OMNI CIVIL LIBERTIES NEWSLETTER #4, March 15, 2013. Compiled by Dick
Bennett for a Culture of Peace and Justice. (#1 October 5, 2011; #2 Jan. 30, 2012;
#3 July 29, 2012)
Here is the link
to all OMNI newsletters: http://www.omnicenter.org/newsletter-archive/ Here is the link to the
Index: http://www.omnicenter.org/omni-newsletter-general-index/
Contents #1
New Books and Films
Susan Herman, Taking Liberties
Bill Quigley, Dissent Weakened, Police More Militarized
Fusion Centers
Habeas Corpus
Right to Dissent
Right to Protest
Victory in Goodman vs. St. Paul
Contents #2
Focus on Indefinite Detention and Obama
Opposition Grows vs. Indefinite Detention in NDAA:
BORDC Action
Swanson: King Obama
Cockburn: Habeas Corpus
Davidson: Indefinite Detention: What Will Our Dem or GOP Elite Do?
Wendell Griffen, Indefinite Detainees
Bill Quigley,
Dissent Weakened, Police More Militarized
20 Ways Obama vs. Civil Liberties
Contents #3
Tom Kennedy on Rights of Aliens
Dick Bennett on Attacks on
Constitution Reagan to Present
From BORDC: Notable Civil
Liberties Events--Indefinite Detention, etc.
Noam Chomsky, US vs. Magna Carta, I and II
Military, Police New Tech for “Crowd Control”
Contents #4
Dick: Civil Liberties, Patriot Act, Imperial and Climate Shocks:
BORDC October 2012
BORDC January 2013
Limits on Protest
Bush and Obama vs. Liberty
Lindorff: Petraeus, Bill of
Rights, Spying USA
Honigsberg, Consequences of the War on Terror
Francis A. Boyle, Defender of Resisters and Dissenters
Lendman’s Review of Boyle’s Protesting
Power
Here is the link to all OMNI newsletters:
http://www.omnicenter.org/newsletter-archive/
AFTER
9-11: CIVIL LIBERTIES, PATRIOTISM AND
PATRIOT ACT, IMPERIAL AND CLIMATE SHOCKS
by Dick Bennett
After 9-11, Congress quickly passed
and Pres. Bush signed a bundle of laws that reduced our liberties. And what did they call them? In
classic doublespeak, they called them the Patriot Act:: cripple freedom and
call it patriotism. It was now patriotic
to diminish freedom. Clever, especially
when our deluded troops were fighting and dying for “freedom.”
So now what do you and I
do? Now the Peace and Justice Movement,
having lost the initiative as has so often happened during the past decade and
before, must struggle to regain constitutional grounding. We must, and we can, show how misguided, how
destructive to democracy is the Patriot Act, and how futile it has been in the
so-called “War on Terrorism.” We must
ridicule the name “Patriot Act,” by showing how false and unpatriotic it is,
until it s abandoned, and we must, and we can, remove that gang of laws that
lied about what freedom actual is and can and should mean in the US .
And what else can we do (we
are not ignorant, timorous wabbits)? We
can educate the public about the history of fascist attacks on constitutional
liberties, and mobilize them to educate their representatives and to mobilize
the public to opposed ignorant representatives who choose imagined security
over liberty. For example, the Nazis
used the 1933 fire that destroyed the Reichstag in Berlin , which they had instigated, as a
pretext to suspend civil liberties and in other ways to help clear the way for
the Nazis’ rise to power. We need to be
well-informed about the histories of failed democracies, we need to know the
process of their destruction to enable us to examine our own. (The emergency method of grasping power is
also common in commerce, by which corporations move into vacuums of human or
natural catastrophes to buy cheap land, buildings, businesses, as Naomi Klein
has show in Shock Doctrine.) We need to be prepared to hold steady
against fear and panic, and to demand the same from our representatives.
