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 yesterday'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.

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)

Energy bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives -- On June 26 the House of Representatives barely passed an energy-climate change bill (HR 2454), 219-212, with 8 Republicans voting for it and 44 Democrats voting against it. It took everything Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer could do to get the bill passed. President Obama had a Hawaiian luau at the White House on Thursday night to woo House members, including many recalcitrant Democrats. Republicans were almost unanimously against it and their Minority Leader, according to CQ Politics, made members wait to debate. To quote:

. . . a last-ditch effort by Minority Leader John A. Boehner , R-Ohio, to stall action, with what amounted to a rare House equivalent of a filibuster. Using his unlimited leadership time to circumvent the time limit for debate, Boehner spent about an hour going almost line-by-line through a 300-page substitute amendment filed early Friday morning, questioning individual provisions.

"I hate to do this to you, I really do," Boehner told colleagues, eager to leave town for the holiday recess. "But when you file a 300-page amendment at 3:09 a.m., the American people have the right to know what's in this bill. They have the right to know what we are voting on."

Chairmen Henry Waxman (D-Calif) and Ed Markey (D-Mass), the leading architects of the bill, had to make serious compromises to get the bill passed. The bill would remove the EPA's power to regulate carbon emissions. And reductions in greenhouse emissions at first will fall short of those recommended by the scientific community. The government would give away most of the first round cap and trade credits, rather than forcing polluters to buy them. An important compromise was changing just one word, "finally" to "initially," in order to get the support of one of the coal-and oil-state Democrats, Rep. Rick Boucher (VA). To further quote Jeanne Cummings at Politico.com,

The initial Waxman-Markey draft exempted only those plants that had been through all the challenge phases of the permit process, including lawsuits. Those were considered "finally" permitted plants. In their vote hunt, the chairmen agreed to change the language to "initially" permitted plants, which means that about 100 plants that are in the various stages of the permit process could be built without meeting new emissions standards.

. . . Waxman defended his compromises, saying they will take the country through "a transition" period that gives the coal industry time to develop technologies to reduce carbon emissions.

"The approach is to be as cost-effective as possible in the transition period, to protect the consumers, the rate payers for electricity," he said.

The Congressional Budget Office "estimated that the House legislation would cost households an average of $175 a year in 2020," CQ Politics reported. The publication also discussed plans in the Senate for next steps. Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) and Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif), to quote:

. . . are already working with moderate Democrats to craft a compromise.

Boxer plans to start marking up a bill soon after Congress returns from the Fourth of July recess, and Reid intends to bring it to the floor this fall. Reid has asked Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Chairman Tom Harkin , D-Iowa, to find out how to win support from his panel, in an attempt to head off the kind of opposition from farm state lawmakers that delayed the House bill.

President Obama's reaction -- According to John Broder of the New York Times (via Memeorandum 6/29/09), President Obama is "against a provision that would impose trade penalties on countries that do not accept limits on global warming polution." The President disagrees "with a tariff approach." And he predicted that it will be very difficult to get energy legislation through the senate, and could take months and many more compromises. Broder also reported, however, that the President is pleased with the bill, saying "I think it's fair to say that over the first six months we've seen more action on shifting ourselves away from dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels than at any time in several decades."

Paul Krugman's NYT op-ed called it "Betraying the Planet." To quote:

So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.

But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn't help thinking that I was watching a form of treason -- treason against the planet.

We can feel cautiously optimistic about this good start.  Anything we do will be a help.

See also Behind the Links.

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 politics congress energy bill obama

Closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility will be one of the most difficult challenges of the Obama administration. His own staff has been divided on how to do it. FBI Director Robert Mueller worries about detainees in U.S. prisons. Michele Flournoy, number three at the Pentagon, maintains that the U.S. must set the right example before our allies will accept detainees for repatriation. Rendition has been another matter, entirely, in the past when the Bush administration implemented the practice of rendering U.S. prisoners overseas to other countries where they were interrogated under torture.

How other law abiding countries handle suspected violent extremists offers a contrasting picture of how it is managed by the United States. The legal fallout over this has sent cases to court (in particular the Jeppesen/ACLU case). The Obama DOJ has asked a federal appeals court to block the case, claiming "state secrets" necessitate throwing out the case, taking up the claim of the previous administration. On June 22, federal judge Richard Leon ordered Abd al Rahim Abdul Rassak, a Syrian held by the U.S. for years, released because he was a victim of torture by al-Qaida. He "emphatically rejected the government's claims against Rassak. . . adding that U.S. officials are taking a position that defies common sense."

How will the U.S. continue to handle violent extremists? Earlier this month Glenn Greenwald analyzed the current practices of many countries, contrasting them with the administration's probable call for indefinite detention by the U.S. He concluded that, "numerous other countries are, with their actions, adhering to the values and principles which we, with words, righteously claim to embody." Now the White House has drafted an executive order reasserting presidential authority to incarcerate suspects indefinitely, bypassing Congress, according to the Washington Post's Peter Finn and ProPublica's Dafna Linzer. To quote the lead,

Such an order would embrace claims by former President George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, White House officials are growing increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may prove impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the facility by the president's January 2010 deadline.

