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

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Glenn exposes the manipulation and hypocrisy behind the latest Obama-Osama hype

glenn shows it for what it is, a bald-faced abuse of executive power all in the name of secrecy and national security...
Selective bin Laden leaking

The WH tells a court the bin Laden raid is top secret, as it keeps leaking snippets to glorify the President

a worthwhile read...

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, December 10, 2010

Naomi Wolf on using the Espionage Act of 1917 to prosecute Julian Assange: the zombie that has enslaved the village just won't die

thank god for the internet... without it, i simply wouldn't have this kind of context...
The Espionage Act was crafted in 1917 -- because President Woodrow Wilson wanted a war and, faced with the troublesome First Amendment, wished to criminalize speech critical of his war. In the run-up to World War One, there were many ordinary citizens -- educators, journalists, publishers, civil rights leaders, union activists -- who were speaking out against US involvement in the war. The Espionage Act was used to round these citizens by the thousands for the newly minted 'crime' of their exercising their First Amendment Rights. A movie producer who showed British cruelty in a film about the Revolutionary War (since the British were our allies in World War I) got a ten-year sentence under the Espionage act in 1917, and the film was seized; poet E.E. Cummings spent three and a half months in a military detention camp under the Espionage Act for the 'crime' of saying that he did not hate Germans. Esteemed Judge Learned Hand wrote that the wording of the Espionage Act was so vague that it would threaten the American tradition of freedom itself. Many were held in prison for weeks in brutal conditions without due process; some, in Connecticut -- Lieberman's home state -- were severely beaten while they were held in prison. The arrests and beatings were widely publicized and had a profound effect, terrorizing those who would otherwise speak out. Presidential candidate Eugene Debs received a ten-year prison sentence in 1918 under the Espionage Act for daring to read the First Amendment in public. The roundup of ordinary citizens -- charged with the Espionage Act -- who were jailed for daring to criticize the government was so effective in deterring others from speaking up that the Act silenced dissent in this country for a decade. In the wake of this traumatic history, it was left untouched -- until those who wish the same outcome began to try to reanimate it again starting five years ago, and once again, now. Seeing the Espionage Act rise up again is, for anyone who knows a thing about it, like seeing the end of a horror movie in which the zombie that has enslaved the village just won't die.

[...]

If Assange can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, then so can the New York Times; and the producers of Parker Spitzer, who discussed the WikiLeaks material two nights ago; and the people who posted a mirror WikiLeaks site on my Facebook 'fan' page; and Fox News producers, who addressed the leak and summarized the content of the classified information; and every one of you who may have downloaded information about it; and so on. That is why prosecution via the Espionage Act is so dangerous -- not for Assange alone, but for every one of us, regardless of our political views.

remember... it's not just about wikileaks and julian assange... it's about you and me...

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, July 29, 2010

It's official: hopey-changey is dead

follow-up to previous post...

from muriel kane at raw story...

From the point of view of civil libertarians, the Obama administration has been an exercise in frustration, with every hopeful sign followed by failures to live up to its own promises.

The ACLU has just issued a report (pdf), titled "Establishing a New Normal: National Security, Civil Liberties, and Human Rights Under the Obama Administration," which focuses on this pattern of inconsistency.

"The administration has displayed a decidedly mixed record," explains ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, "resulting, on a range of issues, in the very real danger that the Obama administration will institutionalize some of the most troublesome policies of the previous administration -- in essence, creating a troubling 'new normal.'"

As summarized in a press release announcing the report, "President Obama has made great strides in some areas, such as his auspicious first steps to categorically prohibit torture, outlaw the CIA's use of secret overseas detention sites and release the Bush administration's torture memos, but he has failed to eliminate some of the worst policies put in place by President Bush, such as military commissions and indefinite detention. He has also expanded the Bush administration's 'targeted killing' program."

[...]

The transparency section, for example, emphasizes that the program of "targeted killing" of suspected terrorists has been "shrouded in secrecy," and that despite a FOIA request by the ACLU, "the CIA has refused even to confirm or deny whether it has records about the program."

It also points out that rather than living up to Obama's promise as a candidate that he would make sure whistleblowers got protection, "the administration has been prosecuting them."

[...]

"We urge the administration to recommit itself to the ideals that the President himself invoked in his first days in office," the report urges. "Our democracy cannot survive if crucial public policy decisions are made behind closed doors, implemented in secret, and never subjected to meaningful public oversight and debate. It cannot survive if the public does not know what policies have been adopted in its name."

