Bradley Manning

i would be seriously remiss if i didn't give some space to the incredibly critical case of bradley manning that's now in a hearing phase at ft. meade, maryland...

here's keith olbermann discussing the case with daniel ellsberg...



ellsberg makes several key points, among them that manning has been judged guilty by president obama before even being brought to trial and, even more ominously, that manning's prosecution is a loud and clear signal from the obama administration about how it treats whistleblowers...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Obama on Bradley Manning: Guilty until proven innocent

glenn...

Protesters yesterday interrupted President Obama's speech at a $5,000/ticket San Francisco fundraiser to demand improved treatment for Bradley Manning. After the speech, one of the protesters, Logan Price, approached Obama and questioned him. Obama's responses are revealing on multiple levels. First, Obama said this when justifying Manning's treatment (video and transcript are here):

We're a nation of laws. We don't let individuals make their own decisions about how the laws operate. He broke the law.

The impropriety of Obama's public pre-trial declaration of Manning's guilt ("He broke the law") is both gross and manifest. How can Manning possibly expect to receive a fair hearing from military officers when their Commander-in-Chief has already decreed his guilt? Numerous commentators have noted how egregiously wrong was Obama's condemnation. Michael Whitney wrote: "the President of the United States of America and a self-described Constitutional scholar does not care that Manning has yet to be tried or convicted for any crime." BoingBoing's Rob Beschizza interpreted Obama's declaration of guilt this way: "Just so you know, jurors subordinate judging officers!" And Politico quoted legal experts explaining why Obama's remarks are so obviously inappropriate.

so sad, coming from our president...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 1 comments

Julian Assange takes a stand

good for him...

from raw story...



our so-called news media, ever alert for scandal and generally asleep at the wheel when anything of real substance is afoot, deserves precisely the kind of treatment they got at mr. assange's hands...

meanwhile, daniel ellsberg, now almost 80 years old, displays the courage of his convictions as well as his past by standing shoulder-to-shoulder with julian assange in denouncing the obama administration's obsession with whistleblowers...

Julian Assange, the founder of the WikiLeaks website, and Daniel Ellsberg, the former Pentagon analyst famed for leaking the Pentagon Papers, lashed out Saturday at what they described as the Obama administration's aggressive pursuit of whistle-blowers.

Assange, speaking at a news conference in London, was joined by Ellsberg, 79, who leaked the 1,000-page secret history of the Vietnam War in 1971.

Ellsberg said the administration's response to whistle-blowers put the United States on a path to the kind of repressive legal framework that Britain has under its broad Official Secrets Act.

He said criminal probes of three Americans linked to government leaks under Obama — including Pfc. Bradley Manning, suspected of providing the documents on Afghanistan and Iraq to WikiLeaks — were a new low.

Ellsberg said the Pentagon's demand that Assange "return" any classified materials in his possession was carefully couched in language similar to that used after the Pentagon Papers' release, when he was threatened with criminal prosecution for espionage.

it isn't about julian assange... it isn't about wikileaks... it isn't about ellsberg... it's about exposing the truth... it's about opening a window on what our leaders don't want us to see... why is that so hard to fathom...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A Sibel Edmonds backgrounder

the amount of work done by luke ryland on the sibel edmonds case is truly amazing... he's taken it up as his principal blogging effort and has begun to make strong inroads at some of the bigger blogs... his post yesterday about sibel and daniel ellsberg was on the recommended diary list of daily kos all day (see my post from yesterday), no small accomplishment for that site... among the questions raised in the comments was "so what the hell is this sibel edmonds thing all about anyway...?" ever responsive, luke put together an excellent backgrounder which is now up at kos, the democratic underground, and let sibel edmonds speak... here's a transcript luke posted back in may 2006 from an article in the april 24, 2006, edition of the american conservative magazine...

Sibel Edmonds, the Turkish FBI translator turned whistleblower who has been subjected to a gag order could provide a major insight into how neoconservatives distort US foreign policy and enrich themselves at the same time. On one level, her story appears straightforward: several Turkish lobbying groups allegedly bribed congressmen to support policies favourable to Ankara. But beyond that, the Edmonds revelations become more serpentine and appear to involve AIPAC, Israel and a number of leading neoconservatives who have profited from the Turkish connection. Israel has long cultivated a close relationship with Turkey since Ankara's neighbours and historic enemies - Iran, Syria and Iraq - are also hostile to Tel Aviv. Islamic Turkey has also had considerable symbolic value for Israel, demonstrating that hostility to Muslim neighbours is not a sine qua non for the Jewish state.

