South by Southwest: civil liberties or security (via Mowser)

Showing posts with label civil liberties or security. Show all posts

Thursday, October 09, 2008

The War -- Everybody says "No"

A District Judge in Washington ordered the Uigers released from Guantanamo Bay, but the Justice Department said "no." This turn of events is explained in an article, from ProPublica "DOJ: We’re Not Releasing Gitmo Detainees," 10/7/08, is by Eric Umansky. To quote:

As expected, the Justice Department says it's filing an emergency appeal to prevent the men from going free: "The ruling presents serious national security and separation of powers concerns and raises unprecedented legal issues." The judge has ordered the government to bring the detainees to the Washington, D.C., court on Friday.

The government's statement also says the Uigher detainees "have admitted to receiving weapons training at camps in Afghanistan." This summer, a three-judge federal appeals court panel hearing the case of one of the Uighers pointedly questioned the government's evidence.

Several Gitmo prosecutors have resigned in protest saying "no" to the terms of detainee treatment. Here's one story. Former Gitmo Prosecutor: Detainee Was Child Soldier and ‘Duped’ by Eric Umansky 9/29/08 at ProPublica. Here are the good people who resigned. "The Six Gitmo Prosecutors Who Protested" is from ProPublica, written by Eric Umansky on 10/1/08. To quote: "Six prosecutors have either stepped down or refused to prosecute, citing qualms about the system. We decided to compile a list." [details in the story]

Major John Carr – March 2004
Major Robert Preston – March 2004
Capt. Carrie Wolf - Mid-2004
Lt Col. Stuart Couch – Mid-2004
Col. Morris Davis - October 2007
Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld – September 2008

Not content with Gitmo, this excellent expose is from The Raw Story: "ACLU: Bush admin tried to create 'Gitmo inside the US*.'"

Catching up on the other related current happenings is easy, because I get a daily newsletter from CQ-Behind the Lines, by David Morrison. These tidbits are for today (10/9/08) --

Feds: An appeals court put the brakes on a federal judge’s plan to transfer 17 Uighur detainees at Guantanamo to his Washington courtroom on Friday, The Associated Press’ Hope Yen reports — while a Washington Post editorial raps the judge for “overreaching.”

. . . A U.S. military officer warned Pentagon officials that a detainee was being driven nearly insane by months of punishing isolation in a U.S. military brig, documents obtained by AP show. A Baltimore-based refugee aid organizationwill try to help Chinese Guantanamo detainees settle in the United States after a judge ordered their immediate release, ABC News notes. “Among the first acts of the new president should be to order hearings for all those held at Guantanamo,” The Des Moines Register, relatedly, chides — while The Miami Herald has two North African detainees being repatriated yesterday.

. . . The Taliban have rebuilt a camp in South Waziristan that trains children as suicide bombers, The Long War Journalhas a video from Pakistan showing. “The internal debate among jihadists is which enemy to target and how, not whether violence should be used or not,” Walid Phares asserts for Spero News.

This "No" to Afghanistan is absolutely amazing. The headline says, "French troops: We won't go to Afghanistan*." It is from Global Research, 10/4/08. To quote:

According to French media, troops in the 27th battalion stationed in a southern France military base said on Friday that they were unwilling to go to Afghanistan as part of France's mission in the central Asian country.

The troops' refusal to go to the war-ravaged country comes as 10 French soldiers were killed in Afghanistan in August.

This blogger reports on a story of "No" that comes from the United Kingdom. "'Good War' Lost, But the Imperial Project Goes On*" by Chris Floyd 10/5/08 at Empire Burlesque writes that the war in Afghanistan may not be winnable. To quote:

Who says so? America's biggest ally in the Afghan adventure: Great Britain. This week, two top figures in the British effort in Afghanistan -- Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, UK ambassador to Kabul, and Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, the senior British military commander in Afghanistan -- both said that the war was "unwinnable," and that continuing the current level of military operations there, much less expanding it, was a strategy "doomed to fail."

Saying "no" to doing another book review right now, I will, however go ahead and include just a bit of the promo as my conclusion to this post. As occasionally happens, I was contacted with an offer of an advance copy of Bill Murphy Jr.'s new book, In A Time of War: The Proud and Perilous Journey of West Point's Class of 2002. In the book, Bill follows five brave officers and their classmates and families of West Point's Class of 2002, the first class to graduate during the Iraq war. These guys did not say "no." Here is the promo information:

Published by Henry Holt & Co.
September 2008; $27.50

The dramatic story of West Point’s class of 2002, the first in a generation to graduate during wartime.

They came to West Point in a time of peace, but soon after the start of their senior year, their lives were transformed by September 11. The following June, when President George W. Bush spoke at their commencement and declared that America would “take the battle to the enemy,” the men and women in the class of 2002 understood that they would be fighting on the front lines. In this stirring account of the five years following their graduation from West Point, the class experiences firsthand both the rewards and the costs of leading soldiers in the war on terror.

In a Time of War focuses on two members of the class of 2002 in particular: Todd Bryant, an amiable, funny Californian for whom military service was a family tradition; and Drew Sloan, the hardworking son of liberal parents from Arkansas who is determined to serve his country. On the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, Todd, Drew, and their classmates—the army’s newest and youngest officers—lead their troops into harm’s way again and again.

Meticulously reported, sweeping in scope, Bill Murphy Jr.’s powerful book follows these brave and idealistic officers—and their families—as they experience the harrowing reality of the modern battlefield. In a Time of War tells a vivid and sometimes heartbreaking story about courage, honor, and what war really means to the soldiers whose lives it defines.

