Perfection or Paranoia?

Security: How much is too much? 

This question has been an important part of our public dialogue for ten years or more, in the context of screening and surveillance designed to protect us from terrorists.   Perhaps it would be helpful to consider a case study that presents the issues in a different context.  That’s why this post has nothing to do with wiretaps or airports.  Not directly, anyway.

I recently attempted to gain access to a new database.  I won’t identify the database because certain people might not like that.  As you will see, they are very particular…

First I applied to a controlling authority to get a temporary password to access the database for the first time.  Using that, I logged in and was informed that an immediate password change was required.  No problem.  I expected that.  I had a prospective password all ready to go. 

My first password was unacceptable because it wasn’t long enough.  I made it longer. 

My second password was unacceptable because it had too many of the same character.  I eliminated the repetition.

My third password was unacceptable because it didn’t contain enough different types of characters.  I added some unusual ones.

My fourth password was unacceptable because one of the characters was not allowed.

Before I made a fifth attempt to satisfy the Password Lords, I stopped to do some calculating.  This is what I found. 

The password requirements were so complex that they yielded an impossibly high number of potential combinations.  I was able to come up with a number, eventually.  That number was so large that I don’t know its name - and I have taught math.  Now speculate.  How many attempts do you think it might take to solve this puzzle?  How many YEARS do you think it might take a bad guy, working nonstop, to get into this database by guessing at the password?

I could tell you the number, but it would be meaningless to ordinary people.  Too big to grasp.  For clarity, let me put it this way.  Suppose that you have a computer that can check 1,000,000,000,000 (that’s one trillion) combinations per second.  Now suppose that computer began working to guess my password at the end of the last ice age about 12,000 years ago.  Today that computer would be a bit less than halfway through the possibilities.

The information in the database is sensitive, of course.  But let’s just say it’s not protecting nuclear launch codes. 

Now consider this.  The database resides on a secure network which is itself password protected.  The network can only be accessed from physical locations that are themselves secure.  NOW how many years do you think it would take?

It gets better.  The techno-geeks who designed this super-password requirement might benefit by considering the human element in this equation.  The users of this database (and of these super-passwords) are human beings.  And human beings usually don’t have the time or inclination to memorize extraordinary strings of random characters.  So what do at least a few of them do?  They write down the password for reference. 

This is strictly against procedures, of course, but still quite logical.  The users weigh the value of onerous security procedures against the time and effort required to comply.  Considered in terms of efficiency (or inefficiency), the decision may not seem difficult.

The law of unintended consequences is in full effect, and the inevitable conclusion is this:  The requirement for extreme password complexity actually degrades security by compelling users to write down their passwords rather than committing them to memory, creating a risk of loss or compromise.  The database would be safer with a less complex and more easily memorized password. 

Returning to the title question, what do you think?  Does the 24,000-year password requirement indicate perfectionism, or paranoia?  My answer is that paranoia and perfectionism fuel one another, and this password situation demonstrates eloquently how counterproductive that combination can become.

All this is an interesting abstraction, but is it relevant to our national debate about security and individual liberty?  I think so.  I think the lesson is this:

When you try to control the actions of others absolutely, you run the risk of looking foolish,

creating discontent, and undermining your own effort all at the same time.

Or to put it another way, one who is trying to make something completely idiot-proof should not fail to consider the guy in the mirror.

Courtesy www.dilbert.com

Now be safe out there.

Gryphem

Law has its Limits

Americans overwhelmingly respect the law.  You might not believe that if your opinion is based on the evening news, but it is true.  The vast majority are law-abiding people who believe that good law is the foundation of a good society.  And they are correct.  The law keeps us safe.  The law keeps us free.  No one should be above the law.  The law sets forth operating principles for our society.

The founders of the United States rebelled against a king whom they believed was violating their rights.  They justified the rebellion in legal terms, and presented a legal argument to the world.  They appealed not only to the legal precedents of their mother nation, but also to a higher concept commonly known as “natural law” (see the writings of Rousseau).  The Declaration of Independence is referring to natural rights when it states that everyone has been “endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.” 

