"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank."
Now if challenged on that he would probably say he was referring to Iraq, but I think that most people hearing his campaign pledges understood Iraq and Afghanistan to be an indivisible projection of military power, and took Obama at his word, expecting that he was an honest man making an honest pledge.
I originally posted the following video interview with Howard Zinn back on April 10, 2009 following the then recent revelations of President Obama's DOJ under Eric Holder betraying Obama's campaign promises to instead embrace the Bush administrations claims for immunity and "states secrets" in the case of clear FISA violations and illegal wiretapping.
In part three of what was a series of interviews, historian, political scientist, social critic, activist, author and playwright Professor Howard Zinn talks here with Real News CEO Paul Jay about why so many people seem to be convinced that Obama is anything more than what he appears to be given his actions and policies implemented since inauguration, and about how to create a mass popular movement to pressure Obama for progressive results in a supportive way, and concludes that social turmoil is not only not bad but necessary if it leads to something good in the sense of creating real change.
Real News - April 10, 2009 Send a message to Obama
Howard Zinn: Social turmoil is not bad if it leads to something good
I originally posted this video interview with Zinn back on April 10, 2009 following the then recent revelations of President Obama's DOJ under Eric Holder betraying Obama's campaign promises to instead embrace the Bush administrations claims for immunity and "states secrets" in the case of clear FISA violations and illegal wiretapping.
So much more has gone down since then, and Obama has turned his back on so many of his campaign pledges to make his administrations policy decisions so far essentially a direct extension of the policies of the past eight years, with most of the bigger points outlined in Paul Street's recent article The Dawning Age of Obama as a Potentially Teach-able Moment for The Left that I wonder if it is time for revisiting what Zinn had to say in this interview now...
In part three of what was a series of interviews, historian, political scientist, social critic, activist, author and playwright Professor Howard Zinn talks here with Real News CEO Paul Jay about why so many people seem to be convinced that Obama is anything more than what he appears to be given his actions and policies implemented since inauguration, and about how to create a mass popular movement to pressure Obama for progressive results in a supportive way, and concludes that social turmoil is not only not bad but necessary if it leads to something good in the sense of creating real change.
Real News - April 10, 2009 Send a message to Obama
Howard Zinn: Social turmoil is not bad if it leads to something good
George W Bush may have damaged this Democracy beyond all repair.
The Constitution defines the powers of the Executive Branch and the Presidency. George W Bush took power beyond those which are defined in the Constitution.
As of now the President CAN spy on me, name me a terrorist, imprison me without trial and torture me until I confess to something. Should it give me any comfort that he promises not to do so? Or should I wait until some President (or his advisors) feel less squeamish about it?
With those new extra-Constitutional power, George W Bush became MORE THAN just a President. With the new and un-Constitutional powers of office, the Presidency under Bush became less Democratic and more Authoritarian.
For all intents and purposes, George W Bush was more than a man, but less than a God.
Now that President Obama holds the office, it is his duty to restore the powers of the Executive branch to their original status as defined within the Constitution.
So far, the Obama Administration has applied the same strategy Bush had been following to matters related to the Iraq-Torture scandal, all while telling us repeatedly, "No. Trust us. We will handle it. "
and we are supposed to believe them.
When George W Bush and his administration took new Executive Powers for themselves they let the Genie out of the bottle. Our job is to put the Genie back in.
So, what happens if POTUS Obama does not intend to abdicate the un-Constitutional powers of the executive branch that were illegally taken by the Bush Administration. What if he will not deny future Presidents the ability to name citizens "enemy combatants". What if he will not deny our Government the ability to illegal spy on citizens without a specific warrant. What if he will not deny future Presidents the ability to torture when necessary. His Chief Of Staff has said as much. But he promises not to let it happen again.
President Obama, your promises are meaningless to me.
Your actions speak volumes.
The day I fully believe the promises of any politician is the day I pack my bags for the funny farm. Especially after the last President, and especially when I consider who may be the next one.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
If Obama does not CHANGE his view on this issue, I can no longer have any HOPE he will be able to administer his office as required under the Oath he swore to when he accepted it.
What matters more than our basic HUMAN RIGHTS? Tax code and global warming mean nothing to a man tied to a rack.
And if you can do it to somebody, you can do it to anybody.
To those who would say that this will mean the Republicans will win, I ask you, which should I prefer?
The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year...
Several intelligence officials, as well as lawyers briefed about the matter, said the N.S.A. had been engaged in "overcollection" of domestic communications of Americans. They described the practice as significant and systemic, although one official said it was believed to have been unintentional.
