Khmetikan.com » Amerikkka

Four Obama Policies That Help Keep Guantanamo Open

Naalij — Sun, 12 May 2013 12:00:34 +0000

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that he still wants to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, as he had promised on the campaign trail in 2008: “I think it is critical for us to understand that Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe,” he said. “It is expensive. It is inefficient. It hurts us in terms of our international standing. It lessens cooperation with our allies on counterterrorism efforts. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed.” The problem, Obama said, is with Congress, which has blocked efforts to transfer detainees or close the prison camp. Last November, the Senate approved an amendment to the annual defense budget bill to ban the transfer of detainees to U.S. prisons. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) offered a colorful explanation for the provision to The Hill: “We don’t want these crazy bastards brought here to the United States,” he said. “They want to steal your way of life, not steal your car. Have you lost your mind?” Obama had threatened to veto the bill if the amendment passed, but signed it anyway, attaching a signing statement claiming the constitutional power to override the amendment. But he hasn’t yet done so, and it’s not clear whether he will: Congress made the same provisions in the 2012 defense bill, and he didn’t override those, either. On Tuesday, Obama said he was going to try again. “I’m going to go back at this,” he said. “I’ve asked my team to review everything that’s currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively, and I’m going to re-engage with Congress to try to make the case that this is not something that’s in the best interests of the American people.” But despite his stated desire to close Guantanamo, Obama has authorized at least four policies that have helped to preserve a detention system that he said Tuesday was “not sustainable” — and made it more difficult for prisoners to be released. Here’s the list:

1. Detaining prisoners already cleared for release.

The administration has already transferred 72 detainees out of Guantanamo, and cleared another 86 for release, either to their home country or to another nation willing to take them. “There are a number of the folks who are currently in Guantanamo who the courts have said could be returned to their country of origin or potentially a third country,” Obama said on Tuesday. But the administration put a freeze on any transfers after the 2009 attempt by a Nigerian man to bring down a US airliner. The man, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, is believed to have been inspired by a Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda, and many of those cleared for release are from Yemen. The administration was concerned about returning them to a country besieged by terrorists. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), noting that the situation in Yemen had become more stable, called last week for the president to consider lifting the transfer ban.

2. Closing the office responsible for transferring detainees.

In January, the State Department announced that it was shuttering the office of the special envoy assigned to work on closing Guantanamo. Daniel Fried, the ambassador assigned to the post, worked to relocate detainees and find countries that might accept those who can’t be returned home, and secured the 72 transfers before the ban was put in place. Fried is now working on sanctions policy. The State Department said he wouldn’t be replaced.

3. Force-feeding detainees.

Currently, 100 of the 166 people currently being held in Guantanamo are on hunger strike, and 21 are being force-fed through tubes put down their noses. “I don’t want these individuals to die,” Obama said on Tuesday. But the practice is a violation of medical ethics, according to the American Medical Association, which sent a letter of protest to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. The definitive report on torture during the Bush administration, released in April by a nonpartisan task force, said that the practice is “a form of abuse and must end.” The prisoners began the strike out of despair that they may never be released. Sen. Dianne Feinstein told the Obama administration in a recent letter that Red Cross staff members visiting the prison had said that the detainees’ level of desperation is “unprecedented.”

4. Preserving the designation of “indefinite detention.”

The Obama administration also determined that 46 detainees can never be released, either because they are too dangerous, or because they cannot be charged with a crime and put on trial. On Tuesday, Obama said, “I mean, the notion that we’re going to continue to keep over a hundred individuals in a no man’s land in perpetuity … that is contrary to who we are, it is contrary to our interests, and it needs to stop.” But even if Guantanamo were to close, the Obama administration would not release these detainees. Instead, they would be sent to a federal prison, to be held indefinitely without trial on U.S. soil.

Khmetikan.com

1,856 to Zero: Secret Spy Court Authorizes 100% of US Government Requests

Naalij — Fri, 10 May 2013 11:48:35 +0000

In court where civilians have no representative, government’s “national security” claims win again and again

- Lauren McCauley

A secret federal court last year did not deny a single request to search or electronically spy on people within the United States “for foreign intelligence purposes,” according to a Justice Department report this week.

The report (pdf), which was released Tuesday to Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), states that during 2012, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (the “FISC”) approved every single one of the 1,856 applications made by the government for authority to conduct electronic surveillance and/or physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.

This past year saw 5 percent more applications than 2011, though no requests were denied in either. Besides the numbers provided, no other information regarding the court and the court’s decisions are made public.