When independence was accomplished, the Founders codified the most basic legal rights in a “Bill of Rights.”  When Americans moved into the wilderness and built new towns and states and local societies, they affirmed or created laws to preserve liberties.  When they did business locally or far away, they depended on the fair application of law to conduct their business successfully. 

Surprisingly, Americans have a reputation in the world for taking the law into their own hands.  This may be because we are descended from generations of pioneers.  On the early frontier, where little or no law enforcement capabilities were established, Americans had to take care of their own legal problems.  Far from being scofflaws as some believe, this experience engendered in the American people a sense of responsibility for upholding the law, even in the absence of normal authorities.

Our record is certainly not pure.  Some Americans appealed to the law to justify the existence of slavery.  Other Americans recognized the hypocrisy of that position.  They appealed to a higher law and forced an end to that unjust institution.

In recent years we have liberated nations from tyrants who abused their own people and threatened their neighbors.  Invariably as soon as the conflict begins to subside, we begin to teach them the concept and practice of the rule of law.  

I affirm and applaud our respect for law, which is the foundation of any just society.  A legal structure created our government (the Constitution).  A body of law exists to ensure the functionality of our society (criminal law).  Another body of law exists to ensure public accord and prosperity (civil law).

Yet, despite our admirable history and all our good intentions, law has become a problem in the United States of America. 

The root of the problem is failure to comprehend the paradoxical relationship between law and liberty.  With the exception of a few anarchists who can never seem to work together anyway, all Americans seem to realize that too little rule of law will result in chaos, a state of perpetual mayhem and insecurity in which might makes right, the strong oppress, and individual rights do not exist.  What most of us fail to realize is that the opposite condition, too much law, is also detrimental to freedom.  When laws begin to perpetuate every aspect of life, we find our freedom strangled by regulations which determine our daily behavior, limit our options, and make us prisoners in a system that cares little for our individual needs or desires.

We misunderstand the role of law in our lives, which is to enhance freedom rather than to prohibit benign behaviors or describe how we must live our lives.

We misunderstand the scope of law, which should be a framework to set limits rather than a prescriptive schematic detailing our life experience.  

We misunderstand the extent to which law is able to control our society.  The power of the law, and its ability to influence, are limited by all the factors which influence human behavior.  (See the story of King Canute, who ordered the tide not to rise.)

We fail to grasp that law, which is necessary for a secure, just, and prosperous society, is not sufficient in the absence of virtue, wisdom, and courage to create that society.

We misunderstand the intent of law, which is to protect liberty and diversity rather than to create compliance and conformity, which is to resolve conflicts of opinion but not to eliminate differences.

We mistakenly conclude that since legal decisions tend to be all on one side (for the plaintiff), or all on the other (for the defendant), that all of life must be black-and-white, right-or-wrong, all this way or all that way.  Real life is not like that, and when we operate in accordance with the mistaken belief that everything must be either good or evil, we set the stage for irreconcilable conflict and endless dysfunction.

Because we misunderstand the law, we try to fix all the problems of our society by means of the law.  We create a law to address every situation.  We fail to realize that continually adding new layers of law and regulation is not only unnecessary but counterproductive.  We lack the wisdom to understand that some problems cannot be solved by appeal to law.  Can we pass a law to make everyone love one another and live in peace?  It's been tried, and it has never worked.  In the end, we make so many laws that we stifle our own freedom.

The law, separate from a human context, is no more valid than a computer code or a set of directions for assembling a bicycle.  Human wisdom and compassion are necessary to prevent the law from becoming an instrument of oppression, or a tyrant in its own right. 

 

How can we restore the law to its rightful role in our society, as the strong social and cultural support for liberty that it should be?  First, we must realize that we are in control of our own destiny.  We have intelligence if we choose to engage it.  We have the ability to modify or cancel laws that have been misapplied or wrongly created. 

Many sincere people in recent history have argued that individuals do not have the right to oppose or violate laws with which they disagree.  In truth, the social contract demands that all members of a society comply with the law or face sanctions.  To make the law subject to individual approval is to make the law completely ineffectual.  By the same logic though, individual laws must sometimes be examined to see whether they are having the proper effect, creating the social environment that was intended.  After all, law does not exist for its own sake.  It exists for the sake of the society, and the people.  If the society and the people reject a law, it will be rejected.

