Blog Flux Directory Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines http://www.wikio.com Blog directory
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Mandy: Great blog!
Mark: Thanks to all the contributors on this blog. When I want to get information on the events that really matter, I come here.
Penny: I'm glad I found your blog (from a comment on Think Progress), it's comprehensive and very insightful.
Eric: Nice site....I enjoyed it and will be back.
nora kelly: I enjoy your site. Keep it up! I particularly like your insights on Latin America.
Alison: Loquacious as ever with a touch of elegance -- & right on target as usual!
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
- Noam Chomsky
Send tips and other comments to: profmarcus2010@yahoo.com

And, yes, I DO take it personally

Friday, April 06, 2012

Seymour Hersh reports on the U.S. trained terrorist group, the M.E.K.

from the new yorker...
[T]he Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) conducted training [at the Department of Energy’s Nevada National Security Site], beginning in 2005, for members of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, a dissident Iranian opposition group known in the West as the M.E.K. The M.E.K. had its beginnings as a Marxist-Islamist student-led group and, in the nineteen-seventies, it was linked to the assassination of six American citizens. It was initially part of the broad-based revolution that led to the 1979 overthrow of the Shah of Iran. But, within a few years, the group was waging a bloody internal war with the ruling clerics, and, in 1997, it was listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the State Department.

[...]

The M.E.K.’s ties with Western intelligence deepened after the fall of the Iraqi regime in 2003, and JSOC began operating inside Iran in an effort to substantiate the Bush Administration’s fears that Iran was building the bomb at one or more secret underground locations.

[...]

Despite the growing ties, and a much-intensified lobbying effort organized by its advocates, M.E.K. has remained on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations—which meant that secrecy was essential in the Nevada training.

[...]

The sources I spoke to were unable to say whether the people trained in Nevada were now involved in operations in Iran or elsewhere. But they pointed to the general benefit of American support. “The M.E.K. was a total joke,” the senior Pentagon consultant said, “and now it’s a real network inside Iran. How did the M.E.K. get so much more efficient?” he asked rhetorically. “Part of it is the training in Nevada. Part of it is logistical support in Kurdistan, and part of it is inside Iran. M.E.K. now has a capacity for efficient operations than it never had before.”

glenn weighs in...

So let’s review what we have here. If this report is true, it means the U.S. Government actively trained a group that the U.S. Government itself legally categorizes as a “foreign terrorist organization,” a clear felony under U.S. law:

Whoever knowingly provides material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both, and, if the death of any person results, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

That alone compels serious DOJ and Congressional investigations into these claims. Worse, this reportedly happened at the very same time that the U.S. aggressively prosecuted and imprisoned numerous Muslims for providing material support for groups on that list even though many of those prosecuted provided support that was far, far less than what the U.S. Government itself was providing to MEK. Meanwhile, right at this moment, America’s closest ally — Israel — is clearly a state sponsor of this designated Terrorist organization, providing training, funding and arms to it, and the U.S. may very well be as well (independent of all else, given that Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. aid, the U.S., at the very least, is financing a state sponsor of Terror).

[...]

Anyone in government, media and think tank circles who routinely and angrily accuse others of being “terrorists” or “supporters of terrorism” without recognizing that the U.S. and its closest allies are plainly and routinely guilty of that is just a rank propagandist. That the U.S., in the midst of its vaunted War on Terror, directly trained a group on its own Terrorist list — while its closest ally and Washington’s venerated former officials continue to provide ample support to that group even as it escalates its violent acts – is about as conclusive a demonstration of that fact as one could have conjured.


lies, manipulation of fact, hypocrisy... is this a great country or what...?

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Glenn continues to lament the lack of accountability of our ruling elites and the National Security State

no excerpts... just go read it...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Monday, May 16, 2011

Is the nation’s expanding secret intelligence bureaucracy beyond meaningful accountability?

i think the answer to that question is a resounding "yes"... it not only is beyond accountability but it has been for a good many years... now, however, we're moving to a new level of reprisal for any and all attempts to force transparency... it's a policy designed to screw the lid on ever tighter and to demonstrate to any and all that you, too, can be severely punished for any attempt to shine light on our shadow government...

from the new yorker...

