This is going to be a short round up. I will spend this afternoon and a good part of the evening in meetings with Kristina Borjesson and Katrina Rill, during which we are planning to go over our first video series and discuss our upcoming projects.

Please welcome our new addition, Dr. Julien Mercille, to the Boiling Frogs analyst team. You can read his recent articles here, and here. Peter and I interviewed him last week, and will have that available to you in about 2 weeks. Here is Dr. Mercille’s bio:

Dr. Julien Mercille is a lecturer in US foreign policy at University College Dublin, where he moved after obtaining his PhD from UCLA. He teaches on US history and foreign policy and has published academic articles on Iran, Iraq and the Cold War and is now researching the “War on Drugs” and Afghanistan. He has also written for various websites and magazines on those topics and others.

I only had time to gather a few noteworthy articles and headlines for this weekend’s round up (a hectic week). Let’s start with this brief video (even though it predates the recent disastrous SC decision!):
 

Why Use A National Security Letter When You Have Post-It Notes
Jacob Sullum, Reason

CCTV in the sky: police plan to use military-style spy drones
Paul Lewis, Guardian

Shadowy Arms Deal Traced to Kazakhstan
Simon Shuster, AP
 
Afghans protest deaths of 4 in NATO-government raid
Sayed Salahuddin, Reuters

More secrecy: Obama hides objections to laws
Watertown Daily Times

US continues to look the other way on ‘war on terror’ abuses
Amnesty International

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

Andy Worthington provides us with an overview of America’s detention center at Guantanamo Bay and the plight of 774 individuals, most of whom are innocent of any terrorism connections. He discusses the general view of the US government and Americans held by many of those released, and the rarity of radicalization or revenge seeking among them. Mr. Worthington talks about the astonishing lack of interest and coverage of these cases and stories by the US media, President Obama’s failure in meeting the release deadline despite his promises during the presidential campaign, the number and current status of inmates released to date…and more.

Andy Worthington is a journalist and historian, based in London. He is the author of The Guantánamo Files, the first book to tell the stories of all the detainees in Guantanamo Bay, and the co-director of the new documentary film, “Outside the Law: Stories from Guantanamo.” You can visit his blog here.

Here is our guest Andy Worthington unplugged!

Interview with Andy Worthington [ 59:47 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

Colonel Kurtz: Did they say why [Captain] Willard, why they want to terminate my command?

Captain Willard: They told me, that you had gone totally insane and uh, that your methods were unsound.

Colonel Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?

Captain Willard: I don’t see any method at all, Sir.

Francis Ford Coppola, Apocalypse Now

One thing that remains consistent over the last 30 years in observing America’s participation in Afghanistan is that mistakes and errors of judgment, no matter how egregious or self-defeating, never seem to get corrected. In fact, in its effort to rationalize a growing culture of war-making from Vietnam to Afghanistan, America has come around to embracing the insanity of the fictional Colonel Kurtz.

Without a care for the consequences, the U.S. first fostered Islamic extremists in the 1980s (repackaging them for public consumption as “fiercely religious freedom fighters�), then endorsed the rise of the Taliban by claiming they were a “cleansing� force (apparently for these same fiercely religious freedom fighters). According to former CIA operative Milt Bearden, the U.S. also helped facilitate the Arab infiltration of Central Asia by assisting Al Qaeda and ultimately redirecting Osama bin Laden out of the Sudan and into Afghanistan. The Washington beltway and a large segment of the media reveled in the genius of their new “method,� for undoing communist influence and securing Central Asia.

Once a person with a cause has been linked to a policy and established in Washington, that person remains forever as the go-to person regardless of their subsequent history. One such example is the Afghan terrorist, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who, like Mephistopheles appears and reappears in the Afghan narrative at various points in time only to vanish in a puff of smoke.

Hekmatyar’s reputation was established back in the late 1960s as a high school student when he joined the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) and then attended the Mahtab Qala military school in Kabul. By the early 1970s Hekmatyar had become radicalized by extremist Islam and joined the Nahzat-e-Jawanane Musalman (Muslim Youth Movement). As an engineering student at Kabul University he became known for throwing acid at women dressed in Western clothes and for murdering a fellow student from a Maoist faction of the PDPA. Imprisoned by King Zahir Shah’s police for the murder, Hekmatyar was freed following a 1973 coup by the King’s cousin Mohammed Daoud and communist PDPA leader Babrak Karmal and fled to Pakistan.

