We have been discussing the collapse of the American civil liberties movement and the attacks on the free press and privacy under the Obama Administration. As discussed in prior columns, we continue to refer to the United States as the “land of the free” despite a comprehensive reduction of civil liberties and due process in this country. The Snowden affair has put that record in sharp relief as the White House and Congress has joined together in barring the prosecution of perjury by high ranking officials and pursuing Snowden with close to unhinged rage. As previously discussed, our governing class has created a new American Animal farm. Long ago, American politicians adopted a type of dismissive paternalism toward the public as shepherds to so many sheep. Then one sheep goes and spooks the flock. The response has been bipartisan rage that has included demands to cut off aid to entire nations if they grant sanctuary to this whistleblower and even boycott the Olympics. The shepherds want Snowden made into mutton for stampeding the flock and no measure appears too extreme. Now Jimmy Carter has entered the fray and said what many citizens are saying in denouncing our duopoly. Carter told Spiegel “America has no functioning democracy.” Of course, you have to live in Germany to read such views.
Carter has rightfully pointed to the dramatic reduction of the United States as a moral authority in the world after Bush and Obama. He clearly views Edward Snowden as a whistleblower. Yet, the media has yielded to the demand of the White House that Snowden not be called a whistleblower. This is follows media allies who have attacked Snowden and even mocked his concern about coming back home. As for the refusal to call him a whistleblower, it seems part of the full court press to demonize Snowden or prevent favorable references to him. [It brings to mind the successful effort to convince media to call waterboarding “enhanced interrogation” in the media rather than “torture” as it has long been defined by courts] Snowden is a whistleblower in my mind. It is true that the Administration can argue that these programs were lawful to the Supreme Court’s precedent stripping pen registers of full constitutional protection in Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979). Many of us disagree with that ruling, but this is a new application of the precedent. While the government has long sought the information for individuals, the Administration is essentially issuing a national security letter against the entire population. Moreover, it does appear that violations have occurred in these programs.
Putting aside the legality issue, whistleblowers are defined more probably by public interest organizations. For example, The Government Accountability Project, a leading nonprofit handling whistleblowers, defines the term as “an employee who discloses information that s/he reasonably believes is evidence of illegality, gross waste or fraud, mismanagement, abuse of power, general wrongdoing, or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. Typically, whistleblowers speak out to parties that can influence and rectify the situation. These parties include the media, organizational managers, hotlines, or Congressional members/staff, to name a few.”
Snowden clearly fits that more common definition of whistleblower, even if the government contests the application of statutory protections. Many can legitimately question Snowden’s chosen means for objecting to this program. However, the hostile and dismissive treatment by the establishment reflects an obvious fear of the implications of this scandal. We saw the same full court press in defining Julien Assange in a way that avoids calling him a journalist or a whistleblower. He is just an Assange.
Carter’s voice at this moment is incredibly important. Most media has ignored such criticism of Obama and his authoritarian powers. Even the story on Carter has been given limited attention and only because smaller blogs have continued to spread the word. We are living in the greatest crisis of civil liberties in our history and the public is facing a unified front of all three branches against efforts to deal with erosion of the rights of citizens in this country. The question is whether the public will finally awaken to this peril. Carter’s courageous voice could not have been heard at a more critical time for this nation.
http://www.ibtimes.com/nsa-controversy-jimmy-carter-says-us-has-no-functioning-democracy-1351389 Here’s the story at IBT. Infowars is a pro-Zimmerman and Sandy Hook denier website among other things. Where’s okie1?
“After 1,000 days in pretrial detention, Private Bradley Manning yesterday offered a modified guilty plea for passing classified materials to WikiLeaks. But his case is far from over—not for Manning, and not for the rest of the country. To understand what is still at stake, consider an exchange that took place in a military courtroom in Maryland in January.
The judge, Col. Denise Lind, asked the prosecutors a brief but revealing question: Would you have pressed the same charges if Manning had given the documents not to WikiLeaks but directly to the New York Times?
The prosecutor’s answer was simple: “Yes Ma’am.”
The question was crisp and meaningful, not courtroom banter. The answer, in turn, was dead serious. I should know. I was the expert witness whose prospective testimony they were debating. The judge will apparently allow my testimony, so if the prosecution decides to pursue the more serious charges to which Manning did not plead guilty, I will explain at trial why someone in Manning’s shoes in 2010 would have thought of WikiLeaks as a small, hard-hitting, new media journalism outfit—a journalistic “Little Engine that Could” that, for purposes of press freedom, was no different from the New York Times. The prosecutor’s “Yes Ma’am,” essentially conceded that core point of my testimony in order to keep it out of the trial. That’s not a concession any lawyer makes lightly.
The charge of “aiding the enemy” is vague. But it carries the death penalty—and could apply to civilians as well as soldiers.
But that “Yes Ma’am” does something else: It makes the Manning prosecution a clear and present danger to journalism in the national security arena. The guilty plea Manning offered could subject him to twenty years in prison—more than enough to deter future whistleblowers. But the prosecutors seem bent on using this case to push a novel and aggressive interpretation of the law that would arm the government with a much bigger stick to prosecute vaguely-defined national security leaks, a big stick that could threaten not just members of the military, but civilians too.” New Republic
As to worry about infowars as a source (which actually doesn’t apply in this case, but it was brought up to discredit Carter)–that is an intellectual mistake called: “an argument against the man”. An argument must be based on its truth value, not on liking or disliking a person who makes it.
Bob K.,
The story is also being reported at Huff Po . . . buried in the middle of their politics section.
OK, second try. My first comment was dropped.
Great article, Professor!
No, Info Wars is not a source.
I respect, and admire, Jimmy Carter.
I will reserve judgement on whether he said what’s been reported.
Carter did not say anything directly to Der Spiegel.
Carter attended a closed-door meeting of “Atlantik-Brücke,” Atlantic Bridge, in Atlanta.
One reporter says that Carter made this remark. That reporter gave the story to Der Spiegel.
So one person on this planet claims that Carter said this.
All that said, I hope that Jimmy Carter said that. He should have said that.
I just found out that she did not throw out the “aiding the enemy” charges. The implications are enormous both for Manning and our nation.
“We are living in the greatest crisis of civil liberties in our history and the public is facing a unified front of all three branches against efforts to deal with erosion of the rights of citizens in this country.”
Today will add more revelations. The judge rules on Manning’s guilt “for aiding the enemy” by exposing illegal actions by USGinc. Part of what she will rule on is this: by taking this illegal activity to a reporting source for publication, he in effect, aided our enemy. That is a breathtaking argument made by USGinc.
This govt., in concert with a small group of extraordinary wealthy private contractors has eviscerated the rule of law. That is illegal. Gutting the Constitution is breaking the law. Carter is correct. All the facts point exactly to the conclusion he has come to. I hope more people will speak out.
SwM,
This from the same Spiegel reporter is even more interesting, in my opinion.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/editorial-obama-must-offer-answers-on-nsa-spying-in-eu-a-909019.html
Bron,
Remember how the Shah returned to power in Iran?
Aug 19, 1953:
CIA-assisted coup overthrows government of Iran
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/cia-assisted-coup-overthrows-government-of-iran
The Iranian military, with the support and financial assistance of the United States government, overthrows the government of Premier Mohammed Mosaddeq and reinstates the Shah of Iran. Iran remained a solid Cold War ally of the United States until a revolution ended the Shah’s rule in 1979.
Mosaddeq came to prominence in Iran in 1951 when he was appointed premier. A fierce nationalist, Mosaddeq immediately began attacks on British oil companies operating in his country, calling for expropriation and nationalization of the oil fields. His actions brought him into conflict with the pro-Western elites of Iran and the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi. Indeed, the Shah dismissed Mossadeq in mid-1952, but massive public riots condemning the action forced the Shah to reinstate Mossadeq a short time later. U.S. officials watched events in Iran with growing suspicion. British intelligence sources, working with the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), came to the conclusion that Mossadeq had communist leanings and would move Iran into the Soviet orbit if allowed to stay in power. Working with Shah, the CIA and British intelligence began to engineer a plot to overthrow Mossadeq. The Iranian premier, however, got wind of the plan and called his supporters to take to the streets in protest. At this point, the Shah left the country for “medical reasons.” While British intelligence backed away from the debacle, the CIA continued its covert operations in Iran. Working with pro-Shah forces and, most importantly, the Iranian military, the CIA cajoled, threatened, and bribed its way into influence and helped to organize another coup attempt against Mossadeq. On August 19, 1953, the military, backed by street protests organized and financed by the CIA, overthrew Mossadeq. The Shah quickly returned to take power and, as thanks for the American help, signed over 40 percent of Iran’s oil fields to U.S. companies.
Mossadeq was arrested, served three years in prison, and died under house arrest in 1967. The Shah became one of America’s most trusted Cold War allies, and U.S. economic and military aid poured into Iran during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. In 1978, however, anti-Shah and anti-American protests broke out in Iran and the Shah was toppled from power in 1979. Angry militants seized the U.S. embassy and held the American staff hostage until January 1981. Nationalism, not communism, proved to be the most serious threat to U.S. power in Iran.
SwM,
Any port in a storm I guess … here’s the original story carried by Spiegel (German news magazine)
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fausland%2Fnsa-affaere-jimmy-carter-kritisiert-usa-a-911589.html
Bron, good response, except in 2014 and 2016 vote for any candidate not a repo or demo. Give another party a chance and when they abuse their power (as they most certainly would given enough time), throw them out.
That a former President would state that this country is no longer a functioning
democracy is quite significant, whatever one thinks of Jimmy Carter’s career. He is acknowledging the current state of affairs in our country and the fact that his statement received little attention in our media, illustrates how far this country has fallen from its purported ideals.
I agree with every word of this post. We do not have a democracy here in the United States. We have a kleptocracy. While espousing different things to their base of “sheep” each party has exactly the same goal – maintaining the status quo where they “split” the leadership and exclude any third party challenger.
Each party has their turn in power and, each party has the same goals when they are in power – enriching themselves and their “owners”. And, I think it is abundantly clear that both parties have the same owners – Wall Street and the Corporate Elite. This is clear from their actions, which are very different from their words – which have no value at all.
Wasnt it under Carters administration when the Shah was replaced with the radical Islamic Cleric Ayatollah Khomeini?
Didnt Carter also praise Hugo Chavez?
“President Chavez will be remembered for his bold assertion of autonomy and independence for Latin American governments and for his formidable communication skills and personal connection with supporters in his country and abroad to whom he gave hope and empowerment.”
I am not so sure Carter understands liberty any better than any other Washington, DC politician.
2014 vote none of the above.
“Now Jimmy Carter has entered the fray and said what many citizens are saying in denouncing our duopoly. Carter told Spiegel “America has no functioning democracy.” Of course, you have to live in Germany to read such views.”
Indeed.
The main reason is a lack of leadership due to not knowing what leadership is, as JT’s post alludes to: “our governing class has created a new American Animal farm.”
We have lost our influence as a world power because we the people have lost our power – LIBERTY! #PatrickHenry. We are not what we once were.
I respect Carter but using Alex Jone’s Infowars as a source. Wow..
Thank you for discussing Jimmy Carter. I liked him. He took over after the Vietnam War and had a big debt and a country in trouble. His effort to cut deficit allowed the next President to know success. I agree with his views. We need to hear a logical mind today.
Yep.
Good on you for telling it like it is, President Carter. You’ve been the only honest and personally decent President we’ve had within my lifetime even if you were hobbled by a hostile Congress.
Reblogged this on euzicasa and commented:
Oh but it does…Democracy of the Lion!