tagged w/ CIA
(Brief history of Mob Rule...) Ochlocracy (Greek: οχλοκρατία or okhlokratía; Latin: ochlocratia) or mob rule is government by mob or a mass of people, or the intimidation of legitimate authorities. As a pejorative for majoritarianism, it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile vulgus meaning "the fickle crowd", from which the English term "mob" was originally derived in the 1680s.
Ochlocracy ("rule of the general populace") is democracy ("rule of the people") spoiled by demagoguery, "tyranny of the majority" and the rule of passion over reason, just like oligocracy ("rule of a few") is aristocracy ("rule of the best") spoiled by corruption. Ochlocracy is synonymous in meaning and usage to the modern, informal term "Mobocracy," which emerged from a much more recent colloquial etymology.
The term appears to have been coined by Polybius in his Histories (6.4.6). He uses it to name the 'pathological' version of popular rule in opposition to the good version, which he refers to as democracy. There are numerous mentions of the word "ochlos" in the Talmud (where "ochlos" refers to anything from "mob," "populace" to "armed guard"), as well as in Rashi, a Jewish commentary on the Bible. The word is recorded in English since 1584, derived from the French ochlocratie (1568), which stems from the original Greek okhlokratia, from okhlos "mob" and kratos "rule, power, strength"
In ancient Greek political thought ochlocracy was considered as one of the three "bad" forms of government (tyranny, oligarchy and ochlocracy) as opposed to the three "good" forms of government (monarchy, aristocracy and democracy). The distinction between "good" and "bad" was made according to whether the government form would act in the interest of the whole community ("good") or special interests ("bad").
An ochlocrat is one who is an advocate or partisan of ochlocracy. It can also be used as an adjective (ochlocratic or ochlocratical).
The threat of "mob rule" to a democracy is restrained by ensuring the rule of law protects minorities or individuals against short-term demagoguery or moral panic.
Historians often comment on mob rule as a factor in the rise of Rome and its maintenance, as the city of Rome itself was large—between 100,000 and 250,000 citizens—while the aristocracy and even military was very small by comparison to the citizenry. With weapons also being crude, a military force did not exist that could have dealt with a revolt from the larger populace. There was a constant need to keep people fed, distracted, and in awe of the power of the state. Those who could do this, ruled not only Rome, but the whole of the Roman Empire.
Lapses in this control often led to loss of power, or even the loss of heads, of officials—most notably in the reign of Commodus when Cleander unwisely used the Praetorian Guard against a mob which had come to call for his head. As Edward Gibbon relates it,
(above text from wikipedia)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_rX3X474gM(Brief history of Mob Rule...) Ochlocracy (Greek:... more
Rob Richer, the No. 2 ranking official in the CIA’s clandestine service, paid a visit to Glenn Carle’s office in December 2002 and presented the veteran CIA operative with an urgent proposal.Rob Richer, the No. 2 ranking official in the CIA’s clandestine service, paid a... more
GENEVA — The U.N. human rights office called Friday for an investigation into the death of ousted Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, noting that his death robbed his victims of a chance at "cathartic" justice in the courts.
Gadhafi was captured alive Thursday in his hometown of Sirte before shaky amateur footage showed rebel fighters standing over his bloodied body.
"We believe there is a need for an investigation," said Rupert Colville, a spokesman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. "More details are needed to ascertain whether he was killed in some form of fighting or was executed after his capture."
"The two cell phone videos that have emerged, one of him alive, and one of him dead, taken together are very disturbing," he told reporters in Geneva.
A Libyan official said Friday that the burial of Gadhafi has been delayed until his death can be examined by the International Criminal Court – though it was not immediately clear if he was referring to a look at the dictator's body or a probe into what led to his death.
The U.N. Human Rights Council established an independent panel earlier this year to investigate abuses in Libya, and Colville said it would likely examine the circumstances of the 69-year-old leader's death.
He said it was too early to say whether the panel – which includes Canadian judge Philippe Kirsch, the first president of the International Criminal Court – would recommend a formal investigation at the national or international level.
