OMNI
NATIONAL SECURITY/IMPERIALISM/SURVEILLANCE /POLICE
STATE (NSS), US DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN MCCARTHYISM NEWSLETTER #3, July 23, 2015.
Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace and
Justice. (#1 March 22, 2013; #2 June 9, 2013).
What’s at stake: “’An entire era of crisis in which urgent decisions have
been required again and again,’ in the words of Senator J. William Fulbright, ‘has
given rise to the Trumanites’ power.
Speedy decisions are required that the Madisonian institutions are
ill-equipped to make; the Trumanites have the means at their disposal to act
quickly. The perception of threat,
crisis, and emergency has been the seminal phenomenon that has created and
nurtures America’s double government.”
Michael Glennon, National Security
and Double Government (2015, 21-22).
BEN
FRANKLIN
They who would give up essential Liberty ,
to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
·
Franklin
·
This statement was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the
Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759); the book, published by Franklin; was written by Richard
Jackson, but Franklin did claim responsibility for some small
excerpts that were
used in it.
·
An earlier variant by Franklin in Poor Richard's Almanack (1738): "Sell not virtue to
purchase wealth, nor Liberty
From Voltaire: Beware of the words internal security or
national security, for they are the eternal cry of the oppressor.
My blog: War
Department/Peace Department
My Newsletters:
Index:
Related newsletters and topics:
Anti-War, CIA, Fear, Cold War, Corporate-Pentagon-White
House-Congress-Corporate Media Complex, Fear, Homeland Security, Human Needs, Imperialism,
Militarism, Myths, Pentagon/War Dept., Political Prisoners, Secrecy, SURVEILLANCE, War on Terror, War, Air
War, Causes, Prevention, Consequences, Control of Media, Costs, Crimes,
Recruiting, Profiteering, Secrecy, Security, Surveillance, Torture, Victims, Whistleblowers
and Leakers, Snowden, Manning, and
related Newsletters
The US NSS and its permanent war (Cold War,
Drug War, War on Terror, Invasion and Occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, 1000
Military Bases Around World in Over 100 countries, Bombing Pakistan, Somalia,
Yemen, Empire, Space War, Conquest of
Pacirfic Ocean, War on China, Cyberwar) reach into countless US institutions, pervade the lives of the populace
under the so-called “Patriot Act,” and intrude into national sovereignty and
individual lives around the world.
Naturally the NSS is the subject of many of the newsletters in OMNI’s
web site, such as: Afghanistan
My Blog focuses on US
empire, militarism, US National Security State, Pentagon War Department, and
peacemaking and peacemakers: War Department/Peace Department. I also have been filming “OMNI
Book Sampler” on peacemaking and peacemakers twice a month on Community TV’s
Short Takes, shown also on my Blog.
And my Blog has my US
Contents of #3
/?? ARRANGE BY FACTS OF US NSS HORROR MOVIE, AND RESISTERS
HISTORY of US
INSECURITY STATE
Friedman, US Cold
War NSS, the “Sovereign Exception”
TomDispatch,
Looking Back and Forward at the National (In)Security State
Kinzer, Dulles
Brothers
Kuzmarov,
“Humanitarian” Intervention
Engelhardt, NSS
the Fourth Branch of Government 2014
Scott, The Deep State of the
Military-Corporate-Oil--Congressional-Presidential-
Surveillance-Mainstream Media Complex
Dick: Local Fear or Conformity, Securitas
in Little Rock, AR, Security Trumps Open
Democracy
Democracy
OPPOSITION divide into wars and
surveillance, maybe all including the above
Congresswoman Barbara
Lee: Let’s At Least Discuss the Wars
Romero, ACLU and
DC Rally vs. NSA
Alex Baldwin, NSS
and the Cowed Public
Chomsky,
Manufactured Threats and Fear
Tomgram, Secrecy
and Whistleblowers
Snowden (2)
Bamford on NSA
and Cyberattack
Roundup List for
Martial Law
Manning and Other
Leakers, Security vs. Informed Citizens
Hedges, Military
Mind
Granick and
Sprigman, NSA Criminally, Massively Captures Mail and Calls
Informers and
Agent Provocateurs
Engelhardt, Tomgram , US
Citizenship in Cold War America:
The National
Security State and the Possibilities of Dissent. ANDREA
FRIEDMAN. U of Mass. P, 2014.
Examines
the boundaries and meanings of American citizenship during the early Cold War
·
TOC
In the wake of 9/11,
many Americans have deplored the dangers
to liberty posed by a growing surveillance state. In this book, Andrea
Friedman moves beyond the standard security/liberty dichotomy, weaving together
often forgotten episodes of early Cold War history to reveal how the obsession
with national security enabled dissent and fostered new imaginings of
democracy.
The stories told here capture a wide-ranging debate about the workings of the national security state and the meaning of American citizenship. Some of the participants in this debate—women like war bride Ellen Knauff and Pentagon employee Annie Lee Moss—were able to make their own experiences compelling examples of the threats posed by the national security regime. Others, such as Ruth Reynolds and Lolita Lebrón, who advocated an end to American empire in Puerto Rico, or the psychiatrist Fredric Wertham, who sought to change the very definition of national security, were less successful. Together, however, they exposed the gap between democratic ideals and government policies.
Friedman traverses immigration law and loyalty boards, popular culture and theoretical treatises, U.S. court-rooms and Puerto Rican jails, to demonstrate how Cold War repression made visible in new ways the unevenness and limitations of American citizenship. Highlighting the ways that race and gender shaped critiques and defenses of the national security regime, she offers new insight into the contradictions of Cold War political culture.
The stories told here capture a wide-ranging debate about the workings of the national security state and the meaning of American citizenship. Some of the participants in this debate—women like war bride Ellen Knauff and Pentagon employee Annie Lee Moss—were able to make their own experiences compelling examples of the threats posed by the national security regime. Others, such as Ruth Reynolds and Lolita Lebrón, who advocated an end to American empire in Puerto Rico, or the psychiatrist Fredric Wertham, who sought to change the very definition of national security, were less successful. Together, however, they exposed the gap between democratic ideals and government policies.
Friedman traverses immigration law and loyalty boards, popular culture and theoretical treatises, U.S. court-rooms and Puerto Rican jails, to demonstrate how Cold War repression made visible in new ways the unevenness and limitations of American citizenship. Highlighting the ways that race and gender shaped critiques and defenses of the national security regime, she offers new insight into the contradictions of Cold War political culture.