Turkey benefits from the relationship by securing general benevolence and increased aid from the US Congress - as well as access to otherwise unattainable military technology. The Turkish General Staff has a particular interest because much of the military spending is channeled through companies in which the generals have a financial stake, making for a very cozy and comfortable business arrangement. The commercial interest has also fostered close political ties, with the American Turkish Council, American Turkish Cultural Alliance and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations all developing warm relationships with AIPAC and other Jewish and Israel advocacy groups throughout the US.

Someone has to be in the middle to keep the happy affair going, so enter the neocons, intent on securing Israel against all comers and also keen to turn a dollar. In fact the neocons seem to have a deep and abiding interest in Turkey, which, under other circumstances, might be difficult to explain. Doug Feith's International Advisors Inc, a registered agent for Turkey in 1989 - 1994, netted $600,000 per year from Turkey, with Richard Perle taking $48,000 annually as a consultant. Other noted neoconservatives linked to Turkey are former State Department number three, Marc Grossman, current Pentagon Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Eric Edelman, Paul Wolfowitz and former congressman Stephen Solarz. The money involved does not appear to come from the Turkish government, and FBI investigators are trying to determine its source and how it is distributed. Some of it may come from criminal activity, possibly drug trafficking, but much more might come from arms dealing. Contracts in the hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars provide considerable fat for those well placed to benefit. Investigators are also looking at Israel's particular expertise in the illegal sale of US military technology to countries like China and India. Fraudulent end-user certificates produced by Defense Ministries in Israel and Turkey are all that is needed to divert military technology to other, less benign, consumers. The military-industrial-complex/neocon network is also well attested. Doug Feith has been associated with Northrup Grumman for years, while defense contractors fund many neocon-linked think tanks and "information" services. Feith, Perle and a number of other neocons have long had beneficial relationships with various Israeli defense contractors.

luke concludes his post with this...

Those 'same people' - at least on the American side - according to Giraldi [Phillip Giraldi, the author of The American Conservative article referenced above], appear to be Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Marc Grossman, Eric Edelman, and Stephen Solarz. It appears that we can also add William Cohen and Joseph Ralston - and Dennis Hastert - to that roster, and I'm sure there are a few more that haven't yet been publicly identified.

If what Sibel says is true, and her claims are all backed by documents and wiretaps, and also backed up by other agents who have filed similar complaints, and are ready and willing to testify. All of these people should be in jail. For a long, long time.

Congress must hold hearings to get to the bottom of these crimes. If you agree, please call Congress, today, and demand public, open hearings.

**************

You know what to do

EMAIL: 60m@cbsnews.com
PHONE: (212) 975-3247

ABC email contacts
http://abcnews.go.com/...

MSNBC & NBC Contacts
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...

BBC America contact page
http://www.bbcamerica.com/...

help us help ourselves... let's raise some hell...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Fear tactics are keeping Sibel Edmonds gagged

the brad blog and luke ryland have been doing incredible yeoman's work in coaxing a government-intimidated domestic media into allowing sibel edmonds to tell her story... it's an AMERICAN story, about AMERICAN corruption, that should be covered by AMERICAN media, but, so far, no takers, although offers from foreign media as well as u.s. alternative media have flooded in... sibel, quite understandably, is seeking a one-time, credible, NATIONAL platform to air her explosive charges so, if she is subsequently hustled off to a cia black site, it will have to be done in full public view rather than seen through the filter of the ever-"questionable" lens of the blogosphere and alternative media...

today, on the brad blog, daniel ellsberg offers his perspective on sibel's situation...

Ellsberg says there's a reason that the Government, and both political parties, would rather not deal with something as explosive as Sibel's charges. Much like his own case, when the Republican Nixon administration fought against publication of the Pentagon Papers even though they were bound to embarrass the Democratic Johnson administration far more than Nixon's.

