Torture was endorsed by Bush

Some of us are giddy about change, but also resolved that there will be justice.  Torture, once spurned by Americans to demonstrate our commitment to higher ideals, was embraced by the Bush administration for the War on Terror, despite it being ineffective.

A new, formerly secret memo to the CIA, written in the summer of 2004, expressly permitted torture by agents.  Of course, the secret is really just to change the definition of torture. 

Maybe we can change the definition of executive privilege.  Here's one vote for Bush to stand trial in international court after he leaves office.

The last 100 days - an agenda of destruction

While Barack Obama's victory is giving many Americans a vision of hope for his first 100 days, the Bush administration is busy trying to wreak as much havoc on civil liberties, the environment, abortion rights as it can.

A sample:

Last month, Attorney General Michael Mukasey rushed out new guidelines for the F.B.I. that permit agents to use chillingly intrusive techniques to collect information on Americans even where there is no evidence of wrongdoing.

In coming weeks, we expect the Environmental Protection Agency to issue a final rule that would weaken a program created by the Clean Air Act, which requires utilities to install modern pollution controls when they upgrade their plants to produce more power.

Soon after the election, Michael Leavitt, the secretary of health and human services, is expected to issue new regulations aimed at further limiting women’s access to abortion, contraceptives and information about their reproductive health care options.  Existing law allows doctors and nurses to refuse to participate in an abortion. These changes would extend the so-called right to refuse to a wide range of health care workers and activities including abortion referrals, unbiased counseling and provision of birth control pills or emergency contraception, even for rape victims. 

I suppose when your approval rating is already under 25%, you might as well just flip the bird to the 75%.    I can't wait to see who gets a pardon. 

Cleaning Blog House - #2

I started this in July and clearly hold my career in too high a regard to prioritize a reduction in my "I should blog this" bookmark folder. Well, here's the second post. At this rate I'll be done in 2023.

So now the administration knows that it can make unsubstantiated claims, without paying a price when those claims prove false, and that saber rattling gains it votes and silences opposition. Maybe it will honorably refuse to act on this dangerous knowledge. But I can't help worrying that in domestic politics, as in foreign policy, this war will turn out to have been the shape of things to come.

Paul Krugman, writing in 2003 about the domestic impact of the Bush Administration's success with lying into Iraq.

"Military Analysts" means "Pentagon lackeys"

A New York Times investigation has uncovered that those generals you see on CNN aren't just post-career pundits, but are often in bed with the Pentagon publicity machine. Just how cozy is that relationship?

Internal Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who could be counted on to deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.”

And the Pentagon strategy was worthy of the greatest psyops efforts of our time.

• These analysts want a business relationship with the Pentagon. Many of these ex-soldiers are responsible for drumming up business for defense contractors. Being cozy is their job.
• The analysts continue to be loyal to the Pentagon, from their careers in the military.
  
• The Pentagon provides the analysts with regular talking points briefings, including at least 18 meetings with the Secretary of Defense. The briefings include the sharing of classified information.
• The Pentagon has flown them to Iraq and given the analysts carefully orchestrated tours to enable them to push the administration's talking points.

Of course, nothing is done right in the Bush administration if it's not a secret:

The access came with a condition. Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.

And the analysts weren't just offering their opinion on the skewed reality shoveled to them by the Pentagon. They were toeing the line. Or else.

When [retired marine colonel and analyst Mr. Cowan] told Bill O’Reilly that the United States was “not on a good glide path right now” in Iraq, the repercussions were swift. Mr. Cowan said he was “precipitously fired from the analysts group” for this [2005] appearance.

Just another reason to be thankful that the Constitution puts a civilian as commander-in-chief. Now we just need to elect an honest one.

Bush administration: Let's do more domestic spying

A spy program, dubious legal authority, and an agency head determined to go ahead regardless? Just the latest episode in the Bush Administration's serial: You Weren't Really Using Those Civil Liberties, Were You?

Here's my favorite part. After submitting woefully incomplete documents about the program to Congress, the Department of Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff said:

"There is no basis to suggest that this process is in any way insufficient to protect the privacy and civil liberties of Americans," Chertoff wrote..."I think we've fully addressed anybody's concerns,"

Now that you say it like that...

Domestic spying began BEFORE 9/11

Yeah, I got a shock when I read that. I figured the Bush Administration, for all its dictatorial hubris, had at least waited until after 9/11 to start assaulting civil liberties.

Nope.

Former chief executive Joseph P. Nacchio, convicted in April of 19 counts of insider trading, said the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to court documents unsealed in Denver this week. [link]

Torture: we only do it when we have to

Jon Stewart's new "Torture Show" explores the Bariyshnikov-like dancing around the definition of torture by the Bush administration. He learns:

• Waterboarding has been called torture since the Spanish Inquisition and Japanese soldiers were prosecuted by American litigators for using it during World War II.
• At least three Al Qaeda suspects have been waterboarded by the CIA.
• The official policy on waterboarding is that we would only use it if we thought a suspect had information about a calamitous attack.

In other words, we use torture on terrorism suspects, despite evidence that it is ineffective, when we feel we have to. Gee, something tells me it wouldn't hold up in international court.

Stewart also notes that:

• No Bush administration will admit that waterboarding=torture
• Attorney General Mukasey will not begin criminal proceedings against CIA officials who waterboarded Al Qaeda suspects.

Yeah, land of the free.

Here's Stewart's video segment:

The false dichotomy of privacy (or liberty) v. security

Think that we all have to give up some privacy to be safe from the 21st century threats of terrorism? You must work for the Bush Administration:

In order for cyberspace to be policed, internet activity will have to be closely monitored. Ed Giorgio, who is working with [Director of National Intelligence] McConnell on the plan, said that would mean giving the government the authority to examine the content of any e-mail, file transfer or Web search. "Google has records that could help in a cyber-investigation," he said. Giorgio warned me, "We have a saying in this business: 'Privacy and security are a zero-sum game.'"

Most accept that dichtomy, says Bruce Schneier. Problem is, it's a false one. He starts with several examples, such as stronger cockpit doors on airplanes or deadbolt locks on homes. There's no loss of privacy.

Instead, the only conflicts occur when security involves issues of identity (e.g. national ID cards). And in these cases, the government has either lied or misled the public about their effectiveness. The most effective security measures are the few immediate post-9/11 ones:

Since 9/11, two -- or maybe three -- things have potentially improved airline security: reinforcing the cockpit doors, passengers realizing they have to fight back and -- possibly -- sky marshals. Everything else -- all the security measures that affect privacy -- is just security theater and a waste of effort.

For more, read his entire 2-page essay.

Grout sealer: recall didn't really work

If you're a DIY kind of person and have done tile recently, make sure you don't have any of this stuff. After being recalled, the company was slow to remove it from shelves and then sent a replacement product with the same dangerous chemical.

The story goes on to discuss the failure of oversight from the Consumer Products Safety Commission.

Torture: immoral, and as it turns out, ineffective

A nice story on the best understanding of the effectiveness of torture. The interview is with an expert who deals with torture victims.

Harsh interrogation definitely yields names and other information, Johnson agreed. "It works," he said.

But the information confessed is utterly unreliable, he said, and it can lead investigators in the wrong direction, endangering U.S. military forces and threatening national security.

In a panic to stop tough interrogation, many will spit out any name that comes to mind — innocent neighbors, cousins and friends — Johnson said.

In other words, torture gets people to spill the beans. Whatever beans will get their torturer to stop... For an administration of yes men, I guess that's why torture works out well.

You can read more on the story at the above link or check out the full (pdf) report.

Humpdty Dumpty

The Humpdty-Dumpty administration

“This government does not torture people,” the president said

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,’ it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’

‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master - that’s all.’

And this is why you need to read Krugman's blog.

President Bush: codifying environmental degradation since 2001

Coal mining has been in the news with the trapping of six miners in a collapsed Utah mine and the subsequent death of three rescuers in a second collapse. The federal government has joined the fray, with an announcement that new rules will expressly allow the longtime practice of mountaintop removal for coal mining. The tradeoff is that this method of mining is substantially safer than underground mines, but significantly more destructive to the environment.

The technique involves blasting off the tops of mountains and dumping the rubble into valleys and streams...Mountaintop mining is the most common strip mining in central Appalachia, and the most destructive. Ridge tops are flattened with bulldozers and dynamite, clearing all vegetation and, at times, forcing residents to move.

...From 1985 to 2001, 724 miles of streams were buried under mining waste, according to the environmental impact statement accompanying the new rule. If current practices continue, another 724 river miles will be buried by 2018, the [Army Corps of Engineers] report says.

As always with this administration, however, the stink of corruption lies heavy about the decision.

The early stages of the revision process were supported by J. Stephen Griles, a former industry lobbyist who was the deputy interior secretary from 2001 to 2004...The regulation is the culmination of six and a half years of work by the administration to make it easier for mining companies to dig more coal to meet growing energy demands and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

Gee, the industry writes its own rules. That's new.

And then there's the bogus note about oil dependence. Coal is for electricity, oil is for cars. But thanks to the excellent journalism at the New York Times, that lie talking point on energy independence will reach thousands of readers. Bravo.

Politics trumps science (again)

President Bush's executive order 13422 (pdf) took effect yesterday, guaranteeing that political appointees of government agencies will have final say over government regulations. The implications are widespread. This analysis from an environmental law firm notes that the executive order also requires that agencies identify the "specific market failure" that their regulation addresses. In other words, the review by a political appointee will have the potential to derail health and safety regulations, even if the best science has found them necessary or in the public interest.

January 2009 can't come quickly enough.

President Bush gets his war bill

Congressional Democrats caved this week, giving the President Bush a war funding bill with no deadline. Let me count the ways this stinks:

1. The American people sent the Democrats to Congress in a landslide victory in November 2006 because of two things: Republican corruption (Tom DeLay, Tom Foley, et al) and the War in Iraq.
   
2. Congress has been reasserting its rightful constitutional authority by starting investigations of many highly corrupt activities in this administration (wiretapping, political nepotism, lying, cheating, stealing, et al). Taking control of the purse strings is part of that job.
3. What really serves the troops better? Giving the President license to keep them fighting and dying or bringing them home?

Let's put it this way. The constitution expressly gives the power of warmaking to Congress. Here's a quick tutorial on war powers, for those whose last constitution-reading came in high school:

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8

The Congress shall have Power:

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress....

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States....

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

Notice where most of the bold type is? Congress - the people - rules the army. In other words, Congress decides how big the army is, when it should be called into action, how it shall be funded, and when it shall come home. The President's constitutional authority is to toot the horn.

Congress should pass a deadline for troop withdrawal by cutting off war funding. Then let President Bush decide whether to toot the horn for withdrawal - he either brings the troops home, or wants them to fight without money. Who supports the troops then?

Of incompetent toadies, and other delights of this administration

There's been a recent revelation that Alberto Gonzales, when serving as White House Counsel, tried to pressure then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to sign off on warrantless wiretapping.

While Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft lay seriously ill in a Washington hospital in March 2004, Alberto Gonzales, then the top White House lawyer, tried to persuade him to sign papers reauthorizing President Bush's controversial warrantless domestic wiretapping program, the Justice Department's former No. 2 official said in congressional testimony Tuesday.

Ashcroft and his deputy refused, but President Bush eventually permitted the program to continue. Shadoweyes has this priceless analysis:

[by refusing to sign,] it turns out that Ashcroft has more respect for the Constitution than Bush. This is akin to saying that the Emperor was more destructive than Darth Vader.

When righteous judgment cometh down

Paul Wolfowitz has resigned, coming as most neocons do to ethical behiavor - under duress.

Courtesy of Queen, this ode's for you, Mr Wolfowitz:

Case in point: industry capture

Industry capture is a political term used to describe a regulatory agency that has been "captured" by the regulated industry. For example, the current Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton, previously worked as a lobbyist for the mining industry.

The Bush Administration is going to continue its tradition of industry capture, putting a senior lobbyist from the National Association of Manufacturers in charge of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. From the NY Times article:

A senior lobbyist at the National Association of Manufacturers nominated by President Bush to lead the Consumer Product Safety Commission will receive a $150,000 departing payment from the association when he takes his new government job, which involves enforcing consumer laws against members of the association...

...As a major trade organization for the largest companies in the country, the National Association of Manufacturers often has issues before the Consumer Product Safety Commission. It recently prevailed on the agency, for instance, to relax the requirements for when companies must notify the agency about defective products.

Yeah, he's going to be all about consumer safety, this one.

The men Bush defends

Paul Wolfowitz has been near the center of the neoconservative capture of Washington under President Bush, first as an architect of the Iraq invasion in the Defense Department and now as the head of the World Bank.

However, serious allegations have arisen that Mr Wolfowitz used his position at the head of the Bank to get a significant raise for his "companion," done while he was heading up an anti-corruption drive to weed out the bank's aid recipients.

A special committee [of the World Bank board of directors found] that Mr. Wolfowitz broke bank rules, ethics and governance standards in arranging for, and concealing, a pay and promotion package for his companion, Shaha Ali Riza, in 2005.

Wolfowitz has responded to the charges:

He promised to change his management approach by relying less on advisers from the Bush administration, restructuring his office, delegating more to managers and placing “more trust in the staff,” according to the text.

[However, he has also protested that] he has unfairly been "caricatured as a ‘boyfriend’ who used his position of power to help his ‘girlfriend...’" [Furthermore,] “I implore each of you to be fair in making your decision, because your decision will not only affect my life, it will affect how this institution is viewed in the United States and the world,” he said.

And how will it look to the world and reflect upon the World Bank if they don't fire a guy who has relied heavily on the Bush administration, placed too little "trust in the staff," and used his position of power to reward his girlfriend? Good riddance, Mr Wolfowitz. It's only a matter of time before you get your medal.

OSHA = "Optional" Safety and Health Administration

Think twice before inhaling that buttery scent of microwave popcorn. The chemical used to create that flavor, diacetyl, has been found to cause severe lung damage in workers at microwave popcorn plants. The discovery, by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, has been brought to the attention of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), but little has been done.

On diacetyl, [OSHA Head] Mr. Foulke said ''the science is murky'' on whether the additive causes bronchiolitis obliterans, the disease that has been called ''popcorn worker's lung...''

...Instead of regulations, Mr. Foulke and top officials at other agencies favor a ''voluntary compliance strategy,'' reaching agreements with industry associations and companies to police themselves.

Administration officials say such programs are less costly, allowing companies to hire more workers and keep consumer prices down. The number of voluntary agreements has grown in recent years, but they cover a fraction of the seven million work sites that OSHA oversees, or less than 1 percent of the work force. (emphasis mine)

Wikipedia's diacetyl entry only illustrates the lack of actual regulation coming from OSHA:

On July 26, 2006, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the United Food and Commercial Workers petitioned the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration to promulgate an emergency temporary standard to protect workers from the deleterious health effects of inhaling diacetyl vapors. The petition was followed by a letter of support signed by more than thirty prominent scientists. The matter is under consideration.

There's some hope, as Congress has begun to reassert its oversight of OSHA, with hearings taking place two weeks ago. But holding hearings won't do much for some of the affected employees, one of whom was present at the hearing.

Among those who testified Tuesday was Eric Peoples, a former worker at the popcorn plant in Jasper, a small town 125 miles south of Kansas City. Once healthy, the 35-year-old Mr. Peoples has been told by doctors that he will need a double-lung transplant. (emphasis mine)

But hey, what's a couple lungs against 10 cent savings on my Jolly Time Blast O Butter?

Superb Iraq War journalism

In an era of 24-hour news, you rarely see the kind of in-depth investigative reporting that reveals the truth about society and government. The mention courtesy of Shadoweyes, this Mother Jones timeline exposes what we knew about Iraq and when we knew it, with particular attention to how the Bush administration ignored its own intelligence to lead us to war. It gives you a chilly sense of foreboding as you see the inexorable move to war amidst all the evidence against it.