Civil liberties have staying power in the long run

On the one hand, you will be relieved to know that the Justice Department is still on the job protecting us from whistle blowers. They are opening a criminal inquiry into the original leak of information about the NSA practice of spying on Americans. According to The New York Times, reporter Scott Shane,

The investigation began in recent days after a formal referral from the security agency regarding the leak, federal officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the investigation.

The investigation will probably go very smoothly since the government has a lot of very sophisticated tools to use to find out what all the people who knew about the program have said and done. The government's data mining will have to cover a number of people and a long time, however, since the NYT held on to the story for years before publishing it.

On the other hand, not everyone agrees that protecting us all so thoroughly is what we need. As a matter of fact, there are more than just a few "nuts" who believe that it is actually illegal. According to LA Times reporters David Savage and Bob Drogin*, the legality of the wiretaps remains in question. To quote from their December 18 story,

President Bush gave one answer . . . saying he was justified in ordering the National Security Agency to spy on "people with known links to Al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations." But a Supreme Court decision more than 30 years ago raises questions about Bush's position. And several legal experts note that a special court exists that could rule on the surveillance requests. As a result, the controversy over the program Bush approved is not likely to end quickly.

The year 2005 marked the year that the nation began to wake up to what is going on with the erosion of protection of citizen's civil liberties. The NSA story was one instance of this awakening. The proposed renewal of the US Patriot Act has been another. Republican leaders may have expected that the legislation would be passed without question, but there were enough votes to hold it up, despite threats from our current president. However, according to CNN, the president finally relented Friday, signing an extension of the law that will allow for needed modifications.

President Bush Friday signed legislation extending key provisions of the
anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act until February 3, despite earlier objecting to
anything short of a permanent renewal.

Greg McNeal at "Law, Terrorism and Homeland Security" posts this article (12/18/05) with a large amount of background (in the linked article below the quote I included here) about the claims of inherent executive power. I quote from the the introduction,

Inherent Powers as Authority for the President's Domestic Spying Power???
Secretary of State Rice appeared on Meet the Press this morning and made an uncharacteristically unpersuasive case for the President's actions regarding his authorization of "domestic spying." Russert repeatedly asked her to cite the authority upon which the President relied when making his determination to authorize the "domestic spying." Rice's response was that the President relied upon Constitutional authority and statutory authority/FISA authority, but as Senator Levin pointed out later in the program, she did not cite any specific provision of the
Constitution and FISA requires an application to the FISA court. The administration likely is relying upon their view of inherent Presidential powers which some scholars suggest are a fundamental Constitutional principle that has existed since the founding. This is a controversial position. Below I have briefly included some arguments which the administration may make in the coming days. These views are subject to a ton of criticism and debate, which I welcome.

This matter is by no means over. When Congress comes back from their holiday recess, I fully expect there to be hearings with many questions for the administration from thoughtful lawmakers.

*Thanks to Greg McNeal @ Law, Terrorism and Homeland Security.com for the original link to this article.

Tags: civil liberties Patriot Act domestic surveillance terrorism

Happenings in Iraq

The results of the December 15 election of a permanent parliament are not yet finalized. Counting, complaints of fraud and voter abuse are still being processed. A number of independent groups are also assessing the election outcome, which will probably not be announced for at least two more weeks.
My own "worst case" prediction is that there will be a theocracy akin to the one in Iran installed. The Sunnis and secular Shiites who were left out will continue their vehement protests, marked by violence. Independent militias will fight amongst themselves and the Kurds will separate from the rest of Iraq. That will scare Turkey to death and tensions between them will rise. The U. S. will declare the election a "Victory!" and begin to draw down the troop levels.
The part I am unsure about is whether the new Shiite government will ask the U.S. to withdraw completely from all of their bases, originally established for a permanent United States foothold in the Middle East. I think there is a good chance they will demand withdrawal because of the protection a closely allied, anti-American Iran will offer.
I am as yet unable to offer a best case scenario. I'll leave that for the current administration.

Here is a quick news roundup from Iraq -

According to the BBC, an independent group will visit Iraq to look at the recent election results.

A team of international monitors has said it is ready to visit Iraq to review complaints that parliamentary elections held this month were unfair. The monitors' offer has been welcomed by leading Sunni Arab and secular Shia parties, who have alleged that the vote was marred by fraud and intimidation. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the UN also welcomed the proposal. Early results suggest governing Shia parties have won the biggest share of the vote, followed by Kurdish groups. The United Iraqi Alliance, the religious Shia bloc that heads the current government, held talks on Thursday with Kurdish leaders about forming a possible coalition. The final result for the 15 December vote is not expected until early January.

This US News & World Report story elaborates on details, including this interesting section,

The presence of two Arab experts on the International Mission for Iraqi Elections team could go far in helping to convince Iraqis that the review of the vote will be fair. The team will also consist of a Canadian and a European. The independent group said it helped monitor the elections in Baghdad and was "assisted by monitors from countries of the European Union working under IMIE's umbrella." The team will travel to Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi election commission - a pointed noted by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. "The Electoral Commission has once again demonstrated its commitment to fair and credible elections that meet international standards," Rice said in a statement welcoming the invitation to the independent team.

The election results have extremely wide potential repercussions, according to this Aljazeera story.

Experts predict that the formation of a new Iraqi government, following a year of political reforms, will help stabilize the country, revive its stagnant economy and pave the way for contentious measures such as privatization. Thomas Delare, counselor for economic affairs at the US embassy in Baghdad, said: "Ordinary Iraqis, domestic entrepreneurs and foreign investors have all been waiting for stability, predictability and greater security,".
The 15 December general election "doesn't guarantee any of those things, but it 0ffers the promise that now we can put it in place.", he said.
That all depends on the smooth formation of the next government which - as various political factions dispute the results, march in the street and threaten to boycott the
new parliament - does not seem a certainty.

DailyKos' "Georgia 10" blogs about US military plans to increase the oversight of Iraqi troops by raising the number of troops assigned to work with them in order to prevent prisoner abuse. "One step forward, two steps back," is how the blogger characterizes the move.

Iraqi in America, "Fayrouz", discusses the current state of affairs in Iraq utilizing her excellent resources, closing with this,

This is why me and most educated Iraqis are very worried. We've seen these acts
during Saddam's dictatorship and here's Hakim and the rest of that group
repeating THAT same brutal history.

TPM Cafe's "Max Sawicky" blogs about the implications of the election results.

My summary of the election results would be that the winners were a dizzying array of parties that oppose U.S. interests. The losers were a thin veneer of secular, moderate, and liberal pro-U.S. forces. A strong state run by the latter would indeed be an achievement for U.S. policy. But that is not what is happening. In political terms, the liberalizing forces are hanging on by their fingernails, what fingernails they have left in light of Shi'ite justice. (For the sake of argument, we ignore for the moment that among these pro-U.S. forces are abject crooks like Ahmed Chalabi.)
Instead we're getting an intolerant, theocratic, pro-Iranian state that is emphatically not aligned with the U.S. national interest, as conceived in conventional, narrow terms by the so-called "realist" school of foreign policy. The only moderating force is the Kurdish block, whose positive role stems completely from their own self-interest, rather than any intrinsic pro-U.S./pro-Western orientation.

Tags: Iraq election Middle East foreign policy Iraq war terrorism

Journalism and the "I" word

This post is a newsroundup of what could be a growing movement that may gain momentum when the congress returns to Washington after the first of the year.
I refer to the "I" word, "impeachment."




Editor & Publisher (title linked above) on 12/21/05 reports this headline,

'Impeachment' Talk, Pro and Con, Appears in Media at Last By E&P Staff. Published: December 21, 2005 11:40 PM NEW YORK

Suddenly this week, scattered outposts in the media have started mentioning the “I” word, or at least the “IO” phrase: impeach or impeachable offense.The sudden outbreak of anger or candor has been sparked by the uproar over revelations of a White House approved domestic spying program, with some conservatives joining in the shouting.

Howard Fineman blogging at MSNBC on 12/21/05, states,

For months now, I have been getting e-mails demanding that my various employers
(Newsweek, NBC News and MSNBC.com) include in their poll questionnaires the issue of whether Bush should be impeached. They used to demand this on the strength of the WMD issue, on the theory that the president had “lied us into war.” Now the Bush foes will base their case on his having signed off on the NSA’s warrant-less wiretaps. He and Cheney will argue his inherent powers and will cite Supreme Court cases and the resolution that authorized him to make war on the Taliban and al-Qaida. They will respond by calling him Nixon 2.0 and have already hauled forth no less an authority than John Dean to testify to the president’s dictatorial perfidy. The “I-word” is out there, and, I predict, you are going to hear more of it next year — much more.

At the same site, this MSNBC poll asks the question, "Do you believe that President Bush's actions justify impeachment?" It is a "live vote," and certainly not scientific.

Molly Ivins in her December 29, 2005 syndicated column writes this about spying on Americans,

The first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Thirty-five years ago, Richard Milhous Nixon, who was crazy as a bullbat, and J. Edgar Hoover, who wore women's underwear, decided that some Americans had unacceptable political opinions. So they set our government to spying on its own citizens, basically those who were deemed insufficiently like Crazy Richard Milhous. . .

This could scarcely be clearer. Either the president of the United States is going to have to understand and admit that he has done something very wrong, or he will have to be impeached. The first time this happened, the institutional response was
magnificent. The courts, the press, the Congress all functioned superbly. Anyone think we're up to that again? Then whom do we blame when we lose the republic?

Katrina vanden Heuvel writing for HuffingtonPost on December 26th declares that, "The I-word is gaining ground."

Ruth Conniff in The Progressive of 12/17/05, talks about "Impeachment Buzz". To quote,

The question about impeaching Bush has nothing to do with legal grounds, and
everything to do with politics. But in the last few weeks, the political climate has been changing, so that more people are seriously considering whether Bush has committed one or more impeachable offenses. The revelations about Bush's spying on Americans through the NSA helped change things a bit.
Representatives Johns Conyers and John Lewis and Senator Barbara Boxer are
talking, in public, about impeachment now.
Way at the left end of the dial, there's been chatter about impeachment for a long time--at least since the grounds for war in Iraq began to fall apart. Last May, a group called After Downing Street began working on an impeachment drive.
While no member of Congress took up the call to draft articles of impeachment, the group's efforts launched Cindy Sheehan's crusade against Bush's war. Now these same activists are organizing a grassroots campaign to support Representative John Conyers's bills to investigate Bush's conduct, with an eye toward impeachment (HR635) and censure Bush and Cheney for blocking Congress's access to information on intelligence manipulation, torture, and other misdeeds (HR636 and HR637).

In the December 15 National Journal's The Hotline, is an article reporting that Senator John Kerry has speculated that there might be a move to impeach if the Democrats take the House in the upcoming 2006 election.

Ralph Nader writing in Common Dreams 12/24/05 newsletter calls for the president and vice-president ot resign, and also cites Richard Cohen's Washington Post column. Quote,

Richard Cohen, the finely-calibrated syndicated columnist for the Washington Post, wrote a column on October 28, 2004 which commenced with this straight talk: "I do not write the headlines for my columns. Someone else does. But if I were to write the headline for one, it would be 'Impeach George Bush'."

Jim Hightower writing for the Illinois Times on October 27, 2005 states, in part,

. . . there’s an even more startling statistic that the establishment media has deliberately failed to report to you — the percentage of Americans who now want Congress to consider impeaching Bush if he lied about his reasons for invading Iraq: 50 percent! This new data from Ipsos Public Affairs, the highly regarded nonpartisan polling company, shows a stunning surge in grassroots support for removing George W. from the White House. It’s even more remarkable when you consider that the media barons have provided zero coverage of the burgeoning sentiment for impeachment. Likewise, not a single congressional Democrat has stepped forward to support what is fast becoming a majority opinion of the people.
The political and media establishment can hide the numbers, but they can’t long hide from the sentiment. To learn more, go to www.afterdowningstreet.org.

Pat Buchannan, writing in his own conservative column on August 29, 2005, called for a bill of impeachment citing the president's failures to enforce our borders. To quote,

Well, we are being invaded, and the president of the United States is not doing his duty to protect the states against that invasion. Some courageous Republican, to get the attention of this White House, should drop into the hopper a bill of impeachment, charging George W. Bush with a conscious refusal to uphold his oath and defend the states of the Union against "invasion."
It may be the only way left to get his attention, before the border vanishes and our beloved country dissolves into MexAmerica, what T.R. called a "polyglot boarding house for the world."

John Dean, writing at FindLaw's Writ on June 6, 2003, cites the invasion of Iraq on what he called bogus information. Quoting Dean,

To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose."

For the other side, columnist Vincent Fiore writes about it in a June 10, 2005, column generally dissmissing the likelihood of such a thing ever happening. I wonder if he will be quite so confident in 2006. Quote,

Having lost badly in this new century’s elections, Democrats are now sounding the alarm for impeachment proceedings against President Bush. If the word "impeachment” were not so serious in its intent, one is tempted to laugh out loud, and I will assume that many did.

Tags: public opinion politics In the News Bush administration

Worldwide press freedom

Here at Home - Freedom of the press is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. In this article by James Goodale, a legal scholar, writes about how this freedom has been repeatedly upheld by the courts. He begins,

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press." Although the First Amendment specifically mentions only the federal Congress, this provision now protects the press from all government, whether local, state or federal.

The subject has been of ongoing interest for me for some time. And it is of paramount interest with the current domestic surveillance controversy in which some of us are now embroiled as writers. Free (press) blogging is something of value to be guarded and cherished. Even loyalty to the MSM is something to celebrate in today's climate of secrecy. They may not do it perfectly or even well at times, but they can be very good. The television coverage during Hurricane Katrina was an example of a very good faith effort. To quote from the Mainstream Media website (title linked above),

Someone once said that a person's perception of reality is a result of their beliefs. In today's age, a lot of those beliefs are in some ways formed via the mainstream media. It is therefore worth looking at what the media presents, how it does so, and what factors affect the way it is done. . .

Worldwide - In October 2005, Reporters Sans Frontiers (Reporters Without Borders or RSF) published their 2005 worldwide press freedom index.

The results were interesting:
On the whole, it showed that democracies ranked best. (The top position was jointly held by predominantly North European nations: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, and Switzerland.)
Totalitarian and communist regimes ranked worst because there was next to no press freedom as in almost all such cases, the media is government controlled. (The worst 5 were Burma, Iran, Turkmenistan, Eritrea, and North Korea.)

But there were a few surprising findings:
The U.S. slipped down to just 44th. In 2004, they ranked 22nd which was not good, anyway; Canada and France also slipped (to 21st and 30th, respectively); U.K. ranked just 24th, almost on par with Benin, a small nation in Africa which the United Nations classifies as being one of the poorest nations in the world, and El Salvador, another very poor country; Spain and Italy ranked just 40th and 42nd, respectively (they were both only joint 39th the year before).

New Zealand (12th), Trinidad and Tobago (12th), Benin (25th) and South Korea (34th) are the highest-ranked countries in other continents and the top 20 were dominated by Europe (only two were from elsewhere).

Our founding fathers felt very strongly about this issue.

We really cannot do better than Thomas Jefferson on freedom of the press. This University of Virginia site quotes Jefferson extensively on press freedom, beginning with this,

"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787. ME 6:57

Our current president called in representatives of the press to his office to try to get them to not publish stories about spying on Americacitizensns. Even with all the pressure and his rather transparent calls to "protect national security," the papers have done fairly well with the NSA surveillance stories, even if rather late in coming. Maddening as they are at times, what would we do without the New York Times and the Washington Post?

Tags: commentary civil liberties domestic surveillance Freedom of Press

How do Americans view domestic spying?

Curiosity about the impact of the big story, of spying on Americans without court authorization, caused me to do a little digging. How has public opinion changed over time? Here are a few things I discovered:


Before the NYT story broke,
Declan McCullagh reports in his listserv <declan@well.com>, on a Zogby International opinion poll (12/13/05).


Quoting McCullagh,

The Zogby poll indicates that 54 percent of Americans favor allowing telephone conversations to be monitored; 80 percent favor allowing video surveillance of public places such as street corners; 67 percent favor roadblock searches of vehicles, and 67 percent favor having their mail monitored.

December 13, NBC News broke the story of spying on American groups, according to Reuters.

The Pentagon has a secret database that indicates the U.S. military may be collecting information on Americans who oppose the Iraq war and may be also monitoring peace demonstrations, NBC reported on Tuesday. The database, obtained by the network, lists 1,500 "suspicious incidents" across the United States over a 10-month period and includes four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, some aimed at military recruiting, NBC's Nightly News said.

December 16, the NYT broke the story of National Security Agency spying on Americans.

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Zogby International opinion poll (12/21/05)

A narrow plurality of likely voters nationwide believe President Bush acted within his Constitutional powers when he authorized the interception of international communications without the approval of a federal judge, but the public is closely divided on the issue, a new Zogby Interactive poll shows. Nearly half – 49% - said they think he has the power to authorize the intercepts, while 45% said he does not, the survey showed.
The interactive survey of 1,929 likely voters nationwide, conducted Dec. 20-21, carries a margin of error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points.
Asked if the President’s actions made Americans more safe or less safe, 50% said the nation was safer because of his actions, while 18% said the actions put the country more at risk and 26% said it made no difference in our level of safety. However, 44% said they were concerned that the communication intercepts were a step toward stripping Americans of their privacy. Another 23% said they believe the secret intercepts are important in rare cases to fight terrorism, and 29% said they were necessary to combat enemies.

Today's Lewiston Imtribune interactive poll has much the same results .

These same NYT reporters reported on December 23 that the NSA spying effort was much larger and more widespread than first reported. To quote,

The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the U.S. as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11 attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials. The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said.

It seems to me that as time goes by and the American public learns more about this matter, they will become more opposed to being spied upon by their own government, losing precious civil liberties. Do I dare to hope this is the case?

Tags: domestic surveillance civil liberties security terrorism public opinion

The joy of discovery

During much of a 365 day year the news looks pretty much the same. Almost all of it is "bad." But once you slice it open sometimes you find something positive at the center of it. The core of the story can be a small bit of good news, hidden until you explore it futher.

Today, when most of the members of the government have gone home, there can be a surprising amount of good news to tell. On this "slow" news day, surfing the net turned up some little gems. Here are a few stories I found by looking for the "pits," the kernels of good news buried within the not-so-good:


Spirituality - "The Weary World Rejoicing"
Blogger " athenae" writes an absolutely wonderful post about her holiday spiritual issues at the blog First Draft. I quote,

God and I have a complicated and not always amicable relationship. This time of year he's trying to charm me using carols and candles and wreaths and Midnight Mass, and I'm asking my girlfriends to remind me of all the times I said I'd
never go back to Him no matter what He did or said.

Irony - "Iraq prisoners to be protected."
The BBC News reports, in an unusual twist, that now the US military does not trust Iraqis to handle prisoners in Iraq. Do you suppost we actually learned this lesson? To quote,

The US says it will not hand over detainees to the Iraqi authorities until they
raise levels of care. After the discovery of hundreds of neglected prisoners
held by Iraq's interior ministry, an official said Iraq still had to meet US
standards.

Hilarity - "Anna Nicole Smith gets White House Boost"

when her case is heard by the Supreme Court of the United States. I wish her well. CNN.com reports, tongue in cheek,

Playboy playmate Anna Nicole Smith has an unusual bedfellow in the Supreme Court fight over her late husband's fortune: the Bush administration. The administration's top Supreme Court lawyer filed arguments on Smith's behalf and wants to take part when the case is argued before the justices. The court will decide early next year whether to let the U.S. solicitor general share time with Smith's attorney during the one hour argument on February 28.

Opportunity - "Osama Bin Laden's niece has posed for sexy photo layout"

In the January's GQ, this enterprising young woman breaks away from our stereotypical assumptions, given her connections to the Middle East. Quoting from Reuters,

Her uncle may be the world's most elusive fugitive, but Osama bin Laden's niece is about as conspicuous as she can be in a sexy photo shoot in the January edition of the men's fashion magazine GQ. Wafah Dufour is an aspiring New York-based musician who told the magazine that her family ties to the al Qaeda leader suspected of masterminding the September 11, 2001 attacks have prompted death threats and sent her into a bout of depression. As part of an effort to distance herself from her massive Saudi family, Dufour appears in a sultry GQ photo spread, reclining on satin sheets wrapped in feathers in one picture and posing in a bubble bath wearing nothing but jewelry in a second.
"I was born in the States and I want people to know I'm American, and I want people here to understand that I'm like anyone in New York. For me, it's home," said Dufour, who took her mother's name after the suicide hijacking attacks that destroyed Manhattan's World Trade Center.

Community - "March of the Penguins picked by US film institute." This documentary has touched many people. It is wonderfully visual, and would be a wonderful holiday pick. The BBC News has the article from which I quote,

The film follows a group of Emperor Penguins. The documentary film March of The Penguins has been branded a "moment of significance" by a US movie body. The American Film Institute (AFI) chose six events and trends from 2005 from the US movie and TV industries. French-made March of the Penguins was commended for "its universal message - the need to be part of a community that cares for each other". The institute said it was among films which reacted to the changed world after the 11 September attacks.

Mentality - "Are we getting Smarter or Dumber?" CNET News asks in the headline, that I have often asked myself. Of course I am convinced my granchildren are smarter than I am. This article from which I quote tells why:

"Too much information" may be the catchphrase of the Internet age. That's why generations reared on Net technology may need to one day rely on the brain calisthenics being developed and tested by Mike Merzenich, a neuroscientist, software entrepreneur and self-described "applied philosopher." . . . Dr. Merzenich continues: Our brains are different from those of all humans before us. Our brain is modified on a substantial scale, physically and functionally, each time we learn a new skill or develop a new ability. Massive changes are associated with our modern cultural specializations. The Internet is one of a series of aids developed over the last millennium or so that has increased the operational capacities of the average world citizen. The Internet is just one of those things that contemporary humans can spend millions of "practice" events at, that the average human a thousand years ago had absolutely no exposure to. Our brains are massively remodeled by this exposure--but so, too, by reading, by television, by video games, by modern electronics, by contemporary music, by contemporary "tools," etc.

Creativity - "Guns for Gift Certificates", is a wonderful creative win/win idea that might have application all over the nation. Very often California leads with cutting edge solutions. According to Happy News.com,

is a swap program set up on a Compton California parking lot. Dozens of gun-toting residents converged on a shopping center parking lot Saturday to anonymously swap firearms for gift certificates as part of a program aimed at reducing violence in the city.

Civilility - "Christmas pilgrims return to Bethlehem"
Dare we hope for the beginnings of a more robust peace between Palestine and Israel. The Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon is getting his heart fixed. Wouldn't it be great if that worked in a spiritual way also?

Calls for peace resonated in Bethlehem on Sunday as a lull in violence spurred the biggest influx of Christmas pilgrims for years to the town where Christians believe Jesus was born. Both Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in messages they were committed to peacemaking in 2006. . . Taking advantage of a truce that Palestinian militants have said they will follow to the end of the year, thousands of pilgrims and tourists came to Bethlehem.

Tags: Good News current events

Children welcome?

Bethlehem welcomes arrivals?

- then and now

In the Christian world, today is celebrated as the birthday of Jesus Christ. The Bible says that he was born in a stable in Bethlehem, "because there was no room at the inn." Mary and Joseph must not have felt like the Child was welcome at this their time of great need. In the modern image on the right, this is what the border crossing into Bethlehem looked like. It does not look very welcoming, either. The nations of the Holy land struggle to settle where it is that people can live on their own soil, to feel like they belong.

More hopeful is this MSNBC story carrying the headline, "Hope arrives with pilgrims in Bethlehem Cease-fire, tourists bring festive spirit to sacred city on Christmas." Quoting from the story,

BETHLEHEM, West Bank - Calls for peace resonated in Bethlehem on Sunday as a lull in violence spurred the biggest influx of Christmas pilgrims in years to the town where Christians believe Jesus was born. Both Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in messages they were committed to peacemaking in 2006. In Rome, Pope Benedict offered a special prayer for peace in the Holy Land. In Bethlehem, an intermittent battleground in a five-year old Palestinian uprising, Vatican envoy Michel Sabbah said there was a real opportunity to grasp, with both Israelis and Palestinians due to hold elections early next year.

Southwest USA - New Orleans evacuee children not welcomed easily-

Houston school kids, according to the Houston Chronicle story are having a difficult time. To quote:

It was a formidable task: Taking hundreds of traumatized children — many of them grieving over the loss of lives and homes washed away by Hurricane Katrina — and trying to assimilate them into crowded, underfunded schools in the Houston area. Add a national spotlight and budget constraints to make the challenge even greater. Experts and students said they're not surprised that fights, arrests and suspensions have marked the first four months of the greater Houston area's effort to absorb more than 20,000 students displaced from New Orleans. And they don't expect the problems to go away until a series of complex emotional, social and academic issues are resolved. . . . schools have scrambled to react to the troubles that come with assimilating these extra students, including culture clashes, turf wars and typical teenage jealousies — just to name a few.

Too much media and perhaps administrative missteps also contributed to the problem, according to this story. To further quote,

that increased tensions early on . . . (but now) Officials with some area districts said they've made a point to stop distinguishing between New Orleans students and Houston students. . . . Many of the fights have been turf wars — attempts by students to take ownership of the school and establish a social heirarchy. Experts said these disagreements should die down with time. . . Striking a balanceTo improve relationships, educators need to strike a balance between helping Katrina students and not making them feel like outsiders. They'll also have to make sure that Houston students are not neglected or left out, students and experts said. . . "It's compassion fatigue," she said. "Everybody felt sorry for them and the kids were able to be compassionate at the beginning, but I don't think they had any understanding that this experience was going to last so long." Unrest is likely to continue until families from New Orleans know whether they're going to permanently make their homes in Houston. At that point, they're more likely to get involved in school activities and feel invested in their community, Mock said. Students are hopeful that those from Houston and New Orleans will stop fighting. "By this time next year, it won't be a big deal. It's a phase," Yonkeu said.

Lots of babies welcomed in Dallas.

Parkland Hospital has been named one of the best in the nation. The demographics of this public hospital indicate that 16,000 new babies are welcomed there every year. And a majority of them are Hispanic. The hospital nurseries can boast of an exceptionally low mortality. No matter what their ability to pay every patient at the hospital gets the same level of care. In recent years this caused numerous fiscal crises. But this year the hospital was much more financially sound than in the past, according to The Dallas Morning News.

Nations not quite so evenly welcoming -

European Union - emerging nations welcome?

Not all EU economies thrive as much as others. Not all of the former communist economies have been welcomed with open arms by their more mature neighbors. To quote the EU Rota,

The new countries of course have their problems and still only account for a small slice of EU-25 total GDP, but they are looked at with envy and suspicion.What are some of the little things employed by these former communist countries as they continue to shine: lower taxes, less regulation, more flexible labor markets.

United States Government - does not welcome enough children's needs in the federal budget - According to this Town Hall headline, "America Can Do Better". This article on Congressional budget actions just prior to leaving for the holidays, highlights many losses to children's services. The article follows,

Americans deserve better leadership than what the Bush administration offers,
South Carolina Rep. James E. Clyburn said Saturday in the Democrats' weekly
radio address. Clyburn, chairman of the House Democratic Faith Working Group and chairman-elect of the House Democratic Caucus, said recent legislation promoted by Republicans has done little to help the lives of many Americans.
"In order to have an America that is strong at home and abroad, we must have a government that is as good as the American people," he said.
Clyburn said American troops in Iraq are particularly hurt by budget legislation that passed the Senate on Wednesday. The measure, which cuts $40 billion in federal spending over five years, reduces funding for student aid, Medicaid and other entitlement programs.
"Every time our nation has gone to war we've called on American citizens from all walks of life to make sacrifices. But not this time," he said. "While our brave young men and women fight to protect our freedoms, Republicans are cutting services to their families back home while giving people of great means unfair and unneeded tax cuts."
Clyburn also said the administration has done little to help victims of the Hurricanes Katrina, Wilma and Rita.
"This Republican administration refuses to provide housing for thousands of disaster victims, while fleecing American taxpayers by giving no-bid contracts to their friends and cronies as Americans along the Gulf Coast continue to suffer," he contended.
"In this time of giving and sharing, no matter which holiday you celebrate or to which, if any religion, you adhere, working together, America can do better," Clyburn said.

Enough said!

Tags: children Middle East European Union Southwest USA federal budget

Literature Restores Faith

Thanks to this The Odds Are One post that quoted from Laura Rozen's War and Peace, I have been able to make more significant sense of all the uproar over domestic spying. I quote portions of Rozen's post:

. . . it is very interesting that so much of the discomfort with and
resistance to growing police state provisions -- without a national debate, without a national consensus -- is coming from inside the agencies, the courts, from those who take what their mission is supposed to be seriously. In every agency, there are abuses and people who abuse their powers, but many many people who work in these agencies, in the courts, in intelligence and law enforcement, take the public trust part of their mission seriously and deeply want at some fundamental level the confidence of the American public. . .

It's no accident that there is no American literature celebrating imperial presidential powers, celebrating a president operating in secret to expand his powers while citing
national security threats, celebrating, in short, demagoguery. No great American literature or Hollywood movie has rewarded trampling on the Constitution. No celebrations of the US waterboarding detainees. What is our whole national literature about? . . .

It's about doing the right thing. Not only that - it's about the right thing prevailing, being rewarded. It's about justice prevailing over injustice. . .

The system, we would be assured, works. It would retract back to normalcy.

Happening across this thoughtful narrative was like a Christmas gift for me. Now I can go about my holidays with my feet on the ground and pointed forward. I will be back to posting after a short hiatus for celebrating.

To my readers, have happy holidays and a good 2006.

Tags: literature domestic surveillance Laura Rozen intelligence community

Conflict inevitable-the headlines

7: 30 A.M. UNITED STATES (South by Southwest)
Christmas Near: War, conflict and competitiveness dominates news -
Confrontations have always made me rather uncomfortable. I grew up during World War II and the Korean War. I was the oldest of several siblings and it was often my job to try to keep peace among them. I wasn't very good at it. But now I am immersed it it daily as an avocation sitting in front of my computer. Conflict and competitiveness comprise much of the coin of that realm. In this season of "peace on earth, good will to men" there are a lot of fights going on in my cyberworld. These are a few of the headlines that caught my eye:

On the web -

• DailyKos blogger Markos Moulitsas Zuniga in flap over article about him: he "feels compelled to set the record straight" and does so in an elaborate chapter-and-verse style.
• This is the original Washington Monthly article with which Kos disagrees. Its headline reads, "For America's number one liberal blogger politics is like sports: It's all about winning"

In the newspapers -

• The headline is "Newly Emboldened Congress Has Dogged Bush This Year." The Washington Post writers VandeHei and Babington discuss the conflict that emerged between our current president and the congress.
• This US News and World Report headline reads, "White House Watch: Bush upbeat as year ends." Writer Kenneth Walsh reports that Republicans can still prevail in 2006.

This is almost the end of 2006. And I am no longer as discomfitted by conflict as I once was. Unfortunately I have become habituated to it since the current administration came into office. And this is a big loss for me. To become inured to war and numbed by confrontation is an indication of a kind of "citizenship PTSD." Is it the normal state of mind for many of us who yearn for peace, but are not actively aware that it is a possibility anytime soon?

Tags: war news headlines DailyKos blog politics

Small victories

Congress has gone home for the holidays. Their most closing actions were a "mixed bag." A couple of writers at TPM Cafe post articles discuss some very big losses, such as the V.P. breaking a tie to pass the budget and passage of massive tax cuts that will send the deficit soaring, for perhaps decades. Despite this, Democrats and moderate Republicans were able to make small differences in legislative outcomes. Kos calls the roll in Congress; see the significant cross-over legislators.

There was some good news (linked to blog title)this past week, and it deserves more notice. Reuters reports,

The Republican-led U.S. Congress was close to wrapping up its work for the year on Thursday in the wake of an unexpected string of Democratic successes on matters from energy to spending to security. Senate Democrats thwarted a permanent renewal of the anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act, setting up instead a temporary six-month extension of expiring provisions so changes can be considered to better safeguard civil liberties. It was a defeat for President George W. Bush, who had argued the law was mandatory for safeguarding U.S. citizens. . . Bush, who has been battling sinking approval ratings, has seen his clout in Congress diminished by recent scandals affecting top Republicans, as well as the recent revelation that he secretly ordered domestic eavesdropping on U.S. citizens.

Senator Ted Stevens lost his obsessive battle to drill for oil in ANWR, at least for the time being. According to this NYT article,

The crucial vote on Arctic oil drilling was cast as its backers tried to cut off debate on the $453.3 billion Pentagon measure to which it had been attached. But they fell four votes short of the 60 they needed, as two Republicans joined Senate Democrats to thwart Senator Ted Stevens, Republican of Alaska, a longtime champion of Arctic drilling. "This has been the saddest day of my life," said Mr. Stevens, 82, as he watched victory slip away again in his 25-year crusade for drilling in the refuge.

There is still a chance to revise the embattled Patriot Act; it was extended for six months in order to fix three of its most troublesome elements. This is a very welcome headline, indeed. "Patriot Act extended." The New York Times reports that,

Critics say the proposed four-year renewal, which the House approved last week, is too slanted in the government's favor regarding national security letters and special subpoenas that give the FBI significant leeway in obtaining records. The targeted people should have a greater opportunity to challenge such subpoenas and the government should be required to show stronger evidence linking the items being sought to possible terrorism, they say. Now they have more time to press their case in the bill's rewrite.

On other fronts there were some stories that were good news because they have represented bad news for the Republicans.

This apt NYT headline, "News of Surveillance is Awkward for Agency," describes why this is good news. To quote from the body of the story,

In fact, since 2002, authorized by a secret order from President Bush, the agency has intercepted the international phone calls and e-mail messages of hundreds, possibly thousands, of American citizens and others in the United States without obtaining court orders. The discrepancy between the public claims and the secret domestic eavesdropping disclosed last week have put the N.S.A., the nation's largest intelligence agency, and General Hayden, now principal deputy director of national intelligence, in an awkward position. While a few important members of Congress were informed of the special eavesdropping program, several lawmakers have said they and the public were misled. The episode could revive old fears that the secret agency is a sort of high-tech Big Brother. It was such fears - based on genuine abuses before the mid-1970's, hyperbolic press reports and movie myths - that General Hayden worked to counter as the agency's director from 1999 until last April.
"The image of N.S.A. has been muddied considerably by this revelation," said Matthew M. Aid, an intelligence historian who is writing a multiple-volume history of the agency. Mr. Aid said several agency employees he spoke with on Friday were disturbed to learn of the special program, which was known to only a small number of officials. "All the N.S.A. people I've talked to think domestic surveillance is (an) anathema," Mr. Aid said.

The New York times reports that an appeals court has refused to allow the transfer of terrorist suspect, Jose Padilla, to civilian authority. Quote,

A federal appeals court delivered a sharp rebuke to the Bush administration
Wednesday, refusing to allow the transfer of Jose Padilla from military custody to civilian law enforcement authorities to face terrorism charges. In denying the administration's request, the three-judge panel unanimously issued a strongly worded opinion that said the Justice Department's effort to transfer Mr. Padilla gave the appearance that the government was trying to manipulate the court system to prevent the Supreme Court from reviewing the case. The judges warned that the administration's behavior in the Padilla case could jeopardize its credibility before the courts in other terrorism cases.

A U.S. court ruled that a school district cannot teach "intelligent design" in biology lessons. Of course the decision will probably be appealed. According to a BBC article,

A US court decision to ban the teaching of "intelligent design" has been hailed
by anti-creationism campaigners. A federal judge ruled in favour of 11 parents in Dover, Pennsylvania, who argued that Darwinian evolution must be taught as fact in biology lessons. School administrators had argued that life on Earth was too complex to have evolved on its own. Intelligent design activists criticised the ruling, saying it would marginalise beliefs based on religion.

Overall, the news could have been worse.

Tags: Congress Democrats Republicans Current Events

Leadership revisited

EADERSHIP
on the issue of domestic surveillance is emerging from a number of public sectors. Information is power. The best leaders operate with correct information. Two major east coast newspapers, the New York Times and the Washington Post, are continuing to fully report the story.
My S/SW blogpost of yesterday focused on the news coming from the U.S. heartland. Today, from the west coast, comes the blistering editorial (title linked above) against the current administration's domestic spying operations. Parenthetically, in the midst of this, and perhaps because of the revelations, the Patriot Act has not been renewed. That is because a number of leading legislators stepped in to block it.
Many more bloggers are posting both fact and opinion on the story that probably will not go away very soon. They are exercising leadership within that "curious animal," the blogosphere.
Here is some interesting information on "the animal" itself:

Kevin Drum wrote an interesting story June 2 of last year on the blogosphere. To quote Drum (his links),

So here are six ways in which the political blogosphere is very, very different
from the real world in which we live:

1. Less than 10% of political bloggers are women. This compares to about 50% in the real world.
2. Approximately 20% of blog readers are women. Once again, this compares to about 50% in the real world.
3. If Josh Marshall and Andrew Sullivan are typical — and I suspect they aren't too far off the mark — the blogosphere is incredibly elite. About 90% of blog readers have college degrees and an astonishing 50% have advanced degrees. Among top bloggers, my personal count indicates that the top six have advanced degrees (Instapundit, Marshall, Kos, Atrios, Sullivan, Volokh) and nearly all of the top 30-40 have at least an undergraduate degree.
4. 11% of blog readers are libertarian. What's more, nearly all major "conservative" blogs are more accurately described as libertarian than truly conservative. This probably has something to do with the blogosphere's roots in the heavily libertarian tech world — read Paulina Borsook's Cyberselfish
   if you're interested in learning more about the history of high-tech
   libertarianism — but in any case it means that true conservatism is heavily
   underrepresented in the blogosphere.
5. However, using the blog version of conservative as our guide, conservatives are still heavily overrepresented in the blogosphere despite the hype that liberal blogs have received lately. It's true that there are four liberal blogs among the top ten (Atrios, Kos, Marshall, and PA), but if you take a look at the next 20 it's about 80% conservative.
6. And now for the truly shocking news: California dominates the top of the political blogosphere. Among the top dozen bloggers, half are Californians (Kos, Volokh, LGF, Kaus, Den Beste, and PA). And of those, five are from Southern California.

Blogs, according to the January 2005 Pew/Internet study (PDF 4 pgs.), have, to quote,

established themselves as a key part of the internet culture. Blog readership shoots up 58% in 2004 6 million Americans get news and information fed to them through RSS aggregators But 62% of online Americans do not know what a blog is

Bloggers are playing a leading role in keeping people informed. This Toronto study of blogging's abstract summarizes the 27 page PDF file,

Weblogs occupy an increasingly important place in American politics. Their influence presents a puzzle: given the disparity in resources and organization vis-à-vis other actors, how can a collection of decentralized, nonprofit, contrarian, and discordant
websites exercise any influence over political and policy outputs? This paper answers that question by focusing on two important aspects of the “blogosphere”: the distribution of readers across the array of blogs, and the interactions between significant blogs and traditional media outlets. Under specific circumstances – when key weblogs focus on a new or neglected issue – blogs can socially construct an agenda or interpretive frame that acts as a focal point for mainstream media, shaping and constraining the larger political debate.

This 6/17/05 article, in the Washington Buzz by Harry Jaffe, discusses in some detail what seem to be the favorites in political blogs. This Washington Times story focuses on conservative vs liberal blogs. It opens with this lead,

Liberal activist Web loggers have made major advances on the Internet, but they
remain far behind their conservative adversaries among the top 250 political blogs, according to a study by a Democratic think tank.
In a detailed report on the political power being wielded by bloggers, who have become a potent force in national and state campaigns, the study found that while liberals have "a decided advantage" over conservatives among the top 40 blogs (24-16), "conservatives hold a whopping 133 to 77 advantage" among the next 210 blogs. The study said this was "a serious problem that progressives must confront," if they are going to overcome the conservatives' advantage at the local level.
"An edge among small, local political blogs also means an edge in small, local, political races. While progressives may have a marked advantage in overall blogosphere discourse, it could also be argued that conservatives are taking a decisive lead in the sort of targeted blogging that will provide them with real, tangible benefits ...," the report says.
If liberal activists "do not invest time, energy and resources building a local blog infrastructure superior to that currently possessed by conservatives, the comparative advantage of progressives' overall traffic lead will be significantly reduced."

One last thought on leadership. Many bloggers are savvy, young and energetic, so-called "Generation X'rs." David Gergen, writing for U.S. News and World Report, discussed the emerging leadership style of members of the so-called Generation X.

Idealism gave way to irony, realism, and pragmatism. Little was expected of them.
But a striking feature of gen X-ers in their young adulthood is how often they have shattered expectations. They made the most of growing up with computers and video games, becoming a generation of entrepreneurs and fueling an economic boom in the 1990s. They created the first great new brands, Google and eBay, of the 21st century. The United States has more billionaires under 40 than at any other time in history, and author Bruce Tulgan estimates that gen X-ers create 4 out of every 5 new enterprises.
Unexpectedly, generation X is bringing that same entrepreneurial, pragmatic spirit to social ills, creating an array of nonprofit and for-profit organizations to tackle problems. So these past years have brought forth a cadre of new, gen X leaders who have founded promising new ventures.
Whether enough of these gen X-ers will also become political leaders is not yet clear. Certainly, some are trying. Republicans point to Bobby Jindal, 34, a congressman from Louisiana who promises to be a healthcare innovator. Democrats cite Rep. Harold Ford, 35, who could become the first black senator from Tennessee. His plan to provide every child a $500 savings account at birth has fans among conservatives and liberals alike.

Tags: political blogs leadership Generation X

President Bush on the offense

In the heart of America people are taking notice of what is happening in Washington, D.C. A scan of news sources "outside of the beltway," reveals that Mr. Bush gets mixed reviews for his performance in recent days. Many applaud his Sunday night speech for its newly conciliatory tone, and decry his return to combativeness at his Monday morning news conference.
He has returned to the throne.

News - The Ohio News quoted the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush, brushing aside bipartisan criticism in
Congress, said Monday he approved spying on suspected terrorists without court
orders because it was "a necessary part of my job to protect" Americans from attack. The president said he would continue the program "for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens," and added it included safeguards to protect civil liberties. Bush bristled at a year-end news conference when asked whether there are any limits on presidential power in wartime. "I just described limits on this particular program, and that's what's important for the American people to understand," Bush said. Raising his voice, Bush challenged Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton - without naming them - to allow a final vote on legislation renewing the anti-terror Patriot Act. "I want senators from New York or Los Angeles or Las Vegas to explain why these cities are safer" without the extension, he said.

Editorial opinion - The Denver Post wrote an excellent editorial from which I quote:
"A more realistic tone on Iraq policy President's uncompromising remarks on electronic eavesdropping without court approval are a contrast to softer message on matters involving Iraq."

Analysis - quoted from the Frankfort, Indiana Times :

Even with his high-profile display of candor — a step anxious Republican leaders had been demanding for weeks — Bush remained unyielding."To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor and I will not allow it," he said in a prime-time address, capping a series of five speeches designed to reverse a stunning political free-fall. There is some evidence that the rhetorical shift has worked. Recent polls suggest that while a majority of Americans disapprove of Bush's performance, his job rating has increased a bit. Nearly six of every 10 Americans said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized, which is Bush's position.

Lawmaker response to Bush's initiatives - quoting from the Boston Globe:

Lawmakers from both parties yesterday questioned the legality of the Bush administration's secret wiretapping -- done without court approval -- of US citizens and foreign nationals, even as the White House continued to defend the intercepts as critical to stopping potential terrorist attacks.

Letters to the editor - The letters in the Fort Worth Star Telegram are almost universally critical of our current president's domestic surveillance policies. To quote one writer:

If I hadn't known already what the story was about, I'd have guessed that the Sunday headline "Bush defends right to spy on Americans" was on loan from The Onion or Saturday Night Live. But, no! It's all true, as President Bush continues to make it clear that he believes his powers to be those of a king, not an elected official in a democracy based on a Constitution and a system of checks and balances. He doesn't care that a procedure already is in place to conduct such surveillance. That would have required court approval, but getting anyone's approval doesn't square with the way Bush sees himself, as a sort of Congress-be-damned cowboy who shoots first and asks questions ... well, never. Introspection isn't Bush's thing.

From elsewhere in the world others are also noting what our current president is up to, and how it plays in the polls.

Opinion Poll - BBC News reported on U. S. public opinion polls:

An opinion poll, carried out for ABC News and the Washington Post, shows his
approval rating has risen to 47%, from an all-time low of 39% in November. High
voter turnout in Iraq and growing public confidence in Mr Bush's handling of
national security and the economy led to the rise, the poll suggests. It comes as Mr Bush faces mounting criticism over secret phone tapping. The latest opinion poll shows his approval rating on Iraq has risen by 10% since early November to 46%. On the economy, his rating has jumped 11 points, to 47%, the Washington Post reports. His overall approval rating has risen to 47%, from 39% in early November. Some 52% say they disapprove of how he is handling his job. The poll found that approval over Mr Bush's handling of the fight against terrorism had risen to 56%, from 48% last month.

Googled - "Polls rise." There were dozens of articles about Bush's rise in popularity.

In the heart of colonial America, public opinion about the British monarchy left behind by those who migrated to America, influenced the way the framers of the Constitution handled the question of civil liberties during times of war. They inserted very specific and strong protections for citizens. And the Supreme Court has affirmed these provisions many times. See this Boston Globe article on constitutionality of certain war powers. It is very heartening to see that Americans still resist imperial attitudes when they are exhibited by our current president.

Tags: Commentary Current Events government News and Politics Public Opinion Polls

The war in Iraq and budget cuts

Daily Kos (12/13/05) linked to a rather amazing summary of the 1000 days of the Iraq war by the numbers including the war's cost,

"$204.4 billion: The cost to the U.S of the war so far."

Though all people of good will cannot help but be cautiously optimistic about last week's election in Iraq, the war in that country is exacting a very high price here in the USA. The cost in lives lost and dollars spent is enormous. It drives so much of what has happened since 9/11/01. There in the background is the shadow of the wrong war at the wrong time as Congress passes their budget.

As this is written, the U. S. house of Representatives just voted on the budget conference report. Congress' budget will have been passed because the Republicans have the majority of votes. And they get to do what you want, including opening oil drilling in Alaska's ANWR. The Republicans wanted health and education spending cuts.
A coalition of groups protested these cuts, even to the point of buying advertising, but to no avail. Working through the weekend and through Sunday night, tax cuts for the wealthy, cuts in service for the middle class and the poor, and an explosion of the deficit will begin once the bill is signed into law. The people of the United States are not being well served by their Republican legislative leaders.

Tags: Congressional Budget leadership budget cuts Iraq war

NSA Surveillance of Americans: NYT

My experiment today was to ascertain the level of the public's internet interest in the domestic surveillance story broken last week by the New York Times. Several search engines revealed a high level of coverage of the new revelation. The term "NSA surveillance of Americans" turned up 11,000 articles at LookSmart. A Google search of the phrase "spying on Americans" turned up 113,000 articles. Ask Jeeves returned 236,500 hits. Ask Yahoo! returned a more exact total: 14,414,267 sites.

There is good evidence that senators and members of congress are extremely interested in the revelation and will be actively investigating this startling practice, according to a Yahoo! story. To quote a portion of the article,

Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy . . . a Democrat, voiced concern about the program and backed plans by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, for a congressional hearing.
"Electronic surveillance is an important law enforcement and intelligence gathering tool, but it can and must be done lawfully, in accordance with our laws and Constitution," he said.

At this moment Secretary of State is being questioned rigorously by Tim Russert on Meet the Press about what authority our current president has to authorize this surveillance. This story is not over yet, by a long shot.
Tags: National Security Agency domestic surveillance Patriot Act

"Polarization" revisited

"Raymond" and I have been periodically continuing a comment thread in this blog since November 20th title linked above. And, so Raymond will feel comfortable, I am again using the image I used on the 11/20 post.

He asks some very provocative and interesting questions that pertain to the post I put up yesterday.
Here is his comment in italics in its entirety, to which I will reply with interspersed regular font bullet points, as openly and completely as I can.

Raymond begins,

"Those are good points. Good open and honest discussion is the best way to solve issues. How do you feel about the Patriot Act? Some feel it is vital to America's protection, some also feel the same about the spying revelation. Some feel o.k. with the topic of spying, others feel violated.

• I have a gread deal of ambivalence about the Patriot Act, and did at the time it was passed. What bothers me about the revelation of domestic spying is that it was apparently done without the proper FISA court oversight. It is my understanding that the U.S. operates under the rule of law. That is not too much to ask.

How do you feel about the admission by the Pentagon that domestic spying has been going on for some time in America?

• Unfortunately, I was not the least bit surprised. As I think about it, I had assumed it was going on ever since the Patriot Act was adopted. At that time I was telling myself that the act opens the door for all kinds of mischief in the name of security. It is important to make the distinction clear about this revelation. The spying was done by the National Security Agency, which sits within the Pentagon, the "military." I believe it is the FBI that is charged under the law to collect domestic intelligence.

Do you feel protected or do you feel violated?

• I would feel more protected if I had confidence that valid info gathered about potential upcoming terrorist attacks would be shared, pushed up through the DNI's office, and used to keep us safe. Antiwar protestors probably feel violated as they now find out that their activities have been monitored as perhaps "dangerous."

Is there, and can there, ever be a balance between protection and privacy?

• Yes, officials must maintain a balance because that is the law. If it is impossible, rather that just inconvenient, then the law needs to be changed. Unfortunately, the current administration has too often operated outside the law. I am not sure why. Perhaps it was out of arrogance, or it was too messy, or deemed too "risky." I just can't know for sure.

Is the president taking advantage of our civil liberties or is he just more remembering of how tragic the events were when the terrorists took advantage of American trusts and freedoms?

• It is very hard to make assumptions about the internal motivations of another person. All I can be positive about are my own motivations and, even then I could be fooling myself. I try to give our current president the benefit of the doubt, but my perception of a pattern of too much secrecy increases my mistrust.

Have we forgotten how painful the tragedy is when we are not prepared?

• The passage of time very often lessens people's levels of heightened anxiety. It is just too demanding and difficult psychologically to "sit in the bunker looking through the slit, scanning the horizon for the imminent attack of all our enemies." Also, our level of preparation has gotten better since then.

Many are concerned by the news that the US Defense Department is intensifying domestic intelligence collection on individuals in the domestic United States. There have been proposed moves to additionally increase the military’s domestic intelligence activities from its current levels. The policy was originally enacted as a response to the tragic events regarding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. According to a recent Washington Post article, it was stated that, “ The Pentagon formerly focused on protecting its US bases and military operations, Pentagon intelligence collection inside the United States has already expanded to cover broader terrorist threats to the country.”

• I believe that the policy was increased at the point back then when our current president secretly gave permission to raise the level of domestic spying. This was the story the NYT broke earlier in the week. There is no way the level of spying should go even higher than its already unacceptable level. It has been "above the law" since that secret policy was handed down.

Many ACLU activists strongly oppose this maneuver as a violation of our civil rights, opposing positions advise that the policy is enacted to investigate most individuals who are not actually legalized permanent citizens of the United States anyways. Are we at a point in time where we must consider what a reasonable amount of privacy is or should we stick to our guns and hold to the already standing policies?

• This is what the current policy should be: surveillance of United States groups or individuals should be under court order and time limited. Our constitutionally protected rights must not be abridged. Illegals in the U.S. do not have those same protections.

Does limiting the governments’ ability to spy on what it considers characters of interest actually jeopardize our own safety?

• Domestic spying not authorized under the Patriot Act has not been lawful. The administration must share responsibility with judicial and legislative oversight in place under the law. Otherwise we live in a police state, not safe from the armed forces acting as it chooses within our borders. Such a contingency was why the governor of Louisiana bristled when there was talk of federalizing the National Gaurd during Hurricane Katrina. We cross those lines at our peril.

Are you willing to give up some of your safety to prevent your loss of any privacy?

• I feel that is a false choice. Because I know that I am not a threat, that our military has nothing to fear from me but criticism, then I have the right to feel safe from our military spying on me for disagreement. It is not that I have anything to hide. I am very open with my criticism, as we all our in the blogosphere. I am also aware that my anonymity is absolutely not protected if the military wants to pursue me into my home under this current policy. The minimum I expect is that it would be the FBI that comes after me, after having had it authorized by a FISA judge. I would also want to be assured that the chairmen and ranking members of the Intelligence Committees were regularly briefed on the manner and scope of all domestic intelligence gathering on our citizens.

If you ask these questions immediately after a tragic event like 9-11 you may get different answers. What do you think?

• I think you are right. And we did get different answers in the form of the USA Patriot Act. Wise heads, however, included the sunset provisions in order that, when the dust settled, we could take another look at that rather broad brushed approach. And that is exactly why it is so good that all these news items (Patriot Act extension, NSA spying, torture, Iraq election, etc.) are converging at this very point in history. It will make it easier to get it right. And we can get it right. We have all the foundation, the history, the experience, the bipartisanship, the institutions we need. We can and will find our way again.

Raymond Bwww.voteswagon.com #

posted by rygnn2@voteswagon.com : 8:44 PM"

Thank you again, Raymond, for this very interesting conversation over time. I like it that you make me think out what I believe, and then have to articulate it.

Tags: domestic intelligence Patriot Act military spying civil liberties

Patriots and the Pentagon Database

In another of my blogs, at TPM Cafe, I wrote about my strange feelings as I discovered that governmental entities were visiting this site in November. And I have never actually physically attended any protests. I merely write online in what I view as a patriotic manner. Furthermore, just within the past 100 visits, I found this information about my more recent visitors:

• One visit from "Senate.gov (Sergeant at Arms)"
• Two visits from "Army.mil at Alexandria, VA"
• Three visits from Washington, D.C.

One of the things that I speculate about is that (possibly mere coincidence) it was near the time I posted comments at The Washington Note, that the site visits occurred. That blog is a widely read and respected centrist blog. Perhaps I need to go in for a check-up. Is this pure paranoia or not? Does the Pentagon feel like it is under seige? Do people there collect information in order to protect themselves? Maybe some of those folks need to go in for a check-up, too.

Last Tuesday NBC first reported that Antiwar activists may be the target of spying by the Pentagon. Yesterday my Common Dreams newsletter also reported that Americans are being spied upon. (Dr. Stephen Cambone is now investigating.) To quote,

A briefing document stamped "Secret" noted "increased communication between protest groups using the Internet" but not a "significant connection between incidents," such as "reoccurring instigators" or "vehicle descriptions," NBC said.The document indicates that information was being gathered about people who attended the meetings and the vehicles they used, a military analyst told NBC. The defense spokesman, who would not be identified by name, would not say whether reports on activists or anti-war incidents were in the database, which is known as the Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) reporting system. But he said Stephen Cambone, undersecretary of defense for intelligence, ordered a review of the database in October in response to media queries about it. "There was information in the database that shouldn't be in there," the spokesman said. The database is made up of unverified reports of suspicious activities filed by "concerned citizens" and Defense Department personnel as well as by law enforcement, intelligence, security and counterintelligence organizations, he said. "Inputs are from DoD installatioms worldwide about suspicious activity, people worried about certain things that happen along, or they see something funny," the spokesman said.

On the opposite side of this same coin is the current legislative battle over the Patriot Act, which has the potential to either abuse or protect our civil liberties. The House of Representatives has voted to renew the U.S. Patriot Act. The NYT reports on the upcoming battle over renewal of the Patriot Act in the Senate.
Senator Russ Feingold has been in the forefront of the efforts to protect our civil liberties since the act was first adopted. Since Monday, the 12th, he has been writing very interesting posts at TPM Cafe about his fight against the problems in the Patriot Act. It has been a privilege to have access to his thoughts. I feel sure this fine public servant does not need to go in for a check-up, by the way.
Daily Kos counts "Patriot Act" as one of their more frequently used tags. Read the most recent posts about this here. You will get an eye- and ear-full from these thoughtful bloggers!
According to my editor, "If Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, or John Hancock somehow woke up and read this, they would surely ask, 'How did this happen?'"

Tags:Spy Pentagon Patriot Act civil liberties Senator Russ Feingold