Rev. in Peace and
Change
Volume
40, Issue 3, pages 425–427, July 2015
Friedman’s book
includes a history of the repression in the US and explains how the rulers control
the people by the construction of endless crises. --Dick
Tomgram: Engelhardt, Feeling Insecure in 2015
Posted by Tom Engelhardt
at 8:18am, January 6, 2015.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch.
[Note for TomDispatch Readers: All I can
say is thank you! The generosity of this site’s readers was spectacular
last year. In particular, your response to my annual mid-December appeal for
bucks bowled me over. It’s wonderful to begin 2015 knowing that the money is in
the bank to continue our operations. I thank every one of you who visited
our donation page. We’ll do our best this year to live up
to your expectations. Tom]
A
Self-Perpetuating Machine for American Insecurity
Welcome to the National Security State of 2015
By Tom Engelhardt
Welcome to the National Security State of 2015
By Tom Engelhardt
As 2015 begins, let’s take a trip down
memory lane. Imagine that it’s January 1963. For the last three
years, the United States has unsuccessfully faced off against a small island in
the Caribbean, where a revolutionary named Fidel Castro seized power from a
corrupt but U.S.-friendly regime run by Fulgensio Batista. In the global
power struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union in which much of
the planet has chosen sides, Cuba, only 90 miles from the American mainland,
finds itself in the eye of the storm. Having lost Washington’s backing,
it has, however, gained the support of distant Moscow, the other nuclear-armed
superpower on the planet.
In October 1960, President Dwight D.
Eisenhower instituted an embargo on U.S. trade with the island that would, two
years later, be strengthened and made permanent by
John F. Kennedy. On entering the Oval Office, Kennedy also inherited a
cockamamie CIA scheme to use Cuban exiles to overthrow Castro. That led,
in April 1961, to the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in which, despite major
Agency support, the exiles were crushed (after which the CIA would hatch
various mad plots to assassinate the new Cuban leader).
What followed in October 1962 was “the most dangerous moment in human history” -- the Cuban
missile crisis -- a brief period when many Americans, my 18-year-old self
included, genuinely thought we might soon be nuclear toast.
Now, imagine yourself in January 1963, alive
and chastened by a world in which you could be obliterated at any moment.
Imagine as well that someone from our time suddenly invited you into the
American future some 52 Januaries hence, when you would, miracle of miracles,
still be alive and the planet still more or less in one piece. Imagine,
as a start, being told that the embargo against, and Washington’s hostility
toward, Cuba never ended. That 52 futile years later, with Cuba now run
by Fidel’s “younger” brother, 83-year-old Raul, the 11thAmerican president to deal with the “crisis” has finally
decided to restore diplomatic relations, ease trade
restrictions, and encourage American visitors to the island.
Imagine being told as well that in Congress,
more than half a century later, a possible majority of representatives remained
nostalgic for a policy that spent 52 years not working. Imagine that
members of the upcoming 2015 Senate were already swearing they wouldn’t hand
over a plug nickel to the president or the State Department to
establish a diplomatic mission in Havana or confirm an ambassador or ease the
embargo or take any other steps to change the situation, and were denouncing
the president -- who, by the way, is a black man named Barack Obama -- as
a weakling and an “appeaser-in-chief” for making such a move.
Perhaps that American visitor from 1963
would already feel as if his or her mind were being scrambled like a morning
egg and yet we’re only beginning. After all, our visitor would have to be
told that the Soviet Union, that hostile, nuclear-armed communist superpower
and partner of Washington in the potential obliteration of the planet, no
longer exists; that it unexpectedly imploded in 1991, leaving its Eastern
European empire largely free to integrate into the rest of Europe.
One caveat would, however, need to be added
to that blockbuster piece of historical news. Lest our visitor imagine
that everything has changed beyond all recognition, it would be important to
point out that in 2015 the U.S. still confronts an implacably hostile,
nuclear-armed communist state. Not the USSR, of course, nor even that
other communist behemoth, China. (Its Communist Party took the
“capitalist road” in the late 1970s and never looked back as that country rose
to become the globe’s largest economy!)
Here’s a hint: it fought the U.S. to a draw
in a bitter war more than six decades ago and has just been accused of launching a devastating strike against the
United States. Admittedly, it wasn’t aimed at Washington but at
Hollywood. That country -- or some group claiming to beworking in its interests -- broke into a major movie
studio, Sony (oh yes, a Japanese company is now a significant force in
Hollywood!), and released gossip about its inner workings as well as the nasty
things actors, producers, and corporate executives had to say about one
another. It might (or might not), that is, have launched the planet’s first cyber-gossip
bomb.
And yes, you would have to tell our visitor
from 1963 that this hostile communist power, North Korea, is also an
oppressive, beleaguered, lights-out state and in no way a serious enemy, not in a
world in which the U.S. remains the “last superpower.”
You would, of course, have to add that, 52
years later, Vietnam, another implacable communist enemy with whom President
Kennedy was escalating a low-level conflict in 1963, is now a de facto U.S. ally -- and no, not because it lost its war
with us. That war, once considered the longest in U.S. history, would at its height see more
than 500,000 American combat troops dispatched to South Vietnam and, in 1973,
end in an unexpectedly bitter defeat for Washington from which America never
quite seemed to recover.
2015 and Baying for More
Still, with communism a has-been force and
capitalism triumphant everywhere, enemies have been just a tad scarce in the
twenty-first century. Other than the North Koreans, there is the
fundamentalist regime of Iran, which ran its Batista, the Shah, out in 1979,
and with which, in the 35 years since, the U.S. has never come to terms --
though Barack Obama still might -- without ever quite going to war
either. And of course there would be another phenomenon of our moment
completely unknown to an American of 1963: Islamic extremism, aka jihadism,
along with the rise of terrorist organizations and, in 2014, the establishment
of the first mini-terror state in the heart of the Middle East.
And oh yes, there was that tiny crew that went by the name of al-Qaeda, 19 of whose box-cutter-wielding militants hijacked
four planes on September 11, 2001, and destroyed two soaring towers (not yet
built in 1963) in downtown New York City and part of the Pentagon. In the
process, they killed themselves and thousands of civilians, put apocalyptic-looking scenes of destruction on American
television screens, and successfully created a sense of a looming,
communist-style planetary enemy, when just about no one was there.