Similarly, individuals have the moral (if not the legal) right to reject a regulation when it conflicts with a higher law.  When an immoral regulation is in effect, people of good faith have not only a moral right but a moral obligation to oppose it.  (See the writings of Thoreau for more about this.)

Sometimes the law may have stood in the way of liberty and justice, instead of supporting those two goals to which our free society aspires.  If so, we can prevent that from continuing to happen, if we have the wisdom and courage to act.

Sometimes we have to let go of precedent, let go of technicalities, let go of entrenched ideas which may not be conducive to the wellbeing of the people, and revisit that elusive quality we call “common sense.”  Sometimes we may have to realize that not every situation has a hero and a villain, a winner and a loser.  Maybe we shouldn’t make laws to force winners and losers when in reality (with thanks to Dave Mason), “there’s only you and me and we just disagree.”

A few final thoughts... 

• Law is not important in and of itself.  Law is important because of the morality it defines (if you are an idealist) or the results it produces (if you are a pragmatist).
• The Rule of Law is necessary if we are to have a safe, just, and prosperous society. 
• Without virtue, wisdom, and courage, law does little good, and can actually be twisted into an instrument of oppression.
• The people define and create the law.  The law will be only as effective, authoritative, and just as the people who create and uphold it. 

To bring this to a close for now, I present a quotation to inspire thought.  As usual, Thomas Jefferson said it best:

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

Gryphem

[Note: This post was origninally presented with the title, 'The Law and Common Sense (Part 1).'  As the narrative developed, it became less about judgment than about unrealized limitations and implications.  Thus the title change.  What had been planned as Part 2 is distinct and will be presented as a separate post.  - G]

Irony

Irony isn't hard to find.  Just look around and think about it.....



Courtesy motivatedphotos.com
















Gryphem

An Opportunity for a Better World

Life can be rough sometimes, can’t it? 

Does it seem, sometimes, that people are so divided, so angry with each other that we’ll never be able to reconcile?  Does it seem like too many people who harm others get away with it?  Is the normal way of things tumultuous, chaotic?  Do you notice that despite extraordinary measures, most people just don’t feel secure?  Are you beginning to think of prosperity as a distant memory, something only a lucky few can experience now?

Would you love to live in a better place?  A place that, even if it’s not perfect, aspires to be?

How about a place in which justice is the goal of every public institution?  A place in which peace is sought more than war, and the people are content?  A place in which you feel safe and secure, because you know everyone else in the place has your back?

How about a place that is prosperous, where everyone has opportunity to pursue the things he or she thinks are worthy of time, effort, and commitment?  Would you love to live in a place of freedom, where no one is oppressed, and everyone knows deep inside that he or she is blessed to be there?

Who wouldn’t want to live in a place like that?  Who wouldn’t work, strive, even sacrifice to find or build a place like that?

And if that better place could be found or attained, wouldn’t it be even better if you knew that it would stay wonderful for generations to come?  If you knew that your contribution to this wonderful world would benefit the children and grandchildren who will follow you?

-  -  -  -  -

You know, if all that sounds really good to you, you wouldn’t be the first to wish it.  In fact, you’d have a lot of company.  Good people have been trying to build a place like that for a long time.  WHO do you suppose might have tried to create such a place?  Take a look at this from the 18^th century:

 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

-  -  -  -  -

WHERE do you suppose we should begin to seek that better world?  You know - the one we’d rather be living in.  Give it some thought today.  Maybe as you go about your work, as you talk to friends and family, as you search around you and within you for something great, you will achieve some surprising and hopeful insights.  

That is my wish for you… my wish for us.

Gryphem

PLACES

A location is a location forever, as long as the planet exists.  But a place is a place only for a precious short time.

Locations simply exist, but each place has been created, by God or nature or humanity or all of them working together.  A place exemplifies influences and individuality.  It is not simply a spot on the global grid.  Each place is built upon a location, but it is distinct in time as well as space.  It is one of a kind, fleeting. 

Location plus time set the limits of a place, but the wonders which make it unique are its defining characteristics.

A location may be a forest one year, a home or office or school in another year, and later a highway or an art museum or an airport.  Someday in the future, it may be a forest again, or a playground, or a desert, or a stadium, or the bottom of a lake.  Same location, different places. 

