Monthly Archives: June 2007

In Our Name

The Central Intelligence Agency has opened up the so-called “family jewels”, the until-now secret record of CIA actions in the 1970s that have been the subject of discussion for decades.

To say the least, the picture isn’t pretty:

WASHINGTON — The CIA released hundreds of pages of internal reports Tuesday on assassination plots, secret drug testing and spying on Americans that triggered a scandal in the mid-1970s.

The documents detail assassination plots against foreign leaders such as Fidel Castro, the testing of mind-altering drugs like LSD on unwitting citizens, wiretapping of U.S. journalists, spying on civil rights and anti-Vietnam war protesters, opening of mail between the United States and the Soviet Union and China and break-ins at the homes of ex-CIA employees and others.

The 693 pages, mostly drawn from the memories of active CIA officers in 1973, were turned over at that time to three different investigative panels _ President Ford’s Rockefeller Commission, the Senate’s Church committee and the House’s Pike committee.

The panels spent years investigating and amplifying on these documents. And their public reports in the mid-1970s filled tens of thousands of pages. The scandal sullied the reputation of the intelligence community and led to new rules for the CIA, FBI and other spy agencies and new permanent committees in Congress to oversee them.

Not to mention the reputation of the United States of America and the freedoms of it’s citizens.

Don’t get me wrong, I see the value in a centralized agency for gathering and evaluating intelligence on possible foreign threats, but it seems clear that, from the beginning, the CIA crossed the line from intelligence gathering to covert spying, not only on foreigners, but also on American citizens (which was supposed to have been against the law).

It’s good that these activities are being revealed to the public, even 30 years later, but it makes one wonder what is still going on in the halls of CIA Headquarters in Langely, Virginia.

The Heck With All Of Them

Dan Riehl on the Republicans and Democrats:

At the risk of being politically incorrect, is it really worth voting in an election when D stands for Dumb-ass and R stands for retarded? Perhaps not. I could always do something constructive like go fishing on election day. I can’t think of a time when I have been more disenchanted with America’s political class and that is saying something, as I basically distrust them to start.

You and me both Dan.

H/T: Brendan Loy

The Imperial Vice-Presidency

Starting yesterday, the Washington Post began running a four-part series on the Vice-Presidency of Dick Cheney, during which we have seen the role of the Vice-President increase in behind-the-scenes power to an extent never before seen in American history. The first two articles have focused on Cheney’s role in the War in Iraq and the War on Terror and they have been, to say the least, revealing:

Yesterday, for example, we learned the extent to which Cheney has created a back channel to the President that allows him to bypass most of the President’s senior advisers and cabinet members when he wants to promote his agenda:

Just past the Oval Office, in the private dining room overlooking the South Lawn, Vice President Cheney joined President Bush at a round parquet table they shared once a week. Cheney brought a four-page text, written in strict secrecy by his lawyer. He carried it back out with him after lunch.

In less than an hour, the document traversed a West Wing circuit that gave its words the power of command. It changed hands four times, according to witnesses, with emphatic instructions to bypass staff review. When it returned to the Oval Office, in a blue portfolio embossed with the presidential seal, Bush pulled a felt-tip pen from his pocket and signed without sitting down. Almost no one else had seen the text.

Cheney’s proposal had become a military order from the commander in chief. Foreign terrorism suspects held by the United States were stripped of access to any court — civilian or military, domestic or foreign. They could be confined indefinitely without charges and would be tried, if at all, in closed “military commissions.”

“What the hell just happened?” Secretary of State Colin L. Powell demanded, a witness said, when CNN announced the order that evening, Nov. 13, 2001. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice, incensed, sent an aide to find out. Even witnesses to the Oval Office signing said they did not know the vice president had played any part.

The episode was a defining moment in Cheney’s tenure as the 46th vice president of the United States, a post the Constitution left all but devoid of formal authority. “Angler,” as the Secret Service code-named him, has approached the levers of power obliquely, skirting orderly lines of debate he once enforced as chief of staff to President Gerald R. Ford. He has battled a bureaucracy he saw as hostile, using intimate knowledge of its terrain. He has empowered aides to fight above their rank, taking on roles reserved in other times for a White House counsel or national security adviser. And he has found a ready patron in George W. Bush for edge-of-the-envelope views on executive supremacy that previous presidents did not assert.

What is even more interesting is this exchange between former Vice-President Dan Quayle and Cheney shortly after Inauguration Day in 2001:

“I said, ‘Dick, you know, you’re going to be doing a lot of this international traveling, you’re going to be doing all this political fundraising . . . you’ll be going to the funerals,’ ” Quayle said in an interview earlier this year. “I mean, this is what vice presidents do. I said, ‘We’ve all done it.’ ”

Cheney “got that little smile,” Quayle said, and replied, “I have a different understanding with the president.”

“He had the understanding with President Bush that he would be — I’m just going to use the word ‘surrogate chief of staff,’ ” said Quayle, whose membership on the Defense Policy Board gave him regular occasion to see Cheney privately over the following four years.

