Defending the Ancien Regime

I'm glad that hyper-tweeter 'blogdiva' (Liza Sabater) made the point early on the morning of Nov. 14, as Oakland was cleared out by a multi-city police force, that the raid was as much a product of President Obama and DHS head Janet Napolitano, as of the multicultural, ostensibly liberal government of Oakland. Whenever multiple jurisdictions are involved, you can be sure that DHS law enforcement funds are involved, and likely the regional Joint Terrorism Task Forces are involved as well.
When you come right down to it, the federal government perceives the continued presence of semi-permanent encampments in multiple cities as a threat to the public order - and there are always enough "Black Bloc" provocateurs in many cities to give that perception some validity. I won't go so far as Liza to say that DHS considers Occupy as "low-level terrorism", but the feds certainly give cities plenty of tactical riot funds to make park-clearance a major goal.

What is to be done? A phalanx of judges in Nashville, including some rather conservative ones, have slapped down the governor of Tennessee and the state police for clearing public squares, saying that political encampments are themselves a protected form of free speech. Why not extend that argument to multiple cities with a class action lawsuit against those municipalities who are quick to ban protests? I'm thinking Albany, Atlanta, Austin, Berkeley, Chapel Hill, Denver, Nashville, Oakland, Portland, St. Louis, Salt Lake City... hmm, the list is getting long. Notice how many cities with "liberal" governments are listed? Arguments for public safety appeal to conservatives and liberals alike. Maybe it's time to initiate an economic boycott against these cities and others.

On Thursday night, I'm on a panel at Colorado College called "What if there were no Bill of Rights?" I'll argue that most Americans shy away from the Bill of Rights if it interferes with their entertainment bubble. And those in political office at municipal, county, or state level, even if they are liberal Democrats, are quick to eradicate free expression when a special event comes to town, like a G20 meeting or political party convention -- raiding organizing spaces, banning the wearing of bandanas within city limits, etc. Judges in locales like St. Paul, Minn. have fined city governments for suspending Constitutional rights on "emergency" grounds, when they know full well their temporary laws will not pass Constitutional muster. Maybe it's time to get serious on the punitive fines for such cities.

(On another topic, I spoke on a panel about the changing role of automated warfare and what it meant for the veteran. Here 'tis.)

Jane Harman, AIPAC, and the NSA

In a mere 48 hours, the case of Rep. Jane Harman and the National Security Agency has gotten so convoluted, it's almost impossible to tell who the good guys are, if any. Do the leaked NSA transcripts revealed in Congressional Quarterly and The New York Times indicate that she was a shill for the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee? Do the existence of the transcripts indicate the NSA is regularly monitoring all members of Congress? Can we believe the Harper's story that the Bush administration used the existence of the transcripts to blackmail Harman into supporting FISA bypass - and into bullying The New York Times in an attempt to prevent the paper from revealing the bypass efforts in the first place?

Here's some things we can say with certainty: Harman, who represents Venice, California in the LA area, is a very creepy gung-ho-Israel and gung-ho-national-security person, a female equivalent of Sen. Joe Lieberman. Even if Obama urged Congress to play nice with Joltin' Joe, people like Harman and Lieberman have no business being in the Democratic Party. Harman's willingness to get in bed with AIPAC and take away our civil liberties shows us that she is only getting the infamous "chickens coming home to roost" treatment.

AIPAC's efforts to bribe her into pushing the Justice Department to go easy on the lobbying organization, by offering to give her the chair of the Intelligence Committee, only shows how smarmy the organization is on a regular basis. And her willingness to go to bat for two low-life criminals Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, shows how easily she can be swayed by a good Zionist lobby.

And yet, and yet... She's absolutely right that the NSA had little business monitoring her calls to begin with, and that no one should have leaked NSA transcripts, inside or outside of the agency. Yet there is a sense of poetic justice to all of this. Harman wanted to keep the public from knowing about the NSA bypass. Apparently, she may have pushed for this in order to keep those transcripts silent. When NPR got hold of Harman Tuesday afternoon, to call her on-air responses "sputtering obfuscation" would be too kind.

Well, Rep. Harman, no honor among thieves, criminals, and authoritarian whores. The NSA is a criminal global monitoring agency, and AIPAC is a criminal gang of thugs pushing the hard-right Israel line. Play with thugs, and you shouldn't be surprised to be taken out into the back alley for a whupping.

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: It Tolls for Thee

Eight months ago, I expressed some concern about the future of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, one of the best sources of national-security stories in existence. Picked up the Nov.-Dec. issue, and a page 2 letter announces this will be the last printed issue published. From now on, there's just the web site and a digital compendium. Let's hope that www.thebulletin.org continues to be a good site for news and views on nukes and other grave affairs, because the printed magazine will surely be missed.