A place is as unique and wonderful as a personality.  It exists once, for a limited time, never to be repeated.  It is a magnificent, unique, and perishable spot in eternity.

My life has changed with the years, and the places I have known also have changed.  Some have vanished like a mist at midmorning.  Some are still the same old places I have loved.  With sorrow, I realize they won’t stay the same forever.



Courtesy http://www.nerdnirvana.org/

A place filled with meaning, beauty, or significance can combine the worldly and ethereal, physical and spiritual, just as effectively as they are combined in a human being.  Places are not just things, objective.  They are entities, subjective, constantly evolving.  They are the geographic, natural, and cultural points that define our lives and our reality.  Places are second only to persons in importance, value, and significance.  Each place, like each person, is a unique creation of the One who made us all. Each place, like each person, has a character and a charisma all its own.  Just like people, who are born, live, and die, places come into being, exist for a miraculous period of moments or millennia, and pass into eternity. 

This is a great irony.  The delicacy and fragility of a place, its temporal and temporary nature, may be exactly the qualities that infuse it with the essence of the infinite and enable us to see its timeless beauty.  Quite often, it is only when we recognize that something may not always exist that we realize its true value.

Even places that seem durable may vary from day to day.  My home on a sunny summer afternoon is not the same as my home during a snowstorm.  My church on Sunday morning, filling with singing, is not the same as my church on a weeknight late in the autumn darkness, silent as stone.

I want to see as many of the wonderful places of this Earth as I possibly can in one lifetime.  I want to see them in different seasons, in different lights.  I want to sense the auras and feel the breezes, smell the aromas - fresh or musty or perfumed.  Some, I want to revisit.  Some places I love so much that I want to experience them more than once. 

The places around me are the canvas on which God has painted his masterpiece… The sounds of the people around me are the voice of God, speaking in love.

This world is filled with all sorts of wonders, far and near.  We should be aware.  We should respond.  I respond by traveling, visiting, "being there," and remembering with wonder and thanksgiving.  When possible I share my experiences with others who love life and places and being.  

My advice to you is this.  First, notice and appreciate the people around you, the people you love.  Next, take notice of the world you live in.  Appreciate the places where you find yourself - creation all around you, natural or man-made, old or new, beautiful or homely, durable or transitory.  Then, while keeping a firm hold on the places that are your very own, go forth and visit the wider world.  Seek out new people and places to know, because people and places alike are unique, fragile, wonderful gifts from God.  When you return to the place that is your own, you will be richer for having known more of the glory of the world. 

These places in which we live are a result of the joint effort of human beings and divine inspiration.  Our friends and forebearers have worked together in and with nature, operated in accordance with rules established by the Creator and under his watchful eye.  Together, these human and divine forces have created beautiful masterpieces of place intended to be known, appreciated, experienced, and loved.

Gryphem

September 11, 2001

I remember that morning.  I was still asleep at the time of the first impact.  A short while later, a few minutes before 6 AM, my radio alarm sounded.  The first words I heard were, “plane crashed into the World Trade Center…”

There was more, but I was already out of bed and on my way to the television.  As dramatic as that sentence was, I sometimes wonder at my reaction.   Sure, it would’ve been a big deal if a small Cessna had accidentally flown into a big building.  But somehow, instinctively and immediately, I knew that it was bigger than that.

My wife and I stood watching, not even thinking to sit down.  The kids asked what was happening and we answered tersely, told them to watch and listen.  We stood in silence as the first tower crumbled down upon itself.  It felt like the end of the world.

I was late to school that morning, arriving a few minutes ahead of the students.  Our school had previously scheduled an assembly for that morning.  It would become a very different assembly than the one that had been planned.  The normally rambunctious middle school students filed into the gymnasium quietly, worried, scared, somber.  They walked or sat, hushed and quiet, and waited for adults to answer the deep, serious questions swirling around in their heads and in their whispered conversations.

