Post 174: Techniques of Power - 5.12.2022

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzJSg3ZiGsI - RIP]

Chapter 13. Not bankruptcy. Rather, two authors’ views on application of a Foucauldian analysis of the system set up at Guantanamo Bay. Specifically, the best quote analyzes Foucault’s description of the use of “‘Spatialization” as a technique in the exercise of power.”

https://www.amazon.com/Representing-Justice-Controversy-City-States-Democratic/dp/0300110960

*

There is a section, the last one of the Chapter, discussing their analysis of Foucault. There’s other references, as well. I find this “interesting.” That is a word I have heard too often instead of numerous others I have needed to hear, especially since 2015. 

I was remarking this morning on another book I found. I cited it in a blog post at the end of 2019. I am supposed to believe right now that SOMEONE else was entitled to claim everything I did between May of 2019 and May of 2020 as their “income” for some as of yet undisclosed financial arrangement and that I “owe” them for so I will not try to quote it directly. But it acknowledged how during 2000 through 2001, a number of individuals acknowledged as “national intelligence[1]” had identified scenarios regarding precipitating events to a terrorist attack in the United States. In fact, more than six months before Sept. 11, 2001 (or, the legislative changes that went into effect on Sept. 1, 2001 in Texas) they had identified a possible attack using a passenger airplane on the twin towers in New York City. They identified a number of alleged incidents aimed at creating “spectacular” events that would impact the national consciousness. 

You know what this tells me?

Someone was interested in specific participation in the “society of the spectacle.”

See, I once called something the “spectacular individual.” That was AFTER Sept. 11, 2001 by about two years before I formally composed the thesis. It was not ONLY mine. But, as far as I know, I was the only one that wrote that specific thesis down and shared it with other people.

But I did so mostly over the telephone internationally and over email. 

That thesis was never published in the journals that I and the anticipated co-author were hoping would publish it.

Where did it end up going?

I do not have a copy of my own thesis.

Did it go to Gitmo?

Is THAT why not one “lawyer” or “judge” or “paralegal” will “break rank” and actually talk in person to me about what, if any, of my former work they already used for themselves? Their “clients?” Their “professional network?”

Their “insurance portal?”

Did I succeed yet?

Am I “spectacular” enough for you?

Did I meet my own theoretical premises?

You were not as interested, it seems, in my thesis on alienation of abstract capital and its relationship to energy as human labor. You were not as interested in my thesis on abstract capital appropriation and its relationship to labor racketeering. 

Were you more interested in my “performance” in the “arena?”

What about my products as the “absorber of radiation in isolation?”

How many derivative products of MY thesis on the “spectacular individual” did you make and get royalties on? For yourself? For your “clients?”

Did you see how many DoD contracts I “terminated” in the last few days?

How about “individual” as legal definition as corporate “person?”

It makes complete sense. 

I am that catastrophic.

There is a problem. I am morally and tactically against suicide.

I think it is moral cowardice.

So how much longer do we stick it out in this pseudo-privatized arena?

I like my thesis better than the one provided by the authors of this book, though. That includes my LEGAL arguments as well. But I will make sure to “site” and “cite” my source as soon as I SEE a reason to.

Thank you all so much for the “discipline.”

I must say, however, you were not qualified for what you tried to do with my life or work.

And you may not have much longer to consider your own purview.

If you defamed my “co-author” as I suspect you did, then we are going to have to redefine the parameters of this arrangement.

I have other technical references now[2]. 

__________________________________

Question 1. Mr. Folk, in your experience, what role did the Somali community play in the prosecution of these recruits?

Question 2. Was the community helpful in passing on information and tips?

Question. Immigrants from around the world have migrated into the United States and experienced isolation and struggles and have not become ``terrorists''. Why do you believe that Somalians, which you mentioned come here and receive an education and believe that working  hard will improve their status, will turn anti-American and bring terror here?

Question 1. For a short period of time, groups such as UNICEF were sending aid into south Somalia, before al-Shabaab banned the groups. Now the group is only allowing aid from certain groups and it is uncertain what they will allow in the future, but the situation is growing worse by the day.

    Is there any way that we can leverage future aid to gain concessions from the group?

Question 2. Are there other options the international community should be considering to provide food aid?

Question 1. Mr. Smith, the Justice Department has specifically cited the relationships between the FBI and Justice department officials with the Somali American communities in your area as a model for community relations. Of particular note is the two-way cultural exchange that was developed. Two-way exchanges such as this one can develop a conversation based on trust and communication, which is why the Justice Department is now trying to replicate these efforts Nation-wide. Has this been your experience at the local level as well?

Question 2. Mr. Smith, counterterrorism and policing experts say that effective policing is based on trust and that isolation and alienation of communities is counterproductive in intelligence  gathering and law enforcement. Can you please explain for the committee what does not work and what we know is counterproductive?

2:13 pm CST

May 12, 2026

CCC[3]

__________________________________________

1 - Chalmers Charity Crouse

2:01 PM Today

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/sites-default-files-hearings-106864.pdf

p. 34.

That is NOT what page 34 said before "the COVID and all..." and last summer was the 25th year after that "classified closed.door.session.

2:00 pm CST

May 12, 2026

Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse

Yes, I believe that "article" was before this "hearing." So was the "trial."

2 - Chalmers Charity Crouse

May 2, 2025

See receipts from yesterday.

11:33 am CST

May 2, 2025

President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse

Did you mean the "People's Library?"

Apparently you did not.

...

3:21 pm CST

Sept. 10, 2025

Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse

Among "evidence" discussed this morning...will it be there by "close of business" today or tomorrow?

Shut up.

3 - Chalmers Charity Crouse

2:14 PM Today

"Append Special Order Here": https://www.congress.gov/112/chrg/CHRG-112hhrg72541/generated/CHRG-112hhrg72541.htm.

"Madame."

2:14 pm CST

May 12, 2026

with "aid" from TransFAG-Senator Charity Colleen Crouse (I-TX)

_____________________________________

6:29 pm CST

May 12, 2026

Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse

*Did you pay them? And they paid who? (9:38 am CST on 5.19.2026)