivolous ruling! Undeniably, this pronouncement of the court is the heights of absurdity and idiocy!
They have the guts and the balls to call their land the land of the free! Shame on them! They are now the empire of the slaves! The world as a whole must stand up as One to counter this attack upon Man!
The central substantive issue here is the Humanity of Man and his inherent rights as against the enormous and overwhelming powers of the state.
Ms. Wolf also offered us a grim analysis of this ruling. She said that:
“The most terrifying phrase of all in the decision is justice Kennedy's striking use of the term "detainees" for "United States citizens under arrest". Some members of Occupy who were arrested in Los Angeles also reported having been referred to by police as such. Justice Kennedy's new use of what looks like a deliberate activation of that phrase is illuminating.”
It seems to me and there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the conservative faction in the US Supreme Court not only raped the constitution but undeniably violated viciously all their magnificent jurisprudence defending the constitutional and human rights of the citizens, including the foreigners.
This stupid and detestable ruling of that bloody moronic court completely demolished and destroyed the constitutional rights of the citizens as embodied and enumerated in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
It is my fervent contention and firm position that the government has no rights whatsoever to invade the privacy of the individual neither to crush his physical rights over his body.
Each individual is a part and parcel of the sovereign whole. Hence, it follows that the moment the state violated and dishonor a citizen’s body, that government is also violating and tearing the whole body politic.