Their acts gave a new administration
of right-wing fundamentalists in Washington the opportunity
to fulfill its wildest dreams of planetary domination by launching, only
days later, what was grandiloquently called the Global War on Terror (or the Long War, or
World War IV), a superpower crusade against, initially, almost no one. Its
opening salvo would let loose an “all-volunteer” military (no more draft Army
as in 1963) universally believed to be uniquely powerful. It would, they
were sure, wipe out al-Qaeda, settle scores with various enemies in the Greater
Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and leave the U.S. triumphant in
a way no great power had been in history. In response to a few thousand
scattered al-Qaeda members, a Pax Americana would be created
on a global scale that would last generations, if not forever and a day. . . .
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175939/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_feeling_insecure_in_2015/#more
As for the rest of us, insecurity will
surely be the story of our lives for the rest of the twenty-first century (as
it was, of course, in 1963). After all, on August 6, 1945, when we
consciously entered the age of the apocalyptic possibility at Hiroshima, we had
no way of knowing that we had already done so perhaps 200 years earlier as the
industrial revolution, based on the burning of fossil fuels, took off.
Nor almost 20 years later, did that American of 1963 know this. By 1979,
however, the science adviser for the president of the United States was
well aware of global warming. When Jimmy Carter gave his infamous “malaise” speech promoting a massive
commitment to alternative energy research (and got laughed out of the White
House), he already knew that climate change -- not yet called that -- was a
reality that needed to be dealt with.
Now, the rest of us know, or at least should know, and so -- with what is likely to be thehottest year on record just ended -- would be obliged to
offer our visitor from 1963 a graphic account of the coming dangers of a
globally warming world. There has always been a certain sense of
insecurity to any human life, but until 1945 not to all human life. And
yet we now know with something approaching certainty that, even if another
nuclear weapon never goes off (and across the planet nuclear powers are upgrading their arsenals), chaos, acidifying oceans,
melting ice formations, rising seas, flooding coastal areas, mass migrations of
desperate people, food production problems, devastating droughts, and monster
storms are all in a future that will be the definition of human-caused insecurity
-- not that the national security state gives much of a damn.
Admittedly, since at least 2001,
the Pentagon and the U.S. Intelligence Community have been engaged in blue-skies thinking about how to give good war in a globally warming world. The
national security state as a whole, however, has been set up at a cost of
trillions of dollars (and allowed to
spend trillions more) to deal with only one kind of insecurity --
terrorism and the ever-larger line up of enemies that go with it. Such
groups do, of course, represent a genuine danger, but not of an existential
kind. Thought about another way, thetrue terrorists on our planet may be the people running
the Big Energy corporations and about them the national security state could
care less. They are more than free to ply their trade, pull any level of fossil fuel reserves from the ground, and
generally pursue mega-profits while preparing the way for global
destruction, aided and abetted by Washington.
Try now to imagine yourself in the shoes of
that visitor from 1963 absorbing such a future, bizarre almost beyond
imagining: all those trillions of dollars going into a system that essentially
promotes the one danger it was set up to eradicate or at least bring under
control. In the meantime, the part of the state dedicated to national
security conveniently looking the other way when it comes to the leading
candidate for giving insecurity a new meaning in a future that is almost upon
us. Official Washington has, that is, invented a system so dumb, so
extreme, so fundamentalist, and so deeply entrenched in our world that changing
it will surely prove a stunningly difficult task.
Welcome to the new world of American
insecurity and to the nightmarish inheritance we are preparing for our children
and grandchildren.
Tom Engelhardt is a co-founder of
the American Empire
Project and the author of The United States of
Fear as well as a history of the Cold War, The End of Victory Culture. He runs the Nation
Institute's TomDispatch.com.
His new book is Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State
in a Single-Superpower World(Haymarket Books).
Follow TomDispatch on
Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Rebecca
Solnit's Men Explain Things to Me, and Tom Engelhardt's latest
book,Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State
in a Single-Superpower World.
Copyright 2015 Tom Engelhardt
[Widely
reviewed. Review in Z Magazine by Jeremy Kuzmarov, prof. at Tulsa Univ. US
The Asia-Pacific Journal,
Vol. 11, Issue 24, No. 1, June 16, 2014.
The Responsibility of Intellectuals Redux: Humanitarian Intervention and
the Liberal Embrace of War in the Age of Clinton, Bush and Obama
Jeremy Kuzmarov
In a New York Times op-ed following the public’s rejection
of president Barack Obama’s call for air strikes on Syria, Michael Ignatieff, a
professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and former leader of the Canadian
liberal party, sought to reaffirm the doctrine of humanitarian intervention,
stating that while the public had become weary over the failure of wars in
Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, Western democracies had a responsibility to
protect civilians when they are threatened with mass killing. In his view, the
use or threat of force may be “illegal but legitimate,” and the US sometimes
needs to “go at it alone to stop atrocity crimes…..Rebuilding popular
democratic support for the idea of our duty to protect civilians when no one
else can or will,” thus represents “a critical challenge in the years ahead.”1
Samantha Power at the United Nations
|
With colleagues such as Nicholas
Kristof of the New York Times and Samantha Power, US ambassador to
the UN and author of the book, “A Problem From Hell,” which criticizes the US for failing to
intervene historically to halt genocide, Ignatieff has for years been an
influential liberal intellectual championing military intervention on
humanitarian grounds. He and his associates in the “cruise missile left,” as
Edward S. Herman labeled them, have often been more hawkish than
neo-conservatives, championing wars in Libya ,
Syria and initially Iraq US
This essay seeks to critically
scrutinize the doctrine of humanitarian intervention, discussing how Ignatieff
and colleagues seeking a useable past distorted history and served a useful
function for what C. Wright Mills termed the “power elite” by allowing them to
appropriate a human rights rhetoric that in the 1960s was adopted by liberal
antiwar activists to condemn America aggression in Vietnam.2 Replicating the role played by their
predecessors in World War I, liberal interventionists helped to save the US
military-industrial complex from oblivion by building public consensus for
dubious military interventions that Ignatieff now laments threaten to
reinvigorate the pacifist and isolationist sentiments of the 1930s.
|
6:10 PM (1 hour ago)
 |
|
||
|
||||
 |
||||
 |
|
As every schoolchild knows, there are three
check-and-balance branches of the U.S. government: the executive, Congress,
and the judiciary. That’s bedrock Americanism and the most basic high
school civics material. Only one problem: it’s just not so.
