October 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Search Our Site


Down by Law

  • 12.20.06. Bush Asserts Power to Search Domestic Mail W/O Warrant!

    In one of President Bush's recent "signing statements," -- more than 700 issued since 2001, this time for the Postal Reform Act, signed on December 20, 2006 -- he has reportedly asserted right of Federal authorites to open domestic mail without a warrant, providing "for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection in a manner consistent..with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances.”

Powered by TypePad
Member since 10/2003

October 12, 2008

NSA's Listening! (Wired Magazine, 10.10.08)

Inside Operation Highlander: the NSA's Wiretapping of Americans Abroad

By Kim Zetter EmailOctober 10, 2008 | 6:06:27 PM

Fort_gordon

A top secret NSA wiretapping facility in Georgia accused of spying on Americans illegally was hastily staffed with inexperienced reservists in the months following September 11, where they worked under conflicting orders and with little supervision, according to three former workers at the spy complex.

"Nobody knew exactly what the heck we were doing," said a former translator for the project, code named Highlander, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We were figuring out the rules as we were going along."

Former Army Reserve linguist Adrienne Kinne, who worked at the facility at Fort Gordon, won new attention this week for her year-old claim that she and her group intercepted and transcribed satellite phone calls of American civilians in the Middle East for the National Security Agency. Senate intelligence committee chair Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) opened a probe into the alleged abuses after ABC News reported on them Thursday.

Threat Level spoke with Kinne extensively last year about the alleged systematic surveillance of Americans and others operating in the Middle East following the 9/11 attacks. She provided a number of details about some of the calls and how the operation was conducted.

Aid workers and journalists were specifically targeted in the program, and their phone numbers were added to a "priority list", Kinne said last year. Among those under surveillance were workers from nongovernmental organizations such as Doctors Without Borders, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the United Nations Development Programme, as well as journalists staying in Baghdad at the time of the Iraq invasion. The intercepted calls included conversations among American, British, Australian and other civilian foreign nationals in the Middle East, as well as conversations between aid workers and journalists in the Middle East and their family members in the United States.

"If it was happening then I'm sure it's happening now, and who knows on what scale," Kinne said. "That's the thing that really bothers me."

But at the time we were unable to confirm her account of the spying. Two coworkers of Kinne's, who spoke with Threat Level on condition of anonymity, conceded that the group operated under ambiguous rules and with poor supervision, but insisted no deliberate eavesdropping on Americans occurred.

Now a second former Arabic linguist with the Navy has corroborated her claims to ABC, and to NSA expert James Bamford, who includes the story in his upcoming book Shadow Factory.

If the allegations are true, it would seem to indicate that warrantless spying of Americans approved by President Bush following 9/11 expanded rapidly beyond U.S. borders to citizens overseas, notwithstanding United States Signals Intelligence Directive 18, or USSID 18 -- an NSA rule that bars overseas surveillance of Americans without authorization and probable cause.

Kinne first raised her allegations in July 2007 to a blogger named David Swanson whom she'd encountered after an anti-war protest. Threat Level contacted her a couple of days later and spoke with her a number of times over several months.

Kinne, who is 31, served in the U.S. Army Reserves as a sergeant and an Arabic linguist from October 2001 to August 2003 at a U.S. Army Signal Center at Fort Gordon, Georgia, which operated as a listening post for the National Security Agency. Kinne had served active duty in the U.S. Army as an intelligence linguist with a top secret SCI security clearance from 1994 to 1998, and was in inactive reserves on September 11, 2001.

In desperate need of Arabic translators with classified clearances, the Army called Kinne's reserve battalion for active duty. Kinne served with the 201st Military Intelligence battalion, which is part of the 513th Military Intelligence brigade.

Kinne said that during the time she was at Fort Gordon, the government was intercepting and listening to phone calls made by American citizens and allies working for aid organizations and media outlets.

At first, Kinne didn't think they were doing anything wrong because in mid-2002, several months after the surveillance began, a supervisor told her group of linguists and analysts that they had received a "waiver" that allowed them to intercept and listen to the conversations of Americans. The waiver also gave them permission to spy on British, Canadian and Australian citizens Kinne said.

Under federal law, such a waiver would usually require special national security circumstances –- such as an imminent threat of death or attack. But Kinne said the people whose conversations she targeted didn't discuss information of a military or terrorist nature, and the interceptions occurred over the entire Middle East –- not just in war zones. The surveillance was still going on when Kinne left active reserve duty in August 2003.

Kinne's mission at Fort Gordon, which was given the name Highlander, intercepted only communication sent through satellite phones, which included faxes. This represented a change from her active duty in the 1990s when her group had intercepted only live radio transmissions involving military targets in the Middle East. The operation that began in 2001 involved region-wide interceptions, which meant that satellite calls of businessmen, journalists and other civilians were sometimes vacuumed up with everything else.

Generally, when incidental interception of Americans occurs, there are procedures for handling the intercepts. Under USSID 18, recordings of such calls are supposed to be abandoned and destroyed when a U.S. citizen is identified. The only exceptions to this rule are when the attorney general affirms that the surveillance target is believed to be an agent of a foreign power, or the purpose of the collection is to acquire "significant foreign intelligence information."

Kinne's description of the interceptions, however, indicated that U.S. aid workers and journalists were routinely targeted without cause.

To illustrate that contrast, Kinne recalled a conversation intercepted by her army intelligence unit in 1997, in which one of the parties to the call mentioned the name of a U.S. politician who was coming to the Middle East for a visit. Under USSID 18, the names of members of the U.S. legislative branch cannot appear in intelligence reports without special authorization, and Kinne said her group deleted every record they collected that mentioned the politician's name.

William Weaver, who worked in the U.S. Army signals intelligence for eight years in Berlin and Augsberg, Germany, concurred with her assessment of how seriously USSID 18 was regarded.

"The way USSID 18 was treated by us was that it came down from God and was sacrosanct," said Weaver, who is now an assistant professor of political science at the University of Texas, El Paso. "We were told at training and many times after that, that if you violated USSID 18 you could spend the rest of your life in prison. The mindset was that you do not intercept U.S. citizens. And the minute you recognized that you intercepted, you immediately reported up the chain of command."

Kinne said everything changed shortly after her unit intercepted a call in early to mid-2002 between British and U.S. aid workers. The two were discussing day-to-day work details when the British worker told the American, "You should be careful about what you're saying because the Americans are listening to us." The American responded that USSID 18 barred U.S. authorities from spying on the communication of Americans, so the British worker had nothing to worry about.

Kinne said her supervisor, Chief Warrant Officer John Berry, and others were livid.

"[They] acted as if he was betraying some hugely intense national secret to a foreigner," she said. "So that's when they were like, 'We need to be able to listen to them'."

Shortly thereafter, she said she was informed that her group had received a waiver from USSID 18. She said it was communicated verbally during one of her shifts."They never showed us anything in writing," said Kinne. "But we never expected to get anything in writing."

Threat Level contacted Berry, who now works as a reporter for the Press-Enterprise in Riverside, California, but he hung up the phone at the first mention of Kinne's name.

Kinne said that in the nearly two years she was monitoring conversations, her group received calls in numerous languages, including Farsi, Pashtu, Dari, Tagalog, Japanese, Chinese and Russian. Between 10-20 percent of the calls she monitored involved English-speakers, which included Americans, Canadians and British citizens. Nearly 99 percent of the calls she monitored were non-military related. Comparatively few of the calls she processed were in Arabic.

The calls were intercepted and digitally recorded by members of the Army's military intelligence unit in Kuwait then sent to Fort Gordon. The system would pick up conversations for whatever phone numbers the military programmed into its interception system, though Kinne assumed the system also randomly swept satellite calls for untargeted numbers, since so many calls were recorded for numbers whose owners were unknown.

For the first couple of months Kinne and her colleagues didn't know the identity of the people connected to the phone numbers they monitored.

"At that point in time, we were just given numbers and we ... were still sorting out who belonged to what," she said. "That's why we initially started collecting Americans and other nationals because we didn't know whose number belonged to whom."

Once they identified speakers, they typed the person's name or organization into the system, so that when a conversation involving that number was intercepted again, the name appeared on their computer screen. Although the system allowed them to block phone numbers identified as belonging to a nongovernmental organization or journalist, they never did so. Instead, she said, they added the numbers of humanitarian aid organizations and journalists to a priority list.

"They were 'priority five,' from what I remember," she said. "'Priority one' was terrorist organizations. 'Priority five' is middle of the road. 'Priority nine' was just unidentified numbers. Not only were we given the ability to listen to [NGOs and journalists], but it was programmed into our system to listen to them."

Periodically, they received a list of new numbers that had been programmed into the system.

"I don't know where the numbers were coming from," Kinne said. "We were just given raw materials and we had to identify what number belonged to what organization and prioritize and set up a list."

They wrote a report on each call, except those made to parties in the U.S. Kinne said they were just instructed to listen to those calls. She later said in another conversation that some people in her group did write reports involving conversations of Americans and Australians, but didn't reference the nationality of the speaker in their report.

"Americans 'in-country' were fair game as long as you didn't identify them as American," she said. "People wrote reports on what journalists said all the time."

Kinne's recollections of intercepted calls were vague on details, as one might expect of someone recalling four-year-old conversations that held no significance at the time. She was unable, for example, to recall the names of people whose calls were intercepted or the names of specific media outlets to which the monitored journalists belonged. The few call details she did remember stood out in her mind because of the nature of the calls or circumstances surrounding them.

For example, Kinne was reprimanded for listening to one call when she should have been focused on a fax that her unit intercepted purporting to identify the location of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The fax arrived in the middle of the night, around the time of the Iraq invasion. Kinne was monitoring a call involving two English-speaking humanitarian aid workers who were in a vehicle frantically trying to reach their office to find cover before bombs began raining on the city.

"I just remember they were ... calling in their position [to their colleagues] every 10 to 15 minutes or so because they were worried about their safety," she said.

Kinne filed several reports about the aid workers and gave their location to her supervisor, believing that U.S. military personnel might help the aid workers, or at least refrain from shooting their vehicle. But while she was monitoring the workers, a fax arrived, several pages long and written in Arabic. Even though the fax was from a phone number with a higher priority, Kinne ignored it because she felt the lives of the aid workers were more important.

When another worker later read the fax and realized its significance, all of the workers were instructed to drop everything to translate it. Kinne said the fax purported to describe the location of chemical, biological and other weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

As soon as her group completed the translation, she said it was sent to the White House -– the only time information was sent directly in this manner.

After the information was on its way, Kinne looked at the source of the document and began to doubt its authenticity. She said it came from the Iraqi National Congress or Iraqi National Accord -- she couldn't remember which.

Kinne said she expressed doubts to her commanding officer, John Berry, about the authenticity of the information and was told that her job was to collect the information, not analyze it. "He said I didn't care about our mission or our country ... and I needed to stop asking questions," she said.

Kinne was written up in an incident report for having ignored the fax when it came in.

When she later read news reports confirming that an Iraqi group had fed the military intelligence false information about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, she suspected the fax had been deliberately sent through an open satellite network so that her unit would intercept it and give it to the White House.

The only other conversations Kinne recalled with any detail involved journalists staying at a hotel in Baghdad around the time of the U.S. invasion. The journalists revealed their location in calls to U.S. family members. Kinne said she'd been monitoring the conversations of journalists at the hotel for a while, when the name of the hotel appeared on a military list of targets for bombing. Kinne said she brought the information to Berry's attention.

"I told him, you realize there are journalists staying in that hotel and we have just said that we are going to bomb it," she said. "I assumed that ... whoever made the targeting list didn't know journalists were staying there."

She didn't know if the information was passed on to anyone, but in April 2003, a U.S. tank fired on The Palestine hotel, which was serving as a base for many journalists. Two journalists were killed. Two subsequent investigations by the army and the Committee to Protect Journalists concluded that the gunners had never been told journalists were at the hotel.

Two fellow linguists who had worked with Kinne at Fort Gordon disputed Kinne's story of illegal surveillance. They asked to remain anonymous because they were violating orders to not discuss their work at Fort Gordon.

Both linguists said they never violated USSID 18 and had never heard about a waiver, which one of them called implausible. They said USSID 18 was drummed into their heads and was posted everywhere at work as a constant reminder.

"There is just no breaking that rule," one linguist said. "There are a lot of other rules they can change and have changed, but they don't change that one. We don't want to have a Watergate experience."

The same linguist said if there had been any guidance from supervisors about violating USSID 18, it would have been along the lines of "if you hear something that meets this high criteria .. and there are words that are scaring you, tip it off to the head chief and they will decide if there is imminent risk. That is the only way we deviate ... So if [Kinne's] understanding is that all the rules got tossed, there is no way [that happened]."

The other linguist was just as emphatic. "[N]ever in my entire military career have I ever been told that it was okay to listen to U.S. citizens. [If] an intercept came in that had a citizen's conversation, I was never told I could report what came from Americans."

They were both angry with Kinne for discussing their work. One said if Kinne thought their mission had been illegal, she should have gone through internal processes or reported it to the FBI.

"If there was something going on, she had methods to handle it. To go outside and do it in this way indicates a need to make it fantastical. Or to get back at somebody."

The other translator noted that Kinne had conflicts with a number of people she worked with -- particularly her supervisor Berry -- and had a negative view of their team and its mission, which may have affected her perception of the operation. They described Berry as a problematic and hostile manager who didn't seem to know what he was doing. Adding to this was a pervasive sense of confusion around their mission, which was set up quickly on the fly and being run by reservists who had no experience intercepting phone calls.

The unit was overworked, understaffed and undertrained. They didn't have a standard of operation, or SOP, when they started the mission and had to cobble one together from other SOPs. Many conversations they had to translate were in dialects unfamiliar to them or languages, such as Pashtu, in which they had no proficiency.

In that confusion, there might have been times when people inadvertently listened to conversations they shouldn't have, but both linguists said the policy was clear that they were not to listen or report on U.S. citizens or allies.

"There was a lot of crazy stupidity going on, but [Berry] wasn't abusing USSID 18 because he didn't have the authority," one said.

The other linguist said, "[T]he entire way of using intelligence and the dissemination of information ... were changing, and as things were changing and we were trying to figure things out, I think there could have been a lot of gray lines that were walked instead of black and white."

Asked for an example of these gray lines, the linguist explained:

"[S]ometimes when you are searching for information ... things come across your way that are extraneous or not pertinent to what you should be doing, and if you come across that and you don't act on it, you don't report it, it's like it never happened. I can say there are times when that's possibly a gray area ... You hear a lot of things, you see a lot of things, but a lot of it is junk ... [and] some of it might be accidental. But the number one mandate [that] you are conscious of is, 'Is this something I should be listening to? Is this something I can report on?' If it doesn't meet those two criteria, you're going to discard it."

It's worth noting that Kinne began speaking about her surveillance activities only after becoming an anti-war activist, and working with groups calling for the impeachment of President Bush.

When Threat Level spoke with her last year, she was working as a research assistant for the Veterans Administration in Vermont and was becoming increasingly active politically. She had worked on get-out-the-vote campaigns for Moveon.org in November 2006, and in January 2007 began meeting with members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. She participated in a rally and a sit-in at the Vermont state house and went on a bus tour with anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan calling for the impeachment of President Bush.

Kinne said that after the White House announced a troop escalation in Iraq, she became very angry that the 2006 mid-term elections and subsequent changes in Congress hadn't led to pressure on the Administration to pull out of Iraq.

But it wasn't until details of the government's illegal domestic spying operation on Americans were revealed in late 2005, that she had reason to ponder her surveillance work, she said. Even then, her realization came slowly.

"I never really thought about how what we did related to [those news reports]," she said. "It took me quite a while to put the pieces together. I just figured we were one mission, and I never thought that probably military intelligence groups across the country were all being given waivers to listen to whomever they wanted."

It was another year and a half after the New York Times broke the story on the domestic surveillance program before Kinne uttered her first public words about the surveillance she had conducted on behalf of the NSA.

"I still felt like it was all classified and I wasn't supposed to talk about it," she said. "But the more I got involved in things, the more I started getting really angry that people in government were not telling the truth and that people who know what's going on [are] not speaking out. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that I should tell people what I knew and hopefully that would encourage other people to say what they know."

She said she just wanted to pass the information to others who could determine whether the army and administration broke the law. To that end, she had submitted her allegations to Sen. Patrick Leahy's office (D-Vermont) in the hope that his staff would look into the matter to determine if laws had been broken. Leahy's staff sent her an e-mail indicating that they sent her letter to the Department of Defense Inspector General. But Kinne never heard anything after that.

Given her political activities and the delay in reporting the alleged abuse, the denials of her peers and the lack of corroborating evidence, Threat Level elected not to publish her claims last year. But in his upcoming book, The Shadow Factory, journalist James Bamford -- the leading civilian expert on the NSA -- reports that he confirmed the illegal surveillance with another linguist named David Murfee Faulk, who worked on the program through the Navy.  One of Faulk's coworkers -- not Kinne -- asked a supervisor about USSID 18, and was ordered to disregard the directive, Bamford reports.

James Dempsey, policy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, said last year that if Kinne's information was accurate, it would be a significant advancement to what we knew about the administration's warrantless surveillance.

"Up to now the administration has said that every single phone call that we intercepted we did so because we knew there was al-Qaida on the phone," Dempsey said. "Now you're saying that, at least overseas, they were targeting Americans when they had no reason to believe an al-Qaida member was on the other line. This is the first indication that the government was targeting not terrorists but Americans overseas on less than probable cause."

(Image courtesy the U.S. Army)

July 10, 2008

Outrage of the Week
"We BS: What's That Awful Whining, Dr. Gramm?"
James S. Henry

07_17_3policenoticefootandmouthdise Economists are not noted for their political sensitivity, but today's comments by Dr. Phil Gramm, John McCain's ChiefGramm Economic Adviser, may have set something of a record. 

In an interview with the cult-owned Washington Times, Gramm suddenly flipped the switch, tossed away the meds,  and took off on the flawed character of modern American society as a whole.

Decrying the news media for exaggerating "misery" to "sell newspapers" and create artificial "anxiety" over the state of the economy,  Dr. Gramm declared that:

We have sort of become a nation of whiners. You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline. You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession.

John McCain, Dr. Gramm's principle client, was quick to distance himself from these remarks, declaring that "Gramm does not speak for me. I speak for me," and that he "strongly disagreed" with the comments.

Summers2 Dr. Gramm has sometimes been mentioned as a candidate to become McCain's US Treasury Secretary, should McCain win the White House this November. Gramm's remarks today recalled the
similar "foot in mouth" propensities of another academic economist and recent Treasury Secretary, Dr. Larry Summers

Summers lost his position as President of Harvard in 2006 when, among other things, he addressed a group of outstanding female academics in Boston and could not resist floating the pet theory that their relative lack of success in "hard sciences" might be due at least in part to "intrinsic differences" between the sexes. 


Continue reading "

Outrage of the Week
"We BS: What's That Awful Whining, Dr. Gramm?"
James S. Henry
" »

January 15, 2007

Skating on Ecstasy
Special Treatment for An Israeli Drug Lord?
James S. Henry

SatelliteWhile most major US drug dealers get prison terms of at least 15 years to life for selling a few kilos of coke or a few hundred pills of the Class A illegal drug Ecstasy (MDMA), the world's ecstasy king-pin, Israel-based Russian mobster Ze'ev Rosenstein, has apparently just learned to skate.    

Rosenstein is reportedly one of the "godfathers" in Israel's burgeoning criminal underworld  --  one of "the worst of the worst" among global drug dealers, according to a former US attorney

Long sought by Israeli police and the US DEA,  Rosenstein was finally arrested in Tel Aviv in November 2004. At the time, the arrest was hailed as a major victory over transnational crime by former US Attorney General John Ashcroft:

"The arrest of Ze’ev Rosenstein is the result of extraordinary close and creative cooperation between U.S. and Israeli law enforcement. It is a significant step forward in our common struggle against trans-border organized crime and international narcotics trafficking that will make both of our countries safer."

After two years in a maximum security cell, in March 2006 Rosenstein was finally extradited to Miami, charged with having organized an international drug gang that reportedly exported millions of tabs of MDMA from Netherlands-based labs to the US -- including the 800,000 pills that were seized in a New York apartment in July 2001.

Rosenstein, who was  also accused of importing Colombian hit men to conduct a hit on the rival Alperon crime family, faced at least 14 years to life in imprison. In 2004, one of his top lieutenants, Shem Tov Michtavi,  had received  a 20-year sentence for lesser miscondut  -- although in November 2005, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th circuit  reduced it to a maximum of 16 years.  With Rosenstein finally in US hands, many thought that he'd probably spend the rest of his days in a Miami prison cell, not far from Panama's former dictator Manual Noriega, who is serving 35 years for drug trafficking.

Continue reading "

Skating on Ecstasy
Special Treatment for An Israeli Drug Lord?
James S. Henry
" »

January 08, 2007

Saddam's Midnight Lynching
Outsmarting Ourselves Again?
James S. Henry

10636059_240x180_1I'm certainly no palpitating, hand-wringing absolutist opponent of capital punishment in the abstract. If there were any evidence whatsoever that the death penalty's  deterrent effects outweighed its high costs, brutalizing impacts,  and other perverse side-effects, and that it was not just someone's idea of "I-4-I"/ Old Testament/Koranic personal justice, then by all means -- bring on the scaffolds and start selling ring-side seats! 

BeheadingHowever, especially in the wake of last week's extra-legal fiasco of Saddam Hussein's midnight lynching by a Klan-like band of hooded henchman for Iraq's increasingly partisan Shiite-dominated government, it is worthwhile reminding ourselves that: 

(1) The vast majority of countries that are "civilized" and "developed" have long since abolished the death penalty.

These include all First World/ OECD countries except the US (38 out of 50 states), Japan, and South Korea -- Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland,  Israel, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland,  Slovak Republic, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK (plus Vatican City, San Marino, Monaco, and Andorra). 

(2) Most enlightened/ mid-level developing countries have also abolished the death penalty. 

These include Albania, Azerbaijan, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Bhutan, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Haiti, Latvia, Liberia, Lithuania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Serbia, South Africa, Timor-Leste, Turkmenistan,  Ukraine, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

Indeed, the anti-death penalty ranks now include every South American country except Guyana and Suriname, all Central American countries except Guatemala and Belize, most FSU/Eastern European countries, several key African countries like Cote d'Ivoire, Liberia, Namibia, South Africa and Mozambique, and even a few Central Asian countries.

All told, as of 2007, 88 countries have completely abolished the death penalty for all crimes, while 40 more have effectively abolished it in practice.  Furthermore, despite the "global war on terrorism," the global abolition movement appears to have gained momentum, with 40 countries abolishing the death penalty since 1990.

Edamzan_01(3) On the other hand, the countries that still employ the death penalty -- especially by way of primitive methods like hanging, beheading, and stoning -- are dominated by such stellar examples of enlightened democratic development as Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Burma, China, Equatorial Guinea, Egypt, Indonesia, India, Iran, Kazahkstan, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia,  Morocco, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and Zimbabwe.    

Most of these countries also are at the head of the class among the world's most nefarious one-person, one-family, one-party, and one-general dictatorships.

050318_iran(4) Many countries that still retain the death penalty, like the US,  Japan, and Singapore,  have long since decided to use alternatives to the barbaric practices of hanging, stoning, or beheading.

In China, for example,  which now accounts for at least 83% to 95% of the world's 2138 to 8400  legal executions per year, most executions are now handled by lethal injections.  

Only such leading "negative role models" as Iran and Saudi Arabia -- the world's second and third largest legal execution markets respectively, just ahead of the US-- still employ hanging, let alone beheading and stoning. 

There is a demand among some "Christian Taliban" sects in the US for a return to these anachronistic punishments, perhaps because they would be such crowd-pleasers among their followers. But so, I'd bet, would witch dunking, cross burning, and the occasional fitted-sheet night ride.

BLIND JUSTICE

Of course, during his 35-year reign, Saddam Hussein also made Iraq a world leader in "legal" hangings and beheadings -- in addition to mass gassing, shooting, and torture. From this angle, many would argue that he only reaped what he'd sown.  

However, precisely in this situation, we might have hoped that Iraq's new democracy and its Washington patrons would have been smart enough to recognize the virtue of breaking sharply with Saddam's own wretched past practices,  seizing the opportunity to set an example for the whole region.

Abolish  What an example it would been  for him to have been condemned to live out the rest of his miserable life in a dark, dank cell at an undisclosed location, with no publicity whatsoever.

In such a situation,  reeking vengeance against Prisoner Saddam Hussein was a needless indulgence.

At the very least, his execution should have been designed to avoid granting Saddam the very status that,  next to being set free, he desired most of alland that he never would have  been able to achieve without the cupidity of his captors -- the status as a martyr,  a victim, and a myth. 

As Pontecorvo remarked long ago -- "Better silence than songs," for you cannot kill a myth.
 

(c) SubmergingMarkets, 2007    



December 11, 2006

For This We've Been Waiting?
The Iraq Study Group's Underwhelming Report
James S. Henry

_4029_jamesbaker1712003_2 So the November 2006 US elections  delivered a clear message to our elected leaders that we want the troops home from Iraq ASAP, right?

And the overwhelming majority of Iraqis also favor a rapid withdrawal of US troops, right?

And most of our loyal allies, including Britain, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and Spain, have either already withdrawn all their own troops from Iraq,  or have announced plans to do so by the middle of next year, right? 

Simpson_1 And after having complained loudly about being "misled" into voting for the War back in Fall 2002, and having just won nearly 58 percent of the nationwide popular vote, Democrats have newfound courage, and are finally going to stand up and be counted on this issue, right? Oconnor_2

So we ought to start seeing the 140,000 US troops in Iraq coming home real soon now, right?

Well, not so fast, my friends....

You see, this is Democracy in America we're talking about, not some tin-horn dictatorship.....

04_06_iraq_b These are complex issues, which can't just be  delegated to any Tom, Dick, or Sheila on the street.

No - these issues requre careful study over many months by an enormous Bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

JUST WHAT WE NEEDED?   

Such a group must be staffed by the best and the brightest people that we can possibly find......People like Alan Simpson, Ed Meese, Sandra Day O'Conor, Leon J. Panetta, and Vernon Jordan.....

They'd be aided, of course,  by four other 12-person subpanels of US experts on "the economy and reconstruction," "political development," "the military and security," and the "strategic environment!" 

The resultng "goat rodeo" of all these Iraqi experts has resembled nothing so much as Hillary Clinton's  expert-laden Health Care reform effort back in the early 1990s. That effort also produced a grand scheme and a cornucopia of interesting ideas, few of which were ever adopted.

Photo_taken_by_michael_yon_2 By the time the  Iraqi Study Group returned to the surface after taking six months to analyze the (constantly-changing) situation, it boldly declared that "the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating," and that President Bush's strategy is "not working." 

To that, the rest of us have been obliged to say, echoing the immortal Johnny Carson:

""Thank YOU!  WE DID NOT KNOW that! " 

The STUDY GROUP also produced a tightly-coupled 79-STEP PROGRAM that would merely REQUIRE...

  1. A sharply-expanded  US training mission -- in the face of evidence that such training may take years, and that the first tough task  will be to "train the trainers"...
  2. The insertion of small groups of (relatively defenseless) US trainers inside large units of (relatively clueless and unreliable) Iraqi forces -- a measure that is not only dangerous, but has also been rejected as "patronizing" by Iraqi officials
  3. "Hail Mary"  negotiations with Syria and Iran -- not exactly our strongest allies in the region, and a step that the Iraqi Government may want to reserve for itself;
  4. Quick progress on the (until-now intractable) Israeli Palestinian issue -- with few details about how the existing Hamas/Israeli deadlock can be overcome; 
  5. Decisive action from the (heretofore nothing-if-not-indecisive) Iraqi Prime Minister -- who is finding it risky to side too closely with the Americans;
  6. Amnesty for the (at least the non-al Qaeda/ more likeable) insurgents...(amnesty for Saddam was fortunately not proposed)...
  7. Etc. Etc.....(79)

Well then. Perhaps the poor public,  the "customers" for this elaborate consulting study,  may be forgiven for being a bit skeptical about how iall this could ever be implemented.

On the other hand, most of us have also long since concluded that "Bush's policy is not working." So the implication is that if the ISG's elaborate, impractical plan really is necessary for a solution, it is time to head for the exits.  

Oldguard_1

WHITHER NOW?

As we might have expected, in the wake of these recommendations,  the PRO-WAR RIGHT -- including the indispensable one-person-party, Senator Joe Lieberman -- has sensed blood in the water, and is attacking aggressively..

Given its own miserable track record and diminished credibility, this may not matter very much. By now the pro-war right is taken seriously mainly by each other. This is not to say that it can no longer make trouble -- especially on matters involving Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, where "Fifth Columnists" are working overtime to explain away the messes they've created.

But the most interesting questions now are for Democrats -- especially those who hoped that the Iraq Study Group would save them the trouble of having to find their own solution to this nightmare.

3noiraqwar_1 This is also an interesting time for the still-all-too-timid anti-war movement, which clearly has a majority of the country on its side. 

 In principle, this movement should be in a position to demand that the new Democratic Congress keeps its promises and starts to compel US troop withdrawals early next year.

To this extent, the Study Group report is helpful, because it demonstrates that there are no free lunches here, no  clever "technical fixes" or "soft landings."

The only real choice appears to be between two rather stark alternatives: 

  • (1) MAKING A PROLONGED commitment to keeping US troops in Iraq -- indeed,  even increasing their numbers in the short run;  or
  • (2) WITHDRAWING with all deliberate speed, along the lines suggested months ago by Congressman John Murtha.

One might have thought that the American people had just spoken clearly on this matter in the November 2006 election, favoring the second alternative.

But of course these are complex issues, which can't just be delegated to any Tom, Dick, or Sheila on the street....!!!   

                                               *****

(c)SubmergingMarkets, 2006


 

 

Continue reading "

For This We've Been Waiting?
The Iraq Study Group's Underwhelming Report
James S. Henry
" »

Right of Return:

Under the Covers

  • 12.13.06

    On Dec. 9, Evo Morales convened the "Segunda Cumbre," a summit of Latin American leaders that included Lula, Bachelet, Chavez, Ecuador's newly-elected Correa, and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega. (Report). The group discussed a new gas pipeline through Chile, legalizing coca, and expanding free trade. The event went largely unnoticed by US media, which remains obsessed with the ME. Yet LA not only has huge undeveloped energy reserves, but also accounts for 7 times as much US trade as the Middle East, and is also the key to issues like immigration, illegal drugs, and the environment. Also absent from the scene was Daniel Ortega's brother Humberto, the former Nicaraguan Defense Minister who now reportedly runs the lucrative "mafia maderera," a group of tropical hardwood companies that have reportedly been pillaging Central America. Of course most Latin American countries that still have tropical hardwoods left, like Peru and Brazil, also have "mafia madereras" -- for which the US is a key export market.

Tip Jar

Free press?

Tip Jar