Monday, January 15, 2007

FOXNews.com - Government Surveillance a Troubling Growth Trend, Say Anti-War Activists

FOXNews.com - Government Surveillance a Troubling Growth Trend, Say Anti-War Activists

Monday , January 15, 2007

Kelley Beaucar Vlaho
WASHINGTON —

The arrest of a political activist in Connecticut two weeks ago is fueling the ongoing debate over how far the federal government can and should go in monitoring groups and individuals it suspects may be planning criminal activities.


Legal experts say the monitoring is perfectly legal, particularly under post-Sept. 11 rules. While authorities are required to obtain warrants to access personal records, in most instances anything in the public domain is fair game.


But critics say the Jan. 3 arrest of freelance journalist Kenneth Krayeske went way beyond the pale.


Krayeske, 34, was taking pictures of Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell's inaugural parade in Hartford when he was approached by police and detained for 12 hours on charges of breach of peace and interfering with an officer.


Hartford police say they recognized Krayeske, a critic of Rell with a record of civil disobedience in anti-war protests, from a photo and briefing they received before the parade from state police and the Connecticut Intelligence Center, which is located at the local FBI office.


During the parade, according to police spokeswoman Sgt. Nancy Mulroy, "our officers observed [Krayeske's] behavior and in their opinion, based on his behavior, they considered him a threat."


The police report says Krayeske sped up to the parade route on his mountain bike "at a high rate of speed," dumped the bike and ran up to the procession "directly in front of where the governor was passing by."


He was "recognized … from the photograph provided by the state police," said Det. Jeff Antuna. He said officers intervened and "escorted him away from the governor and the parade route, which he resisted by attempting to pull away."


But Krayeske and some others tell a different story. Krayeske says he was taking pictures of other dignitaries when he rode over to catch a shot of the governor. He was able to snap a picture of her smiling before he was grabbed by police.

Click here to see Krayeske's parade photos.


Witnesses said Krayeske's behavior was not out of the ordinary, and they confirmed that he was taking pictures when he was surrounded by police. According to his attorney, Norm Pattis, Krayeske was surprised by their approach but did not struggle. He was put in handcuffs immediately, Pattis said.


"He pulled his arm back because he was startled. He was shocked." Pattis said Krayeske asked why he was being grabbed and told the police, "You're not supposed to arrest anybody with an absence of probable cause."


Krayeske was initially held on $75,000 bond and detained until 1 a.m., after which he was released on a promise to appear in court. Pattis suggests the high bond for the misdemeanor charges was used to keep him there until after the evening's inaugural ball.


The attorney said the charges will likely be dropped. And if the case goes to court, "There is no question in my mind that he will be acquitted."


Democratic lawmakers, the city's mayor and the Republican governor herself are demanding an explanation of the situation, and two Democratic state senators have scheduled a Jan. 23 hearing in the General Assembly's Public Safety Committee to investigate.


Other elected officials are looking for an explanation of the so-called "list" that was distributed and named Krayeske and others as threats on that day.


"There is nothing about what this category of peace activists does that poses an actual threat," said state Rep. Mike Lawlor, referring to the types of activism that has earned Krayeske's "in your face" reputation around Hartford circles.


"The purpose of this situation was to intimidate," Lawlor said.


Krayeske reportedly confronted Rell publicly over the Green Party's non-access to the gubernatorial debates last year. But supporters say he has never been physically confrontational or threatened anyone.


State Rep. John Geragosian questions the motivations of the police in this case, and said he believes the arrest speaks to broader concerns.


"If this is going to be a threshold for disturbing the peace and resisting arrest — questioning what an officer is doing — it undermines the entire freedom of the press as well as general freedom of speech," Geragosian said. "It's a scary turn of events in this country at this time."


But Hartford police are standing by the arrest, and state officers insist they do not maintain a list of activists for surveillance. Lt. J. Paul Vance said police compile information on individuals who — based on past actions — may demonstrate a proclivity to "disrupt an event or act unlawfully."