During the Cold War years and far more strikingly in the
twenty-first century, the U.S. government has evolved. It sprouted a
fourth branch: the national security state, whose main characteristic may be
an unquenchable urge to expand its power and reach. Admittedly, it
still lacks certain formal prerogatives of governmental power.
Nonetheless, at a time when Congress and the presidency are in a
check-and-balance ballet of inactivity that would have been unimaginable to
Americans of earlier eras, the Fourth Branch is an ever more unchecked and unbalanced
power center in Washington. Curtained off from accountability by a
penumbra ofsecrecy, its leaders increasingly are making nitty-gritty
policy decisions and largely doing what they want, a situation illuminated by
a recent controversy over the possible release of a Senate report on CIA
rendition and torture practices.
All of this is or should be obvious, but remains
surprisingly unacknowledged in our American world. The rise of the Fourth
Branch began at a moment of mobilization for a global conflict, World War
II. It gained heft and staying power in the Cold War of the second half
of the twentieth century, when that other superpower, the Soviet Union,
provided the excuse for expansion of every sort.
Its officials bided their time in the years after the fall
of the Soviet Union, when “terrorism” had yet to claim the landscape and
enemies were in short supply. In the post-9/11 era, in a phony “wartime”
atmosphere, fed bytrillions of taxpayer dollars, and under the banner
of American “safety,” it has grown to unparalleled size and power. So
much so that it sparked a building boom in and around the national capital
(as well as elsewhere in the country). In their
2010 Washington Post series “Top Secret America,” Dana
Priest and William Arkin offered this thumbnail summary of the extent of that boom for the
U.S. Intelligence Community: “In Washington and the surrounding area,” they
wrote, “33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under
construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy
the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings --
about 17 million square feet of space.” And in 2014, the expansion is ongoing.
In this century, a full-scale second “Defense Department,”
the Department of Homeland Security, was created. Around it has grown up
a mini-versionof the military-industrial complex, with the
usual set of consultants, K Street lobbyists, political
contributions, and power relations: just the sort of edifice that President
Eisenhower warned Americans about in his famedfarewell address in 1961. In the meantime, the
original military-industrial complex has only gained strength and influence.
|
 |
Visit our sister sites:
   
Recent Posts
3 days ago... Tomgram: Nick Turse, An East-West Showdown in the Heart of Africa? 5 days ago... Tomgram: Chip Ward, Leave It to Beaver(s) 1 week ago... Tomgram: Naomi Oreskes, A "Green" Bridge to Hell 9 days ago... Tomgram: Peter Van Buren, Undue Process in Washington
Recent Highlights
1 month ago... Tomgram: Noam Chomsky, America's Real Foreign Policy 1 month ago... Tomgram: Juan Cole, Waiting for the Arab Summer |
|
|
|
Recently, I visited our County Court
House to vote and as always I wondered why we had to pass through a security
checkpoint administered by armed guards.
Where’s the threat?
And then I read in the newspaper about
Secretary of State Mark Martin’s wish to tighten security at the Capitol
(Michael Wickline, “Tighter Security an Itch at State Capitol,” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Nov. 22,
2014). Why? Had a threat, or even a hint of a threat,
been discovered? Well, apparently
not, and Martin’s officials do not wish to disclose more, but wish “to meet
privately with lawmakers,” since “’it involves Capitol security’” and
“’sweeping changes’”—that is, will be inconvenient and expensive. But the public did learn that some members
of the Legislative Council’s Executive Subcommittee had questioned whether
security was adequate. Why? Because “security was tightened at the
entrance to the Big Mac Building.”
Why? No reason given, only that
the Director of the Bureau of Legislative Research, Marty Garrity had hired
Securitas of Little Rock to “secure the entrance” to the building. Someone had sounded an alarm, and the security-obsessed
had started lining up to increase security more. (“Wee, sleekit, cowrin, tim'rous beastie, O, what a panic's
in thy breastie!” thank you Robert
Burns, or does some other motive predominate?)
Capitol police Chief Darrell Hedden
“outlined steps that could be taken to make the building more secure.” So he is safe. But the public, the People whose Capitol it
is? What does he recommend against
the amorphous threat? Increased police
work, police officers to augment the present 22 (with dispatchers)? No, rather, decreased public access to our Capitol. It could be “closed on weekends and
holidays and a traffic tunnel beneath the steps and next to the east entrance
could be closed to the public.” And
“all events by outside parties should be discontinued at Capitol Hill
[Apartments},” where lawmakers live during sessions and have receptions. However, now that he has established
himself as thoroughly on the side of security, wily Shut the Capitol Down Heddon reminds the security-challenged that
such changes will be expensive and once in place difficult to change—“’a
major and lasting financial commitment.’”
In
response, Secretary of State Martin’s spokesman Doug Matayo repeated their
desire to first speak privately with lawmakers, and with the
Governor-elect, Asa Hutchinson, a
former federal Homeland Security undersecretary, before undertaking even
minor changes, such as a rope line at the elevator to ensure all visitors had
been screened for weapons (requested by President Pro-Tempore Jonathan
Dismang). He repeated because “very
sweeping changes” were being considered which would be inconvenient and
expensive (and who will be the contractors?), and they wanted everyone to be
agreeable to the changes.
Particularly, they wanted to “be good stewards of the tax
dollars.” Finally, Mr. Wickline quotes
Matayo as cognizant of the need both for public access to the Capitol and for
“safety and security” for the people who work there. That’s his “balancing act.”
Mr. Matayo seems a nimble Wile E. Coyote
in all this, until one thinks--about the power of fear and conformity despite
the absence of threat (somebody else is increasing security so we’d better do
it), the secrecy (prefer “to meet privately with lawmakers”), the cant (planning
to spend the people’s treasury without cause while claiming to be good
stewards, and to restrict our access—our freedom, our democracy—while trying
to undermine our “rare” Capitol’s access), the possibility of greed (Mr.
Wickline asks no questions about the ownership and clients of Securitas), and
the power (controlling the People’s money
and the People’s physical movement).
