One Nation Under Surveillance

28 08 2011

On Thursday, the New York Times attacked the Obama Administration for its misuse of espionage laws to target news media disclosures of government waste and abuse; and on Friday,

T. Drake

Thomas Drake, the recently-exonerated victim of the Obama Administration’s evil crusade, published his first op-ed exposing what he called the Bush-Obama Administration’s “vicious campaign against whistle-blowers.” The New York Times reported that a former top official “in charge of ensuring that real secrets are kept secret,” J. William Leonard, who headed the Information Security Oversight Office during the George W. Bush Administration, “has delivered a stunning repudiation of the Obama Administration’s decision to use the Espionage Act against a whistle-blower attempting to expose government waste and abuse.” Leonard was willing to testify on behalf of whistleblower Drake, until the Justice Department dropped all ten felony charges against Drake last month. The Times correctly points out that the Obama Administration has used the Espionage Act in five case of news media disclosures, whereas there were no more than four in all previous Administrations. Additionally, the number of documents classified by the Obama Administration jumped by 40% last year. While Obama had originally promised more declassification, “the Administration’s emphasis since then has all been in the opposite direction,” concludes the Times. “Treating potentially embarrassing information as a state secret is the antithesis of healthy government.” Drake’s op-ed in the Washington Post cites the judge’s reference to British tyranny, and recounts that his own dispute with the National Security Agency (NSA) started when he heard about secret electronic surveillance and data-mining after 9/11, that bypassed the 4th Amendment and FISA. Later, he became aware of, and tried to expose, massive fraud involving private contractors, illegalities, and intelligence failures on the part of the NSA. As a result, Drake says, he was targeted “in a multi-year, multimillion dollar federal criminal ‘leak’ investigation as part of a vicious campaign against whistle-blowers, that started under President George W. Bush and is coming to full fruition under President Obama.” Drake notes that this country used to recognize the importance of free speech and privacy; but if we sacrifice these liberties in the name of security, “then we transform ourselves from an oasis of freedom into a police state that crucifies its citizens when they step out of line or speak up against government wrongdoing.” ”These are the hallmarks of despotism, not democracy,” Drake concludes. “Is this the country we want to keep?”





TIME Magazine Pens Five Page Spread To Convince America Ron Paul Can’t Win

27 08 2011

TIME magazine has published a five page spread on Ron Paul’s presidential campaign that hits newsstands today. While some are declaring this a lifting of the veil on media coverage of the Congressman, the reality is that the piece will go out of its way to convince readers that Paul is a fad and has no chance of winning.

Washington Post blogger Erik Wemple today shared a post entitled “News media reverses Ron Paul blackout”, which links directly to a Politico article that contends “Ron Paul scores success in media assault”.

“Paul’s complaints contributed to Time’s decision to do its first major piece on him this campaign season,” the Politico article states.

“He performed strongly at Ames,” Time writer Alex Altman told Politico. “I thought, and my editors think, that he had a valid complaint that he was being overlooked.”

On the surface this sounds great from a Ron Paul follower’s point of view, however, it quickly becomes clear from reading Altman’s blog that the Time piece represents a continuation of the desperate establishment attempt to convince voters that Ron Paul does not have a snowflake’s chance in hell.

In his explanation of the upcoming Time piece, Altman opines, “Paul is probably not a credible contender for the nomination,” attempting to convince readers that his ideology and policies do not resonate with voters.

“His foreign policy of nonintervention is a nonstarter among neoconservatives. His view that social issues like abortion and gay marriage should be left up to the states causes social conservatives to blanch,” writes Altman.

“He’s a fiscal conservative, but his crusade for commodity-backed money and warnings about the looming dangers of hyperinflation aren’t exactly simpatico with deficit hawks’ concerns.” the piece continues. “At 76, his age could be a factor, and he hasn’t shaken the fringe rep he was tagged with in 2008. “Ron Paul is not going to be President of the United States,” conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer said recently.”

So Paul’s ideas do not resonate? One commenter puts Altman’s claims into perspective:

Ron Paul can’t win because he appeals to traditional conservatives who believe in small government, to leftists who believe in personal liberty, to ‘blue’ democrats who believe Obama has betrayed the party, to independents who voted for Obama but are disgusted with the Hopey-Changy that never happened, by gays who don’t want government dictating marriage rules, by straights who don’t want to be forced to live by a ‘gay agenda’. Gee…left, right, young, old, conservative, liberal, gay, straight…with all that support, he doesn’t have a chance!

Altman then takes a leap into Orwellian territory by suggesting that “Paul isn’t really running for President, at least not entirely.”

Last time I checked, Paul was placed third in Gallup’s national presidential preference poll, and is running at an almost dead heat with Obama in the popularity stakes.

It has been an average week as far as Ron Paul appearances on the news networks are concerned. He’s been on CNN a couple of times, Fox News a couple of times and appeared on CNBC also. There have also been more print media stories this week, primarily, and rather paradoxically, reporting the fact that the media is not covering Ron Paul.

So the fact is that Ron Paul is no longer being completely ignored by the media. However, as Time has made it all too obvious, he is still being marginalized and ridiculed.

When the time is right for them, the media will simply ignore Paul again – this is the stark reality that the Congressman’s campaign and his followers have to deal with and overcome.





Ron Paul: Clear Winner of GOP Iowa 2012 Debate

12 08 2011

Ron Paul emerged the clear winner of last night’s FOX News GOP debate according to a poll of Fox viewers and even according to analysis in the Washington Post, as the congressman cemented the fact that he is the only hope America has of ending its involvement in multiple costly and damaging wars across the globe. Paul was in his element at the Iowa debate and delivered the most comprehensible and impassioned performance seen at any of the debates thus far. Every other candidate in attendance attempted to scramble over their rivals to lead the charge for the military industrial complex, while Paul stuck firmly to his anti-war principles, demanding that US troops be brought home with immediate effect. During a heated back and forth with Rick Santorum regarding a potential conflict with Iran, Paul showed true statesman qualities, arguing that merely slapping sanctions on the country and refusing to even entertain the idea of negotiating with the Iranian leadership would lead directly to conflict further down the line. “They have no evidence that they are working on a weapon,” Paul said. “At least our leaders and Reagan talked to the Soviets. What is so terribly bad about this? Countries you put sanctions on, you are more likely to fight them. I say a policy of peace is free trade, stay out of their internal business. Do not get involved in these wars and bring our troops home.” The Congressman added.

R. Santorum

When Santorum insisted that Iran had “killed more American men and women in uniform in Iraq and Afghanistan than the Iraqis and Afghans have,” Paul urged the American people to see through such examples of war propaganda. When Santorum added that Iran had been “at war with us since 1979″, Paul countered that it was the meddling of the CIA in Iranin the 1950s that had directly caused such “blowback”. “The senator is wrong on his history,” Paul urged.

M. Bachman

“We’ve been at war in Iran for a lot longer than ’79. We started it in 1953 when we sent in a coup, installed the Shah. The reaction, the blow-back came in 1979, it’s been going on and on because we just plain don’t mind our own business. That’s our problem!” The Congressman asserted as the crowd in attendance erupted into riotous applause and cheering.“Iran is a threat because they have some militants there, but believe me they are all around the world, and they are not a whole lot different than others.” The Congressman added. “Iran does not have an air force that can come here, they can’t even make enough gasoline for themselves.” Paul said as he fended off constant attempts by Santorum to interrupt him with authority. “They are building up this case just like we did in Iraq, build up the war propaganda. There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq, and ‘they had nuclear weapons and we had to go in’, I’m sure you supported that war as well,” said Paul, directing his words toward the former Senator. In the stand out moment of the entire evening,  a clearly emotional Ron Paul almost burst out of the screen as he boomed into the microphone “It’s time we quit this. IT’S TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WE’RE SPENDING ON THESE WARS!” In other particular highlight, Paul schooled phony tea party wannabe candidate Michele Bachmann on the rule of law after Bachmann defended the gulags at Guantanamo Bay and insisted that accused “terrorists” have no rights whatsoever under the American justice system. “I thought our courts recognized that you have to be tried,” Paul responded. “This administration has already accepted the position that when you assume someone is a terrorist, they can be targeted for assassination – even American citizens, that affects all of us eventually, you don’t want to translate our rule of law into mob rule.” Paul hit back.





Pentagon Snoops Using Facebook and Twitter

3 08 2011

The New York Times and the Washington Post have posted articles detailing a plan by the Pentagon to detect and track popular ideas on social networks. They are not interested in what people think about Lady Gaga or the latest cooking recipes. In 2005, it was reported that the Pentagon was adding anti-war groups and individuals to a terrorist database. A Defense Department document leaked to NBC provided a “first inside look at how the U.S. military has stepped up intelligence collection inside this country since 9/11, which now includes the monitoring of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups.” Northcom also has a unit dedicated to snooping on political activists. In 2002, the Pentagon established CIFA, Counterintelligence Field Activity, by directive. Its size and budget were classified. CIFA created a database, TALON (Threat and Local Observation Notice), to keep track of antiwar activists and individuals opposed to invading and bombing small defenseless countries. After a spate of bad PR, the government said CIFA was to be dismantled. It was later revealed that its operations were outsourced and privatized. The Washington Post admits the DARPA – the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency – plan to hire programmers and researchers to build software to track “popular ideas” on social networks is political. The plan “makes a certain amount of sense, if you think about how Twitter, Facebook and other social media networks have been used to broadcast the ideas of revolutionaries, protesters and other political figures over the past few years,” writes Hayley Tsukayama. And, as the report highlights, DARPA could also use the social networks to identify threats. It suggests, for example, that the agency could look into incidences of several people in the same area posting messages about rumors that a wanted individual is hiding nearby. Or where the next demonstration against the Federal Reserve will be held so agents provocateurs and informers can be dispatched. “Social networks can allow the military not only to follow but also to shape the action,” writes David Streitfeld for the New York Times. In 2009, the Pentagon released a “Force Protection Advisory” about “planned protests at all Federal Reserve Banks and office locations within the United States.” The “advisory” went out to Northcom and the FBI. On November 22, 2008, Alex Jones led a rally at the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas Texas. The Dallas protest is specifically mentioned in the official Army document. Ron Paul’s brother was also in attendance.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.