About the Author
Bill Murphy Jr. worked as Bob Woodward’s research assistant on the bestselling State of Denial. A lawyer and former Army Reserve officer, he reported from Iraq for The Washington Post.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news war guantanamo afghanistan detainees

Monday, October 06, 2008

Bloggers on Torture --an Index

What led to today's post on torture? I was going through one of my favorite's folder at my terrific feed aggregator, Bloglines, and realized that I had saved many on torture. Andrew Sullivan's kept posts, the ones on torture he had written long ago, brought tears come to my eyes as I read the titles. For whatever reason I could not discard them as outdated. This is still raw unfinished business with many of us. Andrew Sullivan writes for The Atlantic.com. Here is his "Daily Dish" on the subject of torture:

"We Do Not Torture" Update - 6/6/08
Talking Torture - 5/22/08 The Vice-President For Torture - 5/17/08 Self-Waterboarding: An Experiment - 12/23/07 The Freedom To Torture - 12/14/07

This great surfing tool, Bloglines, has a number of handy features, including the (save as unread) feature that led to this post. It also offers very easy subscription to what seems like an unlimited number of different feed sources, folders for various categories of feeds, a story clipper, a blog, and a capacity to search for posts or stories. For example, the words "torture detainees" is a search term that today produced 25,200 posts on the subject.

Like anything else Bloglines has limitations. Any feed's folder will only hold 200 new entry headlines. When I want to read the full story I just click on the headline. After I have scanned that set of feed headlines, they all go away except those where I have checked the "save" box. So the feeds "fill up" with old stories unless I get back to them and un-check those in which I am no longer interested. I checked several other favorites folders and found that more torture posts had been saved. There were only a couple of recent ones by the writers to whom I regularly turn. The first one today was from Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com on torture:

Porn producer invokes the Bush/Yoo defense -- unsuccessfully - 10/5/08 Supreme Court restores habeas corpus, strikes down key part of Military Commissions Act - 6/12/08 CNN, the Pentagon's "military analyst program" and Gitmo - 5/9/08 John McCain and Bush's torture powers - 4/27/08

Juan Cole at Informed Comment as well as Dandelion Salad, carried the other new story, about Condoleezza Rice. Professor Cole is perhaps one of the most knowledgeable writers on the Middle East and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is also a regular writer on the subject of torture:

Rice and torture - 10/01/08 The Great Torture Scandal - 6/18/08 Bush Team Pushed Torture behind Myers' Back - 4/21/08

Dandelion Salad's stories on torture I saved were quite numerous, perhaps because the site has a lot of contributors interested in national security, etc. The writers are also good about naming names:

Top White House Offiicials Discussed and Approved Torture, Rice Admits - 10/2/08 Held Hostage For Six Years In Gitmo, Sami El Haj Tells His Story - 8/2/08 Confirmation of Detainee Murders (Wilkerson; Nadler) - 6/19/08 John Yoo, Totalitarian by Paul Craig Rogerts - 6/19/08 Maj. Gen. Taquba Accuses Bush Admin of War Crimes - 6/19/08 Bush Admin Post-Constitutional Order: "It was real 'Manchurian Candidate' stuff" - 6/19/08 American Psychological Association Supports Bush Regime "Interrogations" - 5/28/08 CIA Documents on Torture: Treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody overseas - 5/27/08

Think Progress' posts on torture were concentrated in April of this year, when the issue was making a lot of news. I recommend TP as a regular stop for any news junkie:

Feith:"We Took an Extremely Strong Pro-Geneva Convention Position In the Pentagon" - 4/24/08 Thomas Breaks Press's 14 day Silence on Bush's Torture Approval, Chided Colleagues: 'Where is Everybody?' - 4/23/08 Ashcroft Compares Waterboarding to Being 'Interviewed by Jon Stewart' - 4/22/08 Addington, Gonzales Witnessed Gitmo Interrogations in 2002; Approved of 'Whatever Need to be Done' - 4/21/08 NYT’s Lichtblau: Bush Torture Program And CIA Tape Destruction ‘Could Lead To Criminal Action’ - 4/17/08 McCain Takes Bold Stance On Torture: ‘We Cannot Ever Torture Any American - 4/14/08

My regular contributor (this link is on the subject of torture) is "betmo*"

From the Dissident Voice (May 2008) "FBI compiled war crimes dossier on prisoner abuse and torture"

To conclude, my favorites' folders are now more lean because the posts are now indexed under "torture," here as one of our nation's many items of unfinished business. The Bush administration, I am sure, is happy that the issue is no longer front and center as it was earlier in the year. The purpose of this post is to make sure that it does not go away, not so long as it still fills me with so much anger and sadness for our country.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics torture detainees bush administration

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Police State Update

"Police state" stories, about the sad turn of government events in the United States, came to my in-box in stacks from my regular contributors in recent weeks. The following set of posts about the same news story is my post's lead today.

Overturning Posse Comitatus? Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com, asks about an article at Global Research, "Why is a U.S. Army brigade being assigned to the homeland?#." Also, from News With Views, Chuck Baldwin asks, "U.S. Army troops To Serve As U.S. Policemen?#" At Truth Out, the author asks the question* again, about how it will be when U.S. regular troops become law enforcement authorities within U.S. borders.

As domestic surveillance takes center stage, the FBI's traditional law enforcement role diminishes. And that is the reason why the vigilance of the American Civil Liberties Union is so crucial. The ACLU sends me a regular newsletter. Anthony Romero's Sept. 29th letter got my attention. To quote from it:

Bush and Mukasey are at it again. They've announced dangerous new FBI guidelines that will severely jeopardize the personal privacy of innocent Americans. These regulations need no congressional approval and are terrifying.