"Law enforcement are always told if [these individuals] are observed, to simply give them scrutiny … any arrest will have to be based on probable cause," Vance said. He said it was "the officer's decision" to arrest Krayeske, and he declined to say whether probable cause had been demonstrated in the case.


Vance said that police have often been assigned to protect protesters as well.


"We recognize and understand that people have their right to free speech and to demonstrate, and we are obligated by law to protect everyone's right and that includes protesters," he said.


A Push Toward Surveillance?


Anti-war activists say they have long been tracked by law enforcement and intelligence agencies, but such activity has increased since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.


“I do believe that it is more pervasive than most people realize. Legal or not, the government will take whatever steps it feels necessary to insure their paranoid visions of security are realized,” said Jack Bussell, a member of Maine Veterans For Peace, which was tracked by the FBI in 2003, according to documents released last year through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Maine office of the American Civil Liberties Union.


The documents apparently intercepted by the FBI included copies of e-mails detailing the group's activities as well as the names of individuals involved in local protests. Paul Bresson, spokesman for the FBI in Washington, said the agency does not track groups or individuals unless it has cause to believe they are likely to commit a criminal act.


“By no means are we spying on groups and intimidating them in a way as to deny them of their rights,” Bresson said. Nonetheless, he said, “there are situations where there is a potential for violence, and we know there are people who have been at such gatherings and have broken the law. We would be remiss as a law enforcement agency if we didn’t pay any attention to that potential problem.”


Other recent complaints from activists across the country have included:


— Local and federal law enforcement monitoring last year of anti-war groups like the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker pacificist organization, and Raging Grannies in Seattle before the annual Seafair summer festival;


— Inclusion in the Pentagon’s Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) database — established to monitor terrorist threats — of protest activities organized or supported by the American Friends Service Committee;


— A "pretext interview" by four FBI agents and two Denver police officers at the home of a female member of the American Friends Service Committee before the Democratic and Republican National Conventions in 2004.


Some civil libertarians say the federal government is exploiting the threat of terrorism to monitor and intimidate anti-war demonstrators across the country.


"It is extremely pervasive and very dangerous for a democracy," said Michael McConnell, regional director of the American Friends Service Committee.


"That kind of surveillance and spying of our own citizens, it has a chilling effect on freedom of speech and assembly," he said.


But Scott Silliman, director of the Center for Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University, said the line between tracking terrorists and intimidating peaceful dissenters is thin, and sometimes a balance is difficult to achieve.


Silliman said law enforcement officials occasionally go over the line, but he said he does not consider it systematic or as bad as the domestic surveillance against liberal groups in the 1960s and 1970s.


“Do we get it right 100 percent of the time? No. Are we striving to do that? Yes,” he said.

White House: Can't rule out attack on Iran - CNN.com

White House: Can't rule out attack on Iran - CNN.com

Story Highlights•

White House says no attack planned against Iran, but won't rule out possibility

• National security adviser Stephen Hadley says diplomacy should resolve issues
• Hadley won't say whether he believes move on Iran would need congressional OK
• Iran says U.S. detention of Iranians in Iraq is "illegal"

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House said Sunday it is not planning military action against Iran, but refused to rule out the possibility, bucking pressure from several senators who said the administration is not authorized to do so.

Asked whether the United States is preparing for a potential military conflict with Iran, President Bush's national security adviser Stephen Hadley told NBC's "Meet the Press," "No, the president has said very clearly that the issues we have with Iran should be solved diplomatically."

But, on ABC's "This Week," Hadley would not rule out the possibility of such an attack and would not say whether he agrees with those senators who say that the Bush administration would need congressional backing for such a move.

The sharp questioning about U.S. plans for Iran followed Bush's address to the nation Wednesday night announcing his strategy for Iraq, in which he vowed the United States "will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." (Full story)

The Bush administration accuses Iran of sending fighters into Iraq and attacking U.S. troops. Tehran denies the charges.

"The priority is what's going on in Iraq," Hadley told ABC. "That's the place where the activity's occurring. That's the best place... for us to take this on."

