Tag Archives: government

What Did My Government Do When I Was Taken Hostage In Iran?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Yesterday I filed a lawsuit against the FBI, the CIA, and the State Department. I intend to persuade the government to release records that will reveal how it dealt with the imprisonment of Sarah Shourd, Josh Fattal, and myself in Iran from 2009 to 2011. The three of us were arrested near the Iranian border while on a hike in Iraq’s Kurdish region, which we were visiting on a short trip from Sarah’s and my home in Damascus. Sarah remained in prison for 13 months, and Josh and I for twice as long. For the two years that I was in prison, I wondered constantly what my government was doing to help us. I still want to know.

But my interest in these records is more than personal. Innocent Americans get kidnapped, imprisoned, or held hostage in other countries from time to time. When that happens, our government must take it very seriously. These situations cannot be divorced from politics; they are often extremist reactions to our foreign policy. Currently, Americans are being detained in Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Cuba, and other countries.

What does our government do when civilians are held hostage? Sarah’s, Josh’s, and my family, like others in similar situations, were regularly assured by our leaders—all the way up to the Secretary of State and the President—that they were doing everything they could, but our families were rarely told what that meant. Why is this information so secret, even after the fact? It is important to know how the government deals with such crises. Is there a process by which the government decides whether or not to negotiate with another country or political group? How does it decide which citizens to negotiate for and which not to? Are the reassurances the government gives to grieving families genuine, or intended to appease them? Do branches of government cooperate with each other, or work in isolation?

Some will say disclosing such things only helps our enemies. This is a common defense of government secrecy. The CIA seems to be taking this approach with my request by invoking “national security” in its denial. This logic can be applied to almost anything related to foreign policy. If Congress had not publicly discussed the ins and outs of going to war with Syria, for example, it might by some stretch of the imagination have given our military an edge. But without having to defend their positions to the public, members of Congress might have come to a different conclusion and decided to go to war. Obstructing public discussion on how the government reacts to crises impedes democracy.

We are fortunate in this country to have the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which allows citizens to access unclassified government records. The Act originated in 1955 during the Cold War, when there was a steep rise in government secrecy. It was strengthened after the Watergate scandal. But transparency has since eroded, to the point that federal agencies often don’t abide by the terms of the FOIA without legal coercion. It’s been almost a year since I first filed FOIA requests with the FBI and State Department for records about our case. I filed with the CIA six months ago. The law gives government agencies up to 30 business days to determine whether they will release records. So far, however, no records have turned up. I am not surprised by this. Without a lawsuit, I would not expect to receive anything for years, if at all.

Years can pass before the government gets around to releasing records in response to FOIA requests. Last year, for example, the State Department notified me that it was ready to release around 700 documents in response to a FOIA request I had filed four years prior. The request regarded an Iraqi sheikh who was receiving what amounted to bribes in the form of inflated construction contracts from the US military, a scheme I wrote about for Mother Jones in 2009. Despite the fact that the war is now over, and the records will be much less significant than they might have been at the time, I told State I would indeed like to see them. I am still waiting.

It has unfortunately become commonplace for government agencies to do everything they can to muddle the transparency mandated by the FOIA, to the point where only people trained to get around stonewalling have any chance of succeeding. Take my request to the FBI for records about our case. The Bureau responded to my initial request with its standard denial letter: “Based on the information you provided, we conducted a search of the Central Records System. We were unable to identify main file records.” It’s a standard response—I’ve received it before—but I was surprised to see it this time. The FBI visited my mom’s home, spoke to my family repeatedly and they have no records?

In fact, the FBI letter is intentionally misleading. What they are saying is that they have failed to find a very particular type of records. As my attorney, Jeff Light, put it, the FBI “has main files on persons, event, publications, etc. that are of investigative interest to the Bureau. Imagine a file cabinet containing a series of folders. Each folder is titled with the name of a person, event, etc. When they are searching main files, they are searching the label on each folder. They are not searching any of the documents inside the folder.” In response, Light and I specifically named a long list of databases and records systems for the FBI to search. Nothing has turned up yet.

It is unfortunate that litigation has become a standard part of the FOIA process. It’s also unfortunate that the government is not transparent with people entangled in political crises about what it is doing to help them. While I was in prison, my mother walked out of meetings with politicians, frustrated with their inaction. After Sarah came home, she also asked the government to tell her what it was doing, and got nothing. We asked again after I was released. I wish I didn’t need to go to court to get an answer.

Excerpt from: 

What Did My Government Do When I Was Taken Hostage In Iran?

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Did My Government Do When I Was Taken Hostage In Iran?

Ask a Pollster: Americans More Worried About ‘Warming’ Than ‘Climate Change’

Pollsters find that “global warming” is more familiar and conjures stronger emotional responses. From: Ask a Pollster: Americans More Worried About ‘Warming’ Than ‘Climate Change’ Related ArticlesDot Earth Blog: Americans’ Varied Views of ‘Global Warming’ and ‘Climate Change’Governments Await Obama’s Move on Carbon to Gauge U.S. Climate EffortsOp-Ed Contributor: Climate Change Doomed the Ancients

See the original post:

Ask a Pollster: Americans More Worried About ‘Warming’ Than ‘Climate Change’

Posted in ALPHA, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, Naka, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ask a Pollster: Americans More Worried About ‘Warming’ Than ‘Climate Change’

Law Enforcement vs. the Hippies

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Paul Waldman writes today about how lefty protest groups get treated differently from right-wing protest groups:

The latest, from the New York Times, describes how law enforcement officials around the country went on high alert when the Occupy protests began in 2011, passing information between agencies with an urgency suggesting that at least some people thought that people gathering to oppose Wall Street were about to try to overthrow the U.S. government. And we remember how many of those protests ended, with police moving in with force.

….If you can’t recall any Tea Party protests in 2009 and 2010 being broken up by baton-wielding, pepper-spraying cops in riot gear, that’s because it didn’t happen. Just like the anti-war protesters of the Bush years, the Tea Partiers were unhappy with the government, and saying so loudly. But for some reason, law enforcement didn’t view them as a threat.

Maybe this is because lefties don’t complain enough. You may remember the hissy fit thrown by Fox News when the Department of Homeland Security issued a report suggesting that the election of a black president might spur recruitment among right-wing extremist groups and “even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.” As it turns out, that was a good call. But the specter of jack-booted Obama thugs smashing down the doors of earnest, heartland Republicans dominated the news cycle long enough for DHS to repudiate the report under pressure and eventually dissolve the team that had produced it.

And the similar report about left-wing extremism that DHS had produced a few months earlier? You don’t remember that? I don’t suppose you would. That’s because it was barely noticed, let alone an object of complaint. And even if lefties had complained, I doubt that anyone would have taken it seriously. There’s just no equivalent of Fox News on the left when it comes to turning partisan grievances into mainstream news.

There’s probably more to it, though. Mainstream lefties just don’t identify with the far left as a key part of their tribe. They’ll get a certain amount of support, sure, but they’ll also get plenty of mockery and derision, as the Occupy protesters did. On the right, though, extremists are all members of the tribe in good standing as long as they stop short of, say, murdering people. They only have to stop barely short, though. Waving guns around and threatening to kill people is A-OK, as Cliven Bundy and his merry band of armed tax resistors showed.

So when DHS produces a report suggesting that right-wing extremism might turn out to be a growth industry in the Obama era, the ranks of the conservative movement close. An attack on one is an attack on all, and Fox News stands ready and willing to turn the outrage meter to 11. Rinse and repeat.

Continued here: 

Law Enforcement vs. the Hippies

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Law Enforcement vs. the Hippies

Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

There is a 16-year-old transgender girl in an adult prison in Connecticut right now. She isn’t there to serve a sentence. There are no charges against her. Still, she has been there for more than six weeks, with no indication of when she might be released.

Until last week, the girl, whom I’ll call Jane Doe because she is a juvenile, was in solitary confinement in the mental health unit where, according to a letter she wrote, she cried in bed every night. She heard adult inmates crying, screaming, and banging on the walls. A guard observed her day and night, even when she showered or used the toilet. When other inmates caught sight of her, they yelled and made fun of her.

“I feel forgotten and thrown away,” she wrote to the governor of Connecticut from her solitary cell. “As you probably know, these feeling are not new for me. This is the way my life has been going since I was a little kid.”

The state became involved in Jane Doe’s life when she was five, according to her affidavit, because her father was incarcerated and her mom was using crack and heroin. She was born a boy; after she was placed in the care of her extended family, she said, one relative caught her playing with dolls and bashed her head into the wall. She said another relative raped her at age eight, as did others as she grew older. Doe would only allow herself to look like a girl in secret. Around age 11, a relative caught her in the bathroom wearing her dress and lipstick and slapped her, shouting, “You are a boy! What the fuck is wrong with you?”

At 12, the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) became her legal guardian. While in group homes, she says she was sexually assaulted by staffers, and at 15, she became a sex worker and was once locked up for weeks and forced to have sex with “customers” until she escaped. “I wanted to be a little kid again in my mother’s arms and all I wanted was someone to tell me they loved me, that everything would be alright, and that I will never have to live the way I was again.”

Here is how Jane Doe ended up in prison. On January 28, while living at a juvenile facility in Massachusetts—where she was serving a sentence for assault—she allegedly attacked a staff member, biting her, pulling her hair and kicking her in the head. This kind of behavior wasn’t new for Doe. The director of the Connecticut Juvenile Training School, a correctional facility for boys, later testified in court that, since Doe was nine, police have been called 11 times while she was in state facilities. He said she sometimes smeared feces on herself. Another supervisor claimed Doe regularly “exhibited assaultive behaviors,” targeting female staff and other juveniles.

According to Jane Doe’s lawyer, Aaron Romano, the most recent incident was sparked when a male staffer at the Massachusetts facility put Doe in a bear hug restraint from behind. “This is a girl who has been sexually abused,” Romano says. “She is inclined to interpret actions with that view.” DCF declined to comment on the incident, but the female staff member Doe allegedly attacked did not press charges. The male staffer has since been dismissed.

In order to move Doe to an adult prison, DCF cited an obscure statute that allows doing so when it is in the “best interest” of the child. Initially, the state sought to place Doe in a men’s prison, but her lawyers objected and she was sent to a women’s facility. There, she was placed in solitary confinement because under federal law, juveniles cannot be detained “in any institution in which they have contact with adult inmates.”

Continue Reading »

Link to original: 

Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Good Sense, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

Near-Average Hurricane Season Is Predicted for U.S. as El Niño Develops in the Pacific

Experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said they anticipated three to six hurricanes — one or two of them major storms — this year. Link:   Near-Average Hurricane Season Is Predicted for U.S. as El Niño Develops in the Pacific ; ;Related ArticlesExtreme Weather: How El Niño Might Alter the Political ClimateThe Big Melt AcceleratesIn California, Climate Issues Moved to Fore by Governor ;

Continue reading:  

Near-Average Hurricane Season Is Predicted for U.S. as El Niño Develops in the Pacific

Posted in Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Near-Average Hurricane Season Is Predicted for U.S. as El Niño Develops in the Pacific

Gavin Schmidt on Why Climate Models are Wrong, and Valuable

Two takes on climate science by Gavin Schmidt, who explains while computer models, while highly imperfect, are valuable. Visit site: Gavin Schmidt on Why Climate Models are Wrong, and Valuable ; ;Related ArticlesHefty Global Goals from a Vatican Meeting: Stabilizing the Climate, Energy for All and an Inclusive EconomyThree Long Views of Life With Rising SeasConsider Clashing Scientific and Societal Meanings of ‘Collapse’ When Reading Antarctic Ice News ;

See the article here:

Gavin Schmidt on Why Climate Models are Wrong, and Valuable

Posted in alternative energy, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Gavin Schmidt on Why Climate Models are Wrong, and Valuable

Fire Season Starts Early, and Fiercely

Officials in California have already battled 1,400 wildfires this year, twice the number they would respond to in the same period in a normal year. Taken from –  Fire Season Starts Early, and Fiercely ; ;Related ArticlesNational Briefing | Southwest: Texas: Weather Aids FirefightersScientists Warn of Rising Oceans From Polar MeltDot Earth Blog: Consider Clashing Scientific and Societal Meanings of ‘Collapse’ When Reading Antarctic Ice News ;

Follow this link:  

Fire Season Starts Early, and Fiercely

Posted in Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fire Season Starts Early, and Fiercely

READ: Conspiracy Theorist Dick Morris Blasts Clinton Conspiracy Theorists in Unsealed ’95 Memo

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Dick Morris, the one-time adviser to President Bill Clinton, has carved out a strange, multi-faceted career in recent years, engaging in questionable political dealings, pitching misguided punditry (he predicted Mitt Romney would win in a landslide in 2012), and peddling conspiracy theories. On his website, Morris argues that the CIA, FBI, and the mob were behind the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He co-wrote a book pushing right-wing conspiracy theories about the United Nations, international agencies, and the like. (“Black helicopters is the crazy word for the UN invading the United States,” Morris said in previewing the book. “But it’s really going to happen.”) He’s banged the IRS-scandal drum, insisting that Obama was secretly behind the agency’s supposed scrutiny of conservative groups. He pushed anti-Obama Benghazi theories. He backed Donald Trump’s birther talk.

Morris wasn’t always this, uh, unconventional. In fact, in a newly released memo from Clinton’s presidential archives, Morris advised the president to call out the conspiracy theorists of the 1990s and to combat the widespread right-wing paranoia of that time—the same sort of paranoia that Morris now exploits to make a buck.

Morris’ May 1995 memo offered comments on a speech Clinton was to give at Michigan State University. It was just two weeks after the Oklahoma City bombing, and Morris urged the president to take a tough line against the right-wing militia crowd and those conservatives who had been asserting that the federal government was encroaching on their lives and eviscerating their civil liberties. Such incendiary rhetoric had been on the rise for several years, and the Oklahoma City attack was seen by some political observers as the culmination of this anti-government campaign.

“I’d propose tougher language,” Morris wrote. He suggested these lines: “How dare you say that the government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom. This is the government you helped elect and you can change… How dare you appropriate to your paranoid ways, our scared national symbols… How dare you invoke the Founding Fathers who created the elective government you claim as you persecutor.”

Clinton ended up using several of Morris’ suggestions in his speech. “How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on earth live in tyranny?” Clinton asked. “How dare you call yourselves patriots and heroes?”

Read the full memo:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1145793-dick-morris-may-1995-memo.js”,
width: 630,
height: 600,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1145793-dick-morris-may-1995-memo”
);

This article: 

READ: Conspiracy Theorist Dick Morris Blasts Clinton Conspiracy Theorists in Unsealed ’95 Memo

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on READ: Conspiracy Theorist Dick Morris Blasts Clinton Conspiracy Theorists in Unsealed ’95 Memo

Ex-BP official got rich on Deepwater Horizon spill, gets busted

It’s just capitalism, right?

Ex-BP official got rich on Deepwater Horizon spill, gets busted

SkyTruth

When Keith Seilhan was called in to coordinate BP’s oil spill cleanup after the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded, the senior company official and experienced crisis manager looked at the situation and thought, “Fuck this.” He dumped his family’s $1 million worth of BP stock, earning a profit and saving $100,000 in potential losses after the share price tanked even further.

But Seilhan knew something that other investors did not know when he made that trade. The company was lying to the government and the public about the amount of oil that was leaking from the ruptured well — by a factor of more than ten. And the feds say that doesn’t just make Seilhan an awful person — it means he was engaging in insider trading. Charges and a settlement were announced Thursday.

“The complaint alleges that within days, Seilhan received nonpublic information on the extent of the evolving disaster, including oil flow estimates and data on the volume of oil floating on the surface of the Gulf,” the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said in its announcement.

Without admitting or denying guilt, the Texan, who has since left BP, agreed to pay the government a penalty equivalent to double the $105,409 that he allegedly gained through the trade.


Source
SEC Charges Former Bp Employee with Insider Trading During the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, SEC

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Link to article:  

Ex-BP official got rich on Deepwater Horizon spill, gets busted

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ex-BP official got rich on Deepwater Horizon spill, gets busted

How Rand Paul Bailed on His Bold Plan to Reform Big-Money Politics in Washington

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This past weekend—days after Mother Jones revealed video of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) claiming that Dick Cheney exploited 9/11 to start the Iraq War to boost profits for Halliburton, the military contractor where Cheney had been CEO—Paul claimed in interviews with ABC News and Business Insider that he had never questioned Cheney’s motives. He insisted he had merely noted that Cheney’s Halliburton ties had posed the “chance for a conflict of interest.” Paul was spinning—not acknowledging the actual comments. But when Paul was running for the US Senate in 2009 and 2010 as a tea party outsider who would take on Washington’s special-interest lobbyists, he repeatedly cited the Cheney-connected Halliburton as an example of what was wrong in the nation’s capital. In a videotaped talk on national-security policy, for example, Paul complained, “We give billion-dollar contracts to Halliburton, they turn around and spend millions on lobbyists to ask for more money from government. It’s an endless cycle of special-interest lobbyists.” At one campaign stop after another, Paul bashed Halliburton, and he boasted that he had a bold and imaginative plan for limiting the influence of big-money lobbyists and donors who funnel cash into the campaign coffers of candidates to win access and favors. But several years into his first term, Paul has yet to introduce this proposal—or say much, if anything, about it. In fact, he has been accepting contributions from the lobbyists he once so passionately decried.

On March 2, 2010, Paul appeared on CNN, and host Rick Sanchez asked him what he would do about the “unbelievable amounts of money that are being paid from certain industries into the campaign coffers of certain politicians…and how are you going to deal with that, if you get elected?” Without pausing, Paul confidently replied:

I think that I have a cure for it actually that will pass constitutional muster. What I would do is, on every federal contract, I would have a clause, and it says, if you accept this clause you voluntarily give up the right to lobby, you voluntarily give up the right to give PAC contributions. And I would have the top 20 officers sign it also individually, voluntarily give up their right to give political contributions…I’m talking about people who do business with the federal government. For example, we have big business that get billion-dollar no-bid contracts with the government. They take their first million dollars, and they buy a lobbyist. The lobbyist goes then and asks for more money. It’s a vicious cycle. So I would say if you want to do business with the federal government, what I would say is let’s have a clause in the contract, and it’s a voluntary clause, you don’t have to do business with the government, but if you do, then you give up certain things.

Paul’s critique was reminiscent of the position Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) advocated when he was a campaign finance reform firebrand years ago. McCain denounced the “iron triangle” of lobbyists, campaign contributions, and legislation. Paul, who has often slammed McCain for passing a campaign finance law imposing limits on what outside groups can do to affect federal elections, had devised his own way to break up this unseemly triangle.

Continue Reading »

More here: 

How Rand Paul Bailed on His Bold Plan to Reform Big-Money Politics in Washington

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Rand Paul Bailed on His Bold Plan to Reform Big-Money Politics in Washington