Category: News

In the New York Times, Ben Macintyre reviews the new book by Richard Overy The Bombers and the Bombed. Macintyre gives a summary of Overy’s myth-busting about the Allied bombing of Germany. Indiscriminate bombing of civilians, instead of sticking to military targets, is usually defended as (1) a response to similarly indiscriminate bombing campaigns by the Germans, like in the Blitz, and (2) the only way to completely bring down the Nazi regime.

“Overy demonstrates, however, that the tactic of bombing urban areas had been put into action by the British before the Blitz,” Macintyre reports. And as for the second justification:

[T]hough the devastation left ordinary Germans demoralized, exhausted and frightened, the bombs did not provoke internal collapse or social implosion; the German people were not bombed into revolution. In the cruellest irony, the hardship and terror may even have solidified the Nazis’ grip on the populace: “The effect of the bombing was not, in the end, as the Allies hoped, to drive a wedge between people and regime, but the opposite, to increase dependence on the state and the party.”

Of course, this is by no means to say that the Allies were in the wrong while Nazi Germany was somehow better behaved. WWII was a massive conglomeration of evil acts of mass murder on all sides, and Nazi Germany was the epitome of that evil. But there is a valuable lesson in reviewing Allied war policy critically in this fashion.

The staying power of Allied propaganda has proven remarkably durable. Most people nowadays think back to WWI and frame it as a needless conflagration in which millions were used as cannon fodder for the small-minded and narrow self-interests of competing European states. Very little moral compulsion remains attached to the war effort on any side in that conflict.

WWII, however, is different. Most people still consider the Allied war effort a saintly battle for the freedom of the world. Political and military leaders of the time are still revered as heroes. Purging Europe of Nazis and fascists was, uncontroversially, a welcome result. But this shouldn’t delude us into framing the conflict as a purely Manichean, good vs. evil dichotomy, as it is so often framed in the public.

As U.S. General Curtis LeMay, commander of the Tokyo fire bombing operation, admitted, there were war criminals on all sides. “I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal,” he said. “Fortunately, we were on the winning side.”

If Overy’s scholarship on this is right, and the two main moral and strategic justifications for Allied indiscriminate bombing of civilians don’t hold up to scrutiny, it may represent the beginnings of a broader understanding of WWII that is closer to the one we have about WWI, or closer to LeMay’s characterization. And that is for the better.

The Egyptian court has just handed down one of the most grotesque sentences in Egyptian history, condemning 529 people to death in one fell swoop. The US State Department said it was "shocked" and that the verdict defies logic. “While appeals are possible, it simply does not seem possible that a fair review of evidence and testimony consistent with international standards could be accomplished with over 529 defendants after a two-day trial,” a State Department official said. Amnesty International issued a condemnation, and CODEPINK has launched a campaign to pressure the Egyptian government to overturn the verdict and respect political dissent.

The court sentenced supporters of ousted President Mohamed Morsi for their alleged role in the murder of a single police officer in the southern city of Minya last August. In addition to the murder, the 529 defendants were accused of attempting to kill two other police officers and attacking a police station. The incident occurred after the military overthrew President Morsi in July 2013 and violently broke up two pro-Morsi encampments in Cairo, leaving nearly 1,000 people dead and arresting some 16,000 people, including most of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership.

The court held two sessions. In the first session, the judge angrily shouted down requests by defense lawyers for more time to review the prosecution’s case. In the second session, the judge barred defense lawyers from even entering the courtroom. “We didn’t have the chance to say a word or to look at more than 3,000 pages of investigation to see what evidence they are talking about,” attorney Khaled el-Koumi told The Associated Press.

A senior official involved in courtroom security, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that 154 defendants were in the courtroom in a cage, and upon hearing the verdict, screamed at the judge "You butcher!" The rest of the defendants were tried in absentia.

The group is among some 1,200 Muslim Brotherhood supporters on trial; a second group of 683 Morsi supporters is due to go on trial on March 25, including the leader of the group, Mohamed Badie, and the head of its political wing, Saad al-Katatny.

Continue reading “Egypt Kangaroo Court Sentences 529 Morsi Supporters to Death”

In September 2012, the Washington Post reported that the U.S. government considers cyber-attacks to constitute acts of war that can justly be countered with conventional retaliation.

“Cyberattacks can amount to armed attacks triggering the right of self-defense and are subject to international laws of war, the State Department’s top lawyer said Tuesday,” the report stated clearly.

The hypocrisy of this position was obvious at the time, given what we knew about U.S. cyber-warfare against Iran and other enemies of the state. But the flagrant hypocrisy was all the more apparent following revelations from documents leaked by Edward Snowden.

According to reports this week in the New York Times, Der Spiegel, and elsewhere, the NSA conducted cyber-warfare against the Chinese company Huawei, created “back-doors” and “obtained information about the workings of the giant routers and complex digital switches that Huawei boasts connect a third of the world’s population, and monitored communications of the company’s top executives.” The Times puts it succinctly enough:

American officials have long considered Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, a security threat, blocking it from business deals in the United States for fear that the company would create “back doors” in its equipment that could allow the Chinese military or Beijing-backed hackers to steal corporate and government secrets.

But even as the United States made a public case about the dangers of buying from Huawei, classified documents show that the National Security Agency was creating its own back doors — directly into Huawei’s networks.

American officials, particularly members of the Obama administration, have for years stood on their pedestal in Washington, DC and condemned China for its cyber-warfare and espionage of the U.S. government and American businesses. In secret, though, they are acting in precisely the same way.

Given the State Departments conclusion that “cyber-attacks” violate international law and can trigger “the right to self-defense,” one has to assume the U.S. government believes China is justified in bombing Washington…right? If not, there has to be something terribly wrong with the logic of the U.S. position.

Back in October, two George Washington University professors explained in Foreign Affairs that the leaks of Snowden and Manning “undermine Washington’s ability to act hypocritically and get away with it,” an essential ingredient in exercising world power. “This system” of American power “needs the lubricating oil of hypocrisy to keep its gears turning,” they explained. But the recent leaks show that Washington is “unable to consistently abide by the values that it trumpets.”

Rep. Mike Rogers, one of the most doggedly pro-NSA figures in Congress, is once again making claims for which he presents zero evidence and which contradict findings from the intelligence community. Specifically, he is going on television to claim Edward Snowden is a double agent for the Russians.

New York Times:

A top congressional intelligence official said on Sunday that American counterintelligence officials are virtually unanimous in believing that Edward J. Snowden is “under the influence of Russian intelligence services.”

That suggestion came from Representative Mike Rogers, the Michigan Republican who is chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

Mr. Rogers had previously raised the possibility that Mr. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, might be working for Russia, though the congressman has yet to offer any evidence. His assertions on Sunday, however, were his most sweeping to date.

“Every counterintelligence official believes that,” Mr. Rogers said on the NBC News program “Meet the Press.” “You won’t find one that doesn’t believe today he’s under the influence of Russian intelligence services.”

Actually, I know of one official who doesn’t believe Snowden is working with Russian intelligence services: Rick Ledgett, the guy who leads the NSA’s task force on Snowden’s leaks. That task force, according to a Reuters report, “found no evidence that [Snowden] had help either within the NSA or from adversary spy agencies.”

The FBI has also concluded that Snowden “worked alone.” Indeed, in the final paragraph of the New York Times article reporting on Rogers’ latest allegations, it is reiterated: “There has been no public indication that investigators for the F.B.I., the N.S.A. or the Pentagon have uncovered evidence that Mr. Snowden received assistance from any foreign intelligence service.”

So what the hell is Mike Rogers talking about? Notably, Rogers has also made other outlandish allegations on the NSA scandal, claiming last month that Glenn Greenwald had been “selling his access to information” for his own “personal gain.” When he said this, I called his office and was directed to the House Intelligence Committee’s Spokesperson Susan Phalen, who insisted, “Chairman [Rogers] does not make such statements casually.” When I pressed her for one iota of evidence for these very serious claims, she said she “can’t divulge.”

In other words, there is no evidence. And the claims Rogers has been making about Snowden directly contradict the findings of both the FBI and the NSA. So why is he making these claims?

I have some guesses. One guess is that he is trying to demonize Snowden for propaganda purposes and thereby turn public opinion against him. This is especially plausible after the demonization of Russia following Ukraine crisis, since hatred of Russia is higher than at any time since the Cold War. Another possibility is that he is trying to stoke outrage and gather support within the government to violate Snowden’s asylum, use force to apprehend him, and punish him, thereby discouraging further leaks and staving off the momentum for reform.

The real tragedy here is that no interviewer ever seems to be willing to exhibit the slightest skepticism when Rogers makes these evidence-free claims. The willingness of the press to simply take his words for granted because he is the chairman of the House intelligence committee is astounding.

The National Security Archive, an organization founded “to check rising government secrecy,” has awarded its annual Rosemary Award to James Clapper “for worst open government performance in 2013,” chiefly for his now infamous lie to Sen. Ron Wyden that the NSA doesn’t collect information on millions of Americans.

Despite heavy competition, Clapper’s “No, sir” lie to Senator Ron Wyden’s question: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” sealed his receipt of the dubious achievement award, which cites the vastly excessive secrecy of the entire U.S. surveillance establishment.

The Rosemary Award citation leads with what Clapper later called the “least untruthful” answer possible to congressional questions about the secret bulk collection of Americans’ phone call data. It further cites other Clapper claims later proved false, such as his 2012 statement that “we don’t hold data on U.S. citizens.”

The Archive’s “not-so-coveted Rosemary Award in 2005, named after President Nixon’s secretary, Rose Mary Woods, who testified she had erased 18-and-a-half minutes of a crucial Watergate tape,” the press release explains.

“Bestowed annually to highlight the lowlights of government secrecy, the Rosemary Award has recognized a rogue’s gallery of open government scofflaws, including the CIA, the Treasury Department, the Air Force, the FBI, the Federal Chief Information Officers’ Council, and the career Rosemary leader — the Justice Department — for the last two years,” the Archive adds in its statement.

In addition to Clapper, the Archive also recognizes NSA chief Gen. Keith Alexander, former FBI director Robert Mueller, the Justice Department, and President Obama for what you might call dishonorable mentions. Essentially, their inclusion is based on successive lies told to the American people about the surveillance programs revealed by Edward Snowden.

• Continue reading “Spy Chief James Clapper Wins Rosemary Award”

Who violated international law, Russia or the US? We did get UN authority to threaten Saddam Hussein but not to invade. Our country attacked Iraq with no provocation except for threats of nuclear weapons that turned out to be false. We killed probably well over 100,000 Iraqis and around 4,489 American soldiers. What did we gain from that fiasco? Iraq is falling apart with the beginnings of a religious conflict that may produce a civil war.

The Kremlin, on the other hand, is claiming territory that has belonged to Russia for centuries. There have been only one or two military fatalities. The whole imbroglio originated in the overthrow of the duly elected president of the Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, by a bunch of hoodlums who have been quoted making anti-Semitic remarks and acting like Nazis. Yanukovych was a corrupt president, but the world is full of corrupt leaders. On the other hand, the parliament in the capital of Crimea, Simferopol, which was duly elected as well, voted to put a referendum on joining Russia to the people; the voters overwhelmingly approved the accession. Remember Woodrow Wilson. He asserted the right to "self determination."

Crimea became part of the Ukraine because Khrushchev in 1954 transferred the administration of Crimea from Moscow to Kiev. At the time, it was considered meaningless. After the USSR collapsed, Ukraine became independent. I was in Moscow at that time and was told by Russians that those living in the Ukraine were "little Russians" who would soon return to the fold. At the same time, the people in Moscow had no doubt that the Crimea belonged to them. Russia has more of a claim to Crimea than does the Ukraine.

The threats and military actions made by the West and the US are frightening. We complain that the Russians are staging military exercises on the border of the Ukraine while we are sending warplanes to the Baltic countries and Poland and are planning war exercises with a pitiable Ukrainian force. Our Vice President, Joe Biden, has been threatening Russia and asserting that the US will defend our Baltic NATO allies.

Continue reading “Breaking the Law”