Asked repeatedly whether the United States has the authority to enter Iran if it believes doing so would help prevent attacks, Hadley did not answer. Then came this exchange:

Host George Stephanopoulos: "So, you don't believe you have the authority to go into Iran?"

Hadley: "I didn't say that. This is another issue. Any time you have questions about crossing international borders, there are legal issues."

Several senators have voiced opposition to the idea of the United States entering Iran.

Last week, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during a hearing on Iraq, "I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that, and he does need congressional authority to do that."

Rice did not rule out entering Iran or give a position on whether the Bush administration would need congressional approval.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska, told Rice, "No one in our government can sit here today and tell Americans that we won't engage the Iranians and the Syrians cross-border."

Comparisons to Vietnam war
"When our government lied to the American people and said, 'We didn't cross the border going into Cambodia,' in fact, we did," Hagel said, referring to the Vietnam war. "So, Madam Secretary, when you set in motion the kind of policy that the president is talking about here, it's very, very dangerous."

During the Vietnam war, the Nixon administration denied U.S. troops were conducting raids into neighboring Cambodia to stop the flow of weapons to South Vietnam's communist insurgency.

The Bush administration says dramatic action must be taken in Iraq to halt alleged Iranian meddling.

Vice President Dick Cheney took that message to "Fox News Sunday," saying, "It's been pretty well-known that Iran is fishing in troubled waters, if you will, inside Iraq. And the president has responded to that. ... I think it's exactly the right thing to do."

Tehran: U.S. violates 'diplomatic norms'
Iranian officials portray the U.S. assertions as trumped-up lies aimed at fomenting tension and backing "illegitimate" actions against Iranians in Iraq.

Tehran's complaints follow several steps by the U.S. military against Iranian officials in Iraq, including the detention last week of five people who the United States said are linked to the Iranian military. (Full story)

Seyed Mohammad-Ali Hosseini, spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry, called the U.S. actions "illegal."

He accused the United States of violating "international conventions and diplomatic norms," and called on the United States "to immediately release the Iranian consular employees and pay for damages" that the military action caused to the building, Iran's government-run media outlet IRNA reported.

But the U.S. military, in a news release, said preliminary information revealed the five detained Iranians "are connected to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard - Qods Force, an organization known for providing funds, weapons, improvised explosive device technology and training to extremist groups attempting to destabilize the government of Iraq and attack coalition forces."

Iraqi FM cites 'brotherly relations'
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said he phoned his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, on Friday to assure him that steps were being taken to free the five.

In a written statement, Zebari said he told Mottaki that he hoped the incident "would not affect the brotherly relations between the two peoples and the two neighbor countries."

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, told CBS' "Face the Nation" that he does not believe Bush is looking to open a front in Iran.

"But I think it's very, very important that if Iranians are in Iraq paying people to be suicide bombers, to help the training and equipping them ... it's vital that we go after them too. Everybody knows the Iranians are playing in Iraq and they are trying to drive us out of Iraq so they can assert their age-old ambitions for influence in the Middle East. Everybody knows that. If there's Iranians in Iraq who are doing bad things, go after them, and let's get them."


Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/14/iran.us/index.html

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Data plan 'not like Big Brother'

BBC NEWS - Data plan 'not like Big Brother'

Plans to make it easier for government departments to share information on people are not a move towards a "Big Brother" state, a minister has said.

Pensions Secretary John Hutton said the plan was to stop "overzealous data sharing rules" being "an obstacle to improving public services".

The government was not creating a giant database and people would not have to allow details to be shared, he added.

The Conservatives and Lib Dems called the plans a threat to privacy.

'Good place'

A change in data-sharing rules between government departments is one of the options put forward by policy reviews which Tony Blair announced last October.

It will be put to 100 people taking part in a series of five "citizen's panels", whose views will be reported back at a "citizen's summit" in March.

Research by Ipsos Mori, commissioned by Downing Street, and published as the review on data-sharing was launched, suggested that 81% of people wanted public services to treat people and the public "as customers".