Another striking revelation appears in the section on surveillance: "Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has invested border agents with the authority to engage in suspicionless searches of Americans' laptops and cell phones at the border; Americans who return home from abroad may now [see below *] find themselves confronted with a border agent who, rather than welcoming them home, insists on copying their electronic records -- including emails, address books, photos, and videos -- before allowing them to enter the country. (Through FOIA, the ACLU has learned that in the last 20 months alone, border agents have used this power thousands of times.)"

[...]

[I]f the Obama administration does not effect a fundamental break with the Bush administration’s policies on detention, accountability, and other issues, but instead creates a lasting legal architecture in support of those policies, then it will have ratified, rather than rejected, the dangerous notion that America is in a permanent state of emergency and that core liberties must be surrendered forever."


* "now" is a relative term... i had all of my digital devices - laptop, memory stick, cd's, dvd's, camera, camera memory card - seized by customs in san francisco when returning from europe on 1 june 2007 (funny how some dates are embedded in my memory) and not returned for three weeks... reason given: "forensics"... i was appalled but there wasn't a damn thing i could do about it... fortunately, given the multiple times i've returned to the u.s. since then, i've only received a smile and a wave from customs... (quick, where's some wood so i can knock on it...!)

and so it goes...

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

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Are our so-called liberal-progressive friends starting to wake up to the Obama bait-and-switch...?

from the progress report...
For all of the administration's promising early steps to restore transparency and accountability, however recent developments are less encouraging. Some of these stumbling points have been simple failures of implementation; many of the administration's budget transparency websites, for example, publish inconsistent numbers. Other transparency failures, however, suggest a more disturbing trend. Despite promises to end "secret meetings" and restore the White House as the "people's house," the administration has refused to disclose the names of individuals who have visited the White House since Obama took office, while echoing similar excuses by Bush administration officials who wanted to hide secret meetings with energy industry executives. But most disturbing are recent, tenuous invocations of "national security" to cast a shade over government transparency. After the Environmental Protection Agency uncovered nearly four dozen toxic coal ash sites in Tennessee that "could cause death and significant property damage if an event such as a storm, a terrorist attack or a structural failure caused them to spill into surrounding communities," the administration choose to keep the locations of the toxic sites secret from Tennessee residents because of fears that such disclosure could present a "security risk." Similarly, despite earlier disclosure of the infamous torture memos, the Obama CIA has thus far successfully kept secret a comprehensive account of that agency's interrogation practices. Although a heavily redacted version of the report was uncovered by the ACLU, the administration insists that disclosing the full report would endanger national security. Even more alarming, however, is the Obama administration's adoption of Bush's "state secrets" claim in court cases dealing with issues ranging from extraordinary rendition to warrantless wiretapping. The "state secrets" privilege allows the administration to withhold information in a lawsuit or even dismiss the suit altogether if the subject matter of the suit could potentially reveal information that puts national security at risk. In one suit, brought by an Islamic charity challenging the previous administration's warrantless wiretapping program, a federal judge finally threatened sanctions against the Justice Department if it did not comply with an order to turn over a document to the plaintiff's attorneys. Incidents such as these led the New York Times to lament that Obama has "backtracked, in substantial if often nuanced ways, from the approach to national security that he preached as a candidate, and even from his first days in the Oval Office."

the center for american progress, the publisher of this e-newsletter and the weblog, think progress, has lost a great deal of credibility with me over the past few years... i became a regular reader when i saw that they often got the goods on the multiple abuses and outright crimes of the bush administration ahead of the rest of the baying blogosphere... then it started to dawn on me that they too often played the fawning sycophant to anyone and everyone aligned with the democratic party, frequently turning a blind eye to the fact that we have been and are continuing to be just as thoroughly screwed by the democrats as we are by the republicans, the only difference being that, with the dems, there's no sand in the vaseline...

since obama's election and inauguration, they've taken a turn for the worse, spending WAY too much time, imho, vilifying the likes of bill kristol, bill o'reilly, glenn beck, rush limbaugh, karl rove, and the like, a tactic that only serves to give those despicable characters even more air time and exposure than they already have and thus reinforcing their loathsome presence on the american scene... the best strategy in dealing with such obvious dark forces is to not give them the energy of even recognizing them... the dark feeds on attention whether it be positive or negative, and these guys don't deserve to be fed...

so, now our center for american progress friends seem to be waking up to the fact that our dear sunshine-is-the-best-disinfectant president may well be just another stooge - albeit a very well-spoken, intelligent and polished one - for those who so blithely and heedlessly pull our strings along with the strings of most of the rest of the world...

speaking for myself, i believe obama has a good heart and i would prefer to believe that some of what's going on is the result of his bowing to his handlers... otoh, if he IS a good soul, he'd better start showing it or i will be permanently checking out of the hope hotel...