And until one remembers. This drama mimics anti-democratic national
politics. At the conclusion of Pay Any Price, 273 circumstantial
pages on the catastrophe against our democracy by the “War on Terror”
(torture legalized, 4th Amendment nullified) author James Risen
writes: “The intense [bipartisan]
campaign to ramp up cybersecurity and pour money and resources into
mysterious new programs, while limiting online privacy, sounds eerily similar
to the debate after 9/11 over security versus civil liberty, in which
security always won.”
But perhaps it will not win in this
case, if the People speak up for access to its elected officials and for
spending for citizens’ needs instead of officials’ fear, conformity, and
ambition (Securitas!).
|
OPPOSITION TO THE
US WARFARE/SURVEILLANCE STATE
AT LEAST,
CONGRESS, DISCUSS ANOTHER MIDDLE EAST WAR
June 6, 2015
|
3:37 PM (18 hours ago)
 |
|
||
|
||||
 |
|
Debating the costs of endless war
|
We are already more than 10 months into another Middle East war and the Republican leadership has refused to allow Congress to even debate its costs and consequences. This week, I was able to pass an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill to push Congress closer to finally debating and voting on this war. Click here to read more about my ongoing fight to stop endless war or watch Rachel Maddow’s coverage of my amendment here. |
This was so beautiful to see...
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
TWO LOCAL MEN ATTENDED THE RALLY
Newsletter
Alec Baldwin: Americans have been lied to
Edward Snowden saw things he thought we, as Americans,
should know. He valued the truth and thought you could handle it, says Alec
Baldwin.
Americans wave
flags at Barack Obama's second inauguration as president. Photo: Getty
Obviously, we’ve been here before. The
United States America Guantanamo
Americans,
in terms of their enthusiasm for defending their beloved democratic principles
in the face of an ever more muscular assault on those principles by the state
in the name of national security, are exhausted. If you are a “boomer”, like
me, and have lived through the past five decades with any degree of political
efficacy, you can draw a line from JFK’s assassination to the subsequent
escalation of the Vietnam war, on to 1968 with the murders of Martin Luther
King and Robert Kennedy, the Chicago Democratic Convention and Nixon’s
resurrection; from there, to Kent State, the Pentagon Papers, Nixon’s
re-election, Watergate, Nixon’s resignation, Ford’s pardon, Carter’s one term
and out, the curious Iran hostage situation, Reagan (who brings back a degree
of the charm and affability that died in Dallas), Iran Contra, Oliver North,
Bush the First (as in first CIA director to become president), Iraq the First,
Clinton kills welfare, Gingrich shuts down the Congress, Clinton’s impeachment,
the 2000 election, Bush v Gore, Bush the Second, 9/11, Iraq the
Second, “Mission Accomplished”, the Swift Boaters, Afghanistan, Gitmo, Assange,
Manning, Snowden.
I have left out a good deal. There is,
of course, a lot that’s positive running through the American narrative during
this time, but I think more bad than good. You look at all of this laid end to
end and you’d think the US
Alec Baldwin is an actor and author. Follow him on Twitter:
@AlecBaldwin
Noam Chomsky. (photo: MIT)
Noam Chomsky: America
atherine Komp: It's been twenty- five
years since the publication of your and Edward Herman's acclaimed book Manufacturing
Consent. How much do you think has changed with
the propaganda model, and where do you see it playing out most prominently
today?
Noam Chomsky: Well, ten years ago we had a re-edition
and we talked about some of the changes. One change is that we were too narrow.
There are a number of filters that determine the framework of reporting, and
one of the filters was too narrow. Instead of "anti-communism," which
was too narrow, it should have been "fear of the concocted enemy." So
yes, it could be anti-communism-most of that is concocted. So take Cuba Cuba
was listed as one of the military threats to the United States Luxembourg
The
United States
There is change. Free Speech Radio didn't
exist when we wrote the book, and there are some things on the Internet which
break the bonds, as do independent work and things like the book I was just
talking about when we came in, Jeremy Scahill's Dirty Wars, which is a fantastic piece of investigative reporting
on the ground of what actually happens in the countries where we're carrying
out these terror campaigns. And there's a lot of talk about drones, but not
much about the fact that they are terror weapons.
tomdispatch@nationinstitute.org
|
September 17, 2013
[Note for TomDispatch Readers: I
wanted those of you who were kind enough to send in a donation for a signed,
personalized copy of Andrew Bacevich's widely hailed new book, Breach
of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country, to know that it is now officially in
the mail to you! He's been on a book tour, which has slowed the
process. (Most recent
appearance: the Colbert Report on Monday!) Anyone who still wants a
signed book in return for a contribution of $100 (or more), the offer remains open. Just visit
our donation page to check it out. Tom]Tomgram: Engelhardt, How to Build a National Security Blowback Machine Letter to an Unknown Whistleblower How the By Tom Engelhardt Dear Whistleblower, I don’t know who you are or what you do or how old you may be. I just know that you exist somewhere in our future as surely as does tomorrow or next year. You may be young and computer-savvy or a career federal employee well along in years. You might be someone who entered government service filled with idealism or who signed on to “the bureaucracy” just to make a living. You may be a libertarian, a closet left-winger, or as mainstream and down-the-center as it’s possible to be. I don’t know much, but I know one thing that you may not yet know yourself. I know that you’re there. I know that, just as Edward Snowden and Bradley (now And how exactly do I know this? Because despite our striking inability to predict the future, it’s a no-brainer that the national security state is already building you into its labyrinthine systems. In the urge of its officials tocontrol all of us and every situation, in their mania for all-encompassing secrecy, in their classification not just of the millions of documents they generate, but essentially all their operations as “secret” or “top secret,” in their all-encompassing urge to shut off the most essential workings of the government from the eyes of its citizenry, in their escalating urge to punishanyone who would bring their secret activities to light, in their urge to see or read or listen in on or peer into the lives of you (every “you” on the planet), in their urge to build a global surveillance state and a military that will dominate everything in or out of its path, in their urge to drop bombs on Pakistan and fire missiles at Syria, in their urge to be able to assassinatejust about anyone just about anywhere robotically, they are birthing you. In every action, a reaction. So they say, no? Give our national security managers credit, though: they may prove to be the master builders of the early twenty-first century. Their ambitions have been breathtaking and their ability to commandeer staggering amounts of our taxpayer dollars to pay for those projects hardly less so. Their monuments to themselves, their version of pyramids and ziggurats -- like the vast data storage center the National Security Agency is building foralmost $2 billion in Bluffdale, Utah, to keep a yottabyte of private information about all of us, or the new post-9/11 headquarters the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency built, again for almost $2 billion, so that its 16,000 employees could monitor our system of satellites Click here to read more of this dispatch.Click here to read more of this dispatch. Click here to read more of this dispatch.Click here to read more of this dispatch.nitoring every square inch of the planet -- are in their own way unique. In their urge to control everything, to see everything from your Facebook chatter to th Click here to read more of this dispatch.eemails of the Brazilian president, they are creating a system built to blowback, and not just from the outside or distant lands. Chalmers Johnson, who took “blowback,” an obscure term of CIA tradecraft, and embedded it in our everyday language, would have instantly recognized what they’re doing: creating a blowback machine whose “unintended consequences” (another term of his) are guaranteed, like the effects of the Snowden revelations, to stun us all in a myriad of ways. Click here to read more of this dispatch. |