We are already doing this
nationally and locally, obviously insufficiently, feebly, with not enough money
or determination. The ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights, the
BORDC and other excellent groups had helped strengthen the Bill of Rights and
build walls against congressional failures; they are challenging the
hypocritical “Patriot Act” laws; and they deserve our time and money. Our national peace and justice movement
educates and agitates for constitutional freedoms with justice. The local arm is composed of the OMNI Center
for Peace, Justice, and Ecology, the Workers
Justice Center
But nationally and locally, we should also be looking ahead to the next
shock sure to undermine liberties if authoritarians and imperialists have
control; we should be planning for more shocks sure to come—like that of 9/11--
from US imperial expansion around the world, over 1000 bases globally in over
100 countries, and their ruinous expense and arousal of pushback (for example,
look at a map of US bases facing China in the Pacific and surrounding it west
to east, north to south, or a map at the global bombings against US invasions
and occupations and drone assassinations).
Likewise, we should be preparing for the shocks from climate change
already also happening (Katrina, Sandy ,
forest fires, droughts) with their empire-size immense expenses, displacements,
refugees, and deaths—to care for the victims while retaining our
liberties. The UN High Commissioner
for Refugees in its 2010 trends report estimated 43.7 million refugees and
internally displaced people.
From: "David Segal, DemandProgress.org"
Constitution in Crisis ::October 2012
Bill of Rights Defense Committee bordc@mail.democracyinaction.org
October 2012, Vol. 15 No. 10
View this newsletter as a webpage: http://www.bordc.org/newsletter/2012/10/
US Supreme Court slated to tackle civil liberties in 2012
Unlike the major parties’ presidential candidates, the Supreme Court will
address civil liberties this year. The remaining 2012 Supreme Court Term
includes cases on issues from warrantless surveillance and warrantless
searches, to the ability to try severe human rights abuses in federal court.
BORDC News
BORDC in the news
In the last month, BORDC and coalitions we support across the nation have
been featured in various press outlets as they work to restore civil liberties
one community at a time.
Have you read BORDC’s blog lately? The People’s Blog for the Constitution
has attracted a growing audience that has tripled over the past year. Featuring
news & analysis beyond the headlines on a daily basis, it offers a great
way to stay informed. http://www.bordc.org/mewsletter/2012/10/#blog
Highlights from the past month include:
Terrorist designation a problem? Befriend a politician. by Michael Figura
The privacy law that time forgot
by Nadia Kayyali
Newly released Bybee memo allows distribution of grand jury information
among federal agencies by Alok Bhatt
NYPD sued for noncompliance with Freedom of Information Act request by
Annette G. Macaluso
Court rules in favor of the NDAA by Yiqian Wang
European Parliament votes for accountability of members’ torture,
rendition complicity byAsh Kernen
2012 Secrecy Report: only government secrets are safe by Francisco White
Supreme Court hears case on corporate liability for human rights
violations by Farid Zakaria
Grassroots News http://www.bordc.org/mewsletter/2012/10/#grassroots
October 2012 Patriot Award: Loan Tran
Every month, BORDC honors an individual who has done outstanding work in
support of civil liberties and the rule of law in his or her community. This
month, the Patriot Award goes to Loan Tran from North Carolina
Grassroots Updates
To get involved in any of these efforts, email the BORDC Organizing Team
at organizing@bordc.org.
Law and Policy
Fusion centers: a federal assault on privacy vs. a local reform model
Just last week, Congress issued a report critical of fusion centers:
duplicative regional networks that promote information sharing between local
and federal law enforcement. Civil liberties advocates including BORDC have
long recognized the threats that fusion centers pose to civil rights. The US
Senate recently joined them in expressing concern.
Due process under assault on all sides: the NDAA, Omar Khadr, Abdullah
al-Kidd, and you
In the last month, the domestic military detention provisions of the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) have drawn further concerns, prompted
in part by a series of court rulings. From football players to journalists, no
one is safe from arbitrary detention.
What's really at stake in the cybersecurity debate
Cybersecurity has drawn recent attention from the National Security
Council, Congress and Obama administration. Pending legislation, and recent and
forthcoming executive acts, all hold crucial implications for your rights online,
and checks & balances on executive power going forward.