But the research also suggested that a majority of people disagree that "in the long term the government's policies will improve the state of Britain's public services".

People are most pessimistic about the NHS - and the environment - improving in future years. Education is the only area where more people think things will get better than think things will get worse.

Mr Hutton said the public's "increasingly high expectations" of public services meant the services needed to be "more light-footed and flexible" - and data-sharing was needed to help this happen.

He said: "We are not proposing a new database. We are not proposing new IT systems here."

"I think it would be a good place to get to if we were asking people 'is it OK to share your information with other government departments?'

"That should be a routine part of the process of engaging with the public services."

Mr Hutton said departments already stored "vast amounts of data about individual citizens" but this was not usually shared, often to the detriment of the public.

For example, one family had had to contact the government 44 times to confirm various details after a relative died in a road accident, he said.

'Confident'

Cabinet Office minister Hilary Armstrong told the BBC's Daily Politics information shared by departments would be handled "professionally and sensitively".

She added: "What we want to do is explore with members of the public what we think needs to happen in order to make sure that we are confident about the quality of services that we are going to get."

Shadow constitutional affairs secretary Oliver Heald accused the government of "moving one step closer to a 'Big Brother' state".

He raised concerns that ministers could "set up a database from the cradle to the grave".

The Liberal Democrats accused the government of "snooping".

Phil Booth, coordinator of anti identity card campaign group No2ID, said: "For a government that can't look after its own employees' personal information, and that is so plainly incompetent at linking computer systems, to imagine this will increase efficiency is ludicrous."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6262455.stm

Iran, Venezuela offer aid to U.S. rivals - Americas - MSNBC.com

Iran, Venezuela offer aid to U.S. rivals - Americas - MSNBC.com

Leaders pledge billions in foreign investments to counter U.S. ‘imperialism’

The Associated Press
Updated: 11:59 p.m. ET Jan 13, 2007
CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — fiery anti-American leaders whose moves to extend their influence have alarmed Washington — said Saturday they would help finance investment projects in other countries seeking to thwart U.S. domination.

The two countries had previously revealed plans for a joint $2 billion fund to finance investments in Venezuela and Iran, but the leaders said Saturday the money would also be used for projects in friendly countries throughout the developing world.

“It will permit us to underpin investments ... above all in those countries whose governments are making efforts to liberate themselves from the (U.S.) imperialist yoke,” Chavez said.

“This fund, my brother,” the Venezuelan president said, referring affectionately to Ahmadinejad, “will become a mechanism for liberation.”

“Death to U.S. imperialism!” Chavez said.

Planning to cut oil production
Ahmadinejad, who is starting a tour of left-leaning countries in the region, called it a “very important” decision that would help promote “joint cooperation in third countries,” especially in Latin America and Africa.

Iran and Venezuela are members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and Chavez said Saturday that they had agreed to back a further oil production cut in the cartel to stem a recent fall in crude prices.

“We know today there is too much crude in the market,” Chavez said. “We have agreed to join our forces within OPEC ... to support a production cut and save the price of oil.”

OPEC reduced output by 1.2 million barrels a day in November, then announced an additional cut of 500,000 barrels a day, due to begin on Feb. 1. Dow Jones Newswires reported Friday that OPEC is discussing holding an emergency meeting later this month to reduce output by another 500,000 barrels a day. Venezuela and Iran have been leading price hawks within OPEC.

Ahmadinejad’s visit Saturday — his second to Venezuela in less than four months — comes as he seeks to break international isolation over his country’s nuclear program and possibly line up new allies in Latin America. He is also expected to visit Nicaragua and Ecuador, which both recently elected leftist governments.

Allies growing closer
Chavez and Ahmadinejad have been increasingly united by their deep-seated antagonism toward the Bush administration. Chavez has become a leading defender of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, accusing the Washington of using the issue as a pretext to attack Tehran.

Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, has called Chavez “the champion of the struggle against imperialism.”