"The dust hasn't settled yet," Colville told The Associated Press when asked if Libya was capable of conducting an independent probe into the death.
"You can't just chuck the law out of the window," he added. "Killing someone outside a judicial procedure, even in countries where there is the death penalty, is outside the rule of law."
Colville said the victims of Gadhafi's despotic 42-year-rule deserved to see proper judicial procedures followed and perpetrators of abuses brought to trial. "It can be a rather cathartic exercise as well as being a fundamental tenet of rule of law," he said.
"Of course there are many others apart from Col. Gadhafi, so there may at least be some kind of court proceedings where we do all learn what happened and who is responsible."GENEVA — The U.N. human rights office called Friday for an investigation into... more
With Official Washington abuzz over a bizarre U.S. accusation that Iran’s Quds spy agency plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, it might be worth recalling how American authorities responded to an actual terror bombing in Washington 35 years ago that killed a former Chilean foreign minister and an American co-worker.With Official Washington abuzz over a bizarre U.S. accusation that Iran’s Quds... more
Why is the same guy who got ten people killed by a terrorist bomber advising NYPD on terrorism?Why is the same guy who got ten people killed by a terrorist bomber advising NYPD on... more
1 year ago
(Reuters) – American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Current and former officials said that to the best of their knowledge, Awlaki, who the White House said was a key figure in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate, had been the only American put on a government list targeting people for capture or death due to their alleged involvement with militants....Read More http://www.factoverfiction.com/article/4512(Reuters) – American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or... more
In 2002, not long after he was subjected to so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" by Bruce Jessen and James Mitchell, psychologists under contract to the CIA, high-value detainee Abu Zubaydah made about ten drawings depicting the torture he endured while in custody of the agency.
One of the drawings Zubaydah had sketched captured in incredible detail the waterboarding sessions he underwent. Another drawing showed him being chained by his wrists to the ceiling of a CIA black site prison where he was held and another showed him strapped to a chair and being doused with water as part of a sleep deprivation program, according to two counterterrorism officials who have seen Zubaydah's drawings.
Zubaydah drew the pictures of the torture techniques he was subjected to on a sheet of paper measuring about 8 x 11 inches and on pieces of paper about the size of an index card. In some instances, Zubaydah drew several of the torture techniques on a single piece of paper.
Zubaydah's "artwork is very detailed right down to the straps that were used when he was on the waterboard and almost looks like a photograph," said one of the counterterrorism officials, who requested anonymity in order to discuss classified material.
Brent Mickum, Zubaydah's attorney, previously told Truthout that in the absence of the 92 interrogation videotapes, which the agency destroyed, the drawings Zubaydah made contain the best description of the torture techniques used against him while he was being held at the agency's black site prison facilities.
"These are a good group of drawings and he is a pretty good artist," Mickum told Truthout last year. Mickum said he is prohibited from discussing the contents of Zubaydah's drawings because it remains classified. However, he said, "the depictions would be of interest" and agreed that Zubaydah "can draw and with great detail."
But the CIA, which maintains the "enhanced interrogation techniques" interrogators used on Zubaydah were "safe" and "legal," refuses to release any of his drawings or even acknowledge that they actually exist. If Zubaydah's drawings do exist, the CIA said, it would be part of the agency's "operational files," which means "records and files detailing the actual conduct of [CIA's] intelligence activities."
The CIA made that disclosure in response to a request Truthout filed with the agency seeking a Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) of Zubaydah's drawings. An MDR is a procedure under a section of an executive order signed by President Obama (which replaced a similar executive order signed by former President Bush) that allows the public to seek the declassification review of specific classified material.
"We have conducted a thorough review of your request and have determined that responsive records, should they exist, would be contained in operational files," states a September 21 letter Susan Viscuso, the CIA's information and privacy coordinator, sent to Truthout.
A section of "the CIA Information Act, as amended," Viscuso said, "exempts operational files from the search, review, publication, and disclosure requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)."