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

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Bushco advised telcos on how to lobby for retroactive immunity

just more gag-me-with-a-spoon-but-why-ain't-i-surprised news from the criminals occupying the white house...
Newly disclosed court papers confirm for the first time that the representatives of the nation's largest telecommunications companies reached out to the White House for advice on how to lobby Congress over a Bush administration proposal to give them retroactive immunity.

The Bush administration is refusing to disclose the contents of those communications, which include e-mails, letters and notes showing lobbying strategy.

and what do you suppose they're claiming as the basis for their refusal...?

aw, c'mon now...

you CAN'T be serious...!

ah, THAT'S better... i KNEW it would come to you...

Administration officials claim

their refusal is based on national security concerns,

but if they were to comply with the Freedom of Information Act request seeking those internal records, it would almost certainly show a deep and unseemly level of coordination between President Bush's advisers and the telecommunications companies they contracted to carry out his warrantless wiretapping program, critics say.

[emphasis added, in case you didn't figure that out already]

the united states doesn't have any more national security... bush and his criminal compadres have pissed it all away...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, March 16, 2008

The House FISA bill would allow Americans to finally see the breathtaking extent of Bush's lawless behavior

so says the nyt...
What Mr. Bush wants is to be able to listen to your international telephone calls and read your international e-mail whenever he wants, without a court being able to prevent it or judge the legality of his actions.

[...]

The purpose of [telecom] amnesty is not to protect national secrets — that could be done during a trial — but to make sure that the full damage to Americans’ civil liberties is never revealed.

[...]

The president will continue to claim the country is in grave danger over this issue, but it is not. The real danger is for Mr. Bush. A good law — like the House bill — would allow Americans to finally see the breathtaking extent of his lawless behavior.

that's about the size of it...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Monday, February 18, 2008

"Fear the loss, perceive the danger, and do something about it!"

a reasonably comprehensive run-down in the current state of affairs...

The Defense Department has developed a "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support" against terrorism that pledges to "transform US military forces to execute homeland defense missions in the...US homeland." The Pentagon is presently collecting files on antiwar protesters and is prepared to maximize "threat awareness" and to seize "the initiative from those who would harm us." The Pentagon's National Counterterrorism Center's central repository now includes the names of 325,000 "terrorist" suspects.

In October 2003, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld approved a secret "Information Operations Roadmap" calling for "full spectrum" information operations, including a strategy for seizing the Internet and controlling the flow of information. It views the world wide web as a potential military adversary and speaks of "fighting the net."

The U.S. Army Internet website displays information about the Pentagon's "Civilian Inmate Labor Program," including "policy and guidance for establishing civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army installations." The program underwent a "rapid action revision" on January 14, 2005 to provide a "template for developing agreements" between the Army and corrections facilities for the use of civilian inmate labor on Army installations.

In yet another exercise in September 2005, the Pentagon's U.S. Northern Command conducted a top secret operation known as Granite Shadow that involved emergency military operations within the continental United States without civilian supervision or control. Under the plan, military special forces units operating under unique rules of engagement involving deadly force were deployed to enforce "unity of command."

The original mission of FEMA was to assure the survival of the United States government in the case of nuclear attack, with a secondary responsibility to coordinate the federal response to natural disasters. However, FEMA has come to operate as a secret government in waiting, with powers far beyond that of any other federal agency.

Specific and detailed executive orders now empower FEMA to: take over all transportation, highways and seaports; seize and operate all communications media; take over all electric, gas and petroleum power, fuels and minerals; take over all airports and aircraft; take over all railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities; take over all farms and food resources; register all persons and force civilians into work brigades; take over all health, education and welfare functions; and establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in all U.S. financial institutions.

Executive Order 11921 provides that, once a state of emergency has been declared by the president, the action cannot be reviewed by Congress for six months.

The John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 contains a provision entitled "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." One effect of the provision is to expand the president's limited power to deploy the military within the United States only "to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy" to include "natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident."

The Act authorized the president to assume local authority "if domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order." The president now has the power, without any advance notice to Congress, to declare marital law in any city experiencing a civil disturbance or riot similar to any of those experienced in the past 40 years and to deploy the military, irrespective of the wishes or consent of local and state authorities.

