GAO: US Unprepared for Al-Qaeda Attack

From Democracy Arsenal:

"Here is the title of a report from the Government Accountability Office on combating terrorism released today: The United States Lacks a Comprehensive Plan to Destroy the Terrorist Threat and Close the Safe Haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

That is not some line buried in the report. That is the title. Wow.

This GAO report may be the most damning condemnation of the Bush administration's counter-terrorism efforts. The report goes on to say that the Bush administration has failed to develop any plan to address the Al Qaeda threat. Worse, the report finds that Al Qaeda is now able to attack the United States and represents the "most serious" threat to this country."

(Sigh.)

Most Under-Reported Story of the Year: Bush Paves Way To Stay in Office

Some stories Foreign Policy didn't include in their list of "Top Ten Stories You Missed This Year":

1) The establishment by the USG of a new Unified Combatant Command for Africa. While it is not clear to me yet what precisely Africom's scope of operations will be, it does suggest a growing awareness on the part of the USG that stability in Africa matters for America's own security.

2) Child mortality is at a historic low globally, largely because of orchestrated efforts by NGOs and the UN to vaccinate children against preventable diseases and provide mothers with basic education about child health. Anyone who doubts that foreign aid can make a difference in the security of human beings should take heed of these numbers.

And the most important story you may have missed this year:

3) President Bush has enacted a National Security Presidential Directive that would make it legal for him to remain in office as long as he declares a “catastrophic national emergency” first. Defined, according to the Directive, as:

“any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.”

The mainstream news ignored this since May, but bloggers didn’t. Here are some views on the issue:

One Pissed Off Veteran writes:

“How fucking vague is that? A hurricane in Mexico? An ice storm in Canada? Pakistan dropping the big one into the men's room at the Taj Mahal? Even a precipitous drop in the value of the dollar against the Euro.

Any and all of these can be interpreted within the broad confines of this directive.

Note that it doesn't have to be on American soil. Anywhere on the planet (and probably off of it) is fair game for this far-reaching directive.

This is nothing less than a blueprint for instituting martial law in the United State -- with Der Monkey Fuehrer himself at the top."

Show Us The Inherent Law quoted Matthew Rothschild as saying:

“Under this plan, [Bush] entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

A slightly less paranoid view comes from InformationClearingHouse :

“These are profoundly, potentially calamitously, broad terms. Who defines what is extraordinary? Who defines how severe severely is? Is there any procedure to challenge the junking of constitutional government? …Even if you don't believe the most sinister paranoid coup theories, the document does nothing to allay one's fears that it could be used in a sinister way.”

Read the directive and decide for yourself whether we are likely to see Bush leave office on schedule.


Type rest of the post here

Blowing the Whistle on Torture

Ian over at The Agonist follows Michael Froomkin in berating lawmakers who knew of water-boarding as early as 2002 for failing to raise their concerns on the floor of the House and Senate. Froomkin makes an interesting point that:

"The emerging consensus in the blogosphere seems to be that even if they had the presence of mind to object, the Representatives and Senators who were briefed were in a bind: as members of the Intelligence Committees or the leadership, they signed various secrecy pledges which stopped them from going public... All this misses a critical aspect of our constitutional structure. Thanks to the Speech and Debate Clause there was a way for any Senator or Representative who wanted to blow the whistle to do so in a way that involved no risk of jail or fines – at worst they might have lost their security clearances (and even there the law is a little murky)."

To support his argument, Froomkin excerpts Article 1 of the US Constitution which reads:

"The Senators and Representatives... shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."

Note, however, the exemption for acts of “treason,” defined in Article 3 of the US Constitution:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

Who supposes a government who can claim water-boarding is not torture wouldn’t happily call such whistle-blowing “aiding and comforting the enemy” and thus the construct the whistleblowers as traitors?

I endorse the idea that any right-minded congressperson should have gladly gone to prison if necessary to blow the whistle on these practices. But let’s not “misunderestimate” the gravity of the personal choice they may have faced.

More on Justice in the Middle East

Hmmm, if 50-1000 lashes is a suitable punishment for rape in Saudi Arabia, what's a fair penalty for stealing some lumber in Iraq... Let's see what these US Army tankers have to say... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJC1unnuwds&feature=related ... Oh, wait, the title of this note should probably have been "More Injustice in the Middle East"... Rubbish...