 |
|
Wed Jun 12, 2013
12:46 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Nate
Goldshlag" nategold via VFP
"We are
seeing an unprecedented campaign against whistleblowers and truth-tellers: it's
now criminal to expose the crimes of the state...For that, I paid a very
high price. And Edward Snowden will, too. But I have my freedom, and what is
the price for freedom? What future do we want to keep?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution
Peace,
Nate Goldshlag nateg at pobox.com (replace at with @)
Arlington
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution
Peace,
Nate Goldshlag nateg at pobox.com (replace at with @)
Thu Jun 13, 2013 9:24 am (PDT) . Posted by:
Hi all,
This 29-year-old just gave up his whole life to blow the whistle on the US’s insane PRISM program -- which has hacked all our emails, Skype messages and Facebook posts for years. If millions of us act urgently and get behind him, we can help press the
This 29 year-old analyst just gave up his whole life -- his girlfriend, his job, and his home -- to blow the whistle on the US government's shocking PRISM program -- which has been reading and recording our emails, Skype messages, Facebook posts and phone calls for years.
When Bradley Manning passed this kind of data to Wikileaks, the
The authorities and press are deciding right now how to handle this scandal. If millions of us stand with Edward in the next 48 hours, it will send a powerful statement that he should be treated like the brave whistleblower that he is, and it should be PRISM, and not Edward, that the US cracks down on:
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/stop_prism_global/?bcIDHbb&v=25834
PRISM is profoundly disturbing: it gives the US government unlimited access to all of our personal email and social media accounts on Google, Youtube, Facebook, Skype, Hotmail, Yahoo! and much more. They're recording billions of our messages every month and the CIA can now or in the future use the information to prosecute, persecute, or blackmail us, our friends or our families!
Edward was horrified by this unprecedented violation of individual privacy. So he copied large amounts of files, sent them to the Guardian newspaper for publication and escaped to
We can't let the
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/stop_prism_global/?bcIDHbb&v=25834
Sometimes the things our governments do are simply breathtaking. When heroic individuals like Edward have risked their own freedoms to bring scandals of this scale into light, the Avaaz community has come together to demand fair treatment -- and won. When half a million of us joined with other organizations and activists calling on the
With hope and determination,
Ricken, Emma, Oli, Mia, Allison, Ari, Dalia, Laura and the whole Avaaz team
PS - Many Avaaz campaigns are started by members of our community! Start yours now and win on any issue - local, national or global:http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/start_a_petition/?bgMYedb&v=25795
MORE INFORMATION:
Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
Edward Snowden Contact Glenn Greenwald Should Be 'Disappeared', Security Officials 'Overheard Saying' (Huffington Post)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/10/nsa-leaker-and-journalist-should-be-disappeared-overheard_n_3414346.html?utm_hp_ref=canada&ir=Canada
NSA PRISM program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data
Prism scandal: Government program secretly probes Internet servers (Chicago Tribune)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-nsa-prism-scandal-20130607,0,301166.story
PRISM by the Numbers: A Guide to the Government’s Secret Internet Data-Mining Program (TIME)
http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/06/06/prism-by-the-numbers-a-guide-to-the-governments-secret-internet-data-mining-program/
Anger swells after NSA phone records court order revelations (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/obama-administration-nsa-verizon-records
Data-collection program got green light from MacKay in 2011 (Globe and Mail)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/data-collection-program-got-green-light-from-mackay-in-2011/article12444909/
Greens unveil plan to require warrant to access phone and internet records (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/greens-warrant-phone-internet-records
Support the Avaaz Community!
We're entirely funded by donations and receive no money from governments or corporations. Our dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way.
Reader Supported News | 13 June 13
FOCUS: James
Bamford | The Secret War
James Bamford, Wired
Bamford writes: "In its tightly controlled public relations, the NSA has focused attention on the threat of cyberattack against the US - the vulnerability of critical infrastructure like power plants and water systems, the susceptibility of the military's command and control structure, the dependence of the economy on the Internet's smooth functioning."
READ MORE
James Bamford, Wired Bamford writes: "In its tightly controlled public relations, the NSA has focused attention on the threat of cyberattack against the US - the vulnerability of critical infrastructure like power plants and water systems, the susceptibility of the military's command and control structure, the dependence of the economy on the Internet's smooth functioning."
READ MORE
Main Core: A List Of Millions Of
Americans That Will Be Subject To Detention During Martial Law
from: Intellihub.com
Are you on the list? Are you one of the millions of Americans that have been designated a threat to national security by theU.S.
Are you on the list? Are you one of the millions of Americans that have been designated a threat to national security by the
End of the American Dream By Michael Snyder
June 11, 2013
http://intellihub.com/2013/06/11/main-core-a-list-of-millions-of-americans-that-will-be-subject-to-detention-during-martial-law/
Will you be subject to detention when martial law is imposed during a major national emergency? As you will see below, there is actually a list that contains the names of at least 8 million Americans known as Main Core that the
So I decided to look into Main Core, and what I found out was absolutely stunning – especially in light of what Edward Snowden has just revealed to the world. It turns out that the
The following is how Wikipedia describes Main Core…
Main Core is the code name of a database maintained since the 1980s by the federal government of the
SECURITY
TRUMPS OPEN COURT
“Manning
Attorneys OK Closed Courtroom.” ADG (June 26, 2013).