On May 9, 2007, President Bush signed a "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" defining the "Catastrophic Emergency" leading to "Continuity of Government coordinated efforts by the Executive Branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed." Such emergencies include "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions." Continuity of Operations includes the continuation of mission-essential functions "during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies."

In its definition of "Enduring Constitutional Government," the Presidential Directive envisions a "cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government;" however, it (the effort) is to be "coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches..." Comity is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as, "Courtesy; complaisance; respect; a willingness to grant a privilege, not as a matter of right, but out of deference and good will." In other words, the "Enduring Constitutional Government" will be run by the president and any "cooperative" role played by Congress and the judiciary will be at his pleasure.

Even though Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution provides that, "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States..., " President Bush has, pursuant to his own directives, given himself the unrestrained power to declare whatever he imagines to be an emergency. Once he does so, he alone controls the entire apparatus of government. He will become responsible for arranging for the "orderly succession" and the "appropriate transition of leadership" of the other two branches of government, and he will do all of this with the able assistance of his Vice President, who has the primary job of coordinating things.

Conceivably, at his or her sole discretion, existing and future presidents have the power to use any provocation, including the election of a successor president hostile to his or her existing policies, to declare a state of emergency and to seize and operate the government as a dictatorship for an indefinite period of time.

More realistically, an increase in street and campus protests against the Iraq War, similar to those of the Sixties, could easily lead to the imposition of martial law in the Unites States as an extension of the War on Terrorism. Or, as the current recession deepens into a depression with wide-spread unemployment, hunger and civil unrest, martial law could be imposed and military work camps established. Irrespective of how it plays out, every scenario involves mass preventative detentions, without trial, by the military and requires federal confinement facilities.

Accepting the fact that the president has the power to detain as many American citizens as he chooses, is the government actually building facilities to concentrate them?

In January 2006, the Department of Homeland Security awarded a $385 million contract to former Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR), to provide detention centers in the United States to deal with "an emergency influx of immigrants into the US, or to support the rapid deployment of new programs." Unexplained were these "new programs" and why they require a major expansion of detention centers.

A clue to the definition of "new programs" can be found in President Bush's claim that "the territory of the United States is part of the battlefield" against terrorism and that he has the power as Commander-in-chief to detain indefinitely any American citizen he designates as an enemy combatant. He signed the Military Commissions Act in October 2006 that suspends habeas corpus rights for everyone he deems to be an enemy combatant and allows him to confine them indefinitely without trial or access to counsel. Once detained under the Act, "no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause for action whatsoever...."

The KBR contract is open-ended and authorizes a payment of up to $385 million per deployment. It is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which envisions the development of at least four detention centers, each detaining up to 5,000 single males and females, families with children, and the sick and criminal. Established at "unused military sites or [leased] temporary structures," each facility will be able to accommodate the sick and criminals for extended detentions and to arrange for the "rendition" of potential terrorists to sites outside the continental United States.

Cops have an old saying that you're not paranoid if someone really is following you. We cannot forget that our president has already seized extraordinary dictatorial powers and that he really is spending millions of dollars for the construction of detention facilities to support the "rapid development" of his "new programs." Nor, can we ignore that, contrary to international law, the United States government is in fact detaining hundreds of "unlawful combatants" in prison facilities in Guantanamo Bay and at other secret locations around the world. Finally, we have to accept: that our government is abusing and torturing these detainees to obtain information that will be used against them should they ever come to trial; that they have no access to the federal courts to appeal their detentions; that they cannot consult with counsel without the presence of military monitors, who also read their legal mail; that they cannot review or challenge the "classified" evidence against them; and that they cannot confront or cross examine the witnesses against them.

There's another old saying, "If you snooze, you lose." We have a very narrow window of opportunity between the time we recognize a deadly threat and when we do something about it. Given the highly-advanced technological age we live in and the ready availability of overwhelming military force, once our freedoms are lost, they will be gone forever, whether or not every single one of us is "bearing arms."

Two weeks ago, Congress took an important first step in restricting the president's power by repealing a largely unrecognized section of the 2007 Defense Appropriations Act that, last year, effectively transferred command of the National Guards from state governors to the president. With the unanimous support of the National Governors Association, the National Sheriffs' Association and other law enforcement agencies, Congress restricted the power of the president to order the National Guard of any state to be used within that state or in any other state without the consent of the appropriate state governors.

We must immediately stop the deployment of National Guard troops to fight the illegal war in Iraq and bring them all home where they belong. Remaining under the control of state governors and given time to rest and the resources to re-equip, a well-trained and properly deployed National Guard, acting in support of local law enforcement, will be able to maintain order in most, if not all, domestic disturbances, natural disasters and terrorists attacks. If we survived the assassinations and riots of the Sixties, and 9-11, without martial law, we should be able to get by today without military intervention or the president's help.

There is no time to lose! Congress must immediately hold hearings on the power of the president to declare martial law, to deploy the military within the United States, and to detain American citizens, without trial or benefit of habeas corpus. Congress must establish the constitutional limits of presidential power by statute, rather than to allow the president to do so by his own executive orders.

The incursions on civil liberties in the United States in the past 25 years, and particularly since 9-11, are mind boggling. It matters not whether you are a Democrat or Republican, rich or poor, conservative or liberal, you have been deprived of substantial freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, unnecessarily, in the War on Terrorism. Fear the loss, perceive the danger, and do something about it!


once again, repeating myself ad nauseam, none of the above should remain in place when the new president takes the oath of office on 20 january 2009...

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

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Luke has a new post on Sibel following up from yesterday

Sibel Edmonds case: What was found in the translations

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

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Luke offers still more on Sibel from Phil Giraldi [UPDATE TO PREVIOUS POST]

there's some momentum building here...
Ex-CIA officer Phil Giraldi has a new strong article out in American Conservative, and we're trying to keep the heat on as much as possible this week

Found in Translation. FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds spills her secrets.

It opens like this:

"Most Americans have never heard of Sibel Edmonds, and if the U.S. government has its way, they never will. The former FBI translator turned whistleblower tells a chilling story of corruption at Washington's highest levels—sale of nuclear secrets, shielding of terrorist suspects, illegal arms transfers, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, espionage. She may be a first-rate fabulist, but Edmonds's account is full of dates, places, and names. And if she is to be believed, a treasonous plot to embed moles in American military and nuclear installations and pass sensitive intelligence to Israeli, Pakistani, and Turkish sources was facilitated by figures in the upper echelons of the State and Defense Departments. Her charges could be easily confirmed or dismissed if classified government documents were made available to investigators"


and ends like this:

Sibel Edmonds makes a number of accusations about specific criminal behavior that appear to be extraordinary but are credible enough to warrant official investigation. Her allegations are documentable: an existing FBI file should determine whether they are accurate. It's true that she probably knows only part of the story, but if that part is correct, Congress and the Justice Department should have no higher priority. Nothing deserves more attention than the possibility of ongoing national-security failures and the proliferation of nuclear weapons with the connivance of corrupt senior government officials.

keep it crankin'...

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

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

More on Sibel Edmonds: our worthless AND complicit U.S. news media

i've been convinced for some time that there may be nothing more important than getting a full public hearing for sibel edmonds... you can go here to see my efforts...

the real hero, however, is luke ryland... here's his most recent post at let sibel edmonds speak...

The UK's Guardian is running a piece, "US journalists ignore Sunday Times scoop on FBI nuclear scandal," criticizing the US media for not picking up on the latest revelations by their competitor, the UK's Times, in the case of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds.

The author of the piece is the Guardian's media commentator, Roy Greenslade, a Professor of Journalism and former Managing Editor of the Times. He writes:

It looks to me as though the Sunday Times has landed a genuine world exclusive that should surely have been broken ages ago by US-based reporters.
I agree entirely. Consider what any journalist in the US has known, or should have known, for years.

Sibel's case broke as an espionage story in June 2002 in the Washington Post and an October 2002 CBS' 60 Minutes segment (youtube) where we learnt that foreign operatives had spies working for them in both the Pentagon and the State Department.

Simply following the names and associations of the people known to be involved, any journalist should have been able to piece together the broad outlines of the story simply from public sources.

[...]

Roy Greenslade, Professor of Journalism and the Guardian's media commentator, first notes that the story "should surely have been broken ages ago by US-based reporters" then adds that the latest revelations in the Times's latest series (1, 2):
.. looks to me like a very hot story indeed that should surely have been taken up by mainstream newspapers in the United States

not only is our media a laughingstock in the rest of the world, they're also a huge embarrassment to themselves...

btw, the above is only a small excerpt...

in the full post, luke offers this speculation...

US journalists have been either too lazy, or complicit, to report on anything but the most trivial of Sibel's claims...

[...]