The obvious implication of that statement, of course, is that Cheney had an agreement with Bush in 2000 when he agreed to stand as the VP running mate. What the details of that agreement are is unclear, but that manner in which Cheney has acted as Vice President give the implication that Cheney asked for, and received, a much greater role in Administration policy making than any Vice-President had ever had. The last time anything resembling that happened was in 1980 when Gerald Ford put similar conditions on becoming Ronald Reagan’s running mate. Reagan, of course, turned down the offer.

The biggest Cheney’s assertion of Vice-Presidential power isn’t so much that it was done —- the Constitution is silent on the powers of the Vice-President and, if the President chooses to grant him authority, that would seem to be his right —- but the fact that much of it was done in secret. Take, for example, the controversial torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay:

Three days after the Ashcroft meeting, Cheney brought the order for military commissions to Bush. No one told Bellinger, Rice or Powell, who continued to think that Prosper’s working group was at the helm.

After leaving Bush’s private dining room, the vice president took no chances on a last-minute objection. He sent the order on a swift path to execution that left no sign of his role. After Addington and Flanigan, the text passed to Berenson, the associate White House counsel. Cheney’s link to the document broke there: Berenson was not told of its provenance.

Berenson rushed the order to deputy staff secretary Stuart W. Bowen Jr., bearing instructions to prepare it for signature immediately – without advance distribution to the president’s top advisers. Bowen objected, he told colleagues later, saying he had handled thousands of presidential documents without ever bypassing strict procedures of coordination and review. He relented, one White House official said, only after “rapid, urgent persuasion” that Bush was standing by to sign and that the order was too sensitive to delay.

After reading something like this, it becomes clear why the rush to John Ashcroft’s hospital bed in early 2004 was such a big deal. When you’re dealing with people who act in secret without impunity, a scene directly out of The Godfather isn’t implausible at all.

One of the most serious problems with the Bush Administration has been the extent to which it acts in secret, and in ways that allow it to evade the technicalities of the law (by, say, using RNC email to discuss government business so it doesn’t get saved on the White House server). Now it’s clear where the inspiration for much of that secrecy comes from.

The “Libertarian Position” On Gentrification?

Regular commenter VRB recently asked me what libertarians thought of this story, regarding the poor and black former property owners in New Orleans getting screwed out of their homes by the government:

Evidence of eminent domain abuse can be found in the overwhelmingly-Black Lower 9th Ward, where the city bulldozed homes without informing their owners. Then there was the plan to raze 3,000 units of affordable housing in the city’s housing projects, which many Black New Orleanians called home, even though they were in relatively good shape. Add to that, only half the city’s population (and only 30% of the city’s Black population) has returned and you have the potential for a replay of all that we know about large scale displacement and its disastrous consequences. (See Mindy Fullilove’s “Root Shock: How Tearing Up City Neighborhoods Hurt America and What We Can Do About It”)

This all leaves me with a deluge of important questions such as:

Who will Mr. Blakely’s eminent domain powers and Recovery Zones benefit? How will the many Black homeowners and entrepreneurs still living outside the city represent their property? Will already-struggling communities of color have to worry about city-sanctioned permanent displacement of former residents? Will “appraised value” for property be determined by pre-storm worth or storm-depressed real estate values? Where will the $1.1 billion of public money come from and what is the relationship of the Recovery Zones with the broad, city-wide Unified New Orleans Plan (UNOP)?

With broken promises of affordable housing, an ineffective housing rebuilding program (Road Home) that is now running out of money, widespread housing discrimination, and elected officials who see Katrina “clean[ing] up public housing in New Orleans”, many former residents can’t even find a place to live, let alone establish employment, access quality healthcare, or feel safe in their communities. If left to their own devices, the powers that be seem to be heading toward the gentrification model, which will rake in the bucks for a small minority of people with vested interests in real estate, finance and politics at the expense of most of the people.***

Notice that I said that they were getting screwed by the government, not by developers. Developers may want to raze your property, “buy” it from you for sub-market rates without you having opportunity to object, and then turn it into higher-priced housing at a large profit to themselves. But they can’t do that. Only government has the power to do that, and it’s government that should be looked at here.

So what is the “libertarian position” when poor black people get screwed by the government? Well, like most other issues, it’s a problem with the government having too much power. Government claims to be looking out for the poor, but government is driven by people that have a need to get reelected. To get reelected, you need to buy advertising. To afford advertising, you need to court people with money. So in the long run, you try to keep a balance between “appearing” to help the masses while you’re really helping the people with money behind the scenes.

When government is involved, rich people with lawyers win. Poor people who can’t afford lawyers lose. When government decides who to screw, they go for the easiest target. Why do you think the middle class gets audited while rich people with teams of lawyers to construct their tax shelters don’t? If you’re going to be a bully, and government is most certainly that, you target the people least likely to fight back. It’s that simple. This is how government works. This is how government must work. That’s how all the incentives line up. Anyone who tells you differently shouldn’t be trusted.

You want the libertarian position on poor black people getting screwed by the government? You want the libertarian position on black people being tossed out of their homes before the government bulldozers head their way?

I’d like to say that if we elect “the right people”, all will be well. But that’s not true. The only way to solve this problem, and the libertarian answer, is to take away the government’s bulldozers. Take away their power to screw people. Take from them every bit of power that you can, because you know they can’t be trusted to wield it.
» Read more

1 4 5 6 7 8 24