Just how far can the FBI go without any factual basis for suspecting improper -- let alone illegal -- activity? Under far-reaching new guidelines proposed by Attorney General Michael Mukasey, the answer is frightening. All the FBI has to do to put you or any American under prolonged physical surveillance is assert an "authorized purpose" such as detecting or preventing crime or protecting "national security." Sound familiar? It's the same Bush/Cheney/Gonzales/Mukasey "just trust us" policies that have been eroding our rights for the past eight years.

. . . These new guidelines would allow the FBI to interview you, your friends and your family under a false pretext. The FBI could recruit secret informants and have them infiltrate peaceful protest groups. And the FBI could initiate investigations based on little more than race, ethnicity or religion. The FBI could also search commercial databases for personal details about your life with no real reason. And all of this would be allowed without an ounce of evidence that you or anyone else has done anything wrong.

The right to privacy is increasingly under assault by the U.S. federal government. This is another example of the police state mentality that turns more and more away from law enforcement and towards domestic surveillance. This article from The Raw Story (9/23/08),"DHS quietly expands border search policies,*" explains. To quote:

The Department of Homeland Security quietly expanded its authorization to examine, copy and archive an array of documents and electronic files from citizens and visitors crossing US borders, according to reams of internal documents released Tuesday.

The changes implemented last year reverse a two-decade-old policy requiring border agents to have reasonable suspicion of a crime before reading documents someone is bringing into the country; probable cause was required before documents could be copied.

Those standards have been thrown out the window in favor of lenient standards that allow Customs and Border Patrol agents to read or copy essentially anything they would like from a person entering the United States. The new policies also make it easier for CBP to share documents it copies or confiscates with other law enforcement agencies.

Within the Bill of Rights is another under assault, that of free speech. And we also have the right to petition our government for redress. We see more and more of this under the current administration. The story is from After Downing Street (9/15/08): "Three peace activists arrested in front of Federal Building in Madison.*" To quote:

Three Madison area peace activists were arrested during a peaceful demonstration, blocking the door to the federal building at 215 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd at 1:00 pm on Monday September 15, 2008. Cassandra Dixon, Bonnie Block, and Joy First were charged with obstruction of building during a peaceful vigil calling for an end to war and for an end to the deployment of our national guard to Iraq. They were cited and released.

The three joined about 30 other activists for the peace vigil that has been a fixture on Monday noon in downtown Madison for the past 26 years.

The USA is in a very sorry state of affairs when the cops act as an "arm of the state," in the worst sense of the term. Here is a relatively benign example that is still unnervings. It comes from The Raw Story (9/28/08), "Denver cops get T-shirts that mock DNC protesters*." To quote: ". . . commemorative T-shirt that makes light of the use of violence by police, particularly in the wake of 154 arrests during the week of Democratic National Convention this past August."

A "police state" climate could be contagious. Here is an example of such absolute insanity, from the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram (9/25/08): "Student who wore gorilla suit says he was trying to boost school spirit#." To quote:

Curtis Patton said he and Sean Kight, seniors at Flower Mound High School, thought sprinting across the school football field dressed as a gorilla and banana during last Friday’s homecoming game would be good for school spirit.

"I thought it would unite the student body, but not like this," he said, referring to a large segment of students who — from online postings — seem to believe administrators and police overreacted when they hauled the two off to jail for 16 hours.

More police state silliness -- For those of us who call themselves civil libertarians, this story from Yahoo! News (9/25/08) reinforces the sense of disquietude that pervades these times. The headline, "Hot dogs outside Philly ballpark cause bomb scare.#" makes my head spin. To quote:

But someone inadvertently left three of the duct taped hot dogs outside the ballpark, sparking security fears. Stadium employees were evacuated and the bomb squad was called in.

Only after the packages were blown up did authorities realize they'd just exploded some sausages.

This police state update is not just another of my regular civil libertarian gripe sessions. It is my way of reinforcing what registering. . . and phoning . . . and distributing yard signs . . . and, then voting for Barack Obama and Joe Biden is all about. It does not hurt to say again, the stakes could not be higher.

Reference -- on one of the chief architects of the Police State, Vice-President Cheney:

"Talking with the Washington Post’s Barton Gellman," by Eric Umansky of ProPublica - September 23, 2008. It is on the new book about Dick Cheney. To quote:

But, part of Cheney’s legacy is that he over reached and got pushed back. The Supreme Court said, for the first time, that the president needs permission from Congress to have military tribunals, for example. Even though Congress turned right around and said, “well okay, you go right ahead,” that doesn’t mean that the presidency is not constrained by this.

So ironically, precedents of limitations of power have been set.

Yeah, precedents have been set that are not good for the presidency or for the unilateral declaration of executive power. Sometimes Cheney’s tactical victories led to strategic defeats.

About Civil Liberties: McCain vs. Bush (9/21/08)Yeah, precedents have been set that are not good for the presidency or for the unilateral declaration of executive power. Sometimes Cheney’s tactical victories led to strategic defeats.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics 2008 election national security constitution domestic surveillance civil liberties

On McCain Watch

Presidential candidate, Senator John McCain bears watching. His behavior seems increasingly questionable for a potential leader. Recent news items come to mind, such as the one about the McCain Meltdown* from the Des Moines Register, and Frank Rich's New York Times Op-Ed column (9/27/08), "McCain's Suspension bridge to nowhere#." To quote:

The question is why would a man who forever advertises his own honor toy so selfishly with our national interest at a time of crisis. I’ll leave any physiological explanations to gerontologists — if they can get hold of his complete medical records — and any armchair psychoanalysis to the sundry McCain press acolytes who have sorrowfully tried to rationalize his erratic behavior this year. The other answers, all putting politics first, can be found by examining the 24 hours before he decided to “suspend” campaigning and swoop down on the Capitol to save America from the Sunnis or the Shia, or whoever perpetrated all those credit-default swaps.