Is Bush precedent Obama precedent? Zachary Roth at TPM Muckraker had this chilling conclusion to the news of the draft memo: "If the last eight years have taught us anything, it's that executive abuses, left to continue unchecked for many years, have a tendency to congeal into precedent." It need not be that way. The Constitution has been a powerful bulwark with plenty of capacity to sustain the rule of law, particularly with a president whose specialty has been Constitutional law.

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 politics guantanamo rule of law

Image via Wikipedia

Domestic Surveillance and National Security:

"FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Databases," is by Solomon Moore at The New York Times (4/18/09).

"Role of Bush NSA Plan Under Review," is by Ellen Nakashima at the Washington Post (4/17/09).

"The 6-Month Review," is by emptywheel (4/16/09). Re warrantless wiretapping.

"Head of Senate Panel Calls For Hearing on Wiretaps," is by Eric Lichtblau and James Risen at The New York Times (4/16/09).

"Feingold: NYT Report Shows We Need to Fix Wiretapping Laws," is by Zachary Roth at TPM Muckraker (4/16/09). Also, "Report: NSA Tried to Wiretap Member of Congress," (4/16/09).

"The NYT predictable revelation:new FISA law enabled massive abuses," is by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (4/16/09).

"Documents: FBI Spyware Has Been Snaring Extortionists, Hackers for Years," is by Kevin Poulson at Wired- Threat Level (4/16/09).

"Lichtblau and Risen Report Wiretapping of Americans ... Again," is by emptywheel (4/15/09). NYT story.

"Did Holder Know About the 'Significant Misconduct' When DOJ Claimed Sovereign Immunity," is by emptywheel (4/15/09).

"Fusion Centers: Listen to us Already," is by Amanda Simon at the ACLU Blog of Rights (4/8/09).

"Credit Where Due: Keith Olbermann Edition," is by bmaz at emptywheel (4/8/09). Regards Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act lawsuit by EEF.

"Roslyn Mazer to be ODNI Inspector General," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (4/6/09).

"IG Report Blasts the Director of National Intelligence," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (4/2/09). Report: November 2008.

"What the Scope of the IG Report on Warrantless Wiretapping Tells Us," is by emptywheel (3/31/09).

"President's Intel Advisor Board Members All Resigned," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (3/17/09).


Government Secrecy:

"An emerging progressive consensus on Obama's executive power and secrecy abuses," is by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (4/13/09).

"Courts Pay Attention to New FOIA Policy," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (3/26/09).

"A Test of the New FOIA Policy," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (3/24/09).

Related articles by Zemanta

• Warrantless NSA Email Surveillance of U.S. Citizens (nytimes.com)
• The Eavesdropping Continues (comsecllc.blogspot.com)
• Feingold Asks Obama to Clarify Position on Warrantless Wiretapping (comsecllc.blogspot.com)
• NSA Secret Database Ensnared President Clinton's Private E-Mail (wired.com)

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

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

Under the heading of "Poor Baby" -- It is hard to have compassion sometimes. And I have compassion fatigue when it comes to feeling sorry for Republicans.

• Senator John Ensign's poll ratings have plummeted since he disclosed his affair with a married staffer.


• Former Senator Norm Coleman still wants to help pay his legal expenses out of his Senate Campaign funds, but the FEC may deny part of his request.


• Senator Jeff Sessions, Ranking Member, got his feelings hurt when he heard that Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings on the confirmation of Judge Sotomayor had been scheduled without his knowledge. Senator Leahy tried to contact him ahead of time but was unsuccessful.
  

Under the heading of "The Party of No" -- It looks like the Republican Party prefers that over 40 million people are without health insurance, program costs are skyrocketing and service quality is diminishing.

• Senators Pat Roberts and Tom Coburn brought Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee debate on Medicare's possible use of comparative effectiveness research to a halt recently, charging that it would lead to rationing of service.


• Senator Jon Kyle reminded C-SPAN listeners that Senator Chuck Grassley "is not negotiating with Max Baucus" on the health care bill. "Sen. Grassley has been given no authority to negotiate anything by all of us Republicans on that committee," Kyl said. "The bill that [Baucus] comes up with . . . will not be a bipartisan product."
  

Under the heading of "Geez, they still don't get it!" -- Bigotry is one thing and hypocrisy is another. We see too much of this from Republicans.

• Pat Buchanan, Standard Republican Television Pundit, admits that he "prefers the old bigotry" to affirmative action policies that benefited Sonia Sotomayor, saying "at least they were honest," according to TPM Muckraker.


• Representative Pete Hoekstra may have leaked classified information regarding what was discussed in a closed committee hearing on enhanced interrogation techniques, says TPM Muckraker. What's worse, he is on record criticizing leakers for giving information to the NYT in the Valerie Plame case.

Under the heading of "Now, who was it that won the election?" -- The Change-Energy policy train has already left the station. But Republicans remain stuck in the environmental mistakes of the previous century.

• Senator Lisa Murkowski still wants to drill for oil in the Alaska Wildlife refuge. Representatives Eric Cantor, Joe Barton, John Boehner, Mike Pence, John Shimkus and others have presented their own energy bill which includes a title focusing on nuclear power. In congressional hearings, industry representatives are defending a federal loophole for drilling using hydraulic fracturing that causes water contamination, according to ProPublica.

