Good Morning!
Longwood Gardens. May, 2013. Photo by: joanneleon
Longwood Gardens. May, 2013. Photo by: joanneleon
Tunes
Don Henley - Dirty Laundry
News & Opinion
We're getting to the point where it's going to become more difficult to label things as conspiracy theory. Matt Taibbi (and it sounds like there is more to come):
Everything Is Rigged, Continued: European Commission Raids Oil Companies in Price-Fixing Probe
We're going to get into this more at a later date, but there was some interesting late-breaking news yesterday.
According to numerous reports, the European Commission regulators yesterday raided the offices of oil companies in London, the Netherlands and Norway as part of an investigation into possible price-rigging in the oil markets. The targeted companies include BP, Shell and the Norweigan company Statoil. The Guardian explains that officials believe that oil companies colluded to manipulate pricing data:
[...]
The story is obviously hugely significant in its own right, just as the LIBOR story was. But both are even more unpleasant in conjunction with each other, and the other price-fixing scandals that have cropped up in the financial markets in the last year or two. We've had other price-fixing scandals involving gas in the U.K. and here in the U.S., just a few weeks ago, it came out that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) concluded that JPMorgan Chase used "manipulative schemes" to tinker with energy prices in Michigan and California.
I didn't know that Aaron had written this software. I wonder if this is another reason why the feds were after him and wanted to make an example of him.
New Yorker Launches New Whistleblower Submission System, With Code Written by the Late Aaron Swartz
In an important announcement, the New Yorker has launched ‘Strongbox,’ a whistleblower submission system that aims to allow for anonymous leakers to digitally hand off important information to journalists. The underlying code, called 'Dead-Drop,' is an open-source project and was written by Internet pioneer and legendary coder Aaron Swartz, before he tragically died in January.
[...]
Yet, leaks have never been more critical to democracy, given that government secrecy is at an all time high. Countless times over past decade—from NSA warrantless wiretapping and CIA secret prisons, to secret drone strikes and unprecedented cyberattacks—leaks have exposed corruption, wrongdoing, and illegality in government when the flow of information has been stifled through other channels. In fact, virtually every unconstitutional action by the government over the last decade was initially uncovered by a leak to the press.
Yet when WikiLeaks was operating a submission system three years ago and published secret government information in the public interest, they were attacked by government officials, pundits, and sometimes even journalists. This, despite the fact, their actions were protected by the First Amendment, just like when the New York Times or Washington Post receives classified information from a government source in the physical world.
Hopefully this project will remind people that these types of WikiLeaks-like submission systems should proliferate, not wither away.
There is a good infographic included with this article.
INTRODUCING STRONGBOX
This morning, The New Yorker launched Strongbox, an online place where people can send documents and messages to the magazine, and we, in turn, can offer them a reasonable amount of anonymity. It was put together by Aaron Swartz, who died in January, and Kevin Poulsen. Kevin explains some of the background in his own post, including Swartz’s role and his survivors’ feelings about the project. (They approve, something that was important for us here to know.) The underlying code, given the name DeadDrop, will be open-source, and we are very glad to be the first to bring it out into the world, fully implemented.
Greenwald, on the epiphany of the MSM:
The major sea change in media discussions of Obama and civil liberties
The controversies over the IRS and especially the AP phone records appear to have long-lasting effects
Due to the controversies over the IRS and (especially) the DOJ's attack on AP's news gathering process, media outlets have suddenly decided that President Obama has a very poor record on civil liberties, transparency, press freedoms, and a whole variety of other issues on which he based his first campaign. The first two paragraphs of this Washington Post article from yesterday, expressed in tones of recent epiphany, made me laugh audibly:
"President Obama, a former constitutional law lecturer who came to office pledging renewed respect for civil liberties, is today running an administration at odds with his résumé and preelection promises.
"The Justice Department's collection of journalists' phone records and the Internal Revenue Service's targeting of conservative groups have challenged Obama's credibility as a champion of civil liberties - and as a president who would heal the country from damage done by his predecessor."
You don't say! [...]
But, with a few noble exceptions, most major media outlets said little about any of this, except in those cases when they supported it. It took a direct and blatant attack on them for them to really get worked up, denounce these assaults, and acknowledge this administration's true character. That is redolent of how the general public reacted with rage over privacy invasions only when new TSA airport searches targeted not just Muslims but themselves: what they perceive as "regular Americans". Or how former Democratic Rep. Jane Harman - once the most vocal defender of Bush's vast warrantless eavesdropping programs - suddenly began sounding like a shrill and outraged privacy advocate once it was revealed that her own conversations with Aipac representatives were recorded by the government.
Last May, if you remember, there were three bomb shell stories. First, the Undiebomb 2.0 story where the government announced that it had foiled a bomb plot and then Brennan slipped and revealed that it was a plot that was arranged by our intel agencies along with the Brits and the Saudis and the bomber was a double/triple agent, though the makers of the bomb were AQAP. One of them, Fahd al-Quso, an AQAP planner/leader, was droned shortly afterward but the other, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri, a bomb maker, is still at large (I think, not sure). The second bomb shell was the Stuxnet story with details about how the U.S. and Israel created it and how someone made a mistake which release Stuxnet into the wild. The third story was the blockbuster about Obama's kill list, which had previously been classified and the story looked a lot like "authorized leak" propaganda because the authors said that dozens of administration officials had been interviewed for the story. Shortly afterward, Obama did a press conference in which he was clearly angry and he said that there would be investigations. At first everyone assumed the investigations would cover all three bomb shells but it was later determined that only the first two would be the subject of investigation. After this latest revelation about surveillance of the AP, the New York Times is worried about whether there has been a big grab of their journalists' communications in relation to the Stuxnet investigation. So there could be yet another announcement about that, which would further inflame the corporate media. And just as a reminder, the sources of the AP and NYT stories could be facing charges under the Espionage Act, while John Brennan, who has leaked classified information more than once, got promoted and is now running the CIA.
DOJ Tactics Against AP Raise Concerns For The New York Times
New York Times reporter Charlie Savage had a different question for Holder, who had just announced he'd recused himself from the AP leak investigation. "Are you also recused from the Stuxnet investigation out of Maryland?" Savage asked. Holder declined to comment, as the Times noted in Tuesday's story. The DOJ also didn't comment on that other leak investigation to the Times for a Monday story on the AP seizure. Times reporters had asked "whether a similar step was taken" in the secretly obtaining journalists records in the Maryland investigation.
Speaking of John Brennan, let's just review a few things from his confirmation hearing, for old times sake.
Senate Select Intelligence Committee Holds Confirmation Hearing on the Nomination of John O. Brennan to be CIA Director (PDF)
BURR: Well, let me just say, as one that was overseas shortly after that, I certainly had, on numerous occasions, U.S. officials who expressed to me the challenges they've gone through to try to make apologies to our partners. And I personally sat down in London to have that apology conversation and it was very disruptive. Very quickly, did you provide any classified or otherwise sensitive information to reporters or media
consultants regarding the details of the Abbottabad raid?
BRENNAN: No, I did not, Senator.
BURR: Then do you know who disclosed information that prompted the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to advise the White House to tell people to shut up?
BRENNAN: You would have to ask Senator Gates what he was referring to at that time, because I don't know.
[...]
RISCH: No, the question was, why did you feel compelled to hold this press conference and divulge that information
at that time on that day?
BRENNAN: It wasn't a press conference, it was a teleconference with these individuals. And I know they were going out on TV that evening and I wanted to make sure that these individuals with that background on counterterrorism were able to explain appropriately to the American people as (inaudible) talking about the importance of making sure the American people were aware of the threat environment and what we're doing on the counterterrorism front.
RISCH: And they were gonna go on TV that evening to discuss this event?
BRENNAN: Yes, because it had already broken. The -- the news reports had broken that afternoon, Senator, and so there was a flurry of activity and press reporting that was going on. These individuals reached out to us, as they normally do. So this was just a routine engagement with the press as we normally do when these things are made public.
RISCH: The next paragraph says, "According to five people familiar with the call, Brennan stressed that the plot was never a threat to the U.S. public or air safety because Washington had inside control over it." Is that an accurate statement?
BRENNAN: Inside control of the plot, yes, that's exactly right.
RISCH: OK. So based on that, one would know that we had something inside. Is that a fair statement?
BRENNAN: It's -- it's -- from that statement it is known that that IED at the time was not a threat to the traveling public, because we had said publicly there was no active plot the time of the bin Laden anniversary... (CROSSTALK)
RISCH: Would you agree with me that that disclosure was -- resulted in the outing of an asset that shouldn't have been outed?
BRENNAN: Absolutely not, Senator. I do not agree with you whatsoever.
(CROSSTALK)
RISCH: Well, how can you say that?
BRENNAN: Because I -- I -- what I'm saying is that we were explaining to the American public why that IED was not in fact a threat at the time that it was in the control of individuals. When -- when we say positive control, inside control, that means that we (inaudible) that operation either environmentally or any number of ways. It did not in any way reveal any type of classified information. And I told those individuals and there are, you know, transcripts that are available of that conversation, "I cannot talk to you about the operational details of this whatsoever."
RISCH: Having used the words that you used of "inside control," it isn't much of a leap to determine that somehow you had a handle on it.
BRENNAN: It's not much of a leap to know that if in fact we said "this IED was in fact obtained and it was not a threat at the time," that there was some type of inside control. It is almost a truism.
RISCH: Well, having said that, it seems to me that the leak that the Justice Department is looking for is right here in front of us. And you disagree with that?