For one reason or other - incompetence or complicity - not a single American journalist followed up on the important issues in the 60 Minutes report and the Washington Post, and we didn't learn about any of this in the US media in 2002. Instead, we are 'learning' it in 2008 from the British press - and still the US media refuses to publish it, which leads me to believe that the American media is not 'incompetent' but rather 'complicit.'

i passed the point of no return on "complicity" quite some time ago, pretty much the same time i came to the conclusion that "incompetence" on the part of the bush administration was nothing but an acceptable myth, helping us avoid the most unpleasant reality that our government is deliberately trying to screw us to the wall...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Monday, January 21, 2008

Daniel Ellsberg on Sibel Edmonds: "the entire U.S. press has let itself be scooped" and "is participating in a cover-up"

i've been doing my part in keeping the sibel edmonds story visible... you can go here to see my efforts...

today we have daniel ellsberg, writing in the bradblog, courtesy of luke ryland and let sibel edmonds speak...

For the second time in two weeks, the entire U.S. press has let itself be scooped by Rupert Murdoch's London Sunday Times on a dynamite story of criminal activities by corrupt U.S. officials promoting nuclear proliferation. But there is a worse journalistic sin than being scooped, and that is participating in a cover-up of information that demands urgent attention from the public, the U.S. Congress and the courts.

For the last two weeks --- one could say, for years --- the major American media have been guilty of ignoring entirely the allegations of the courageous and highly credible source Sibel Edmonds, quoted in the London Times on January 6, 2008 in a front-page story that was front-page news in much of the rest of the world but was not reported in a single American newspaper or network. It is up to readers to demand that this culpable silent treatment end.

Just as important, there must be pressure by the public on Congressional committee chairpersons, in particular Representative Henry Waxman and Senator Patrick Leahy. Both have been sitting for years on classified, sworn testimony by Edmonds --- as she revealed in the Times' new story on Sunday --- along with documentation, in their possession, confirming parts of her account. Pressure must be brought for them to hold public hearings to investigate her accusations of widespread criminal activities, over several administrations, that endanger national security. They should call for open testimony under oath by Edmonds --- as she has urged for five years --- and by other FBI officials she has named to them, as cited anonymously in the first Times' story.

It's a measure of how far the New York Times and Washington Post have fallen from their responsibilities...since I gave them the Pentagon Papers in 1971. They printed them then. Would they today?

And this is the time for those who have so far creditably leaked to the Times of London to come forward, accepting personal risks, to offer their testimony --- and new documents --- both to the Congress and to the American press. I would say to them: Don't do what I did and waste months of precious time trying to get Congressional committees to act as they should in the absence of journalistic pressure. Do your best to inform the American public directly, first, through the major American media.


here's a youtube of few clips of ellsberg commenting on sibel edmonds as put together by luke...



i will repeat my fervent plea... can we PLEASE get on with getting the truth out and bringing our lawless government down...?

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, January 18, 2008

Luke's follow-up on the UK Sunday Times Sibel story

i posted a couple of weeks ago on the london sunday times article on sibel edmonds and the u.s. covert sale of nuclear weapons technology... luke, as usual, doing a critical service for us all, offers a follow-up...
Sibel has previously said that from her experience:
"The Department of State is easily the most corrupted of the major government agencies."

[G]uilty people are allowed to walk free, and Western governments go to great lengths to cover up the facts.

all in the name of "national secrets"...
[T]he Guardian last Friday noted:
National security is being invoked not to protect us but to shield politicians from embarrassment

[...]

There are genuine threats to national security and to our public and personal safety. It is a dangerous abuse if a government hoists the flag of national security and deploys the Official Secrets Act when all it is really trying to do is protect itself from embarrassment.

In the US, we've recently seen the State Secrets card played to cover up illegal spying, torture, and any number of other crimes - including complicity in the spread of nuclear weapons to our purported enemies.

Enough is enough.

enough HAS been enough for a very long time now, but the merry band of criminals keeps on a'rollin'...

p.s. i haven't excerpted the meat, so i suggest visiting luke's sibel site and reading it all...

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Softening us up for government control of the internet

with the internet being pretty much the last uncontrolled (note: i DIDN'T say un-TAPPED) means of individual expression and unfiltered news left, it's obviously only a matter of time before governments put a halt to that too... mettle has posted regularly on this blog about content filtering using packet sniffing technologies, the kind of technology that will allow the internet to be controlled and access restricted to those with the most money (and the most power)... another way that it's going to happen is under the guise of national security, namely, protecting the security of the internet infrastructure...

bet on it... it's on its way...

A "cyber cold war" waged over the world's computers threatens to become one of the biggest threats to security in the next decade, according to a report published on Thursday.

About 120 countries are developing ways to use the Internet as a weapon to target financial markets, government computer systems and utilities, Internet security company McAfee said in an annual report.