Under the heading of Rants, I will try to hold these to a minimum, probably once a week or so.

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 politics congress republicans

Federal District Judge Samuel B. Kent of Texas had to leave the bench, though not his salary behind.  He will be unable to preside in court because he has been in jail since last Monday, according to Ashley Southall of The New York Times: "serving 33 months in prison for lying to a judicial panel about his sexual assault of two female employees."  The NYT editorialized a week ago that he did not deserve his salary, but needed to be impeached and so he was.  If the U.S. Senate trial of Judge Kent finds him guilty of the House's recent impeachment charges, he will lose his $169,300 salary also.  Federal judges are appointed for life.  Judge Kent refused to resign before going to jail, claiming disability for bipolar disorder and depression, as well as alcoholism.  The judge will be "serving his sentence in a Massachusetts prison that specializes in alcohol and drug rehabilitation," Southall reveals. The House of Representatives, Southall reported,

approved four impeachment articles to remove Samuel B. Kent from the federal district court in Galveston, Tex.: two articles of sexual misconduct, one article of lying during a judicial inquiry, and one article of making material and false statements to federal investigators.

It was quite a journey  for him. As is so often the case it, was not the original offenses that put him away, but the lying about it.  The judge is a sexual offender.  He plead guilty "for lying to an investigative committee of judges about whether he had sexually harassed his secretary. . . In return, the government agreed to drop five charges that he had repeatedly groped his secretary and his case manager," the New York Times reported back in May.  The investigative panel, who did not get the full story,  originally suspended Kent without pay for 4 months, reprimanded him and did not release the details of the abuse.  But then came the indictment and several months later, the guilty plea of lying about it to the original judicial panel.

I was curious to see how he descended so far. In addition to the current impeachment stories, a New York Times search turned up an August 1993 story that I remembered, though I had not made the Judge Kent connection.  Judge Kent, who is from Corpus Christi, Texas,  was appointed in 1991 by George H.W. Bush.  The story concerned a lawsuit brought by Northwest and Continental Airlines against American Airlines for predatory pricing.  American was based at the time in the DFW Metroplex where I live.  Judge Sam Kent presided, famed lawyer David Bois was one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, and Robert Crandall was the colorful head of American Airlines. They clashed and Crandall won, as the jury, following Judge Kent's instructions, turned in a quick verdict for the defendant American Airlines.  To quote:

After an intense four-week trial, jurors decided in less than four hours today that American Airlines did not try to drive weaker competitors out of business with "predatory" prices during the air fare war last summer.

Continental decided not to appeal the verdict, according to a follow-up NYT story.

"I think the fact that the jury came in so quickly and rejected their accusations out of hand probably has had some effect in their thinking," said Andrew B. Steinberg, American Airlines' senior attorney, referring to Continental's decision not to appeal. "It was a clear vindication for American."

Mr. Jamail and David Boies, Continental's lead lawyer, said after the verdict that the only avenues they saw for appeal were Judge Samuel B. Kent's instructions to the jury, which they thought were too specific, and certain rulings on evidence.

. . . Mr. Steinberg also said American Airlines plans early next week to send a bill of its court costs to Judge Kent. He said the costs range from $200,000 to $500,000, which American Airlines wants to recover since it did not bring the suit.

Judge Kent, who said Tuesday he was not inclined to reimburse the costs, told American Airlines lawyers he would take the request under advisement and make a decision next week.

I think of the contrasts in Judge Kent's power and position between 1993 and 2009.  In 1993 Kent presided over a big corporate trial that garnered national coverage , just two years after he came to the federal bench.  After the trial was over he would have been the sole decider as to whether American Airlines would get the $200,000 to $500,000 it lost defending itself against its competitors.

Fast forward to last year and this year. Again it was power and position that came into play.  Sexual harrassment of paid employees is very often rooted in the power-over position of a superior over his subordinates.  I am not qualified to say what part Judge Kent's claimed mental illness paid in the episode.  Perhaps he will get whatever treatment he needs.  But he does not need to continue to collect his salary at taxpayer expense.  Let us hope the Senate acts quickly to remedy this outrageous and sordid saga.

Are public opinion polls the only measure of reality? Citing recent polls that "make clear that there are rising concerns about his policies," Congressional Quarterly (6/18/09) declares the honeymoon is over and that "It's on Obama's watch now." The concerns seem to center around spending resulting in big deficits, his interventions with car makers, and closing Guantanamo. Even though these are often the favorite Republican talking points, the story said that "voters view the Republican party unfavorably by a 2-t0-1 margin." The excellent article thoroughly explores the latest polling data from two big recent polls.

It will truly President Obama's watch only when the key members of his administration have been nominated and confirmed by the Senate. Senators are still holding up several nominations, including that of the very crucial head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Dawn Johnsen.