Hekmatyar joined with Ahmad Shah Massoud’s Jamaat-e-Islami (Islamic Party) in a Pakistani plan designed by their Directorate of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) to destabilize Afghanistan with cross border raids. Dissatisfied with the radical Jamaat’s political approach after failing to stir an uprising in Afghanistan, Hekmatyar formed his own more radical party, the Hisb-e Islami (Islamic Party) and came to the attention of the CIA. In 1979, Hekmatyar helped to precipitate the Soviet invasion by engaging Afghanistan’s desperate Marxist President Hafizullah Amin in a power sharing arrangement. According to the British publication The Round Table of April 1981, (No. 282) the Soviets panicked when they realized Amin had set December 29^th  as the date for dissidents of the regime and their tribal supporters to march on Kabul. Read more È

Here is a clip from a recent speech by Congressman Ron Paul on the CIA:

There’s been a coup – have you heard? It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything! They run the military .. and they’re every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. And yet, think of the harm they have done since they were established at the end of World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They’re in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators… We need to take out the CIA!

I don’t remember ever hearing any politician, elected official, putting these points out so very boldly, unapologetically, and fearlessly.

Let’s face it: Has there ever been anything good, anything positive, associated with this dark agency? Some may say ‘Hey, we don’t get to know of the good they do, or have done, because it would be all secret!’ Really? I mean really? Despite all the secrecy we’ve gotten to know about hundreds of flops, abuses, shady businesses, atrocious murders and assassinations, human rights violations – torture, kidnappings, renditions…With that sort of no logic-logic, you’d think their intended secrecy would prevent us from knowing about these horrendous disasters and the criminal conduct they commit around the world in our name and with our money. And, that they’d leak all sorts of heroic and good deeds (if they ever existed) to gloat about and take credit for. No?

If you were to go around the world and take a survey on what is it that most people hate about the United States, you’d hear the word ‘CIA’ as the answer given by many. Or if the answer is ‘US Foreign Policy’ and that answer is probed further, you’d see that mainly it comes down to the CIA and their dark operations conducted around the world in the last 6 decades or so. I know a little bit about this, having lived in various countries. It’s never been ‘the Americans,’ or ‘the American way of life,’ or … So do we really see this agency and its dark conduct as the representation of who we Americans are, what we believe, and how we want to treat the rest of the world? Do you?

Okay, now it is your turn. Please tell us what you think?

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

If we human frogs are to escape boiling–or baking, frying, glowing and other fates our leaders are warming us up to–we need to heed the voices summoned by Sibel Edmonds on Boiling Frogs Post warning us to help each other jump out of the pot and off the stove.

Boiling Frogs brings to you crucial voices, viewpoints and stories that are blacked out elsewhere. In these times when truth seems to be harder to come by, and maintaining hope keeps getting harder to do, here is an oasis in the desert of spin, half-truths, and fabrications that sadly passes for the “free press� guaranteed by our Constitution. What you read here, what you hear here, and what you will soon see here is un-filtered by government or corporate interests and not driven by ideology – a breath of fresh air.

I want to congratulate Sibel on launching this much needed venue free of partisanship focused on issues that truly matter. I wholeheartedly endorse and support this site and the distinguished team of truth-reporters, and I invite all of you to do the same: join this movement, spread the word, and contribute what you can.

Dan Ellsberg

Dan Ellsberg graduated from Harvard in economics in 1952, served in the US Marine Corps from 1954-57, and obtained a PhD in economics from Harvard while working for the Rand Corporation in 1962. In 1964 he joined the Defense Department to work principally on decision-making in the Vietnam War. Mr. Ellsberg precipitated a national political controversy in 1971 when he released the Pentagon Papers, a Top-Secret Pentagon study of US government decision-making about the Vietnam War, to the New York Times and other publications. He was indicted facing 115 years in prison; charges were eventually dismissed on grounds of government misconduct, White House crimes against him which figured in President’s Nixon resignation facing impeachment. Ellsberg has ever since campaigned for peace, encouraging others to reveal truths that are wrongfully withheld by those in power.

This project is solely dependent on your donations. Your contributions will allow us to:

• Purchase and publish investigative news stories and exposés
• Bring to you in-depth commercial free Podcast interviews
• Present independent editorials and analyses
• Showcase original editorial cartoons
• Facilitate lively discussions
• Maintain & Manage this Website

We need your support to make this project a reality. Please contribute what you can, and many thanks for all you do.

Last Friday as I was searching the headlines for noteworthy and interesting news articles I came across a fairly lengthy and detailed story on Humam Khalil Abu-Mulal al-Balawi. Considering the saturated state of this recent CIA slaying story and the reporting source, I almost skipped the article, but then, something caught my eye; something easy to miss with the naked eye, at least those of gullible US Media readers-believers. It wasn’t the story itself, nor was it the flowery details in an attempt to make it a possible future ‘Hollywood Action Drama’ worthy of a six figure movie rights offer. It also wasn’t due to the authors, since neither one of them was familiar to me. No, it was none of that. What caught my attention and held it there for the next few hours was the very calculative and selective usage of a word in the title; Victim:

“In Afghanistan attack, CIA fell victim to series of miscalculations about informant�

With that word, victim, in mind, I quickly checked a few other media sites, and sure enough the word was there. I will give you a couple of quick examples, starting with NY Daily News:

Among the CIA victims, including several contractors, was a mother of three who directed operations and intelligence gathering at Forward Operating Base Chapman, a secretive site in Khowst province on the Pakistan border that also houses a State Department reconstruction team.

An eighth American victim was a State Department worker. An Afghan also was killed in the attack and six other Americans were wounded.

…

And the next excerpt from the so-called lefty PBS:

Families of some of the CIA victims have released information about their lives. Harold Brown Jr., 37, from Massachusetts, had a wife and three children; Jeremy Wise, 35, was a former Navy SEAL and worked as a security contractor; Scott Michael Roberson, 39, worked as a security officer and had a wife who was eight months pregnant; and Dane Clak Paresi, 46, was a contractor and retired soldier.

…

First, let’s get the very simple facts straight here: Read more È

Soon-to- be- Launched Boiling Frogs Exclusive Video

I’m going to start with an exciting update on our Boiling Frogs Exclusive Video Project. Again, I’m not known for being very patient, and in this case I’m not able to contain my excitement.

Kristina Borjesson and Katrina Rill have been working very hard on the production side, and have been doing it under extraordinary circumstances. Kristina’s brother lives in Haiti and for almost 4 days they were unable to establish contact with him, know about his well-being or whereabouts. They heard from him yesterday, after days of frantic phone calls, e-mails, and stressful waiting-pacing. I am so very happy and relieved. Additionally, during that chaotic period they had to resolve several software-hardware related problems and glitches. Fortunately, they have now arrived at the ‘happy-satisfied-exciting’ stage where they are putting their final touches on our first four-part video series.

The upcoming video series will be based on exclusive interviews with Larry Wilkerson, with great footage. I don’t believe anyone has ever heard or seen some of the extraordinary revelations and commentaries contained in these clips; at least I hadn’t. Here is a glimpse of what I’m talking about from the transcript:

Larry Wilkerson on Israel:

I have not mentioned one other motivation in here which was, I think very much at work. And that’s Israel… Douglas Feith, for example as many people often said in the state department, including the highest members of the state department, was a card carrying member of the Likud Party… what it meant of course was that he had a double set of interests in mind at most times and those interests were not just America’s interests, they were Israel’s interests…

We have a situation today in both Israel and the United States created in part because of incompetent leadership but in part because of very venal leadership in exploiting the politics of fear, that can’t bring us peace—either of us—and is making lots and lots of money as Andrew Basevitch said, off not bringing us peace. Lots of money.

there are a group of people in this country who have an interest in Israel’s security that goes beyond America’s interests…. When the Cold War ended, Israel in that regard became a strategic liability, not an asset…

LW on our Disappearing Civil Liberties:

…So we’re moving away rapidly from all those things—the constitution, the rule of law, operating within our own revenues instead of debt, debt, debt and so forth, all because the presidency has become so powerful that it can do these things and it has become powerful in some respects because of the politics of fear…

LW on the Role of Military Industrial Complex:

In our country, money is negating democracy. It is doing it in a host of ways. It is doing it in a way Dwight Eisenhower warned it would do in 1961 when departed the Oval Office…

…there’s nothing out there that will tell you how to deal with this. This is not the president of Lockheed Martin, the president of uh, of uh General Dynamics or Graumann or whatever plotting at night to take over Washington or to take your money away from you. This is much more insidious than that. It is power, and building over time as we decided after world war two to build a national security state and to make security the end all and be all of our existence. Just listen to the democratic candidates the other night in the debate. Every one of them I believe as I recall even the guys on the fringes they essentially said the first requirement of any president is to protect the United States of America. Hogwash. The first requirement of any president is to protect the Constitution. The Constitution will, if it’s adhered to, protect America.

…….

Okay, you see what I mean? How could I not be ultra excited?! The interview is loaded with macro points and facts long ignored by the media and others, and issues and realities that have been chosen by our public to be denied rather than being faced and dealt with.

Buckle up and get ready for our soon to be launched video series. For some of you who have not registered with the site, this is a good time and even a better reason to go ahead and do it. The full-length clips will be available only to Boiling Frogs Registered Users, those I refer to as members of the Irate Minority Club.

………

Boiling Frogs Podcast

We had a great interview session with Chris Hedges. After reading his sound analytical pieces, hearing him articulate issues relevant to our discussion, and knowing a bit about his sincere and non-partisan outlook, I decided to add his ‘corner’ to my ‘must-read’ daily list. I say corner, because I don’t particularly like some of the angles and partisan approaches of the general site, and I believe that’s mutual, since those operating it happen to not like mine either On the other hand, I try to give credit where it’s due, and in this case, having Chris Hedges on board is a major positive.

This week we’ll interview Professor Julien Mercille and Coleen Rowley. I know I’ve said this a gazillion times, but I truly enjoy these sessions, and end up learning so much. I’m looking forward to having both guests this coming week.

Coming up on Friday: Our interview with Andy Worthington.

………….

And here is a round up of a few headlines and news of interest:

US Public Majority: Willing to Sacrifice Liberties for Perceived Security

The following makes us truly members of the irate minority club:
 

           Most OK with TSA full-body scanners
           By Thomas Frank, USA Today

Air travelers strongly approve of the government’s use of body scanners at the nation’s airports even if the machines compromise privacy, a USA TODAY/Gallup poll finds.

Poll respondents appeared to endorse a Transportation Security Administration plan to install 300 scanners at the nation’s largest airports this year to replace metal detectors. The machines, used in 19 airports, create vivid images of travelers under their clothes to reveal plastics and powders to screeners observing monitors in a closed room.

…

In the poll, 78% of respondents said they approved of using the scanners, and 67% said they are comfortable being examined by one. Eighty-four percent said the machines would help stop terrorists from carrying explosives onto airplanes. The survey was taken Jan. 5-6 of 542 adults who have flown at least twice in the past year.

…

And, this one:

            Poll: Most Americans would trim liberties to be safer
            By Steven Thomma, McClatchy

After a recent attempted terrorist attack set off a debate about full-body X-rays at airports, a new McClatchy-Ipsos poll finds that Americans lean more toward giving up some of their liberty in exchange for more safety. The survey found 51 percent of Americans agreeing that “it is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.â€� At the same time, 36 percent agreed that “some of the government’s proposals will go too far in restricting the public’s civil liberties.”

…

Here are my questions for the ‘majority’ who support giving up privacy and liberties for perceived security:

Let’s say the next attack, or attempted terrorist attack, takes place in a shopping mall on a busy Saturday. What should be our government’s measures and so-called solutions afterwards? Should they place metal detectors at all main entrances of all US shopping malls? And since they happen to be ‘ineffective,’ should they go all the way and have these body-scanners instead? But then, some terrorist or terrorist wanna-be or just mentally deranged person may try to pull the explosive truck in the parking lot trick. Then what? Should we also place search guards and detectors at all entrances of all US shopping malls?

Please feel free to replicate the example, scenario above, for all the mega movie theaters, mega hotels, mega amusement parks, mega restaurants, museums… Each one of them a possible target. Each one of them vulnerable. Each possible attack with a possible large civilian death toll. So I’m asking those supporters of giving up privacy and liberties for some irrational and perceived security: What would you want to be done to make you feel secure, safer? Will you be willing to stand in long lines and check points, spread your legs and arms before government patters, maybe even bend over for a good ole cavity search and enema, for shopping, dining, entertainment…? And don’t pull that ‘oh, that’s different’ line with me. Because it isn’t. Because there are millions of ways for those who are willing to execute terror plots, and there are thousands of places to be targeted. Even if we were to turn the entire country into a massive check point with scanners and patters, even if we were to turn our entire population into security guards and police… So, what you gonna do? Maybe ignorantly do the following: Read more È