The long saga of the Brooklyn-born "Dirty Bomber," Jose Padilla is over. After 3 and a half years in military custody, Padilla's constitutional rights were finally upheld and he was granted a civilian trial.

The three month trial showcased the post-9/11 standard for justice in America.

From the New York Times: "Following the defendants' convictions last Aug. 16, some legal experts said the success of the Justice Department's strategy cemented a new prosecutorial model in terrorism cases by relying on a little-used conspiracy law that required very little in the way of concrete evidence showing Mr. Padilla's intent or ability to carry out the crimes."

The key words here: "very little," "evidence," of "intent or ability." Despite this Padilla was sentenced to 17 years and four months on charges that he conspired to help Islamic terrorists around the world.

He conspired. He thought, talked, dreamed, and schemed about helping terrorists. But he didn't DO anything. Seventeen years.

Labels: 9/11, Dirty Bomber, Jose Padilla, patriot act, Precrime, technology

In the aftermath of September 11, 2001 the US intelligence community acted with broad support from the Bush Administration to collect data on virtually every email, phone call, and web visit originating or terminating within the borders of the United States of America.

To this end, clandestine intelligence gathering operations are conducted against the citizens of the United States. Facilities and equipment were permanently placed to collect this data without warrants from a secret intelligence court as mandated by the 1978 Foreign Service Intelligence Act. However, in most cases, telecom companies voluntarily aided data collection on their own clients without proof or accusation of wrong-doing. Qwest Communications was the only company to deny these requests. (The CEO of Qwest is currently on trial for insider trading, and maintains that his dealings were influenced by intelligence community meddling.)

As news of these operations were leaked to the media by telecom whistle blowers, calls to revise FISA grew. The argument was that the 1978 law was out of date, and incapable of providing the intelligence community with the tools necessary to protect national security in the Internet age.

A bill sponsored by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-West Virginia) seeks to reform FISA, but has an added provision supported by the Bush Administration which would grant retroactive immunity to telecom companies that helped the government illegally spy on Americans. President Bush has stated that he will veto any national surveillance bill that does not contain such provisions.

However, “because bills are supposed to have unanimous consent in the Senate before going forward...One Senator can make it very difficult to bring a bill to the floor by objecting...” That one Senator is Chris Dodd (D-Conn, Presidential Candidate 2008).

Please support Senator Dodd with a kind word, a message of support, or even a campaign donation to help show the Democratic Party in this country that Americans will not stand for indiscriminate attacks on our Bill of Rights.

One final word on the bill currently before the Senate, the one sponsored by Jay Rockefeller...Here's a glimpse of Senator Rockefeller's campaign contributors.Maybe it's time for the gentleman from West Virgina to go home.

Labels: 9/11, Chris Dodd, fisa, George W. Bush, Jay Rockefeller, technology, tia, warrantless wiretaps

It's Presidents' Day Weekend. A time of reflection and relaxation for most. I know that I'll be doing some of each myself. Today, I'm reminded of Nixon's trip to China. It was a legendary diplomatic achievement, one of our nation's finest. Despite the transgressions of Watergate and the ensuing scandal, no one can take China away from Nixon. So how will scholars and historians view the current administration? I have a theory.

Based on everything we've seen so far, the incompetence, the bold faced lies to congress and to the American people, the political manhandling of our nation's scientists, the blatant violations of international law and treaties to include the Geneva Convention, and the current struggle to consolidate more power in the executive branch than has ever been allowed, I think that they'll view the current administration as the greatest our country has ever known.

George W. Bush, will be celebrated as a visionary leader who laid the foundations for a peaceful, democratic middle east. His administration, though dogged by an overly critical class of digitally enabled navel gazers and fringe elements of the mainstream media, will be universally recognized for its efficiency, competency, and fiscal acumen. By the end of the century, George W. Bush will be immortalized on Mount Rushmore.

Let's face it. The GOP currently controls both houses of congress, the white house, and the supreme court. They have successfully managed the media portrayal of every political topic from abortion to the environment to the economy to the extent that the average American thinks things are OK right now. This is bad.

How bad is it? Let's put it this way, last weekend, the vice president shot a man in the face, and this was enough to set the news media into enough of a frenzy that that the unwarranted wiretapping of perhaps millions - and at least thousands - of Americans will escape a congressional investigation. Not only that, but Congress is now drafting a bill which will exempt NSA wiretapping from the 1978 FISA laws.

As a former service member specializing in communications intercept and translation I was subject to these laws. I know very well the guidance and restrictions they provide to protect American civil liberties. And to those who consider the current circumstances of the so called War on Terror to be grounds to waive strict adherence to these laws, I say this:

These laws were designed during the Cold War. The United States waged this war against an enemy who threatened not the destruction of one of our cities, but a war of such profound proportion as to promise the swift and sure eradication of human existence as we know it. And yet during this war the FISA laws were proposed, enacted and adhered to by the NSA and every other intelligence gathering agency in the United States of America because that's who we are.

The world DID NOT change on September 11, 2001. We have ALWAYS been under threat, and yet have maintained the faith that every individual in this nation is "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

If we turn a blind eye to FISA now, we might as well start chipping away at Rushmore today.

Labels: 9/11, fisa, George W. Bush, war on terror, warrantless wiretaps

The National Archivist is the custodian of American history. The head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is tasked with preserving “precious and irreplaceable national treasures.” (Things like presidential documents, State Department e-mails, and the 9/11 Commission's research and findings.) Naturally - given the potential that should the archivist be appointed “arbitrarily, or motivated by political considerations, the historical records could be impoverished [or] even distorted” - it is vitally important that the right person be selected for the post.

To that end, since NARA became an independent agency in 1985, the process of nominating a National Archivist has been open for "public discussion and input." Meaning that other archivists, researchers, and historians have done their best to lobby against the selection of archivists who might - for whatever reason - impede access to politically sensitive national records. Fortunately, the American people will no longer needlessly suffer this scourge of transparency in government.

"On April 8 the Bush Administration quietly pushed the current archivist, John Carlin, a Clinton appointee, to step down. To replace him, Bush will nominate Allen Weinstein, a historian who has been criticized for failing to abide by accepted scholarly standards of openness".

People have put forward several theories as to why the Administration has taken this unusual step. One is that the White House is out to protect dad's "legacy" by having their man on the scene to manage access to Bush 41's documents set to be released to the Archive in January 2005. Another theory concerns the Administration's desire to limit access to the records collected and produced by the 9/11 Commission later this year. And then there's my theory.

In addition to being the gatekeeper of the whats, wheres, whens, whys, and whos of our government, the National Archivist has another responsibility. I'll explain.

While you and I are busy making hanging chads in November the REAL voters - those elite few known as the Electoral College - will be...well, they'll probably be sitting on their asses enjoying their inherited lives of wealth and privilege however they damn well please. They won't get together to decide who the 44th President of the United States of America will be until December 13th. We're all taught in civics class that the electors are supposed to vote according to the outcome of the popular vote in their respective states, but "there is no Constitutional provision or Federal law" requiring this.

After the 538 electors vote, the governors of the 50 states (and the mayor of DC) send the Certificates of Ascertainment to NARA...by registered mail. Yup. Registered mail. I won't even bother with that one.

And that’s where Bush's hand-picked National Archivist comes in.

Now if one were to say - oh I don't know - attempt to rig a presidential election, which would be easier: Tampering with the popular vote in thousands of precincts nationwide, or just waiting until 51 Certificates of Ascertainment are in one envelope, on the desk of one man?

Delusional fantasy? Yeah, in a sane world.

Labels: 2004 election, 9/11, bill clinton, George W. Bush, NARA

A few months ago, during a White House visit by President Fox of Mexico, President Bush let slip a curious code name: Operation Desert Badger. The reference was part the President's reply when he was asked "...is it true, as your former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill says, that you started planning for the invasion of Iraq within days of your inauguration? Do you feel betrayed? And should he have released those documents?"

In response, President Bush said "the stated policy of my administration towards Saddam Hussein was very clear. Like the previous administration, we were for regime change. And in the initial stages of the administration, as you might remember, we were dealing with Desert Badger, or fly-overs and fly-betweens and looks, and so we were fashioning policy along those lines. And then, all of a sudden, September the 11th hit. And as the President of the United States, my most solemn obligation is to protect the security of the American people. That's my -- to me that's the most solemn thing an American President -- or any president -- must do. And I took that duty very seriously."

So here we have one of the President's famous instances of equating the September 11th attacks with Saddam Hussein and Iraq. But there's something else. Tonight CNN reports "the secret plan Operation Desert Badger called for escalating air strikes within four to eight hours of a shootdown [of a US/UK fly-over]. Pentagon sources say a long list of targets across the country would be hit, crippling Iraqi air defenses and command and control. The plan went far beyond the Clinton administration's 1998 Operation Desert Fox, which hit 100 targets in four days...And so we were fashioning policy along those lines...One defense official familiar with the plan says, "If a plane got shot down, that was the trigger, we were going in." Over time, the source said, Operation Desert Badger evolved into a more robust plan for attacking the regime...The president would have quickly decided whether to take the next step, approving a small number of ground troops to secure key areas. At the time, only a few thousand troops were in nearby Kuwait. Sources tell CNN Operation Desert Badger was not a plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power...Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says the new options were justified by the threat..."We packaged them, we pre-cleared them with the president, and we were cocked and ready to do a variety of different things in the event something occurred that fit one of those possible unfortunate possibilities.""

Desert Badger was a planned retaliation against the Iraqi regime. One that went far beyond Desert Fox. A decapitation strike perhaps? Was Saddam one of the command and control targets? If so, with all this planning and emphasis on Saddam and Iraq ready to be "triggered" by something "that fit one of those possible unfortunate possibilities", can the Administration still say with a straight face that it didn't push Dick Clarke to fabricate a connection between the September 11th attacks and Iraq?

Labels: 9/11, Desert Badger, Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, iraq, Mexico, saddam hussein, Vincente Fox

Richard A. Clarke, former counterterrorism coordinator to Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush has hit the administration where it hurts. He claims the White House - prior to September 11, 2001 - couldn't be bothered with talk of terrorism. Furthermore, Clarke comments on the administration's obsession with Iraq, not Osama since day one of the administration despite overwhelming intelligence that something big was about to go down.

Before, during, and after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center towers, the White House was hell bent on going to war with Saddam Hussein. So much so that Clarke was pressured to concoct a link between al Qaeda and Iraq. When he refused to do so, he was shuffled off to head a new cyber-terrorism initiative.

As expected the administration has come out with guns blazing. Fortunately for Clarke, he isn't married to a covert CIA agent whose life can be threatened by exposing her identity to the world with a few well placed phone calls. Nevertheless, it's character assassination a-go-go inside the beltway today as the White House fights to keep this story out of American diner conversation. Ain't election years a bitch, George?

Labels: 9/11, al-Qa'eda, bill clinton, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, iraq, Richard A. Clarke, Ronald Reagan, saddam hussein

Just in case you missed this story - although I can't see how that could be possible considering it was run by such journalistic power houses as The New York Post and the Centre Daily Times - the chairman of the federal commission investigating the September 11, 2001 (aka 9/11) terrorist attacks said that they could have been prevented.

Tom Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey stated, "As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea of what wasn't done and what should have been done...I mean, this was not something that had to happen."

The NY Post piece - which also appeared on FOX News.com - offered this little gem: "Kean didn't name names but it has previously been reported that the Bush administration received intelligence warnings that provided hints about Usama bin Laden's (sic) intentions before Sept. 11. "

But will any other media outlet touch this story with a ten-foot pole? Hell no. Eventually it will be forgotten, along with all the other details of the attacks.

Labels: 9/11, Osama bin Laden, Tom Kean

The news cycle has been dragged to a razor's edge. Everyone on Earth is poised on the edge of their seats, and the second shoe has yet to hit the floor.

It's maddening - this waiting. We're powerless stop it, but we know what's coming. Each day I wake-up to find that no bombs were dropped in the dead of night. Should I be thankful that no one has died yet, or should I mourn them for the brutal death that awaits? Is there anymore that I can do than hope their deaths are quick?

As terrible as it is, many people will feel a sense of relief when the killing begins. The wait will be over, and everyone can get back to their "normal" lives; or so the administration would like us all to believe. It's a selfish and arrogant delusion.

September 11th changed the world we live in. Forever. Nothing will return to the way it was before. No matter how many people die, or what laws are passed, things will never be the same. Take a look around - at the news and the protests - this is the world we live in. Conspiracy theorists and religious fanatics are only the beginning; tremors of the unrest to come.

Al-Qa'ida was the first, but others will threaten the United States. They will be crushed. In every case our government will demand more power and more money to protect us: its helpless citizens. Who would deny them? Who could? Eventually law abiding folks will begin to feel the slightest pressure of the walls they have allowed to be built around them. These will be the labor pains of the birth of tyranny.

How many of us could survive the microscope of a bureaucrat? Taxes, rolling stops, travel expenses - one way or another we're all guilty in the eyes of the law. Sooner or later, the proper authorities will have something on everyone. We won't end up in a gulag, but can we say the same for our neighbors? What happens when the police ask for your help to finger someone? Make a statement here, or make it down at the station - the choice is up to you.

I'll still be waiting for that second shoe - even after the bombs start falling - it doesn't have too much further to go.

Labels: 9/11, iraq, patriot act, warrantless wiretaps

George W. Bush is not dumb. Nor is he a slack-jawed buffoon. He is, in fact, an excellent orator. This is not observed by the vast majority of us because we are plebeians not privy to the real George W. Bush. His true persona is reserved for the share holders of America Inc.

Case in point: His recent address to the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI). Bush used the opportunity of a dinner sponsored by that most prestigious of “right-wing think tanks” to outline his administration’s long term foreign policy goals (28 min. RealMedia or transcript).

As a long time foreign affairs and international relations junkie, my final analysis of those goals is this: Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.

Pax Americana is no fantasy. The Bush administration is doing everything in its considerable power to ensure a global hegemony the likes of which have never been known. Following the war in Iraq, the U.S. will maintain instantaneous force projection capability throughout the world. Put simply, we will be able to deploy a significant number troops to any nation on Earth within 24 hours, and their support units will already be in place. Never before has a single nation had such power.

On its surface, this doesn’t seem a bad thing. With this type of reach, our country will be safe from any who oppose it. It becomes troubling, however, when one considers the converse: None who oppose our nation shall be safe.

If American domestic policy was a model for the world - if it did in fact represent the greatest freedoms of the world – I think most Americans would go along with the Pax Americana plan. But this is not the case. Let’s face it, America has some problems.

I could make a laundry list here of cases in which the U.S. government has over-stepped its bounds - either intentionally or otherwise - to the detriment of law abiding citizens like you and I, but I won’t. We all know how badly our government can screw-up sometimes. I’m also not going to say that any other government does everything better than ours. No such government exists. The question is, if every government is flawed, which one is best deserving of the title “ruler the world”?

The answer is none of them. No one nation should ever rule this world. Not even America.

Despite this, the goal of Pax Americana is nothing short of world domination by a single super power. It is a vision of sustainable global stability, if not global peace, under the watchful eye of the United States. The Bush administration, and those who support them, believe that the United States can be a benevolent dictator to the world. But they need Iraq first.

To this end, the administration has been struggling to convince both the international community, and the citizens of the United States, that America can be trusted to act as custodian of one of the largest oil fields ever discovered, and then walk away once a democratic government is in place in Iraq. The administration points to Germany and Japan, and our occupation of those nations after the Second World War as proof of our abilities of self-restraint. It’s an argument not without merit, but it does not apply here.

Iraq is not Germany, and it is not Japan. Neither of those nations had the ethnic and religious diversity of Iraq. Neither of them presented the long term challenges of security and factional conflict that Iraq will. The United States occupied Germany and Japan not only to protect the world from their militaristic aspirations, but also to protect those nations from being consumed by an expanding Soviet Union. We will have no such role in Iraq. Instead, the task of the occupation forces will be to keep Iraq from exploding into a million pieces before a stable government can be established. This is not World War II, this is Bosnia in the desert.

President Bush and his top generals, namely Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Shinseki, have assured us that the U.S. will “stay in Iraq as long as we have to, and not a day more.” But who will decide when it is safe to leave Iraq on its own? America will. When we have decided that Iraq is safe for democracy, we will withdraw most - but not all - of our troops just as we did from Japan and Germany. From that point on, we will pay Iraq for the privilege of hosting whatever U.S. troops remain, just as we do with Germany and Japan to this day. In short, the American military will have a permanent home in the Middle East.

Pax Americana is a brilliant plan. This whole world domination thing really has potential. And yet, it just doesn’t smell right.

Something’s rotten in the state of domestic policy. If we’re going to be benevolent dictators to the world, then that means we’ll be able to protect American freedoms here at home from all manner of threat. All manner of exterior threat that is. That’s the problem with the neat and tidy Pax worldview. It allows the most powerful government in the world to become that much more powerful. And all the while that government is chipping away at the basic freedoms of its own citizens.

This blog is filled with examples of how our rights as individual citizens are being stripped away. These instances are not separate from the role the U.S. is seeking to play on the global stage. At this point, our foreign and domestic policies are more intertwined than ever before.

Make no mistake, our government is still reacting to September 11, 2001. As a matter of fact, I think they're just getting started. Day by day the administration is moving to curtail more of our freedoms and enforce newly minted laws. It’s like a well oiled machine; Humming and spinning, its power grows with each press conference and with every news broadcast.

Be careful, world. A sleeping giant has just awoken, and the administration of George W. Bush is at the helm.

Labels: 9/11, aei, Gen. Shinseki, George W. Bush, iraq, neocon, new american century

JUST SHUT UP by Neal Pollack is quality. An excellent criticism of the sudden outpouring of emotion and opinions in America since September 11, 2001.

His assertion:

"Nobody gives a shit what anti-war or pro-war writers think. Really. So shut up. That goes double for poets. Shut the hell up, poets. Everybody just shut up."

I especially appreciate this piece of analysis:

"September 11, 2001, has had all kinds of unintended consequences. One of the least tragic, but most irritating, has been an explosion of absolutely terrible writing. The flow of lousy literature began almost immediately after the attacks, and has continued without pause."

As a card carrying member of the self-important, lousy writers association of America (SILWAA) - please see my credentials for membership littered throughout this blog - I welcome Neal's input.

However, to be honest, I'm probably going to continue write poorly about a great many things - including the war - on this blog.

Anyone reading this interested in a SILWAA membership can e-mail me with comments regarding posts on the blog, or any other topic you believe I might find interesting.

Labels: 9/11, bloggers, blogging, Neal Pollack