As Wired’s David Kravets explains:

The secret court, which came to life in the wake of the Watergate scandal under the President Richard M. Nixon administration, now gets the bulk of its authority under the FISA Amendments Act, which Congress reauthorized for another five years days before it would have expired last year.
The act allows the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant so long as one of the parties to the communication is believed outside the United States.

Previous to its 2012 reauthorization, Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said during a debate on amending the FISA Act, “The public has absolutely no idea what the court is actually saying. What it means is the country is in fact developing a secret body of law so Americans have no way of finding out how their laws and Constitution are being interpreted.”

Putting the FISC in context, Kevin Gosztola at FireDogLake writes, “America has a court that reviews surveillance requests in secret and makes rulings in secret that are kept secret.”

He goes on to cite a 2008 Harvard Law Review, which critiqued the unique arrangement of the secret court system, to explain why the court’s 100 percent acceptance rate may be unsurprising:

One of the most striking elements of the FISA system is the total absence of adversariality.
[t]he judge is forced not only to act as an arm of the prosecution in weighing the prosecution’s arguments about whether disclosure would or would not compromise national security, but also to act as a defense lawyer in determining whether the information is useful to the defendant.” Similarly, in reviewing a FISA application, the FISC must attempt the difficult, if not impossible, task of simultaneously occupying the roles of advocate and neutral arbiter — all without the authority or ability to investigate facts or the time to conduct legal research. The judge lacks, a skeptical advocate to vet the government’s legal arguments, which is of crucial significance when the government is always able to claim the weight of national security expertise for its position. It is questionable whether courts can play this role effectively, and, more importantly, whether they should. [emphasis added]

“Though depicted as some kind of check on Executive Branch behavior,” Glenn Greenwald writes, the entire process “is virtually designed to do the opposite: ensure the Government’s surveillance desires are unimpeded.”

He adds that the lack of oversight is significant because of recent calls to create a ‘drone court’ under the same model, providing a similar process through which the president can target for execution people who have been charged with no crime.

He continues:

But like the Fisa court, such a “drone court” would be far worse than merely harmless. Just imagine how creepy and tyrannical it is to codify a system where federal judges – in total secrecy and with only government lawyers present – issue execution warrants that allow the president to kill someone who has never been charged with a crime. It’s true that the president is already doing this, and is doing it without any external oversight. But a fake, illusory judicial process lends a perceived legitimacy to his execution powers that is not warranted by the reality of this process.

The Justice Department report also noted that the government issued 15,229 National Security Letters last year. The letters, issued by the FBI compelling “internet service providers, credit companies, financial institutions and others to hand over confidential records about their customers,” were declared unconstitutional in March. However, the decision was stayed 90 days pending the White House’s expected appeal.

Khmetikan.com

America’s wicked foreign policies and covert operations exposed

Naalij — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:13:36 +0000

CHICAGO (FinalCall.com) – In part 13 of his weekly online series “The Time and What Must Be Done,” the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan focused squarely on the underhanded meddling and wicked deeds connected with the covert operations sponsored by the government of the United States of America.

“We want to open up the record of the atrocious foreign policies of our government,” he said.

Minister Farrakhan noted during his travels abroad in places where America is hated that generally, their anger is directed at the American government because of those unjust foreign policies and not really the common American people. In fact, most Americans know very little about their government’s foreign policy, and therefore, know very little about operations conducted around the globe, in their name, he added.

“At the top of things you have a satanic, demonic mind that is the architect of America’s foreign policy. This foreign policy has objectives and this foreign policy has national interests but the American people don’t necessarily know what those interests are and they don’t necessarily know what the foreign policy objective of their government is towards the nations and the people of the Earth,” he said.

An example of America’s deceptive foreign policy is playing out on the world stage right now.

On March 28, according to reports, the U.S. sent B-2 stealth bombers on mock bombing attacks targeting North Korea as an apparent show of force. Earlier in March, the U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions against North Korea’s Foreign Trade Bank, the nation’s primary foreign exchange entity, however, listening to narratives offered by the controlled Western media, and the propaganda put forth by U.S. government representatives, it would seem as if North Korea’s young leader Kim Jong-un was acting irrationally. Pentagon spokespersons have called him “dangerous” and “belligerent.”

The Minister warned the American government, and suggested the viewers look deeper into the conflict. As tensions increase, “Be careful how you are handling North Korea,” he said. “They are not backing down from your provocation, and now they are absolutely rising up against you,” he said.

“Assassinations of Patrice Lumumba of the Congo, Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevarra, Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, and South Vietnam’s Ngo Dinh Diem, and multiple assassination attempts on Cuba’s Fidel Castro, are just some of the examples of the blood-shedding and mischief-making cited by Minister Farrakhan.”

America’s record

How America treats racial and ethnic groups residing within her borders is indicative of her views on those same people abroad, because the foreign policy is an extension of this nation’s cultural values. So if America treats Mexicans badly, it is not possible for there to be a mutually beneficial relationship with Mexico. Similarly, if America mistreats Blacks, it is not possible for America’s foreign policy objectives in Africa to be good for those living on the continent.

“The record is clear on the suffering of Black and brown, the Native Americans and oppressed people in this nation,” said Minister Farrakhan.

Then, in exhaustive detail, the Minister took viewers through incident after incident of the American government’s wicked foreign policies and meddling in the affairs of others nations. Spanning the entire globe, he showed America’s efforts to assassinate and overthrow leaders who wouldn’t do their bidding, and their consistent modus operandi using covert operations to foment revolution in order to undermine governments that stood in the way of their foreign policy objectives. And their meddling was not just limited to the darker nations of the Earth. Even in some European nations, America interfered in their internal affairs.

To drive home the point that no part of the Earth has been exempt from that satanic influence, he showed the famous cartoon drawing of Eugene Majied from the Muhammad Speaks newspaper titled “The Serpent Deceived the Whole World.”

He read from data compiled in 1984 by Tom Gervasi of the Center for Military Research and Analysis covering the years 1946-1983. He also cited writings from Harper’s Magazine, the second-oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the U.S., which began publication in 1850.

Assassinations of Patrice Lumumba of the Congo, Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevarra, Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, and South Vietnam’s Ngo Dinh Diem, and multiple assassination attempts on Cuba’s Fidel Castro, are just some of the examples of the blood-shedding and mischief-making cited by the Minister. Fomenting civil war in many nations, backing political candidates, military groups or rebels that would do their bidding and conducting training for others in assassination and interrogation techniques for police and intelligence personnel are other strategies used.

Perhaps the most famous incident of this occurred in the early 80s when the Central Intelligence Agency delivered military aid to rebel groups fighting against the Soviet Union. Among those being financed and aided by the CIA, was Osama bin Laden who later became America’s number one enemy.

The American taxpayers largely finance these covert operations.

The Minister placed particular emphasis on the writings of John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hitman,” a book he has previously recommended for a comprehensive view of what the American government does in order to gain access to the resources of other nations.

“You the American people must listen and look, because if you don’t you will be deceived into thinking that America’s foreign policy objectives are moral and ethical. They are anything but that!” he said emphatically.

God’s presence made known

God’s presence in the world is being made known through the Christ figure, and in the Islamic tradition referred to as the Great Mahdi, said the Minister. This is the time of Satan’s end, which will be brought about by speaking truth, revealing Satan fully, the Minister noted.

He reminded viewers of the words of Jesus during his Sermon on the Mount who said, “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth.” This is good news for the Black man and woman of America and those who have suffered under the rule of the wicked. The kingdom is being taken from the wicked and given to those who have served them during the appointed term.

“This is the time of the beginning of a brand new world,” he said.

The Minister, citing the Holy Qur’an, the book of scripture of Muslims, Surah (Chapter) 45 titled, “The Kneeling,” showed submission to God is demanded and the doom of the wicked is assured.

“Every nation will be kneeling down. Kneeling down for what?” he asked rhetorically. “It is the time then of the judgment.”

It is the time for the judgment of nations, but each individual will be judged according to their record of deeds as well.

“Black man and woman of America, this is really a call to you and me to repent of the evil that we have learned from our open enemy and the evil that we practice. If we don’t change, we will perish,” he said.

By Ashahed M. Muhammad

Taliban Says Attacker Acted Alone

Details are emerging about the killing of US Sgt. Michael Cable last week, with officials confirming that he was stabbed to death by an Afghan civilian, believed to be a teenager. The attacker stabbed Cable in the neck during a meeting in Nangarhar Province. Cable was outside and reportedly playing with children who had come to the site when the attack occurred, and the assailant escaped. Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid identified the attacker as a 16-year-old named Khalid, saying he was acting on his own in the killing but had since joined the Taliban after fleeing the scene. Today’s revelations are a stark change from the Pentagon’s initial statement on the matter, which claimed he was killed in combat with “enemy forces.” Officials say that since the attacker was not in uniform it is not believed to be an “insider attack,” and there is no indication he was working for the Afghan security forces at the time.

By Jason Ditz

Federal authorities step up efforts to license surveillance aircraft for law enforcement and other uses, amid growing privacy concerns.

WASHINGTON — While a national debate has erupted over the Obama administration’s lethal drone strikes overseas, federal authorities have stepped up efforts to license surveillance drones for law enforcement and other uses in U.S. airspace, spurring growing concern about violations of privacy.

The Federal Aviation Administration said Friday it had issued 1,428 permits to domestic drone operators since 2007, far more than were previously known. Some 327 permits are still listed as active.

Operators include police, universities, state transportation departments and at least seven federal agencies. The remotely controlled aircraft vary widely, from devices as small as model airplanes to large unarmed Predators.

The FAA, which has a September 2015 deadline from Congress to open the nation’s airspace to drone traffic, has estimated 10,000 drones could be aloft five years later. The FAA this week solicited proposals to create six sites across the country to test drones, a crucial step before widespread government and commercial use is approved.

Local and state law enforcement agencies are expected to be among the largest customers.

Earlier this month, TV footage showed a midsized drone circling over the bunker in southeast Alabama where a 65-year-old gunman held a 5-year-old boy hostage. After a tense standoff, an FBI team stormed the bunker, rescued the boy and shot his captor. Authorities refused to say who was operating the AeroVironment drone, which has a 9-foot wingspan.

In Colorado, the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office has used a fixed-wing drone to search for lost hikers in the mountains, and a helicopter drone to help crews battling fires. Flying manned planes or helicopters would cost at least $600 an hour, explained Ben Miller, who heads the program.

“We fly [drones] for less than $25 an hour,” Miller said. “It’s just a new way to put a camera up that’s affordable.”

Big-city police departments, including Los Angeles, have tested drones but are holding back on buying them until the FAA issues clear guidelines about operating in congested airspace, among other issues.

“You’ve got to take baby steps with this,” said Michael Downing, the LAPD deputy chief for counter-terrorism and special operations.

Los Angeles Police Department officials went to Simi Valley in December, he said, to watch a demonstration of a helicopter-like device that measured about 18 inches on each side and was powered by four propellers. It could fly about 90 minutes on its battery.

Downing said the LAPD was “pursuing the idea of purchasing” drones, but wouldn’t do so unless the FAA granted permission to fly them, and until the department could draw up policies on how to keep within privacy laws.

If the LAPD bought drones, Downing said, it initially would use them at major public events such as the Oscars or large protests. In time, drones could be flown to track fleeing suspects and assist in investigations. Tiny drones could even be used to fly inside buildings to shoot video if a suspect has barricaded himself within.

In theory, drones can offer unblinking eye-in-the-sky coverage. They can carry high-resolution video cameras, infrared sensors, license plate readers, listening devices and other high-tech gear. Companies have marketed drones disguised as sea gulls and other birds to mask their use.

That’s the problem, according to civil liberties groups. The technology is evolving faster than the law. Congress and courts haven’t determined whether drone surveillance would violate privacy laws more than manned planes or helicopters, or whether drone operators may be held liable for criminal trespassing, stalking or harassment.

“Americans have the right to know if and how the government is using drones to spy on them,” said Catherine Crump, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has called for updating laws to protect privacy.

A backlash has already started.

In Congress, Reps. Ted Poe (R-Texas) and Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) introduced privacy legislation Thursday that would require police to get a warrant or a court order before operating a drone to collect information on individuals.

“We need to protect against obtrusive search and surveillance by government and civilian use,” Poe said in a telephone interview. A similar bill failed last year.

Legislatures in 15 states are considering proposals to limit drone use. The City Council in Charlottesville, Va., passed a resolution on Feb. 4 barring local police from using drones — which they don’t yet have — to collect evidence in criminal cases.

In Seattle, Mayor Mike McGinn ordered police to return two Draganflyer X6 helicopter drones earlier this month after privacy advocates and others protested. The police said they had hoped to use them for search-and-rescue operations.

Federal agencies fly drones to assist in disasters, check flood damage, do crop surveys and more. U.S. Customs and Border Protection flies the largest fleet, 10 unarmed Predators, along the northern and southern borders to help track smugglers and illegal immigrants.

In 2004 and 2005, the U.S. Marshals Service tested two small drones in remote areas to help them track fugitives, according to law enforcement officials and documents released to the ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act. The Marshals Service abandoned the program after both drones crashed.

Except in rare cases, the military is barred from using drones in U.S. airspace to conduct surveillance or pursue individuals. No state or federal agency has proposed arming domestic drones with weapons, but the prospect has raised alarms in Congress and elsewhere.

In response to a question during an online Google chat Thursday, President Obama said drones had never been used to kill “an American citizen on American soil.”

“The rules outside of the United States are going to be different than the rules inside the United States, in part because our capacity, for example, to capture terrorists in the United States are very different than in the foothills or mountains of Afghanistan or Pakistan,” Obama said.

No drone was sent up to help find suspected killer Christopher Dorner after his truck was found burning near Big Bear Lake on Feb. 7, said Al Daniel, an officer in the aviation division of the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department. But Customs and Border Protection transmitted secure video from a Pilatus PC-12 plane to police commanders on the ground.

Despite a massive manhunt, Dorner vanished and authorities speculated he had escaped to Mexico. Five days later, however, he was found in a snowbound cabin near his truck and died after a shootout and fire.

The long delay, and the embarrassing fact that Dorner was hiding close by the police command post, sparked sharp criticism of police tactics and abilities.

Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, said an aerial drone might have helped find Dorner more quickly.

“The search would have been much wider and quicker because you’d have an unmanned aircraft looking,” he said. “You can cover more ground.”

brian.bennett@latimes.com

joel.rubin@latimes.com

blocked the government from enforcing those particular statutes on grounds that they violate Constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process. In response, the Obama administration immediately appealed Forrest’s ruling, asking for an “immediate stay,” or suspension of the case’s proceedings. When Forrest denied the request, the government went to the Second US Court of Appeals in Manhattan and asked another judge for an emergency stay, which Judge Raymond J. Lohier granted. The latest appeals court extended the stay, undermining Judge Forrest’s ruling that the government should be barred from enforcing the law.

Consider how panicked the government’s response here was. Following Forrest’s decision, they scrambled to get a hold of Lohier at 9:00 AM the following day, and overrule the injunction. Chris Hedges, the lead plaintiff in the case, speculates that this is an indication that the Obama administration is already depriving citizens of due process under the NDAA provisions. The hurried response to Forrest’s decision was done, he says, because the US government might otherwise have been in contempt of court.

Here’s Hedges writing at Truthdig about the stakes of the case:

If we lose in Hedges v. Obama—and it seems certain that no matter the outcome of the appeal this case will reach the Supreme Court—electoral politics and our rights as citizens will be as empty as those of Nero’s Rome. If we lose, the power of the military to detain citizens, strip them of due process and hold them indefinitely in military prisons will become a terrifying reality. Democrat or Republican. Occupy activist or libertarian. Socialist or tea party stalwart. It does not matter. This is not a partisan fight. Once the state seizes this unchecked power, it will inevitably create a secret, lawless world of indiscriminate violence, terror and gulags. I lived under several military dictatorships during the two decades I was a foreign correspondent. I know the beast.

The right to due process is one of the most essential devices to check state power, going back to the Magna Carta in 1215. The King of England almost 800 years ago didn’t have the arbitrary power to detain citizens that Obama is trying to claim.

See NSA Whistleblower Thomas Drake speak eloquently about the case:

By John Glaser

Politico reports:

Fifty-three percent of Americans believe the government is a threat, and 43 percent do not, according to a Pew Research Center poll. Three-in-ten Americans believe government constitutes a major threat. In a poll conducted October 2003, only 45 percent saw government as a threat to their freedoms. Fifty-four percent do not.

I’m not necessarily one to take public opinion as sacred (majorities of Americans support all kinds of horrible things), but it’s hard to blame the 53% of Americans who think the government is a threat to their liberties. The sectors of the economy in which the government is most involved are also the most dysfunctional (e.g., healthcare, banking, etc.). We live in an age where there is a bipartisan consensus that the government can secretly spy on Americans communications without a warrant from a traditional court; political activists are infiltrated with government agents; the President can wage secret wars with robots and can even kill US citizens without a shred of due process; American citizens may be subject to indefinite detention on the say-so of the Executive branch alone; and so on.

Granted, 70% of those who think the government jeopardizes liberties are Republicans, so many respondents are thinking about Obama taking away their gun rights and their Christianity. But 45% are not gun owners and 55% of independents are in the camp that believe the government is a threat to their liberties. And with the level of encroachment into people’s lives and liberties these days, it shouldn’t be surprising.

Khmetikan.com