"It involves our allies in various places in the Middle East. It involves our allies in Turkey and in Afghanistan and involves people in our Congress and our State Department," he says.

Yes, Israel and the extremely powerful AIPAC lobby which supports both parties, is said to be involved as well.

"There's no way that the President and Vice-President can escape culpability in this case," Ellsberg charges. "If they claim they don't know about it, then they are culpable in not knowing about it, and that's impeachable right there."

i say, let's get this party started...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Daniel Ellsberg GETS IT, BIG-TIME!

this is an absolutely extraordinary speech... extraordinary not because it comes as any surprise to me, but extraordinary because daniel ellsberg actually GETS IT...

Editor’s Note: Daniel Ellsberg, the former Defense Department analyst who leaked the secret Pentagon Papers history of the Vietnam War, offered insights into the looming war with Iran and the loss of liberty in the United States at an American University symposium on Sept. 20.

[The following are excerpts from an] edited transcript of Ellsberg’s remarkable speech:

I think nothing has higher priority than averting an attack on Iran, which I think will be accompanied by a further change in our way of governing here that in effect will convert us into what I would call a police state.

If there’s another 9/11 under this regime … it means that they switch on full extent all the apparatus of a police state that has been patiently constructed, largely secretly at first but eventually leaked out and known and accepted by the Democratic people in Congress, by the Republicans and so forth.

Will there be anything left for NSA to increase its surveillance of us? … They may be to the limit of their technical capability now, or they may not. But if they’re not now they will be after another 9/11.

And I would say after the Iranian retaliation to an American attack on Iran, you will then see an increased attack on Iran – an escalation – which will be also accompanied by a total suppression of dissent in this country, including detention camps.

It’s a little hard for me to distinguish the two contingencies; they could come together. Another 9/11 or an Iranian attack in which Iran’s reaction against Israel, against our shipping, against our troops in Iraq above all, possibly in this country, will justify the full panoply of measures that have been prepared now, legitimized, and to some extent written into law. …

This is an unusual gang, even for Republicans. [But] I think that the successors to this regime are not likely to roll back the assault on the Constitution. They will take advantage of it, they will exploit it.

Will Hillary Clinton as president decide to turn off NSA after the last five years of illegal surveillance? Will she deprive her administration her ability to protect United States citizens from possible terrorism by blinding herself and deafening herself to all that NSA can provide? I don’t think so.

Unless this somehow, by a change in our political climate, of a radical change, unless this gets rolled back in the next year or two before a new administration comes in – and there’s no move to do this at this point – unless that happens I don’t see it happening under the next administration, whether Republican or Democratic.

[...]

Let me simplify this and not just to be rhetorical: A coup has occurred. I woke up the other day realizing, coming out of sleep, that a coup has occurred. It’s not just a question that a coup lies ahead with the next 9/11. That’s the next coup, that completes the first.

[...]

We are heading towards an insane operation. It is not certain. It is likely. … I want to try to be realistic myself here, to encourage us to do what we must do, what is needed to be done with the full recognition of the reality. Nothing is impossible.

What I’m talking about in the way of a police state, in the way of an attack on Iran is not certain. Nothing is certain, actually. However, I think it is probable, more likely than not, that in the next 15, 16 months of this administration we will see an attack on Iran. Probably. Whatever we do.

And … we will not succeed in moving Congress probably, and Congress probably will not stop the president from doing this. And that’s where we’re heading. That’s a very ugly, ugly prospect.

However, I think it’s up to us to work to increase that small perhaps – anyway not large – possibility and probability to avert this within the next 15 months, aside from the effort that we have to make for the rest of our lives.

i've been screaming my fool head off on exactly these points for what seems like FOREVER... what ellsberg is saying is so damn critical for our very SURVIVAL as a constitutionally-based, democratic republic, his points simply CANNOT be over-emphasized... god help us all, but we've GOT to do this... every single goddam day that passes that we don't is another step closer to potential disaster and ellsberg makes that point with total clarity...

Getting out of Iraq will take a long time. Averting Iran and averting a further coup in the face of a 9/11, another attack, is for right now, it can’t be put off. It will take a kind of political and moral courage of which we have seen very little…

please, please, can we see some courage...? PLEASE...??

(many thanks to robert parry at consortium news for making this important speech more widely available...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments