Digby Dissing DLC

Disagrees with DLC's "DC Democrats" on definition of patriotism:*

Let's just say I'm a big believer in supporting the troops --- troops like Spc. Joseph Darby, for instance, who had the courage and patriotism to stand up and say something when his fellow troopers were committing reprehensible acts --- or the FBI agents who complained on the record about what they saw at Guantanamo. I will never excuse the United States using torture or abuse or holding prisoners indefinitely without due process. Never. No matter what the "barbaric insurgency" does in Iraq. And I am more than willing to throw down the gauntlet on this and say that anyone who soft peddles those things is the worst kind of anti-American there is. We're not going to find common ground on this subject. If that kicks me out of the big tent so be it. I'm not signing on to that shit, ever.

I recognise that saying all this means that I couldn't get elected. And for that reason there are almost no elected Democrats who do say what I'm saying. They all wave flags and shriek like old ladies every time something happens --- and they back ridiculous wars, because if they don't the chattering classes will go nuts and label them unpatriotic. But saying it doesn't make it true. That's inside the beltway Republican kabuki which nobody who calls himself a Democrat should ever allow himself to perform. There are legitimate reasons why we might disagree on this stuff and still take national security seriously.

*We apologize for the abuse of alliteration.

Trolls

are apparently just the ticket to goad readers into commenting your blog, if SneakeTroll's effect is any indication. Biscuit's had more comments since SneakeTroll first made his appearance than ever before. So, thank you, SneakeTroll. Long time, no see, by the way. How's the basement treating you lately? Also, we noticed you were posting from a -- gasp -- Windoze machine. What happened to your Linux box?

What do I find amazing? Certainly not politics, per se. Presidents want power, and it is the job of Congress to keep them from getting it. If you hadn't noticed, however, I am pretty firmly against torture, and the idea that a President would fight his own party tooth and nail in order to retain a dubiously-derived "legal authority" to torture people -- an authority that his own lawyers invented for him -- is amazing and revolting to me. It's monstrous. I suppose I should no longer be amazed by it. But then again, if it no longer amazed me, if I thought it just normal politics to threaten to veto a bill that includes a provision to prevent the military from torturing people -- a policy that the military's own lawyers have always preferred, see the recently declassified memos on the matter -- then I'd be a bit of a monster too. (Perhaps a troll, even...)

See something, say something

N.Y. Mayor Apologizes For Raid on Tourist Bus

NEW YORK, July 25 -- Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (R) apologized Monday for an incident in which heavily armed police ordered 60 tourists off a sightseeing bus and detained them for 90 minutes while checking out what he called an erroneous report of five suspicious passengers with backpacks.

"While we say call the professionals, call 911 or 311" -- the emergency and non-emergency phones numbers -- "you also have to exercise some common sense," Bloomberg said at a news conference. "These half a dozen people did not present any threat whatsoever, and it's a shame, and I certainly apologize on behalf of the city."

New York increased police protection of transportation facilities after the London public transit bombings.

When a Gray Line Bus Tour supervisor reported that five men carrying stuffed backpacks had boarded a double-decker tourist bus, a police captain summoned the city's heavily armed Emergency Services Unit, Deputy Police Commissioner Paul J. Browne said. Police ordered riders to get off with their hands in the air, patted them down and searched their bags while 51st Street between Eighth and Broadway was cordoned off.

Officers briefly handcuffed the five South Asian men who had aroused the suspicion of bus company employees. They did not have backpacks, Browne said. "After we determined that no one on the bus constituted a threat, everybody was released," he said. "The responding officers showed the appropriate caution in light of the information and the situation."

Omigod! South Asian men, without backpacks. Or with backpacks. Or wearing raincoats. Or whatever. Call the police, they must be terrorists!!!!

Bird Flu Advertorial

Bird Flu Deaths Sow Panic In Wealthy Jakarta Suburb:

Despite repeated assurances from government officials, the tests conducted on Rafei and his older daughter, coupled with the timing of the three deaths, suggest the virus might have been passed among family members, according to health experts. Although scientists have not proved that bird flu can spread from one person to another, heath experts say it is possible that transmission among family members has already occurred in about a half-dozen cases in Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia.

Bird Flu. It's The New Black Death.
PAID FOR BY AVIAN INFLUENZA, LTD.

