US President Barack Obama now pledges to transfer the responsibility of the shadow ‘Drone Wars’ from the CIA to the Pentagon – so the US Congress is able to monitor it. Until virtually yesterday the Obama administration did not even recognize in public the existence of the shadow ‘Drone Wars’.The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) at the Pentagon – which would then be in charge of the ‘Drone Wars’ – is bound to remain secret.And the Pentagon is not exactly yearning to retouch its definition of a “militant”, a prime candidate to be ‘target-assassinated’; “any military-aged male in a strike zone”. “Muslim” male, it goes without saying. Obama’s rhetoric is one thing. His administration’s ‘Drone Wars’ are another thing entirely.The President now insists GWOT is no longer a “boundless global war”.That’s rhetoric. For the Pentagon, the “entire globe is a battlefield”. That is the operative concept since the beginning of GWOT, and inbuilt in the Pentagon’s Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine.And if the entire globe is a battlefield, all its causes and consequences are interconnected.The rules of the gameWhat’s the difference between a British soldier (the UK is attached to GWOT via the “special relationship”), stationed at an army barracks, gruesomely hacked to death with a meat cleaver in a London street and a Syrian soldier beheaded/disemboweled/cannibalized in “rebel”-held territory by a mercenary Sunni jihadi? The difference is that the Nigerian-British killer in London is a terrorist, and the jihadi in Syria is a freedom fighter.What’s the difference between an alleged – never conclusively – proven Chechen-American principally responsible for the Boston bombing and a little Pashtun girl killed by a US drone in Waziristan?The difference is that the Chechen-American is a terrorist, and the Pashtun girl is not even acknowledged by the Pentagon (and even if she was, she’d go down as “collateral damage”.)And what if the “collateral damage” is a US citizen, as in Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, the 16-year-old son of Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, ‘target-assassinated’ by a US drone in Yemen in October 2011? It will take 19 months for the administration to admit he was “terminated” – but still with no justification attached. GWOT’s rules of the game won’t change – no matter how soaring Obama’s rhetoric.When the US – or “the West” – kills or ‘target-assassinates’ Muslim civilians, that’s never terrorism.When Muslims supported by “the West” kill other Muslim civilians – as in Syria – they are not terrorists; they are Reaganesque “freedom fighters”. When Muslims kill Western soldiers – as in London – they’re terrorists.When Muslims happen to come from regime-changeable Iran and Syria’s government, not to mention Hezbollah, they are by definition terrorists.And when Muslims are lingering in Guantanamo just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time when the US invaded a Muslim country, they remain terrorists – the umpteenth Obama promise to close Guantanamo notwithstanding.Pick your favorite blowbackTake a look at the trailer of Dirty Warsfeaturing Jeremy Scahill’s investigation of Washington’s shadow war. Pay attention to what a Pashtun peasant says: “If the Americans do this again, we are ready to shed our blood fighting them”.That’s blowback. And not only Pashtuns are ready – but pan-Arabs and Muslims born and bred in “the West”. The new “lone wolf” catchphrase/hysteria barely identifies the future proliferation of Muslim individuals whose anger finally explodes.They may not be affiliated with any al-Qaeda-style franchise or copycat. What they do embody is the notion that if “the West” can get away with killing Muslim civilians, there will be a price to pay.That’s 1, 2, 3, one thousand blowbacks. And reasons for a thousand blowbacks are piling up.The Bush administration’s ‘Shock and Awe’ over Baghdad 10 years ago was Western terrorism inflicted on Iraq’s civilian population.The ‘Drone Wars’ are Western terrorism inflicted on civilian populations from Yemen to Pakistan’s tribal areas. The sanctions packages imposed for years on Iraq and later on Iran are slow-motion Western terrorism inflicted on civilian populations to “prepare” them for regime change. Meanwhile “the West” simply won’t quit its ability to fabricate more blowbacks.NATO’s war “liberated” Libya and turned it into a failed state. The result is Sahelistan; northern and western Africa on fire. Suicide bombers in Niger have just attacked a military camp and a uranium mine operated by French company Areva. Responsibility was claimed by Mokhtar Belmokhtar, a former leader of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) who late last year formed the splinter group Signatories in Blood, then led the attack on a natural gas plant in Ain Amenas in Algeria last January, and later may – or rather may not – have been killed. The bottom line is that the entire globe will remain a battlefield – a self-fulfilling Pentagon prophecy. So many Belmokhtars to fight, so many Syrian jihadis to support, so many “al-Qaeda” to target-assassinate, so many Muslim lone wolves to track. Obama’s rhetoric is just a show. GWOT is bound to remain a serpent biting its own tail, eagerly feeding itself till the end of time. … Read More
Poland – Government ministers try to intimidate Polish media
Reporters Without Borders is very disturbed by attempts by Polish government ministers to intimidate the media during the past the days. The media freedom organization condemns the utterly disproportionate and exorbitant damages that transport minister Slawomir Nowak is demanding from the magazine Wprost in a libel suit over an April 2013 story about his friendship with businessmen who often win government contracts and his presence at private parties paid for by wealthy corporate (…) … Read More
United Arab Emirates – Prison sentence for netizen
Reporters Without Borders expresses outrage at the Abu Dhabi appeals court confirmation of the 10-month prison sentence of netizen Abdullah Al-Hadidi. The appeals court made its ruling on 22 May. Arrested on 22 March, Al-Hadidi was convicted in a lower court in April of having disseminated information on Twitter “in bad faith.” The information concerned the trial of 94 UAE citizens accused of endangering national security. Al-Hadidi was charged under a new cyber-crime law adopted in late (…) … Read More
Courtroom ordered closed for Manning trial session to ‘protect classified information’
The order comes after judges dropped one count against Manning, but are still pushing for serious charges: Disclosing classified data to WikiLeaks and aiding Al-Qaeda. Manning has pleaded guilty to 10 of the 22 charges set against him, standing accused of leaking over 700,000 documents to Wikileaks.Twenty-four witnesses, including several US ambassadors, will testify behind closed doors during the trial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, which begins on June 3.The decision was made by US Military judge Col. Denise Lind, who heads the case. She indicated that otherwise, some sensitive information could be revealed. A censored transcript of the hearing will be published at a later date, the judge explained.There has already been too much secrecy in the Manning case, Jesselyn Radack, national security and human rights director of the Washington-based Government Accountability Project told AP two weeks ago.”The more they do behind closed doors and the more they do through secret codes or anything else that shields the public from information, like not providing transcripts, those things are all antithetical to the democratic idea of having a free and open trial,” Radack stressed.Last year, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a petition to order the court to grant the public and press wider access to the trial, a request an appeals court later denied.In April, prosecutors urged journalists to “police” each other and inform judges if they notice other reporters taking notes or recordings the proceedings. The move followed the leak of a snippet of audio from the courtroom featuring Manning’s testimony about his motives in leaking the documents.The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) released the audio, marking the first time the public has heard Manning’s voice since his 2010 arrest. Manning justified his actions by calling for the exposure of what he saw as US government wrongdoings in order to “spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general as it related to Iraq and Afghanistan.”In the recording, he goes on to accuse the US Army of “not valu[ing] human life,” and compared other soldiers to “a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass.”Pfc. Bradley Manning admitted to disclosing classified government documents and diplomatic cables to whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, and now faces charges of aiding the enemy for those leaks. Part of the government’s case against Manning asserts that late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden asked one of his deputies to download documents leaked by Manning.Among the witnesses set to testify was one of the Navy SEALs that raided Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan in May 2011. Prosecutors said the “DoD operator,” whose identity was not disclosed, would testify that terrorists had received access to some of the WikiLeaks material through an associate.Prosecutors said Tuesday that they had agreed not to pursue a charge that Manning had violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, reducing his potential 162-year prison sentence by eight years.Just over a month ago, the judge ordered the prosecution to prove that Manning intended to harm the US by leaking the cables.On Tuesday, judges accepted Manning’s guilty plea to one of the charges. The offense was related to a State Department cable from the US embassy in Reykjavik, Iceland, which Manning has admitted to leaking.Manning has offered to plead guilty to 10 of the less serious charges against him, which could see him sentenced to up to 20 years. If convicted of all charges against him, he could be imprisoned for up to 150 years. … Read More
Iran – Open letter to the eight candidates in the Islamic Republic’s 11th presidential election
Reporters Without Borders has written an open letter to the eight approved candidates in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s 11th presidential election, requesting that they publicly commit themselves to support freedom of information. The list of eight approved candidates published yesterday by the Guardian Council – whose members are directly chosen and appointed by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei – offers little hope that the 14 June election will be conducted in a clear and transparent manner. In (…) … Read More
5 Overlooked Lessons From the AP Subpoenas and Other Leak Investigations
The journalism world has been rightly outraged by the Justice Department dragging the Associated Press (and now a Fox News reporter) into one of its sprawling leak investigations. … Read More
‘Like hardened criminals’: UK police sample DNA from 120,000 children in 2 years
“It is disappointing to see valuable crime-fighting resources being wasted on taking DNA samples from thousands of innocent children while serious offenses go undetected,” said Francis Crook, chief executive of the legal activists Howard League for Penal Reform.The group was able to obtain the data for 2010 and 2011 with a Freedom of Information request. Other than the overall numbers, the biggest surprise was the age spread – showing that children aged 13 were almost as likely to be recorded in the police database as 17-year-olds.Seven out of 10 swabbed under-18s were boys.Most of the youngsters had been taken into police stations pending investigation, or as a caution for minor offences. The vast majority were never charged with recordable crimes.“Children who get into trouble with the police are usually just up to mischief. Treating so many like hardened criminals by taking their DNA seems excessive,” said Crook.A record of anyone’s DNA, or unique genetic code, acts as a more complex version of a fingerprint, and allows any piece of physical evidence to be traced a potential perpetrator, victim or witness. The test usually involves taking a swab from the youngster’s mouth.In total, the UK is storing over 1.2 million DNA samples taken from people when they were underage – as part of a DNA database that covers 6 million people, a tenth of the population, and one of the highest ratios in the world.Amanda Cooper, the leading DNA expert for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said the sheer numbers concealed a more complex picture – in which the children were not always suspects.”These may be when a child has been a victim of crime, when police would take DNA to confirm an incident took place and check whether it can be linked to a perpetrator. Others will be as part of criminal investigation where a child is the suspect. DNA samples are also taken to conduct criminal paternity tests as part of sexual offence investigations.”The unchecked growth of the country’s DNA database has been curbed with the Protection of Freedoms Act, which comes into force later this year.”DNA evidence is a crucial tool in the fight against crime, but it must be used proportionately,” said a Home Office statement in light of the revelations.”Through the Protection of Freedoms Act we are restoring common sense to the system by ensuring only those convicted of a criminal offence will have their DNA retained indefinitely.”Now, only under-18s convicted of serious crimes or at least two minor offenses will have their DNA preserved indefinitely, while those cleared of serious charges can have their samples stored in the database for five years.But the Howard League for Penal Reform says this does not remove the problem of unnecessary tests, or personal freedom violations.“We welcome the government’s decision to stop storing innocent people’s DNA indefinitely, but it remains unclear how this will affect the number of children having their DNA taken needlessly,” said Crook. … Read More