There was no suspension of his campaign. His surrogates and ads remained on television. Huffington Post bloggers, working the phones, couldn’t find a single McCain campaign office that had gone on hiatus. This “suspension” ruse was an exact replay of McCain’s self-righteous “suspension” of the G.O.P. convention as Hurricane Gustav arrived on Labor Day. “We will put aside our political hats and put on our American hats,” he declared then, solemnly pledging that conventioneers would help those in need. But as anyone in the Twin Cities could see, the assembled put on their party hats instead, piling into the lobbyists’ bacchanals earlier than scheduled, albeit on the down-low.

. . . It’s that utter power vacuum that gave McCain the opening to pull his potentially catastrophic display of economic “leadership” last week. He may be the first presidential candidate in our history to risk wrecking the country even before being voted into the Oval Office.

"Is there a psychological explanation for John McCain’s recent behavior?" This was a fascinating article in the Democratic Strategist on a possible psychological diagnosis for John McCain. HT also to betmo for this link and post in Roger Ebert's column. To quote:

You made a TV commercial showing the moments Obama agreed with you.
Everybody knows he did. Did his agreement show honesty, or weakness?
It is significant that you said it proved he was not ready to lead.
What is the better leadership quality: (1) Willingness to listen to your opponent, and keep an open mind? (2) Rigidly ignoring him? Which of the two of you better demonstrated the bipartisan spirit you say you represent? Was there anything he said that you agreed with? Could you have brought yourself to say so?

I'm not the only one who noticed your odd, hostile behavior. Just about everybody did. I'm sure many of your supporters must have sensed the tension. Before the debate, pundits were wondering if you might explode in a display of your famous temper. I think we saw that happen, all right, but it was an implosion. I have instructed my wife to exclude you from any future dinner parties.

A few nuts and bolts of the presidential campaign also bear watching:

McCain and Obama's ads are equally negative, according to Neilsen's, the raters. The states that have been the recipients of the most negative advertising are Ohio and Michigan. McCain's fate hangs on three states, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Minnesota. From Congressional Quarterly (9/25): Hillary Clinton voters say McCain would do a better job than Obama on terrorism by a narrow 32 percent to 25 percent, AP reports."

Homeland Security -- This from my CQ Behind the Lines newsletter is a very good reminder of scary possibilities for bad stuff to happen as a result of erratic behavior by a president:

Poly-tics: “One of the most remarkable aspects of this campaign has been how little attention has been focused on homeland security,” Julian Zelizer writes for The History Network, suggesting pertinent questions for Friday’s debate. “What Americans often fail to comprehend is that the [post-9/11] powers amassed by President Bush will not expire when he leaves office. They will be available to future presidents to use — and abuse,” John Whitehead explores in American Chronicle. “What we want to do is try to describe what the world will look like to the new president and consider how each candidate is likely to respond to the world,” Stratfor’s George Friedman writes in the first of four parts posted by Global Oracle. “Are we fighting a real war against Islamist terrorist regimes and movements . . . Or is terrorism just a criminal justice problem?” Clifford D. May poses in The Minneapolis Star Tribune as one of several key questions for candidates.

A few more tidbits -- These additional leads come from CQ Behind the Lines (9/23/08) --To quote:

DHS has not talked to either the Democratic or Republican campaigns for president regarding the homeland transition next January, drawing the ire of top members of Congress, Homeland Security Today’s Mickey McCarter mentions.
. . . Poly-ticks: “A majority of Americans think the United States isn’t winning the war on terrorism, a perception that could undermine a key Republican strength,” a McClatchy Newspapers poll finds. Like other voters, Arab Americans’ “deep dissatisfaction” with the Bush administration’s performance has prompted a shift from the GOP and toward the Dems, pollster James Zogby writes in Abu Dhabi’s The National.

Watch what those who should be supporters are saying about the candidate. For example, A Colorado Evangelical leader, Richard Cizik, has criticized John McCain for lack of principle# regarding climate change. And I conclude with this paragraph that perfectly summarizes my post's points. To quote Mitchell Bard# at The Huffington Post,

The 2008 election is about which candidate's view of governing America you want to buy into. McCain and Palin have demonstrated, through their behavior, that they will govern like Bush, not just in their policy beliefs, but, like Bush, with a greater interest in political gain than serving the American people. If you enjoyed living with the consequences of Bush's philosophy of government, then you'll love four years under the boots of McCain and Palin.

Reference: "A Visual Guide to the Nominees' Speeches," by Dan Nguyen at ProPublica.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: [tagname]

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Just so you do not forget --

Tonight is the Vice-Presidential Debate between Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) and Governor Sarah Palin (R-Alaska.) Most of us think it could produce some headlines. We are all waiting to chalk up another Palin favorite moment.

Prior to the first debate between Senators McCain and Obama, Rand Beers at The Huffington Post said that it was a Commander-in-Chief test for them both. And most of the critics agree that, in some ways both passed the test. My own bias is that Obama passed with an "A" and McCain passed with a "D." Each of the candidates for Vice-President also has to pass the Commander-in-Chief test#, because that could conceivably be their role in the future. So think about what Beers said that still applies:

• Into this cauldron come two non-incumbent candidates, each of whom must pass the commander-in-chief test and demonstrate that he [or she]:
• Offers real change from the past eight years;
• Understands foreign policy beyond simplistic soundbites and tough talk, by providing serious solutions;
• Is ready to grapple with the complexities that link our security and our economy; and most importantly
• Has the temperament and judgment to lead.

If we are to believe Senator Obama, and I do, Senator McCain, and by extension, Governor Palin represent more of the same out of control militarism and intelligence abuses as during the past 8 years. Here are a few random news bits from my newsletter CQ Behind the Lines, just to remind. To quote from (9/25/08):

"Senior White House officials played a central role in determining whether the CIA could use harsh interrogation techniques, The New York Times’ Mark Mazzetti learns from newly released documents."

Terror tech -- from CQ Behind the Lines (9/24/08). Each edition of this handy little newsletter reveals the latest developments in our surveillance state. Do you have any question whatsoever that it would not continue under McCain-Palin? To quote:

U.S. intel agencies are unable to share info about foreign cyber attacks against companies for fear of jeopardizing intelligence-gathering sources, The Washington Post has an official testifying last week. DHS researchers “have previewed new technology that they promise will help rout out terrorists and other dangerous people in public places by covertly bio-scanning subjects as they walk past sets of cameras,” Revolution Radio reacts — and see FOX News: “Homeland Security Detects Terrorist Threats by Reading Your Mind.” DHS has many other such projects, “the descriptions of which are so impenetrable, there must be some way to use them for actual protection. If only we could wear jargon like armor,” The Everett Washington Herald harrumphs.

From the Vice-President's office we give you, ladies and gentlemen -- Think also about this Bush administration left-over from After Downing Street: "A war criminal in academia*." To quote:

The Miller Center on Public Affairs at the University of Virginia has invited a war criminal to speak on October 27, 2008, on the topic of "War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism." Georgetown University employs the very same war criminal as a "Professor and Distinguished Practitioner in National Security Policy." Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government has made him a "Belfer Center Visiting Scholar." And to Stanford University he's a "Distinguished Visiting Fellow of the Hoover Institution." The man's name is Douglas Feith.

. . . Feith's work after September 11, 2001, quickly became the manufa[c]ture of pseudo-evidence pretending to link al Qaeda to Iraq. Feith created, cherry picked, and distorted information, and pressured others to do the same, to help build a false case for an illegal war of aggression. And he didn't even do so from within an agency legally permitted to engage in so-called intelligence work. He did so from within the Pentagon where he set up a parallel intelligence operation with the role of producing what Cheney and Bush wanted but couldn't get from the other intelligence agencies. Feith's operation was called the Office of Special Plans.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics bush administration palin vice-president debate

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The Power of the Presidency, for good or bad?

How much power does our current president (OCP) have to calm the credit market crisis? If we look at the current POTUS and the potential POTII (Obama and McCain), many would say that the three men have not had the most influence over the problem solving process. In this case it is probably to the good. The plan for solving economic crisis on Wall Street has been worked out between Congressional leaders and the combined efforts of Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke. President Bush will certainly have to sign the legislation, but because he is in full lame duck mode, he did not exercise much power in the deal making.

Nor did either Senator running for President preside over the deal that has emerged. We do not yet know the full story of how much power to influence either candidate exercised. Senator Obama preferred to generally observe a line between the Political campaign and the negotiations. Senator McCain tried to interject himself into the process to gain political points, not because of any economic expertise he could bring to the table. McCain claims expertise in foreign policy, but it will always seen through a neocon/terrorism/fight the enemy lens identical to OCP. It is easy to see when the two issues get conflated as in this example from my daily newsletter, Congressional Quarterly Homeland Security -- Behind the Lines (9/23/08). Except for the Tom Head piece in the next paragraph, all the following quotes are from the CQ newsletter by David C. Morrison (dates in parentheses). To quote:

“The financial terrorism thing to me has to be put on the table just because the regular short sellers are not doing this. They’re not doing this,” The Columbia Journalism Review’s Ryan Chittum quotes CNBC’s Jim Cramer on last week’s market madness — and see TheStreet’s Dan Freed, as well, on “the specter of financial terrorism.”

"The Power of the Presidency" was written by Tom Head under the Issues and Views section in Civil Liberties/About.com. He says that the exercise of presidential power is the most dangerous, packing the most potential to be bad for the country. Head explores the problem:

The federal government is made up of the executive branch (led by the president), the legislative branch (Congress), and the judicial branch (led by the Supreme Court). While all branches have at times abused their roles, the executive branch is by far the most dangerous of the three.

The 8 Worst Presidents in U.S. History on Civil Liberties Issues
Watch the Executive Branch
Does the White House Need a Civil Liberties Advisor?
Understanding the Unitary Executive Theory
Does John McCain Endorse the Unitary Executive Theory?
Bill Clinton's Legacy and the Unitary Executive Theory
Torture and Executive Power

OCP, our current president, has been misguided in his use of power from the beginning of his tenure. He misused his power by raising our fears of terrorism. His kind of attitude led to the 2001 power grabs. The power wielding style of (OCP) illustrates what a bad example the U.S. has been. See this similar style in our close ally, Australia. We see it alive and well in "Talking Terror," (9/23/08). To quote:

“Contrary to opinion in some quarters, bleeding-heart naivete and soft-headed stupidity are not virtues, especially in terror prevention,” an Australian editorial asserts in the wake of a massive terror trial.

"Over there" is from (9/24/08). Exercising power through bullying words and patronizing ignorance is destructive to our place of moral leadership in the eyes of the world. To quote:

In his valedictory U.N. General Assembly address, President Bush accused Syria and Iran of sponsoring terrorism, which he said “has no place in the modern world,” Agence France-Presse reports. “Yemeni people by nature are kind and friendly. Most foreigners who have visited Yemen would agree to this. If so, then how come the same nation is said to be a haven for terrorism?” The Yemen Times muses.

This kind of rhetoric is not helpful. Because presidential words have such power, these attitudes are evidently communicable. They morph into religious intolerance, muddy foreign relations waters, and surely alienate moderate Muslims. These links from 9/25/08, are examples. To quote:

Holy Wars: “I am beyond ashamed of all the ‘Christian’ groups who have hosted [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in New York] and are placating and talking peace with this living piece of trash and evil!” a Canadian Free Press contributor condemns.

Unfettered presidential power is at its worst when it is clearly unconstitutional -- The Constitution was careful to say that the military must not act as domestic law enforcement agents, except in case of a temporary emergency, such as a natural disaster. The newsletter has a current "bad for the country" example, from 9/25/08. To quote:

Having spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, a 3rd Infantry Division brigade will spend the next year at home as an on-call federal response force for emergencies, including terrorist attacks, The Army Times’ Gina Cavallaro recounts. This deployment inside the United States“ for purely domestic law enforcement purposes is the fruit of the Congressional elimination of the longstanding prohibitions in Posse Comitatus,” Salon’s Glenn Greenwald growls.

There are little signs that the Constitution continues to have some small influence over the Executive. It happens when an official resigns out of conscience, when a judge expresses reluctance to rule for OCP, or when the FBI pays more attention to their constitutional responsibilities. The newsletter on 9/25/08 illustrates:

Courts and rights: A military prosecutor at Guantanamo is stepping down after a disagreement with his superiors described as a dispute over the ethical handling of a war crimes case, The New York Times tells. . . . A U.S. judge has “reluctantly” agreed to a request from Washington to delay appeals brought by some 250 Guantanamo detainees challenging the legality of their detention, Agence France-Presse recounts. In a nod to concerns that Americans could be investigated in terrorism cases without evidence of wrongdoing, Justice says it will tweak still-tentative rules governing FBI national security cases before they are issued, AP says.

EU does it right -- (9/24/08) The European Parliament yesterday underlined freedom of speech and the protection of privacy in E.U. legislation on the fight against terrorism, Xinhua says.

Presidential power should be exercised for the good of the nation and world peace. My newsletter of 9/25/08 notes, "The next president should call for better relations with the Muslim world in his inaugural address and pursue an Israeli-Palestinian accord within three months of taking office, AP has 34 ex-U.S. officials saying in a report released yesterday." Unfortunately OCP seems to know nothing other than military intervention. And terrorism has not been eradicated as a result of this bias towards kinetic power. CQ (9/23/08) has this: “Military operations do not provide safety from terrorism. On the contrary, the rule is that bombing attacks multiply in reaction to military offensives,” Deutsche Welle's Thomas Baerthlein propounds." And here is the really good CQ news about the power of nonviolence. “Global terrorism is now drawing more and more youngsters to study the Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy,” The Times of India’s Bharat Yagnik surveys.

The presidential powers granted under the U.S. Constitution can be wielded for the good or for bad of the nation. Thirty-seven days from now the last of the 2008 election votes will be cast. Then we will have a new president. I hope it will be Barack Obama, by far our best chance for a fresh start. OCP has 113 days left in office. Between now and then South by Southwest will look at Constitutional matters on Sundays, at the Bush legacy on Mondays, at the war on Thursdays, at the election on Fridays, and at how all this affects other nations on Saturdays. Please join me as the countdown continues.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics presidency 2008 election economic crisis

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Why bother with a constitution?

More Power to you, Mr. President? Actually, we the American people do not think so. We believe we still have the constitution. According to Matt Berman, who writes "The Daily Muck" (9/15/08) at TPM Muckraker,

A new AP-National Constitution Center poll shows that a majority of Americans are opposed to giving more power to the President, even at the expense of national security or the economy. The poll shows that two-thirds of Americans are opposed to shifting the balance of government towards the executive, evidence of wide-ranging skepticism of the advances in executive power during the Bush years. The poll also found more of a split when Americans were asked if Congress should be awarded greater power in times of economic or national security hardships. (AP)

I am a Constitution Voter Campaign -- At the ACLU Blog, , 9/15/08, Caroline Fredrickson on Salon Radio, on the Constitution Voter Campaign talks about how useful it would be to have the presidential candidates talk about Constitutional issues.

Our current president (OCP) started ignoring the Constitution by spying on Americans without a legal warrant some time ago. A great post illustrates an example. It cleverly and succinctly summarizes the new Barton Gellman material, with the five main points of the book's revelations. It came from ACLU Blog, and was written by Amanda Simon (9/15/08): "Ashcroft Defends Constitution in Spying Clusterfrack. Happy Opposite Day!"

Our current president (OCP) had massive help from the private sector in shredding our Constitution's privacy protection -- At the website, Dandelion Salad [by Tom Burghardt, of Global Research, September 11, 2008], comes the sordid story. To quote:

What do the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program and enterprising capitalist grifters have in common? Workarounds...and lots of them. The kind that aren't covered by any law.

Two highly-disturbing reports by CNET and the London Review of Books describe how government intelligence agencies and niche telecom providers have teamed-up to subvert our privacy rights-while providing security agencies with real-time cell phone tracking capabilities.

. . . And with a swarming multitude of new companies crawling out of the woodwork to "service" the "homeland security" market, why its a snap. Firms such as ThorpeGlen, VASTech, Kommlabs, and Aqsacom all sell what CNET's Chris Soghoian describes as "off-the-shelf data-mining solutions to government spies interested in analyzing mobile-phone calling records and real-time location information."

Called "passive-probing" data mining, these companies are carving-out lucrative niche markets. Only there's nothing "passive" about these intrusive operations undertaken in concert with a veritable army of state and corporate spooks.

. . . And there you have it. Niche telecom providers are the latest players in the West's burgeoning "terrorism industry," one that "keeps us safe" by destroying our privacy and our rights with hefty profits all around. Call it another seamless victory for the market's "invisible hand" that clenches as it morphs into the state's iron fist wrapped in American flags and blood-drenched corporate logos.