According to the NSA, the "overcollection" has been happening because the agency is unable "at times to distinguish between communications inside the United States and those overseas". "One official said that led the agency to inadvertently 'target' groups of Americans and collect their domestic communications without proper court authority."
Particularly relevant following the recent revelations of President Obama's DOJ under Eric Holder betraying Obama's campaign promises to instead embrace the Bush administrations claims for immunity and "states secrets" in the case of clear FISA violations and illegal wiretapping, in part three of a series of interviews historian, political scientist, social critic, activist, author and playwright Professor Howard Zinn talks with Real News CEO Paul Jay about why so many people seem to be convinced that Obama is anything more than what he appears to be given his actions and policies implemented since inauguration, and about how to create a mass popular movement to pressure Obama for progressive results in a supportive way, and concludes that social turmoil is not only not bad but necessary if it leads to something good in the sense of creating real change.
Real News - April 10, 2009 Send a message to Obama
Howard Zinn: Social turmoil is not bad if it leads to something good
According to White House Press Secretary Gibbs, who spoke yesterday to reporters, President Obama agrees with the position taken by his DoJ.
Responding late Friday afternoon to a suit filed by the EFF against the NSA, the Justice Department
argued that the case should be dismissed because information surrounding the program was a "state secret" and therefore couldn't be litigated or discussed. It also proposed that the government was protected by "sovereign immunity" under federal wiretapping statutes and the Patriot Act, arguing that the United States could only face lawsuits if they willfully elected to disclose intelligence obtained by wiretapping.
Obama Administration Embraces Bush Position on Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy
Says Court Must Dismiss Jewel v. NSA to Protect 'State Secrets'
San Francisco - The Obama administration formally adopted the Bush administration's position that the courts cannot judge the legality of the National Security Agency's (NSA's) warrantless wiretapping program, filing a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA late Friday.
n Jewel v. NSA, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging the agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. The Obama Justice Department claims in its motion that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets." These are essentially the same arguments made by the Bush administration three years ago in Hepting v. AT&T, EFF's lawsuit against one of the telecom giants complicit in the NSA spying.
As Dick and George slithered out of DC, a number of lawsuits that were filed by victims of their criminal acts involving FISA, torture and rendition have now been inherited by President Obama. Bush routinely dismissed these cases by claiming his version of state secrets privilege on unilateral steroids. The megamedia have reported that the Obama Justice Dept. has indicated in pleadings that it will also invoke the state secrets privilege. However, there is an alternative which could protect legitimate governmental prerogatives, a victim's right of redress for harms perpetrated by government officials and society's right for a transparent government that sustains the rule of law. The alternative is for Obama to adopt the state secrets standards that govern criminal prosecutions as his guidelines for use in civil litigation until Congress adopts the State Secrets Protection Act that was defeated last year amidst Bush's veto threats. These guidelines are consistent with Supreme Court precedent that has rarely been correctly utilized.
I know it's hard to move on, but I really hope that in the months and weeks leading up to January 20th, the left liberal blogosphere will not focus its attention single-mindedly on every rumor of Obama cabinet appointments or even every toothsome morsel of gossip about Republican backbiting and infighting.
It seems there are three main responses progressives and leftists are taking to the new administration-in-formation.
The first is the classic honeymoon:
Cut the guy some slack, he's got a lot on his plate. Already the election has had a transforming effect on the mood of people in the country and more good stuff is on the way. Now is not the time to be tugging his coattails.
The second is to try and lobby or bring direct pressure to bear on the Obama/Biden team, the Congressional Dems and/or the Democratic Party machine around a broad agenda or, more commonly a particular issue. In particular, This takes the form of trying to call in markers by forces who worked hard to produce the Obama landslide. The clearest example is the drive announced by the Change to Win union coalition to get the Employee Free Choice Act "card check" law passed in the first 100 days of the new administration. The AFL-CIO, for its part, is calling for a million EFCA petition signatures to be delivered on Inauguration Day. Similar calls have been launched by health care reform groups, (The push here to defend the 50 state strategy and its organizing core seems to fall into this category.)
The third is the one I want to argue for. It has already been modeled modeled by the Proposition 8 activists in California and their supporters around the country in the wake of Tuesday's vote.. They chose a target, the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (a/k/a the Mormon Church), and lit it up with militant demonstrations, extensive muckraking exposure of the facts, and public online debate over, and planning for, a possible boycott of Utah.
I would characterize this third option as creating a firestorm of struggles, locally-based in the main, around critical issues. These will by and large not make the administration-to-be their main target but will create facts on the ground in terms of social unrest among important sections of the people, which will have to be factored into their planning and policy-making.
A couple of additional points on this strategic approach:
1. Those arguing for the second approach should bear in mind the FISA battle of this spring, when folks across the left liberal blogosphere, a sector Obama owed bigtime, fought urgently to get him to stand up for constitutional rule in this country. A broad united front of progressives, liberals, civil liberties advocates and libertarians was quickly built. Funds were raised and teevee ads even made. What his backers got from Obama was one live-blog session with some staffers defending his unconscionable support for the Bush-engineered FISA bill, which passed.
2. Some may object that this doesn't deal with the big picture can be made, but let's take the example of the global economic meltdown and the rapidly deepening depression in this country. Obama's seventeen-advisor panel is drawn from the very clowns and crooks who dragged the world into this mess. The best thing that could happen before the inauguration would be a wave of protests-against plant closings here, foreclosures there, tuition hikes on campus, service cuts in broke communities. The bankers, the automakers, the shippers are already whispering in every ear they can find, amplifying their urgency with "common sense" and the rustle of lobbying cash. We have to show that listening to them has real social costs as well as fiscal ones.
3. The worst thing about Obama for many of his supporters was his "tough guy" military stance, The promise of an eventual substantial withdrawal from Iraq-providing the high command agrees-is more than undercut by his pledge to dump thousands more troops into Afghanistan (the Graveyard of Empires, going back millennia) and "plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 soldiers and the Marines by 27,000 troops." It is time for the anti-war movement, which has done so much to crystallize opposition to the occupation of Iraq (and thus to turn the public away from the Republicans), to step up again. Troops are dying, Iraqis are dying. The war has brought unimaginable devastation to their country and costs ours $2.5 billion a week. We can't wait for Inauguration Day to make our voices heard. A good place to start is the Iraq Moratorium. This locally-based Third Friday protest will be observed by groups and individuals around the country on November 21, for the fifteenth straight month. Make plans to take part now!
Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com has succinctly made the point about the pending Obama victory, saving me the trouble of writing it out in my own strained syntax:
It certainly seems, by all appearances, that Barack Obama and Joe Biden will win on Tuesday (though anything can happen, don't assume anything, etc. etc.). For reasons I've explained many times before, I consider that to be a good and important outcome (principally due to the need to excise the Right from power for as long as possible). But the virtually complete absence from the presidential campaign of any issues pertaining to the executive power abuses of the last eight years -- illegal eavesdropping, torture, rendition, due-process-less detentions, the abolition of habeas corpus, extreme and unprecedented secrecy, general executive lawlessness -- reflects how much further work and effort will be required to make progress on these issues no matter what happens on Tuesday.
It doesn't help that Obama has already voted with the national security fetishists on FISA expanded wiretapping.
Original article, by Joe Mowrey and sub-titled Which Candidate Supports Petraeus, the Bailout, the Death Penalty, Nuclear Power, the Occupation, the Cuban Embargo ..., via counterpunch.com.
Ooooh...a guessing game. I wonder who it could be? Hmmmm? Let's find out below the fold!
The SF Chronicle reports on corporate lobbyists taking advantage of a loophole in rules preventing them from throwing lavish parties to "honor"House lawmakers, which exempts parties for groups of Members.
Prominent, a Sunday evening bash thrown by ATT for the "Blue Dogs" to thank them for the FISA amnesty.
Congress, pledging to clean up Washington's culture of corruption, approved a rule last year to end the practice of lobbyists or their clients throwing lavish events honoring lawmakers at the parties' national conventions.
But the House ethics committee opened a huge loophole in the rule by issuing guidelines in December saying it was fine for lobbyists or their employers to throw parties for a group of House members - just not for a single lawmaker...
...AT&T is among the sponsors of a party celebrating the conservative House Blue Dog Democrats on Sunday night.
Perfect spot for the first appearance of my "STOP GOVERNMENT SPYING" banner.
On March 5th, dailykos denizen norahc (Ben Plunkett) obtained permits in the name of "Swift Students for Truthiness" from the St. Paul Parks Department for use of Hamm's Plaza for non-partisan issue oriented expressive activity on Sept. 3d and 4th, 8AM to 8PM. Planned, a Shutdown Guantanamo Stop Torture event the 3d, Stop Government Spying on the 4th, both starting at 4:00. I'm co-ordinating the "spying" event.
Hamm's is tiny, not much more than a traffic island, so the limit of 91 in attendance at any time was acceptable.
Yesterday, Ben received a Certified Mail from the Parks Department, dated August 5th, indicating that the permits had been revoked, offering alternative space at Ecolab Plaza or Mears Park, both much less visible. Hamm's is 2 blocks from the Convention site at the Excel Center, and faces the St. Paul Hotel, a major delegate hub. I've just lined up an attorney, we'll be seeking a Temporary Restraining Order directing that the Parks Dept. honor the original permit.
I've only caught some news snippets lately but I noticed what might be a pattern emerging.
The big immigrant round-up in Postville, IA was an exercise in mass processing of a large round-up of illegal immigrants. They were taken to a cattle auction fairground and batch processed through a rigged system that put them each in prison for five months prior to their deportation. There are some good diaries around on the subject. I'll add some links if I have time, otherwise a google should do it.
My discipline is computer science and I have had a lot of management experience in a large organization (IBM after they bought Lotus out; I was and am a Loti, ex). This whole operation struck me as a trial run for a process that would be repeated and refined over time. The victims in this case were the evil brown people - the illegal immigrants. They've been getting demonized for years now so the collective working class sympathy for them is pretty low. After all, they're taking American jobs. That those are jobs that Uhmericans won't do doesn't matter. They are part of the economic problem and therefore - no widespread outrage.
The second mass operation was the combined federal, state and local mass round-up of sex offenders. No big deal, they deserved it right? No one wants to defend that crowd. That makes it very easy to do a trial run on them, too. The feds made this happen by doling out huge sums of cash for lots of OT pay for state and local authorities. Everyone likes more cash in their pockets. One of the big benefits was building longer term relationships among the three governmental law enforcement levels. This was even touted in some of the press coverage. What a wonderful thing to see such cooperation on a multi-state, multi-locality effort.
So first the illegal immigrants and then the sex offenders. Nice, safely demonizable practice groups is what I see. The first run at Postville hit a single location and gave valuable feedback on how to process human beings through a carefully jury-rigged (npi) legal chute. (Check out the huge busing capacity in the first link up top.) It was just like cattle to the slaughter except the outcome was temporary imprisonment at just below the maximum sentence. Of course the immigrants will now be available as free prison labor for those five months.
The second run is more insidious. I've seen small rumblings here and there about the feds identifying state and local law enforcement types who would be willing to go so far as to shoot at Uhmerican citizens. I'll have to research that a bit more. Maybe someone can link to any relevant bits in the comments. The pervert posse set up what can be a continuing and growing bond, well lubricated by federal funds, to develop a vertical enforcement structure that could, if it fell into evil hands, be used to round up any stray thinkers. Not that anyone would actually be so evil as to conceive of such a thing.
Separately, these two events seem unrelated. Add a huge dash of illegal, warrantless wiretapping and let it simmer for a bit. Smells like soup to me. What would be the next ingredient? Across Russia and Europe it would always be the Jews, gypsys and gays. I suppose Muslims could be next. I doubt they'd go after the drug gangs. They're better armed and funded.
OK. I give up. Here it is: Operation Falcon! Federal And Local Cops Organized Nationally. I guess I'm just slow tonight. That's the official government web site touting its huge benefits.
I suppose the next move is outsourcing the wet work to Blackwater and Dyncorp. The last eight years will never be taught in American History classes. At least not the way they actually happened. File the American Dream under Nice-Try, No-Cigar.
So apparently some people missed the FISA vote protest. Well...shucks. You snooze, you lose. Not me, though. I was there, and it was AWESOME. 100,000 bloggers stormed the Capitol, dressed in preppie business suits, carrying pocket Constitutions, and wielding their laptops like deadly maces. People trampled each other to kick Harry Reid in the balls. The old coot put up a hell of a fight, but in the end the numbers were against him, and he submitted meekly, like we knew he would.
TomP has posted a diary calling on everyone to sign Russ Feingold's petition against the "compromise" FISA bill.
From Russ Feingold:
In recent days, people across the country have voiced the opinion that the so-called "compromise" FISA bill working its way through the Senate must be stopped.
As you already know, I am working hard to strip retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that allegedly cooperated with the President's illegal warrantless wiretapping program from the bill.
But that is not the only problem. This FISA legislation gives enormous powers to the government: including the ability to read emails and text messages and listen to phone conversations of anyone communicating with their family members, friends, associates, reporters, ANYBODY who may be overseas - all with zero court review. Nobody should be supporting this legislation.
We can defend our country from terrorists while at the same time protecting the rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution. It's time for our elected officials to stand up for the values on which our country was founded.
We should celebrate our Constitution this Fourth of July - and do everything we can to prevent it from being torn up when the Senate returns to Washington next week.
Progressives everywhere have already had a tremendous impact - with phone calls, emails, and letters pouring into offices by the hundreds (in some cases thousands), but the pressure on my colleagues to give in to this so-called "compromise" and President Bush is strong.
I'm going to continue to do everything I can to stand up for the rights and freedoms we all share. Thanks again for doing your part.
Sincerely,
Russ Feingold
Honorary Chair
Progressive Patriots Fund
An easy way to get active. Sorry this is so short. Wanted to get it out quick.
Well, I just read Olbermann's rejoinder on FISA and man, http://www.dailykos.com/storyo... ,if he'd just check out wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... he would know how fruitless the idea of criminal prosecutions is. In short, Bush can pardon anybody from criminal prosecutions, charges pending or not. All you have to do is recall Dick Nixon and what he got from Jerry Ford to know this.
Neglected is the beauty thing of a pardon: if you accept, you are admitting guilt. And under the res judicata doctrine (and because the standard of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases, is higher than civil cases (preponderance of evidence), you accept a pardon, you probably (I say probably since a court might hold you didn't really litigate a case by accepting a pardon) lose your civil case.
So that is the real reason why civil immunity is so important. Important to the telcoms, their owners and others involved, just so they can accept a pardon and run off scooter, I mean Scot, free. Important to strip from the bill because it is the only means to keep these folks on the hook--and get their evidence.
If FISA passes, the only thing an Obama admin. could do is not challenge the Unconstitutionality of FISA. But the telecom immunity would likely be severable and upheld.
First, print the thing out, all 114 pages (pdf), and hand it to your Senators. Best if you can say "I've read it, I expect you to take the time to do so yourself." For extra credit, take a highlighter to the printout and mark up the sections you consider problematic.
Bring an accomplice with a vidcam. An admission that they haven't and won't read the bill makes nice youtube, come re-election time.
"I'm pleased we were able to delay a vote on FISA until after the July 4th holiday instead of having it jammed through. I hope that over the July 4th holiday, Senators will take a closer look at this deeply flawed legislation and understand how it threatens the civil liberties of the American people. It is possible to defend this country from terrorists while also protecting the rights and freedoms that define our nation."
How to find your Senators' appearances? Start with their Senate and Campaign websites. Next, search Google News for "YourSenator'sname Parade" "YourSenator's name Barbeque" "YourSenator'sname Picnic" "YourSenator'sname fundraiser" If you don't get hits, make a Google Alert. Post any scheduled events you find below in comments.
Senator Feingold plans to introduce 6 Amendments. He explains them, not in great detail, in Fact Sheet: Potential Feingold Amendments to FISA Bill. Print it out too, and when you catch your Senator, ask that they support them all.
Feingold-Webb-Tester Amendment to Provide Protections for Americans
Use Limits Amendment
Prohibiting "Reverse Targeting"
Prohibiting "Bulk Collection"
Congress Access to FISA Court Materials
If your Senator won't budge on immunity shift the conversation to the problems with the parts that go forward. If any Amendments pass, and the Senate approves the revised version, it throws the whole deal back to re-negotiation with the House, which would then have to start it's process all over again. The package can not go to Bush's desk until both the House and Senate pass identical versions.
Something is missing beyond the spine of some Democrats in the rush to legalize warrantless wiretaps, end privacy, and reward corporations for betraying the public trust. Let's call it the beef (or nicely textured soy protein for the vegetarians among us).
I am an empiricist at heart. I want proof in the form of sound evidence before I am willing to believe something is true. I am also deeply cynical and suspicious of politicians because too few decisions favor the common good. That cynicism has grown after our elected officials 'misrepresented' the threat posed by Iraq. In the uproar over the FISA revisions, now is a good time to point out there are some glaring gaps in the evidence at hand.
Reform Immigration -
March on Washington
As Dick and George slithered out of DC, a number of lawsuits that were filed by victims of their criminal acts involving FISA, torture and rendition have now been inherited by President Obama. Bush routinely dismissed these cases by claiming his version of state secrets privilege on unilateral steroids. The megamedia have reported that the Obama Justice Dept. has indicated in pleadings that it will also invoke the state secrets privilege. However, there is an alternative which could protect legitimate governmental prerogatives, a victim's right of redress for harms perpetrated by government officials and society's right for a transparent government that sustains the rule of law. The alternative is for Obama to adopt the state secrets standards that govern criminal prosecutions as his guidelines for use in civil litigation until Congress adopts the State Secrets Protection Act that was defeated last year amidst Bush's veto threats. These guidelines are consistent with Supreme Court precedent that has rarely been correctly utilized.
