Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) on the possibility of stopping a US surge in Afghanistan.
Civility, 2007-Style: Hanging George Bush
Some people who are outraged by anti-Obama placards have forgotten that, only a few years ago, many people were condemning George Bush in terms as harsh or harsher.
Here is a picture I took at an antiwar rally in Washington in January 2007. The sign – “What’s good for the goose….. gandar” – refers to the recent hanging of Saddam Hussein had been hung after a kangaroo trial. (Saddam was guilty as hell of many things, but the trial process was a disgrace to the United States and to Iraq). The Bush administration was in such a sweat to use the Saddam trial to influence the US congressional midterm elections that the Iraqi government announced Hussein’s sentence – death by hanging – even before they had officially released the sentence (which was not released until after the US election).
The artist’s representation of George Bush could have been better, but so could the photograph itself. Some people may have been offended by the title I added to the photo: “Bush Swings by Congress.” (The full size version of the photograph is available at my Flickr site here).</a>
Daniel Ellsberg: The Most Dangerous Man in America
More like The Most Heroic Man in America. Daniel Ellsberg is the subject of a new documentary: Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers.
The movie is opening today in selected theaters.
Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman interviewed Ellsberg this morning about the movie. Joining Ellsberg is his wife, Patricia, and the co-director, Judith Ehrlich.
The interview is available as a video stream, an audio stream, an MP3 download, or a transcript (at this time, only a partial rush transcript is available). Other formats are also available.
Military to share classified intel with state and local fusion centers
Correct me if I am wrong, but this must spell an unprecedented level of domestic intelligence sharing. One wonders, is the sharing between the DoD and fusion centers — which incorporate local, state and federal law enforcement and homeland security agencies — both ways? Again, a big disappointment coming from a new President who promised all sorts of sunshine into the creepy darkness of Bush-era law enforcement/domestic security policies, but seems to be instead pushing forward into the gloaming of his own administration full throttle. Considering his justice department has announced it is pretty much all settled to extend the three controversial Patriot Act provisions set to expire at the end of the year, and now this story out of DHS, it is really hard to make out the sliver of sunlight between Obama and his predecessor.
From the ACLU tonight:
Fusion Centers To Obtain Access To Classified Military Intelligence
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 15, 2009
CONTACT: Mandy Simon, (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced Monday that it was giving state and local fusion centers access to the classified military intelligence in Department of Defense (DOD) databases. The federal government has facilitated the growth of a network of fusion centers since 9/11 to expand information collection and sharing practices among law enforcement agencies, the private sector and the intelligence community.
Allowing fusion centers access to DOD classified information appears to be a shift in policy. The New York Times reported in July that “Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, said … that fusion centers were not intended to have a military presence, and that she was not aware of ones that did.â€
The American Civil Liberties Union has long warned the government about the dangers posed by fusion centers without proper oversight and, in 2007, released a report entitled, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers?†The report, which was updated last year, identifies specific concerns with fusion centers, including their ambiguous lines of authority, the troubling role of private corporations, the participation of the military, the use of data mining and their excessive secrecy.
According to DHS, there were 70 fusion centers in the United States as of February 2009. It is unknown how many include military personnel.
The following can be attributed to Michael Macleod-Ball, Acting Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:
“As fusion centers gain more and more access to Americans’ private information, the information about them being made available to the American public remains woefully inadequate. There is a stunning lack of oversight at these fusion centers and, as we’ve seen, these centers are rapidly becoming a breeding ground for overzealous intelligence activities. Opening the door for domestic law enforcement to gain access to classified military intelligence coupled with no guidelines restricting the military’s role in fusion centers is a recipe for disaster.
“Congress must take the necessary steps to ensure that a thorough and rigorous oversight mechanism is in place to ensure that Americans’ most sensitive information is protected. Without proper guidelines, fusion centers will continue to threaten our privacy while doing nothing to improve security.â€
To read the ACLU’s report, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers,†go to: www.aclu.org/fusion
Busily Making More Enemies in Pakistan
U.S. policy is succeeding brilliantly … in making more enemies in Pakistan. Reports McClatchy Newspapers:
For weeks now, the Pakistani media have portrayed America, its military and defense contractors in the darkest of lights, all part of an apparent campaign of anti-American vilification that is sweeping the country and, according to some, is putting American lives at risk.
Pakistanis are reacting to what many here see as an “imperial” American presence, echoing Iraq and Afghanistan, with Washington dictating to the Pakistani military and the government. Polls show that Pakistanis regard the U.S., formally a close ally and the country’s biggest donor, as a hostile power.
U.S. officials have either denied the allegations or moved to blunt the criticism, but suspicions remain and relations between the two countries are getting more strained.
The great flaw in the Neocon vision of the world, in which the U.S. bombs anyone who gets in the way of America’s designs and then everyone else quickly genuflects as Washington’s representatives walk by, is that other peoples typically respond to U.S. diktats with the same nationalistic obstreperousness that long has characterized Americans. In short, just as Americans don’t want foreigners telling them what to do, foreigners don’t want Americans to tell them what to do. So maybe it’s time to stop trying to impose the U.S. government’s will on everyone else around the globe.
Doug Bandow, American Conservative Defense Alliance
This blog post is reprinted from Campaign for Liberty with permission.
A Good First Step on Cuba
President Barack Obama has relaxed controls over contact with Cuba. Reports the Washington Post:
The Treasury Department formally lifted nearly all U.S. restrictions on family travel to Cuba on Thursday, along with limits on how much money families can send to relatives on the island.
The department also eased regulations prohibiting U.S. telecommunications and satellite linkages between the United States and Cuba and licensing requirements for visitors engaged in agricultural and medical sales.
President Obama first announced most of the changes in April as part of a general opening that he said would allow Americans to reach out to the Cuban people, and he ordered Cabinet departments to take steps to implement the changes. Since then, the administration has also resumed a regular dialogue with the Cuban government on immigration issues and said it would move toward a resumption of direct mail service between the two countries.
This is a good first step, but only a first step.
The Castro Brothers & Co. are a nasty lot, but the U.S. has been trying for nearly 50 years to starve the regime into submission. The Castros’ dictatorship survived the end of the Soviet Union and Soviet subsidies, and appears to be in no danger of collapsing in the near future.
It’s time to try an alternative approach: eliminating travel, trade, and investment restrictions. The Europeans, Canadians, and Latin Americans are all active in Cuba. When I visited Cuba (legally) a few years ago, I stayed at a Dutch hotel. U.S. sanctions have no impact other than to eliminate any chance for Americans to promote change through dialogue and contact. Liberalizing relations might not be likely to result in democracy. But current policy is an abject failure. Indeed, the embargo actually has aided the regime by allowing it to blame its failure on outsiders.
President Obama ran for president promising “change.” This is one issue where he should deliver on his promise.
Doug Bandow, American Conservative Defense Alliance
This blog post is reprinted from Campaign for Liberty with permission.