Stop and frisk, and beyond
The modern era of stop & frisk policing can be traced to 1968, when
the Supreme Court declared in Terry v. Ohio
Judge dismisses ACLU lawsuit seeking information about ethnic profiling
mandated by FBI
The ACLU’s attempt to investigate the FBI’s “domain management” efforts
in New Jersey
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
www.bordc.org • info@bordc.org • (413) 582-0110 • Fax: (413) 582-0116
BORDC Bill of Rights Defense Committee,
JANUARY 2014
Constitution in Crisis January
2012
|
Jan 20 (1 day ago)
|
|
 |
Bordc@mail.democracyinaction.org
January
2012, Vol. 12 No. 01
View
this newsletter as a webpage: http://www.bordc.org/newsletter/2013/01
Washington greets
the New Year by assaulting your rights
Congress and White House extend domestic military detention powers in NDAAOn January 2nd of this year, President Obama signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) of 2013 into law, without any provisions to restore due process in the face of surviving sections of the 2012 NDAA that continue to threaten indefinite domestic military detention. While President Obama strongly criticized the bill that reached his desk, his criticism focused on congressional restrictions on the military’s authority to transferCongress and White House extend pervasive domestic surveillance powers in FISAOn December 30th, President Obama signed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act (FAA), extending the National Security Agency's (NSA) program of unconstitutional warrantless wiretapping for another five years. FISA is essentially a codification of the illegal domestic spying program begun in secret under the Bush administration.BORDC NewsBORDC in the newsIn the last month, BORDC and coalitions we support across the nation have appeared in various press outlets to promote concerns about constitutional rights and the powers of police and intelligence agencies that abuse them.Raise your voice to demand the truth about US tortureLast month, the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to approve a 6,000 page report on torture based on a three year investigation that reviewed over 6 million pages of documents from the CIA and other intelligence agencies. While the bipartisan Senate report is sharply critical of torture, however, it remains secret.Legal Fellow Nadia Kayalli speaks in Seattle, WAOn January 19th, BORDC Legal Fellow Nadia Kayyali will be the keynote speaker at a forum on racial profiling focusing on the Secure Communities Initiative (S-Comm).Read the latest news & analysis from the People’s Blog for the ConstitutionHave you read BORDC’s blog lately? The People’s Blog for the Constitution has attracted a growing audience that has tripled over the past year. Featuring news & analysis beyond the headlines on a daily basis, it offers a great way to stay up to date and informed.Highlights from the past month include: Grassroots NewsPatriot Award: Andrew BashiEvery month, BORDC honors an individual who has made an outstanding contribution in his or her community to the movement to restore civil liberties and the rule of law. This month, the Patriot Award goes to Andrew Bashi fromMourn an Internet hero and take action in his honorOn January 11, our country lost a luminary in the suicide of Aaron Swartz, a brilliant young man who, according to BORDC's Shahid Buttar, "did more for the world in his 26 years than most people do in a lifetime." In the wake of Aaron's tragic death, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has launched an online petition to fix the draconian computer crime law that exposed Aaron to 13 felony counts of hacking and wire fraud for a victimless crime actually committed in the public interest.Grassroots updatesTo get involved in any of these efforts, please email the BORDC Organizing Team at organizing@bordc.org. We’re eager to hear from you and help support your activism!
·
Alameda
County, CA: Coalitions
mobilize to challenge local surveillance drones, immigration enforcement
·
Los Angeles,
CA: Broad protests on 11th
anniversary of
·
Dallas, TX: Advocates host press conference and demonstration
to creatively challenge detention, torture, NDAA
·
Chicago, IL: Coalition rallies first to challenge mass
incarceration, and again to confront detention under NDAA and torture
·
New York, NY: Coalition presses towards victory on racial profiling
as federal judge blocks NYPD profiling in the
Law and PolicyThe FBI vs. OccupyIt’s no secret that the FBI and local law enforcement have targeted the Occupy movement since its inception in fall 2011, sometimes to the degree of planting informants and manufacturing criminal charges. However, recently released documents reveal that monitoring by federal law enforcement was even more extensive than imagined.Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal's Zero Dark Thirty opens with a title that declares "The following motion picture is based on first hand accounts of actual events." With this title and relentless publicity, Biegwlow has suggested “What we were attempting is almost a journalistic approach to film.’’ Zero Dark Thirty not only misrepresents the facts surrounding the role of torture in Osama Bin Laden's capture, it also uses film technique to align the audience with the torturers. Programs under development to further erode privacy through cybersecurity, domestic drone aircraftIn 2010, the Wall Street Journal reported on the initial phases of a NSA program now known to be called “Perfect Citizen.” Despite its brazenly Orwellian title, the NSA allegedly designed Perfect Citizen to prevent cyberattacks on federal agencies and computer systems that control critical infrastructure. FOIA documents procured by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) confirm the concern with protecting power grids and other vulnerable systems.New Resources and OpportunitiesWant to spy on your neighbor? The surveillance state comes to a store near youThe next time your family celebrates a birthday, consider a gift for the whole family: a functional aerial surveillance drone. Verizon Wireless has you covered—you can purchase your very own quadro-copter, along with two HD cameras, online.Help BORDC restore the rule of law
·
Get involved! Volunteer, organize, raise your voice—we have an
opportunity that's right for everyone.