BRENNAN: I disagree with you vehemently, Senator. And I've talked to the Department of Justice. As I said, I conducted interviews with them. And, you know, I am a witness in that, as many other people are. And as you know, there's witness and subject and target. I'm not a subject. I'm not a target. I am a witness. Because I want to make sure whoever leaked this information that got in the press and that seriously did disrupt some very sensitive operational equities on the part of some of our international partners, that never should have happened.
RISCH: And you're in agreement with that, that this was a serious flaw in what should have happened. Is that correct?
BRENNAN: It's a serious flaw that it got out to the press before that operation was in fact concluded. Absolutely. And my discussion with those individuals that night, it already was out in the press.
RISCH: You would agree with me that on the day that we get Mr. Asiri, it's going to be either a very, very good day or if he gets us first, it's going to be a very, very bad day for the American people, and particularly for anyone who was involved in a leak concerning him.
BRENNAN: Senator, I live this every day and night. I go to bed at night worrying that I didn't do enough that day to make sure I could protect the American people. So when Mr. Asiri is brought to justice one way of or another, it will be because of the work that's been done over the past number of years by some very brave Americans in the CIA and other places. So, believe me, I am focused as a laser on the issue of the IED threat, AQAP, and Mr. al-Asiri.
RISCH: I have more. My time is up. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
[Emphasis added]
Homeland Security Shuts Down Bitcoin Use By Startup Company
Thou shalt have no other gods before me. The State may have started the ball rolling on bringing an end to Bitcoins in America with Iowa based startup Dwolla. The virtual crypto-currency has been a thorn in the government’s side ever since the currency crossed the billion dollar mark. People have been operating businesses outside of regulation which is apparently only allowed by Wall Street.
NOAA got $48 million to help with modernization and programs to improve their operations and service, and it took a major weather disaster for them to get it. $48 million means so much to them, and yet, it's only a few years' compensation for a TBTF Wall Street CEO. Consider the value to this country of the improvement of decades old NOAA equipment and technology vs. the value of a Wall Street executive. It's only a small fraction of the amount paid out in Wall Street bonuses every year. Consider how small $48 million is compared to the trillion spent on Homeland Security and the many trillions spent on wars, and the half trillion dollar budget the Pentagon gets every year. Consider that the sequester designed by the president and all the president's men to force Democrats to cut "entitlements" and how it affects government agencies. Consider the austerity policies and obsession of the president and all the president's men that have been used to cut and furlough jobs in the public sector. Our priorities are profoundly messed up.
NOAA releases final report of Sandy service assessment
After a thoughtful and deliberate review, today NOAA released a report on the National Weather Service’s performance during hurricane/post tropical cyclone Sandy. The report, Hurricane/Post Tropical Cyclone Sandy Service Assessment, reaffirms that the National Weather Service provided accurate forecasts for Sandy, giving people early awareness of the significant storm churning toward the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. The report includes recommendations to improve products and services to fully meet customer and partner needs in the future.
[...]
He explained that the agency’s structure and operations were last modernized two decades ago, and much of the agency’s communications capacity was designed in the 1980s.
This spring Congress passed the Sandy Supplemental Appropriations Act, providing NOAA with unprecedented opportunity to strengthen the National Weather Service. The Act provides $48 million in supplemental funding to the agency’s FY13 budget for Sandy recovery efforts and to improve response and recovery capability for future weather events. The funding will allow the National Weather Service to make critical improvements in high-speed computing, higher resolution weather prediction models and key observation systems, among other projects that will improve the agency’s support to local communities for extreme weather events.
Action
Kevin Gosztola soliciting funds to help continue his excellent and tireless reporting on the Manning trial. Remember, he was virtually the only one reporting on it at times. I hope he is well funded for the court martial trial. He deserves a Pulitzer for his journalism on this. It will be interesting to see if the media does a turnaround on Manning and Assange now that they have had their epiphany and a taste of the whistleblower witch hunt. But unlike the MSM, Kevin needs the funding from his readers to keep going. Without Kevin and some others like Alexa O'Brien, the government would have succeeded in keeping most of the Manning situation in the dark.
To Those Who Have Supported My Coverage of Bradley Manning’s Court Martial (So Far)
Every dollar donated to help fund coverage of Bradley Manning has helped transform me into a foremost journalist on one of the biggest cases in military justice history.
Every post of mine shared on Facebook or Twitter has helped amplify critical coverage that is keeping the world informed of how the government is prosecuting Manning as if he is a traitor that aided terrorists.
[...]
I hope you will keep sharing my reporting with family, friends or those in your social network, and, when possible, make donations so I can remain a fixture in the press pool at Meade and keep up my coverage of the Manning case.
With gratitude,
Kevin Gosztola
Firedoglake.com Journalist
|
Blog Posts and Tweets of Interest
Evening Blues
More Tunes
Cover Of The Rolling Stone-Dr.Hook