The News We're Not Hearing

Rep. Harman (D-CA) demands release of 'grim' Iraq intel report

RAW STORY
Published: Friday October 6, 2006

Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, sent a letter to Michael V. Hayden, Director of the CIA, demanding the release of a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that "paints a 'grim' picture of the situation in Iraq," the Los Angeles Times is reporting.

Harman requested the report's release, "charging that the agency was withholding the information out of political considerations," writes Greg Miller in the Times.

"I believe that the intelligence community has produced an in-depth intelligence review of Iraq," Harman said in the letter, "but that the material has been stamped 'draft' and will not be finalized" until after the elections.

The Bush administration released a previous NIE in September that painted an unflattering picture of the Iraq war's effects on the terror threat; National Intelligence Director John D. Negroponte then acknowledged that there was a second NIE in progress, whose release Harman is now demanding. "Such assessments," Miller writes, "represent the consensus views of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies."

Excerpts of the registration-restricted article follow:

#
A spokesman for Negroponte's office said the latest intelligence estimate on Iraq was begun in August, and Bush administration officials have indicated that it is unlikely to be ready for release until next year.

Harman has expressed frustration with that timetable. She said Thursday that she had recently learned of a separate assessment on Iraq that was much closer to being finished.

In a conference call with reporters, Harman said she had few details on the document, but that she was "confident" that a completed draft was being held at the CIA. She said it should be made available to members of the House Intelligence Committee.

"I know that there is a substantially complete assessment on Iraq," Harman said. "I understand it is grim. I understand many working inside the intelligence community are frustrated because the release of that document is being blocked."
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Rep._Harman_DCA_demands_release_of_1006.html

0 Replies

Um, Squinney and the Bear are celebrating an anniversary. 18 years. There were no fireworks, but a chemical waste facilility just outside of Raleigh NC, their town, exploded. I thought that was significant.

0 Replies

i'm afraid we'd be filling a2k to the brim if we attempted to report even 1% of news every day .
one of the latest i heard was that sen. warner (R) is beginning to have doubts about the ability to "win hearts and minds" .
hbg

0 Replies

The Environmental Protection (ha!) Agency passed a new set of pollution standards for small, dangerous 'soot' particulates. The seem to have angered both sides of the issue. Power companies (the biggest producers of fine particulates) feel the tough standards will cost too much (for them, $400 million per year). Those who live near to polluting industries, especially those who have lost loved ones (or a lung of their own), are angry because the standards are too weak (4,000 people with die, annually because of this lower standard according to Jack Beady, news analyst on WBUR).

Many feel that the standards, mediocre as they may be, will not be widely met even by 2015.

Arizona Daily Star online
Medical News Today

0 Replies

Thanks for posting!

0 Replies

here is the link to the short news item :

...SENATOR WARNER HAS GRIM VIEW OF IRAQ...

...AND ANOTHER REFERENCE TO HIS COMMENTS...

0 Replies

Death toll in Iraq: July and August saw over 3,000 dead Iraqis each and we had 13 American Soldiers die in 3 days.

Bradenton Herald
Buffalo News

0 Replies

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Guantanamo guards described physically and mentally abusing detainees, including slamming one's head into a cell door and denying them privileges merely to anger them, a U.S. Marine said in a document made public on Friday.

"Examples of this abuse included hitting detainees, denying them water, and removal of privileges for no reason," the Marine Corps sergeant stated in a sworn affidavit sent to the Pentagon's inspector general's office for investigation.

The affidavit, signed on Wednesday, was provided by lawyers representing some of the approximately 455 foreign terrorism suspects held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It represents the latest in a series of allegations of abuse of Guantanamo detainees by U.S. personnel.

The name of the sergeant, a female paralegal in a detainee criminal case, was blacked out. The sergeant described an hourlong conversation with guards at a bar at the base on September 23, but the affidavit mentioned only the first names of those accused of taking part in the abuse.

U.S. Navy Cmdr. Robert Durand, a spokesman for the military task force running the Guantanamo facility, said: "The mission of the Joint Task Force is the safe and humane care and custody of detained enemy combatants. Abuse or harassment of detainees in any form is not condoned or tolerated."

"The Joint Task Force will cooperate fully with the inspector general to learn the facts of the matter and will take action where misconduct is discovered," Durand added by e-mail.

A Navy sailor named Bo told of beating detainees. "One such story Bo told involved him taking a detainee by the head and hitting the detainee's head into the cell door," the sergeant wrote, adding that Bo stated that others at Guantanamo knew of his actions and did not punish him.

A guard named Steven said that even when the conduct of detainees was good, guards would take away personal items. "He said they do this to anger the detainees so they can punish them when they object or complain," she stated.

'A COMMON PRACTICE'

The affidavit said about five other guards talking at the bar admitted to hitting detainees, including punching them in the face. "From the whole conversation, I understood that striking detainees was a common practice. Everyone in the group laughed at the others' stories of beating detainees," she wrote.

Lt. Col. Colby Vokey, a Marine lawyer assigned to defend a Canadian detainee, Omar Ahmed Khadr, charged with murder, said in a memo to the inspector general's office that the abuse described violated U.S. and international law.

The United States has faced international criticism over its indefinite detention of Guantanamo detainees, many held more than four years without charges. The Pentagon contends the facility is vital to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects who might otherwise return to the battlefield.

Wells Dixon, a lawyer representing four current Guantanamo detainees, said the latest account of abuse reflected a complete breakdown in the chain of command at Guantanamo and a lack of accountability by senior military officials there.

"The fact that members of the U.S. Navy can sit around at a bar and laugh about beating detainees for no reason is outrageous. We're one step away from Abu Ghraib ( Iraq prison abuse scandal) or possibly worse," Dixon said.

0 Replies

Last April, in Iraq, US Marines threw an Iraqi civilian into a hole and killed him with ten shots to his head. They then tried to interfere with the crime scene by arranging weaponry to make it look like he was planting a road-side bomb. They have been court-marshalled. Officer Bacos was the initiator, he shot the first 3 rounds.

BBC

Quote:

Presiding judge Col Steve Folsom said Petty Officer Bacos could face a life sentence if found guilty but media reports have said it could be as little as 12 months.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

Last April, in Iraq, US Marines threw an Iraqi civilian into a hole and killed him with ten shots to his head. They then tried to interfere with the crime scene by arranging weaponry to make it look like he was planting a road-side bomb. They have been court-marshalled. Officer Bacos was the initiator, he shot the first 3 rounds.

BBC

Quote:
Presiding judge Col Steve Folsom said Petty Officer Bacos could face a life sentence if found guilty but media reports have said it could be as little as 12 months.

Bacos was sentenced to one year in the brig, with credit for 142 days he spent in custody awaiting trial. He can stay in the Navy although the Navy and Marine brass have the right to discharge him under less than honorable circumstances if they want.

In exchange for his guilty pleas, a murder charge was dismissed that could have brought the death penalty. Bacos' detailed admissions will be used to prosecute the other Marines involved, officials said.

0 Replies

And, what do you think about that?

0 Replies

It interesting that posters on this thread are identifying "news we are not hearing," aka 'important, but missing news items" with source material from news agencies and outlets.

If the way one hears of a story is through the new media, doesn't that pretty much disqualify it as a story the new media is not reporting?

0 Replies

Finn, I think we all agree on the concept. News can be reported by a reputable source (it wouldn't be news if it weren't), but be drowned out by sensational stories which have little real meaning for most of us (like the Jon Bonet Ramsey news of late).

0 Replies

bm

Good idea, k!

0 Replies

I wonder what potential problems this bill will create. Makes one wonder if the Bush administration will use this against its critics.

Quote:

ATTORNEYS FOR GUANTANAMO DETAINEES COULD BE DETAINED AS ENEMY COMBATANTS UNDER NEW LEGISLATION

President Given Undue Power to Silence Critics

Synopsis

On September 26, 2006, attorneys for the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) determined that what appears to be the final version of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 could allow the government to detain the attorneys themselves as 'enemy combatants.' CCR Legal Director Bill Goodman said: "This ominously broad definition of enemy combatants would mean that almost anyone who actively opposes the President or the government could be locked up indefinitely. This bill makes a mockery of the rule of law."

The current version of the Military Commissions redefines an "unlawful enemy combatant" (UEC) so broadly that it could include anyone who organizes a march against the war in Iraq. The bill defines a UEC as "a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States" or anyone who "has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense of the United States." The definition makes no reference to citizenship and therefore could be read to include any number of individuals, including:

CCR attorneys and other habeas counsel, Federal Public Defenders and military defense counsel for detainees at Guantánamo Bay

Any person who has given $5 to a charity working with orphans in Afghanistan that turns out to be associated in some fashion with someone who may be a member of the Taliban.

The bill also currently includes provisions so sweeping that they strip U.S. courts of jurisdiction over habeas petitions by any non-citizen detained by the government anywhere. Because there is no geographic limitation in the bill's language, it would allow the President to detain any non-citizen without their ever having the chance to challenge their detention in court: "No court... shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination." Examples of people who could be detained indefinitely with no access to a court include:

A foreign tourist wearing an anti-Bush t-shirt at the Statue of Liberty

A protester at an immigration rally who has lived in the U.S. since she was six months old and is a lawful, permanent resident

CCR Executive Director Vincent Warren said: "This new version of the legislation grants the President frightening power to silence his critics. Habeas corpus is, like voting, one of the fundamental rights of democracy. The President's efforts to exercise the privilege of kings must be turned back, before the so-called 'war on terror' turns on our own citizens."

0 Replies

The Age

JonBenet hoaxer walks free

Santa Rosa, California
October 6, 2006 - 8:31AM
A judge in California dismissed child pornography charges today against one-time JonBenet Ramsey murder suspect John Mark Karr after prosecutors said they did not have enough evidence to take the case to trial.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

Finn, I think we all agree on the concept. News can be reported by a reputable source (it wouldn't be news if it weren't), but be drowned out by sensational stories which have little real meaning for most of us (like the Jon Bonet Ramsey news of late).

littlek

The definition of "news" is not that which is published by newspapers and reported by tv journalists. "News we are not hearing" or "Important but missing news items," clearly suggests not only that all "news" is not reported, but that "important news" is being held from us.

I don't have a real problem with the notion that you meant to address important news stories that are lost in the mass of daily news reports ---much of which is merely tabloid titillation. I do think, however, that it is worth noting the irony associated with your employing (sub-consciously or otherwise) the very tactic of the tabloids that you decry - hyperbole; overstating the issue to which you wish to draw attention.

Please believe me that this is not intended as a personalized criticism of you, for you are, by no means, alone in the usage of this technique. I'm afraid, though, that it has become a commonly accepted practice (no doubt, instilled in the public by our commercial news agencies).

Consider how many times your local news broadcaster uses reprehensible news teasers to urge you to watch the nightly news program: "Deadly weather approaching parts of the metroplex - details at 11:00!" There are numerous other examples of these teasers, and they all tell us that our local news broadcasters are either PT Barnums or irresponsible bastards. If deadly weather is approaching your area, you need to know that as soon as the broadcasters do.

Unfortunately, when called upon it, the practitioners of the tactic tend to respond as you did: "Well yes you are technically right but we all know what I mean." Maybe we did and maybe we did not. As pedantic as it may seem to address this issue, I think it is far greater than an academic matter.

Language is one of our greatest accomplishments and words do matter. People, through ignorance, misuse them all of the time and that is not particularly troublesome --- hopefully we all remain in a learning mode throughout our lives. However when people who undoubtedly understand the meanings of choice words misuse them in a way that attempts to further the interest in or import of what they are saying, that is a problem.

Individuals who engage in or fall prey to this practices are not necessarily guilty of intentional misinformation or misdirection, but they are guilty of intellectual sloth.

Witness the corruption of the word "literally." How many times have you heard phrases like:

"In fact, the Reagan administration was literally driven underground by the population."

It is even more ironic that the above statement was made by Noam Chomsky, a brilliant scholar of linguistics, in an interview by Bill Moyers.

Many people would like "begs the question" to mean that a given statement practically begs for a certain question to be asked, but this is not the proper usage of the phrase. It's a shame it isn't because the actual meaning is difficult to comprehend and is relevant almost exclusively to debating. It would be nice if the phrase meant want so many want it to, but it doesn't.

Yes, English is a living language and many of the words and phrases we use today are perfectly acceptable corruptions of much earlier forms, but that certainly doesn't mean we should encourage misuse or not attempt to maintain proper usage.

It takes many years for misuse to become proper use. In the meantime confusion is sown, and over the long term the language can lose its depth, its precision, and its subtlety.

0 Replies

I read finn's post and now I'm confused. Literally.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I read finn's post and now I'm confused. Literally.

Never would have thought it a figurative admission.

If you try and be more specific with your confusion, I will try and and clarify.

0 Replies

The News We're Not Hearing

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know