Magpie

Saturday, August 19, 2006

How much classified information does the US need?

If you work in the Pentagon or the US Energy Department, the answer to that question is: 'A whole lot more than exists now — especially if that info concerns nuclear weapons.' That kind of attitude, of course, can lead people to start classifying pretty strange stuff. Just like paranoiacs in the Pentagon and Energy Dept. have been doing.

Before and after nuclear data was censored

Before and after nuclear data was censored

Nixon's nuclear doctrine before and after the censors.
[Source: National Security Archive]

From a briefing book on document re-classification from the National Security Archive:

The Pentagon and the Energy Department have now stamped as national security secrets the long-public numbers of U.S. nuclear missiles during the Cold War, including data from the public reports of the Secretaries of Defense in 1967 and 1971, according to government documents posted today on the Web by the National Security Archive....

Pentagon and Energy officials have now blacked out from previously public charts the numbers of Minuteman missiles (1,000), Titan II missiles (54), and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (656) in the historic U.S. Cold War arsenal, even though four Secretaries of Defense (McNamara, Laird, Richardson, Schlesinger) reported strategic force levels publicly in the 1960s and 1970s.

The security censors also have blacked out deployment information about U.S nuclear weapons in Great Britain and Germany that was declassified in 1999, as well as nuclear deployment arrangements with Canada, even though the Canadian government has declassified its side of the arrangement.

While it would be easy to blame Dubya for the censorship, it actually got going several years before he took office as the result of the Kyl-Lott amendments passed by the GOP-controlled Congress in 1998. As a result of the amendment, the Energy Department alone has re-classified over 6000 document pages — mainly having to do with nuclear weapons. Dubya, it seems, is only responsible for accelerating the pace of re-classification since 2001.

This re-classification isn't just of interest to historians and nuclear experts:

"The government is reclassifying public data at the same time that government prosecutors are claiming the power to go after anybody who has 'unauthorized possession" of classified information," said Archive director Thomas Blanton. "What's really at risk is accountability in government."

Basically, Dubya's administration is setting up a situation where journalists, activists, or whistleblowers could face criminal prosecution for releasing data that was public knowledge for decades. And, given the secrecy with which the re-classification process has proceeded, it would be easily possible to be in 'unauthorized possession' of secret information without even realizing it.

You have to ask just who Dubya's administration and the GOP are protecting the country from, don't you?

| | Posted by Magpie at 9:41 AM | Get permalink

I hope my cat Medea never sees this.

She already gets into way too much trouble.

Via Echidne of the Snakes.

| | Posted by Magpie at 1:18 AM | Get permalink

Thursday, August 17, 2006

More on the illegal wiretapping ruling.

Given that I'm still on deadline at my 'real job,' I haven't had time to give the decision more than a quick once-through, but it looks like US District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor totally rejected all of the rationalizations that Dubya's administration used for it's illegal wiretapping and for keeping the case out of the courts.

Here's part of Taylor's ruling:

Defendants assert that they cannot defend this case without the exposure of state secrets. This court disagrees. The Bush Administration has repeatedly told the general public that there is a valid basis in law for the TSP [Terrorist Surveillance Program]. Further, Defendants have contended that the President has the authority under the AUMF and the Constitution to authorize the continued use of the TSP. Defendants have supported these arguments without revealing or relying on any classified information. Indeed, the court has reviewed the classified information and is of the opinion that this information is not necessary to any viable defense to the TSP. Defendants have presented support for the argument that "it . . is well-established that the President may exercise his statutory and constitutional authority to gather intelligence information about foreign enemies." Defendants cite to various sources to support this position. Consequently, the court finds Defendants' argument that they cannot defend this case without the use of classified information to be disingenuous and without merit.

What makes the decision especially interesting to this magpie is that Taylor's ruling relies in part on cases involving the detention of terrorist suspects that Dubya's administration has already lost.

If you want to read the decision for yourself, you can download a PDF file here, and a PDF of the permanent injunction barring the wiretapping here.

If Dubya's administration hasn't already appealed this ruling, you can bet it will be filing papers quickly. And you can be just as sure that Dubya's minions in the Congress are already crafting legislation to legalize the illegal wiretapping carried out by the NSA at the prez's behest.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:14 PM | Get permalink

Federal court says that Dubya's warrantless wiretapping is illegal.

Hot off the wire:

DETROIT (AP) - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The administration will appeal this, of course, but the ruling is very hopeful. Keep your eye now on a similar case being heard in the federal courts in San Francisco.

| | Posted by Magpie at 9:10 AM | Get permalink

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

On deadline again.

Posting will likely be spotty at best until I wrap up my current work on Friday.

If you need to satisfy your blog jones before then, go visit my pals Mary and Natasha over at Pacific Views. Or you might want to sample some of the many fine blogs listed over there on the left.

I'll be back as soon as possible.

| | Posted by Magpie at 8:49 AM | Get permalink

Monday, August 14, 2006

Tuning in to 'security theater.'

Since 9/11, airline travelers in the US (and elsewhere) have been amazed and baffled by the ever-changing list of stuff that poses a security threat: Nail clippers. Knitting needles. Scissors. Screwdrivers. All of these items have been banned, and then un-banned.

The alleged terror plot against transatlantic airliners has brought a new list of no-no's: Lip gloss. Shampoo. Sports drinks. Yogurt. You can bet that, just as soon as the current wave of government-abetted paranoia slackens, these items will suddenly stop being so threatening.

All of this goes to point to some incontrovertible facts about anti-terror measures: You can't defend against the last attack. And you can't anticipate what the method of the next attack will be. That's why banning lip gloss isn't going to make the skies any safer than they were when nail cutters were on the blacklist.

What does work, however, is careful investigative work conducted by law enforcement — a conclusion that runs directly counter to the Dubya administration's insistence the 'war on terror' can only be won if the nation acquiesces to an ever-broadening assault on privacy and the US Constitution. The arrests made by Uk authorities after a year-long investigation should prove to any reasonable person that Dubya's anti-terror policies are wrong-headed and ineffective.

Security expert Bruce Schneier has an excellent post making these points more eloquently than we have:

It's easy to defend against what the terrorists planned last time, but it's shortsighted. If we spend billions fielding liquid-analysis machines in airports and the terrorists use solid explosives, we've wasted our money. If they target shopping malls, we've wasted our money. Focusing on tactics simply forces the terrorists to make a minor modification in their plans. There are too many targets -- stadiums, schools, theaters, churches, the long line of densely packed people before airport security -- and too many ways to kill people.

Security measures that require us to guess correctly don't work, because invariably we will guess wrong. It's not security, it's security theater: measures designed to make us feel safer but not actually safer.

Airport security is the last line of defense, and not a very good one at that. Sure, it'll catch the sloppy and the stupid -- and that's a good enough reason not to do away with it entirely -- but it won't catch a well-planned plot. We can't keep weapons out of prisons; we can't possibly keep them off airplanes.

The goal of a terrorist is to cause terror. Last week's arrests demonstrate how real security doesn't focus on possible terrorist tactics, but on the terrorists themselves. It's a victory for intelligence and investigation, and a dramatic demonstration of how investments in these areas pay off.

As much sense as Schneier is making, you can bet that Dubya's administration will continue on with its same old 'security theater' song and dance. After all, building a huge anti-terror apparatus makes lots of money for the big corporations that have bankrolled the rise to power of Dubya and his accomplices. And stoking public fears of terrorism has so far kept GOP election victories coming fast and furious.

Making money. Having an audience. What more does a theater need?

| | Posted by Magpie at 10:30 AM | Get permalink

The PR war in the Mideast.

Over at CJR Daily, Alia Malek has a very interesting piece on how the very effective efforts by Lebanese bloggers to tell what it's like to be living through Israel's attack on their country have prompted the Israeli government to wage its own propaganda war in the blogosphere.

An appeal in the form of an emailed letter, signed by Amir Gissin, the Director for Public Affairs at the Israeli Ministry, identified the Internet as "the new battleground for Israel's image." He must have in part been referring to the almost overnight proliferation of blogs from Lebanon, which seem to be spontaneous and unsupported by any Lebanese ministry. The outpouring of first-person accounts coming out of Lebanon via newly constructed blogs and mass emails has managed to give a human and sometimes charismatic face to a country oft beleaguered by war but unable until now to disseminate with speed and savvy Lebanese narratives of what is happening in that country.

The blogs and emails have been so effective that stories have run on them in outlets such as the Wall Street Journal (subscription required), MSNBC.com, and the Associated Press. The keepers of these blogs have also been interviewed on Nightline, BBC, and CSPAN, not to mention a host of European media.

Simultaneously, the Internet has allowed Lebanese and other Arab voices to be accessible to English-language consumers, especially those not satiated by the MSM's coverage of the conflict. With these new ways of communicating — blogs, forums, mass emails — being heard is no longer dependent on wealth and power or even on volume, membership in political parties, or in armed militias. The convergence of these dynamics has meant readers are hearing the unfiltered voices of regular yet diverse folk — voices that have often been eloquent, artistic, reflective, even academic, a notable difference from the hysterical, wailing, or angry masses the MSM tends to capture on the "Arab Street."

Now, to counter these voices, the Israeli FM is urging supporters of Israel to go to the Web site, Give Israel Your United Support, and download the "Megaphone" software, developed by an Israeli company to alert subscribers to internet polls, "problematic" articles, and online debates which the Ministry would like Israel supporters to "talk back" to. GIYUS.org puts activists just a click away from the forums in which they are asked to participate or the media outlets to which they are asked to complain.

As Malek points out, the publicizing of the Megaphone software has had a predictable result: Arab bloggers have published the URL for the software, suggesting that Israel's opponents use it to track the same debates that Israel's supporters are interested in. The fireworks are ongoing.

I've always suspected that something like the Megaphone software existed. Over the past year, I've noticed that any unfavorable mention of Israel in Magpie gets an almost immediate reaction from a pro-Israel commenter — usualy one who shows no evidence of having read Magpie before. These commenters always have the same list of pro-Israel bullet points, which they normally make without sticking around for any discussion. Given the Magpie has a really low profile in the blogosphere, I've always wondered how these pro-Israel trolls find this blog so quickly. Now I know.

| | Posted by Magpie at 9:24 AM | Get permalink

Just what the world needs.

A blog by Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

While Ahmadinejad's blog is supposed to be available in Farsi, French, and English, only the Farsi appears to be fully working right now. If you're dying to know what Iran's prez has to say, though, Reuters has translated part of his first 2300-word post here.

While this magpie has fond memories of the blog by Iran's former vice-president, Mohammad Ali Abtahi, I don't think I'll be spending a lot of time reading the blog of the current president, even when it's easy to read it in English.

More: I just found out that the blog by former VP Abtahi (a reformist, by the way) is still going strong, although the direct link is suffering technical difficulties. I was able to read his latest English-language posts via Google's cache by going here. This magpie notes with pleasure that Abtahi's wonderful Babelfish English is still the language du jour.

| | Posted by Magpie at 8:58 AM | Get permalink

Happy birthday to me!

Nah, it's not the blog's birthday — Magpie isn't four years old until next March. But it is the birthday of the magpie who writes this blog.

Being fond of mystery, I'm not going to say exactly how old I am today. I will tell you that I saw the Clash on their first US tour. And that I voted against Richard Nixon the second time he ran for president.

Birthday greetings are cheerfully accepted down in the comments!

| | Posted by Magpie at 8:47 AM | Get permalink

Sunday, August 13, 2006

This story raises so many questions...

... it's hard to know where to start asking them.

And since the report comes from the Herald Sun in Australia — hardly the world's most reliable source — you have to take it with several grains of salt. If even half of the details are true, however, something very strange is going on.

An elite US unit has secretly removed a cache of weapons-grade uranium from a vulnerable site in Poland, fearing terrorists could have stolen it to make a crude nuclear bomb.

Despite efforts to improve security at the Maria research reactor in Swierk, National Nuclear Security Administration officials determined there was the serious potential threat of a "diversion" to terror groups.

"This is the easiest material to make a crude nuclear weapon with," agency spokesman Bryan Wilkes said of the highly enriched uranium. "Terrorists want to make one."

Working with Polish authorities, the US agency this week extracted 41kg of uranium in green canisters marked "radioactive" and "fissile".

A huge motorcade delivered it to a Russian plane, which flew to a secure disposal site.

Given that the Russians can't even control their own nuclear materials, why would anyone with brains hand over dangerous nuclear material to them? Of course, no one in Dubya's administration has any brains, so I guess the question answers itself.

Via Doug Krile.

| | Posted by Magpie at 1:14 PM | Get permalink

Pretty suspicious, if you ask me.

Since the the alleged terror plot against transatlantic airliners was announced last week, this magpie has been a bit suspicious of the timing of that announcement, given Dubya's continuing political problems. According to a report from NBC, the arrests of suspects in the terror plot were pushed forward at least a week because of pressure from the US.

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.

The source did say, however, that police believe one U.K.-based suspect was ready to conduct a 'dry run.' British authorities had wanted to let him go forward with part of the plan, but the Americans balked.

The White House, of course, denies all of this.

And you have to admit, it's oh-so-unlikely that Dubya's crashing popularity, the faltering occupation of Iraq, Israel's failure to vanquish Hezbollah (despite US support), and the defeat of an important political ally in the US Senate (Joe Lieberman) could have made the White House want some terror arrests to divert the public's attention.

I mean, Dubya's administration would have to be filled with amoral, manipulative political hacks who care for nothing except the perpetuation of their own political power — even at the expense of the good of the country. And we all know that's not true. Right?

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:52 PM | Get permalink

Truth in advertising.

Tons of truth, actually. I wish I could tell you something about the longer work from which this is obviously an excerpt.

Most of the video could have come from any workplace you could name — including a surprising number of non-profit organizations. In particular, the 'Director's Pitch' reminds me of the 'brilliant' suggestions that emanate from consultants whose job it is to tell US public and community radio stations how to 'improve' their 'services.'

From YouTube, via MetaFilter.

| | Posted by Magpie at 12:02 PM | Get permalink

Stingy at home, stingy abroad.

Which nation does the most to help improve the quality of life in developing countries? Not the US, that's for sure. In line with it failure to spend on social programs — or anything except military programs and corporate welfare, for that matter — Dubya's administration has taken the US almost to the bottom of the Commitment to Development Index. Released annually by the Center for Global Development, the index ranks the world's 21 richest countries by what they're doing to fight the poverty in the world. On the newest list, only Japan ranks lower than the US.

Graph of 2005 Commitment to Development Index

Graph of 2005 Commitment to Development Index

[Graphic: BBC; Source: Center for Global Development]

[D]espite the US giving the largest amount of aid that donation was the smallest in relation to the size of its economy.

The CGD added that a lot of the money was also contingent on the purchase of US goods, and so was in fact a "backdoor subsidy for American interests".

America was also criticised for its handling of aid in Iraq with the CGD claiming that 90 cents in every dollar was lost to violence and corruption.

You can read more about the Commitment to Development Index here. There's a PDF file with more information about the 2005 index here.

Via BBC News.

| | Posted by Magpie at 11:31 AM | Get permalink