Last month, the CIA’s revised its MDR regulations “to more clearly reflect the current CIA organizational structure and policies and practices, and to eliminate ambiguous, redundant and obsolete regulatory provisions.”
The revised regulations still states “declassification review requests will not be accepted… for any document or material containing information contained within an operational file…”
Judge Silences Zubaydah
However, it's not just Zubaydah's drawings that the government wants to keep secret. In a four-page order issued earlier this year, US District Court Judge Richard Roberts, who presides over Zubaydah's habeas corpus case, issued an order that said that any statements Zubaydah has made to his attorneys describing the torture he endured must remain classified and cannot be revealed publicly in court filings. Zubaydah has given his attorneys a signed declaration totaling about 15 pages detailing the torture he was subjected to during his imprisonment at CIA-run prisons.
Roberts' order was issued in March, in response to a motion Zubaydah's legal team filed nearly two years earlier that accused the government of "improper classification" of documents that included statements Zubaydah made describing "the interrogation techniques inflicted upon him while in CIA custody ... other personal knowledge of his experience within the CIA Torture and Rendition Program and ... statements made by [Zubaydah's] counsel based upon information that is found within the public domain."
Roberts said Zubaydah's legal team, in seeking to have Zubaydah's statements related to his treatment declassified, was essentially trying to bring "a FOIA challenge in the midst of a habeas petition."
"... The government must provide petitioner's counsel, not the public at large, with classified information unless the government moves for an exception to disclosure," Roberts wrote.
In 2007, during an interview with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Zubaydah described in detail how CIA interrogators tortured him, which included placing him in a "confinement box" and repeatedly slamming his head against a wall. The interview with the ICRC was part of a confidential report on the treatment of 14 high-value detainees in custody of the agency. Journalist Mark Danner obtained the ICRC report and published a lengthy story in the New York Review of Books detailing the detainees' statements about their torture.
Still, Roberts' order means that anything Zubaydah says or writes or has said or written that has not been officially approved for disclosure by the government is classified and that applies to his interview with the ICRC.
Mickum said Roberts' order and the secrecy surrounding Zubaydah's drawings deprives his client of a "voice" and allows former Bush officials, including former Vice President Dick Cheney, to control the narrative about Zubaydah's treatment and the efficacy of his torture.
"One of the great frustrations that we as Zubaydah's defense counsel have faced is the inability to tell his story," Mickum said in an interview. "That inability is brought about by two things: one, the government's misuse and improper use of the classification system to essentially muzzle our client and his attorneys to prevent telling his side of the story. And the other is the unwillingness of the district court to make decisions on motions that have been fully briefed, in some cases, for almost three years. These include motions to declassify his diaries. In the final analysis, nothing that my client says, draws, or writes is classified. The government is using this as a ruse because they are embarrassed and don't want this information to be revealed."
(little more @ link)
http://www.truth-out.org/cia-says-zubaydahs-torture-drawings-remain-top-secret/1317822688In 2002, not long after he was subjected to so-called "enhanced interrogation... more
By Earland Lilly,WWH – One of the greatest BETRAYALS of “We the People” by our U.S. Government was the hands off approach that the White House and Congress had toward the CIA and the SAC by giving them a BLANK CHECK with no one to OVERSEE what they were doing.By Earland Lilly,WWH – One of the greatest BETRAYALS of “We the... more
The National Archives has approved an appeal by journalist Robert Parry seeking release of a 30-year-old secret, the address where George H.W. Bush supposedly went on an October weekend in 1980 — when several witnesses put Bush in Paris meeting with Iranians. But it turns out the “alibi witness” is now dead. http://consortiumnews.com/2011/09/27/taking-a-bush-secret-to-the-grave/The National Archives has approved an appeal by journalist Robert Parry seeking... more
Al Jazeera’s director general has resigned due to rumors he is linked to the CIA. Critics say that would explain the switching US attitude towards the Qatar-based news network.Al Jazeera’s director general has resigned due to rumors he is linked to the... more
Remember when Obama undoing what Bush did and getting back to the Consitution was cool and popular? Turns out Obama has still been as bad as Bush and even worse in some cases.
Last week, the top lawyer and 34-year-veteran of the CIA, John Rizzo, explained to PBS' Frontline that Obama has "changed virtually nothing" from Bush policies in these areas, and this week, the ACLU explains that "most [Bush] policies remain core elements of our national security strategy today."
At some point very soon, this basic truth will be impossible to deny with a straight face even for the most hardened loyalists of both parties, each of whom have been eager, for their own reasons, to deny it (and even the two differences cited there, though positive, are wildly exaggerated by Obama defenders: the torture techniques authorized by Bush were no longer in use and the CIA black sites were empty by the time Obama was inaugurated; by contrast, there is ample evidence that the Obama administration continues to use torture by proxy and rendition/CIA-black-sites by proxy as well).
The report is broken down into sections/chapters, and here are a few highlights:
The ACLU then devotes an entire chapter to the way in which immunity for America's torturers -- bestowed jointly by President Obama and a judicial branch meekly deferential to his and Bush's claims of state secrecy -- has contaminated and degraded the entire justice system and made the future reintroduction of torture a virtual inevitability:
This Surveillance State, like most other Bush/Obama Terrorism policies, is justified by a never-ending orgy of fear-mongering. But other than the enrichment of the private Security State industry (see here and here).
A separate chapter is devoted to what the ACLU calls "A Massive and Unchecked Surveillance Society." It explains: "Using Patriot Act authority, the Bush Administration started -- and the Obama Administration has continued -- to conduct wholesale 'preventive' surveillance of innocent Americans without judicial review." And "the result is a national surveillance society in which Americans’ right to privacy is under unprecedented siege." But little is known about exactly what is being done by this purely unaccountable hidden government -- what The Washington Post calls "Top Secret America" -- because of this:
Pointing to that core theory of both presidencies, the ACLU dispatches one of the most misleading claims of Obama defenders: that the President's failure to close Guantanamo is due exclusively to Congressional obstructionism; in fact, long before Congress acted at all with regard to that camp, the President announced his intention to continue its core injustice -- indefinite detention -- albeit in a different locale:
During the Bush era, the actions and condemnations of the ACLU received ample positive attention from progressives. That, of course, is no longer true, and this damning report will likely be ignored in most of those circles, just as this truly remarkable comment from the ACLU's Executive Director has been. And, as usual, anyone urging that attention be paid to these facts will be met with demands that eyes be diverted instead to how scary Sarah Palin Christine O'Donnell Michele Bachmann Rick Perry is, and then this will all blissfully fade away in a cloud of partisan electioneering even with the election more than a year away.
Either way, this creeping unchecked authoritarianism marches forward unabated, and is now -- rather than the province of the right-wing GOP -- fully bipartisan consensus. I really don't understand how progressives think they'll be taken seriously the next time there is a GOP President and they try to resurrect their feigned concern for these matters; they'll be every bit as credible as conservatives who pretend to be deficit-warriors and defenders of restrained government only when the other party is in power.Remember when Obama undoing what Bush did and getting back to the Consitution was cool... more
Gareth Porter at FPIF:
In the commentary on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the news and infotainment media have predictably framed the discussion by the question of how successful the CIA and the military have been in destroying al Qaeda. Absent from the torrent of opinion and analysis was any mention of how the U.S. military occupation of Muslim lands and wars that continue to kill Muslim civilians fuel jihadist sentiment that will keep the threat of terrorism high for many years to come.
The failure to have that discussion is not an accident. In December 2007, at a conference in Washington, D.C. on al Qaeda, former State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism Daniel Benjamin offered a laundry list of things the United States could do to reduce the threat from al Qaeda. But he said nothing about the most important thing to be done: pledging to the Islamic world that the United States would pull its military forces out of Afghanistan and Iraq and end its warfare against those in Islamic countries resisting U.S. military presence.
During the coffee break, I asked him whether that item shouldn’t have been on his list. “You’re right,” he answered. And then he added, “But we can’t do that.”
“Why not,” I asked.
“Because,” he said, “we would have to tell the families of the soldiers who have died in those wars that their loved ones died in vain.”
His explanation was obviously bogus. But in agreeing that America’s continuing wars actually increase the risk of terrorism against the United States, Benjamin was merely reflecting the conclusions that the intelligence and counter-terrorism communities had already reached.
Please read the rest of the post at the link.Gareth Porter at FPIF:
In the commentary on the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the news... more
1 year ago
A former FBI agent who worked at the heart of America's battle against al-Qaeda has told the BBC he is being prevented from telling the truth as he challenges the back story of 9/11 and what has happened since.
Mr Soufan also argues against the effectiveness of interrogation techniques used by the CIA, such as water boarding.
Ali Soufan has not appeared on camera before, but he has now decided to speak out to counter what he sees as a misleading narrative about the last 10 years.
Mr Soufan has direct, first-hand experience of some of the most heated controversies of the past decade: whether 9/11 could have been prevented and whether tactics like the water boarding of al-Qaeda suspects were effective and justified.
Born in Lebanon, Mr Soufan came to America as a teenager and joined the FBI in the 1990s. As one of the only Arabic speakers he was assigned to early investigations on al-Qaeda.
'I threw up'
When the 9/11 attacks occurred, he was in Yemen investigating the bombing of the USS Cole.
The day after the attacks, he met a CIA officer at the US embassy in Yemen. The officer passed him an envelope.
Inside was a report detailing links between people Mr Soufan had been investigating for the warship bombing and two of the hijackers - who had been living in the US for months.
Mr Soufan says that written requests for this kind of information had been made three times before without any result.
"I think it was probably the worst feeling I have ever experienced in my life," he told BBC Newsnight in an interview.
"It was a combination of frustration, anger, sadness, betrayal. The only thing I recall is I left the office, went across the hall to the bathroom and I just threw up.".......
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14891439A former FBI agent who worked at the heart of America's battle against al-Qaeda... more
Rick Parry, who broke many of the stories about the Iran-Contra debacle in the eighties, has written a new book along with his sons, Sam and Nat. Called; Neck Deep it lays out the very carefully planned attack by the rich against the world. This article from Consortiumnews.com discusses that old nemisus of the left the CIA and its continued role in destabalizing govornments to allow the rich an powerful to take over and run rough shod over people and their resources. I would call the CIA the tip of the sword in the advancement of the "free market" juggernaut.
http://consortiumnews.com/2011/06/03/making-the-us-economy-scream/Rick Parry, who broke many of the stories about the Iran-Contra debacle in the... more
As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Americans will be taking measure of our government’s response to those events. To be sure, the American reaction included selflessness, dedication, and bravery, but it also included some harebrained and counterproductive steps. As John Stuart Mill and Walter Bagehot teach us, one of the strengths of a democracy is its ability to engage in candid self-assessment — “government by discussion” — in order to ascertain where those in power have made mistakes, and to correct their errors.
Mistakes are inevitable in government. What is essential is that they be identified, and that steps be taken to avoid their institutionalization or repetition. This process is impeded by the natural tendency of the powerful to try to limit critical discussion so that they may avoid embarrassment and the political costs that democracy exacts from leaders who have erred. But one of the fundamental distinctions between an authoritarian society and a genuine democracy is precisely that a democracy forces truth to the surface and weighs it as essential to the nation’s political dialogue.
The heavy hand of censorship has never been wielded more clumsily by the nation’s intelligence community than it is being wielded right now. Scott Shane of the New York Times brought a striking example to light on Friday, in a report on the CIA’s efforts to suppress a forthcoming book by former FBI agent Ali Soufan:
In what amounts to a fight over who gets to write the history of the Sept. 11 attacks and their aftermath, the Central Intelligence Agency is demanding extensive cuts from the memoir of a former F.B.I. agent who spent years near the center of the battle against Al Qaeda.
The agent, Ali H. Soufan, argues in the book that the C.I.A. missed a chance to derail the 2001 plot by withholding from the F.B.I. information about two future 9/11 hijackers living in San Diego, according to several people who have read the manuscript. And he gives a detailed, firsthand account of the C.I.A.’s move toward brutal treatment in its interrogations, saying the harsh methods used on the agency’s first important captive, Abu Zubaydah, were unnecessary and counterproductive.
Nothing in Soufan’s argument is really new. The accusations concerning the two al Qaeda operatives in Southern California, for example, figure heavily in a documentary for which former Bush Administration counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke was interviewed. In an excerpt recently aired on a PBS affiliate in Colorado, Clarke reveals his suspicion that the CIA was attempting to recruit and turn the two operatives, and that the Agency suppressed information about its egregious error afterward. As Clarke notes, the affair escaped detection in the various probes undertaken after 9/11, including the 9/11 Commission report (.pdf). His comments track Lawrence Wright’s analysis in the award-winning book The Looming Tower. These potentially explosive revelations have so far drawn very little attention from major American broadcast and print media.........
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/08/hbc-90008214As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Americans will be taking measure of our... more
War by Deception, the definitive 9/11 documentary
'In all affairs, it's a healthy thing, now and then, to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted'
Anyone looking at the events of 9/11 with an open mind understands full well that the government conspiracy can not be true.
This is documented in almost all the 9/11 films, which invariably focus only on the problems with the official story. Until seeing War by Deception, it was obvious I had been missing the forest for the trees. This three hour epic brings matters full circle; capturing in three concise hours what likely took years of research by Mr. Ryan Dawson.
If a three hour movie is a turn off for you, it is very likely that you don't have the desire to understand the full spectrum of this issue to begin with. Not only does it demolish the official conspiracy, it ties together the fraud of the Iraq war, as well as the key Anthrax link that most miss, linking it to the same group of (mostly) dual citizen criminals whose success in hijacking the American government and using it as an engine for their own ends is unlike anything ever witnessed in history.
This film should be mandatory viewing for every American, and frankly, anyone who is deeply troubled by what has transpired in the years since 9/11. Ryan Dawson is a true patriot and hero of the highest order, and War By Deception is the definitive documentary on the 9/11 fraud."War by Deception, the definitive 9/11 documentary
Why did the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) let criminals buy firearms, smuggle them across the Mexican border and deliver them into the hands of vicious drug cartels? The ATF claims it launched its now-disgraced Operation Fast and Furious in 2009 to catch the “big fish.” Fast and Furious was designed to stem the “Iron River” flowing from American gun stores into the cartels’ arsenals. The bureau says it allowed gun smuggling so it could track the firearms and arrest the cartel members downstream. Not true.
During the course of Operation Fast and Furious, about 2,000 weapons moved from U.S. gun stores to Mexican drug cartels - exactly as intended.
In congressional testimony, William Newell, former ATF special agent in charge of the Phoenix Field Division, testified that the Internal Revenue Service, Drug Enforcement Administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement were “full partners” in Operation Fast and Furious. Mr. Newell’s list left out the most important player: the CIA. According to a CIA insider, the agency had a strong hand in creating, orchestrating and exploiting Operation Fast and Furious.
The CIA’s motive is clear enough: The U.S. government is afraid the Los Zetas drug cartel will mount a successful coup d’etat against the government of Felipe Calderon.Why did the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) let criminals... more
Ron Paul completely destroying Christian Zionist nutjob Rick Santorum in a debate on an upcoming war in Iran recently has caused many people to revisit this video.Ron Paul completely destroying Christian Zionist nutjob Rick Santorum in a debate on... more
How could it be that a country that made its reputation on "democracy" and
"individual liberties" is now an inflexible totalitarian system bent on
bringing every person on earth under its oppressive fist, either through
irresistible bribes to corrupt leaders, outright invasions, or the imposition
of devastating financial shackles through the International Monetary Fund? http://firstname.lastname@example.org/msg03466.htmlHow could it be that a country that made its reputation on "democracy" and... more