Besides being a gifted musician, Dave (our band leader) was a kind and empathetic man.   He knew instinctively what he needed to do.  He picked up his saxophone.  As the students continued to file in and sit down, he began to play, all alone on the gym floor.  Soulfully, wordlessly, he played 'America the Beautiful' with as much intermingled pain and pride as I have ever heard in a single song.  He gave us a way to feel and express the conflicting emotions we all were trying to deal with.  A few students cried softly. 

When everyone was seated and Dave had finished, Nancy (our vice principal) came to the microphone.  If anyone there had a reason for concern or fear, it was Nancy.  She knew it.  We all knew it.  She was from New York City, and had the accent to prove it.  Her family was there.  A brother worked in Manhattan; friends did business in the Twin Towers.  Nancy knew that hundreds of adolescents and more than a few adults in that gymnasium 3000 miles west of Ground Zero were taking their cues from her. 

Nancy was honest about her fear.  She was human, and she cried a little as she affirmed for us how terrible this thing was that had happened.  She was strong, and she assured us that although there would be pain and grief, we would survive.  We felt the raw emotion she shared with us, and somehow that made our fear and pain more manageable.  Children and adults alike, we trusted Nancy.  We believed her when she said we would come through this crisis.  We didn’t believe her because she was the vice principal, but because she was Nancy.  We knew her.  We cared about her.  We knew she cared about us.  We trusted her.  We saw her standing tall and resolute even with tears in her eyes, she who had the most to lose… That is when we knew that no matter how bad the situation seemed we would be okay, so we stood a little taller and held our heads up, too. 

Dave and Nancy got those kids through the day.

We did not watch the television coverage.  No one thought it would be a good idea to see the tragedy over and over again for hours upon hours, so we turned the televisions off.  We talked, though.  We put the lesson plans aside, and we talked.  Students opened up with their fear, their frustration, their confusion, their anger.  Adolescents and adults forgot the generation gap that sometimes divided us as we all experienced something utterly new, together.

We learned about the tragedy at the Pentagon.  We learned about the crash of Flight 93 in Pennsylvania, which we didn’t yet know would be remembered as the first victory in the War on Terror.

With decades more life experience than all my younger friends, I tried to help them wrap their minds around the events of the day, to put it into some kind of perspective.  As a history teacher, I made the obvious comparisons to the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, to the battle of Antietam in 1862.  I told them about my generation’s traumatic introduction to tragedy on a national and global scale, the assassination of President John Kennedy.  Now as then, I told them, a change had been thrust upon us suddenly, unexpectedly, and it was a change that could never be undone. 

I told my students that they would remember this day for their entire lives, that it would become for them a dividing line between the “before” of their youth and the “after” of their young adulthood.  We mourned together.

In days that followed we talked about how Americans had stopped their partisan politics and their regional rivalries.  Southerners who used to enjoy talking bad about The City realized, perhaps for the first time, that underneath the differences we were all one.  Democrats who used to complain bitterly about Republican plans and attitudes realized, for the first time in a long time, that there was more uniting than dividing us.  African-Americans, Latinos, Anglos, Native Americans, Asians, Americans of every ethnicity realized that our differences were insignificant in the face of the tragedy. A writer for the New York Muslim Examiner wrote an article entitled, “Condemn the Terror and Pray for the Victims.”  We became just people, just American people.  We took a break from the artificial attitudes and prejudices that divided us and, at least for a little while, decided we’d best get along with each other because we were all in this together. 

If only for a moment, we were united in our grief and in our resolve. 

We listened in awe to stories of firefighters and police in New York and Arlington who gave their lives to save others; we revered them and hoped to be worthy of them and their sacrifices.

We shortly realized that the victims were not only Americans, but good people from all over the planet.  The targets were, after all, the World Trade Center, and the victims included persons from 90 nations and all major world religions.  We realized that the attack was not only against the United States of America, but an attack against civilization and even humanity itself.

We watched outpourings of support around the world.  In a momentary break with three centuries of tradition, the Coldstream Guards at Buckingham Palace in London played 'The Star Spangled Banner' at the changing of the guard.  Despite recent differences in the international arena, the President of France stated, “All French people stand by the American people.”  The Chancellor of Germany declared “unlimited solidarity” with the American people.  Even some who were not particularly friendly toward the United States – Russia, China, and the Palestinian Authority, for instance – condemned the attacks, and offered their support. 