·
Support our work! Donate online or mail a check or
money order to:
·
Spread the
word! Forward this email
newsletter to your friends and family.
|
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
www.bordc.org • info@bordc.org • (413) 582-0110 • Fax: (413) 582-0116
www.bordc.org • info@bordc.org • (413) 582-0110 • Fax: (413) 582-0116
We apologize if you have received this communication in error.
Unsubscribe || Subscribe
Unsubscribe || Subscribe
Date: September 12, 2012 8:15:08 AM PDT
To: "Lawrernce L. Lee"
Subject: Federal offense
Reply-To: "David Segal, DemandProgress.org"
MORE LIMITATIONS ON PROTEST
Imagine an America America
In March, Congress passed HR 347, a bill that limits Americans' ability
to protest in public and on government grounds. Mainstream media didn't raise
peep, but now there's finally some anger building. The bill, passed almost
unanimously, makes it a federal offense punishable by up to ten years in
prison to "knowingly" protest in the vicinity of the Secret Service
-- that is anywhere the Secret Service "is or will be temporarily
visiting."
Click here to demand that Congress reinstate -- and safeguard --
Americans' right to engage in protest. http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/963?l=79459.P2f5aG
This campaign is being run by WatchDog.net, a side-project of Demand Progress.
It also makes many public events impervious to lawful protest. Any
"National Security Special Event" (NSSE) requires Secret Service
protection. NSSE-designated events have proliferated since 9/11 to include
Super Bowls, concerts, campaign events, and now any public event that Very
Important People want protest-free.
Most
dangerously, it criminalizes protest. Under the bill, "disorderly or
disruptive conduct" or activities that "impede or disrupt the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions" could warrant felony
charges. What constitutes such "disruptive conduct" rests in the eye
of the beholder--or the eye of Eric Holder. To put it plainly: the government
can decide where and when free speech is allowed and severely prosecute any
"disruptive" activity, while we're confined to "free speech
zones." We can help fix it, however!
Will you click here to sign WatchDog.net's petition to protect our speech
rights? http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/963?l=79459.P2f5aG
Let's keep on fighting.
-Demand Progress
Paid for by Demand Progress
(DemandProgress.org) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's
committee.
Who is the worst civil liberties president in
US
Where do the abuses of the
last decade from Bush and Obama rank when compared to prior assaults in the
name of war?
·
·
·
6
·
Email
Email
Barack Obama and George Bush at the White
House. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
The
following interesting question arose yesterday from what at first appeared to
be some petty Twitter bickering: who was the worst president for civil liberties
in US
It's worthwhile first to set forth the
context in which the question arose. At their Lawfare blog, Ritika Singh and
Benjamin Wittes posted an excerptof an essay they wrote for a
new book on the War of 1812; their essay pertains to the impact of that war on
civil liberties and executive power. The two Brookings writers note that
despite intense domestic opposition to the war, President Madison
"eschewed the authority to detain American citizens in military custody or
try them in military tribunals, and more generally, declined to undertake the
sorts of executive overreaches we have come to expect - and even encourage -
from our presidents in war."
After Julian Sanchez, I and others
tweeted that essay by remarking that Madison refrained from exploiting the war
to abridge civil liberties, Slate'sMatt Yglesias' wrote:
That struck
me as a cheap and vapid reply. Nobody was suggesting that Madison Madison
Moreover,
the issue raised by the essay on Madison was about the extent to which
presidents use their power to erode civil liberties which exist when they
assumed the office, or refrain from attacking those rights despite having the
opportunity in the form of war or other crises. That a person is born into a
society in which the evil of slavery already exists has little to do with that
historical question.
