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.
Can we please not get into a paranoid rant about vaccines?
I agree that the original thread, about a non-functional democracy, is a fine topic of discussion. Whether or not Jimmy Carter said anything about it.
Oky1,
My comment was an opinion based on unfounded claims that we are as bad as Iran and North Korea. Since there was no hard evidence to back what I consider a wild claim, I had nothing to prove. Besides, can North Koreas access a site lie this and can they legally, and safely criticize thir governments?
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.
———————————
They are no longer Shepherds (if they ever were,,,,), they are wolves.
LK,
If it’s any consolation, I’m ready for a new fallacy de jour too. 😀
Great comment, btw.
I know we’ve talked about John Brunner before, but I think it was “Stand on Zanzibar”. Have you read his “Shockwave Rider”? He was fairly prescient about the pervasive surveillance state in it. Good read. Almost as good as SOZ.
lottakatz:
“I liken the current power of the government as that old cliche’ an iron fist in a velvet glove- everything kind of looks the same but it isn’t, not at all, and the full menu of options that the government has now assumed to itself to control and suppress the citizenry has not been revealed widely or publicly.”
I think that is a brilliant observation. I think it is why people feel so uneasy without being able to articulate why.
Oops, It’s not the original link I had, I have viewed this one but think it’s a copy of the same….
Michael,
I’m posting this & continuing paying respect to my brother, family members & friends.
It’s the original link or the only link I have on this & other subjects regarding the same type dimociode.
Dr. confesses Cancer & other Viruses is found in Vaccines
lottakatz,
Thanks, ya I’ve got fairewinds site saved & check it from time to time.
Is the USA worst the Iran & North Korea?
I’m collecting stats as I find them on US/world deaths & injuries.
I guess a new hobby?
Part of the reason is I suspect that when the stats come in the death/injuries numbers caused by Clintons/Bushes/Obama’s action will be far greater then even WW2.
How could I even think such a thing?
As just one example I can point to this.
Bill Gate of Micosoft, with the help of Obama’s buddy Warren Buffet & Gate”s foundation, there is video footage of Bill Gates saying that the world’s population is expected to grow to 9 billion in a few years.
Further, That through the use of his foundation & the World Health Org. that they intend to use vaccine programs & health care to “Reduce” that 9 billion by 10-15% or 1.35 billion people.
Yes, it could mean prevent pregnancy or it could mean the spread of deadly deasase through the use of vaccines as there are already cases known to have happen that way.
You know what has replaced the “Godwins Law” standard on this site? The “Ad Hominem Dissection”. Srsly, I just grow weary. 🙂
I periodically cruise the rightwing blogs because they jump on any story to discredit the left and the President/government even if it isn’t on point. There are stories that turn out to be (mostly) true after some searching but just don’t engage the interest of the MSM. Complaining about finding a story and Infowars being the source (or early aggregator) is akin to complaining about finding your true love (or temporary love) in a dive- you find it where you find it, it doesn’t define you or the tavern.
Okey1, I use Fairwinds but http://www.simplyinfo.org/. has interesting info for Fukushima, they’re a good jumping off place. Things are not going well at Fukushima at all.
If President Carter said it I’m glad, it needs to be said by someone with his gravitas. He was always my favorite President though I disagreed with him on some issues of substance.
——–
Mespo, Patty C had interesting things to say but she was a relentless bully. She didn’t leave, she was asked to leave. Just say’n.
Regarding Carter, he was an ideolog based on major part his christianity, he didn’t bend easily and as a consequence I had some deep differences with his policies/actions. Oddly enough, that same ideology informed the things about him that I respect. I think that his remarks, if they were his remarks, can be viewed as an assessment of potential and a recognition of the harm done to the Constitution. I liken the current power of the government as that old cliche’ an iron fist in a velvet glove- everything kind of looks the same but it isn’t, not at all, and the full menu of options that the government has now assumed to itself to control and suppress the citizenry has not been revealed widely or publicly.
“everything looks the same but it isn’t”
LK,
Priceless and perfect.
Oops, stike that last comment, here’s the corrected version:
** I agree with Mespo that we should not be grouped with Iran and North Korea. **
rafflaw,
That’s a respectful response & opinion yet, I respectfully submit, that does not prove the case.
Of course we all demand that it be the case.
**rafflaw 1, July 18, 2013 at 5:44 pm
oky1,
I prefer to deal with facts not guesses.
While I agree that we have lost too many liberties, I agree with Mespo that we should not be grouped with Iran and North Korea. **
rafflaw,
That’s a respectful response & opinion yet, I respectfully submit, that does not prove the case.
Of course we all demand that it be the case.
How is it Americans are unable to prioritize their efforts?
We witness yet again many of them being sucked into another one off OJ type case for the personal entertainment I guess?
Just slowing down, gawking at the latest car wreck & thinking about banning cars?
MADD brought attention to drunk drivers. I have no idea what the stats were before MADD & after.
But I am wondering the stats of the exponential growth of cancers & human mutations.
I believe the Price/Anderson Act is unconstitutional. That it’s illegal, color of law, for the govt to grant liability protection to one individual, a group or an industry at the expense of those that have been harmed.
But to date no lawyer has undone the Act.
It seems to me if people wished to prioritize their efforts & be entertained by tragic car wrecks at the same time they’d be all over the Fukushima case & the world Jap/GE nuke disaster.
It’s been raining down radiation over the USA/World for over two years now.
Does the US legal community believe the Price/Anderson Act also shields a foreign nation from damaging you/me, our families/friends & our property?
How many cancer tumors, human mutations & related deaths have there been of family/friends of MADD vs the the number of drunk driving deaths & injuries of the same?
I’m interested in prioritizing seeing those stats & the legal standing surrounding that issue.
oky1,
I prefer to deal with facts not guesses.
While I agree that we have lost too many liberties, I agree with Mespo that we should not be grouped with Iran and North Korea. I would like to see some more reporting on the statements by Carter. As suggested earlier, we have had no more moral person in the White House in my lifetime than Jimmy Carter.
MM,
True enough, but it’s that “sometimes” that presents the credibility problem. Veracity ultimately rests on verification and validation of proof.
I’d still like to have been in Livingston’s office when he found out about that. I bet you could see every vein on his head throbbing. He was always a weasel.
No, we do not have a functioning democracy and things are getting worse everyday: “A version of this post originally appeared on the ACLU Free Future blog in 2012. It has been updated and cross-posted with permission from the author.
UPDATE: The judge ruled today she would not dismiss the ‘aiding the enemy’ charge. Manning can still be found not guilty.
Today, the military judge overseeing the court martial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, who has admitted to giving government documents to WikiLeaks, is expected to rule on the prosecution’s charge of “Aiding the Enemy.” The charge, which is akin to treason and is punishable by death, is separate from the charges that Manning has already pled guilty to — that he leaked sensitive documents to people unauthorized to receive them. The government’s inclusion of this charge raises enormous problems, and a conviction of Manning in these circumstances would be unconstitutional.
The key to the government’s case is this simple claim: that posting intelligence information to the internet aids Al Qaeda because Al Qaeda has access to the internet.*
The implications of the government’s argument are breathtaking. To understand why, it helps to recall the experience of another soldier. In December of 2004, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld held a town-hall style meeting for troops who were preparing to deploy to Iraq. Following his remarks, Rumsfeld was confronted by an Army specialist who complained about the inadequacy of the combat equipment provided by the military.
“Our vehicles are not armored,” said Specialist Thomas Wilson, an airplane mechanic with the Tennessee Army National Guard. “We’re digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that’s already been shot up . . . to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper vehicles to carry with us north.”
The soldier’s question — and Rumsfeld’s now infamous response that “you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have” — were front-page news around the world. And while war cheerleaders like Rush Limbaugh accused Specialist Wilson of “near insubordination” for embarrassing the defense secretary in a public forum, there was no suggestion in serious quarters that he face punishment — much less prosecution — for his words.
Yet the government’s decision to prosecute Manning for “Aiding the Enemy” threatens to make public comments like Wilson’s grounds for criminal prosecution. The government does not contend that Manning gave any information to Al Qaeda, or even that he intended that Al Qaeda receive it. Rather, it claims that Manning “indirectly” aided Al Qaeda by causing intelligence information to be posted on WikiLeaks’ website, knowing that Al Qaeda has access to the internet. Specifically, the government contends that Manning violated Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which provides that “any person who . . . gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.”
Article 104 is not limited to sensitive or classified information — it prohibits any unauthorized communication or contact with an enemy. So, if the government is right that a soldier “indirectly” aids the enemy when he posts information to which the enemy might have access, then the threat of criminal prosecution hangs over any service member who gives an interview to a reporter, writes a letter to the editor, or posts a blog to the internet.
For example, there are now more than a thousand enlisted military bloggers. According to Stars and Stripes, “Army officials . . . encourage troops to blog as long as it doesn’t break any operational security rules, and they see it as a good release for servicemembers.”
Are these bloggers aiding the enemy? Prior to Bradley Manning’s case, charging anyone with that crime in the absence of any allegation or evidence that he had intended to aid the enemy would have been inconceivable.
The crux of the government’s case against Manning — that he leaked sensitive documents without authorization — in no way depends on branding him a traitor. Indeed, some courts have held that leaks may be punished even if the leaker’s motive was purely patriotic. In its zeal to throw the book at Manning, the government has so overreached that its “success” would turn thousands of loyal soldiers into criminals.
Which brings us back to Specialist Wilson — and, for that matter, Donald Rumsfeld. Both men spoke openly about the vulnerability of U.S. forces in Iraq. Both men surely knew that the enemy would watch their exchange on television or read about it on the internet. The notion that Wilson and Rumsfeld broke the law by communicating this information to the media and thereby “indirectly” aiding the enemy is absurd — but no more so than the government’s contention that Bradley Manning did so.
*The military judge has previously ruled that prosecution does not need to prove Manning had the specific intent to “aid the enemy” to be convicted.”
Like Bush/Cheney before, I believe, Obama, Leahy, Levin, Reid & other leaders have knowingly used insurrection,war, riots & treason to subvert the intentions of the US Constitution & it’s Bill of Rights.
I have no idea why they decided to destroy their own Democratic party but they have with their on going attacks against the people’s Rights.
With public support having fell off the cliff it could be, that in order to stop the hemorrhaging of supporters fleeing, Carter was rolled out in public to offer hope to disenchanted former supporters of the DNC.
Or maybe Carter made the comments on his own without pressure from somewhere?
What have you done personally?
What does seem apparent is the exponential growth of Americans that are going public & refusing to go along this modern authoritarian type Nazi govt Clinton’s/Bushes/Obama having been building.
So much so is the case thousands of them got off their butts & made over 600 original videos in an online/ongoing protest against DC’s Fascism.
Here are the first half of them. Some bad, some good, some great.
I’ve crewed though some of them, but not all of them.
Operation: Paul Revere
http://www.infowars.com/paulrevere/
Gene,
Regarding your back-and-forth with Jill about sources and their credibility, you state: “It’s no more ad hominem than attacking the credibility of something like the National Enquirer as a source.”
This reminds me of the notorious Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler Magazine — an unapologetic porn rag — who caused Representative Bob Livingston to resign as Speaker of the House (minutes after his swearing in) because Flynt threatened to publish certain facts concerning Representative Livingston and a female lobbyist with business before his House committee. Railing against the sleazy Flynt, Representative Livingston called him “a bottom feeder.” Replied Flynt:
“Sure, I’m a bottom feeder. But look what I found when I got down there.”
Sometimes the disreputable bottom feeders have the facts in hand and do good work with them. Sometimes.
I’m not so sure Carter’s statement is hyperbolic, Mark.
Blouise:
You would have liked PattyC. Deeply Worried, PattyC, and I had some wonderful discussions on the blog only briefly interrupted by personal vignettes and even a recipes or two thrown in.
Like I said, you would have liked PattyC. I do.
Mark,
I too liked Patty C. a whole lot. She and you and Bob es., pre-dated me on the blog and helped draw me in.
As for whether this country is better than those you’ve mentioned, yes it is. Nevertheless, this country has devolved spectacularly from the ideals of it’s founders and our democratic rights are fast becoming distant memories.