Our NATO partners invoked that part of the founding treaty of the Alliance which declares that an attack upon one nation is an attack upon all.  Whoever would have believed, when the NATO Alliance was forged in the aftermath of World War Two to protect democracy in Europe, that the first time Article Five of the Treaty of Washington would be invoked would be in response to an attack on the United States?

The world had been turned upside down.

Before the decade had expired I would leave the classroom and return to uniform.  First in Baghdad, and later throughout Europe and the Middle East with NATO, I would do my part to stop terrorism.

Some of those students who met harsh reality in my eighth grade classroom that day became no longer students, but comrades in arms in Iraq or Afghanistan.   Today they are, in fact, 23 years old.  They and their peers have borne the brunt of the wars of the past decade.  How little we all knew on that fateful morning.

Ten years on, we know we have survived.  We struggle to balance the need to protect our people with the need to maintain personal freedom in America.  We fight to eradicate the international scourge of terrorism, and worry that we sometimes overstep the bounds of international law.  We struggle to pay the bills incurred in the War on Terror.  But we are still here, and we will go on. 

Often underestimated by our enemies, we tend to underestimate ourselves as well.  Beneath the political debates, we are Americans.  Beyond the complaints and controversies we allow to play out on our front pages, we really are strong.

A decade has passed and here we remain, still strong and free.  Thanks to Dave and Nancy, ordinary people who became extraordinary when their strength, comfort, and wisdom were needed.  Thanks to the first responders who selflessly acted out their love for neighbors, nation, and humanity.  Thanks to the soldiers and sailors who have left the comfort of home to take on the responsibility of defending our America.  Thanks to allies and people of good will around the world who stand with us.  We go on.

This Sunday, ten years on, I will grieve again.  When I finish grieving, I will give thanks for our abiding strength, our enduring freedom, our allies.  I will give thanks for hope that is timeless, for the miracle of compassion in the face of hatred, and for the blessings of liberty and brotherhood.

May God continue to keep us all - people of faith and commitment, of hope and good will - safe through this ongoing storm.  May we always resist the urge to hate, and never fail to answer the call when those who work evil must be stopped.  I thank God for friends, family, and freedom.  I thank God for people throughout the world who believe in human rights and liberty.  I thank God for the opportunity to build a better tomorrow.

On September 11, 2011, God bless you.  God bless all people who believe in freedom, human dignity, and love, wherever they may be.  God bless those who stand courageously against assassins who preach hatred.  And finally -

God Bless America. 

Gryphem

The Home of the Brave?

I WAS ONCE ASKED, with fear and trembling, whether North Korea could destroy us with their missiles.  I suppressed my amazement that the person asking could be so scared of an incompetent enemy half a world away.  North Korea did indeed have a new missile that could fly a long way.  Of course, North Korea couldn’t guarantee it would hit any particular target in Japan, much less North America.  But my coworker did not know all this.  Suppose they got lucky and it flew directly at Seattle?  Would it kill us all, she asked.

I wondered that she had so little knowledge of or faith in our U.S. air defenses.  Could she really doubt that the U.S. Air Force and Navy would take out any stray missile on the way in?  But she was scared.  Furthermore, she was a civilian, unacquainted with military matters.  I reprimanded myself mentally for being arrogant, and kindly gave her reasons why she should stop worrying, go back to her classroom with confidence, and take comfort in the security provided by the world’s most effective military.  She was still a little bit concerned, but I think my assurances helped.

Upon reflection, I gained some of understanding of her fear.  Frankly, the news stories about the new North Korean missile were written to alarm and intimidate.  The stories were intended to inspire fear, because fear sells newspapers.  Because she was a caring person concerned for the safety of children, and because she had no frame of reference for military matters, her reaction was reasonable.  I am glad that I was able to put her mind at ease, at least a little bit.

If the question had come from a military person, my reaction might have been different.  If a soldier or sailor had presented the same question in a matter-of-fact way, I would have simply answered it because not everyone in the military works with air defense or intelligence.  However, if the question had come from a soldier or sailor exhibiting the deep fear I saw in my civilian coworker, my reaction would have been different.  I would have questioned whether that individual belonged in the U.S. military.

