Big Brother and the Cookie Monster

By Rick Saunders
America’s Right

If it has been more than one year since you last read George Orwell’s prophetic 1984, finish reading this post, then proceed to (a) your bookshelf to retrieve the book; (b) your local public library to check out the book; or (c) your nearest video rental store to rent the DVD. Or, for those of you not yet concerned that your visitation of various Internet websites is not already being tracked and cataloged somewhere, try Wikipedia for a summary.

Why? Because you will see that Orwell was off by only 25 years when, in 1949, he authored and named the timeless–and now, ominously, quite timely–novel about the dystopian world of Big Brother and his totalitarian grip on a once-free society. The parallels between 1984 and the landscape under the current regime in charge, frankly, are chilling as you watch Orwell’s “everyman” protagonist, Winston Smith, employed by the government at The Ministry of Truth, re-write, scrub and occasionally “memory-hole” historical documents and even newspaper articles to make “reality” conform to the dogma dictated by The Inner Party and Big Brother.

Sound familiar? Anyone out there remember when it was noted here at America’s Right that Barack Obama’s name, as well as the names of several congressmen being considered for administration appointments, were ordered scrubbed and removed as being sponsors of one of more of the 9,000 earmarks that infected the so-called “stimulus” bill which, according to the president and nearly every Democrat in Congress, did not contain a single earmark?

Oh, and regardless of the merits of the birth certificate issue, how about those interesting alterations of Web sites that had originally listed Obama’s Hawaiian birth hospital as “A” but now list it as “B” following the seeping into the public domain of more “convenient” facts?

Now comes the most telling–and chilling–evidence of the efforts by Obama and his Chicago Machine to solidify its grip on those who would dare to resist:

First, there was the disturbing revelation by Fox News reporter and White House correspondent Major Garrett (hero du jour) that the White House may have already accessed and catalogued a number of e-mail addresses of individuals (a.k.a. “persons of interest” in other contexts) with whom a “special communications” link is desired. Translation: a number of individuals–including some who might even disagree, in a very general way of course, with Obama and his policies, including his policies regarding healthcare “reform”–have reportedly received unsolicited e-mail “infomercials” from none other than . . . drum roll, please. . . White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod, the man whose voice and political advice has been described by The New York Times as carrying “more weight than most anyone else’s on the president’s payroll.”

Interesting. So, now, if perchance someone sends an e-mail somewhere deviating from the Party Line or sounding even a mere discouraging word over the land where the skies are not cloudy all day, they might now expect to receive some encouraging words from Monsieur Axelrod? Or maybe thereafter from Rahm? Or maybe eventually from someone nicknamed “The Hammer,” “The Ox,” “Knuckles” or “The Funny Mustache”?

Second, we now learn that Vivek Kundra, Obama’s “chief information officer” within the Office of Science and Technology Policy wants to lift a ban on the Feds’ use of Internet “cookies” every time you access a Web site ending with “.gov”. These intentionally innocuous sounding electronic ticks are small programs that attach themselves to your hard drive every time you visit an Internet Web site. Much like their more venomous cousins, known as “spyware,” the cookies can collect information on you, store it and disgorge it on command later. Cookies from bona fide, benign Internet Web sites attaching themselves to your hard drive can be an irritation; cookies dispatched from a .gov website would be less benign. Far less. Talk about cookie monsters. Yikes.

Even after the apparent euthanization of the White House’s “snitch” e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov, intended to collect e-mail addresses of those perpetuating dissent toward Obama’s health care reform plans, the administration continues to seem determined to overturn the ban on the use of “cookies” by the federal government has been in place since June 2000 in an effort to attempt to protect the few privacy rights that people still retain these days (except, of course, a proto-mother’s privacy right to abortion on demand, which must remain untouched no matter what). Kundra prevaricated in a blog he posted on the OSTP website–tantalizingly-titled in the website address “The Way the Cookie Crumbles”–that there was a “compelling need” to “bring the federal government into the 21st century.”

[CAUTION: By clicking that link, you may now have received unwanted cookies. Just saying you might want to run your disk cleaner program later today.]