The Department of Homeland Security is also still without an intelligence chief. Jeff Stein, in his (6/5/09) blog Spy Talk, reported that nominee Phil Mudd's name is being withdrawn by the White House. Stein concluded, "Mudd was going to be questioned sharply by the Senate Government Affairs and Homeland Security Committee on his relationship to the CIA's counterterrorism policies and pre-war intelligence on Iraq, committee sources said." Stein wrote previously that "the writing was on the wall," before Mudd withdrew his name from consideration. It seems that Mudd is carrying too much baggage from his service in the Bush administration, according to Yahoo! News (6/5/09).

President Obama's release of the original OLC torture memos is what made all these important Bush administration revelations possible. We all hailed the decision as the correct one. It would seem that the President now, however, is rethinking a number of his commitments to open government and true transparency. Public opinion has not yet been measured on these questions.

Is the Obama administration currently trying to operate in an open and transparent way? There is recent news that the White House is continuing to insist on keeping secret who visits the White House. MSNBC and a nonpartisan watchdog group (CREW) made requests for visitor logs and were denied by the Secret Service, who is subject to the FOIA laws. This is a continuation of the policy of the Bush administration, who claimed in court cases that the records are "presidential," not Secret Service. Federal judges have ruled several times against the administrations' OLC filings and each time the OLC appeals. The current administration has said the the policy is currently under review. This was explained in the MSNBC article with a short transcript of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' comments when questioned by reporters at a regular briefing.

In a related matter, Steven Aftergood covered President Obama's executive order to review the national security classification policy in Secrecy News (6/1/09). Over classification of government documents has been a growing problem for decades. But there are certainly very good reasons to classify information that relates to national security sources and methods. It is hard to say whether the CIA photos of detainee abuse fall into that category. I tend to think they do present a potential danger to troop safety, by providing incendiary arguments that terror networks can use for recruitment. But there are also very good arguments on the opposite side.

That same day Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com posted convincingly against "Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman secrecy law," called "The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009." The law would allow the government to suppress the remaining detainee abuse photos that President Obama originally intended to release. Greenwald asks,

What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people?

. . . Is there really anyone who wants to argue that defiance of a federal court's order and enacting a new law authorizing suppression of torture evidence -- the disclosure of which is compelled both by courts and FOIA -- are remotely consistent with anything Obama said he would do, or remotely consistent with what a healthy democratic government would do?"

The mixed bag of approval of, or dissaproval for, President Obama's policies will inevitable follow these same trends. That is normal and natural as the Bush administration's influence fades, and as our President governs, rather than campaigns. My list of disappointments grows as the Justice Department appears to take on Bush's Constitutional assaults as their own in court case after court case. The trend seems to be that of never giving back an ounce of the unitary executive power grabbed by Mr. Bush and his cronies. The same stance is not becoming to AG Holder and to President Obama, fine men who should know better.

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

Technorati tags: news news and politics politics obama administration national security transparency public opinion

Update: The supplemental bill is now in the Senate. Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) made a point of order regarding the addition of the $1 billion+ for the "cash for clunkers" program. He lost that vote 60 to 36, by exactly the 2/3 majority required. There are times when 60 votes do matter.

The House approved the 2009 $105.9 billion supplemental war spending bill on Tuesday evening, but not with a big Democratic majority, Politico reports. The result was 226-202. Only 5 Republicans voted for it and 32 Democrats voted to oppose. House Minority Leader John Boehner claims that his "no" vote "protects the troops. " The bill included $5 billion in IMF credits, $32.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, $7.65 billion to prepare for the H1N1 flu expected this winter and $1 billion towards the new "cash for clunkers" program. Congress actually added to the President's original request, taking care of their local defense contractors. To quote Politico's conclusion:

The total defense spending is larger than Obama's request and includes about $2.5 billion in new money to deal with personnel cost overruns in, especially, the Army and Army National Guard. Nearly $28.5 billion is provided for procurement, including billions added for the purchase of air transports and armored vehicles.

Eight Boeing C-17s would cost about $2.1 billion, and an additional $504 million would cover seven C-130s, manufactured by Lockheed. General Dynamics has a stake in $312.7 million for the purchase of Stryker armored vehicles for the Army -- a $200 million increase over the administration's request. And the bill adds $1.9 billion to the Pentagon's requests for more heavily armored, mine-resistant MRAPs.

Total spending for State Department and foreign aid accounts is $9.7 billion; another $700 million is provided for food assistance overseas. Afghanistan and Pakistan are among the major recipients, including $225 million to help the Islamabad government deal with the refugee crisis triggered by recent fighting.

To an unusual degree, even routine foreign aid requests for Middle East countries such as Israel, Egypt and Jordan have been added to the mix. This is all part of a Democratic strategy to shift close to $2.5 billion from 2010 into 2009 and thereby leave more room under next year's spending caps.

A wartime spending bill passed the House in mid-May but leadership lost 51 Democrats in the process. Anti-war House members opposed the President's new commitments in Pakistan and Afghanistan. This time Politico opines that "flu funds have been the cure for the war bill." In addition CQ Politics reported that "the White House cut a deal with Texas Democrats" who were holding back their votes in a dispute over the way that funds in the economic stimulus package are not being spent on public schools in the state. CQ explained that "the White House promised to use a future appropriations bill as a vehicle for language to block Texas from shifting the funds" to its "rainy day" general purpose fund.

Today in the U.S. House, ProPublica reports that there will be a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on civilian contract workers injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. ProPublica is a nonprofit investigative journalism organization, who helped ABC News and the LA Times find out that AIG and others routinely denied claims by these injured civilians for medical care and disability benefits, under federal Workers Compensation. The Labor Department is supposed to oversee the program.

The 2009 Supplemental spending bill has been the most contentious issue between Congress and the President this year. Opposition by anti war liberals to the escalation of the war in Afghanistan has been steady and ever-present. Fiscally conservative Democrats are resistant to spending in somewhat the same way as Republicans, although they are certainly not as vocal. And Republicans seem to be dedicated to holding up their reputation as the "party of no," uncharacteristically in the national defense arena.

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 defense military obama administration U.S. House

No blanket protection for the government -- This ACLU Blog of Rights post (6/5/09) elaborates on "the long-overdue State Secret Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 984)." To quote further:

. . . now the tide is finally turning. In April, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court's ruling on the Jeppesen case, noting, in Mr. Wizner's words, that "the state secrets privilege should be applied to discrete pieces of evidence instead of entire cases." And at yesterday's hearing, most of the members and witnesses agreed with Mr. Nadler's statement that "the Executive cannot be its own judge."

. . . We fully agree with witness Asa Hutchinson's assertion that the executive branch should "not be immune to checks and balances," as well as Hon. Patricia Wald's statement that this "legislation is long overdue." The three branches of government are supposed to be co-equal, and Congress is completely justified in creating legislation that balances the Executive's power.

President Jimmy Carter "disagrees with President Obama's decision to block the release of photographs that depict U.S. use of torture and other harsh interrogation methods under the Bush administration." The story is from the ACLU Blog of Rights (6/2/09).

House Hearing held in June -- The Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties subcommittee of the House Judiciary committee, chaired by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), held a hearing Thursday "to examine how to curb abuse of the privilege, while protecting true state secrets. . . Testifying at Nadler's hearings will be Patricia Wald, a retired federal judge; Asa Hutchinson, the former GOP congressman from Arkansas; Ben Wizner of the ACLU; and Andrew Grossman of the Heritage Foundation." The report comes from TPM Muckraker (6/1/09).

President orders secrecy review completed in 90 days -- "President Obama ordered a review of government secrecy," according to CQ Politics (5/28/09). To quote:

President Obama has ordered two reviews of government secrecy, one examining whether too much information is classified and another examining whether the system for protecting other sensitive information needs to be streamlined.

He set a deadline of 90 days to complete the recommendations. National security adviser James L. Jones would lead the review of classified information, which would consider ideas such as establishing a center to conduct classification reviews and restoring the "presumption against classification" that was suspended by President George W. Bush .

The reviews would include recommendations on building a National Declassification Center, a
proposal Obama made on the campaign trail. Obama's memo, released Wednesday, said the reviews are a reflection of an administration that "is committed to operating with an unprecedented level of openness."

New secrecy category developed -- "'Controlled unclassified info' policy is on the way." This post is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (5/13/09). To quote:

A new government-wide policy on "controlled unclassified information"(CUI) is still more than a year away from implementation, but not because of any lack of attention or interest. To the contrary, it is the subject of rather intensive policy deliberation, officials say, and is not "languishing" as Secrecy News stated on May 11.

CUI refers generally to information that is restricted in some way other than by national security classification. Because such restrictions have taken many different forms and names -- such as sensitive but unclassified, official use only, limited official use, and more than a hundred others -- they have also become a disruptive barrier to communication and a source of confusion inside and outside of government.

Court rules in favor of FBI author -- "Court rebuffs FBI censorship of manuscript," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (5/11/09). To quote:

A federal court last week rejected most of the objections raised by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to publication of a 500-page manuscript critical of the FBI counterterrorism program that was written by retired FBI Special Agent Robert G. Wright. The manuscript had been submitted for pre-publication review in October 2001.

Democrats are not the only ones who are upset with the executive -- "Republicans press for greater disclosure," is by Steven Aftergood from Secrecy News (5/7/09). To quote:

"Questions of secrecy and disclosure are increasingly prominent in congressional interactions with the executive branch, particularly on the part of Republican members of Congress.

House Republicans wrote (pdf) to Defense Secretary Gates this week to complain about what they called "a disturbing trend of restricting budget and inspection information within the Department of Defense."

Which federal documents are most sought? "Various Resources" is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (3/26/09). He reports that,

A survey of the "most wanted" government documents that should be publicly available but are not was recently conducted by OpenTheGovernment.org and the Center for Democracy and Technology. They reported their findings in "Show Us the Data: Most Wanted Federal Documents" (pdf), March 2009.

"Where once we [the United States] were seen as the world's leader in intellectual discourse and debate, we are now viewed as withdrawn and unconcerned with any views other than our own," wrote Senator Richard Lugar in the introduction to a new Senate Foreign Relations
Committee report that advocates renewed engagement in public diplomacy and outreach to foreign audiences. See "U.S. Public Diplomacy -- Time to Get Back in the Game" (pdf), February 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 state secrets obama administration

Different legislative tracks intersect at several points -- cost, control, consumer needs, care-giver interests and collegiality. Republicans are almost universally skeptical. Democrats are very divided about health care reform between liberals and moderates. How fast the legislation can move through Congress depends on how fast the committees can complete their work. President Obama wants a vote in the Senate by August. The President now active in the debate using the town hall as his forum. So far the American Medical Association is opposed to a public option. And it is fairly apparent that a single payer plan is out of the question.

"The health care industry has a huge stake in reform" opines J.P. Green of the Democratic Strategist: "They will fight the public option, but they know that some form of expanded government health coverage is inevitable." To quote Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown, "The public insurance option remains the single biggest obstacle to a bipartisan bill, snarling the parties - and wings within each party - in a debate over the power of government, the role of the free market and the need to cover the uninsured."

A big part of the division in the Senate is associated with the so-called "public plan." Senators in the cross-hairs of several active advocacy groups include Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Kent Conrad of North Dakota. Other moderates with whom groups must contend are Evan Bayh of Indiana, John Tester of Montana, Tom Carper of Delaware, along with Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

Floor strategies in the Senate are not yet settled. The reconciliation process, needing just 51 votes is still on the table. Two senators, Kennedy and Byrd, are absent due to illness, and the Minnesota seat is still empty. Senator Chris Dodd is acting in a leadership role for Senator Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which has, quoting Politico:

. . . released a 615-page bill, but details on the most contentious issues, such as the public insurance option and the employer mandate, were left out for now . . . The bill calls for insurance market reforms, a prohibition on insurers' denying coverage to sick people, a mandate on individuals to own coverage and the creation of marketplaces where people can compare and buy coverage.

In the U.S. House of Representatives -- According to Patrick O'Connor and Chris Frates of Politico, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer's top aides have prepared a joint memo indicating the unity of their leadership positions. To quote:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer are double-teaming powerful chairmen and rank-and-file members to save health care reform from a repeat of the Democratic Party infighting that helped kill it in 1994.

. . . Pelosi and Hoyer urged Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.), Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to heed the concerns of moderate Democrats.

. . . Waxman, Miller and Rangel -- along with their respective aides -- are trying to draft legislation in concert with each other so their committees will take up the same bill later this summer.

In the House, moderates include Blue Dog Democrats, constraining any public health plan option, and members of the New Democratic Coalition. Again, the public option provides a variety of sticking points for them including cost, Medicare rules. Rep. John Dingell of Michigan is a respected leader who has "offered a universal health care bill every year since he came ot Congress in 1955," the authors reported. To quote:

Toward the end of Tuesday's caucus meeting, he rose on his crutches and told the audience that this measure has the promise of becoming a legacy like Social Security -- a program his father helped create in the 1930s.

As he closed, he told members they should have the courage to move forward, eliciting a standing ovation from his fellow Democrats. Pelosi announced Tuesday that the bill will bear Dingell's name.

. . . House Democrats expect to introduce actual legislation next week, Waxman and others said Tuesday. The preliminary goal is to move legislation out of the committees by the Fourth of July and then clear the House by the August recess, setting up a fall showdown with the Senate over a final bill.

Health Care Reform will happen this year, in my opinion. The train has already left the station. In fact change is already happening. The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is now the law of the land. Health Information Technology reform is being funded by the President's Stimulus monies. And the President will soon sign the bill to mandate tobacco regulation by the FDA. If all of us work hard, a new era can emerge. But it could also easily get derailed. It is going to be an interesting ride.

References:

• "Can Health Overhaul Heal the Economy," by Alex Wayne of Congressional Quarterly (6/3/09).


• "Axelrod Fuels Democratic Message Machine for Health Care Overhaul," by Drew Armstrong of Congressional Quarterly (5/13/09).
  

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 politics health care reform obama congress U.S. Senate U.S. House

With the Democrats in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, rapid change is the reality that keeps news hounds busy keeping up with the pace.

President Obama is making noises like the nation's budget deficit may become a problem before too long.  He has proposed a pay-as-you-go plan that resembles that used in Congress during the Clinton years.  But they are not the same.  The biggest difference is that the savings are not immediately due, according to Yahoo! News.  Rather, such legislation can be paid for over the next ten years.

Stimulus spending may not be happening fast enough.  The President has introduced a "Roadmap to Recovery," ten initiatives that would impact more favorably on the job situation, reports CQ Politics.  In a related story, the source reports that the Department of Health and Human Services is ahead of all others in spending, and the Social Security Administration comes in second.  And one of the stimulus proposals is to allow some transit stimulus money to be spent for operating costs instead of only capital improvement projects.  A battle between the highway interests and public transportation supporters is shaping up, which might include a push to increase the gasoline tax to boost trust fund revenues.

Congress and the President are both getting serious about health care reform. But how is it to be financed?  CQ Politics reveals that taxing health benefits won't pay for the full cost of insurance for everyone.  It would cover less than half over the next ten years. And Democrats on the Ways and Means tax-writing committee are resistant to the idea.  The disagreements with Republicans over including a "public plan" are forecasting a very rough period ahead in Congress, with little hope for bipartisanship, according to Politico.com.

Congress is moving along quickly with the "Cash for Clunkers" plan where trading in a less-efficient vehicle on a new, more fuel efficient vehicle could mean a $4,500 voucher on the purchase, CQ Politics writes.  President Obama supports the idea.

The war supplemental bill is still under negotiation, with military personnel costs badly underestimated, in the opinion of Politico.com.  But at least, President Obama but the ongoing military costs in the regular budget rather than the emergency spending bill.

With Democrats in control Republicans are left with little to do but obstruct and complain.  The world moved past them.  It may take them years to become relevant again. 

National Security has dominated the news for me in recent months, because there is so much going on . . . and so much at stake. I have been collecting news items from a number of my favorite good reliable sources. I am posting these links and synopsis quotes today as a service to my readers. You will see important items you may have missed or to which you would like to return for more study.

Cybersecurity for the military -- The civilian cybersecurity initiative* was rolled out recently and the military moded is not far behind. "Pentagon plans new arm to wage cyberspace wars," comes from the New York Times (5/28/09). To quote:

The Pentagon plans to create a new military command for cyberspace, administration officials said Thursday, stepping up preparations by the armed forces to conduct both offensive and defensive computer warfare. The military command would complement a civilian effort to be announced by President Obama . . . that would overhaul the way the United States safeguards its computer networks. . . White House officials say Mr. Obama has not yet been formally presented with the Pentagon plan. . .

But he is expected to sign a classified order in coming weeks that will create the military cybercommand, officials said. It is a recognition that the United States already has a growing number of computer weapons in its arsenal and must prepare strategies for their use -- as a deterrent or alongside conventional weapons -- in a wide variety of possible future conflicts.

*Civilian cybersecurity initiative -- "Obama aides debate role of proposed Cyber Czar," came from the Washington Post (5/13/09). To quote:

The nation's top military, intelligence and homeland security officials are recommending that President Obama establish a new White House cyber czar under the National Security Council with broad policy-setting authority for protecting both public- and private-sector computer networks, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

State laws regain standing -- Rebalancing this equation was imperative due to the Bush administration's tendency to run roughshod over entities with less power. "Obama curtails Bush's policy of 'preemption'," came from the Washington Post (5/22/09). To quote:

It lets federal rules override state laws. President Obama continued to reverse his predecessor's policies this week by undoing a controversial Bush administration rule known as "preemption" that used federal regulations to override state laws on the environment, health, public safety and other issues.

Regarding President Obama's National Security adviser, former Marine General James Jones, he is one of my favorites. "In frenetic White House, a low-key 'outsider'," is a feature from the Washington Post (5/7/09). To quote:

In recent weeks, Jones has been portrayed in foreign policy articles and blogs as too measured and low-key to keep pace with the hard chargers working late hours in the West Wing. Some senior White House officials questioned early on whether Jones, 65, a retired four-star Marine general who barely knew Obama before the election, would succeed among younger staffers whose relationships with the president were forged during the long and arduous campaign.

. . . White House officials who cited early misgivings, more stylistic than substantive, insisted they have now disappeared. But Jones acknowledges that the road has not always been smooth, and he appears more comfortable than some of his administration colleagues in saying they still have some distance to travel.

It is "absolutely" fair to say that it has taken some time for him and his colleagues to get used to each other, Jones said in an interview Tuesday. "From this West Wing, in particular, because this is Obama Nation, right? True? This is where the Obama election campaign came,
landed, en masse."

Watch lists full of errors -- Why is it so hard to get babies, dead people and duplicates off these lists? FBI's lapses on terrorist watchlist put nation at risk, report warns," is from the Washington Post (5/7/09). To quote:

The FBI has retained almost 24,000 names on the nation's terrorist watch list without current or proper justification, while failing to include people who are subjects of terrorist investigations, according to a Justice Department report issued yesterday.

The FBI's lapses "create a risk to national security," Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine said in the report. In addition, he said, keeping people on the list improperly can lead to unnecessary delays for travelers at airports, along highways and elsewhere.

Is it any wonder the warrantless wiretapping program was an accident looking for a place to happen?
"Israeli in NSA spying program comfortably on the run in Africa," was written by Jeff Stein, of CQ's Spy Talk on (3/24/09). To quote:

A light-hearted piece in Sunday's New York Times, "Tips for the Sophisticated Fugitive," reminded me that Jacob "Kobi" Alexander, an Israeli businessman at the center of the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, is still on the lam.

Many people would be shocked to learn that the two biggest contractors in the ultra-sophisticated NSA eavesdropping program are owned and run by Israelis, many of whom came from their country's own electronic spying services.

In effect, writes James Bamford in his latest book on the NSA, "Virtually the entire American telecommunications system is bugged by [Israeli-formed] companies with possible ties to Israel's eavesdropping agency."

And the head of one of them is a crook, according to federal indictments.

Wrapping up with a few last items:

• "CRS Views the Cybersecurity Initiative," is by Steven Aftergood at Secrecy News (3/12/09). The report from the Congressional Research Service.


• "E-Verify Has Problems, and the Government Agrees With Us," comes from the ACLU Blog of Rights (3/11/09). The database is riddled with errors.


• "Focus on Fusion Centers" is from Secrecy News by Steven Aftergood (2/27/09). Regional national security centers facilitated by the FBI. National and local "big brothers" team up to watch what we are doing.
  

More on national security another day.

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 national security obama administration

"Dangerous people, detainees, prisoners of war, terrorists, extremists" -- The words we use to describe our adversaries are important. Not only are they important to those people, but they matter all over the world. We must also be accurate when we describe what we have done to detainees says Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (6/6/09). His post is titled, "The NYT's nice, new euphemism for torture." To quote (his links):

. . . according to the NYT, detainees in CIA black sites were merely subjected to "intense interrogations." That's all? Who opposes "intense interrogations"? This active media complicity in concealing that our Government created a systematic torture regime -- by refusing ever to say so -- is one of the principal reasons it was allowed to happen for so long

. . . The steadfast, ongoing refusal of our leading media institutions to refer to what the Bush administration did as "torture" -- even in the face of more than 100 detainee deaths; the use of that term by a leading Bush official to describe what was done at Guantanamo; and the fact that media outlets frequently use the word "torture" to describe the exact same methods when used by other countries -- reveals much about how the modern journalist thinks.

At the heart of the biggest arguments about what to do about releasing Guantanamo's is the one about whether they remain security risks. Conservatives have exaggerated their level of dangerousness, it turns out. How often do they return to jihad? The story is headlined, "NYT: We made big mistakes on front-page Gitmo story, but we did not get spun," and it is reported by Justin Eliot at TPM Muckraker (6/5/09). "The confirmed category in the Pentagon report claims that just one in 20, not one in seven, former detainees returned to terrorism." To quote further:

The New York Times has published a lengthy "Editors' Note" rolling back key claims in its front-page story on Guantanamo "recidivism" last month, and the paper's Washington bureau chief concedes it wouldn't have been a Page 1 story if the paper realized the errors in the story when it ran.

. . . The editors' note, which is pasted in full below, acknowledges use of terms like "rejoined" and "recidivism" "accepted a premise of the report that all the former prisoners had been engaged in terrorism before their detention."

. . . McClatchy and others have reported on evidence that some detainees may have in fact been radicalized while imprisoned at Gitmo.

The editors' note also acknowledges the story "conflated two categories of former prisoners" -- which were broken up into suspected and confirmed categories in the Pentagon report (which we have posted here).

There are very good reasons why President Obama ordered the closing of Guantanamo as one of his first official acts. Given our Constitution, it was not working, not for foreign policy, not for justice, and not for American values. The story of Guantanamo is a tragic one on several fronts, including detainee suicides: "Death by Detention," by ACLU (6/4/09). "Gitmo detainee dead in 'apparent suicide,' " is from TPM Muckraker (6/2/09). In 2005 the detainee had been on hunger strike and lost down to 86 pounds. This is the 5th suicide at Guantanamo. To quote:

A Guantanamo detainee has died in what the military are calling an "apparent suicide" -- and civil liberties groups are calling for action.

Guards found 31-year-old Muhammad Ahmad Abdallah Salih, known as Al-Hanashi, unresponsive and not breathing in his cell Monday night, U.S. military officials announced, according to the AP.

"Another Club Gitmo guest kills himself," was the ironic post written on this same subject by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (6/2/09). His firmly held conclusion,

It's very difficult to know why someone commits suicide, if that's what happened here. And since he had no trial, one can't know what Salih did or didn't do. But what is not hard to see is that it is simply wrong to imprison people for life with no charges. That should not be something that we even have to debate.

Guantanamo Bay's plan for closing, the story of the torture regime that started there, the Constitution and and detainee treatment -- the truth must still be told. Painful as it is, disheartening as it feels as new information comes out, there is no getting around it if we are ever to heal and return to the rule of law.

References to earlier detainee stories:

• Britain responds to the "rule of law" nuisance is by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (3/27/09). Regards returned British detainee Binyam Mohamed.


• Britain's bizarre reaction to war crimes allegations: investigations needed is by Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com (3/8/09).
  

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

Technorati tags: news news and politics guantanamo detainee treatment

President Barack Obama, according to Charles Mahtesian of Politico.com, believes that there is a concerted Democratic effort to divide and conquer leaders in the Republican party.  His Wednesday article, "Stealth War: Barack Obama sabotages Republicans," is a compelling argument buttressed by Obama's recent nomination of Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.) to be the new Secretary of the Army.  To quote from the piece,

"Boxing the Republicans into a South-dominated party is very good strategy, because the more you reduce the Republican Party, the more conservative and reactionary it will become, and thus less attractive to moderates," said Tom Schaller, a University of Maryland-Baltimore County professor and the author of "Whistling Past Dixie: How Democrats Can Win Without the South." "The Midwest and the Northeast are the places where there are still remnants of old-line Rockefeller Republicans. And these are the places where the Democrats will build durable majorities."

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama taps NY Republican for Army Secretary (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Snowe: 'Ideological Purity Is Not the Ticket Back' (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• Nancy Reagan Assists Barack Obama in Signing Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act (shoppingblog.com)