Persons in our military must never allow fear to determine their actions and attitudes.  I do not say that our soldiers and sailors should not be afraid, because we are all human, and sometimes we all feel fear.  The difference is, a military person must deal with fear in a mature way, selflessly, in such a way that judgment and job performance are not impaired.  The military person should manage feelings with facts, counter apprehension with obligation, and put mission above self-interest.  A good solder or sailor will never be more concerned with personal safety than with the mission. 

Of the Navy Core Values, the central one is COURAGE.  We are supposed to be courageous.  Not fearful.  We are soldiers and sailors, American fighting men and women, not children hiding from a bully, not cowards failing to defend their charge, not timid.  We are expected to be courageous.  If we are not courageous, we should not have put ourselves in a position to be hurt by joining the U.S. military.

Fear is nothing to be ashamed of.  I have felt great fear.  I have feared incoming missiles, sniper fire, suicide bombers, and terrorists.  Not to mention crazy drivers and really tall bridges. 

The honorable soldier or sailor will not let fear incapacitate him or her.  The American military member will continue to fulfill obligations in spite of the fear he or she may be feeling.  That’s what courage is – not the absence of fear, but pressing forward in spite of fear.

In a hostile or dangerous situation, the good soldier or sailor will do what needs to be done.  He will step forward with fortitude to defeat those who threaten him, his brothers in arms and shipmates, his family and homeland.  She will stare down the ones who try to intimidate her with strength and righteous indignation.  Intimidation only works when the target gives in to fear. 

We, the Defenders of the United States of America, Do Not Cower.  At least, that’s how it used to be. 

That’s how it was back when farmers and shopkeepers fought professional soldiers to gain independence for their American nation.  That’s how it was in the Civil War, when valiant patriots of both sides gave their lives in a cause greater than self.  That’s how it was in the World Wars when our country rescued Europe and East Asia from determined aggressors.  That’s how it has been in Afghanistan, as we seek to help people who sometimes have less hope and respect for themselves than we have for them.

That’s not how it might be in years to come.  The American military is being trained to cower.

Read these excerpts from a mandatory military training program, which is intended to keep military personnel safe from dangerous people.  These excerpts have been mildly paraphrased to enhance clarity, and my comments are italicized.  You might call it 'Mandatory Timidity Training.'

1. “When you travel, wear civilian clothing with no military symbols.  Blend in.  Do not put military insignias or titles on your luggage. This may reduce the likelihood of being a target because of your association with the U.S. military.  Be anonymous.” [Pride in your military affiliation is dangerous.]
2. “When flying, choose the seat least accessible to a hijacker, a window seat in the midsection of the aircraft. A hijacker in the aisle would have difficulty reaching a passenger in a window seat. [“When he decides to hurt me, you mean?  That frightens me.”]  Also, a hijacker is likely to stand at the front or rear of the aircraft, so seats in the middle of the compartment will be least exposed.”  [Apparently, the idea is to hide behind civilian bystanders.]
3. “You are in a public area when someone begins to make a scene with a security guard in a loud, threatening way. You should wait while security personnel handle the disruption since you must remain anonymous. If the situation persists or worsens, you might consider leaving the area to return when things have settled down.”  [Tactic: Run away.  Okay, I agree with giving the security personnel a chance to handle their own problems.  But leaving the area because someone is upset?  How can we possibly expect people who run away from such minor conflicts to stand up to an armed enemy?] 
4. “You will travel to another city where there have been disturbances.  Tips on staying safe:  Always inspect your vehicle for tampering before you get in.  Try not to draw attention to yourself.  Make sure a responsible person [“You mean like an adult?”] knows where you are.  Always travel with a buddy.  Always have a local map, emergency phone numbers, and proper identification.  [None of these is a bad idea, per se.  But doesn’t the tone bother you?  I mean... ‘travel with a buddy’?  Sounds like advice from a mommy to an elementary age child going on a field trip – not advice to a professional warrior and defender of American freedom.]

