A modest proposal

By Carl

Little noticed in the hoopla over the failed terrorism attempt of Christmas Day, with the concurrent fingerpointing (these rules were instituted under the Bush administration, something jackasses like Rep. Peter King (R-Frontrunning Poser) seem to forget) was an item that made me think a little:

WUHAN, Dec. 26 (Xinhua) -- The Wuhan-Guangzhou high-speed railway with the world's fastest train journey at a 350-km-per-hour designed speed, started operation Saturday.

Two passenger trains rolled out the Wuhan Railway Station and Guangzhou North Railway Station at about 9 a.m. and reached the terminals within three hours, compared with the previous 10 and a half hours.

The service between Wuhan, a metropolis in central China, and Guangzhou City, a business hub in the southern Guangdong Province, was put into trial operation on Dec. 9, reaching a maximum speed of 394.2 km (ed. note: roughly 250 miles) per hour.

Not quite as fast as a jet airplane, but no one drove a train into the 90th floor of the World Trade Center, either. And given the delays in airline terminals sure to arise from this incident, bullet trains might begin to make more sense.

Several reasons drive train travel in Europe and Asia that seem not to affect Americans: higher fuel prices due to government taxes, shorter distances between hub cities, less developed road systems (really, the Autobahn and perhaps Englands motorways are about the closest any nation comes to the US interstate highway system) creating slower speeds and longer travel times, among other reasons.

Indeed, China may be the only nation who suffers from both the need to have citizens in two places at once as well as the staggering large distances between those places.

Now, Barack Obama did propose investing in high speed rail systems, particularly across the heartland of the United States. So far, the only firm proposal is for a rail link between Disneyland and Las Vegas (courtesy of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid). I'm not entirely sure what the advantage is for having this. Do you drop your kids off with Goofy in the morning and pick them up at night after you've blown the mortgage payment?

But I digress. We have an opportunity now to invest in something that a) makes sense to do, given the economic catastrophe that higher fuel prices will create shortly; b) can be shovel-ready within months; c) would help wean us off foreign energy sources; d) could employ zero-emission power plants strung along the rail lines; e) would reinforce homeland security, both from a macroeconomic point of view as well as a micro-security viewpoint; and f) would give us a goal that most Americans can appreciate and wrap their minds around.

After all, rail travel has been around 150 years and there's a whole litany of romantic notions with regards to it. Imagine going from Chicago to Denver. It's a 17 hour drive. It's a three hour plane flight, plus two hours at security. At 660-odd miles and 250 mph on a train, it's 2 and one-half hours. And you're in downtown at both ends.

Makes sense, right?

Threat level orange

By Capt. Fogg

Well it certainly won't be a surprise to anyone who thought the Bush administration was using Tom Ridge's color coded threat levels to keep his poll ratings up every time they needed a boost - like right before an election. even though he was quoted in 2004 as saying

"We don’t do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."

Ridge's new book contains at least one bombshell of a revelation according to MSNBC's Chris Matthews - yes indeed Ridge was pressured to raise the level days before the 2004 election even though there was no threat. He refused.

In rather dry and understated language he explains that he now had proof that the main concern of the administration was politics and not national security and this was the moment he decided he had to get out.

The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege...and How We Can Be Safe Again is due to be released September first. That should give the Republicans enough time to launch a smear campaign.

The terrorists have won

By Libby Spencer

The greatest weapon a terrorist has isn't a bomb, it's fear. If we allow ourselves to diminish our humanity and toss our common sense out of fear of terrorism, then they've won without lifting a finger. This latest bit of security theater is a prime example.

Officials ordered nine Muslim passengers, including three young children, off an AirTran flight headed to Orlando from Reagan National Airport yesterday afternoon after two other passengers overheard what they thought was a suspicious remark.

And what was this highly suspicious remark? They were speculating about which seat on a plane is safest, one assumes in the event of a crash. This is a conversation I've had myself with fellow passengers at some point in the course of many years of plane travel. There are certain sections of an aircraft that are marginally safer.

By the way, these "Muslims" are American citizens. Somehow I think if it was a group of white Christians on their way to a revival meeting, this would never have been an issue.

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

A completely silly post

By Edward Copeland

Now that we have hope for the future again, I think we should bring back some humor as well. I would love to see Obama announce that he's naming Bill Ayers secretary of homeland security and see how many right-wing nuts keel over before he says, "Just kidding."

Seventh Anniversary -- 9/11/2001

By Carol Gee

Today will be a solemn occasion for all of us here in the United States, not an anniversary celebration. The only "celebrations" will be those in our individual hearts, as we celebrate the lives of those thousands who died on that tragic day. We must also remember the others who lost their lives later as a result of illness brought on by their prolonged work in the aftermath at Ground Zero.

Barack Obama suggested to John McCain, in a phone call after the Republican convention, that they appear jointly at the September 11 commemoration at Ground Zero. The political opponents will not be so today as they mark the tragedy of the terrorist attacks of that day several years ago. To find out all about what is going on today, we are indebted to David C. Morrison who writes the terrific newsletter, CQ Behind the Lines. On 9/8/08, he wrote a piece that included, "Grounded at zero." To quote from it (author's links):

McCain and Barack Obama will appear jointly — with partisanship tuned way down — at Ground Zero on Thursday, the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, The Wall Street Journal spotlights. As the commemorative date looms, the World Trade Center Medical Working Group has released its first annual report related to the aftermath of the attacks, The Chicago Tribune tells. The results of a biopsy, published by The New Yorker, suggest that an NYPD detective whose 2006 death has been held up as an example of the toxic illnesses suffered by Ground Zero workers, actually died of some other cause, the Times tells. Construction workers last week installed the first steel column for New York’s Sept. 11 memorial, Newsday relays — while the Post previews the dedication of the Pentagon’s 9/11 monument, and USA Today notes that the other major memorials are at least three years off.