Congress has sometimes been complicit with OCP in the business of warrantless wiretapping, even when Democrats were in charge. To give them their due, however, they have held many hearings revealing some truth about the extent of damage to the principles of the Constitution's Bill of Rights. For example, hats off to Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) for recently holding this Judiciary subcommittee hearing: "Restoring the Rule of Law#." It was this desire to dial back the executive power overreach that was Bush's primary governing philosophy that led the senator to call together nearly a dozen experts Tuesday morning for the Judiciary subcommittee hearing. To quote:

Some Democrats -- frustrated at banging their heads against a wall much of these last eight years, as they've watched George W. Bush run roughshod over the Constitution and the rule of law -- are determined to return some semblance of order once the president leaves office next year.

The FBI became the agency charged with domestic intelligence gathering during the post-9/11 reorganization of the government's intelligence and homeland security programs. But like other organizations in the executive branch, they have become less and less interested in civil liberties over the years. The following story is an illustration of what Congress is trying to do about that. "Mueller Grilled Over Claims New FBI Powers Amounts to Racial Profiling, More Spying,*" by Robert Chlala for The Public Record on September 19, 2008. To quote:

. . . what the new framework Mueller described would actually do is allow agents to begin "assessments" and surveillance without first obtaining factual evidence. Additionally, the guidelines would permit agents to use race and ethnicity as a factor for triggering investigations.

Despite the concerns raised during the hearings and pressure from civil rights groups, Attorney General Michael Mukasey plans on signing the guidelines into law on Oct. 1.

These guidelines represent only some of a series of changes in law enforcement set in place the last year, increasing the power of federal, state and local authorities. Other new policies include the proposal to eliminate restrictions on local and state law enforcement intelligence gathering, the recruitment of over 15,000 new informants, and the creation of local-level "fusion centers" that gather and monitor masses of criminal and non-criminal information on individuals.

While the FBI guidelines have not been released to the general public, several members of Congress and key staffers from the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate pressed and received limited access to the draft. Department of Justice briefings and a speech by Attorney General Michael Mukasey in August also shed light on the topic.

Evidently protest is not protected in the copy of the Constitution carried by OCP. The Secret Service, under the Treasury Department, is charged with the protection of the President and Vice President, as well as of the candidates currently running for those offices. They are very good at taking their marching orders from OCP, who ignores Constitutional rights under the guise of maintaining safety. This perfect example "Secret Service order police to block McCain protesters,*" was a post at The Raw Story by David Edwards and Muriel Kane on September 17. To quote:

. . . Leaders of the protest, which had been arranged and publicized by local unions and the Ohio Democratic Party, said that as many as several hundred people had been expected to attend, but police were not letting them through roadblocks surrounding the area.

ACLU Calls for Investigation into Civil Liberties Violations at RNC -- During the Republican National Convention there were mass arrests, police raids on private homes and the detention of several journalists. This comes from my ACLU newsletter, and is a reminder why I am so grateful for the ACLU's long battle to protect our rights under the Constitution. To quote:

"Attempts by law enforcement to squelch lawful political speech and stifle the press have no place in our democracy and are unacceptable," said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. "Political conventions should be a showcase for free expression, not a venue for bullying and intimidation."

The ACLU specifically called for an investigation into possible violations of the First and Fourth Amendments, including:

* The arrest of reporters trying to gather the news;
* The mass arrest of hundreds of peaceful protestors;
* The surveillance and subsequent raids on several activist groups and private homes; and
* The confiscation by law enforcement agents of constitutionally-protected private property.

The ACLU affiliate office in Minnesota has assembled legal counsel for many of the reporters and peaceful protesters arrested at the protests and has also filed a lawsuit in federal court calling for the release of boxes of literature that were confiscated during raids.

Why bother with the Constitution at all when Homeland Security, under the cover of Keeping Us Safe, can intrude into Sesame Street, of all things? I give up. "Homeland Security, Sesame Style *," by Jeff Dufour and Patrick Gavin -- 9/1808, at DC Examiner, explains. To quote:

In a move that will make Bush administration detractors bring back those duct tape jokes again, the Department of Homeland Security has partnered up with the famous children's show.

"We all want our children to feel safe in this world," said Meryl Chertoff, wife of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, at a ceremony held at the John Tyler Elementary School to announce the partnership. "And who better to do that than our Sesame Street friends, Grover and Rosita!"

. . . As you can imagine, the partnership is aimed at children, and seeks to encourage family preparedness plans in the case of emergencies.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo*" and Jon#.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My "creativity and dreaming" post today is at Making Good Mondays.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics bush constitution domestic surveillance fbi aclu bill of rights

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Constitution Day, Sept. 17, 2008 --

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish the Constitution for the United States of America@.

Senator Robert Byrd, President Pro Tem, carries a copy of the Constitution with him as he goes about. He explains,

[image] "I carry a copy of the U.S. Constitution with me wherever I go. In as much as I am a U.S. Senator, this may not seem like strange behavior. I refer to it and study its provisions every day -- but what about you? What do you know about the Constitution? How much of it do you carry around with you? Why should you want to know about your Constitution?"

As we all celebrate the signing of the Constitution on this day back in 1787, I note that Senator Byrd is a Democrat. And so am I. But, as Democrats, we have a number of things in common with true Conservatives, such as Bruce Fein, Bob Barr and Richard Viguerie. At both ends of the political spectrum, we want our Constitution back, just like these Republicans reported on 9/16/08, at The Huffington Post, to be "Conservatives [who] turn on McCain." Our priceless document has been hijacked* in effect, by the Bush Neoconservatives and their followers. Fein puts it this way,

"The most conservative principles of the Constitution have been repeatedly violated in the last several years," says Fein. "[The] Founding Fathers engrafted a system of checks and review of one branch by another -- a system of due process safeguards against injustice that is likely to occur because of prejudice and fear. And those checks and balances have eroded enormously over the last several years, particularly since 9/11."