Intelligence agencies already routinely test other states' networks looking for weaknesses and their techniques are growing more sophisticated every year, it said.

Governments must urgently shore up their defenses against industrial espionage and attacks on infrastructure.

"Cybercrime is now a global issue," said Jeff Green, senior vice president of McAfee Avert Labs. "It has evolved significantly and is no longer just a threat to industry and individuals but increasingly to national security."

remember... it's for your own good...

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Supreme Court terminates el-Masri's suit

in my post yesterday, i concluded with this...
will accountability carry the day...?

evidently not... more props for bushco's continued defiance of the rule of law and any measure of legal redress...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Monday, October 08, 2007

Khaled el-Masri's case moves to the Supreme Court. Will accountability carry the day?


Khaled el-Masri

i've been kinda sorta following el-masri's case (here and here) for a number of reasons... one, el-masri was abducted and subjected to rendition in macedonia in early 2004, during a short window of time between my first and my second (out of a total of 6) engagements there, so his story hits a bit close to home, as it were... two, germany, following italy's example (italy is trying the cia agents involved in abu omar's abduction in absentia), issued arrest warrants last june for the cia agents involved in his abduction... third, el-masri was released without ever being charged, and fourth, he is a german citizen... it would seem to me that if anyone is entitled to legal redress, it would be el-masri... last march, the u.s. court of appeals in richmond, va, ruled that el-masri was not entitled to redress because his lawsuit would expose state secrets... i was hoping the case would make it to the supreme court and it looks like that's happening this week...
The Supreme Court is set to decide as early as Tuesday whether the government can invoke the doctrine of "state secrets" to quash a legal claim that CIA bungling resulted in a man being abducted, imprisoned and tortured.

After five months of such treatment, CIA agents apparently realized that the man in custody, Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, was not the wanted terrorist Khalid al-Masri.

The case has attracted wide public attention in Europe, but El-Masri has been unable to gain a court hearing in the United States because the government has so far successfully invoked the argument that it cannot be taken to court when doing so might expose state secrets.

For his appeal to get an airing in the Supreme Court, four of the nine justices will have to agree to hear it. The justices have been closely split in cases that challenge the administration's handling of the war on terrorism.

That El-Masri is the victim of a case of mistaken identity does not seem to be in doubt.

the last paragraph in the following is particularly noteworthy...
Though the Supreme Court has not directly ruled on the state-secrets privilege in more than 50 years, the rule has been invoked regularly in the lower courts. The Bush administration has used it to block suits involving whistle-blowers, wiretapping and the firing of CIA agents.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union are urging the high court to take up El-Masri's case. They say the privilege has been transformed from a limited protection for military secrets to a broad shield for the government to hide behind when confronted with allegations of "grave executive misconduct."

It is particularly strange, they say, to allow the Bush administration to "invoke state secrets to protect the nation against the disclosure of information that the entire world already knows."

will accountability carry the day...? color me skeptical...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Everything's so secret, we don't even know our OWN NAMES!

not exactly, but we're getting there fast...
Lawyers for the Bush administration encountered a federal appeals court Wednesday that appeared deeply skeptical of a blanket claim that the government's surveillance efforts cannot be challenged in court because the litigation might reveal state secrets.

[...]

Deputy Solicitor General Gregory G. Garre was forced to mount a public argument that almost nothing about the substance of the government's conduct could be talked about in court because doing so might expose either the methods used in gathering intelligence or gaps in those methods.

think progress has compiled some of the astonished reactions of the three-judge panel...

The three judges on the court were unsatisfied with the argument, offering various stinging comments and rebuttals:

- “Is it the government’s position that when our country is engaged in a war that the power of the executive when it comes to wiretapping is unchecked?” asked Pregerson.

- “This seems to put us in the ‘trust us’ category. ‘We don’t do it. Trust us. And don’t ask us about it,’” said Judge M. Margaret McKeown.

- “Every ampersand, every comma is top-secret?” queried Judge Michael Daly Hawkins about a withheld document.

- “”Are you saying the courts are to rubber-stamp the determination of the executive of what’s a state secret? What’s our job?” asked Pregerson.

- “I feel like I’m in Alice and Wonderland,” observed McKeown.

When Deputy Solicitor General Greg Garre argued that “other avenues” than the court system were the proper forum for complaints about government surveillance, Pregerson shot back: “What is that? Impeachment?”


this kind of administration nonsense simply cannot be allowed to stand... it's long past time to toss this kind of totalitarian approach into the trash where it belongs...