On June 13th, a fifty-four-year-old former government employee named Thomas Drake is scheduled to appear in a courtroom in Baltimore, where he will face some of the gravest charges that can be brought against an American citizen. A former senior executive at the National Security Agency, the government’s electronic-espionage service, he is accused, in essence, of being an enemy of the state. According to a ten-count indictment delivered against him in April, 2010, Drake violated the Espionage Act—the 1917 statute that was used to convict Aldrich Ames, the C.I.A. officer who, in the eighties and nineties, sold U.S. intelligence to the K.G.B., enabling the Kremlin to assassinate informants. In 2007, the indictment says, Drake willfully retained top-secret defense documents that he had sworn an oath to protect, sneaking them out of the intelligence agency’s headquarters, at Fort Meade, Maryland, and taking them home, for the purpose of “unauthorized disclosure.” The aim of this scheme, the indictment says, was to leak government secrets to an unnamed newspaper reporter, who is identifiable as Siobhan Gorman, of the Baltimore Sun. Gorman wrote a prize-winning series of articles for the Sun about financial waste, bureaucratic dysfunction, and dubious legal practices in N.S.A. counterterrorism programs. Drake is also charged with obstructing justice and lying to federal law-enforcement agents. If he is convicted on all counts, he could receive a prison term of thirty-five years.

[...]

When President Barack Obama took office, in 2009, he championed the cause of government transparency, and spoke admiringly of whistle-blowers, whom he described as “often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government.” But the Obama Administration has pursued leak prosecutions with a surprising relentlessness. Including the Drake case, it has been using the Espionage Act to press criminal charges in five alleged instances of national-security leaks—more such prosecutions than have occurred in all previous Administrations combined. The Drake case is one of two that Obama’s Justice Department has carried over from the Bush years.

Gabriel Schoenfeld, a conservative political scientist at the Hudson Institute, who, in his book “Necessary Secrets” (2009), argues for more stringent protection of classified information, says, “Ironically, Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history—even more so than Nixon.”

[...]

Steven Aftergood, the director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, says of the Drake case, “The government wants this to be about unlawfully retained information. The defense, meanwhile, is painting a picture of a public-interested whistle-blower who struggled to bring attention to what he saw as multibillion-dollar mismanagement.” Because Drake is not a spy, Aftergood says, the case will “test whether intelligence officers can be convicted of violating the Espionage Act even if their intent is pure.” He believes that the trial may also test whether the nation’s expanding secret intelligence bureaucracy is beyond meaningful accountability.

another case in point - bradley manning...

watch your step, fellow citizens...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Cutting out the middle-man

brasscheck tv...
Why don't we shoot ourselves?

One of the plans entertained at a meeting presided over by Dick Cheney was for the US to manufacture Iranian gun boats and order Navy SEALs dressed in Iranian military uniforms to attack US ships.

It was rejected because "you can't have Americans killing Americans?"

The New Yorker refused to include this story in its reporting.

As Sy Hersch put it so well: "Editors are mice training to be rats."



yeah, why DON'T we just shoot ourselves...? easier... cheaper... you don't have to go to all the trouble of creating another war as an excuse...

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Note to the New Yorker - the world as you know it does NOT end at the Hudson River [UPDATE]

Photobucket

Photobucket

no one likes satire better than i do, but in these days of heightened sensitivity to goddam near EVERYTHING, the line between good satire and outright offensiveness is thin... the new yorker, a purported bastion of good taste and high-brow sophistication, should have known better... yes, i know that manhattanites think the world ends at the hudson river, but my guess is that there are also plenty of manhattanites who think the new yorker shot itself in the foot...

al jazeera english...




let's face it... the new yorker could have saved their asses AND themselves a whole lot of trouble by simply captioning the cover with something like "How the lunatic fringe sees the Obamas" or "Fear-mongering at its finest" or SOMETHING, ferchrissake, that would have left no doubt as to the satirical intent... leaving the cover to stand alone was simply an invitation to a very justified firestorm that tarred not only the magazine but also, by association, one of its finest contributors, sy hersh...

[UPDATE]

next week's new yorker cover, demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that turnabout is fair play...

Photobucket

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

"He's very radical, this president. He's probably the most radical president we've ever had."

al jazeera interviews sy hersh...
Al Jazeera's Ghida Fakhry talks to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh about his latest article in New Yorker magazine, claiming that US congressional leaders have agreed to a presidential request for up to $400 million in funding for covert operations against Iran.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Meanwhile, the war drums continue to beat and a revised strategy for attacking Iran moves forward

i'm glad to see hersh back in the thick of it... first spiegel (see earlier post) and now this...
In a series of public statements in recent months, President Bush and members of his Administration have redefined the war in Iraq, to an increasing degree, as a strategic battle between the United States and Iran.