This is amazing

The president has already said he'll veto any bill that attempts to regulate U.S. treatment of detainees.:

The Bush administration, under fire for the indefinite detention of enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and questions over whether its policies led to horrendous abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, put lawmakers on notice it did not want them legislating on the matter.

In a statement, the White House said such amendments would "interfere with the protection of Americans from terrorism by diverting resources from the war."

"If legislation is presented that would restrict the president's authority to protect Americans effectively from terrorist attack and bring terrorists to justice," the bill could be vetoed, the statement said.

Because, apparently, Congress is no longer responsible for making laws. Not while the entire country is a battlefield, no sirree. We'll all march to the orders of our Commander-in-Chief, yes we will.

Biscuit Variety Pack

The Irish Examiner reports that the CIA can now interrogate Irish citizens in total secrecy. What does the Examiner think of this? Well, the article's not an opinion piece, but it's not difficult to figure it out:

The person who will request co-operation is US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the man who, as White House counsel, instigated the notorious 'torture memo' to US President George W Bush which advised how far CIA agents could go in torturing prisoners. The person to whom the request is sent is the Minister for Justice.

About 20,000 immigrants, who have not been charged with any crime, are currently in prison in the US. In two recent US Supreme Court cases, the US Government argued that US citizens could be imprisoned indefinitely without charge if the president designated them as "enemy combatants".

In other news, WaPo reports that

The House for the first time in five years will weigh in on national space policy today, considering a bipartisan endorsement of President Bush's initiative to send humans to the moon and Mars and authorizing an extra $1.3 billion over the next two years to forestall cuts in NASA's traditional programs in science and aeronautics.

Because going to Mars should definitely be a big priority right now.

Oh, and while we're parsing the French Fries case, Congress is working on making most of the Patriot Act permanent.

Also, the UK police ask for lots of fun new powers to combat terrorism.

Most of you probably have seen this already, but New York has just started random searches of subway passengers' bags. Boston, D.C., and all the other major transit systems are watching closely to see if they, too, can violate passengers' rights for no actual public safety benefit.

Finally, did you know the military has developed microwave ray guys for crowd dispersal? That's so Futurama, dontcha think?

What to think about Roberts

James Balkin in Newsday: A nominee after Bush's own heart:

The most dangerous issue is presidential power. Bush has pushed the constitutional envelope, throwing U.S. citizens in military prisons without hearings, and demanding the right to search without judicial warrants. His lawyers claim Congress can't interfere with his interrogation practices, even if cruel, inhuman and degrading.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and courts are one of the few institutions with an interest in preserving the rule of law from an overreaching executive. Don't expect Roberts to stand up to Bush. Roberts will support the president.

And that's exactly why Bush chose him.

Here's John Yoo (yes, THAT John Yoo) in the Washington Post:

Confirming Roberts could also be the first step in bringing consensus to the Supreme Court itself. In his few opinions, Roberts has displayed a noteworthy deference to the elected branches of government on matters of policy. In what is becoming known as the "french fry" case, Roberts (a father of two young children) did not allow his clear personal feelings to get in the way of upholding a valid regulation prohibiting eating on Washington's Metro, even though it resulted in the arrest of a 12-year-old girl for eating a single french fry. Last week, Roberts was a member of a unanimous panel of the D.C. Circuit that accepted Bush's decision to use special military courts to try Osama bin Laden's driver and bodyguard, and that refused to second-guess Bush's decision that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the war against al Qaeda. No doubt critics of these decisions would have preferred different rulings, but Roberts understood that those choices are up to the president and Congress, not the unelected courts.

E.J. Dionne, also in the Post:

Anyone who doubts that Roberts will be a consistent conservative vote on the court should examine the avalanche of endorsements that immediately fell his way from right-of-center groups. Brian Fahling of the American Family Association's Center for Law and Policy called Roberts an excellent choice. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said the nomination of Roberts provided "an unparalleled opportunity to restore the proper role of the Supreme Court." Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice called the nomination "great news."

These gentlemen are not "squishes," to use the popular right-wing word for conservative sellouts. They care passionately about moving the court to the right. If they think Roberts will do that, the rest of us should pay attention.

There's nothing we can do about Roberts, unfortunately, except to gird our loins for a long battle to retrieve and retain our civil rights. The third branch of government is about to fall into the hands of men who believe the President has the right to order torture, to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial (all of America is a battlefield, after all!), and, basically, to do whatever he damn well pleases if he can lie and say it's related to the GWOT.

Court Update: The Padilla Case

U.S. a Battlefield, Solicitor General Tells Judges:

Luttig repeatedly pressed Clement, even after the solicitor general noted that Padilla's alleged intentions as a soldier of al Qaeda -- to target civilians -- constituted "unlawful combatantcy" even if he were on a battlefield in uniform.

"Those accusations don't get you very far," Luttig replied, "unless you're prepared to boldly say the United States is a battlefield in the war on terror."

Clement answered, "I can say that, and I can say it boldly."

But Michael said Padilla wasn't captured anywhere near a battlefield. "You captured Padilla in a Manhattan jail cell," Michael said. "What, in the laws of war, allows you to undertake a non-battlefield capture and hold them for the duration? I don't think you cite anything."

Surveillance

The FBI Counterterrorism Unit tracking the activities of legal, non-terrorist organizations like the ACLU and United For Peace and Justice. Fine, the FBI is watching us, but why the Counter-Terrorism Unit? Since when is the ACLU involved in terrorism? By the way, are you a card-carrying member? You should be.

Not just the FBI either. The California National Guard terrorist unit was called out to monitor a peaceful anti-war protest.

And here's an immigration lawyer who's serving a year in prison, for, apparently, criticizing the Patriot Act.

Also, your ISP may be filtering your email and not bothering to tell you. Fine then, let them filter out the viagra ads. Not those, though. They're filtering out messages that contain AfterDowningStreet.org in the body of the message. Where do we live now, China??

Finally, on another topic, new study shows that most of the foreign terrorists flowing into Iraq were not terrorists before we invaded Iraq.

The Schmidt Report on Guantanamo

From the Washington Post:

A military investigation into allegations of abuse at Guantanamo Bay reported this week that a number of specific interrogation tactics -- such as forced nudity and the use of military working dogs -- were employed at Guantanamo Bay to extract information from a high-value detainee. They were considered 'authorized' by the Army field manual and Defense Department guidance and were therefore not considered abusive. Identical tactics were later used at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison by military police officers who were not authorized to employ them.

Let us be clear about what this means. Last year, when the photographs at Abu Ghraib were published, everyone -- everyone -- expressed shock and horror at the treatment depicted in the photographs. This administration, and the entire military, made clear that nothing shown in the Abu Ghraib photographs was authorized treatment of detainees. This was just a few crazy kids on the night shift, people! Nothing to worry about.

One year later, we are told that not only were the things we saw authorized, they're authorized not by some special authority of the commander-in-chief (which would be disturbing enough), but implicitly authorized by the Army Field Manual itself. That is: something that was shocking and unauthorized one year ago today is not shocking, not extraordinary, and has always been authorized. The only problem with Abu Ghraib was that Lynndie England wasn't in Military Intelligence but in Military Police.

Here is how it happens:
1) We never authorized that!
2) Okay, we authorized that in a few specific circumstances for really bad guys, and it was maybe a little bit outside the law, but the President has the authority to do that.
3) That's always been authorized, for everyone and anyone.

So don't tell me we're investigating everything and cleaning it all up. We're investigating, yes. To clean it up, no. We're investigating in order to normalize.

UPDATE: My original post stated that it has been two years since Abu Ghraib was revealed. RJ Keefe helpfully pointed out that it has not actually been two years, but only one year. So I have modified my posting. It only took a year for Abu Ghraib to become always already legal. Yay for us!

No, no, Rep. King, we only shoot journalists ACCIDENTALLY!

Rep. King Says Russert and Others in Media Should 'Be Shot,' Not Karl Rove

And Joe Wilson has no right to complain. And I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove.

Listen, maybe Karl Rove was not perfect. We live in an imperfect world. And I give him credit for having the guts.

And I really—I tell you, Republicans are running for cover. They should be out attacking Joe Wilson. We should throw this back at them with all the nonsense that has been said about George Bush and all the lies that have come out.

SCARBOROUGH: Well...

KING: Let's at least stand by the guy. He was trying to set the record straight for historical purposes and to save American lives. And if Joe Wilson's wife was that upset, she should have come out and said that her husband was a liar, when he was.

TSA watch list update...

AlterNet: Readers Write: Who's Watching the Watch List?

Our readers had a lot of thoughts on Graham's story, ranging from rage to paranoia to commiseration. A few folks commented on having traveled down the same "No fly"-sparked road -- such as Jessie BC, who writes, "I'm on the list too. Right now, I'm only Orange, so I can still fly. But in the years since September 11, I've watched my security status increase. Last time I flew, TSA informed me I'm now Orange, but of course wouldn't tell me why and I have no clue. I have to go through all kinds of crap to get on a plane now, including (because my front-clasp bra hooks set off the wand) having a TSA agent reach up under my shirt."

Reader Erinachara also reports embarrassing experiences with the TSA: "I've waited the 45 days, and here's what TSA had to say in a non-personalized form letter: 'We are pleased to report that upon further review of the information you have presented, we have determined that the delays you have encountered do not result from being mistaken for an individul on a TSA watch list.'

HUH? Does that then indicate that I experienced delays because I am actually on the list?"

Is this what we liberated Iraq for?

Observer | Revealed: grim world of new Iraqi torture camps

Biscuits

I would be remiss if I did not link to and heartily urge you to read Jane Mayer's new New Yorker article about what Biscuit teams are doing in Guantanamo and elsewhere. Unfortunately it's not online. You can get a taste from the Q&A they've published on their website and a brief Democracy Now interview with Mayer.

To those who don't know it already, the Biscuit Report was named after Biscuit Teams. When I first read about Biscuit teams, many months ago, I was overcome with revulsion to see the uses to which psychiatry has been put for the dubious benefit of the War on Terror.

Biscuits

[Ed: double post, deleted.]

Homeland Insecurity

Two Afghans to be deported for no apparent reason...: "they were snatched from their home in northern Virginia on June 22 by Homeland Security agents and tossed into jail for reasons that the feds have not seen fit to explain.."

American filmmaker being held by U.S. military in Iraq; U.S. refuses to admit they are holding him:

Mr. Kar, the son of an Iranian physician, came to the United States when he was 2 and was raised partly in Utah and Washington State, where he played high school football. He attended college in California, received a master's degree in technology management from Pepperdine University, worked for years in Silicon Valley and served in the United States Navy and the Naval Reserve.

Nonetheless, Mr. Kar's relatives and their lawyers said they had been utterly stymied in trying to learn his fate despite repeated inquires at the Defense Department, the Justice Department, the State Department, the allied forces in Iraq and the offices of two United States senators.

The relatives said the only detailed information they had received came from one of the F.B.I. agents who searched Mr. Kar's apartment in the Silver Lake neighborhood of Los Angeles on May 23. They said that after analyzing his personal files, computer drives and other materials, the agent, John D. Wilson, returned the seized items on June 14 and assured them that that the F.B.I. had found no reason to suspect Mr. Kar.

"He's cleared," one of Mr. Kar's aunts, Parvin Modarress of Los Angeles, quoted Mr. Wilson as saying, "They were waiting for a lie-detector machine, but they finally got it. He passed the lie-detector test."

M. Catherine Viray, a spokeswoman for the F.B.I.'s office here, said she could not comment on either the bureau's investigation of Mr. Kar or Mr. Wilson's conversations with his relatives.

A spokesman for the Defense Department, Lt. Col. John A. Skinner, said he could not confirm that Mr. Kar was being held by American forces in Iraq, citing a Pentagon policy against the disclosure of the names of detainees.

...

Mr. Kar's sister, Anna, described her brother in a telephone interview from Nairobi as "the last person who could ever be a threat." She said her brother "really believed in Bush's foreign policy," adding, "He believed sincerely that exporting American democracy would make the world a better place."

Ms. Kar, who works for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Africa, said she had discouraged her brother from going to Iraq and was pleasantly surprised when she received a call on May 24 from a Red Cross colleague in Iraq, who said she had just seen Mr. Kar.

"I said: 'Oh, great! What a coincidence that you met him over there,' " Ms. Kar said. "Then she said, 'No, I just visited him - in detention.' "

That visit, however, was about the only hard evidence Mr. Kar's family has received about where or how he is held. He has made three brief, furtive telephone calls to his relatives in Los Angeles, but has not told them anything more than that he is being held "by the Americans" and that he fears for the fate of his cameraman, from whom he was separated.

Mr. Kar's aunt, Ms. Modarress, said she had asked him in one of the calls if he had been tortured.

"He said: 'Not now. At the beginning. Where I am now is like a country club compared to where I was,' " she recounted.

The Defense Department official disputed that suggestion, saying, "We have absolutely no indications of any mistreatment."

Here's a guy who ended up on the TSA watch list:

Huh? My name is on a list of real and suspected enemies of the state and I can't find out what I'm accused of or why, let alone defend myself. And I'm guilty, says my government, not just until proven innocent or a victim of mistaken identity--but forever.

Sure, 9/11 changed a lot. Tougher internal security measures (like thorough screenings at airports and boundary crossings) are a dismal necessity. But, in protecting ourselves, we can't allow our leaders to continue to create a climate of fear and mistrust, to destroy our civil liberties and, in so doing, to change who we are as a nation. What a victory that would be for our enemies, and what a betrayal of real patriots and so many in the wider world who still remember this country as a source of inspiration and hope.

I don't think it's like Germany in 1936 -- but, look at Germany in 1930. Primed by National Socialist propaganda to stay fearful and angry, Germans in droves refused to see the right's extreme views and actions as a threat to their liberties.

And don't forget that frog. You know that frog. Dropped into a pot of boiling water, he jumps out to safety. But put him into a pot of cold water over a steady flame, he won't realize the danger until it's too late to jump.

So how hot does the water have to get? When the feds can rifle through your library reading list? When they can intimidate journalists? When a government agency can keep you off airplanes without giving you a reason? When there's not even a pretense of due process? We're not talking about prisoners at Guantanamo; this is you and me. Well, after last week, it sure as hell is me and it could be you, next.

Two of the three judges to decide an important Homeland Security case involving the rights of foreign nationals at Guantanamo were just appointed, one month ago, by Bush.

All hail the rise of the secret police:
First, the Washington Post reports on "a new Pentagon strategy for securing the U.S. homeland calls for expanded U.S. military activity not only in the air and sea -- where the armed forces have historically guarded approaches to the country -- but also on the ground and in other less traditional, potentially more problematic areas such as intelligence sharing with civilian law enforcement."

Then there's the new National Security Service:

WASHINGTON, June 29 - President Bush ordered today changes intended to break down old walls between foreign and domestic intelligence activities by creating a new national security division within the Federal Bureau of Investigation that will fall under the overall direction of John D. Negroponte, the new director of national intelligence.

The directive by Mr. Bush is aimed at consolidating the power of Mr. Negroponte, whose authority over the F.B.I. had been left ambiguous. It also sets in motion a major restructuring intended to dissolve the barriers that have often kept the Central Intelligence Agency and the F.B.I. at arm's length, and elevates intelligence operations to new prominence within an F.B.I. that has remained firmly oriented toward traditional law enforcement, even since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the deputy director of national intelligence, said the government would take steps to ensure that the changes did not impinge on American civil liberties. But in a briefing for reporters, General Hayden also said that the United States no longer had the luxury of maintaining divisions between its foreign and domestic intelligence structures, because "our enemy does not recognize that distinction."

...

Frances Fragos Townsend, the White House homeland security adviser, said the changes would allow Mr. Negroponte to wield influence and seek information down to the level of each of the F.B.I.'s field offices, though she noted that the Attorney General, Alberto R. Gonzales, would remain responsible for ensuring that intelligence activities in the United States did not violate American law.

I'm so reassured that Mr. Torture Gonzales will be looking out for us, aren't you?

Oh, fer Christ's sake...

Catholic Church comes out against evolution...

Pressing Issues

Doug Clifton, the editor of The Cleveland Plain-Dealer, tells readers and E&P that Miller's jailing has led to their scuttling two major investigative articles to avoid the legal consequences of a leak investigation that might lead to the jailing of their reporters. "The reporters say, 'Well, we're willing to go to jail, and I'm willing to go to jail if it gets laid on me,'" Clifton added, "but the newspaper isn't willing to go to jail. That's what the lawyers have told us." Later in the E&P interview, Clifton adds: "Some people might argue that you're being chicken-shit," Clifton said. "Well, I, I can respect that," he said, his voice trailing off."

Yes, Mr. Clifton, I do think you're all being chickenshit. A. Who exactly is this "newspaper" which doesn't want to go to jail? Can a newspaper be imprisoned? I suppose it could be shut down entirely; they do that in other countries, don't they -- seize the presses and lock the doors. And if that were done, well, that'd be a pretty impressive story itself, right? Wouldn't your paper go down in history for that?

Given that you and your reporters are all willing to go to jail, and that the newspaper cannot be jailed, who exactly is it that is unwilling to go forward with this story? And may I suggest you instead leak the stories to another newspaper that might be willing to publish, after requesting anonymity, of course?