That said, once one posits a
president's personal slavery ownership as inconsistent with a positive civil
liberties record - as Yglesias implicitly did - then that must be the number
one factor in assessing a president's place on the civil liberties list. By
that metric, all slave-owning presidents, or one who expressly endorsed the Dred Scott decision as James
Buchanan did, would automatically have to be deemed the worst.
After all,
owning human beings as chattel is the supreme civil liberties violation, by far
the gravest civil liberties abuse in US
That's why it was so bizarre to see
that the very same Matt Yglesias, just moments later, pronounced Woodrow Wilson - a president who never owned any
slaves and never presided over slavery - to be the "worst-ever president
on civil liberties", even suggesting that Wilson has no "serious
competition" for that ignominious title. It was when I pointed out the
irony of Yglesias' selection of a non-slave-owning president in light of his
tweet that the interesting question arose of who should be considered the worst
civil liberties president in US history.
If one were simply to consider specific
acts which constituted grave assaults on civil liberties - narrowly defined as
the core political rights explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights: free
speech, freedom from deprivation of life and liberty without due process, etc.
- one could make a strong argument for several presidents. John Adams signed The Alien and Sedition Acts, which
essentially criminalized certain forms of government criticism in preparation
for a war with France
Abraham Lincoln illegally suspended the core liberty of habeas corpuswithout
Congressional approval. Wilson
And then there are the two War on
Terror presidents. George
Bushseized on the 9/11 attack to usher in radical new surveillance
and detention powers in the PATRIOT ACT, spied for years on the communications
of US citizens without the warrants required by law, and claimed the power to
indefinitely imprison even US citizens without charges in military brigs.
His successor, Barack
Obama, went further by claiming the power not merely to detain citizens without judicial review but to assassinate them(about which the New York Times said: "It is extremely
rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing").
He has waged an unprecedented war on whistleblowers, dusting off Wilson US
Ultimately,
it is close to impossible to rank these abuses strictly as a qualitative
matter, in terms of the powers seized. How does one say that interning citizens
in concentration camps (Roosevelt) is better or worse than imprisoning people
for dissent (Adams and Wilson), putting people in cages with no charges
(Lincoln, Bush, Obama), or claiming the power to execute citizens in total
secrecy and without any checks of any kind (Obama)? If anything, one could
reasonably argue that the power of due-process-free executions is the most
menacing since it's the only act that is permanent and irreversible.
Certainly,
the quantity of abuse matters. In that regard, Roosevelt's interments and Wilson 's free speech prosecutions would appear worse than,
say, Adams ' attacks on dissent, Bush's
indefinite detentions, or Obama's citizen assassinations.
Moreover, it is one of the ironies of
US history that civil
liberties erosions are often accompanied by civil liberties progress from the
same leader: Adams was integral in the founding of the republic and
its rights-enshrining documents; Lincoln freed the slaves; Wilson supported
women's suffrage; Roosevelt appointed two of the most sterling civil liberties
advocates to the supreme court; Obama withdrew authorization for some torture
techniques (ones that were not in use when he was inaugurated) and banned CIA
black sites (ones that were empty when he assumed office).
Ultimately, there are two critical
factors that, for me at least, are highly influential if not decisive in
determining the proper ranking. The first is the extent to which the civil
liberties abuses are temporary or permanent.
Most of the
contenders for worst civil liberties abuses were "justified" by
traditional wars that had a finite end and thus dissipated once the wars were
over. Lincoln Wilson
This is one
key factor that distinguishes the War on Terror. By its nature, it will never
end, at least not in the foreseeable future. It is a "war" far more
in a metaphorical sense than a real one.
Since it began, both administrations
who have waged it have expressly acknowledged its virtually indefinite - and
thus unique - nature. In May 2009, when Obama unveiled his proposal for "preventive detention", he said: "Unlike the Civil War or World
War II, we can't count on a surrender ceremony to bring this journey to an end."
He added that we'll still be fighting this war "a year from now, five
years from now, and - in all probability - 10 years from now."
Just last week, the Washington Post reported that
the Obama administration is creating permanent bureaucratic systems to
implement its War on Terror powers as it "expects to continue adding names
to kill or capture lists for years". Specifically, "among senior
Obama administration officials, there is broad consensus that such operations
are likely to be extended at least another decade." That "suggests
that the United States
Civil
liberties abuses justified by a finite war can be awful while they last, but
then they cease. Abuses that are systematized based on the premise that they
are to be permanent do far more than that: they radically alter the nature of
the government and the relationship of the political class to the citizenry.