When you put it all together and connect the dots, so to speak–from altering historical documents to sending unsolicited infomercial propaganda e-mails to proposing the use of “.gov” cookies to track individuals accessing certain Internet websites–what emerges is a picture of a regime seeking to control and watch you. Imagine the howls if this painting had been unveiled under a Republican president such as the dreaded George W. Bush, and then ask yourself: is this the sort of “hope” and” change” you expected?

Alas, the whole episode is another example of how one hand in this administration doesn’t quite know what the other hand is doing. Kundra, after all, says he wants to metaphorically drag the federal government into the 21st century — but, in fact, the regime that now masquerades as the federal government seems to be stuck in 1984. And, seemingly, it is quite comfortable there.

—————
Rick Saunders is a freelance writer who splits his time between endeavors in southern California and the American southwest. He began writing for America’s Right in December 2008.

Share

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    Jeff:

    I just received my t-shirt order from cafepress…the shirt says, "ORWELL'S 1984 IS A NOVEL, NOT A PLAYBOOK"…

    I love wearing it any chance I get and observing so many who are totally confused (read ignorant) by it!

    Scary times….

    Lisa in TX

  2. THAT THE FLAG WAS NOT STILL THERE says:

    I bet I get more looks with my 'got birth certificate?' t-shirt. Freedom of Speech R O C K S! Long live the Republic! I hope I played at least a small role in shutting down flag@whitehouse.gov by sending Sponge Bob Square Pants picture.

  3. Ian Thorpe says:

    Did you know the TRACE feature on your cellphone enables anybody authorised to use it to pinpoint your position any time your handset is switched on.

    The UK govt. National ID cards scheme proposed to issue ID cards loaded with RFID chips to track us all at all times. The scheme has been blocked and obstructed for now and is on the back burner. These authoritarian schemes never truly die.

    But you can bet it would be one of the first things a future Labour government would resurrect. The things that are going on stretch beyond national borders. If I was really a conspiracy theorist I would be researching The Illuminati.

    BTW Win Patrol is an excellent little free program that stops malware being loaded on your hard drive without your consent and also makes cookie management very easy.

  4. Rix says:

    While I am in no way the Usurper's fan and couldn't agree more regarding the comparison of our predicament to "1984", I'd like to suggest a few technical corrections.

    1) The mass-mail in question, which I also happened to receive, did not concern me in the least. I doubt that any sane person – and have no doubt, Obama's kingpins aren't stupid by any measure – would believe that a mass-delivery email can change anyone's mind. They also were perfectly aware of the political price to be paid for such mailing. Most likely, it was a private initiative of some overzealous idiot in Mr. Axelrod's office, and – again, most likely – he or she is already removed from the office and silenced by whatever means necessary. It might be cruel but I have absolutely no tears for that idiot.

    2) By themselves, cookies, whether .GOV or not, are totally harmless to anyone's computer. I say that as a computer pro and I'd testify in court to that. Unless the browser is hacked, each server can only read its own cookie. A relatively small number of servers place their cookies every time your browser opens a site with an ad banner affiliated with that server. By analysing the timing and source of their own cookies, these servers can "track" your browsing habits – and no, they do not steal your credit card data or bank account numbers. For people who do not visit Islamic Jihad forums or child porn galleries, I even believe such tracking to be benefitial because its main puirpose is to improve relevancy of displayed advertising.

  5. Anonymous says:

    on another note:::: why is obama's mySPACE page showing him as 52? the person doing the typing did it from the actual data? even if he claims he is not 52 i feel good that i have always maintained i suspect obama to be older than he claims. and despite the boyish kind of face revealed on the camera he is aging at a normal rate and possibley faster than others. the cameras and makeup people did a great job in presenting him dring campaign but several times i got a glimpse of obama in other shots and his face in my opinion defied his real age. while his dad(?) seemed to have serious smile lines at about thee same age i always questioned the folds in obma's face as being to prominent for a person of his claimed age. and he obviously uses a hair dye if you watch him closely, especially before during and after the Europe trip. and three weeks ago when he seemed more heavily grayed on his right side.

    my second suspicion was his refusal to present the birth certificate.

    and not that i have been told if he is 52 it clearly makes him inelligible because hawaii was a mere terrority and not a State yet – - well the possibility works for me.