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, July 20, 2007

Neither over-confident nor crazy, merely dogged and determined

from today's wapo roundup of the nation's op-ed pages...
Today's Hot Topic: Is Bush Confident or Crazy?

In the WaPo, Eugene Robinson worries that the leader of the free world has "really, truly lost touch with objective reality." He writes: "It's bad enough that Osama bin Laden is still out there plotting bloody acts of terrorism, convinced that God wants him to slay the infidels. Now we know that the president of the United States believes God has chosen him to bring freedom to the world, that he refuses to acknowledge setbacks in his crusade, and that he flat-out doesn't care what 'the polls' -- meaning the American people -- might think" ... in the NYT, Paul Krugman writes that Bush's continued optimism is "terrifying," and that it "doesn't demonstrate Mr. Bush's strength of character; it shows that he has lost touch with reality." He adds that "Mr. Bush keeps doing damage because many people who understand how his folly is endangering the nation's security still refuse, out of political caution and careerism, to do anything about it."

suggesting that bush has lost touch with reality misses the point entirely... the bush administration is on the homestretch of its - so far - quite successful campaign to turn our nation into an authoritarian state... a complete and total disregard for any and all external influences other than those that support that agenda is merely symptomatic...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Dear Senator Kerry, - Sincerely, David Addington

i posted on these executive orders the other day (Executive Order 12958 as amended by Executive Order 13292) and kagro x's spot on excerpts, which make no mention whatsoever of treating the president and vice president any differently than "agencies..." imho, addington's way out on a limb on this one...
David Addington, issued a letter to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) today defending the Vice President's interpretation of his office being outside the executive branch - only this time, he said it was because Cheney's office isn't an "agency."

[...]

"Dear Senator Kerry," Addington writes. "The executive order on classified national security information -- Executive Order 12958 as amended in 2003 -- makes clear that the Vice President is treated like the President and distinguishes the two of them from 'agencies.'"

[...]

"The executive order gives the [Information Security Oversight Office], under the supervision of the Archivist of the United States, responsibility to oversee certain activities of 'agencies,' but not of the Vice President or the President."

[...]

Addington insists that the question of whether Cheney is in the executive branch does not apply to the discussion of classified materials.

"Constitutional issues in government are generally best left for discussion when unavoidable disputes arise in a specific context instead of in theoretical discussions," Addington adds. "Given that the executive order treats the Vice President like the President rather than like an "agency," it is not necessary in these circumstances to address the subject of any alternative reasoning, based on the law and the history of the legislative functions of the vice presidency and the more modern functions of the vice presidency, to reach the same conclusions that the vice president is not an 'agency' with respect to which ISOO has a role."

what a gigantic load of steaming, fresh horseshit...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, June 24, 2007

Bullshit walks, talks, edits the Weekly Standard, and defends Dick Cheney

from fox news sunday via think progress...
[Weekly Standard editor William Kristol] said the exemptions for the president and vice president were “reasonable enough.” He called it “a pain in the neck” to have “some bureaucrat” from the National Archives “come and inspect your safe to see whether you’re locking it up properly each night.”

defending the bush/cheney/rove cabal has now officially descended into the realm of surreal absurdity... national security and the rule of law is really nothing but bureaucracy and a pain in the neck...? my god, we've sunk low...
Surrealism
Pronunciation: s&-'rE-&-"li-z&m also -'rA-
Function: noun
Etymology: French surréalisme, from sur- + réalisme realism
: the principles, ideals, or practice of producing fantastic or incongruous imagery or effects in art, literature, film, or theater by means of unnatural or irrational juxtapositions and combinations

here's one surrealistic perspective



and here's another...



on the whole, i have to say i prefer dali...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

We're being studied and manipulated like lab rats



today's nyt...
President Bush has turned the executive branch into a two-way mirror. They get to see everything Americans do: our telephone calls, e-mail, and all manner of personal information. And we get to see nothing about what they do.

yeah...? and...?
Governments have to keep secrets. But this administration has grossly abused that trust, routinely using claims of national security to hide policies that are immoral and almost certainly illegal, to avoid embarrassment, and to pursue Mr. Bush’s dreams of an imperial presidency.

ferchrissake, nyt... you're laying out a thumbnail sketch of an out-of-control, criminal presidential administration, and THAT'S your conclusion...? how about a CALL TO ACTION, fercryinoutloud...? i'm tired of sitting around, blogging my ass off, wringing my hands, bemoaning the fate of my country...

WHEN THE HELL
ARE WE GOING TO
DO
SOMETHING...?

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments