October 9, 2013, Fed Up
So the suspense is over... it's monetary bid'ness as usual, as the President nominates Federal Reserve Vice-Chair[wo]man, [Brooklyn-born-and-bred] Janet Yellen to be the next most important person on Earth Federal Reserve Chair[wo]man.
If you think Bernanke had a tough time improvising some way through the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent prolonged depression "Great Recession," Ms. Yellen will promptly have to deal with even bigger "too big to fail" banks, even more debt and derivatives everywhere, the ongoing playground urinating contest government shut down and the granddaddy of them all... the ultimate own-goal... the potential American default, now slated for around October 17th (although, ironically, not paying nearly a million federal workers because of "the shutdown" will have the bizarrely salutary effect of improving the Government's cash flow, so it may get an extra week or two before having to miss any legally required payments.)
Not to worry-- the answer to these, and all other woes, will be the magic bullet (yes, that's the term... "silver bullets" only either kill werewolves or contain Coors Light) known as creating currency through purchase of ever more dodgy debt "Quantitative Easing," and Ms. Yellen is not only with the program, she will "un-taper" and probably buy even more crap each month than Greenspan Bernanke did, and ultimately, stick the bill to the taxpayers (a declining number of people as full-time jobs fade away, and this trend will accelerate, in part, due to increased hiring costs caused by... Obamacare.)
The current fiasco of Republicans purporting to hold the nation hostage was set in motion by one Barack Obama... when he sold us out back in 2010 with the Bush tax cut extension (and I thought he was just doing what his backers wanted). I thought things were bad when I noted that extending the Bush tax cuts-- which would, and did, add trillions in cumulative deficit, without a concomitant increase in the debt ceiling was political malpractice. But "bad" was understating. Obama's extension of the Bush tax cuts in exchange for nothing was as gross an act of political malpractice as has ever been committed, and may, because this President has shown Republicans that he will always cave when push comes to shove, actually result in a calamitous "default" situation (which, btw, could be disastrous even absent an actual default if the interest the U.S. government has to pay on bond interest goes up significantly as a result of the perceived risk)... and it's entirely Obama's fault.
I can't say that enough times. And his present position-- holding the line that Newt Gingrich's Mitt Romney's health care plan is so sacrosanct that all else must be sacrificed to it--. is just stupid. Don't get me wrong-- the Republicans (to the extent you believe that all of this isn't just some giant kabuki to benefit financial interests who have placed huge bets on the chaos and that they are actually different from "the Democrats") are plenty stupid too.
And so there we have it-- two groups of stupid people (or one group, if you like) having a gigantic schoolyard "hold your breath" contest... Good luck to the rest of us. Because while I can't predict a "winner," I can sure as hell tell you who is going to lose.
September 18, 2013, Twelve years of blogging
Dear Lord, it's been a dozen years, to the day, since the first post on this blog. Where does the time go?
September 17, 2013, More bad stuff
John Cole gets right to it on "the national debate" after the D.C. Navy Yard shooting which left a dozen victims (plus the apparent perp) dead.
The national consciousness will, of course, "move on," like it always does. But this sort of thing seems to be happening more and more frequently.
And yes... it is because we are becoming a more crass and violent society at every level (starting with the rotting fish head at the top as he proposes another pointless war against someone somewhere, because his overlords in finance demand it), as we promote violence in every last corner of the world that we don't already occupy. And yes, it is because of our national perverse, one-off attitude toward private gun ownership (Second Amendment my ass... the rest of the Bill of Rights is now "optional"... this is the one we give a sh*t about?). And yes, it is because of a simultaneously failing economy and ever-increasing stress level. Note the victims so-far identified are in their 40's and up-- the workforce is aging, even as young people have fewer prospects. And finally, yes, it is because we consume most of the world's output of psychotrophic drugs; it is extraordinarily unlikely that an autopsy would not reveal large quantities of anti-depressants, anti-anxiety meds and God knows what else coarsing through the veins of the shooter.
Nothing to see here, folks. Move along...
September 11, 2013, Once more... with feeling.
.
Because September 11th only comes once a year. It's only been a dozen years... indeed, I've been blogging for all of them... and yet, it all seems... so long ago when I got put out of my office a block from the WTC by the morning's events, which seem ever more a distant memory (though I was there), and yet, the perpetual underpinning of what America has become.
Ah... just a dozen years ago... back when things like the Bill of Rights seemed so... relevant. When it wasn't my college classmate (twelve years ago, a political non-entity in the Illinois state senate) and now, the President of the United States. the alleged Muslim socialist radical arch-liberal who used the occasion of this 9-11 Eve to propose murdering Syrian civilians himself in retaliation for Bashir al-Assad murdering Syrian civilians...
And today... a primary race in New York, to finally replace Mike Bloomberg, who was pretty much elected mayor a dozen years ago... because of 9-11.
Well... just saying... enough musing from me... happy 9-11 everybody.
August 24, 2013, Bad stuff
There seems to be nothing good to say about anything coming out of Syria, as the government of Bashar al-Assad [and his visible allies, Hezbollah and Iran and his less visible allies, Russia] and "the rebels" [a wild consortium, almost certainly sponsored by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and without doubt possibly the CIA], now accuse each other of unleashing a chemical attack on the Syrian city of Ghouta in the suburbs of Damascus, which is estimated to have killed well over 300 people and sickened thousands... as the Obama Administration deploys some U.S. naval vessels ever closer to Syria... for some inadequately explained reason, because direct American intervention in Syria would probably start World War III be bad.
This Grey Lady op-ed by Edward Luttwak suggests that a prolonged unpleasant bloody stalemate is the only outcome favorable to American interests (he certainly cautions against-- and rightly so-- American intervention in Syria), noting that the Islamist extremists likely to emerge after a "rebel" win are not favorable to American interests, nor would an Assad regime that relied on assistance from Hezbollah and Iran (and presumably, Russia.)
Really? REALLY? Have we learned NOTHING? The list of our misguided and utterly f***ing DISASTROUS interventions seems endless, be they of recent vintage such as in Iraq... Afghanistan... Libya... Somalia... and our less obvious involvement in places like Egypt, and Bahrain, not to mention slightly older adventures in Southeast Asia, Iran (back when we overthrew a democratically elected government to install the Shah), and of course, all over the Western Hemisphere.
In short-- Mr. Luttwak is correct that American intervention-- of any kind, for any reason (other than perhaps giving humanitarian aid to surrounding countries like Jordan that have to deal with refugees)-- would be "ill-advised." And somebody's use of chemical weapons is, alas, just not a good reason for American intervention. And the presence of U.N. weapons inspectors already in Syria at the time of the attacks and the attacks just a few miles from their hotel-- makes me wonder about whether the Assad regime is that stupid (hint... I don't think so, though it certainly might be). Naturally, other than the rebels themselves, it seems the United States government is arguing the loudest that it is the Assad regime (rather than "the rebels") that is responsible for the chemical attack. None of us can say for sure, but right now, the evidence is inconclusive at best, and what American officials get out of stirring this pot (other than some really sweet contracts for whoever gets to provide support for the presumed sh*tstorm they're trying create)... is a mystery, at least to me.
Anyway, as awful as it is, Syria is unlikely to have a liberal, democratic government any time soon. I tend to think that a stable, albeit unpleasant regime like Assad's would be far, FAR better than either an Islamist sh*t-hole state (see how well that one just worked out in Egypt, for example) or an unstable, corrupt semi-failed state resulting in ostensibly permanent anarchy and civil war (of the kind we have installed and unleashed in Iraq and Afghanistan). And this result would also be true for Israel, which, without doubt, wants stability on its Northeastern border, and would (presumably) prefer not to have an Islamist regime reminiscent of Hamas in control of an entire well-armed country.
At the end of the day, the Middle East is a tough neighborhood with no good prospects... American intervention in the region has achieved exactly zero unqualified successes (save arguably Israel's position as regional powerhouse... and even there, our support has not involved direct military intervention)... and getting involved in this one-- chemical weapons or not-- would be yet another bad idea.
Just saying.
Update (8-25-13): Syria will allow weapons inspectors full access to the site of the attack. Another strong hint as to its provenance... at least in my view. And yet... seeing as Assad's Syria is a client-state of, you know, Russia, I don't think American forces will be ordered to back off anytime soon.
August 21, 2013, Thirty-five years
That's the sentence handed down by a military court-martial to Bradley Manning for leaking evidence of the United States's war crimes and other acts of malfeasance. The idea is to deter others who might have the audacity to try to let the public know what their government is up to. Hell-- the government was arguing for an even longer sentence-- of sixty years or more, to assure that Manning would die in prison for having the audacity to tell the American people what their government and military are doing in their name with their tax money. Damn him.
Of course, it bears noting that our government recently begged a country headed by a former KGB Colonel to hand back one of our citizens, assuring Russia that we [probably] wouldn't torture Edward Snowden [too much].
Interesting times. Do you not think we're living in 1984, only maybe even "new and improved"? Well... reminds me (albeit tepidly) of how Candace [and to some extent, I] were muzzled by this Administration shortly after it assumed power.
But go ahead, alleged progressives, and tell me about "lesser of two evils" and all...
August 8, 2013, Exercises in Credulity-Defying
Well, this piece from WaPo sort of lays out the conventional wisdom (as WaPo is wont to do)... to wit, given that the majority of the poor bastards still held at GTMO hail from Yemen, and given that there is a purported "threat" coming from "Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula," allegedly based in Yemen, this will "complicate" the return of said Yemeni men to their home country, which of course, had been held up by Barack Obama for years now, in response to "the underpants bomber," but was supposedly "resumed" in response to the GTMO hunger strike. Of course, the Obama Administration, and every government agency asked to do so, has found that some 86 men at GTMO, many of them Yemeni, pose no threat whatsoever because they were NEVER terrorists of any kind... meaning... what freaking difference would it make to return men who were never part of al Qaeda to begin with to a country with a purported al Qaeda presence? (Stop with reality...)
Of course, the "credible threat" arising from "intercepted chatter" [that has led to the closing of around twenty-two diplomatic embassies and missions throughout the Islamic world] is, presumably, completely made up as a political stunt to get Congress to back off its recent efforts to rein in NSA spying on Americans. Of course, the scope of that spying is, surprise, surprise, broader than the government had been telling.
I say this because, and I admit its only IMHO... but I tend to think after all the trouble that OBL went through to make it hard to find him... that al Qaeda leadership is probably just not stupid enough to have a conference call... but, of course, in a nation that used to lead the world in most things and now leads it only in propaganda, the American people probably are stupid enough to believe that "the evildoers" would form a Legion of Doom on an easily intercepted open line.
You know, over a decade ago, on this very blog's "talking dog points," given former President George W. Bush's tendency to refer to "evil doers" and "war on terror" and "axis of evil" and the like, we pondered whether his National Security team (then led by Condi Rice) was briefing him with comic books... We have, of course, often quipped about how seamlessly, it seems, the Obama Administration has wholly adopted Bush Administration policies in everything important... such as the never-ending expansion of totalitarianism "the national security state..." but now even the asinine nomenclature and diction of the Bush Administration has trickled down to its worthy successors... in the Obama Administration.
And so... as my college classmate the President, who turned 52 a few days ago (happy birthday, Mr. President) petulantly tries to out-Bush Bush by reigniting the Cold War (over pique that a political dissident has fled from the United States to Russia!), by stepping up those killer robot drone strikes, by the ongoing war on whistleblowers in general, and by so many other Bush-like policies...
I'm sorry, I lost my train of thought. Kind of, you know, like the President did with that whole "close GTMO" thing. Sigh.
August 1, 2013, Unintended consequences... sort of...
It seems that uber-whistleblower and former contractor to the NSA Edward Snowden has, at least for the next twelvemonth, been given asylum in Vladimir Putin's Russia. Perhaps a September Obama-Putin summit will be canceled as a result of this... or perhaps it won't. Russia is obviously an irritant, along with Ecuador, Venezuela, Cuba and the few other countries flexing their independence from Washington's jackboot. Having both a nuclear arsenal and huge oil reserves, Russia can pretty much do what it likes... and has. Actual national sovereignty independent of the financial interests running most of the world: imagine that?
Let me make this easy for both you and my own NSA minders. Obviously, not only do I approve of the actions of Mr. Snowden (and Mr. Manning, who awaits sentence, and Mr. Assange, who is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and any of the other freedom-fighters out there who want to tell us what our own quite-literally-rogue-state government no longer wants to tell its own citizens), I applaud their actions, while readily admitting that I personally would almost certainly not have the courage to take the risks (probably lengthy prison terms) to do anything of the kind.
And so, I'll immediately juxtapose this news of Mr. Snowden's asylum with a great piece from James Fallows writing in the Atlantic,
"Why NSA Surveillance will be More Damaging than you think." The short answer to that is that business interests not forced by virtue of being here to operate in the United States will soon choose alternatives to doing so, be it local or regional networks not going through here, or other arrangements perhaps even of a lower tech nature, to avoid the prying eyes of the United States government and its contractors, because the United States has flushed its honest broker status, and heinously abused the exorbitant privilege of ostensibly hosting most of the backbone elements of the internet.
Here's the thing, boys and girls: not only is none of this shit going to keep us any "safer" from the mini-van or two worth of al-Qaeda operatives still in existence (and among others, Sen. Leahy evidently just concluded that the big phone thing accomplishes nothing of the sort), it wasn't designed to. It's designed to be used against specific kinds of targets: dissidents (animal rights activists, especially the kind who might take pictures of the activities of "agri-business" are prime examples), personal enemies of those in power (generally in the financial sector or the military), or, best of all, business interests whose secrets might prove extremely profitable to steal, particularly for American business interests under contract to do the snooping.
Oh... right... "foreign terrorists" doesn't seem to be on that list. Because everyone knows that terrorists operating in the poorest countries on Earth just this side of the stone-age are best thwarted using the world's most complex and sophisticated high-tech interception methods.
What... they're not? Uh oh...
July 14, 2013, Fear Factor
Was it that much of a surprise that George Zimmerman of Sanford, FL was acquitted in the homicide of Trayvon Martin? You'll recall that originally, police didn't even want to charge Mr. Zimmerman with killing Mr. Martin, who, after all, represented American society's ultimate bete noire, a young Black man. But, you know... the public outcry and all.
I'm not going to comment specifically on the case, or on the outcome. Indeed, this from the Atlantic says it more articulately than I ever could, noting essentially that "we wuzn't there..." Where the only living witness is the alleged perp, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" could be difficult to prove. And I wasn't even in the courtroom (nor did I follow the coverage); I've been in enough courtrooms where juries have done things that I've personally found inexplicable to add any value in commenting on this particular case... maybe it was just a tough case to prosecute... maybe the prosecution did a horrible job... don't know. [Candace, quoting Langston Hughes, comments even more articulately.]
No... I'll let the public outrage (on "both sides") play out elsewhere. I kind of want to "drill-down" into something else. I'm going to talk about Mr. Zimmerman himself, who I've found fascinating for any number of reasons. Mostly, I want to know just why this man was so scared shitless of everything that he felt the need to play Batman God, and be a well-armed homicidal vigilante volunteer neighborhood watchman... had this been the 1960's, when millions of middle class White people (including most of my own family) abandoned the ever scarier inner cities for the seeming peace, quiet and safety of the suburbs, driven by that force that is now embedded in the American DNA (though it was arguably less apparent then), that being, of course, fear, particularly, fear of "the other," I might have "understood." Clearly I'm missing something... perhaps it's that I live in the seemingly peaceable kingdom of a "mixed" (though just about fully gentrified) Brooklyn neighborhood, while most of my family remains in the suburbs, or even in points beyond... of course, the irony is that I can walk to places without fear of imminent death (mostly by being run down by cars)... and they can't.
Anyway... we find Mr. Zimmerman in an ostensibly "gated suburban community," as, fear (of something or other) seems to reside quite literally in his own bones, he being employed as an insurance underwriter and taking courses toward a junior college degree in criminal justice... but again, I'm just stuck on "reality" (it always gets in the way)... I just was not aware of gated suburban communities in Seminole County, Florida being hotbeds of violence by young Black men... one might think the word "Brooklyn," even gentrified Brownstone Brooklyn, would be more fear-inspiring... But... I guess I'm mistaken.
I admit that I try, superficially at least, not to live my own life in fear. After all, unlike most Americans, I found myself in downtown Manhattan on September 11, 2001, as I still do on most work days, within a football field's length or two of the WTC site... and yet, readers of any regularity know I am nonetheless an absolutist in Ben Franklin's "those who would give up their precious liberty for temporary security deserve neither..." I never accepted the need to become a totalitarian country (which, boys and girls, we have become) in order to "fight terrorism." I'm evidently in a small minority.
Hey, paranoia is patriotic. Obviously, on a macro-level, we are all supposed to fear the ever-lurking swarthy A-rab terrrrrrrrorists of al-Qaeda ... notwithstanding that OBL is dead and that AQ elements in Libya and Syria seem to be on American --or at least American allies'-- payrolls... on a less macro-level, White suburbanites, including presumably Mr. Zimmerman, are supposed to remain scared shitless ever vigilant against incursions by... young Black men. Even those evidently visiting their father, who happens to live in the same gated communities.
In some sense... who am I to talk? I can put on my own brave face, but if my own neighborhood were to see a spike in street crime... what would I do? [Fortunately, and I mean this, I live in a City where it's damned hard for me, and hence, for the George Zimmermans of the world, to get their hands on a gun... but I digress...] Indeed, I hide behind the anonymity of a pseudonym for this blog, as much from fear of possible adverse work implications as from fear of irritation by trolls and those who simply disagree with me. And why is that? Notwithstanding the supposed enlightened state of our democratic republic (for those who believe we have one in anything other than form), most people would certainly agree that the conditions under which most Americans earn their living are far stricter... our managers exercise virtually unfettered authority over us during the six or eight or ten or whatever hours a day of work that we perform, and we self-temper our work behavior (and, more and more, our off-hours behavior), lest we offend someone who might kill fire us, thereby cutting off not merely our self-esteem, but almost certainly, our access to health care, the ability to remain in our homes, or ultimately, to eat (let alone to live with any kind of personal dignity), and casting us to our fate in a country where actual unemployment (as opposed to the official propaganda rate) is, and for some time has been at, Depression era levels.
And I guess I'm going to point out that this fear (of starvation if wages are cut off) is more or less embedded in the very DNA of industrial capitalism... our basic needs can be met in comparatively few hours of work a day... capitalism requires that we generate " a surplus," promptly handed over to our betters who manage us accordingly (while taking the lions' share for themselves). Without going all "Occupy!" on you, my comment is not on the resulting distribution of money, but on the intrinsic distribution of power... in our supposed representative democracy, the basic attitude of our work life is, of course, fear... the fear of living in essentially totalitarian environments. And, surprise surprise, once duly primed, fear can easily make its way into everything else- i.e., the extremely politically useful fears-- such as fear of crime (notwithstanding that crime rates have been declining for years) resulting in an insane level of incarceration (particularly for men of color), or of course, fear of terrorism (notwithstanding its extraordinary rarity), or of course, as has been of note in the recent legislative theater of the absurd known as "comprehensive immigration reform," fear of Mexican people illegal immigrants, leading to various absurdities such as proposals to militarize our Southwestern border to levels comparable only to the border between the two Koreas.
And so, we have this ambient level of fear leading to Florida's outrageous "Stand your Ground" law, making it public policy to favor aggressive behavior likely to result in death... out of very politically useful fear.
With all this fear out there swirling around, including, of course, in the heads of the likes of physically slight, gun-toting, absolutely scared-shitless George Zimmerman hanging on in his suburban enclave ever more fearful of losing ground economically, or of course, giving way to all of the other litany of fears swirling around his head... and voila. Throw in all this fear, hundreds of millions of firearms, and the general racial unfairness in this society (temporarily papered over by the Presidency of not-actually-descended-from-slaves Barack Obama), and you get unfortunate events like the Trayvon Martin killing. Which, had it resulted in a prompt charge and guilty plea to something like involuntary manslaughter, wouldn't have generated much attention.
But the powers need the peasants to turn on each other (rather than their betters in the banking sector, military industrial complex, Monsanto, etc.)... and hence, the fear-mongering, the stand-your-ground-laws, the psychotic numbers of guns circulating...
I think you get the picture. Regardless of your views on the Zimmerman verdict... the picture is still not a pretty one.
July 4, 2013, TD Blog Interview with David Marshall
David Marshall is an attorney in Seattle, Washington, where his practice focuses on defense of those accused of child abuse. He represents a Syrian national detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. On July 2, 2013, I had the privilege of interviewing Mr. Marshall by telephone. My interview notes, as corrected by Mr. Marshall, are below.
The Talking Dog: Where were you on Sept. 11, 2001, and to the extent you can answer, please tell me where your GTMO-detained client or clients were?
David Marshall: I was among the last people in America to find out! I first heard something peculiar when I was riding a bus to work. A couple of women on the bus were talking to each other, and one said "and that's when they closed all the airports." I thought, "that can't be right..." I got to work, and walked past a conference room where people were watching t.v.-- by that point, both towers had fallen down. I realized this was not going to be just another day. For whatever reason, even though I was in a sky-scraper, I don't recall even going home from work early.
The Talking Dog: Please identify your GTMO-detained client by name and nationality. To the extent you can, please tell me something about him, such as age, family status, personality, circumstances of capture, or anything else you believe of relevance.
David Marshall: My client is Syrian, and, although Arabic transliteration is not always perfect, I spell his name Ahmed Adnan Ajam. He grew up in Aleppo, Syria. His family was well to do. His father ran a textile factory (which was a business he apparently married into!) Ahmed was trained as an apprentice jeweler and goldsmith. When he was in his early twenties, a friend of his died in an automobile accident. This caused Ahmed to think about eternity. The free life he lived, he felt, was dissolute-- he wanted to get right with God and set about becoming more serious about Islam. He was widely read (as he still is), and he found about the society in Afghanistan that took Islam very seriously. He wanted to become a more devout individual, so he traveled to Afghanistan. He lived in Kabul for eleven months or so, and he did some charitable work with an organization that distributed food there, and he played soccer and volleyball and took walks around the city.
When the war broke out, he got word that the Northern Alliance was going to take the city, and it was planning on killing all of the Arabs. As he was an Arab, he left. He was seized while entering into Pakistan, and he was been in captivity since late 2001 or early 2002. He bears the designation "ISN 326." He is now in his mid 30's.
The Talking Dog Please tell me the status of his habeas litigation to the extent you can; if you can identify who the judge involved is, and please tell me about the recent motion you brought challenging the restrictions on transferring prisoners.
David Marshall: Ahmed's habeas case is pending before Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. No habeas hearing is scheduled.
I have just filed a motion challenging the restrictions on the transfer of prisoners from Guantanamo imposed by the past three annual National Defense Authorization Acts. My contention is that this is an unconstitutional encroachment on the President's commander in chief powers. The President decides when to exert force (in an authorized conflict) and when to release or relax that force. Detention is a form of force. My client denies that he is an �enemy belligerent," but even if he were, the President would have the power to release him without Congressional restriction.
Ahmed has been cleared for release by this government-- the Obama Administration�s inter-agency task force. Once the Executive Branch decided to release him, Congress had no right to interfere. By analogy, when President Bush decided to attack Fallujah, Congress could not interfere in his doing so, nor could they interfere with his later decision to withdraw from Fallujah by compelling him first to issue a certification that it was safe to do so.
The Bingham firm in Boston and New York has provided great assistance to me with this motion, but I am the sole signatory on the motion, and it is only on behalf of my client.
The Talking Dog Of course, you are asking for his outright release, but he can't go home to Aleppo, can he? Are you contending that Congress can't restrict his release into the United States?
David Marshall: It has been recognized by our government that the Syrians (of whom there are now about seven left at GTMO) can't be returned to Syria. The Assad regime would treat GTMO detainees very harshly.
The motion I recently filed does not challenge Congress's prohibition on admitting detainees into the United States. For reasons you can imagine, Ahmed does not care to live here; it has not been �the home of the free� for him. Our goal is for the Obama Administration to transfer him to a third country to live in peace and freedom there.
The Talking Dog: Can you please tell me the last time you visited your client or clients at Guantanamo?
David Marshall: I have not visited my client in 2013 (since the hunger strike and surrounding events have transpired). I'm not sure I would go at this point. Since my client regards the genital searches that are now imposed as a condition of visiting counsel as so extremely offensive to him, he might not be willing to meet me if I did go. I note that he recently didn't come to the phone when I called-- which I suspect is connected to something he said in his letter to me of May 17th, where he reported consternation that other prisoners had to be searched just to take phone calls from their attorney.
The Talking Dog Can you tell me if your client is participating in the present hunger strike?
David Marshall: In his 5/17 letter he wrote that he had ceased the hunger strike himself-- he could just not take the Ensure that he was being forced to consume. According to his letter, he has been placed in isolation, is not allowed exercise, and has intolerable noise inflicted on him.
The Talking Dog: Can you tell me, if you believe the recent events of escalating tension culminating in the hunger strike are the actions of the local command structure (however misguided), or perhaps reflect broader, high level decisions, for whatever reason?
David Marshall: I have no specific knowledge about this-- you know as much as I from reading newspaper accounts. I will say this seems to be a crazy policy that has precipitated a crisis that may ultimately redound to the benefit of the prisoners. Frankly, I can't see the Obama administration being so clever that they induced extreme actions from inmates knowing it would create the kind of political pressure that would culminate in closing the detention facility.
The Talking Dog: Can you comment on media coverage, in particular, of events at Guantanamo in calendar year 2013, and previously, and in particular, with respect to your own clients and representation?
David Marshall: It certainly appears that there has been a whole lot more media coverage this year because of the hunger strike. If it was planned as a means to get attention, it has been extremely successful.
The Talking Dog: Do you have any predictions for Guantanamo, preventive detention, and related issues for, say, the remainder of Barack Obama's Presidency?
David Marshall: I have no predictions. In late 2008 and early 2009, we all thought "thank goodness this will soon end" because of the election of President Obama. That experience has cured me of making predictions.
The Talking Dog: How did you become involved in representing a detainee, and can you tell me how your Guantanamo representation has effected you personally, be it professionally, emotionally, spiritually, or any other way you'd like to answer?
David Marshall: I became involved when the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers sent an e-mail in the summer of 2005 asking if there was interest in representing detainees. I expressed interest. Then a year went by, and in the summer of 2006, another e-mail went out saying "we're serious now", and this time noting that, unlike other pro bono cases, there was not only no compensation for the time to be expended, but no reimbursement for expenses which were likely to be substantial. I talked to my wife, and she agreed that this was important for me to do, and I undertook it. After a lengthy time to get my security clearance, by February of 2007 I was cleared to be Ajam's representative.
That is how I became involved; now I should tell you why. I'm a little older than you. I grew up at the height of the Cold War in the 50's and 60's. I learned that in the USSR, people were imprisoned indefinitely without trial. I was struck by how awful that was. I was glad I didn't live in a country that did that. Early in the last decade I realized I now do live in a country where that can happen. And so, in the interest of helping to get back to that country where that kind of thing cannot happen, I undertook this representation.
One thing that has surprised me is the level of support I have gotten from other people. I have asked for donations to help me cover the expenses of representation. I have been stunned by how many people responded and how much they donated (particularly relative to the means of the donors). I see there are many people who, like me, want to get that "other America" back-- the country that doesn't imprison people indefinitely without trial. I have been deeply touched by their generosity.
The Talking Dog: I join all of my readers in thanking Mr. Marshall for that compelling interview.
Readers interested in legal issues and related matters associated with the "war on terror" may also find talking dog blog interviews with former Guantanamo military commissions prosecutors Morris Davis and Darrel Vandeveld, with former Guantanamo combatant status review tribunal/"OARDEC" officer Stephen Abraham, with attorneys Jan Kitchel, Eric Lewis, Cori Crider, Michael Mone, Matt O'Hara, Carlos Warner, Matthew Melewski, Stewart "Buz" Eisenberg, Patricia Bronte, Kristine Huskey, Ellen Lubell, Ramzi Kassem, George Clarke, Buz Eisenberg, Steven Wax, Wells Dixon, Rebecca Dick, Wesley Powell, Martha Rayner, Angela Campbell, Stephen Truitt and Charles Carpenter, Gaillard Hunt, Robert Rachlin, Tina Foster, Brent Mickum, Marc Falkoff H. Candace Gorman, Eric Freedman, Michael Ratner, Thomas Wilner, Jonathan Hafetz, Joshua Denbeaux, Rick Wilson,
Neal Katyal, Joshua Colangelo Bryan, Baher Azmy, and Joshua Dratel (representing Guantanamo detainees and others held in "the war on terror"), with attorneys Donna Newman and Andrew Patel (representing "unlawful combatant" Jose Padilila), with Dr. David Nicholl, who spearheaded an effort among international physicians protesting force-feeding of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, with physician and bioethicist Dr. Steven Miles on medical complicity in torture, with law professor and former Clinton Administration Ambassador-at-large for war crimes matters David Scheffer, with former Guantanamo detainees Moazzam Begg and Shafiq Rasul , with former Guantanamo Bay Chaplain James Yee, with former Guantanamo Army Arabic linguist Erik Saar, with former Guantanamo military guard Terry Holdbrooks, Jr., with former military interrogator Matthew Alexander, with law professor and former Army J.A.G. officer Jeffrey Addicott, with law professor and Coast Guard officer Glenn Sulmasy, with author and geographer Trevor Paglen and with author and journalist Stephen Grey on the subject of the CIA's extraordinary rendition program, with journalist and author David Rose on Guantanamo, with journalist Michael Otterman on the subject of American torture and related issues, with author and historian Andy Worthington detailing the capture and provenance of all of the Guantanamo detainees, with law professor Peter Honigsberg on various aspects of detention policy in the war on terror, with Joanne Mariner of Human Rights Watch, with Almerindo Ojeda of the Guantanamo Testimonials Project, with Karen Greenberg, author of The LeastWorst Place: Guantanamo's First 100 Days, with Charles Gittings of the Project to Enforce the Geneva Conventions, and with Laurel Fletcher, author of "The Guantanamo Effect" documenting the experience of Guantanamo detainees after their release, to be of interest.
June 28, 2013, Department of irony department
Chris Cillizza of WaPo ordinarily devotes his life to the conventional wisdom, i.e., being a legitimate heir to the late David Broder of WaPo... and, needless to say, being a useful repository of... conventional wisdom.
Color me surprised by this sudden reality check on the part of... Mr. Cillizza... who gives us this compilation noting that political donors of meaning, to wit, the ones who donate big enough that politicians pay attention (not to mention do their bidding...) number barely 31,385 in this whole freaking country of 300,000,000 people...... he also links to this even more useful piece... WOW. Just wow.
The point seems obvious... these one-one hundredth of one per cent (to wit, .01per cent of the population) are the feudal lords... the rest of us just live in their world... as some kind of feudal vassal, or outright peasant... they actually own this world. Way to go Chris. We've suspected this to be true... but now you've provided us the numbers.
I hope you keep your job after telling us this.
June 18, 2013, Some of the things happening in the latter stages of Empire
From the great Carol Rosenberg of the Miami Herald, we get this piece indicating that the Dept. of Defense has decided to identify the 48 men who are deemed "too dangerous to try, but too Muslim to release" and hence subject to indefinite detention. For whatever reason, the Government decided to honor this particular Freedom of Information Act request... given that the Big O's approval ratings have finally taken the Bush-like nosedive finally appropriate to well, doing things like the latest NSA surveillance over reach, i.e., being Bush... maybe, a few interesting moves might be in order.
Then again, Candace treats us to her American life, Ira Glass's program being one of the few bright spots on National Propaganda Radio (NPR)... in this case, with a program segment devoted to talking to GTMO lawyers about the fact that they assume all of their telecom transactions (phone, e-mail, texts, faxes, etc.) are monitored by the government. As a sometimes frequent correspondent with said GTMO lawyers (particularly Candace), I assume I am under such monitoring myself... and the fact that I try to lead an exemplary life is no excuse (I tried to lead an exemplary life anyway).
But the fact is, I assume you are also being monitored... in my view, the limitations are now strictly technical and logistical... if they can, they are... once you can murder your own citizens with complete impunity, we can assume that "the law" is not an impediment to well, anything... the only concerns are "can we get away with it" and "can we get away with the adverse publicity if caught," Which takes us to where we are. I assume you're being monitored... care, or don't... but don't assume you have an "expectation of privacy" if you use any electronic media. Practically, of course, Uncle lacks the manpower to read and listen to everything... but if you piss off someone important.... just saying...
Here's a profile (is it a puff-piece? a hit-piece?) of America's "drone-master"... CIA Director John Brennan. Just an unassuming guy who went to a Catholic school in New Jersey's Hudson County who has gone on to order Mafia style hits... only in his case, for the Empire, rather than doing something less unsavory, like say, murdering other criminals for the Mafia.
And in yesterday's news today, we get this piece from Amy Goodman and Democracy Now! urging GTMO medical staff to comply with medical ethics and stop the force-feeding (you know.,.. we were only on this seven years ago with our interview with Dr. David Nicholl on the subject of... the medical ethics of force-feeding GTMO hunger-striking prisoners!) Not to belittle Amy... she also being one of the few bright-spots of broadcast journalism, and of course, she's keeping the hunger strike at GTMO front and center where it belongs. Goodonya, Amy.
Mostly, I got nothing. The only encouraging sign is that Obama's Bush-like behavior has finally started to yield Bush-like approval numbers. Yes, it's only symbolic and rhetorical, but consciousness has to start somewhere.
Again.... just saying.
Update: Candace observes that the list associated with the Miami Herald piece might be somewhat different from other lists that she has seen; I believe this link to Gawker will take one to the actual Freedom of Information Act response (I hope)... draw your own conclusions...
June 10, 2013, Hail to the victors
A brief reference to the U. of Michigan fight song, after this weekend's visit to Ann Arbor, where, notwithstanding an early asthma attack and a late foot problem with my big toe, completed the Ann Arbor Marathon in more or less the usual time, for my second marathon since I turned 50, 36th marathon finish overall and 20th state.
The song presumably does not apply to the Obama Administration, nor to its newest public enemy no. 1, former NSA/CIA employee and whistleblower Edward Snowden, now bizarrely seeking refuge in Chinese controlled Hong Kong.. Snowden merely confirmed what I certainly thought had been true since before the Obama Administration even took office, let alone decided to out-Bush Bush on virtually every regressive and awful policy available (from expanding the war in Afghanistan and the formerly known as war on terror to keeping GTMO nice and open.... right down to extending "the Bush tax cuts")... that being...
Snowden outed the government on its "PRISM" program which, unsurprisingly, is designed to capture all electronic communications, be it phone calls, e-mails, text messages, or internet usage... we presume it can cross-reference with things like GPS and automatic toll paying devices and probably your dishwasher and choice of cable viewing. I commend the media for the pivot... obviously, I only listen to alleged progressive media, such as National Propaganda Radio (NPR), which started to throw words around like "possible treason" and "undermining national security" with respect to Mr. Snowden, who, like Bradley Manning and Julian Assange, should instead be up for a Nobel Peace Prize, if not possible sainthood. Notice instead that the "Peace Prize" went to my college classmate Barack-- the figurehead of our war machine. Well, the damned thing is freaking named after a dynamite merchant, so what should we expect?
Oh... the polling shows... "it's o.k. if you're a Democrat." In other words, public principled opposition to the government's intrusion on your life is based on whether you think the other party is doing it.
The most repressive and dangerous regime in the world is, and has been for some time, based in Washington, D.C.: the American corporate financial national security state. It is relentless, can (and does) kill with impunity, and will let nothing stand in its way... if necessary in its own belief system, it will take actions that result in the ultimate destruction of life on this planet... certainly human life. To the extent that a few courageous people are willing to risk death and torture at the hands of such a regime is a testament to their courage, if not possibly their rashness and foolhardiness.
And let's face it: the only real difference between Barack Obama and George W. Bush is the personal likeability thing... their policies are indistinguishable (except, as far as we know, Bush never ordered hits on American citizens).
Alrightie then. We got ourselves a never-ending war-- certainly, the war on whistleblowers goes on... even the same day that the Obama Administration eases up a tad on its own war on young women... just letting the Founding Fathers slow down the spinning in their graves just a little.
May 23, 2013, When in doubt, give a big speech
That would seem to be the standard operating procedure of Barack Obama's public life for some time... and today's "drone speech" (transcript here c/o HuffPo) fits the bill perfectly: the President is back on his heels because of the multiple scandals, in ascending order of actual adverse political impact on him, being (1) Benghazi, (2) the deliberate targeting of the press for illegal surveillance, (3) the GTMO hunger strike, (4) the IRS fiasco, and (5) the fact that his Administration has done nothing other than lie about the actual state of the economy for the last five years (that would be "moribund or worse"), and now that the actual bill for "Obama-care" is hitting hard (and destroying what's left of small business)... and as predicted, the benefits for anyone except large insurers and financial behemoths will be illusory at best... well, hey... it's time for a big speech!
Well, to be sure, in the big drone speech at the National Defense University, the President droned on about drones, which I guess we can take will now be reduced as a military "first option," although as Fred Kaplan notes in this Slate piece, not so much. Drones are here to stay-- the internal loopholes of "imminent threat" mean that they'll keep being used-- and hell, they provide nice "psychological distance" between their operators in Nevada and the victims... somewhere... else. Plus, they're cool and high tech for those non-assassination assassinations (more accurately "premeditated murder") that the President declined to take any responsibility for. Of course, as Kaplan noted, Obama (thanks to the hunger strike-- let's not kid ourselves that this is anything other than damage control for him) did revive at least discussion of GTMO... though as usual, he declined responsibility and blamed Congress, notwithstanding his own ability to veto any restrictions they placed on him, or his remarkably wide latitude as chief executive and commander in chief as it is... and btw... kudos to Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin for heckling Barack (who I suspect won't be at my-- and his-- 30th college reunion next week)... shouting the obvious truth to power, to wit, the exchange apparently went:
�You are commander in chief! You can close Guantanamo today!� Benjamin shouted. �You can release those 86 prisoners!� �It�s been 11 years!� she said. �Let me finish,� Obama pleaded with her. �I love my country. I love the rule of law!� she said as she was finally removed by security. �Abide by the rule of law. You�re a constitutional lawyer!�
Other than the "constitutional lawyer" part, for which there is no evidence, Medea was dead on... Obama's inter-agency task force has already cleared the majority of men at GTMO for release-- only his own personal intransigence (and political cowardice and opportunism of course) is keeping them there.
Anyway... on GTMO, the President had a fair bit of verbiage... (unexpurgated, and as follows):
And that brings me to my final topic: the detention of terrorist suspects.To repeat, as a matter of policy, the preference of the United States is to capture terrorist suspects. When we do detain a suspect, we interrogate them. And if the suspect can be prosecuted, we decide whether to try him in a civilian court or a Military Commission. During the past decade, the vast majority of those detained by our military were captured on the battlefield. In Iraq, we turned over thousands of prisoners as we ended the war. In Afghanistan, we have transitioned detention facilities to the Afghans, as part of the process of restoring Afghan sovereignty. So we bring law of war detention to an end, and we are committed to prosecuting terrorists whenever we can.
The glaring exception to this time-tested approach is the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. The original premise for opening GTMO � that detainees would not be able to challenge their detention � was found unconstitutional five years ago. In the meantime, GTMO has become a symbol around the world for an America that flouts the rule of law. Our allies won�t cooperate with us if they think a terrorist will end up at GTMO. During a time of budget cuts, we spend $150 million each year to imprison 166 people �almost $1 million per prisoner. And the Department of Defense estimates that we must spend another $200 million to keep GTMO open at a time when we are cutting investments in education and research here at home.
As President, I have tried to close GTMO. I transferred 67 detainees to other countries before Congress imposed restrictions to effectively prevent us from either transferring detainees to other countries, or imprisoning them in the United States. These restrictions make no sense. After all, under President Bush, some 530 detainees were transferred from GTMO with Congress�s support. When I ran for President the first time, John McCain supported closing GTMO. No person has ever escaped from one of our super-max or military prisons in the United States. Our courts have convicted hundreds of people for terrorism-related offenses, including some who are more dangerous than most GTMO detainees. Given my Administration�s relentless pursuit of al Qaeda�s leadership, there is no justification beyond politics for Congress to prevent us from closing a facility that should never have been opened.
Today, I once again call on Congress to lift the restrictions on detainee transfers from GTMO. I have asked the Department of Defense to designate a site in the United States where we can hold military commissions. I am appointing a new, senior envoy at the State Department and Defense Department whose sole responsibility will be to achieve the transfer of detainees to third countries. I am lifting the moratorium on detainee transfers to Yemen, so we can review them on a case by case basis. To the greatest extent possible, we will transfer detainees who have been cleared to go to other countries. Where appropriate, we will bring terrorists to justice in our courts and military justice system. And we will insist that judicial review be available for every detainee.
Even after we take these steps, one issue will remain: how to deal with those GTMO detainees who we know have participated in dangerous plots or attacks, but who cannot be prosecuted � for example because the evidence against them has been compromised or is inadmissible in a court of law. But once we commit to a process of closing GTMO, I am confident that this legacy problem can be resolved, consistent with our commitment to the rule of law.I know the politics are hard. But history will cast a harsh judgment on this aspect of our fight against terrorism, and those of us who fail to end it. Imagine a future � ten years from now, or twenty years from now � when the United States of America is still holding people who have been charged with no crime on a piece of land that is not a part of our country. Look at the current situation, where we are force-feeding detainees who are holding a hunger strike. Is that who we are? Is that something that our Founders foresaw? Is that the America we want to leave to our children?
Our sense of justice is stronger than that. We have prosecuted scores of terrorists in our courts. That includes Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who tried to blow up an airplane over Detroit; and Faisal Shahzad, who put a car bomb in Times Square. It is in a court of law that we will try Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who is accused of bombing the Boston Marathon. Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, is as we speak serving a life sentence in a maximum security prison here, in the United States. In sentencing Reid, Judge William Young told him, �the way we treat you�is the measure of our own liberties.� He went on to point to the American flag that flew in the courtroom � �That flag,� he said, �will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag still stands for freedom.�
Time will tell if actions follow words... but I remember a President with infinitely more political capital than the one we have now coming off a landslide victory and huge majorities in both houses of Congress who made promises to "close Guantanamo within a year..." and he had individualized determinations then... those determinations that concluded (unanimously among the intelligence and defense communities) that the majority of the men he is holding-- and boys and girls-- he, Barack Obama, is personally deciding to keep holding them-- were "cleared for release" as posing no threat to anyone... most of whom are Yemeni... so what is "released on a case by base basis" other than cover to do (more) nothing? Damned if I know.
All I do know is that if John McCain had been elected President, and had (as I suspect he might have) adopted many if not all of the same aggressive, imperial policies as Barack Obama, alleged progressives would be calling for his impeachment, if not his head. But because Barack is on "our team"... we hear crickets chirp, where we should be hearing millions taking to the streets in protest.
Well, well... you'all haven't figured out after 11 plus years that GTMO is a beta-test-- the canary in the coal-mine as to whether our supposed democratic republic can withstand the abuses heretofore reserved for those unfortunates on the fringes of our empire that included things like death squads in Latin America, dictatorships in Africa, assorted dictatorships and "secret bombings" in Southeast Asia and assorted brutality of all kinds in the Middle East and North Africa... well, as we reach whatever stage of empire we are, these "unfortunate" practices are now quite literally being brought home. GTMO has proven once and for all that as long as they are pitched as directed at some sort of racial/ethnic "other" (and foreign Muslims seem to have done wonderfully for this purpose)... well, totalitarianism is a.o.k. Indeed, it no longer takes a 9-11-- just a couple of homicidal (FBI informant?) Chechens, and one of our largest metropolitan areas literally put up with martial law...
Yes... GTMO has been so successful in advancing imperial goals, one does wonder why the President would even joke about shutting it down? [Oops... I guess I've accidentally told you what I thought of the speech there... mybad.]
May 22, 2013, What'll it cost, man... what'll it COST?
Evidently it will cost $450,000,000, or roughly $2.5 million per prisoner to maintain and "upgrade" the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a Pentagon budget request. Considering 86 or so-- the majority-- of the 166 men still held there have been cleared for release by our own government, that means we'll be spending over $200 million to hold men our government tells us are innocent and shouldn't be there.
The sheer financial cost of political cowardice and national ignorance and apathy mixed with complacency is impressive, to say the least. My prediction remains that Guantanamo will ultimately be shut down at some point not out of some legal or moral epiphany, or even international pressure, but because the United States will simply lack the financial wherewithal to keep it open.
Of course, given the massive prisoner hunger strike that has managed to get GTMO back into public consciousness in the first place, it seems that the government isn't spending all that much on prisoner meals... although quite a bit seems to be being spent on Ensure.
Priorities, folks. We've got to keep our phoney baloney jobs... give the President a harumph!