U.S. officials have accused Chavez — a close ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro — of authoritarian tendencies, and National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said recently in an annual review of global threats that Venezuela’s democracy was at risk.

The U.S. also believes Iran is seeking to use its nuclear program to develop an atomic bomb. Tehran says its program is peaceful and geared toward the production of energy.

The increasingly close relationship between Chavez and Ahmadinejad has alarmed some Chavez critics, who accuse him of pursuing an alliance that does not serve Venezuela’s interests and jeopardizes its ties with the United States, the country’s top oil buyer. Venezuela is among the top five suppliers of crude to the U.S. market.

Chavez vows to end term limits
In a speech earlier Saturday, Chavez called for the U.S. government to accept “the new realities of Latin America,” as he brushed aside restrictions that limit presidents to two consecutive terms. He vowed to stay in office beyond 2013, when his term expires, saying he would revise the constitution to get rid of presidential term limits.

But Chavez also said in his state of the nation address to government officials and legislators that he had personally expressed hope to a high-ranking U.S. official for better relations between their two countries.

Chavez said he spoke with Thomas Shannon, head of the U.S. State Department’s Western Hemisphere affairs bureau, on the sidelines of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega’s inauguration earlier this week.

“We shook hands and I told him: ’I hope that everything improves,”’ Chavez said. “I’m not anyone’s enemy.”

Venezuela nationalizing industries
Chavez prompted a crash in Venezuelan share prices this past week when he announced he would seek special powers from the legislature to push through “revolutionary” reforms, including a string of nationalizations and unspecified changes to business laws and the commerce code.

He also announced plans for the state to take control of the country’s largest telecommunications company, its electricity and natural gas sectors and four heavy crude upgrading projects now controlled by some of the world’s top oil companies.

He said Saturday, however, that private companies would be allowed to own minority stakes in the lucrative Orinoco River basin oil projects.

The government has already taken majority ownership of all other oil-producing operations in the country through joint ventures controlled by the state oil company. Most companies have shown a willingness to continue investing despite the tightening terms, which have also included tax and royalty increases.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16616372/

Russian Admiral Says U.S. Navy Prepares Missile Strike on Iran



mosnews

U.S. Navy nuclear submarines maintaining vigil off the coast of Iran indicate that the Pentagon’s military plans include not only control over navigation in the Persian Gulf but also strikes against Iranian targets, a former commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Eduard Baltin has told the Interfax news agency.

“The presence of U.S. nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area,” Admiral Baltin said.

He made the comments after reports that a U.S. submarine collided with a Japanese tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

“American patience is not unlimited,” he said. “The submarine commanders go up to the periscope depth and forget about navigation rules and safety measures,” the admiral said.

Currently there is a group of up to four submarines in the Persian Gulf area, he said. So far they only control navigation in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and in the Arabian Sea, he said. They might receive different orders in future: to block off the Gulf of Oman, that is the Iranian coast, and, if need be, launch missile strikes against
ground targets in Iran, he said.

U.S. says to "go after" Iran, Syria networks in Iraq

U.S. says to "go after" Iran, Syria networks in Iraq

Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:40 AM ET

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The United States plans to "go after" what it said were networks of Iranian and Syrian agents in Iraq, U.S. ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said on Monday.

"We're going after their networks in Iraq," he told a news conference, as he laid out the new U.S. and Iraqi strategy to end sectarian violence at what Khalilzad called a "defining moment" for Iraq.

U.S. forces are holding five Iranians following a raid on an Iranian government office in Arbil last week -- the second such operation in recent weeks.

Presidential Candidate Fears "Gulf Of Tonkin" To Provoke Iran War

prisonplanet

Republican Congressman and 2008 Presidential candidate Ron Paul fears a staged Gulf of Tonkin style incident may be used to provoke air strikes on Iran as numerous factors collide to heighten expectations that America may soon be embroiled in its third war in six years.

Writing in his syndicated weekly column, the representative of Texas' 14th district warns of "a contrived Gulf of Tonkin-type incident (that) may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran."

The August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, where US warships were apparently attacked by North Vietnamese PT Boats, was cited by President Johnson as a legitimate provocation mandating U.S. escalation in Vietnam, yet Tonkin was a staged charade that never took place. Declassified LBJ presidential tapes discuss how to spin the non-event to escalate it as justification for air strikes and the NSA faked intelligence data to make it appear as if two US ships had been lost.

Should a staged provocation take place in an attempt to justify striking Iran it would not be the first time the current administration has considered such a ploy.

In February 2006, documents were leaked of a conversation between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush in which different scenarios to try to provoke Saddam into making a rod for his own back were discussed. One included painting a U.S. spy plane in UN colors and flying it low over Iraq in the hope it would be shot down and the incident exploited as a means of enlisting international support for the 2003 invasion.

Paul, who on Friday announced his intention to run for President in 2008, has resolved to introduce legislation in the coming weeks to head off the drift towards war, encouraging a commitment to policies of dialogue as outlined by the Iraq Study Group.

Commentators largely agree that the furore surrounding President Bush's speech in which he ordered the deployment of a further 20,000 troops to Iraq is a manufactured distraction to divert attention away from alarming developments that grease the skids for an inevitable conflict with Iran.



The New York Times and other establishment mouthpieces are busy regurgitating White House propaganda that Iran is supplying weapons to Iraqi insurgents that are killing U.S. troops. As columnist Larry Chin elaborates, "The Bush administration buildup towards Iran is strikingly similar to Hitler’s campaign against Poland, and the Third Reich’s eventual 1939 blitzkrieg. Hitler’s final act was to manufacture a "deliberate and cold-blooded provocation", to be blamed on the Poles, which would bring down the vengeance of German armed forces. He accomplished this by putting drugged prisoners from a nearby concentration camp into Polish uniforms and shooting them near a radio station inside the German border. The "Polish attack on the Gleiwitz transmitter" marked the official start of World War Two."

"In Hitler’s words, "I shall give the propagandist cause for starting the war. Never mind if it is implausible or not."

In reality, the source of the IED technology being utilized by the insurgents goes back to the British security services, from whom it was acquired by the IRA and then sold around the world in the early nineties. Claims that Iran is helping Shia insurgents to make the devices is outright propaganda.

However, the only remaining justification that Neo-Cons cling to in an attempt to sell another conflict to a war-weary American public is the falsehood that American troops are being killed on the battlefield by insurgents with the direct assistance of Iran. This is the only rationale a majority of Americans will accept as grounds for war, overriding spurious warnings about weapons of mass destruction, a yarn they have seen spun once before.

As Chris Floyd points out, "Make no mistake: this is the marker that has now been put down; this is the card that's been laid on the table. The Bush Administration has openly accused Iran of killing American soldiers in Iraq. Again, this is a charge far more resonant, far more effective as a pretext for war than anything offered during the successful stampede to invade Iraq. Even a president as weakened and isolated as Bush is at the moment would be able to get support for an attack on a state that was "killing our soldiers in the field."

It is also now confirmed that the raid on the Iranian liaison office in Iraq, after which five Iranians were arrested and detained, was directly authorized by the White House in an attempt to provoke an Iranian response.

Whether Iran takes the bait or not, American aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines are multiplying in the Persian Gulf and Bush recently appointed Adm. William Fallon, a Navy veteran, to oversee the ground war in Iraq, a contradiction many fear betrays preparation for an air strike on Iran's uranium enrichment facilities which could take place as soon as next month.

Whether the White House or the feverish Israelis will even feel the need to factor in a Gulf of Tonkin event remains to be seen, as the war drums beat ever louder and the next escalation of what the Neo-Cons call "World War Four" awaits final execution.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Hanging of Saddam's aides filmed

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Hanging of Saddam's aides filmed

Iraqi government officials have shown journalists video of the hanging of two of Saddam Hussein's aides, during which one of the men was decapitated.
The film shows Barzan Ibrahim - Saddam Hussein's half-brother - and Awad Hamed al-Bandar hanged side-by-side.

