You know, there has never been an abuse of power by a government, using its security forces - just look at that name - to hurt innocent citizens. Just ask them.
Every action is in the name of 'security'. When Egypt massacred 600 men, women and children Wednesday, they were merely protecting Egypt from terrorists.
The topic here is a recent incident (the last 24 hours) as an example of a minor abuse of power.
Glenn Greenwald is a longtime writer focusing on constiuttional rights. I've read him since he was a writer on Salon long ago. Currently he's more a reporter for The Guardian, one of the few largest newspapers in England, and now perhaps the world's leading newspaper for
reporting on stories about abuses of power.
Given Greenwald's long history of reporting on the issues of people's rights and government violations of them, it was he Snowden approached and Greenwald who broke the NSA story.
The government might not like that - but it's supposed to follow rules about the press.
The Obama made news months ago by setting a new precedent looking at charging not only a leaker but the reporter with crimes for revealing the information.
That blew up and they had to back off, but it indicated their interest in attacking reporters.
The inhumane treatment of Bradley Manning (called torture), the strong pressure brought to capture Snowden - forcing the Bolivian President to land and searching his plane -are more indications of this 'security state' focus on stronger and stronger measures against the people being informed what their government is doing in the name of security, after a big power grab by the 'security state' after 9/11, under people such as Dick Cheney.
These minor incidents are intended to intimidate it seems. Recall the adding of Senator Ted Kennedy to the terrorist cannot fly list. Oops, just a mistake. Right.
The incident that triggered this thread is looking at how the government wants to intimidate or punish reporter Glenn Greenwald - and that resulted in his partner, flying to Brazil through England, being detained by security forces in England under a law allowing them to detain and question people for up to 9 hours, no questions asked.
This seems a clear abuse of power - but what will happen from it? Will the citizens rise up and demand accountability from their government?
The Kennedy incident got press, but I know of no accountability whatsoever. And at this point there's no indication of accountability likely for the detention of Greenwald's partner.
I've seen estimates as high as over 90% of Guantanamo detainees being guilty of nothing - again, no accountability for years they were imprisoned.
Part of the blame is with an apathetic public. How many people just don't care, and say 'let them do what they want on these things, they're protecting us'.
A question for discussion is, how a democracy remains a healthy democracy in terms of preventing minor abuses by the security forces when they do happen?
Stop and Frisk could be viewed as another - for years usually minority people had their right to be free from unreasonable search violated. It's only recently become more of a political controversy, and after a judge ruled criticizing it, that the mayoral candidates have all gotten in line against it.
No accountability ever happened that I know of for Bush's illegal warantless wiretapping.
The government has given immunity from criminal liabiliity to companies who cooperate when it wants to do something illegal. It can punish those who don't go along.
This goes way back. When Western Union was the system for any important communication, the government secretly received a copy of all telegrams daily.
Most people would agree that abuses like Kennedy or Greenwald's partner are 'wrong', but they happen.
Funny thing is, the more power the 'security state' gets, the stronger the measures it's usually willing to use to keep it. Remember the KGB, look at the Egyptian military now.
Remember our own history of the 60's and 70's with out of control 'security forces' assassinating around the world and infiltrating and monitoring peaceful groups.
The embarrassment when there would be more government agents at a communist party meeting than legitimate members. When the agents rose to be the leaders.
We rely heavily on the courts to provide some protection - but it seems less and less at times, as the judiciary becomes more politicized, fed by The Federalist Society members.
When simply enforcing the laws that protects people's rights is attacked as 'not protecting the people'.
This is a 'boiling frog' issue - referring to the metapor that if you put a frog in hot water it'll jump out, but if you put it in cool water and slowly increase the temperature, it'll boil.
These minor incidents, these occassional stories, don't get enough reaction from the public to do much, but over time the water gets to boiling. And then there's no going back.
When the President wanted to create the FBI, Congress said no - they were worried about having some 'secret police force' under his power in the US. He created it anyway by reassing people from other agencies. When the CIA was created, it was for information, not becoming a massive operation organization - but by using one small clause in the charter, operations turned the agency into primarily one involved in operations - assassination, sabotage, terrorism, election manipulation and more.
And after these things happen it's hard to reverse. The last time the CIA faced a serious threat of being reigned in was when JFK planned to overhaul our intelligence agencies.
It did have some new constraints when its activities became known in the Watergate era, but nothing much since.
What should happen from an incident like Greenwald's partner is to recognize it as an act of intimidation against the press, and therefore against the people's right to information.
That includes the people of the UK and the people of the US for each of their governments' roles.
That seems unlikely. How do we do bettter about this?
I could mention again that I think electing progressives - not Obama, not Republicans - would help. But since that's no easy thing, we can look for what else can be done.
Donating to rights groups - like the ACLU and the EFF - is one action people can take.
Every action is in the name of 'security'. When Egypt massacred 600 men, women and children Wednesday, they were merely protecting Egypt from terrorists.
The topic here is a recent incident (the last 24 hours) as an example of a minor abuse of power.
Glenn Greenwald is a longtime writer focusing on constiuttional rights. I've read him since he was a writer on Salon long ago. Currently he's more a reporter for The Guardian, one of the few largest newspapers in England, and now perhaps the world's leading newspaper for
reporting on stories about abuses of power.
Given Greenwald's long history of reporting on the issues of people's rights and government violations of them, it was he Snowden approached and Greenwald who broke the NSA story.
The government might not like that - but it's supposed to follow rules about the press.
The Obama made news months ago by setting a new precedent looking at charging not only a leaker but the reporter with crimes for revealing the information.
That blew up and they had to back off, but it indicated their interest in attacking reporters.
The inhumane treatment of Bradley Manning (called torture), the strong pressure brought to capture Snowden - forcing the Bolivian President to land and searching his plane -are more indications of this 'security state' focus on stronger and stronger measures against the people being informed what their government is doing in the name of security, after a big power grab by the 'security state' after 9/11, under people such as Dick Cheney.
These minor incidents are intended to intimidate it seems. Recall the adding of Senator Ted Kennedy to the terrorist cannot fly list. Oops, just a mistake. Right.
The incident that triggered this thread is looking at how the government wants to intimidate or punish reporter Glenn Greenwald - and that resulted in his partner, flying to Brazil through England, being detained by security forces in England under a law allowing them to detain and question people for up to 9 hours, no questions asked.
This seems a clear abuse of power - but what will happen from it? Will the citizens rise up and demand accountability from their government?
The Kennedy incident got press, but I know of no accountability whatsoever. And at this point there's no indication of accountability likely for the detention of Greenwald's partner.
I've seen estimates as high as over 90% of Guantanamo detainees being guilty of nothing - again, no accountability for years they were imprisoned.
Part of the blame is with an apathetic public. How many people just don't care, and say 'let them do what they want on these things, they're protecting us'.
A question for discussion is, how a democracy remains a healthy democracy in terms of preventing minor abuses by the security forces when they do happen?
Stop and Frisk could be viewed as another - for years usually minority people had their right to be free from unreasonable search violated. It's only recently become more of a political controversy, and after a judge ruled criticizing it, that the mayoral candidates have all gotten in line against it.
No accountability ever happened that I know of for Bush's illegal warantless wiretapping.
The government has given immunity from criminal liabiliity to companies who cooperate when it wants to do something illegal. It can punish those who don't go along.
This goes way back. When Western Union was the system for any important communication, the government secretly received a copy of all telegrams daily.
Most people would agree that abuses like Kennedy or Greenwald's partner are 'wrong', but they happen.
Funny thing is, the more power the 'security state' gets, the stronger the measures it's usually willing to use to keep it. Remember the KGB, look at the Egyptian military now.
Remember our own history of the 60's and 70's with out of control 'security forces' assassinating around the world and infiltrating and monitoring peaceful groups.
The embarrassment when there would be more government agents at a communist party meeting than legitimate members. When the agents rose to be the leaders.
We rely heavily on the courts to provide some protection - but it seems less and less at times, as the judiciary becomes more politicized, fed by The Federalist Society members.
When simply enforcing the laws that protects people's rights is attacked as 'not protecting the people'.
This is a 'boiling frog' issue - referring to the metapor that if you put a frog in hot water it'll jump out, but if you put it in cool water and slowly increase the temperature, it'll boil.
These minor incidents, these occassional stories, don't get enough reaction from the public to do much, but over time the water gets to boiling. And then there's no going back.
When the President wanted to create the FBI, Congress said no - they were worried about having some 'secret police force' under his power in the US. He created it anyway by reassing people from other agencies. When the CIA was created, it was for information, not becoming a massive operation organization - but by using one small clause in the charter, operations turned the agency into primarily one involved in operations - assassination, sabotage, terrorism, election manipulation and more.
And after these things happen it's hard to reverse. The last time the CIA faced a serious threat of being reigned in was when JFK planned to overhaul our intelligence agencies.
It did have some new constraints when its activities became known in the Watergate era, but nothing much since.
What should happen from an incident like Greenwald's partner is to recognize it as an act of intimidation against the press, and therefore against the people's right to information.
That includes the people of the UK and the people of the US for each of their governments' roles.
That seems unlikely. How do we do bettter about this?
I could mention again that I think electing progressives - not Obama, not Republicans - would help. But since that's no easy thing, we can look for what else can be done.
Donating to rights groups - like the ACLU and the EFF - is one action people can take.
Facebook
Twitter