Defense
attorneys raise no objection to closing the court-martial hearing to public and
press when the prosecution wishes “to protect classified evidence.” [Given the unrestrained classification of
government documents and the seriousness of the charges against Pfc. Manning
(espionage, theft, computer fraud, aiding the enemy, carrying a life sentence),
the public should demand an open courtroom and the highest standards for
security classification. For more see
the following. –Dick]
1.
Courtroom closures likely at
Army leaker's trial | News OK
5 days ago – Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, right, is escorted as he
arrives at the ... As the trial entered its fourth week, defense attorney David Coombs told the military ...Denise Lind, he had no objection
to closing the courtroom only while ...
2.
Presentation by
Bradley's attorney David Coombs,
transcript and video
December 3, 2012
presentation by Bradley Manning's
attorney David
Coombs at ... an attorney that is focused on what is happening in the courtroom and only what is .....OK, for simle
and stupid canniballs like the “Holzhacker from germsland” ...
3.
Correction: Manning-WikiLeaks story |
neurope.eu
4 days ago – On Tuesday, defense attorneys did not object having the judge read those
portions ... Manning defense OK with plan to avoid court closure ... military judge he had no objection to closing the courtroom while prosecutors read ...
4.
WikiLeaks suspect's lawyer: Manning's treatment 'blemish'
on ...
Dec 4, 2012 – David Coombs, the civilian lawyer representing Bradley Manning at his court ... the courtroom, Coombs addressed an
audience of Bradley Manning ... way things are going, and confident they will
ultimately turn out OK for him.
5.
Manning Trial Shrouded in
Secrecy, Security | TIME.com
Jun 4, 2013 – One of the pretrial hearings was closed to the public. ... School of Law
Chris Hedges.
“The Menace of the Military Mind .”
TruthDig , Reader Supported News, Feb. 3, 2014
Hedges writes: "In the military, whether at the Paris Island boot camp or West Point, you are trained not to think but to obey."
READ MORE
TruthDig , Reader Supported News, Feb. 3, 2014
Hedges writes: "In the military, whether at the Paris Island boot camp or West Point, you are trained not to think but to obey."
READ MORE
The Criminal
NSA
HE twin revelations that telecom carriers
have been secretly giving the National Security Agency information about
Americans' phone calls, and that the N.S.A. has been capturing e-mail and other
private communications from Internet companies as part of a secret program
called Prism, have not
enraged most Americans. Lulled, perhaps, by the Obama administration's claims
that these "modest encroachments on privacy"
were approved by Congress and by federal judges, public opinion quickly
migrated from shock to "meh."
It didn't help that
Congressional watchdogs - with a few exceptions, like Senator Rand Paul,
Republican of Kentucky - have accepted the White House's claims of legality.
The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of
California, and Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, have called the
surveillance legal. So have liberal-leaning commentators like Hendrik Hertzberg and David Ignatius.
This view is wrong - and not only, or even mainly, because of the
privacy issues raised by the American
Civil Liberties Union and other critics. The two programs violate both the
letter and the spirit of federal law. No statute explicitly authorizes mass
surveillance. Through a series of legal contortions, the Obama administration
has argued that Congress, since 9/11, intended to implicitly authorize mass
surveillance. But this strategy mostly consists of wordplay, fear-mongering and
a highly selective reading of the law. Americans deserve better from the White
House - and from President Obama, who has seemingly forgotten the
constitutional law he once taught.
I hope Jennifer Grankic and Chris Sprigman
are not persecuted nor prosecuted for their brave, apparently well-researched , comments. I believe they are correct:
The actions of our government/gove rnmental agencies have violated the spirit and letter of
the law. The question arises: Who will bring them up on charges, and who will
prosecute the miscreant acts? It will never be the current Attorney General. It
must be left up to a Congress that is riddled with thugs, incompetents and
wrong doers. To whom do the American people turn now ... in their desperate
hour of need ...?
"Who will bring them up on charges,
and who will prosecute the miscreant acts?"
I suspect no one. Even the most enraged of all the politicians and others critical of the current crop of government excesses are only spouting words. There exists a huge chasm between oratory and action - a chasm that few (if any) are willing to traverse. Even the most heinous trespasses i.e. torture, kidnapping and negligent homicide have gone unpunished. Our government has all the integrity of a twenty-dollar hooker e.g. "Show me the money."
I suspect no one. Even the most enraged of all the politicians and others critical of the current crop of government excesses are only spouting words. There exists a huge chasm between oratory and action - a chasm that few (if any) are willing to traverse. Even the most heinous trespasses i.e. torture, kidnapping and negligent homicide have gone unpunished. Our government has all the integrity of a twenty-dollar hooker e.g. "Show me the money."
30 June 13 Reader
Supported News
Todd Gitlin | America
and Agent Provocateurs
Todd Gitlin, TomDispatch
Gitlin writes: "Some intriguing bits about informers and agents provocateurs briefly made it into the public spotlight when Occupy Wall Street was riding high. But as always, dots need connecting."
READ MORE
Todd Gitlin, TomDispatch
Gitlin writes: "Some intriguing bits about informers and agents provocateurs briefly made it into the public spotlight when Occupy Wall Street was riding high. But as always, dots need connecting."
READ MORE
Tomgram: Engelhardt, Boo!
Posted by Tom
Engelhardt at 4:43pm, November
24, 2013.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch.
[I omitted several opening paragraphs. http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175776/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_boo!/#more –D]
The
Sharks, Aliens, and Snakes of Our World
This came
to mind recently because I started wondering why, when we step out of those
movie theaters, our American world doesn’t scare us more. Why doesn’t it
make more of us want to jump out of our skins? These days, our screen
lives seem an apocalyptic tinge to them, with all those zombie war movies and the like. I'm curious,
though: Does what should be deeply disturbing, even apocalyptically terrifying,
in the present moment strike many of us as the equivalent of so many movie-made
terrors -- shivers and fears produced in a world so far beyond us that we can
do nothing about them?
I’m not
talking, of course, about the things that reach directly for your throat and,
in their immediacy, scare the hell out of you -- not the sharks who took
millions of homes in the foreclosure crisis or the aliens who ate so many jobs
in recent years or even the snakes who snatched food stamps from needy Americans. It’s the
overarching dystopian picture I’m wondering about. The question is: Are
most Americans still in that movie house just waiting for the lights to come
back on?