5. "When eating at a restaurant, you ask for a table away from the street, because streetside tables are more exposed to danger.  [Hide.]  An attractive stranger moves to the table next to you and asks where you are from and what you do.  Your best course of action is to politely end the conversation and consider using room service next time.”  [Seriously?  On what planet?] 
6. “Later, in the lobby, you think you recognize the same individual. [Think? I’m pretty sure I would recognize the pretty lady who was hitting on me.]  Knowing that the lights in the lobby show on which floors the elevator stops [“Oh, no!  What if the pretty lady follows me?”], you should go to a secure, public area of the hotel such as the gift shop for a few minutes. [“Please make the pretty lady go away… please, please, please…”]  If the individual is still there, you should go to the front desk and report the stranger. You should ask for a member of the hotel staff to escort you, and go to your room by an indirect route. [“Mr. Hotel Manager, that scary pretty lady is hitting on me.  Please stop her.  And can the big strong bellhop please walk me to my room?  And since I’m afraid she might follow us do you think we could use the cargo elevator to ditch her?”]

Try to visualize John Wayne saying that.  Wariness is reasonable, but any soldier or sailor who is this afraid of a friendly attractive stranger is pathetic and doesn’t deserve to have a mature romantic relationship, ever. 

Seriously, there is no way that anyone this scared of his or her own shadow would ever be able to complete accession training (boot camp), much less be an active participant in real military operations.  Many of these suggestions might be good advice for an adolescent girl, but it is embarrassing that they are directed to members of the United States military.

This new counter-courageousness may have originated with well-intentioned civilians who do not understand the military ethos.

It is certain that the creators of this training do not understand that thinking in a purely defensive way is a dangerous and debilitating habit for members of a military in which offensive operations are often necessary.  They may not understand that boldness can be an advantage.  They may not understand that to give in to fear is to lose.  They may not understand the imperative to put mission above safety and personal concerns.  They certainly do not understand either courage or honor. 

The new counter-courageousness might be the unintended result of a generation of risk-averse policies engendered by our litigious society.  It might be political correctness misapplied and running amok.  Whatever created it, it must be rejected.

As American fighting men and women, we seek maximum security for our nation, our allies, our people, our families, our fellow-soldiers and sailors.  Ideally we also seek security for ourselves – but personal safety comes after the mission, and after the safety of others. 

When reasonable precautions are likely to keep us safe, those precautions should be taken.  As military members, a natural instinct for self-preservation is sometimes our greatest asset.  At other times, though, we must consciously override that instinct in favor of protecting others or deterring a threat.  Honor and courage demand that when it is necessary to put ourselves in harm’s way to defend others or accomplish our mission, we step forward boldly.  When it is our obligation to protect others or to deter an aggressor, we must act fearlessly, without hesitation, from strength rather than timidity. 

We must be strong and unflinching because we know from history that he who hesitates is lost, that a people who are afraid are easily conquered, that those who value security more than freedom are likely to lose both.

We, the fighting men and women of the American military, will take reasonable precautions to keep ourselves safe, but we will never tremble before an enemy.  We will choose courage over cowardice, even though we may suffer personal harm, because that is the nature of our mission and that is the nature of who we are.  If we do otherwise, we become less than we should be - in the estimation of the world, of our emboldened enemies, of our families, and most catastrophically, in our own estimation of ourselves.  Becoming less, we will be incapable of defending our nation adequately when the battle begins.  Being “safer,” we will become less secure.

We continue to aspire to the Core Values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment.  We will live worthy of the patriots who bravely gave all for us and our liberty.  We will choose, like our honorable and courageous forefathers, to Live Free or Die.

Note to the incoming defenders of America:

Do not let those who do not understand honor, courage, or commitment tempt you to reject honor, courage, or commitment in order to gain a little temporary security.  Take reasonable precautions, but never live in fear.  The ones who would train you to be afraid do not understand honor or courage or commitment, nor do they understand who you are or why you want to take on the responsibility of protecting your nation and your people. 

You are Honorable.  You are Courageous.  Live committed to your ideals.  Believe in that something which is more important than yourself.  The timid and fearful ones may not understand you, but they need you to be strong for them.  We, your brothers and sisters in arms, will understand, support, and honor you.  Just as you will do for us if and when the need arises.

You are honorable.  You are proud.  You are worthy to be a defender of America. 

Thank you for your service.  Remember your heritage.

Gryphem