Since the attacks in 2001 The United Nations has struggled to come to terms with terrorism, unable even to define the term. The current Secretary General is Ban ki-Moon, about whom I have written in the past. with whom the U.S. is not an effective partner. From Yahoo! News 9/11/08 by Howard La Franchi: "At U.N., a bolder approach to terrorism." To quote:

Terrorism is not an easy topic to raise at the UN: The political, religious, and ideological dimensions of the issue always seem to get in the way of a full-on discussion. . . And yet there sat Mr. Ban on Tuesday, using the back door of a conference of his creating about the victims of terrorism – who could disagree with that topic? – as a way to get at the overarching issue of terrorism.

. . . Ban's one-day symposium, the first conference on the topic held by the UN, reflects the determination of the results-oriented chief of the unwieldy institution to address the top issues of the day, as delicate as they may be. When Ban rose to the secretary-general's office in January 2007, many UN hands wondered how the longtime South Korean diplomat's signature efficiency and impatience with no-can-dos would fare in a job prizing the ability to walk on 192 eggshells.

. . . Others say that Ban, while a realist about what can be achieved in the short term, refuses to accept that a central challenge to civilization must be left off the world agenda because of controversy.

"Terrorism has turned into something of a taboo topic, but [Ban] refuses to accept that and stands by his belief that we must be able to have a fair discussion of the main issues of the day," says one UN official who is well acquainted with Ban's thinking but who is not authorized to comment publicly on him. "He realizes this may not result in policy, at least not right away," the official adds.

Tense times are upon us. On 7th Anniversary Of Attacks, White House Claims Bin Laden Was Not The ‘Mastermind’ of Sept. 11," according to Memeorandum. The campaign to be the next President of the United States is fierce. A hurricane is bearing down on my state, and though we live considerably inland, yard stuff must be tied down, extra water saved, and batteries located for when the power goes off. Those activities are absolutely nothing compared with what the survivors of those lost in the 9/11 attacks are faced with today. I will be "sending white light," as my friend Laura says their way. I am hoping that they are finding peace and solace as they visit the various memorials now emerging at the various attack sites. They are in various states of completion. The beautiful Pentagon memorial is now opening. Ground Zero and the Shanksville, Pa. site have a way to go, though many people will gather to pay their respects at all three sites.

Previous South by Southwest "9/11" posts:

• "What do we do?" -- September 12, 2007
• "A handful of events came together" -- September 11, 2006
• "Taking stock - four years later" -- September 12, 2005

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Exploring rights and wrongs

By Carol Gee

Knowing the difference between right and wrong . . . is at times a murky business. It is not always easy to see what is beneath the surface of reality.

Fallout the so-called "war on terror" -- Telecommunications companies achieved immunity from lawsuits in the latest Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act revision. And insurance companies are exploiting terrorism fears as they set museum insurance rates. These items from my CQ Behind the Lines free e-mail newsletter, by David C. Morrison, of 8/15/08:

State and local: . . Vermont’s two-year investigation into allegations that telecoms released customer data to NSA snoops appears to be drawing to a close, The Barre Times Argus tells.

Kulture Kanyon: . . Since terror fears spiked seven years ago, insurance hikes have “threatened to strangle museums’ ability to present important art to the public,” a curator tells the L.A. Times’ Mike Boehm

"This is so wrong," -- is the headline about this item from the NYT in, "Police State USA" at Yes, I take it personally. My blog friend, "betmo's" link* describes how a man got caught up in an immigration sweep, was shuttled from facility to facility, and then died due to failure to receive even minimal medical care. The map at this site is also very revealing. To quote:

. . . fifteen years of an exemplary life in the U.S. only to get thrown into a detention center. . . detention watch network has put together this handy map...

Hate speech is flat wrong -- Conservatives have long called for the heads of prominent liberals. Looks like they got their wish. This story came from my friend Jon. It was posted by Steven D. at AlterNet, and titled, "The Tragic Arkansas Shooting and Conservative Hate Speech," taken from the Booman Tribune, August 14, 2008. To quote:

. . . there was no personal connection between the shooter and Bill Gwatney, and apparently there wasn't one. Instead, there are some initial eerie similarities between the shooter Timothy Dale Johnson, and the man who massacred members of the Unitarian church in Knoxville, Tennessee last month. Both, for example had just lost their jobs, and both were very, very angry about that fact

. . . It's past time for members of the the right wing wurlitzer to apologize for their hate speech and to renounce any further use of the language of extermination with respect to their political, religious and ideological adversaries, as well as their demonization of minorities.

Stealing the words of another to use as one's own is wrong. Jody Rosen posted an article* "Dude, You Stole My Article" -- How I investigated a suspicious alt weekly -- at Slate Magazine on Aug. 6, 2008, about someone at a Texas newspaper, The Bulletin, who plagiarized an article about Jimmy Buffett.

What is wrong with this picture, if anything? This item* came from World Changing: "Virtual Transgender Suit, Avatar Termination and Other Online World Tales," by Regine Debatty, August 15, 2008. To quote:

You might remember that a year ago Marc Owens designed the Avatar Machine, a system which replicates the aesthetics and visuals of third person gaming, allowing the user to view themselves as a virtual character in real space via a head mounted interface.

. . . A study by psychologists at Nottingham Trent University has found that 54 percent of all males and 68 percent of all females "gender swap"--or create online personas of their opposite sex.

. . . Another of Owens' projects, Sabre & Mace - Second Death, was concerned more specifically with the online environment Second Life.

Collaborating with Tony Mullin, he created SABRE & MACE, a company that offers virtual characters the opportunity to experience death as a way to close their user account permanently. The project examines the notion of feeling sentimental toward a virtual character and examines the link between sentimentality and tangibility.

The ability to become invisible likely would never be allowed by our government's security apparatus. Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the FBI, the National Security Agency and many other government entities all want their full range of rights to search for terrorists and other suspicious people. This intriguing little blurb* is from The Raw Story, "Invisibility Cloak Now Within Sight: Scientists," 8/11/08. To quote:

The age-old fantasy of making yourself invisible has taken a step toward reality, with scientists saying they have created three-dimensional materials that can bend visible light.