I mean,
we’re living in a country that my parents would barely recognize. It has
a frozen, riven, shutdown-driven Congress, professionally gerrymandered into
incumbency, endlessly lobbied, and seemingly incapable of actually
governing. It has a leader whose presidency appears to be imploding before our eyes and whose single accomplishment
(according to most pundits), like the website that goes with it, has been
unraveling as we watch. Its 1% elections, with their multi-billion dollar campaign seasons and staggering
infusions of money from the upper reaches of wealth and corporate life, are
less and less anybody’s definition of “democratic.”
And while
Washington fiddles, inequality is on the rise, with so
much money floating around in the 1% world that millions of dollars are left
over to drive the prices of pieces of art into the
stratosphere, even as poverty grows and the army of the poor
multiplies. And don’t forget that the national infrastructure -- all
those highways, bridges, sewer systems, and tunnels that were once the unspoken
pride of the country -- is visibly fraying.
Up-Armoring
America
Meanwhile,
to the tune of a trillion dollars or more a year, our national treasure
has been squandered on the maintenance of a war state, the garrisoning of the planet, and the eternal
upgrading of “homeland security.” Think about it: so far in the
twenty-first century, the U.S.
In the twenty-first
century, the power to make war has gravitated ever more decisively into the
White House, where the president has a private air force of drones, and two
private armies of his own -- those special operations types and CIA
paramilitaries -- to order into battle just about anywhere on the planet.
Meanwhile, the real power center in Washington has increasingly come to be
located in the national security state
(and the allied corporate “complexes” linked to it
by that famed “revolving door”
somewhere in the nation’s capital). That state within a state has gone
through boom times even as many Americans busted. It has experienced a
multi-billion-dollar construction bonanza, including the raising of elaborate
new headquarters, scores of building complexes,
massive storage facilities, and
the like, while the private housing market went to hell. With its share
of that trillion-dollar national security budget, its many agencies and outfits
have been bolstered even as the general economy descended into a seemingly permanent slump.
As
everyone is now aware, the security
state’s intelligence wing has embedded eyes and ears almost everywhere,
online and off, here and around the world. The NSA, the CIA, and other agencies are scooping up just about every
imaginable form of human communication, no matter where or in what form it
takes place. In the process, American intelligence has “weaponized” the Internet
and functionally banished the idea of privacy to some other planet.
Meanwhile,
the “Defense” Department has grown ever larger as Washington
Domestically,
the U.S.
In a
parallel development, Americans have themselves become more heavily armed and
in a more military style. Among the 300,000,000 firearms of all sorts estimated to be
floating around the U.S.
On August
1, 1966, a former Marine sniper took to the
28th floor of a tower on the campus of the University of Texas
And don’t
even get me started on imprisonment, a category in which we qualify as the
world’s leader with 2.2 million people
behind bars, a 500% increase over the last three decades, or the rise of the punitive spirit in this country.
That would include the handcuffing of
remarkably young children at their schools for minor infractions and a fierce
government war on whistleblowers -- those, that is, who want to tell us
something about what’s going on inside the increasingly secret state that runs
our American world and that, in 2011, considered 92 million of
the documents it generated so potentially dangerous to outside eyes that it
classified them.
A
Nameless State (of Mind)
Still,
don’t call this America
And by the
way, what I’ve been describing so far isn’t the apocalyptic part of the story,
just the everyday framework for American life in 2013. For your basic
apocalypse, you need to turn to a subject that, on the whole, doesn’t much
interest Washington
You still
wanna be scared? Imagine that someone offered you a wager, and let’s be
conservative here: continue on your present path and there will be a 10%-20%
chance that this planet becomes virtually uninhabitable a century or two from
now. Not bad odds, right? Still, I think just about anyone would
admit that only a maniac would take such a bet, no matter the odds.
Actually, let me amend that: only a maniac or the people who run the planet’s major energy companies,
and the governments (our own included) that help fund and advance their activities, and
those governments like Russia and Saudi Arabia that are essentially giant
energy companies.
Because,
hey, realistically speaking, that’s the bet that all of us on planet Earth have
taken on.
And just
in case you were wondering whether you were still at the movies, you’re not,
and the lights aren’t coming back on either.
Now, if
that isn’t scary, what is?
Boo!
Tom
Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire
Project and
author of The United States of Fear as well as a history of the
Cold War, The End of Victory Culture (now also in a Kindle edition),
runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com.
His latest book, co-authored with Nick Turse, is Terminator Planet: The First
History of Drone Warfare, 2001-2050.
Follow
TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook or Tumblr.
Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Ann Jones’s They Were Soldiers: How the Wounded
Return From America’s Wars -- The Untold Story.
Copyright
2013 Tom Engelhardt
2013/10/30
AlterNet By Nicolas J.S.
Davies: The Tragic History of U.S.
[I read Davies’ essay in Z Magazine (Dec. 2013). –Dick]
The idea of U.S. U.S. Syria Syria U.S. U.S. Germany
and Japan in the Second
World War was not the result of American military supremacy, but of an alliance
across ideological lines with imperial Britain
and the communist Soviet Union , based on
mutual trust, vigorous diplomacy and the recognition of a common existential
threat. Most Americans believed at the time that the war would lead to a
renewed international commitment to peace and disarmament, not to an American
bid for military supremacy. American, British and Soviet leaders agreed that
their common interests required what Roosevelt
called "a permanent structure of peace" after the war.
Contents
of US NSS Newsletter #1 March 22, 2013
Gagnon, New Missile “Defense” in Maine
Melley, Secrecy and NSS
Mueller, From Threats to Fear to Political Control
Engelhardt on Fear USA
Dick: Hearts and Minds
Graham on Military Urbanism
Dick: Hearts and Minds
Graham on Military Urbanism
Engelhardt, Terror Fears
Turse, President/Pentagon and Middle
East Despots
Engelhardt, Post-Legal USA
Douglass, Assassination of JFK Jr
Contents
#2 June 9, 2013
National Security Agency (NSA) Domestic Spying
Obama and Militarization of Police
Top Secret USA
Giroux: US Warfare
State
Blum: Exporting
“Democracy”
Dick: Cyber Threat, Fear, Empire, War
Google Search: US Cyber War
Barry: Drones Further Militarize the Border
Kuzmarov: US
Police Training for Repression and Empire
McCoy: Policing US Empire
Dick: US NSS Newsletters
END NSS NEWSLETTER #3 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment