National Security Issues Spotlighted

The Obama administration continues to make national security decisions with which I might not agree.  For example, Obama attorneys incorrectly argued for warrantless cell phone tracking, according to a Raw Story - 2/14 post.  Glenn Greenwald from Salon.com (1/8/10) put his own disagreement even more strongly: "The backfiring of the surveillance state" is how he characterized the failure. To quote:

Every debate over expanded government surveillance power is invariably framed as one of "security v. privacy and civil liberties" -- as though it's a given that increasing the Government's surveillance authorities will "make us safer." But it has long been clear that the opposite is true. As numerous experts (such as Rep. Rush Holt) have attempted, with futility, to explain, expanding the scope of raw intelligence data collected by our national security agencies invariably impedes rather than bolsters efforts to detect terrorist plots. This is true for two reasons:(1) eliminating strict content limits on what can be surveilled (along with enforcement safeguards, such as judicial warrants) means that government agents spend substantial time scrutinizing and sorting through communications and other information that have nothing to do with terrorism; and (2) increasing the quantity of what is collected makes it more difficult to find information relevant to actual terrorism plots. As Rep. Holt put it when arguing against the obliteration of FISA safeguards and massive expansion of warrantless eavesdropping power which a bipartisan Congress effectuated last year:

It has been demonstrated that when officials must establish before a court that they have reason to intercept communications -- that is, that they know what they are doing -- we get better intelligence than through indiscriminate collection and fishing expeditions.

Intelligence gathering is a very hard business in any administration, including that of President Obama.  Explaining the failure of the Intel community to detect the Christmas Eve attempt to blow up an airplane over Detroit, a new study financed by Congress,  according to the New York Times (2/22/10), has found that hurdles stymie the National Counterterrorism Center. To quote:

. . . the study concludes, is a lack of coordination and communication among the agencies that are supposed to take the lead in planning the fight against terrorism, . . The findings come just weeks after the National Counterterrorism Center was criticized for missing clear warning signs that a 23-year-old Nigerian man was said to be plotting to blow up a Detroit-bound commercial airliner on Dec. 25.

. . . The report found that the center’s planning arm struggled with “systemic impediments” like overlapping statutes, culture clashes with different agencies and tensions with two formidable players: the State Department’s counterterrorism office and the C.I.A.

. . . The study called on Mr. Obama to issue an executive order to define the nation’s counterterrorism architecture in order to address some of the problems and improve coordination. It also recommended giving the center’s director, currently Michael E. Leiter, a say in the choice of counterterrorism officials at other federal agencies, a step the 9/11 Commission had recommended but was not adopted.

With all that, the current intelligence community is willing to try such completely unconventional methods as MCClatchy's (3/29/10) headline revealed: "Feds are thinking outside the box to plug intelligence gaps."  Congress will be asked to appropriate funds for this project, as well as oversee it on behalf of the citizens they represent.

We all should be very grateful that intelligence oversight in Congress is no longer in the hands of former House Intelligence Committee chairman, Peter Hoekstra.  Read the following little gem by David C. Morrison from CQ Behind the Lines (3/30/10).  To quote:

Yemen, brother:  “ ‘I’ll lead a preemptive strike on Yemen,’ Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., vows, publicly stating his plans for the Michigan National Guard if he wins election as governor this fall,” Glossy News notes. ‘I’ve been leading on national security for the last nine years in Congress, trying to drive this administration in a policy direction that keeps America safe,’ Hoekstra said on ABC’s This Week. ‘Obama hasn’t shown interest in my concerns here, so I intend to strike with the reconstituted Michigan National Guard in Yemen. As the leading national expert, it’s certainly appropriate for me to promote this strike in Yemen. The leaders of that little speck of earth need to see what a ball buster a Michigan strike can be. They won’t know what hit them. I think the unemployed people of the fine state of Michigan can be of help to the safety of the citizens of the United States of America . . . Unemployed Michigan folks can come to the rescue of our dire situation here. And so say all of us.’”

Representative Hoekstra appears to have been completely serious in his above statement.  I note that Michigan is where the FBI recently arrested and charged with sedition a group of militant militia members who were allegedly plotting to kill police.  This gubernatorial candidate needs to be much more careful with his proposal to take up arms in his own "war on terror."  His is a long history of ignoring the rule of law.  For example, torture did not seem to bother him when he learned of it from the CIA.  But we'll never know for sure because the CIA failed to keep accurate records of Congressional briefings.

The CIA has no idea what it briefed Congress on torture reported "emptywheel" at Firedoglake (3/16/10). The CIA did not keep adequate records of what was briefed to members of Congress in 2003 and 2004 regarding torture.  To quote:

The CIA documents released in the latest FOIA batch prove that all the claims that CIA (and Crazy Pete Hoekstra) have made about briefings Congress received on torture are, at best, reconstructions based on years old memors, if not outright fabrications.

The documents appear to have been a summary of torture briefings CIA Office of Congressional Affairs put together on July 11, 2004 in anticipation of CIA’s Congressional briefing in July 2004.

The summary shows that:

CIA OCA didn’t even write up the briefings it gave Porter Goss and Jane Harman in February 2003 or the Gang of Four in September 2003 by July 2004. . . any claims they make about the content of those briefings cannot be said to be accurate. . .

The only MFR that OCA seemed to have completed in July 2004 is the February 4, 2003 briefing, at which Pat Roberts apparently unequivocally approved of destroying the torture tapes (and at which he also agreed to end nascent Congressional attempts at oversight).

In other words, the claims that CIA had detailed records about what Nancy Pelosi or Jane Harman or Jay Rockefeller said about destroying the torture tapes? They appear to be completely fabricated.

There is a related story regarding additional lawmakers'involvement coming out of this month's release of the CIA  records, "Ex-Intel Committee Chair Blasts GOP Successor for Killing Torture Probe" is by David Corn from Mother Jones (3/3/10). Former Democratic Senator Bob Graham of Florida was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee until January of 2003, when he was replaced by Republican Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas.  To quote:

. . at the start of the US government's campaign against Al Qaeda [Graham] tells Mother Jones he cannot fathom why his Republican replacement squashed his request for an independent review of the interrogation techniques then being used by the CIA. . .  he believes Sen. Roberts  neglected his obligations as head of the intel panel by smothering Graham's proposal for a committee assessment of so-called enhanced interrogation practices.

On February 4, 2003, according to a CIA memo released last week, . . . a classified briefing [was presented] . . . to Roberts and an aide to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the senior Democrat on the committee. Over the course of nearly two hours, the briefers covered the CIA's brutal interrogation (or torture)—including waterboarding—of two detained terrorist suspects, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, and told Roberts of the agency's plan to destroy videotapes of the Zubaydah sessions. The memo noted that Roberts "posed no objection to what he had heard" and "supported the interrogation effort."

. . . [CIA briefer] Moskowitz told Roberts and the others that the CIA would not allow any additional committee staffers to be briefed on the interrogation program. Nor would the spy service permit any committee staffer to review the interrogations in real time or visit the secret site where these sessions were occurring. Roberts didn't protest. In fact, at that point, according to the CIA memo, Roberts "interjected that he saw no reason for the committee to pursue [Graham's] request and could think of 'ten reasons right off why it is a terrible idea' for the committee to do any such thing as had been proposed." No committee investigation ensued.

That is not the case in 2010.  Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) held a  Judiciary Committee hearing in late February regarding the Justice Department's recently released Office of Professional Responsibility report, which he has condemned.  The Hill - 2/22/10 - had the story on the disappointing report that Senator Leahy investigated. To quote:

. . . a report that allowed two Bush administration officials to escape any formal punishment regarding their role in drafting the legal justification for the harsh interrogations of detainees.

Jay Bybee and John Yoo, two former high-level Bush administration officials who drafted the legal basis for the Bush administration’s treatment of overseas terror suspects, escaped any formal punishment . . .

The new report, written by Deputy Associate Attorney General David Margolis, reversed the recommendations of ethics officials within the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which earlier had concluded the state bar committees should decide whether Bybee’s and Yoo’s law licenses should be revoked.

As the previous year has shown, the current administration has not worked to restore privacy and civil liberties, trampled by the Bush administration.  The Intel community still has too many elements that cannot analyze and communicate effectively.  Few in the previous administration have been held accountable for transgressions of the rule of law.  Congress failed to exercise adequate national security oversight, and remains weak in their responsibilities.  And many Democrats and Republicans have completely different views of what constitutes adequate national security that operates well within the rule of law.

Additional references from CQ Behind the Lines by David C. Morrison (3/30/10). To quote:

Ways and means: The 2002 death of a suspected Afghan militant in the so-called Salt Pit — the only fatality known to have occurred inside the secret post-9/11 CIA prison network — is a cautionary tale, The Associated Press’s Adam Goldman investigates. “I believe that there is a discrepancy between what most Americans believe is legal and what the government is actually doing under the Patriot Act,” Secrecy News’s Steven Aftergood quotes Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. “How does being watched affect the quality of our lives? You can argue that only terrorists and criminals would protest, but the reality is that none of us has the same privacy we had before,” Jay Fidell argues in The Honolulu Advertiser. “If, God forbid, Americans are ever rounded up in large numbers during a natural or man made disaster, where could they be detained?” Mark Anderson asks in The American Free Press, answering that FEMA surely has it figured out.

Trend analysis: is from a current news roundup by David C. Morrison at CQ Behind the Lines (3/30/10):

“The latest wave of jihadists traveling to Pakistan and elsewhere for training may have been motivated by a sense of jihadi cool*,” NPR’s Dina Temple-Raston leads. “A researcher has found that many terrorist organizations, including Hamas, are using their children’s Web sites in order to recruit girls for terrorist activities,” ANI leads.

*Jihadi Cool is from Newsweek Magazine (4/15/2008).  Here is the link to the PDF version: newsweek_jihadi_cool_150408.pdf (application/pdf Object

March: Womens History Month -- Honors to Women of Courage

International Women of Courage Awards were presented on International Womens Day, Wednesday, March 10.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and First Lady Michelle Obama honored a number of outstanding women for their courage in standing for women's rights around the world.  To quote from Secretary Clinton's remarks at the event:

I am particularly delighted to welcome back to the State Department our First Lady, Michelle Obama. (Applause.) This is the second time that Michelle Obama and I have celebrated the International Women of Courage Awards together. It’s a tradition I really like because she is doing so much for women and girls not only in our own country, but around the world. She inspires them. She challenges them. She exemplifies for them the kind of strength, warmth, and grace that so many of us see in her and aspire to for our own daughters. She has made the health and empowerment of young people, particularly young women, a centerpiece of her leadership. And she and I agree on many things, but one that we particularly agree on is that every child should have the chance to fulfill his or her God-given potential. And I just have to thank her for the mentoring programs that she created at the White House, for the special project that she is doing now to tackle childhood obesity, and to really setting the standard for what we want to see in our own country and around the world as well.

And I want to thank and recognize – I want to also recognize Melanne Verveer. (Applause.) Melanne is our country’s first Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues, and it’s no accident that that would happen in the Obama Administration, where we would have someone of her experience and expertise promoting the political, economic, and social empowerment of women. As Melanne often reminds us, the world is full of remarkable women whose work goes unnoticed or undervalued. And today, we celebrate some particular women, but they really stand in for millions of other women who are serving their communities and making our world a better and safer place for all.

********** [Each honoree was presented with her award between the following segments]

What we’re going to do now is actually present the honorees. I will read the awards citations and then Mrs. Obama and I will present them with their International Women of Courage Award. I’d like to note that we’re going to start with two women from Afghanistan, so let me start with Shukria Asil – (applause) – as one of four female members of the Baghlan Provincial Council. Ms. Asil has been instrumental in promoting government responsiveness to the needs of Afghan women. She is being honored for pioneering efforts to promote opportunity, justice, and education for women and girls; serving as a voice for diverse members of Afghan society; and at great personal risk, increasing the accountability and responsiveness of the government to the needs of women and girls in Afghanistan. Thank you so much, Ms. Asil. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: I woke up to the voice of this next honoree because she was interviewed on public radio, NPR, this morning. And Colonel Shafiqa Quraishi of Afghanistan is the Director of Gender, Human, and Child rights within the Ministry of the Interior. She began her career in the Afghan National Police. She has been at the forefront of integrating women into the government and police force. And she is being honored for her visionary leadership in breaking down barriers to the professional advancement of Afghan women, promoting unity and gender equality, humanitarian activism, and initiating programs to strengthen the Afghan National Police. Congratulations, Colonel. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: You heard Mrs. Obama speaking of this next honoree, Sonia Pierre of the Dominican Republic. She was born on Dominican soil to Haitian parents. She is the founder and leader of the Movement for Dominican Women of Haitian Descent, an NGO dedicated to fighting for the rights of vulnerable communities in her country. She is being honored for advancing the cause of social justice, confronting exploitation and discrimination, defending the dignity of persons of Haitian descent in the Dominican Republic, and helping marginalized communities develop their own voices for their own future. Congratulations, Sonia. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Ann Njogu of Kenya is the co-convener of the Civil Society Congress – (cheers and applause) – a leader in constitutional reform and head of the Center for Rights, Education, and Awareness. She has been an activist seeking social transformation and working for reform in her native country. She is being honored for progressive leadership in the fight against corruption, the push for gender equality in Kenya, the battle for constitutional reform, and for bravely mobilizing Kenyan civil society to secure the passage of landmark legislation against sexual offenses. (Applause and cheers.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Dr. Lee Ae-ran of South Korea was born in North Korea. She was a witness to tyranny at a very early age. She defected to South Korea and transformed her life, where she has been a force for promoting human rights of the North Korean refugee community. She is being honored for spearheading initiatives to improve the lives and education of the North Korean refugee community in South Korea, elevating the empowerment of women, and raising awareness of the dire human rights situation in North Korea. Congratulations, Dr. Lee. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Jansila Majeed of Sri Lanka is a women who lived as an internally displaced person for almost 20 years. She became one of the few women activists working on behalf of the displaced Muslim and Tamil civilians and is the managing trustee of the Community Trust Fund in Puttalam Province. She’s being honored for her dedicated grassroots activism and minority community leadership on behalf of women and girls, their empowerment, peace building, relief work, the resettlement of internally displaced persons, and a commitment to bringing society together. Congratulations.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Sister Marie Claude Naddaf is the Mother Superior of the Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd. She has been a beacon of hope for women and girls who have nowhere else to turn. She is a pioneer in working for social services for women in Syria. She is being honored for her steadfast dedication to ending the suffering of women and girls who are victims of domestic violence, sexual exploitation, and human trafficking. She launched Syria’s first shelter and emergency hotline for women. Thank you so much, Sister. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: And the final honoree who could be with us today is Jestina Mukoko of Zimbabwe. Jestina is the Executive Director of the Zimbabwe Peace Project and a longtime leader in the human rights and activist community in her country. She is being honored for her relentless activism for justice and defense of human rights, for bringing attention to widespread violence against women in Zimbabwe, and for pursuing her case to the supreme court, resulting in a victory that has offered hope to her fellow citizens. Congratulations. (Applause and cheers.)

Reference:
Here are some very interesting facts, pulled from the U.S. Census Bureau about the state of womanhood… It comes from Women's History Month, a blog post by Lijit.com (3/5/10).

[Post date: 3/11/10]


Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: women State Department International Women of Courage Awards Women's History Month

Peace in the Middle East: What Are the Possibilities

Israel-Palestine -- 

In my opinion, there is no possibility to settle this generational struggle as long as a conservative hawk heads the government in Israel.  It will not matter what any Palestinian leader does, or what progress Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza make.  The two sides are not even talking to each other right now because of Israel's continuation of settlement activity. Our diplomatic man in the Middle East, former Senator George Mitchell, will be attempting to reinvent Henry Kissinger's style of shuttle diplomacy, going back and forth between the Israelis and the Palestinians.  But he is not the only big gun in the region.

Vice President Joe Biden has also gone to Israel to work on restarting the Middle East peace process, it is well reported by Steve Clemons at the Washington Note.  Just to show the United States not to get too cocky about its chances, Israel announced 1600 more buildings in the nation's continued settlement of occupied east Jerusalem disputed territory. Then Israel apologized for embarrassing Biden, according to Yahoo! News. 

Iraq --

The chances for peace seem a bit better in Iraq, though it is still a long shot.  Most of the major differences have yet to be settled.  Sunday was election day in Iraq.  Over 60% of the people turned out to vote for members of the new parliament.  Current Prime Minister Malak, a Shiia,  will probably win the most votes, though not a majority.  This election the Sunnis did not boycott voting, and will gather a lot of votes.  It will, thus, take some months for the PM candidate with the most votes to form a new coalition government.  What will happen in the meantime?

The big question is whether Iraq will descend into civil war when the U.S. withdraws its combat forces.  Will an insurgency begin to gather steam again?  Or will the Shiia, Sunni and Kurdish sectors be able to work out their differences peacefully?  Will all the years of the United States waging a counterinsurgency war in Iraq bear any fruit whatsoever?  For background on our "Counterinsurgency Operations in Iraq," see the video of this fine conference broadcast on C-SPAN  March 5, 2010.  The excellent panel included Patrick Cronin, Andrew Exum, Thomas Ricks and Linda Robinson.

Possibilities for peace in the Middle East were never good under the previous Bush administration, populated as it was by neocons.  It is becoming more apparent that not peace, but domination, was the goal.  A new book by "Bush's brain," Karl Rove is causing a great deal of consternation as he tries to rewrite the last 10  years of history of the region.  Karl Rove's book is about the wrong person, according to a recent guest post by Lawrence Wilkerson at The Washington Note.  Wilkerson's theory is that Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge, and that the war in Iraq was always about the oil needs of the United States.  Cheney's behavior since leaving office bears that out.  He has never been a peaceful man and seems incapable of change.


Possibilities for peace in the Middle East are better under the Obama administration, in my opinion.  They are smarter and more pragmatic.  Its leaders are less troubled by hubris, and less beholden to the military-industrial complex.  I leave you with a great new website for following President Obama's peace processes, when and if they happen:


Reference -- The Middle East Channel on Twitter.


[Post date: March 10, 2010]



See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.
Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.
Technorati tags: [tagname]

Middle East and Military -- This and That

Israel and Palestinian territories -- Headlined, "House resolution to condemn U.N. Investigator's Israeli/Hamas war crimes report," the story comes from The Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman. Reflecting on this news, Matt Yglesias said, "Very last sentence of this Goldstone resolution could be an endorsement of a possible Israeli attack on Iran:" Yglesias added, "Nice assessment of Goldstone resolution: "some valid points...riddled with inaccuracies and misleading statements." To quote TWI:

TWI has acquired the text of a congressional resolution that may be introduced in the next few days condemning the findings of U.N. investigator Richard Goldstone’s report into war crimes during Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza this past winter.

The resolution — drafted by Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Dan Burton (R-Ind.), Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.) — which condemns Goldstone’s work in very harsh terms, is sure to generate controversy in Congress, within the Obama administration and among peace watchers.

This headline followed the publication of the congressional resolution article. It is another story by Spencer Ackerman at the Washington Independent (10/30/09): "J street is unable to support the Congressional Goldstone resolution." To quote from the story:

In a statement to be sent to supporters, J Street, the pro-Israel-pro-peace American Jewish lobby group, is urging members of Congress not to pass to significantly modify a resolution condemning U.N. investigator Richard Goldstone’s report into war crimes committed by Israel and Hamas during last year’s conflict. That resolution, strongly supported by other American Jewish organizations, fails to call for, among other things, “independent investigations by both Israelis and Palestinians.”

Iraq war fallout -- The Washington Independent's Daphne Aviatar reported that, "Al-Qaeda Assistant [was] Sentenced to Eight Years in Prison." To quote: "Depending on who you ask, the sentencing yesterday of Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri to eight years in prison is either evidence that the civilian federal judicial system can successfully handle terror cases, or evidence that it’s a dismal failure." Daily Kos liked what Adam Server said about the issue:

RT @AdamSerwer: Former Al Qaeda member sentenced in civilian court, somehow, America survives.

Iran -- TWI News posted this: "Iran Has Reportedly Rejected the Vienna Nuke Deal." And The Nation Magazine posted this: "Why Obama's Iran Policy Will Fail." And it posted this: "Iran Split on Nukes."

Defense spending -- Marc Ambinder made a wry observation regarding the availability of a couple of jobs at the prison at GTMO BAY: "Not closing down too soon, I guess. RT @defensejobs: Arabic Linguist II - Chenega Corporation."

References saved from recent weeks on Twitter:

"Tehran Plans to Execute 3 Protesters of Election http://bit.ly/2De1FE," is from the New York Times (10/10/09).

"Palestinians' anger mounts over Gaza report http://bit.ly/pqxGj," is from The Huffington Post (10/9/09).

"Senate approves $636B Pentagon bill: The Senate on Tuesday approved a $636 billion Pentagon spending bill after.. http://bit.ly/Te52p," is from The Hill (10/6/09).

"Iraqis, Americans seeking a new relationship http://bit.ly/DWj0d," is from McClatchy (10/5/09).

"For U.S. combat soldiers, new role in Iraq is frustrating http://bit.ly/1eKlle," is from McClatchy (10/5/09).

"Military Memo: Clear Voice of Bush’s Pentagon Becomes Harder to Hear http://bit.ly/PRhv5," is from the New York Times (10/4/09).

"Israel Agrees to Release Prisoners in Return for Information on Soldier http://bit.ly/10XgvE," is from the New York Times (9/30/09)

"Senior administration official says US and Russia preparing joint intelligence assessment of Iran's ballistc missile capabilities," is from Marc Ambinder (9/17/09).

Questions about Afghanistan --

Is Afghanistan "going south?" Liberals are deserting President Obama on Afghanistan, according to Jeff Stein's "Spy talk" at CQ Politics. And I may join them. Now that we are leaving Iraq, things are not going well in President Obama's military or diplomatic efforts in the war that really matters to this administration. It is not yet clear what our true purpose is in the region. Where is NATO? And what happens when contractors outnumber the military?

The State Department was questioned Wednesday by reporters regarding a bizarre report about a contractor scandal in Kabul. It turns out that security at the U.S. embassy in Kabul is a cruel joke played on the State Department by a private contracting firm, ArmorGroup, evidently operating without supervision from anyone. Informed Comment's Juan Cole says it for us with this quote:

I can't understand why the US army isn't assigned to tasks like guarding the embassy; why farm that task out to geriatric frat boys? The cult of private contracting, which is promoted in the name of a free market but is actually a kind of socialism, is bankrupting the US government-- and we aren't even getting our money's worth.

Multiple questions remain about the recent elections in Afghanistan. Was it a fraud? Was it stolen? Who would be the rightful President? What can the United Nations do about it? Who will conrtol the provinces? Is the high level of corruption insurmountable?

A new question about Afghanistan was raised by a Reuters story Thursday from the GlobalPost: "Are U.S. taxpayers funding the Taliban?" To quote the intro, "The United States Agency for International Development has opened an investigation into allegations that its funds for road and bridge construction in Afghanistan are ending up in the hands of the Taliban, through a protection racket for contractors." Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) promised to hold hearings in the fall.

Serious questions were raised by a current story in Mother Jones Magazine "A Few Good Kids?" written by David Goodman. Recruitment into the Armed Services is a well organized activity, too organized it seems. In summary: "How the No Child left behind Act allowed military recruiters to collect info on millions of unsuspecting teens." To quote further:

. . . the recruiters [know a student's] email address, Social Security number, or details about his ethnicity, shopping habits, or college plans. Yet they probably knew all that, too. In the past few years, the military has mounted a virtual invasion into the lives of young Americans. Using data mining, stealth websites, career tests, and sophisticated marketing software, the Pentagon is harvesting and analyzing information on everything from high school students' GPAs and SAT scores to which video games they play. Before an Army recruiter even picks up the phone to call a prospect . . . the soldier may know more about the kid's habits than do his own parents.

Questions regarding the future of the war in Afghanistan will not go away. Many of the problems are clearly leftovers from the Bush administrations mishandling of both wars in the Middle East and South Asia. But that is not an excuse that will hold forever. Congress and the President must decide reasonable foreign policy goals that are achievable and over which oversight can be done. The U.S. government does not have very long to answer these mounting questions.

[Post date - September 3, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics afghanistan state department war obama administration

The Big Tug of War --

News items about national security are emerging more rapidly in recent weeks. Despite the stated preference for "not looking back," the stories have emerged that lead to a buildup of momentum. According to The New York Times, former Vice President Cheney is linked to the concealment of a highly classified CIA program, until it was recently revealed to Congress by CIA Director Leon Panetta. To quote:

Intelligence and Congressional officials have said the unidentified program did not involve the C.I.A. interrogation program and did not involve domestic intelligence activities. They have said the program was started by the counterterrorism center at the C.I.A. shortly after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, but never became fully operational, involving planning and some training that took place off and on from 2001 until this year.

President Obama is increasingly under pressure to change his mind about investigating the Bush administration's security programs, despite the political risks. Sunday talk shows saw leading Democrats demanding to find out how a highly classified counter terrorism program was kept secret from the Congressional leadership on the orders of Vice President Dick Cheney. The New York Times published a subsequent news analysis that lays out where the investigative push is, and from whom. To quote:

. . . Mr. Obama said this weekend that he had asked his staff members to review the mass killing of prisoners in Afghanistan by local forces allied with the United States as it toppled the Taliban regime there.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is also close to assigning a prosecutor to look into whether prisoners in the campaign against terrorism were tortured, officials disclosed on Saturday.

And after a report from five inspectors general about the National Security Agency’s domestic eavesdropping said on Friday that there had been a number of undisclosed surveillance programs during the Bush years, Democrats sought more information.

. . . That makes four fronts on which the intelligence apparatus is under siege. It is just the kind of distraction from Mr. Obama’s domestic priorities — repairing the economy, revamping the health care system, and addressing the long-term problems of energy and climate — that the White House wanted to avoid.

Revelations about the CIA and torture, deliberate deception of Congressional Intelligence committees, and emerging Inspectors General reports seem to heading towards formal investigations that the Obama administration, including the Attorney General, and Congress may not be able to resist. Glenn Greenwald's post yesterday provides one of the best overviews of the current climate, along with what others who stay on top of these issues are saying. It seems that this tug of war is far from over. The weight of the law will somehow have its way, if we remain vigilant and have a bit of luck along the way.

[Post date - July 13, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics national security torture rule of law

Entourages in Italy for G8 Summit

Heads of eight nations are meeting in Italy discussing a variety of issues. Yesterday, my post discussed the nuclear disarmament deal made by President Obama while in Russia enroute to the Summit. Later on down the line the story may lead with this headline, "Obama May Bypass Senate to Implement New START Treaty," which is from CQ POlitics (7/6/09). The Obama administration is thinking about a plan that would make it possible to use an executive order for the key inspection provisions, and then submit the treaty to the Senate in 2010. To quote:

President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on Monday signed a framework for further nuclear weapon cuts that increases the likelihood their nations can finalize an accord to replace the Strategic Arms limitation treaty that expires on Dec. 5.

But the tight timetable could prompt the Obama administration to take the highly unusual step of bypassing the Senate and not seek the chamber's formal ratification before enforcing key portions the pact.

. . . Monday's agreement instructs negotiators to cut the number of deployed nuclear warheads on each side to 1,500 to 1,675 from levels above 2,200. But there are disagreements over what to count, complicated by lingering friction over U.S. plans to install a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The United States maintains the system is intended to deter threats from North Korea and Iran, not from Russia's arsenal. But Medvedev and other Russian leaders believe any such system cannot be purely defensive in nature and will fundamentally alter the balance of power, if installed.

The primary issue for both Russia and the United States is to avoid letting the START treaty lapse at the end of the year. So there might be time for Congress to act. And Congressional votes go mostly President Obama's way, as it turns out, reports CQ Politics. So this is probably not a huge worry for the administration. To quote:

. . . his success score of 95.2 percent, if it continues for the rest of the year, would be the highest for any president since Congressional Quarterly began this measurement in 1953. That’s true not only for the first year of a presidency, but also for any year.

. . .Democrats in both chambers are far more supportive of Obama than they have been for a president of either party in half a century. Senate Democrats are voting with him 92 percent of the time on average, and House Democrats are supporting him 89 percent of the time.

Senate and House Republicans aren’t consistent with each other in their support for Obama. Perhaps it’s not a surprise that members of the House GOP are voting with Obama just 36 percent of the time — compared with their average support score of 39 percent for Clinton in his first year and 42 percent for Democrat Jimmy Carter in his first year. But Senate Republicans have so far supported Obama 56 percent of the time. That’s the second-highest Senate GOP support score for any Democratic president — just shy of the 60 percent they gave Clinton in 1997.

Reference: From Congressional Quarterly - Behind the Lines by David C. Morrison, I quote the section on nuclear issues:

Know nukes: “No previous American president has set out a step-by-step agenda for the eventual elimination of nuclear arms,” notes a New York Times profile tracing the evolution of President Obama’s stance — while The Washington Post has him inking a nuke reduction accord in Moscow yesterday. The U.N. nuclear watchdog will help Serbia ship tons of spent nuclear fuel to Russia and decommission its research reactor, “removing it from a list of countries which could be targeted by nuclear terrorism,” Reuters reports — and see The Boston Globe’s inside look at the U.S. role in the just-completed withdrawal of all enriched uranium from Romania. World Politics Review, meantime, ponders Cuba becoming the 54th state to accede to the Nuclear Terrorism Convention, so as “to burnish the island nation’s counter terrorist credentials.”

President Obama is good at this kind of thing. His approach is markedly different than that of his predecessor, and it will take the other leaders a bit of time to adjust to the new guy in town. He will do just fine.

[Post date - July 8, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news foreign policy nuclear treaty obama russia leadership

Taking a higher road

Image via Wikipedia

It is a relief to have a U.S. president who is proving to be up to his job as chief foreign policy specialist, able diplomat, competent communicator and all-round "debonair dude." President Obama has been very impressive on his trip to Russia. Properly respectful to the two co-leaders and to their national soveignty, he walked a very fine line with what looked like effortless steps.

Tackling nuclear disarmament in earnest must have felt good to him, given his long Senate history of interest and legislation on the subject. And he will manage to make progress even with the constraints of a mandatory nuclear posture study due in a few months. He, of course, will manage to make both deadlines. It was good to see National Security Jim Jones as part of the team, steady and probably as smart as his boss.

The agreement to transport men and materials through Russia to Afghanistan is a very good deal, and we can assume that Russia will volunteer other help over time. It will be ironic of course, but they might be able to help us avoid some of their mistakes in Afghanistan. It could be a fantasy, but certainly they could provide police and military trainers. Russians must have an interest in diminishing the drug trade heading straight for their country. And it might make them look good to NATO. But Obama is not above trying a new way. Afghanistan jus cannot be our problem alone to solve, and President Obama, if anyone, might be able to engage more allied help.

In conclusion, it was wonderful to see the Obama family make the trip to Russia. It sent a message of trust, of warmth, and of valuing the Russian experience that will not be lost on them. So soon it is on to Italy and then to Ghana. What a set of contrasts! What possibilities!


[Post date - July 7, 2009]

See also Behind the Links.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news news and politics foreign policy russia obama

Related articles by Zemanta

• Russia and US agree nuclear disarmament deal wording (telegraph.co.uk)
• Barack Obama tells Russia to respect borders of Georgia and Ukraine (telegraph.co.uk)
• Obama Seeks New Start in US-Russia Relations (abcnews.go.com)
• Obama: U.S., Russia 'not destined' to be rivals (msnbc.msn.com)
• Obama Faces Two Russian Bears (abcnews.go.com)
• Obama Seeks NATO Support on Afghanistan (abcnews.go.com)
• US and Russia offer to cut warheads (guardian.co.uk)

Middle East Developments

Image via Wikipedia

Vice President Joe Biden is in Iraq. He is there for meetings with military commanders, Ambassador Chris Hill, and Iraq's President Talibani and Prime Minister Malaki. His visit comes on the heels of the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from the cities to the bases near the perimeters around metropolitan areas. Iraqis celebrated the transition to more control over their own destiny, and more risk of security breakdowns. But it was by their design and our that we are now implementing this formal Status of Forces agreement signed last December. And from the beginning of this year military operations have been refocusing on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The US army says it has launched a major offensive against the Taliban in south Afghanistan's Helmand province. "Operation Strike of the Sword gets under way," according to today's BBC News. To quote further from the story:

The US military says about 4,000 marines as well as 650 Afghan troops are involved, supported by Nato planes. Brig Gen Larry Nicholson said the operation was different from previous ones because of the "massive size of the force" and its speed.

A Taliban spokesman said they would resist in various ways and that there would be no permanent US victory.

. . . It is the first such large-scale operation since US President Barack Obama authorised the deployment of 17,000 extra US troops to Afghanistan, as part of a new strategy for winning the conflict. Many of them are being redeployed from operations in Iraq, to help with training Afghan security forces and to tackle the insurgency.

A House Intelligence panel late last month reported out with a warning of emerging threats to the nation's security, according to a 6/29 story in CQ Politics. The report also "thinks spy agencies are behind in addressing cybersecurity, diversity and foreign language training, according to a committee report released Monday." The Democratic Intelligence Committee also approved the 2010 intel authorization bill that includes a provision that eliminated the administration's "right to control when the full intelligence panels are briefed as opposed to more limited 'Gang of Eight' briefings for panel and congressional leaders."

Countries mentioned that face security challenges include Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Mexico. Today's post focuses on Middle East developments. The Intel Committee Report says that the "political and military situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan continues to deteriorate." As an example, according to the Financial Times (6/23/09), "A tribal leader who vowed to lead an uprising against Pakistan's most notorious Taliban militants was killed, raising doubts over the success of a planned military offensive along the Afghan border." Qari Zainuddin, 26, was reportedly shot by one of his own guards in Dera Isamil Khan in northwest Pakistan. A BBC 6/24 report said, to quote:

at least 43 people have died in missile strikes by a US drone aircraft in a militant stronghold of Pakistan [in South Waziristan], a Taliban spokesman said. The people killed had been attending the funeral of a military commander killed in an earlier strike.

. . . There have been more than 35 US strikes since last August - killing over 340 people - and most have landed in the North and South Waziristan tribal regions. Pakistan has been publicly critical of drone attacks, arguing that they kill civilians and fuel support for militants like Baitullah Mehsud.

NATO partner, the United Kingdom, has intensified its fight in southern Afghanistan's Helmand province. Significant progress to hold territory was only made possible because of the arrival of additional U.S. troops to assist. Great Britain has lost 169 soldiers in Afghanistan since 2001. Also, "three German soldiers are killed in Afghanistan when their patrol came under fire, the defence ministry in Berlin says," to quote the BBC. The attack happened in the northern city of Kunduz, where the Germans have a military base where a 3,700 member German military force is stationed. The Germans have lost 35 troops since 2002.

In an interesting aside, Steven Aftergood of Secrecy News (6/15/09), wrote that the new U.S. Afghanistan Commander did not get complete support for his appointment to the post. To quote:

Gen. Stanley McChrystal was confirmed by the Senate last week to be the new commander of U.S. (and NATO) forces in Afghanistan, a role that he assumed today. But his nomination was opposed by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) who objected to the General’s advancement on unspecified “classified” grounds.

“I oppose the nomination of LTG Stanley McChrystal to command U.S. forces in Afghanistan for two reasons,” Senator Feingold said on June 11. “The first relates to a classified matter about which I have serious concerns. I have conveyed those concerns in a letter to the President.”

The second reason cited by Sen. Feingold was McChrystal’s embrace of interrogation techniques that went beyond those authorized in the Army Field Manual on the subject.

News bites associated with the above items come from CQ Behind the Lines newsletter July 1, 2009, by David C. Morrison. To quote:

Courts and rights: The alleged shooter in the deadly Holocaust Memorial Museum assault, himself wounded, is still unfit to appear in court, CNN has a judge declaring — as Pakistan’s The Nation says a defense-hired shrink will testify in a New York courtroom today on the mental soundness of a terror-charged Pakistani neuroscientist. The foreman of the Florida jury that acquitted an Egypt-born student on terror charges is convinced that the defendant — now facing deportation on charges levied by ICE — is a victim of profiling, CNN, again, spotlights. A federal judge who authorized habeas challenges in U.S. courts for military detainees in Afghanistan ruled Monday that that right doesn’t apply to at least one Afghan prisoner, AP reports.

[Post date July 2, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: news foreign policy middle east national security

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.S. launches 'major' Afghanistan operation (cnn.com)
• Marines launch major Afghan attack (msnbc.msn.com)
• Obama's First Op: U.S., Afghan Troops Close In on Taliban (abcnews.go.com)

Presidents "win some, lose some"

Commander in Chief -- President Obama has issued his first veto threat. He says he will not sign the House 2010 Defense authorization bill if they try to add funds for the F-22 aircraft or the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The President and the Secretary of Defense, I think will win this one. And it is essential for Congress to realize that war fighting has changed, and the military industrial complex must change or be left behind.

Defense Budget References: Here is the legislation in question. Read it and weep. (HT to ProPublica) Mother Jones Special Report: "MoJo dissects the Defense Budget so you don't have to:"

• Part I: Shock and Audit


• Part II: Operation Overrun


• Part III: Where’s My Flying Tank?


• Part IV: The Axis of Pork


• Part V: Mission Impossible

Collateral damage, civilians lose -- According to a BBC News (6/23/09) Special Report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, "Civilians 'bear the brunt of war'." In summary, "A report carried out among 4,000 people in eight countries suggests civilians bear the brunt of modern conflict." To quote further:

The report, called "Our world, views from the field" asked 4,000 civilians from eight countries to relate their personal experiences of war. Of those, 44% said they had witnessed armed conflict first hand and one in three had seen a relative killed.

The countries were Afghanistan, Georgia, Haiti, Liberia, DR Congo, Colombia, Lebanon and the Philippines. More than half - 56% - said they had been forced to leave their homes and almost half had lost contact with a loved one.

. . . The report also suggests that most civilians caught up in war turn first to relatives or friends for help, a sign, the ICRC says, that more needs to be done to support those carers.

Reaching out to Muslims will be a winning strategy -- The "Obama Cairo speech," post is from emptywheel (6/4/09). I agree with this author's evaluation that it was a big winner. To quote:

Spencer has posted the full text of the speech, and some good comment. Click the link and read the full text of the speech, it is well worth it.

It was a remarkable speech. This is a not just a speech that George Bush would not have given, but a speech he functionally could not have given; even with wordsmith speechwriters and handlers, he simply doesn't have the intellectual depth, greater worldview or oratorical skill to have pulled off what Obama did. If there is a hope for peaceful and productive coexistence with the Islamic world, and peace in the middle east, this speech will be the first linchpin of Obama's effort in that regard.

Changing the dynamics might win peace -- At the same time as the President was reaching out to the Muslim world, he was setting limits with Israel. And I believe this will be a winning strategy in the long run, because it changes the balance of power and the old worn out dynamics in the peace process. "Obama's 'interference in Israeli politics," is by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (6/3/09). Glenn's points:

. . . if one chooses instead to become dependent on someone else or seeks help and aid from them, then complying with the demands of those providing the aid is an inevitable price that must be paid – and justifiably so.

. . . While hypocrisy and double standards are far too common in our political discourse to highlight every time they appear, the notion being pushed by Likudniks in Israel and the U.S. -- that it is wrong for one country to "interfere" in the politics of another democracy -- is far too ironic to ignore.

. . . How serious Obama is about applying real pressure to Israel remains to be seen, but it’s hard to deny that these initial steps are encouraging. When is the last time there were public rifts of this sort between the American and Israeli governments?

Domestic surveillance, gone right -- The Department of Homeland Security has killed a domestic spying program, the National Applications Office, emptywheel reported earlier this week. This is the program that Rep. Jane Harman was going to try to kill with legislation, because it has been a bad idea from the outset. Military spy satellites have been used to survey domestic locations in the case of natural disasters. But back during the Bush administration there was talk that this office would use the military eyes in the sky for domestic surveillance.

Domestic surveillance gone wrong -- Former President Clinton lost out in this episode. "NSA Secret Database Ensnared President Clinton's Private E-mail," is from Wired - Threat Level (6/17/09). To quote:

A secret NSA surveillance database containing millions of intercepted foreign and domestic e-mails includes the personal correspondence of former President Bill Clinton, according to the New York Times.

An NSA intelligence analyst was apparently investigated after accessing Clinton’s personal correspondence in the database, the paper reports, though it didn’t say how many of Clinton’s e-mails were captured or when the interception occurred.

The database, codenamed Pinwale, allows NSA analysts to search through and read large volumes of e-mail messages, including correspondence to and from Americans. Pinwale is likely the end point for data sucked from internet backbones into NSA-run surveillance rooms at AT&T facilities around the country.

Intelligence oversight loses -- The "White House Intel Advisory Board Has No Members," Steven Aftergood revealed at Secrecy News. The implications of this are there is no formal oversight of questionable intelligence gathering practices, programs that could be unlawful, or contrary to executive orders or presidential directives. Aftergood writes that it was rumored that former DNI Mike McConnell was going to be appointed to the board, but nothing has happened on the matter.

President Obama lost Renegade Democrats, who are going against President Obama with these plans. House members Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) and Rep Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), are both willing to challenge incumbent senators in their own party, according to Politico.com. In Pennsylvania, the Senator is former Republican, Arlen Specter, in New York it is newby Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

[Post date - June 27, 2009]

See also Behind the Links, for further info on this subject.

Blogs: My general purpose/southwest focus blog is at Southwest Progressive. My creative website is at Making Good Mondays. And Carol Gee - Online Universe is the all-in-one home page for all my websites.

Technorati tags: president war national security

A bit of perspective on Iran --

Today's post is a compilation of news items from mostly foreign sources covering the Iranian government's presidential election crisis. It begins with how things were before Iran's world turned upside down. I conclude with a bit of perspective on U.S. national security, that reminds us of how lucky we are to have our solid new president around when the Middle East's beset by chaos.

How fast things changed after the election -- On June 15th, Russia's Ria Novosti reported that "the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency said on Monday he welcomed the U.S. initiative to begin direct talks with Iran without any preconditions and on the basis of mutual respect."

Violence escalates -- This rare information is from The Washington Note, "Guest Blog: Dispatches from Tehran," (6/22/09). Steve Clemons introduces the blogger: "An anonymous student in Tehran who has been writing and speaking in the media under the name, "Shane M." has just sent in some more dispatches." The BBC News of 6/22/09 says that details are emerging about how "hi-tech helped Iranian monitoring" of its citizens during the protests, with the help of Nokia Siemens. The world was galvanized on 6/23/09: Memeorandum headlined, "Family, friends mourn Iranian woman whose death was caught on video," taken from Borzou Daragahi of the LA Times In summary: "Neda Agha-Soltan, 26, ‘was a beam of light’ and not an activist, friends say. The video footage of her bleeding to death on the street has turned her into an international symbol of the protest movement." Next "Fresh street clashes in Tehran" outside of parliament were examined by the Financial Times on 6/24/09.

World leaders responded -- The 6/23/09 BBC News reports that the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was "urging Iran to end the violence." Summarizing: "United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon expressed his "dismay" at the use of force against civilians in the wake of Iran's disputed election." The Financial Times of London is of the opinion that President Obama "toughened his stance on Iran" after Monday, June 22. The BBC News (6/23/09) says that President Obama strongly condemned "unjust" violence of Iran clamping down on election protests, saying he respects Iran's sovereignty and that it was "patently false" of Iran to say the West was fomenting the unrest.

Calming worries -- President Obama's handling of the Iranian crisis has been right on point, in my opinion. His "heart broke" along with ours as young women, students and others who want freedom were murdered, beaten and imprisoned. But the deep unrest that might indicate a growing instability in the country is just that. It does not mean we confront a nuclear cloud as might have been the case in a Bush administration. David Morrison, who writes CQ Behind the Lines (6/25/09) said, to quote:

In pondering a nuclear-armed Iran, “no plausible scenarios come to mind where terrorism comes into play, or where Tehran ever would have any reason to share nuclear capability with a terrorist client,” an ex-CIA analyst writes in National Journal.

References -- from Tom Head who writes the About.com Civil Liberties Guide:

• Human Rights in Iran - Iranian Human Rights Abuses


• Shirin Ebadi - Iran's leading advocate for human rights


• Complete Guide to Iranian Politics, Elections and Government

[Post date - June 25, 2009]

My all-in-one Home Page of websites where I post regularly: Carol Gee - Online Universe

Technorati tags: news news and politics Iran foreign policy war and conflict Obama

This and that about harsh interrogation - an issue that will not go away.

Psychologists in the military were deeply involved with programs that utilized harsh interrogation techniques. And they did it with the the full support of the American Psychological Association (APA). The professional organization of psychologists supported the government’s illegal interrogation program. They were in advisory roles, they assisted with implementation and even initiated torture programs that are still being highly criticized, the more we find out. Calls for independent investigation have not diminished. Other prefessionals, such as doctors, psychiatrists and social workers withdrew their support of the government's policies.,"American Psychological Association Sees No Evil," is from ACLU Blog of Rights (6/16/09). To quote from the piece:

The role that psychologists played in the Bush administration’s detention and interrogation policies is slowly being made public.

. . . Meanwhile many, perhaps most, members of the APA were unaware of the policies that were being carried out in their name. I shall briefly describe how the APA aided and abetted the U.S. government in Guantánamo Bay and the CIA black sites, and the steps that a number of psychologists are taking to end this unholy alliance.

. . . [Author] Ghislaine Boulanger,Ph.D. is a clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst and the author of Wounded by Reality: Understanding and Treating Adult Onset Trauma.In 2006, in reaction to the American Psychological Association’s cooperation with the Bush administration’s interrogation practices of detainees at Guantánamo Bay and CIA black sites, Dr. Boulanger withheld her APA membership dues and began a listserv for like-minded psychologists. She is a founding member of Psychologists for an Ethical APA.

"Accountability for torture" is the new ACLU website that consolidates everything about the U.S. torture programs in one comprehensive location. Glenn Greenwald raved about it (on 6/11/09):

The ACLU today launched a major new campaign to impose accountability for torture and related Bush-era crimes. The campaign -- Accountability for Torture -- is devoted principally to a restoration of the rule of law and the appointment by the DOJ of a Special Prosecutor. The website to coordinate these efforts is here, and that site is also now probably the single best resource for all documents and other information relating to torture and accountability efforts. The ACLU has clearly led the way in battling for disclosure of Bush-era war crimes secrets
-- so much of what we know is due to their litigation efforts and those of other civil liberties groups (rather than, say, the efforts of the "watchdog" media or the "oversight" Congress). But what has been missing up until now is a coordinated, centralized effort to galvanize public demands for accountability, and this project is intended to provide that.

At the American Civil Liberties Union's new "Accountability for Torture" action center, Executive Director Anthony Romerero suggests that interested people "help submit evidence and demand accountability" of Attorney General Eric Holder. (Democrats.com also offers a petition to Congress and A.G. Holder, that you can sign). To quote further from ACLU,

At this comprehensive and resource-filled new site, you can also view videos that make a powerful case for accountability…see profiles of the main architects of the Bush torture program…and use a search engine to examine the mountains of evidence the ACLU has obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation.

The harsh interrogation techniques using torture started long before the Office of Legal Counsel gave advice and counsel or rules to those carrying out the interrogationsl. Salon.com's outstanding writer, Glenn Greenwald says what the new Jim Comey torture emails actually reveal, is different than what Bush administration spokesmen claim. To quote :

[regarding] how these DOJ torture memos were actually produced. The key excerpts tell the story as clearly as can be. Comey was vehemently opposed to a draft memo written by Acting OLC Chief Steven Bradbury -- ultimately dated May 10, 2005 (.pdf) -- that legally authorized the simultaneous, combined use of numerous "enhanced interrogation techniques" on detainees. This "combined techniques" memo was crucial because these were the tactics that had already been used on detainees, and -- after the prior OLC memos authorizing those tactics were withdrawn -- the White House was desperate for legal approval for what they had already done and what they wanted to do in the future.

Congressman Robert Wexler (D-Fla) is a fierce fighter for accountability regarding the Bush torture programs. He supports "an investigation into the Bush administration policies" and he has "introduced legislation that would establish a special select House Committee to reexamine our national security after a full investigation. . ." Representative Wexler reminds us that recently General David Petraeus supported President Obama's stance against torture. And General Ricardo Sanchez, "called for a truth commission to investigate the abuses and torture" while he was serving in Iraq, according to Wexler.

Jeff Stein, who writes Spy Talk for The Congressional Quarterly, recently made a very interesting behind the scenes report about the torture photographs that the White House does not want to reveal. His post, "Is the White House calling Tony Taguba a liar?," gives General Anthony Taguba, who officially investigated Abu Ghraib, credit for reportedly hinting at the fact that the torture photographs now in question existed. His very revealing post came as a result of an interview with Taguba as they were attending an off the record conference on torture recently in Florence, Italy. Stein described the meeting: "for three days last week, about 40 scholars, lawyers, government officials and journalists, mostly from the United States, gathered in Florence to talk about torture, among other urgent topics of the post-9/11 era."

References from Tom Head who writes on Civil Liberties for About.com: Torture and Trust, Is Torture Ever Justified?, and, Jane Mayer and the New Literature of U.S. Human Rights