Wednesday, August 26, 2009

The second Lockerbie tragedy

This letter to the editor appeared in the Times Union on 8/26/09:

I have been to Scotland. I liked it. I especially enjoyed the hospitality of the people I met along the way, and I respected their tales of fighting for justice and equality against bad government and oppressive rulers.

Because of that, I am not foolish enough to condemn an entire population because of the actions of their government officials. If everyone in the world held our own government against us, no one ever would visit our shores. However, it will be a long time before I visit Scotland again.

The reason: One of the worst mass-murder terrorists on record has been freed despite being sentenced to life in prison for his role in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, the commercial airliner that exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, butchering 270 innocent souls, many of them Americans.

And why was Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, 57, set free? For what Scottish officials termed "humanitarian reasons."

The former Libyan intelligence operative has prostate cancer. By contrast, 259 Pan Am passengers and 11 people on the ground where the wreckage hit them still are dead.

In a typical and sickening outpouring of adulation too often seen for an Arab who has slain non-Arabs, a crowd of thousands turned out to greet al-Megrahi when he landed in Tripoli, the capital of his homeland. They danced, sang and chanted. Some wore T-shirts with his face printed on them. Some waved posters bearing his image.

After all, he murdered "infidels" and only had to serve 10 or 11 days per victim. What a hero.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Please cooperate, under penalty of law

I recently received a letter from the U.S. Census Bureau informing me that in a few days I would receive a letter from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The opening paragraph explains:

"In a few days your household will receive a questionnaire in the mail for a very important national survey, the American Community Survey. When the questionnaire arrives, please fill it out and mail it back promptly. The U.S. Census Bureau is conducting this survey and chose your address, not you personally, as part of a randomly selected sample."

Interesting that this very process nullifies any statistical viability of such a survey. I'm not sure what to do.

PART TWO

Not only have I now received another Census Bureau letter concerning "The American Community Survey," I also received a questionnaire I am informed I must fill out and return, under penalty of law.

It tells me information gleaned from the survey will be used to help plan "where new schools, hospitals, and fire stations are needed." Nevertheless, I'm finding the survey very intrusive. Still not sure what to do.

PART THREE

Yet another letter from my friends at the U.S. Census Bureau, a little edgier in tone than the previous missives. They again demand my cooperation, even though they swear they don't know who I am since I was "randomly selected" -- by them. Oh, and they remind me I still am required to do this bit of homework under penalty of law.

I am told that information elicited from me will help my government plan -- in addition to the aforementioned "new schools, hospitals, and fire stations" -- "programs to reduce traffic congestion, provide job training, and plan for the healthcare needs of the elderly."

All good things for a government to be doing. So, I suppose I'm being unnecessarily stubborn in asking what these survey questions have to do with those topics:

How many times have I been married?

How many times has my spouse been married?

How are the two people in the household related to each other?

What are the household residents' ethnic origins?

When did the residents move into the current residence -- you know, the one that has been selected "at random" to interrogate, under penalty of law.

What is my monthly condominium fee, if applicable?

Has anyone in the household ever served in the military?

What kind of work do the residents of the household do?

Another troubling item is the declaration in the latest letter that "The Census Bureau is required by U.S. law to keep your answers confidential."

Unless the Census Bureau has, while I was sleeping, been assigned the task of planning the nation's highways, running the health care system, handling public safety programs, and building new schools, that makes no sense. The information it demands obviously will be shared with someone outside the Census Bureau. Many someones, no doubt.

PART FOUR

Despite my misgivings, I had finally, dutifully mailed out the completed American Community Survey form about 10 days ago. So, I was surprised when I got a phone call from the Census Bureau.

The caller asked me to verify my address and phone number. Interesting, considering the Bureau had mailed me all the paperwork I've mentioned, and its representative had, after all, reached me by phone.

Eventually, she launched into a prepared spiel about the survey and its legendary special qualities. After several attempts, I was able to insert a verbal wedge and get her to stop blathering on.

"I mailed out the completed survey about 10 days ago," I informed her.

"Oh, well, it's not marked down that we've received it. Maybe it's still working its way through our intake system," she offered.

I remained mute.

"Well, I'll just mark it down that it's in the system and we'll wait. We might have to call you again if there's anything we can't read on any of the answers."

"Virtually all the questions were multiple choice, so all I had to do was make a check mark in the appropriate box. Do you think that would be hard to read?," I asked.


"I'm not sure," she said. "I'm not involved in that part of the survey."

Oh, how I wish I wasn't either.