Barzan, former intelligence chief, and al-Bandar, former head of Iraq's Revolutionary Court, were convicted over the killing of 148 Shias in 1982.

The government said Barzan's beheading was accidental.

The BBC's Andrew North in Baghdad says the video first shows both men being prepared for execution standing next to each other.

They were both dressed in orange boiler suits.


JUDICIAL HANGING
Execution intended to break the neck, not strangle
'Long drop' method developed in late 19th Century
Length of rope calculated using prisoner's weight
Drop is usually 4ft-10ft (1.3m-3m)
Too long a drop leads to decapitation


Executioners in balaclavas placed hoods round both men's heads, then the noose.

A short while later the footage, which is silent, shows both men fall.

Almost immediately the rope that was round Barzan's neck flicks upwards, the body dropping below.

The cameraman then shows the pit below and a headless body, bloodied at the neck and what officials say was Barzan's head still covered by a hood.

Bandar's body was still hanging above, said one official who was present at the execution.

Our correspondent says officials say they are not planning to release the footage publicly.

Both men's bodies are reported to have been flown to Saddam Hussein's home town of Tikrit, 180 km (110 miles) north of Baghdad, for burial.

Mixed reaction

Witnesses said Barzan and Bandar were shaking with fear as they approached the gallows.

One of those present, public prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi, told the BBC that when the trap door opened, he could only see Barzan's rope dangling.





"I thought the convict Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti had escaped the noose. I shouted that he's escaped the noose, go down and look for him. I went down a few steps ahead of the others to see: I found out that his head had separated from his body."
The hangings took place at 0300 (0000 GMT), apparently in the same building in north Baghdad where Saddam Hussein was put to death on 30 December.

The manner of the former Iraqi leader's execution drew international criticism after unofficial mobile phone footage showing him being taunted and insulted in his final moments was released.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said there were no such scenes at the hanging of his aides.

The BBC's world affairs correspondent Mike Wooldridge says reaction in Baghdad to Barzan and Bandar's executions has been mixed.

He says residents of Baghdad's largest Shia district, Sadr City, have celebrated the latest hangings, especially Barzan's.

But other Baghdad residents have said the executions have nothing to do with the problems Iraqis face every day, our correspondent adds.

In the Shia holy city of Najaf, residents beat drums and marched in the streets at news of the executions, AFP news agency reported.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6263787.stm

Published: 2007/01/15 15:40:53 GMT

WP: Pentagon probed citizens' finances - washingtonpost.com Highlights - MSNBC.com

WP: Pentagon probed citizens' finances - washingtonpost.com/MSNBC.com

Using ‘noncompulsory’ authority, military seeks records for investigations

By Karen DeYoung
The Washington Post
Updated: 12:51 p.m. ET Jan 14, 2007

WASHINGTON - The Defense Department has used a long-standing authority to acquire the personal financial records of American citizens in military-related criminal and other investigations as part of an expansion of the Pentagon's gathering of counterterrorism intelligence at home, officials said yesterday.

"There are certainly types of information and transactions that are valuable to the department when conducting counterintelligence and counterespionage investigations," said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.

Whitman emphasized that although the FBI can compel banks, credit card companies and other private institutions to produce such records by issuing a National Security Letter, the military is authorized only to request that the institutions turn them over.

The CIA has long had similar "noncompulsory" authority, although intelligence officials said that such requests are rare and tend to relate to espionage investigations of the CIA's own officials. The authority was used during the investigation of Aldrich Ames, the CIA operations officer who was convicted in 1994 of spying for the Russians.

More than 500 requests since 9/11
The military's expanded use of the records authority was first reported yesterday on the Web site of the New York Times, which said that military officials had made more than 500 such requests since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Quoting unnamed military intelligence officials, the Times said that the actual number of letters was probably well into the thousands, because a single investigation often resulted in requests to multiple institutions.

By law, the FBI is charged with conducting investigations of U.S. citizens and with counterterrorism activities in this country.

Domestic intelligence-gathering by the CIA and the military is sharply restricted. In the military's case, such activities have generally involved investigations of direct threats to military installations and personnel in the United States, as well as inquiries into possible criminal activities by uniformed or civilian Defense Department employees.

Under then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, the Pentagon expanded its collection of intelligence within the borders of the United States -- a development that stirred concern among members of Congress and prompted stern criticism and lawsuits from civil liberties advocates.

Agency's work largely classified
These efforts are overseen by the Pentagon's Counterintelligence Field Activity agency, or CIFA, which was established in September 2002 by then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz.

CIFA is charged with coordinating policy and overseeing the domestic counterintelligence activities of Pentagon agencies and the armed forces. The agency's size and budget are classified, but congressional sources have said that the agency spent more than $1 billion through October. One counterintelligence official recently estimated that CIFA has 400 full-time employees and 800 to 900 contractors working for it.

In written responses to questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing last month, Rumsfeld's replacement, Robert M. Gates, pledged to look "in greater detail" at CIFA's activities.

Database under scrutiny
The agency was criticized in December 2005 after it was revealed that a database managed by CIFA, called TALON, contained unverified, raw threat information about people who were peacefully protesting the Iraq war at defense facilities, including recruiting offices. In August, CIFA Director David A. Burtt II and his top deputy, Joseph Hefferon, resigned in the wake of a scandal involving CIFA contracts that went to MZM Inc., a company run by Mitchell J. Wade. Wade pleaded guilty last February to conspiring to bribe then-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif).

In his confirmation responses, Gates said that an internal Pentagon review of the program "found procedural weaknesses" and that "steps are underway to correct these deficiencies."

Whitman, in a discussion of the financial-records requests, said that only four U.S. military entities are authorized to ask for them -- the U.S. Army Counterintelligence Center, the Criminal Investigation Service of the Army and of the Navy, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations.

All of these entities are overseen by CIFA.

Source: Contractor's income probed
Whitman declined to discuss individual cases in which the authority had been used, although one U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue said it was utilized in an investigation of a contractor working at the Guantanamo Bay naval facility who appeared to have unexplained income.


In comments attributed to unnamed military intelligence officials, the Times said that the financial records of Capt. James Yee -- a Muslim chaplain at the U.S. military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who was charged with aiding prisoners there -- had also been obtained. Espionage charges against Yee were eventually dropped by the government.

The CIA declined yesterday to comment on its use of the financial-records authority. An intelligence official said that the CIA usually asks the FBI to obtain financial records involving U.S. citizens in terrorism investigations because the bureau has the authority to compel cooperation. "There have been a handful of instances, in very rare circumstances over the years, that the CIA has used" its authority to request such records on its own, the official said.

Staff writers Walter Pincus and Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report.

© 2007 The Washington Post Company
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16616833/

Bush vows to 60 Minutes that 'no matter what Congress wants' surge is on

RAW STORY

In an interview set to air on this Sunday's 60 Minutes, President George W. Bush vows to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq "no matter what" the Democratic-controlled Congress tries to do.

"Do you believe as Commander in Chief you have the authority to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do," 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley asks Bush in the short clip uploaded to the CBS News web site Friday night.

"I think I've got, in this situation, I do, yeah," Bush said.

"Now I fully understand they will," Bush continued, "they could try to stop me from doing it, but, uh, I've made my decision and we're going forward."

In an address to the nation on Wednesday, Bush announced his new plan which calls for an increase in US troops to end ongoing violence in the country, which many believe is either at or approaching "civil war," with Iraqi civilian deaths tripling at the end of 2006, according to one report.

The plan, nicknamed "surge" by the administration but referred to as an "escalation" by most Democrats has drawn fire from both parties, and Congressional members have threatened to cut funding – though not for the troops that are already there.

"Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who oversees military funding, said he will propose tying congressional approval of war funds to shutting the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba," the Associated Press reports. "Other conditions he said he is considering include not extending troop deployments and giving soldiers and Marines more time to train between deployments."