*Thanks for these links from "betmo," who writes life's journey.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Chertoff's Iron Curtain

By Capt. Fogg

Something there is that doesn't love a wall, said the poet. I think it's called freedom.

Say you have a nice ranch down near the Rio Grande. The view is fabulous, you use the water for your cattle, you have a little boat to fish with. The deer and the antelope play.

Say you enjoy the San Pedro river, the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area on the Arizona border. You can forget it; it's soon to be blocked by a huge corrugated iron curtain right out of the cold war era because we're all so desperately afraid of Mexicans who don't come in to the country on tourist visas, like most illegal immigrants do.

This isn't a diatribe on any racialist or economic basis for xenophobia or the grave danger of people with expired visas cutting your lawn, it's about big government getting away with unquestionable authority by declaring emergencies. It's about Michael Chertoff's Bush-given ability to overturn court rulings and ignore laws passed by Congress because - well just because the commander guy has commanded it. Our Republican Congress gave him the power to waive any laws he needed to to get this fence built and our Republican courts in all their activist glory have now backed him up today by upholding a lower court's ruling that giving Michael Chertoff authority to write and unwrite laws passed by congress does not violate the separation of powers set forth in the constitution. Michael Cherthoff can be the law and neither we nor our elected representatives can stop him sayeth the Bush Court.

Somehow the people who give us the Fatherland and the Motherland seem awfully similar to the people who changed National Security into Homeland Security.

Many people sincerely doubt that this wall will actually secure our border and protect us from undocumented dishwashers. The history of walls lends them some support, but of course when things get bad enough here, perhaps it will help keep us from fleeing to Mexico.

(Cross-posted from The Impolitic.)

The state of the "surveillance state"

By Carol Gee

According to Wikipedia:

The "surveillance state" is a pejorative term used to describe a national government's surveillance of large numbers of citizens and visitors. Such widespread surveillance is most usually justified as being necessary to prevent crime or terrorism.

Today's post is a compilation of a few recent blog posts or articles that pertain to the U.S. as one of those surveillance states. The stories focus on the unsettled debate about wiretapping in the United States, Congress and the surveillance laws, huge inaccurate terrorist watch lists, and the imminent DHS plan to turn spy satellites on U.S citizens.

"Wiretapping Powers Debate Still Unsettled," is a report on a debate at the RSA 2008 conference Wednesday moderated by Pulitzer Prize-winning NYT reporter Eric Lichtblau. The conference was attended by Ryan Singel, who reported on April 9, 2008 @ Wired-Threat Level. To quote:

In a interconnected, packet-based global telecommunications world, just how far should the nation's spooks be allowed to live inside the nation's communication tubes in order to root out communications of spies and terrorists and how much should they be supervised by courts?

. . . Bill Crowell, a former NSA official, and lawyer David Rivken argued for the spooks, saying that in the modern world they need to have equipment inside the United States due to the propensity of even foreign communications to flow inside the United States. Crowell went so far as to say that the "NSA has no interest in collecting domestic information" and that "People inside the untited states are considered to have all the protections of the Constitution."

. . . "If the type of surveillance described in Mark Klein's document is accurate, we are losing that oversight," Blaze said. "That's a profound shift in how wiretapping is done -- if filtering is being done by government, important technical safeguards are gone."

. . . But that idea, Dempsey said, is one that cannot even be discussed rationally due to the Bush Administration's obsession with secrecy and its willingness after 9/11 to persist with its secret surveillance programs as a test of its belief in a king-like president.

"What the administration has done is turn every foreign intelligence surveillance into a Constitutional crisis," Dempsey said. "It was a mistake for the administration to test its theory of constitutional power in the middle of the war."

. . . As for Lichtblau, he played a proper reporter's role by directing conversation across the issues, but perhaps his comments at the beginning of the panel remained as applicable at the end.

"Almost two and a half years ago, we first disclosed the existence of the warrantless wiretapping program. I still don't know exactly what this program is all about."

"Is the FISA fight over?" asks Steve Benen at The Carpetbagger Report. The House Leadership has been unwilling to accept the demands of a wide range of people within the Senate and the current administration. And it may be working to combat their widespread fear mongering tactics. To quote:

. . . the White House indicated recently that the Bush gang might be willing to chat with Democratic leaders after all.

Earlier this week, The Hill reported that House Republicans, who had been shouting that the sky was falling as a result of the PAA’s expiration, have apparently decided to accept the status quo and turn their attention elsewhere.

House Republicans are poised to shift their focus from national security to the economy, hoping to rally opposition to what they claim are Democratic plans to raise taxes amid the economic downturn. Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) is expected to announce Thursday that the House GOP floor emphasis will transition away from passing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and earmark reform to “stop the tax hike.”

The Hill added that a recent NYT/CBS poll found that the economy was far and away the most important issue facing the United States, which may have contributed to the Republicans’ shift in priorities. Given this, it’s worth pausing to wonder if House Dems just won the FISA/immunity fight.

"The FBI, TREX and the Terrorism Watchlist," was the March 18, 2008 headline by Firedoglake's "looseheadprop." The story begins with definitions. International and domestic terrorists get on the watchlists as investigative or non-investigative subjects. To quote a few other confusing and maddening elements of this story (blogger's links):

Today I got my hands on an audit report issued by the DOJ-IG entitled Audit of the U.S. Department of Justice Terrorist Watchlist Nomination Process.

. . . For international terrorist nominations, TREX reviews and approves the nomination and forwards it to the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) which is a component of the Office of the Director for National Intelligence (ODNI). NCTC reviews and approves it and sends it on to the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center (TSC).

Domestic Terrorism [--] The process is almost identical to the above, except that they skip the review by ODNI because there is no international information for them to review. The nomination goes directly from TREX to the TSC. . . nomination packages produced by the case agents were not usually being reviewed for completeness or accuracy by their bosses. . . So, once you're on, unless somebody actually finishes ALL the closeout work for the investigation (I have never seen an agent who jumped to do closeout work), once you're on, you are likely to grow moldy sitting on the list. Both TREX and TSC personnel told the IG that they believed that "often individuals inappropriately remained watchlisted because the case agents did not file the paperwork necessary to effect their removal."

Non-Investigative Subjects, International Terrorism Remember I told you that the other alphabet soup agencies (including Interpol) had to go through FBI to nominate someone? This was a good idea b/c at least FBI keeps good records of who got on the list. All those forms and memos were in place when they audited. However, it turns out that these agencies have not been going through FBI, they have been forwarding their nominations directly to NCTC who insanely has been listing the FBI as the nominating agency (so how you gonna now sort them apart?--Sheez!) and the FBI has no freakin' idea who these other agencies put on, what criteria were used, there are no records.

"Congressional Critics Want More Assurances of Legality," written by Spencer S. Hsu, Washington Post, April 12, 2008. Hat Tip to "betmo." I devoted an earlier post at S/SW to this same idea. Titled, "Like an Ubiquitous Spook - Part II, " it was dated Sept. 9, 2007. Obviously the idea has not gone away. To quote:

The Bush administration said yesterday that it plans to start using the nation's most advanced spy technology for domestic purposes soon, rebuffing challenges by House Democrats over the idea's legal authority. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his department will activate his department's new domestic satellite surveillance office in stages, starting as soon as possible with traditional scientific and homeland security activities -- such as tracking hurricane damage, monitoring climate change and creating terrain maps.

. . . The Bush administration said yesterday that it plans to start using the nation's most advanced spy technology for domestic purposes soon, rebuffing challenges by House Democrats over the idea's legal authority. . . But Congress delayed launch of the new office last October. Critics cited its potential to expand the role of military assets in domestic law enforcement, to turn new or as-yet-undeveloped technologies against Americans without adequate public debate, and to divert the existing civilian and scientific focus of some satellite work to security uses.

Democrats say Chertoff has not spelled out what federal laws govern the NAO, whose funding and size are classified. Congress barred Homeland Security from funding the office until its investigators could review the office's operating procedures and safeguards. The department submitted answers on Thursday, but some lawmakers promptly said the response was inadequate.

"I have had a firsthand experience with the trust-me theory of law from this administration," said Harman, citing the 2005 disclosure of the National Security Agency's domestic spying program, which included warrantless eavesdropping on calls and e-mails between people in the United States and overseas. "I won't make the same mistake. . . . I want to see the legal underpinnings for the whole program."

DHS officials said the demands are unwarranted. "The legal framework that governs the National Applications Office . . . is reflected in the Constitution, the U.S. Code and all other U.S. laws," said DHS spokeswoman Laura Keehner. She said its operations will be subject to "robust," structured legal scrutiny by multiple agencies.

See also Bluebloggin' -- same story +. For your dessert after such an indigestible meal, I suggest you return to Wikipedia and bone up further on "the surveillance state."

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Homeland securing

By Carol Gee

National Security news -- Every day my Congressional Quarterly "Homeland Security" newsletter arrives in my g-mail box. It comes packed full of everything you could want to know, and lots of things I would almost rather not know about homeland securing. Borrowing from the generosity of their links, you will surely want to know this about:

• The Homeland Security Council -- "The HSC’s purpose is to ensure coordination of all homeland security-related activities among executive departments and agencies, and to promote the effective development and implementation of all homeland security policies," according to its website. The secret Council has a staff of 35 and is overseen by the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Steven Aftergood has more at Secrecy News.
  
  Recently named to replace Francis Townsend as the President's Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, is Kenneth Wainstein. He has served previously as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Assistant Attorney General for National Security (see Reyes Intel hearing posts, here, here, and here; and FISA posts here and here), as well as General Counsel and Chief of Staff at the FBI. If you remember, Wainstein recently declared that the government was not "dark" in its ability to gather intelligence, as had been claimed by the DNI during all the controversy surrounding amending the House FISA bill.
  
  In a related matter, it was recently reported, on C-SPAN by the Homeland Security's offices of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (Daniel Sutherland)/Privacy (Hugo Teufel III), that one or both of them have "observer" status and can attend the Homeland Security Council meetings.



• The Onion Truth -- To quote the final paragraph from CQ's newsletter:
  
  

  Back from Irack: “Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain wrapped up his fact-hiding mission to Iraq, declaring the trip an unqualified success,” The Borowitz Report reports. “My friends, I came to Iraq to hide the facts about the way the war is going, and in that I have succeeded,’ McCain told reporters. ‘Omission accomplished.’ McCain praised his campaign staff for steering clear of visual evidence of recent violence in Baghdad: ‘Thanks to the hard work of my advance team, the surge has the appearance of working.’ The Arizona senator said that his trip to Iraq was successful in part because he was able to obscure the actual facts with new facts of his own creation,” Andy Borowitz writes. “‘It’s a well known fact that Iran is training al Qaeda,” he said. “And if it wasn’t a well-known fact before, it is now.’”

Travel and security -- On the other hand you would probably just as soon have remained ignorant about:

• Outsourcing passports -- Bill Gertz at the Washington Times on 3/36 headlined, "Outsourced passports netting govt. profits, risking national security." First, the Government Printing Office makes a huge "profit" by charging the State Department more than the secure passports cost from the foreign supplier. Second, the Thailand supplier is vulnerable to lack of quality control, plus lack of security control, the company having been victimized by Chinese espionage.



• Skip London, go straight to Paris -- A U.K. company has unveiled a screening camera capable of peering through clothing to detect weapons or explosives from 80 feet away, CBS News spotlights.

As citizens concerned about remaining both free and secure, takes a great deal of work to stay informed on what our government is doing in secret to preserve both. My newsletter helps tremendously. To sign up for CQ's free newsletters, click here.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Congress' Spring Break Is Over

By Carol Gee

Congress comes back into session on Monday, March 31. Pending is the 2008 authorization to fund the nation's intelligence efforts, H.R. 2082. It was vetoed by President Bush on 3/8/08. A subsequent vote to override the veto failed. The Senate is scheduled to come back into session for morning business at 2:30 PM. They then plan to take up the energy bill, H.R. 3221. The Senate Intelligence Committee will meet in closed session on Tuesday afternoon to talk about "pending calendar business."

What has been going on with amending FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (S.B. 2248 and H.R. 3773) since the Senators and Representatives left Washington? Leaders would like to say that successful negotiations have produced a bipartisan solution to the impasse, but that is not what happened. And it may be a while before the issue is again brought up before the lawmakers for a vote. FYI: side by side comparison of the Senate and House bills (3 p. pdf).

The administration mouthpieces, in the meantime, are out and about in the hinterlands. Department heads are claiming how mortally endangered the nation has become because the House wants to legislate to protect both civil liberties and national security. The Congressional Quarterly provides an excellent summary of the GOP strategy on FISA (ht to FDL). To quote:

During the break, the GOP has not issued the daily barrage of news releases . . . Instead, Republicans have focused on reaching out to publications beyond the Beltway.

“Republicans have dedicated significant time and resources in engaging regional and local media, editorial boards, and talk radio over the break,” said Kevin Smith, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner , R-Ohio. “We’re going to hold every Democrat accountable for their irresponsible actions on this bill, and we will ramp up the pressure until they do the right thing and pass the bipartisan Senate bill. In the end, we believe they will cave.”

Senate Democrats, though, don’t plan to return immediately to the debate, and may not act for several weeks on a lasting overhaul of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (PL 95-511).

. . . A Senate Democratic aide said that Democrats continue to talk among themselves, but the Senate is probably weeks away from taking any action. Before the break, Senate Democratic leaders said the Senate would bring the House bill to the floor at some unspecified time, although it is expected to be altered.

AG, DNI -- Attorney General Michael Mukasey spoke tearfully in San Francisco and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell spoke Friday in South Carolina ("C-SPAN coverage -- Director of Nat'l Intelligence Michael McConnell on Global Intelligence and National Security (03/28/2008)." McConnell spoke to students at Furman University, his alma mater, giving his standard canned speech (link to my previous "McConnell Primer" post), down to the story about his relationship with Colin Powell. The students were probably impressed to learn in his introduction that McConnell is "in the top ten most powerful people in the U.S., and also that he coordinates 100,000 employees in the 16 agencies over which he was placed, complete with a $49 billion budget."

For the Department of Homeland Security -- The Homeland Security's offices of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (Daniel Sutherland) and Privacy (Hugo Teufel III), spoke at the American Bar Association. Sutherland has been nominated to be the Chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board, an independent agency that was formed to be a resource for both the administration and for Congress. Their presentations were not impressive. I see both men as well-meaning "booster-ish" attorneys who do a good job of coordinating their offices, have admiration for their staffs, but could very easily be marginalized by the bureaucracy of Homeland Security. The Privacy Office distributed its Annual Report to Congress for 2006-2007 at the meeting, as did the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties officer (2 large pdfs). Also available is another large pdf publication titled, "Privacy Impact Statement Guidance," to help agencies not required to produce these impact statements. In a related matter, they recently reported on C-SPAN (3/29/08) that one or both of them have "observer" status and can attend the National Security Council's secret meetings (see yesterday's post).

So it is activist time again. The House FISA bill is preferable. Let your Senators and Representatives know that retroactive immunity for telecoms is not necessary to keep the United States safe from terrorist attack.Firedoglake has the contact numbers you need.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

The explanation: PTSD

By Carol Gee

On 9/11/2001 the United States was attacked by terrorists within our own territory. It was shocking and for its victims and the rest of us, and it was mostly unexpected. In my opinion, as a result the nation has experienced -- and is still experiencing -- the symptoms of PTSD.

A disclaimer to begin this post -- First, I in no way, want to minimize the trauma done to the nation by the terrible terrorist attacks in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania. Almost three thousand people died that day and thereafter, and every one of those lost lives was precious. Second, I in no way want to minimize the current national security threat posed by al Qaeda and its offshoot adherents. It is serious.

When an individual experiences an unexpected traumatic event, or repeatedly experiences trauma, Post Traumatic Stress can develop into a Disorder. The symptoms of PTSD include: reaction to a precipitating event; withdrawal; apathy (lack of interest in life); difficulty concentrating; anger; sleeping problems; fatigue; irritability; fear/hyper-vigilence; recurrent intrusive thoughts/recollections; recurrent distressing dreams; rage; intense fear, helplessness, horror; intrusions; flashbacks; intense psychological reaction at exposure; intense physiological reaction at exposure; restricted affect; or exaggerated startle response.

After our nation experienced an unexpected traumatic series of events on that September day six years ago, a significant percentage of the population is still experiencing these symptoms (with my examples): over-reaction to that precipitating event (administration subversion of civil-liberties protections), our apathy (low voter turnout at elections or boycotting the news), difficulty concentrating (mainstream media's failure to investigate wrong-doing), anger (Bush attacking Iraq), our fatigue (blogger burnout), irritability (partisanship in Congress), fear/hyper-vigilence (extended "Yellow" official threat level), our recurrent intrusive recollections (precipitated by 9/11 anniversary news coverage or administration code phrases), rage (Bush threats of attack towards Iran), helplessness (Congress capitulation to administration demands), horror (administration officials capitulation to "blood on your hands" threats), restricted affect (Vice President Dick Cheney), or exaggerated startle response (Blackwater).

Better treatments for PTSD are being researched by the military, as traumatized soldiers, sailors, etc. come home from combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. One would wish that the benefits of that research could be applied to our nation's recovery after trauma. One would wish that our leaders, who are supposed to provide healing, do not re-traumatize citizens with inappropriate interventions. One would wish that the Fourth Estate (the media) on our behalf would rigorously question those in charge of treatment choices (government actions). One would wish that our elected representatives would advocate for us as they negotiate with Leaders exhibiting the most obvious PTSD symptoms. One would wish that voters would ascertain which of the candidates for U.S. President has the fewest symptoms of PTSD.

A third disclaimer ends this post. I have compassion for all of us who are victims of PTSD, including the members of the Bush administration whose decisions continue to reflect lack of healing, caving Democrats, cowed members of the media, fearful voters, and apathetic judges. I also have compassion for my own obsessive tendencies towards an over-focus on the issues of civil liberties (the PTSD symptom is recurrent intrusions/recollections).

The thing is this. This national trauma seems to be similar to the same way that rape and incest victims, members of the military who have experienced the horrors of war over and over, or someone just fresh from a bad car accident, cannot help what symptoms they are having. But just like individuals with PTSD, leading groups in the nation need to go about getting some healing, regaining some perspective, fighting the actual enemies, and getting on with the business of the country.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Homeland Security and the CIA -- what in the world is going on?

By Carol Gee

Operation Vigilant Shield 2008 is going on today, about which I posted not long ago, asking "What do we do?" This is not the first time such a significant exercise has been deployed. Oregon is the lucky (?) state that gets to go thought this training. Louisiana was the lucky (?) state that became the original laboratory for today's exercise. Global Research.ca also has the story, from which I quote:

US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) has just announced plans for an anti-terrorism exercise called Vigilant Shield 2008. The series of exercises is mandated by the US government to prepare, prevent and respond to any number of national crises that would call for the use of the military inside the United States.

At the same time the new National Applications Office has not gone into business. This is the first really good news we have had in a while about the Bush administration's ubiquitous domestic spying efforts. I wrote of my very dubious assessment of the proposed spy in the sky program in a past post - "Like an ubiquitous spook - Part II." TechNewsWorld headlined, "Domestic Spy Satellite Program Halted on Privacy Fears." This is terrific news! To quote:

A program designed to provide emergency response, border control and law enforcement organizations with information gleaned from spy satellites has been put on hold due to questions concerning privacy. Proponents of the program say it could help save lives, but some critics have a lot of questions they want answered before spy satellites are pointed at Americans.

The Department of Homeland Security Latest News about Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has opted to postpone the planned opening of its new National Applications Office (NAO) that would oversee the expanded use of spy satellite imagery of American territories, the agency announced Monday. The NAO had been scheduled to start operations on Oct. 1.

The decision came after the agency received several requests from the Homeland Security Committee to delay the start of the program until questions concerning its impact on privacy and civil liberties as well as the legal basis for the program have been addressed.

"While we are pleased by the Department's decision to go back to the drawing board and get it right, we are troubled by its silence on the second part of our request: that Congress also be provided 'a full opportunity to review the NAO's written legal framework, offer comments and help shape appropriate procedures and protocols,'" said Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.

The CIA Inspector General is perhaps not going on right now. This is bad news again. Former CIA agent Larry Johnson is a longtime blogger. Remember his great posts about his colleague Valerie Plame? On 10/14/07, Johnson wrote a very interesting post on a CIA internal fight at TPM Cafe:

IG means Inspector General. Normally, the IG operates outside the boundaries of political influence and cronyism. This week we learned that CIA Director Michael Hayden has launched an investigation of the IG. This comes in the wake of the IG–a man named John Helgerson–investigating torture and other abuses by CIA officers. Sure looks like an effort to shut down Mr. Helgerson. So what the hell is going on?

In the civil liberties business in the 21st Century, we win some and we lose some, but it is a fight every time, unfortunately.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

What do we do?

By Carol Gee

Exercise Vigilant Shield 2008 -- Fellow activist/blogger "betmo" sent me these links with which she hoped I would "do something good." They are to NorthComMil News (pdf) and Dissident News. And they are real "doozies"! The two together are enough to make knots in your stomach, similar to mine.

Preparing the U.S. for martial law -- The first describes "Exercise Vigilant Shield 2008" from the point of view of NORTHCOM, short for United States Northern Command. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will also be participating. The second describes the potential for good things and bad things happening to us as a result of this and subsequent government actions. I quote (note that this link went dead, removed by the authors) Dissident News:

Although the description of the exercise is disturbing, USNORTHCOM also announced that they are more prepared for a natural disaster and a terrorist attack after they used their response to Hurricane Katrina as a test laboratory. During Hurricane Katrina, authorities violated the constitutional rights of citizens by stealing people’s firearms and even relocating people against their will. These announcements are incredibly disturbing on a number of levels as the nature of Vigilant Shield 08 and the admission that Hurricane Katrina was used as a test laboratory shows that the government is actively preparing the military and government institutions for martial law.

USNORTHCOM’s primary exercise venues for VS-08 include locations in Oregon, Arizona and a cooperative venue with USPACOM in the Territory of Guam. NORAD’s aerospace detection and defense events will take place across all the exercise venues, to exercise the ability to mobilize resources for aerospace defense, aerospace control, maritime warning, and coordination of air operations in a disaster area.

This exercise is clearly a way to prepare government to respond to a national crisis with martial law. This announcement also follows a number of other news stories that indicate the government is becoming more actively prepared for the implementation of martial law.

The United States Government was established to serve and protects its people. But this story makes me feel just the opposite, angry and anxious. Let us take a look at our government via the Internet. USA.gov -- the US government's official web portal -- displays the slogan "Government Made Easy." Ben's has a chart of government (pdf) -- all on one page, actually. That is a big accomplishment.

Defense Department -- One little box on that chart is the Department of Defense. The DoD lists 44 different web sites. I was drawn to one in particular, the DoD No FEAR Act, which has a list of 17 web sites. The explanation of the No FEAR Act states, "the responsibility to 'ensure fair, impartial, and timely investigation and resolution of complaints of discrimination in employment, including complaints of sexual harassment' by implementing the procedures outlined..." No luck there. I would have to go to work for the Department of Defense to take advantage of this benefit. I do not think they would want to hire a 70-year-old Democratic activist in rather poor health.

So what am I to do with any fears raised by "betmo's" thoughtful e-mail? My answer came in the morning newspaper. I will remember Shirley, one of my activist mentors, who died this weekend at the age of 83. I honor her for modeling what community activism at its best has always been - gathering people together to work to make things better for themselves, their families and their communities. Her vision of community, transmitted to me, came through membership in my county's League of Women Voters, 40 years before "9/11/01" happened.

Today my "community" has widened to include folks like "betmo"; she lives across the nation from me. Under other circumstances, years ago we would have met with a dozen other women every Wednesday at Shirley's house. We would have brought brown bag lunches and come away with renewed inspiration, ready for our next big and hard change-making efforts. October is going to be a very long month for activists.

What's in your sack? Does anyone want to trade a PB & J sandwich for tuna fish?

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Warrantless surveillance and national security

By Carol Gee

Congress is beginning to take a fresh look at what they did in a big hurry in early August to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Due to Richard Nixon's Executive Branch abuses, FISA originated in 1978 to bring court oversight to warrant less unreasonable searches and invasions of privacy against American citizens. Ironically titled, the "Protect America Act," the recent amendment to FISA does not go far enough to protect our constitutionally guaranteed Fourth Amendment rights.

Soon after passage of the Protect America Act, its controversial aspects raised red flags around the country. The Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima reported (on 9/15/07) that the "Bush Administration [is] Aiming to Ease Surveillance Concerns." To quote:

The Bush administration, facing withering criticism over its temporary foreign intelligence wiretap law, has launched a campaign to assure Democratic lawmakers that the law will not result in domestic surveillance without a court order, and at the same time it has indicated that it is willing to consider changes.

The effort comes as Congress prepares to tackle a broad overhaul of the government's foreign intelligence wiretap authority.

In a letter sent to Capitol Hill yesterday, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth L. Wainstein said the Protect America Act, passed in August under intense White House pressure, does not authorize physical searches of homes, domestic mail or people's personal effects and computers, and that Justice Department lawyers "do not think" it authorizes the collection of medical or library records.

Concerned about the new Act's possible erosion of Americans' civil liberties, the House Judiciary Committee held a House of Representatives Oversight Hearing on 9/18/07 . It was chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan). The Ranking Member was Dan Lungren (R-California). Witnesses (full statements in pdf are linked to their names) included: Adm. Mike McConnell -- Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Kenneth Wainstein -- Assistant Attorney General for National Security, and Ben Powell -- Counsel to the DNI.

Additional fears raised by DNI in his opening Judiciary Committee statement -- Pointing out a recent National Intelligence Estimate's expectations of increased danger to the United States from al Qaeda, it is the position of the administration that the new law does not go far enough. They want a new definition of "electronic surveillance." And they are still demanding that retroactive immunization from law suit* be granted to the telecommunications companies who have been required to cooperate in facilitating the intelligence surveillance programs. A New York Times article (9/18/07) headlined "Spy Chief: China, Russia Spying on U.S." To quote:

China and Russia are spying on the United States nearly as much as they did during the Cold War, according to the top U.S. intelligence official.

Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, says in testimony prepared for a Tuesday congressional hearing that a law passed last month expanding the U.S. government's eavesdropping power is needed to protect not just against terrorists but also against more traditional potential adversaries, such as those two Cold War foes.

''China and Russia's foreign intelligence services are among the most aggressive in collecting against sensitive and protected U.S. systems, facilities and development projects, and their efforts are approaching Cold War levels,'' McConnell says in his testimony. ''Foreign intelligence information concerning the plans, activities and intentions of foreign powers and their agents is critical to protect the nation and preserve our security.''

The new law will also enable the intelligence agencies to identify ''sleeper cells'' of terrorists in the United States, according to McConnell's statement to the House Judiciary Committee.

The Judiciary Committee hearing was carried on C-SPAN. Watching and listening twice and taking notes, I clarified for myself a great deal about what concerns remain with members of Congress. For a good summation read Jesse Lee's The Gavel: (blogging for Nancy Pelosi) "Judiciary Hearing on Warrant less Surveillance and FISA." The post includes several videos and some excellent quotes. Several key areas of concern emerged from the committee member's questions.

The Hearing's "Bones of contention" from its members --

• History of the Bush administration's broken trust with Congress - Several members of the committee discussed the failure of Congress to exercise proper oversight in past years. They also reminded the witnesses that the administration began the surveillance operations in secret without appropriately informing key members of Congress. Ranking Member Lamar Smith, (R-Texas) asked for a full explanation of what the program does to protect civil liberties. Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), asked a series of questions regarding whether the scope of congressional oversight was covering all of what began as mere "presidential authorizations." Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-Cal.), pointed out that the amendment is "either poorly drafted or intentionally drafted to be overly broad." Rep. Delahunt (D-Mass.),
  
  

  reminded the witnesses that the mistrust is not personal but institutional. . . FISA came about because of executive abuses. We are not working around the margins here. We can give you what you need and assure fundamental freedoms at the same time.

  
  Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), asserted that
  
  

  Congress has not been able to rely on the administration's information provided to Congress. . . The Protect America Act can be a stark intrusion on innocent Americans. Why not get a warrant?. . . Now we are contending with spy satellites. Americans are up in arms. You take away the bar [courts], there could be miscues. The spiralling sown of civil liberties is the real danger."
  



• Amount of work needed to get a FISA warrant -- Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) explored the claims of DNI McConnell that a FISA warrant takes 200 man hours of work to prepare, as asserted in the El Paso interview.* Representative Delahunt assured the witnesses that
  
  

  Congress would provide the intel community "all the resources you need" to do the work and "assure fundamental freedoms at the same time." He noted that the FISA court warrants are "perfunctory. Over 10,000 have been issued and only a small number (15-17) have been denied."



• DNI McConnell's declassification of information in an interview- After the issue had been raised by Chairman Conyers and Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va), Representative Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) got McConnell to admit that he declassified intelligence information on his own authority for an El Paso Times interview. He revealed the summary number ( less than 100) of cases with FISA warrants authorizing targeted domestic surveillance*.


• Nature of intelligence failures before 9/11 -- . . Sheila Jackson Lee reminded the witnesses that "9/11 had nothing to do with the FISA court. The information was out there. It could have been avoided. It was the intelligence culture, not the American people at fault here." Adm. McConnell agreed about where the failures 'to connect the dots' were located, and that 9/11 could have been avoided with good intelligence sharing. Rep. Artur Davis (D-Alabama) closed the questioning by confronting Adm. McConnell's inference that not missing a call from someone in a San Diego "sleeper cell," could have prevented 9/11. Davis said, "It was a number of critical events, not just his one." McConnell conceded, "We could have done a better job as a community."

References:

• *Recent El Paso Times interview transcript (8/22/07)
• List of Judiciary Committee members

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

Gonzales out, Chertoff in

By Michael J.W. Stickings

That's the juicy rumour at U.S. News, picked up by Steve Benen, who rightly finds it rather "odd". (Grain of salt. Taken.)

It would make sense for Gonzales to resign, or to be forced out (finally, at long last), but Chertoff has had his own share of problems at Homeland Security. (How often would the name "Katrina" come up at confirmation hearings? How often would senators ask him about his gut?)

Stranger things have happened, though, and, to quote the title of one of the better movies of last year, the Bush presidency has often been stranger than fiction.

Given that Bush likely doesn't see Chertoff the way the rest of us do (he probably thinks he's doing a heckuva job) -- given that he doesn't see reality the way the rest of us do -- I wouldn't put this one beyond the realm of possibility.

The U.S. Senate "caved" - what else can you say?

By Carol Gee

They raised their hands in droves, and couldn't wait to do it. Democratic senators lined up behind OCP (our current president), and abandoned the American people's civil liberties. "Kagro X" at DailyKos states it clearly: " There is something fundamentally wrong here." There is no other way to say it. We expect the House to follow suit today.

The news is disheartening. It is this. The "Senate passes Bush-backed spy bill", according to Reuters. To quote the story basics,

On a vote of 60-28, the Senate sent the measure to the Democratic-led U.S. House of Representatives for consideration as early as Saturday as lawmakers push to begin a month-long recess.

. . . The Senate defeated, on a 45-43 vote, a Democratic alternative, which would have placed tighter controls on the spying and provided for independent assessments of the attorney general's implementation of the measure.

Like watching the production of sausage - We observed more than we wanted to know as the events emerged. We saw that the fear mongering of OCP and his lieutenants worked well on the highest legislative officials in the land, United States Senators. They lost their nerve, perhaps rationalizing that the measure is temporary. Vulnerable Americans are now left to the protection of Alberto Gonzales. The Los Angeles Times headlined, "Senate votes to expand spy authority - The last-minute legislation gives agencies more power to track foreign communications and removes the court approval process." It was written by Greg Miller, August 4, 2007. Quoting portions of the story,

. . . The House is scheduled to vote on an identical bill today; congressional officials said they expected the measure to pass. On Friday, the House rejected a competing version offered by Democrats

. . . In January, facing scrutiny from Congress and accusations that the program was unconstitutional, Bush shifted the program to the FISA court's purview. Sometime later, however, a FISA judge ruled that certain aspects of the Bush administration surveillance program violated the law. Intelligence officials indicated that the ruling required the government to obtain warrants even for "foreign to foreign" communications when the e-mail or phone call crossed networks in the United States.

That secret ruling — the court's deliberations are classified — caused a panic in intelligence circles. National Intelligence Director J. Michael McConnell warned that U.S. spy agencies were suddenly unable to collect dangerously large swaths of foreign communications.

In the Middle East, treatment of the story was matter of fact. It points out that the "crisis" occurred after it was leaked that the FISA court was not allowing the illegal program to continue as it has been. Oh, and there was an increase in foreign so-called "chatter." Will the court now be able to provide the oversight needed? I doubt it. The law will now be in the hands of DNI Admiral Mike McConnell, as superviced by OCP. We saw during the negotiation process how little independence the DNI really has. We have become a nation of men, not of laws, as a pundit pointed out. Aljazeera English - News headlined its story, "US senate approves spy bill." I quote,

The US senate has approved a bill that would maintain president George Bush's authority to eavesdrop on terror suspects without court approval. . . The temporary powers give Congress time to draw up a more comprehensive plan instead of rushing approval for a permanent bill before the break. . . The bill would allow the administration to continue the warrant-less surveillance but require it to describe to a secret federal court the procedures it uses in targeting foreign suspects.

. . . After the September 11 attacks, Bush authorised the interception without warrants of communications between people in the US and others overseas if one had suspected ties to terrorists. . .Critics say the programme violated the FISA law, but Bush argued he had wartime powers to do so.

A recent ruling by the FISA court barred the government from eavesdropping on foreign suspects whose messages were being routed through US communications carriers, including Internet sites, prompting the Bush administration to call for the new bill.

The steam roller moved unchecked. Individual senators lost their nerve in the face of threats, hyperbole, and the duplicity of a White House negotiating in bad faith. It will be interesting how many senators foreign phone calls will come under the watchful eyes of our now ubiquitous big brother watching out for us. The next six months will see the presidential campaign in full swing, the September reports of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, and the finishing of this current session of Congress. It is one of the saddest times for me since the elections of last November. What were these people thinking? They turned us over to people demanding tools to "keep us safe." Our freedom and civil liberties have not been so threatened in a long time, if ever. The International Herald Tribune headlined, "Broader wiretapping authority advances in U.S. Congress," by Eric Lichtblau and Mark Mazzetti, August 4, 2007. To quote,

A furious push by the White House to broaden its wiretapping authority appeared on the verge of victory Saturday as a bill advanced in Congress to give the Bush administration more latitude temporarily to eavesdrop without court warrants on foreign communications that it suspects may be tied to terrorism.

. . . In an unusual maneuver, Bond pressed the case for new legislative authority by reading on the Senate floor, apparently to the surprise of some administration officials, an e-mail message that the office of the director of national intelligence, Mike McConnell, sent to Congressional leaders on the urgency of amending the wiretapping law.

Court officials and McConnell's office refused to comment on the message. The concerns from his office appeared to reflect, at least in part, the recent restrictions imposed by the court on intercepting what is known as "foreign-to-foreign transit traffic," in which both parties are outside the United States but the phone calls or e-mail messages are routed through telecommunications centers in the United States.

Please let your elected legislators know how disappointed you are, when they get back to their districts. Their adjourning for the August recess was far too much of the impetus for all this.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)