[...]

The focus of the plans had been a broad bombing attack, with targets including Iran’s known and suspected nuclear facilities and other military and infrastructure sites. Now the emphasis is on “surgical” strikes on Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in Tehran and elsewhere, which, the Administration claims, have been the source of attacks on Americans in Iraq. What had been presented primarily as a counter-proliferation mission has been reconceived as counterterrorism.

The shift in targeting reflects three developments. First, the President and his senior advisers have concluded that their campaign to convince the American public that Iran poses an imminent nuclear threat has failed (unlike a similar campaign before the Iraq war), and that as a result there is not enough popular support for a major bombing campaign. The second development is that the White House has come to terms, in private, with the general consensus of the American intelligence community that Iran is at least five years away from obtaining a bomb. And, finally, there has been a growing recognition in Washington and throughout the Middle East that Iran is emerging as the geopolitical winner of the war in Iraq.

so, in response to being thwarted at every turn, how does the ruling cabal respond...? why, with a p.r. strategy, of course...
At a White House meeting with Cheney this summer, according to a former senior intelligence official, it was agreed that, if limited strikes on Iran were carried out, the Administration could fend off criticism by arguing that they were a defensive action to save soldiers in Iraq. If Democrats objected, the Administration could say, “Bill Clinton did the same thing; he conducted limited strikes in Afghanistan, the Sudan, and in Baghdad to protect American lives.”

there is absolutely no way my opinion of our government leaders could possibly sink any lower... they should be the first targets of the office of detention and removal (see previous post)...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

A shadow battle against the shadow government that wants war with Iran

robert parry, as usual, offers a first-rate analysis and summary of the ugly disease that took us into iraq and is poised to strike iran...
One intelligence source told me that Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Peter Pace, has explored the possibility of resigning if Bush presses forward with air attacks against Iran, a war strategy that might be done in coordination with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Though Pace has given no public signal on resigning, he has undercut Bush’s case for an expanded Middle East war by challenging the administration claims about Iran’s alleged sponsorship of attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and by telling Congress that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have eroded American military capability to confront another crisis.

[...]

One intelligence source directed me to a paragraph in Seymour Hersh’s new article in The New Yorker, referring to Bush’s order for hair-trigger preparations on going to war with Iran so he can attack within 24 hours.

[...]

By creating such a tight time frame for action, Bush would negate the possibility for the Pentagon brass and Congress to mount any serious opposition to a presidential order on Iran, even if they are convinced Bush’s actions will be catastrophic.

The tradition of the U.S. military is to implement presidential orders regardless of doubts. Perhaps months later, a dissenting commander might quietly resign.

That practice and the 24-hour window may help explain why several U.S. generals are pondering now how to stop Bush from blindsiding them with a new war. One of their tactics appears to be leaking indications of their strong opposition to the press.

[...]

But one source told me that the resistance – from the Pentagon, Blair and even Democrats in Congress – appears to be having an effect on Bush’s decision-making. This source said he believed Bush had planned to launch an attack on Iran, possibly as early as this week, but was getting “weak knees.”

[...]

But one source told me that the resistance – from the Pentagon, Blair and even Democrats in Congress – appears to be having an effect on Bush’s decision-making. This source said he believed Bush had planned to an attack on Iran, possibly as early as this week, but was getting “weak knees.”

if bush is getting "weak knees," it will be the first time that anything has come between his fantasy world and reality...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Who's giving this info to Sy Hersh...? More importantly, why...?

this stuff is being purposely leaked by those who are, rightly, dead-set against war with iran... there is no way this kind of info would be hitting the streets otherwise...
Despite the Bush administration's insistence it has no plans to go to war with Iran, a Pentagon panel has been created to plan a bombing attack that could be implemented within 24 hours of getting the go-ahead from President George W. Bush, The New Yorker magazine reported in its latest issue.

[...]

The panel initially focused on destroying Iran's nuclear facilities and on regime change but has more recently been directed to identify targets in Iran that may be involved in supplying or aiding militants in Iraq, according to an Air Force adviser and a Pentagon consultant, who were not identified.

this obviously goes hand-in-glove with the previous post...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments