Showing posts with label Julian Assange. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Julian Assange. Show all posts

Sunday, June 10, 2012

American Heroes

“Now let your American heroes know how grateful you are for their service as they protect our freedom!” – Heard at any sporting event in the US

The voice from the loud-speaker prompts the crowd at a sporting event as half a dozen drab-dressed soldiers walk onto center stage.  The crowd rises to its feet and cheers as the uniformed soldiers wave.

Which of our freedoms do US soldiers protect? 

Do they protect our freedom to have our crotches groped at airports, train stations, and bus stops by government agents?

Do they protect our freedom to be strip-searched by our jailers after routine traffic stops?[1]

Do they protect our freedom to be monitored as decided by secret tribunals? [2] [3]

Do they protect our freedom to be stopped at random checkpoints to be commanded to show our “papers please” or to submit to a pat-down or luggage search?[4]

Do they protect our freedom to pay for unmanned drones to kill US citizens overseas and now to watch us at home?[5] [6] [7]

Do they protect our freedom to have our cell phones monitored?[8]

Attack the Messenger

“I feel uncomfortable about the word hero because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war.” – MSNBC host Chris Hayes generated a storm of criticism for daring to doubt the heroism of soldiers fighting in the US government’s perpetual war on terrorism.[9]

“But in fact the forces aren’t ‘serving their country’ or ‘keeping us free.’ They are doing the bidding of hack politicians, well-connected economic interests, and court intellectuals who are striving to satisfy personal ambition, attain wealth, or create historical legacies.” - Libertarian writer James Bovard[10]

During Memorial Day weekend, MSNBC host Chris Hayes was castigated by many for jeopardizing their illusion that US troops “defending the Homeland” (called the Fatherland in another time and place whose heroes were honored with the Iron Cross) were not performing a heroic task.[11]

And if the charges against Bradley Manning are true, Manning did even more than just suggest US troops are not on a heroic mission: Manning showed that US government actions overseas are terrorism—which is supposed to be what the other guys do.  

Manning, currently in a US military prison, is accused of leaking information to WikiLeaks that the US government would prefer to keep secret from the American public:

  • video of US troops and contractors killing innocent civilians and two journalists in Baghdad in 2007 with an attitude similar to teenage boys playing video games[12]
  • video of the Granai airstrike in Afghanistan on May 4, 2009 which killed over one hundred civilians, mainly women and children[13]
  • numerous US diplomatic cables on torture, diplomatic relations, drone attacks in Yemen, and other matters embarrassing to the US government.

How did American public respond to these revelations?

They didn’t—it didn’t immediately affect them.

How did the US government respond?

As evidenced by Manning’s imprisonment and the charges against him: with persecution and prosecution for aiding the enemy.[14]  The US government didn’t prosecute those who killed civilians, nor did it acknowledge its mistakes.  Instead, it attacked not only the whistleblower, but also WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, who had the courage to publish the information.[15]

Blowback

"We have gone a long way down the road of creating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield. We are already there with regards to Pakistan and Afghanistan…. If you strike them indiscriminately you are running the risk of creating a terrific amount of popular anger. They have tribes and clans and large families. Now all of a sudden you have a big problem … I am very concerned about the creation of a larger terrorist safe haven in Yemen." - Robert Grenier, former CIA chief of counter-terrorism

The real danger will come from the response of those terrorized by US military actions.  Chalmers Johnson called it “blowback,” a euphemism for people in foreign countries who fight back against the oppressive foreign policies of the US.

The Obama administration has increasingly used unmanned drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas.  The drone strike campaign diverts the attention of the public and lulls Americans to sleep because the drones are remotely piloted and there are fewer US troops in the battle zone.  Dennis C. Blair, former director of national intelligence, calls the drone strikes “dangerously seductive”:

“It is the politically advantageous thing to do — low cost, no U.S. casualties, gives the appearance of toughness.  It plays well domestically, and it is unpopular only in other countries. Any damage it does to the national interest only shows up over the long term.”[16]

Former CIA chief of counter-terrorism, Robert Grenier, criticizes the US government use of drones in the Middle East.  The indiscriminate strikes kill so many civilians and so outrage the population that Grenier expects a blowback response:

“We have been seduced by them and the unintended consequences of our actions are going to outweigh the intended consequences."[17]

A Nation of Suspects

In 2010, the Obama administration wrote a secret memo to rationalize the legality of killing US citizens overseas.  Again the public outcry was minimal, limited to Ron Paul and a few others who were marginalized by the media.  Most Americans ignored the US government murder of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen, without due process. 

Now drones are not just used overseas.  While we were sleeping, the federal government brought drones home to spy on us.  Michael Donley, Secretary of the Air Force, released a memorandum on 23 April 2012 authorizing the use of drones to spy on US citizens in the US.[18] [19] America is now a nation of suspects.  Our American “heroes” spy on us.

Section 9.5 of the memo authorizes the military to release photos taken by the spy drones to others in the government if “the recipient is reasonably perceived to have a specific, lawful governmental function requiring it.”

But don’t worry: the military will be careful when it violates our constitutional rights in the name of national security.  According to page 2 of the memo:

“Intelligence oversight (IO) involves a balancing of two fundamental interests: obtaining the intelligence information required to protect national security and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws of the United States (US).”

Section 7 of the memo talks about protections against intelligence agents who break the rules while operating in the US.  This is merely lip service as we remember how the government persecuted Bradley Manning for exposing the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Despite all of the words in section 7 of the memo, the truth is: the government doesn’t really care if it breaks the rules; it just doesn’t want the public to know about it.

What will happen when the troops using spy drones in the US abuse their power?  Will another Bradley Manning step forward to be imprisoned for defending the rights of US citizens?

Heroes and Pawns

Supporters of the war make good use of the dead, who can’t speak for themselves, but they have no use for Bradley Manning, who allegedly told the world what the US government did to civilians overseas.  Unfortunately, US citizens’ response to proof of US forces killing civilians has been underwhelming.  And a collective yawn has greeted the PATRIOT Act, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allowing indefinite detention of US citizens without trial, the TSA treating travelers like farm animals, and now the use of spy drones in the US.

Who are the heroes?  Those men and women who, however well-meaning, invade and occupy foreign countries because the government hoodwinks them into believing they’re protecting their country’s freedom?  Or are the real heroes those who point out the evils done by their own government and now sit in jail because of it?

“Memorial Day should be a time to remember the government’s crimes against the people. Politicians have perennially sent young Americans to die for false causes or on wild-goose chases.” – James Bovard

[1] Supreme Court of the United States, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington et al., October Term 2011, (Accessed at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-945.pdf on June 3, 2012).

[5] “Drone Use Takes Off on the Home Front,” April 20, 2012, By ANDY PASZTOR and JOHN EMSHWILLER, Wall Street Journal, (Accessed at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304331204577354331959335276.html# on Apr 21, 2012).

Local organizations are applying to use drones:

“The more than 50 institutions that received approvals to operate remotely piloted aircraft…include not only agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security but also smaller ones such as the police departments in North Little Rock, Ark., and Ogden, Utah, as well the University of North Dakota and Nicholls State University in Louisiana.

“The information, released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, came to light as the Federal Aviation Administration gears up to advance the widespread use of the drones. By the fall of 2015, Congress wants the agency to integrate remotely piloted aircraft throughout U.S. airspace.”

[6] “Gov.: Drones over Va. 'great'; cites battlefield success,” 5/29/2012, WTOP, by Paul D. Shinkman, (Accessed at http://www.wtop.com/120/2882193/Governor-Drones-over-Va-great-right-thing-to-do on May 31, 2012).

[7] “The Age Of Drones: Military May Be Using Drones In US To Help Police,” by Charles Feldman, CBS LA, June 4, 2012, (Accessed at http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/06/04/the-age-of-drones-military-may-be-using-drones-in-us-to-help-police/ on June 5, 2012).

“The revised Air Force report is a continuation of a policy already a few years old, but is causing more alarm now as drones appear poised to soon become a ubiquitous presence in U.S. skies thanks to a federal policy to promote their use, first by law enforcement agencies, and then by commercial concerns.”

[8] “Police Are Using Phone Tracking as a Routine Tool,” By ERIC LICHTBLAU, Mar 31, 2012, NY Times, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/us/police-tracking-of-cellphones-raises-privacy-fears.html?_r=2&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=all on Apr 1, 2012).

[11] “Blogs rip MSNBC's Chris Hayes on 'heroes',” By MACKENZIE WEINGER, 5/28/12, Politico.com, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76799.html on June 3, 2012).

[18] “AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 14-104,” 23 APRIL 2012, Intelligence, OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES, (Accessed at http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi14-104.pdf on June 9, 2012).

Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Doublethink (Part 8)

“The result of this classification mania is the division of the public into two distinct groups: those who are privy to the actual conduct of American policy, but are forbidden to write or talk about it, and the uninformed public, which becomes easy prey for the official lies exposed in the WikiLeaks documents…” – David Samuels in the Atlantic

Transparency and Accountability

"Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing." –President Obama (D)[1]

In a world of Doublethink, we’re conditioned to admire the emperor’s new clothes.  In America, unlike in the children's fairy tale, if someone dares to shout that the emperor really is naked, the response isn’t laughter.  Instead, cries of treason and calls for prosecutions and executions in the name of national security fill the airwaves.

Transparency promotes accountability, but in the national security state there is no transparency.  The Obama administration, like each of its predecessors, never intended an open administration for citizens.  Public ignorance of government operations keeps our rulers in power.  Our ignorance is their strength. 

By leaking classified US government documents, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, in cooperation with various news organizations, seem to have shined some revealing light on US government operations.[2][3]  Instead of a US government-sponsored “transparency,” WikiLeaks has promoted the kind of transparency which President Obama says “provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.”

Only The Government May Spill Blood 

“Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen[4]

According to US government estimates, one hundred thousand US troops oppose, at most, 100 al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan.[5][6]  That’s one thousand US soldiers (not counting mercenaries) for each al Qaeda member.  Most of the killings in the war in Afghanistan are not of al Qaeda members—the purported reason for the war.  Most of the Afghan family blood spilled, for which the chairman of the JCS professes so much concern (video), is not from those 100 al Qaeda members, either. 

On April 5, 2010, via WikiLeaks, Julian Assange dared to release secret footage from 2007 of  US helicopters killing more than 12 Iraqi civilians, including children.  The cavalier attitude of the US forces shown in that video, as they treated the killings like a video game, spoke volumes of the banality of evil.  Assange has since released an additional several hundred thousand classified US documents on the Afghan war, the Iraq war, and US diplomatic cables.

Assange has enraged those who worship the state by daring to reveal US government treachery.  Wearing a chest full of decorations, high priest of the national security state and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen warned Assange not to leak secrets that could spill the blood of soldiers who willingly participate in the war.  The admiral thinks only the state has the right to sacrifice individuals on the altar of the state.

Many Americans are offended by Assange—he upsets their worship of the state as god.  The US government hates Assange—his revelations end the ignorance that is its strength.

Naked Apes

"Back in the old days when men were men and countries were countries, this guy would die of lead poisoning from a bullet in the brain..." – Rush Limbaugh, “limited-government” advocate[7]

Like the scene in “2001 A Space Odyssey” (4:30 into this video) where a collection of apes mimic their leader by clubbing an already fallen, harmless opponent, others joined in, bashing Assange:

  • Rush Limbaugh, a pretend, limited-government conservative, called Assange names before calling for his assassination.  Limbaugh described Assange as a sissy: “No, I just don't like the guy in general principles.  I don't like the name. I don't like the way he looks. I don't like the way he sounds. He's a sissy; he's a waif, purely and simply an Internet creation.”  Limbaugh then hoped for Assange’s life to be wrecked: “…I asked them two questions: ‘Is there a way that it can be arranged that the identity of Julian Assange could be stolen and then with that identity we wreck his life?’"
  • Nouvelle, pretend,  limited-government conservative Sarah Palin asked “Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?”[8]
  • Did pretend, limited-government conservative Senator Jon Kyl (R) suggest making an ex post facto law to target Assange?  According to Kyl: "Ben Cardin and I are going to be working on some legislation I think that would enable us to more broadly be able to charge people even if they’re not handing over information to an enemy, for example."
  • Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) called Assange a “high-tech terrorist.”
  • Senator Dianne Feinstein (D) wants Assange prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act, ignoring the First Amendment to the US Constitution as she has ignored the rest of the Constitution throughout her career.
  • Referring to a US government legal creation to avoid the Geneva conventions, neo-conservative Newt Gingrich said Assange “should be treated as an enemy combatant.”

Former candidate for the R-presidential nomination, Mike Huckabee, clamored for the blood of the source of the leaks (video).

Avert Your Gaze as the Naked Emperor Passes

“Because they don't lie in diplomatic cables. The odds are that what we're getting here is the raw truth.” – Rush Limbaugh while decrying “evil Julian Assange” who dared give Americans the raw truth.

The US government, embarrassed by the leaks, has strong-armed the Domain Name Server for WikiLeaks, Amazon, and Paypal in an effort to cut off the funding and operation of WikiLeaks (see list of WikiLeaks mirrors).  The US government warned federal employees not to read WikiLeaks.[9]  Columbia University warned students that they endanger future job prospects if they download the publicly available material.[10]  Raytheon, as did other military contractors, warned employees:

"U.S. Government agencies are releasing guidance to contractors. Reviewing information on WikiLeaks or subsequent disclosures is strictly prohibited. As a contractor to the Federal Government, this means ... personnel are prohibited from accessing WikiLeaks whether on company-issued or on personal equipment."[11]

The emperor has commanded that people must pretend that the emperor’s new clothes are marvelous, when all the world should know: “The emperor has no clothes.”

President Obama (D) and his open administration (Doublethink translation—he lied to you, he didn’t close Guantanamo, he didn’t end the war in Iraq, and he doesn’t have an open administration) threaten to prosecute Assange:

“Published reports suggest that a joint Justice Department-Pentagon team of investigators is exploring the possibility of charging Assange under the Espionage Act, which could lead to decades in jail. "This is not saber-rattling," said Attorney General Eric Holder, commenting on the possibility that Assange will be prosecuted by the government.”[12]

The US government pressured other countries to expel Assange:

“…American ambassador to Switzerland, Donald S. Beyer Jr., responded to signs that Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks might seek refuge in that country, warning in the weekly magazine NZZ am Sonntag that the Swiss ‘should very carefully consider whether to provide shelter to someone who is on the run from the law.’”[13][14]

On December 7, 2010, Assange appeared before a magistrate in London and faced extradition to Sweden for rape charges.  He is being held without bail.  According to Swedish authorities, the charges had nothing to do with the WikiLeaks website.[15][16]

On the same day Assange was jailed, the US Department of State released a press statement about hosting a planned World Press Freedom Day event May 1-3, 2011 in Washington, D.C.:

“We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.”[17]

The US government mocks us by pretending to support the free flow of information while the government:

  • Forces businesses to refuse service to those who disagree with it
  • Warns employees and contractors not to read the leaked information on company or personal equipment
  • Threatens students not to read the leaked information at the price of future job prospects
  • Threatens nations harboring individuals who reveal the dirty laundry of the US government
  • Threatens the individuals who reveal classified information—information classified only because it embarrasses the US government.

Classified Documents No Longer Hidden From Our Prying Eyes

“The prying eyes that caused Dulles most concern belonged not to the president, Congress, or the press—all of whom, if for different reasons, tended to defer to the CIA—but to the American people.” – Andrew Bacevich describes the formation of the CIA–one-third of the US national security state[18]

Assange has not given in to the threats of prosecution or assassination.[19]  WikiLeaks distributed an encrypted “insurance file”  over the internet containing more than 250,000 US diplomatic cables.[20]  In a news conference, Assange warned that if he is imprisoned or killed, “the key parts will be released automatically.”[21]

In a world of Doublethink, our ignorance is the government’s strength.  Releasing information to end that ignorance gives power back to the people.

Why else would Assange be such a danger to the state?

________________________________________

[1] “Transparency and Open Government,” Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, (Accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/ on Dec 7, 2010).

[2] “Respected media outlets collaborate with WikiLeaks,” AP News, Dec 3, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0Vruimmvy8loGklsz34QyGDKMDA?docId=120c7bf5d3a34dbaadf1280dace2e456 on Dec 7, 2010).

[3] “WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Tells TIME: Hillary Clinton 'Should Resign',” By Howard Chua-Eoan, Time, Nov. 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2033771,00.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[4] “Gates Calls on FBI to Join Leak Investigation,” By Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service, July 29, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.jcs.mil/newsarticle.aspx?ID=341 on Dec 7, 2010).

[5] “New Estimate of Strength of Al Qaeda Is Offered,” By DAVID E. SANGER and MARK MAZZETTI, NY Times, June 30, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/world/asia/01qaeda.html?_r=1 on Dec 7, 2010).

[6] “President Obama's Secret: Only 100 al Qaeda Now in Afghanistan,” By RICHARD ESPOSITO, MATTHEW COLE and BRIAN ROSS, ABC News, Dec. 2, 2009, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/president-obamas-secret-100-al-qaeda-now-afghanistan/story?id=9227861 on Dec 7, 2010).

[7] “Rush Analyzes the WikiLeaks Waif,” Nov 29, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_112910/content/01125107.guest.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[8] “Exclusive: Sarah Palin Under Cyber-Attack from Wikileaks Supporters in 'Operation Payback'*,” Jake Tapper, ABC News, Dec 8, 2010, (Accessed at http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/12/exclusive-palin-under-cyber-attack-from-wikileaks-supporters-in-operation-payback.html on Dec 9, 2010).

“’No wonder others are keeping silent about Assange's antics,’ Palin emailed ABC News. ‘This is what happens when you exercise the First Amendment and speak against his sick, un-American espionage efforts.’”

Palin is a mistress of Doublethink.  She cries about her First Amendment rights, but had no problem seeing them denied to Australian Assange.

[9] “Don’t Look, Don’t Read: Government Warns Its Workers Away From WikiLeaks Documents,” By ERIC LIPTON, NY Times, December 4, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/world/05restrict.html?ref=world on Dec 6, 2010).

[10] “Columbia students told job prospects harmed if they access WikiLeaks cables,” Ewen MacAskill, guardian.co.uk, 5 December 2010, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/05/columbia-students-wikileaks-cables on Dec 6, 2010).

[11] “Raytheon forbids employees to access WikiLeaks website,” By Muhammed El-Hasan, Daily Breeze, 12/03/2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailybreeze.com/latestnews/ci_16762048?source=email on Dec 6, 2010).

[12] “The Shameful Attacks on Julian Assange,” Dec 3 2010, David Samuels, The Atlantic, (Accessed at http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/12/the-shameful-attacks-on-julian-assange/67440/ on Dec 6, 2010).

If Obama has an open administration, it is only due to Assange:

“For his part, Assange has not been shy about expressing his contempt for the failure of traditional reporting to inform the public, and his belief in the utility of his own methods. ‘How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined?’ he told The Sydney Morning Herald. ‘It's disgraceful.’"

[13] “Hundreds of WikiLeaks Mirror Sites Appear,” By RAVI SOMAIYA, NY Times, December 5, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/world/europe/06wiki.html?hp on Dec 5, 2010).

[14] “Homeland Security seizes domain names,” By Sara Jerome, The Hill, 11/26/10, (Accessed at http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/130763-homeland-security-dept-seizes-domain-names- on Dec 7, 2010).

Each time the government arrogates power to protect people from some abuse, they also gain power to inflict their own abuse.  This is part of Freedom is Slavery double-thinking.

[15] “The Wikileaks sex files: How two one-night stands sparked a worldwide hunt for Julian Assange,” By Richard Pendlebury, 7th December 2010, Daily Mail, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html?ito=feeds-newsxml on Dec 7, 2010).

[16] “Assange Vows To Fight On After Bail Refusal,” Alison Chung and Richard Williams, Sky News Online, Dec 07, 2010, (Accessed at http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Julian-Assange-WikiLeaks-Founder-Meets-Police-In-Britain-Over-Sexual-Assault-Claims-In-Sweden/Article/201012115849036?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15849036_Julian_Assange%3A_WikiLeaks_Founder_Meets_Police_In_Britain_Over_Sexual_Assault_Claims_In_Sweden on Dec 7, 2010).

[17] “U.S. to Host World Press Freedom Day in 2011,” US Department of State Press Statement, Philip J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs, Washington, DC, Dec 7, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm on Dec 7, 2010).

[18] Washington Rules, Andrew Bacevich, Holt and Company, NY, NY, 2010, p. 42.

[19] “WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange 'will release poison pill of damaging secrets if killed or arrested',” By Ian Drury, 6th December 2010, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1335888/WikiLeaks-Julian-Assange-release-damaging-secrets-killed-arrested.html on Dec 7, 2010).

[20] “WikiLeaks Ready to Release Giant 'Insurance' File if Shut Down,” Foxnews, Dec 05, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/05/wikileaks-ready-release-massive-insurance-file-shut/ on Dec 7, 2010).

[21] “WikiLeaks Founder Warns About More Dispatches,” By SCOTT SHANE, NY Times, Dec 6, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/world/europe/07assange.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a22 on Dec 7, 2010).

Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)