This, to
me, has always been the most uniquely pernicious aspect of the War on Terror
civil liberties assaults of the last decade: they will not end when the
"war" does because the "war" will have no end. Each new
power is embedded permanently into the political framework, incrementally
transforming the political culture and the species of government itself.
The second vital factor is the justification used for
these assaults. However critical one wants to be of Lincoln ,
Wilson and Roosevelt - and harsh criticism is
appropriate in all three cases - they were actually fighting major wars that
had the potential to severely harm if not destroy the US
By contrast, the "War on
Terror" is not even legitimately described as a "war", let alone
one anywhere near the magnitude of its predecessors. Shortly after I began
writing about politics in late 2005, I examined the inane tactic of Bush-following neoconservatives -
one that is, like so many neocon views, now vigorously embraced by many Obama
defenders - to cite Lincoln
"During
Lincoln America
"Making
matters worse – much worse – the country was only 70 years old at the time. And
even before the Civil War began, America United States
It takes little effort to demonstrate
that the "War on Terror" is not in the same universe. As Professor
Richard Jackson has documented, there is a greater risk of dying
from lightning strikes or bathtub falls than terrorism. Professors John Mueller
and Mark G. Stewart, writing in the latest issue of International Security,
condemned the "extraordinarily exaggerated and essentially delusional
response" to 9/11. As Professor Stephen Walt described their article:
"Mueller and Stewart analyze 50 cases of supposed 'Islamic terrorist plots' against the
To the
extent the validity of the proffered justification matters, and it must matter
some, the War on Terror abuses are easily the worst for this metric. Unlike the
actual, threatening wars of the past, this "war" is pure pretext, a
total farce: so out of proportion to the civil liberties assaults employed in
its name as to be inconceivable.
As noted,
this discussion assumes a rather narrow range of the term "civil
liberties": namely a focus on the original core political liberties
expressly guaranteed by the Bill of Rights: freedom of speech, freedom from
deprivation of life and liberty without due process, habeas corpus. If one expands
the term to include more contemporary debates surrounding issues such as gay
equality and reproductive rights, as is proper, then the overall picture
meaningfully changes.
The one common strain running through
these historic civil liberties assaults is war.
War almost always erodes political liberties. That has always been true. Cicero
That fact - that wars maximize a
political leader's power - is a key
reason they often crave war and why wars, under the Constitution, were supposed to be extremely difficult for
presidents to start. As John Jay wrote in Federalist 4, "absolute monarchs
will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the
purposes and objects merely personal" (that's also why the absurd contortions invoked by President Obama to fight a war in Libya not only in the absence of
Congressional approval, but in the face of formal Congressional disapproval, belongs high
on the list of his worst and likely most enduring civil liberties assaults).
But in
terms of the role played by war in enabling civil liberties assaults, at least
the exploited wars are usually real. In the case of the "War on
Terror", it is far more illusory and frivolous than real. That - along
with their permanence - is a major factor in determining where the civil
liberties erosions of the last decade, and the presidents responsible for them,
rank in history.
NOVEMBER 13, 2012
The Grand Irony of the Petraeus Scandal
Done in by the Patriot Act?
by DAVE LINDORFF. Counterpunch. [Dick: The slightly longer version I read
appeared in The Humanist Jan.-Feb.
2013.]
There is
a delicious irony to the story of the crash-and-burn career of Four-Star
General and later (at least briefly) CIA Director David Petraeus.
The man
who was elevated to the ethereal ranks of a General Eisenhower or Robert E. Lee
by swooning corporate myth makers like the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Trudy Rubin,
the Washington Post’s David Iglesias, and the NY Times’ Michael Gordon, was
never really that brilliant. It wasn’t his “surge” after all that quieted things
down (temporarily) in Iraq; rather it was a deal to pay off the insurgents with
cash to stand down until the US could gracefully pull out without having to be
shooting its way down to Kuwait in full retreat. As for his allegedly
“brilliant” counterinsurgency policy of “winning hearts and minds,” we
have already seen how well that has worked in Iraq, which is now basically a
client state of Iran, and the writing is already on the wall in Afghanistan,
where the US is almost universally loathed, with US forces spending most of
their time looking out for Afghan soldiers who might turn their guns on their
supposed ally and “mentor” American troops.
For a
real measure of Gen. Petraeus , go to Admiral William Fallon — that rare
military leader who had the guts to tell President Bush and Cheney he would not
allow an attack on Iran “on his watch,” thereby quite possibly saving us all
from being at war with Iran years ago. Fallon, who at the time in 2007 was head
of Centcom, the military command region covering the entire Middle East, once
reportedly called, Petraeus, who was being put in charge of the Iraq theater,
an “ass-licking little chicken-shit” — to his face.
Anyhow,
what makes the epic collapse of this consummate political general’s career so
exquisite is that it was the post-9-11 spying capabilities of the FBI that
allowed its agents to slip unannounced into the email of the General’s
paramour, Paula Broadwell (a name that could have been selected by Ian
Fleming!), and possibly into the general’s own email too, there to find the
evidence, allegedly in the form of X-rated letters, of a covert adulterous
relationship underway.
We now
know that the FBI was alerted to this breach of decorum (if the illicit romance
began while Petraeus was on active duty in Afghanistan, he could be
prosecuted under the same rules that have led to the prosecution of many lower
ranking offers: bringing ill-repute upon the military) and lack of judgement on
the part of the head of the nation’s spooks, by a second woman, Jill Kelley, who
was a volunteer military liaison and family friend of the Petraeus clan.
Kelley’s closeness to Petraeus allegedly caused the jealous Broadwell to
allegedly send threatening emails to her imagined rival, including one that
told her to “stay away from my guy!”
It seems
likely Kelley, in asking the FBI to put a halt to the threatening emails, would
have been quick to point out that Broadwell was having an affair with Petraeus.
In any event, once the FBI successfully go the telecom company she was using to
allow them into Broadwell’s email, that would have been clear, and it would
have been easy work to move on to the general’s own cache of love letters (in
which he may have been referred to by Broadwell by what she told the Daily
Show’s John Stewart was his childhood nickname “Peaches”).
The CIA
chief was thus done in by the Patriot Act and other assorted violations of the
First and Fourth Amendments, all backed by Gen. Petraeus and his
political promoters in Congress and the White House, as well as in the corporate
media.
Of
course, while we can enjoy this payback, and speculate on how it must be giving
the shivers to many a White House staffer and member of Congress, it should
also be a warning to us all that the FBI, the CIA, and the myriad other
intelligence agencies littering the US landscape, these days have virtually
limitless ability to monitor our every email message, tweet and phone call.
Maybe we
should invite the now humbled Petraeus to become the poster child for a
renewed battle to restore the Bill of Rights.
DAVE LINDORFF is a founding member of
ThisCantBeHappening!, the new independent Project Censored Award-winning online
alternative newspaper. His work, and that of colleagues JOHN GRANT, LORI
SPENCER, LINN WASHINGTON, JR. and CHARLES M. YOUNG, can be found at www.thiscantbehappening.net
Our
Nation Unhinged: The Human Consequences of the War on Terror
Peter Jan Honigsberg (Author), Erwin Chemerinsky (Foreword). U OF CALIFORNIA
READ AN EXCERPT
RIGHTS INFORMATION
Jose Padilla short-shackled and
wearing blackened goggles and earmuffs to block out all light and sound on his
way to the dentist. Fifteen-year-old Omar Khadr crying out to an American
soldier, "Kill me!" Hunger strikers at Guantánamo being restrained
and force-fed through tubes up their nostrils. John Walker Lindh lying naked
and blindfolded in a metal container, bound by his hands and feet, in the
freezing Afghan winter night. This is the story of the Bush administration's
response to the attacks of September 11, 2001—and of how we have been led down
a path of executive abuses, human
tragedies, abandonment of the Constitution, and the erosion of due process and
liberty. In this vitally important book, Peter Jan Honigsberg chronicles
the black hole of the American judicial
system from 2001 to the present, providing an incisive analysis of exactly
what we have lost over the past seven years and where we are now headed.
DEFENDER OF DISSENTERS,
RESISTERS OF US
1.
“Francis A. Boyle— to the Hague” (Dissenting Op-Ed) | Veterans Today
www.veteranstoday.com/.../francis-a-boyle-to-the-hague-dissenting-o...
Dec 12, 2012 – We contend with the
available evidence, widely published, with admissions from Dr, Francis A. Boyle in writing and interviews which are ...
2.
Francis Boyle ZSpace page - Z Communications
At the age of 12 I joined the American Civil Liberties Union after I read in the
evening newsp... Francis Boyle ZSpace page. Wednesday,
Oct 17, 2007 ...
3.
As potential pick for court, Kagan gets fire from left -
The Boston Globe
www.boston.com/.../as_potential_pick_for_court_kagan_gets_fire_fr...
Apr 15, 2010 – ... human rights and civil liberties organization in the
country,'' saidFrancis Boyle, a professor of international law at
the University of
Illinois
4.
Boyle, Francis. "NO WAR AGAINST AFGHANISTAN!"
groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/boyle.htm
Francis A. Boyle, "No War against Afghanistan
5.
End the Crime That Is the War on Afghanistan | Global
Research
www.globalresearch.ca/end-the-crime-that-is-the-war-on.../29825
Mar 17, 2012 – By Francis Boyle ..... Except on this one
they're infringing the civil rights and civil liberties of all of us, moving us
that much closer to a police ...
6.
Boyle's Law: Turning up the Heat Against Militarism Through Civil ...
Francis A. Boyle is a distinguished University of Illinois
7.
George Bush, Jr., September 11th and the Rule of Law FROM
- ratical
www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CrimNukDetSI.html
by FA Boyle - Related articles
Feb 1, 2002 – by Francis A. Boyle .... The longer Bush Jr.'s war againstAfghanistan
Feb 1, 2002 – by Francis A. Boyle .... The longer Bush Jr.'s war against
8.
Francis A. Boyle's "Protesting Power - War, Resistance and Law
sjlendman.blogspot.com/.../francis-boyles-protesting-power-war.html
Feb 28, 2008 – Writing on major world and
national issues began in summer 2005. ...Boyle has the antidote:
"civil resistance, international law, human rights, and ... and so are human rights, civil liberties, the rule of law, and
common dignity, ...
9.
Francis Boyle's Palestine, Palestinians, and International Law ...
dissidentvoice.org/.../francis-boyles-palestine-palestinians-and-interna...
Aug 1, 2008 – Francis Boyle is a distinguished University of Illinois
10.
Internet Archive Search: subject:"civil liberties"
archive.org/search.php?query=subject%3A%22civil+liberties%22
50+ items – You searched for:
subject:"civil liberties", Advanced search ...
|
sf; civil liberties;
books; literature
|
152
|
|
war on drugs; civil liberties
|
571
|
STEVE LENDMAN BLOG
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2008
Francis A. Boyle's Protesting
Power - War, Resistance and Law
Francis A. Boyle's "Protesting
Power - War, Resistance and Law" - by Stephen Lendman
Francis A. Boyle is a distinguishedUniversity
of Illinois
Boyle's book is powerful, noble and compelling, and he states its purpose upfront: Today, a "monumental struggle (is being waged) for the heart and soul of (America
Boyle has the antidote: "civil resistance, international law, human rights, and the US Constitution - four quintessential principles to counter....militarism run amok." Our choice is "stark and compelling." We must act in our own self-defense "immediately, before humankind exterminates itself in an act of nuclear omnicide." The threat today is dire and real, it demands action, and civil resistance no longer is an option. With survival at stake, it's an obligation.
The Right to Engage in Civil Resistance to Prevent State Crimes
Francis A. Boyle is a distinguished
Boyle's book is powerful, noble and compelling, and he states its purpose upfront: Today, a "monumental struggle (is being waged) for the heart and soul of (
Boyle has the antidote: "civil resistance, international law, human rights, and the US Constitution - four quintessential principles to counter....militarism run amok." Our choice is "stark and compelling." We must act in our own self-defense "immediately, before humankind exterminates itself in an act of nuclear omnicide." The threat today is dire and real, it demands action, and civil resistance no longer is an option. With survival at stake, it's an obligation.
The Right to Engage in Civil Resistance to Prevent State Crimes
. . . .
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2008/02/francis-boyles-protesting-power-war.html
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2008/02/francis-boyles-protesting-power-war.html
END CIVIL LIBERTIES NEWSLETTER #4
No comments:
Post a Comment