Building on the natural and normal fears of citizens after the terrorist attacks, an entire "security" industry has emerged. What these businesses do often comes perilously close to assaulting the Constitution. For example, what do you think about this system? Two Flint-area charter schools install high-tech security that does background checks* on every visitor, according to Shannon Murphy at the The Flint Journal, 9/12/08. This predicted military-industrial complex has been relentless in its pursuit of us. This rather extensive and fiery article by Tom Burghardt is from Global Research, 9/15/08#. Titled "Big Brother in the "Big Apple -- Encircling Manhattan with thousands of surveillance cameras," it is a very passionate and thorough litany of the out of bounds behavior of the Bush administration. To quote:

In other words, COINTELPRO-style infiltration and neutralization operations by federal gangsters and their paid provocateurs will now be "normalized" under new Bushist rules. However, far from being a case of improving the efficacy of "information gathering" to "detect terrorist threats" as the Post claims, new federal guidelines will create a broad legal framework for the suppression of basic constitutional and democratic rights.

Indeed, under the new rules proposed by U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, "threat assessments" based on one's race, ethnicity or religion will become standard operating procedure as FBI agents and their informants target individuals, or left-wing political groups, solely on the basis of constitutionally-protected speech or religion.

. . . By tossing Nixon-era intelligence guidelines out the window, Mukasey and his masters in the Executive branch are granting line agents, "unparalleled leeway to investigate Americans without proper suspicion, and that will inevitably result in constitutional violations," according to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "Our right to protest the government and its policies is not suspicious behavior; it is constitutionally protected speech."

Unfortunately, in America's post-constitutional "new normal," characterized by an unprecedented looting of social wealth by crony capitalists, bloody wars of aggression, environmental plunder and the general putrefaction of culture under the flag of a "Christian Republic," protesting the government and its policies are indeed the quintessential hallmarks of suspicious behavior!

In the meantime Wall Street and our ubiquitous banking system is looking to the government to help them survive, after years of unregulated excess and corruption. Those of us who decry the "corporatocracy" are shedding few tears for all the greedy money men and women who are now in such deep trouble, along with some of their Republican enablers. However, yesterday my newsletter, The Democratic Strategist in its piece, "Meltdowns and Morality," focused on the important thoughts of Matt Yglesias. He reminded us that the meltdown is also hurting millions of hard working Americans caught in the blaze.

And all the while, the GOP is working to keep eligible African Americans from voting in several states, according to another fine writer, Jonathan Alter at Newsweek (9/11/08). He reports on "Jim Crawford Republicans#." Despite all of this, I am comforted by the knowledge that the Constitution set up the process by which we can make major course corrections. It is called an election and we get the chance to vote no later than November 4, 2008. It might be a good idea to vote early if you are able. Things are really dicey around the old United States these days, as long as the GOP can make mischief.

References:

@Link: your state's time for reciting this preamble today.
Hat Tip for the links from regular contributors, *"betmo," and #Jon.
From the ACLU, 9/12/08: Sign our "I'm a Constitution Voter" pledge and get your free "I'm a Constitution Voter" bumper sticker now.

View my current slide show about the Bush years -- "Millennium" -- at the bottom of this column.

(Cross-posted at The Reaction.)

My “creativity and dreaming” post today at Making Good Mondays is a series of quotes about the Constitution from famous leaders in history.

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics republicans domestic surveillance constitution constitution day conservatives democrats

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Congress is back and what are they doing?

Elections, ethics and hearings are the stuff of the day as Congress tackles a short session before leaving again for the fall elections. Politico takes an in-depth look at 10 [races] . . . worth watching closely in "2008's hot House, Senate races," by Tim Grieve, 9/9/08. To quote: "Eight weeks from Tuesday, voters will elect 435 House members and 35 senators." Democrats have a real chance to increase the size of their majorities. But all those races will inevitably be influenced by the news of the day, both domestic and foreign.

In the past politics "stopped at the water's edge," when it came to foreign relations, but no more. The foreign relations problem of Russia vs. Georgia is something with Congress wrestles. The presidential candidates, however, are not terribly far apart on their positions, according to Politico.com:

The fallout from Russia’s conflict with Georgia is producing an unusual split in American politics — not between the parties so much as between the presidential candidates and their colleagues in Congress.

Congressional Committee Chairmen are staying busy. The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Vermont Democratic Senator Pat Leahy, will be meeting to hear what the FBI Director has to say about his new surveillance guidelines. And Representative Charlie Rangel (D-NY) will continue his attempt to get off the hotseat. This all according to Matt Berman, who writes "The Daily Muck" (9/15/08) at TPM Muckraker. To quote:

The Justice Department proposed new FBI guidelines on Friday that would apply to national security and foreign intelligence threats. The guidelines, which would expand physical surveillance, have come under heavy criticism by the ACLU and some Democrats for possibly allowing for racial, ethnic, and religious targeting. FBI Director Robert Muller is set to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the guidelines on Wednesday. (AP)

. . . Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Charlie Rangel (D-NY) has decided to hire a forensic accounting expert to assist him in his growing problems stemming from unreported income and unpaid taxes on his Dominican Republic beach house. The accountant, who is yet to be hired, will go through Rangel's finances and later deliver a report to the House ethics committee. (AP)

Legislation and more Bush administration scandal is looming -- The