  6. Anonymous says:

    What you really need to read or view is Soylent Green. It is where we are headed under Obama.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Oh please. There is not a website in the .com/.gov/.edu/.whatever that does not use cookies. You are trying to scare the kids with cookies now? Yawn.

    -THEE Rick Saunders

  8. Gail B says:

    Rick, I took your advice and cleared all history and cookies. Then I couldn't receive email. That's okay, though, because after I cleared out about 2,500 in the inbox, 1,000 in the sent box, kept emptying the deleted box, cleaned the disk and defragged, and cleaned and defragged again, everything works much better! Got all 40 incoming emails!

    Thanks for the info about the websites, too.

  9. Gail B says:

    But when you send an email, you also send your IP address and all that other information that I don't understand. They will know the computer that the email came from.

  10. Gail B says:

    Re: Obama/Soetoro being 52–The site was probably hacked. His Indonesian school records say he was born in 1961.

    Whoever did it is probably waiting for a lot of Internet chatter about it, like the April Fool's joke.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Please look in on 43rdsfan@zazzle.com. Help me spread the truth about this usurption.

  12. WEAR MY IP ON MY TSHIRT says:

    We have to mentally reach the point, like I have, that I could care less if they know who or where the email came from. Get real people, our forefathers weren't pu**ies.

  13. Katherine says:

    I'm a liberal democrat Obama supporter who also feels like we're headed to 1984. It's not just this administration, people. It's society as a whole. Bush was the one who authorized the illegal wiretaps, remember? The internet has been recording your every move long before Jan 2009. I completely agree with this post except for the accusation that spying on us, withholding information, and trying to control us is a NEW phenomenon of an Obama administration. Does anyone here know any of the long list of reasons democrats want to send several Bush-administration folks to jail? Anyone remember the illegal firing of the attorneys? (and how ultimately no one got in trouble?) I also think that the news (yes, including talk radio!) are at least as guilty as the government in trying to control us.

  14. PUHLEEEZEEE says:

    Katherine,
    Are you talking about Bill Clinton's firing of attorneys and travel staff???

  15. FOR KATARINA says:

    She was not in charge from the beginning. Upon taking office, in an unexplained departure from the practice of recent Administrations, Miss Reno suddenly fired all 93 U.S. attorneys. She said the decision had been made in conjunction with the White House. Translation: The President ordered it. Just as the best place to hide a body is on a battlefield, the best way to be rid of one potentially troublesome attorney is to fire all of them. The U.S. attorney in Little Rock was replaced by a Clinton protege. The long-running Waco emergency that culminated in the deaths of eighty Branch Davidian men, women, and children again proved that Janet Reno was not in charge in the Justice Department. Webster Hubbell, Hillary's former law partner in Little Rock and Bill's man at Justice, coordinated tactics with the White House. The President did not even talk to his attorney general throughout the crisis.

    Scandal followed scandal. Clinton had hardly been sworn in when he fired the entire staff of the White House travel office. The object, it seems clear, was to divert business to friends of the Clintons. The firings were so obviously unsupportable that the FBI was told to issue a press release suggesting criminality in the travel office. The head of the office was indicted and tried, but acquitted almost instantly. An inquiry suggested that Hillary Clinton ordered the coup. Then it was discovered that the White House had asked for and received nine hundred raw FBI files on Republicans. Nobody knew who had issued the request or hired the unqualified security officer who carried it out. The evidence pointed to Hillary, but she denied responsibility. If her denials were false, she probably committed indictable offenses. Janet Reno sat on her hands until she got all these matters out of her bailiwick by handing them off to the independent counsel.

  16. THE TRUTH HURTS, HUH? says:

    Talk radio doesn't control me, but it sure as hell is INFORMING me. Libs hate that.

Speak Your Mind

*