Abuse of Secrecy Power in Massive Cover-Up.

February 16, 2010 at 8:04 P.M. Attempts to access these blogs from a public computer were unsuccessful because I was, allegedly, at an "insecure connection." This information was provided to me before I signed-in. Strange. At any time, N.J. hackers may succeed in preventing me from writing on-line.

February 16, 2010 at 4:25 P.M. "Is it rational to believe in God?" was defaced and corrected, again. I cannot say how many other essays have been altered since this morning.

"6 Killed in Drone Strike," in The New York Times, February 15, 2010, at p. A6.
"Seven Paragraphs," (Editorial) in The New York Times, Februay 15, 2010, at p. A20.
Robbie Brown, "Judges Free Inmate on Recommendation of Special Innocence Panel," in The New York Times, February 18, 2010, at p. A14. (Such panels can save millions of dollars for the legal system through avoiding costly appellate proceedings and new trials when it becomes clear that mistakes were made.)
Kareem Fahim, "Jurors Begin Deliberations in Police Sexual Abuse Case," in The New York Times, February 18, 2010, at p. A21. ("I am Sean Bell.")

There were a number of mistakes made as part of the military operations in Afghanistan. These mistakes have produced civilian casualties for which our military services cannot be faulted since they have taken every precaution to avoid such casualties in a difficult situation. Let us hope the operation is successful. However, the drone attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan are a result of a criminal policy that disregards the civilian casualties among villagers as "collateral damage" and, over a period of years, indiscriminately kills innocent people with the goal of destroying the Taliban leadership. We are not at war with Pakistan.

The Taliban leadership will be replaced. Discontent in the population in several countries will continue to provide new recruits (something we are not being told in U.S. media). Taliban forces will disperse and return to engage in guerilla strikes. It is a war of attrition for them. We are not being provided with the full truth concerning this conflict. I urge you to read foreign media coverage as well as American journalists on this war. American media's orchestrated silence concerning the censorship which you are witnessing at these blogs should tell you something about the "independence and freedom" of U.S. media.

What countries are providing intelligence assistance to our enemies in the region? Why are we still allowing others to define us in the world? Some countries, clearly, do not want the U.S. in the region.

"There are times when governments fight to keep documents secret to protect sensitive intelligence or other vital national security interests. And there are times when they are just trying to cover up incompetence, misbehavior or lawbreaking."

New Jersey's OAE and several Attorney Generals have stonewalled in response to requests for Tuchin's and Riccioli's records and reports, investigative and other materials pertaining to me. They continue to deny, illegally, all of these records to me. It is too late to protect Ms. Poritz or Anne Milgram.

If Ms. Milgram's goal was to assist in the cover up, then she should acknowledge the fact and turn over the hidden documents. The lesbianism of these women is irrelevant to my request. Mutual protection and cover-ups are not O.K., regardless of the sexual-orientation of those persons guilty of such crimes. Cranking up the slander machine or sending out the various bullshit dispensers in Trenton will not solve the problem. Inserting "errors" in these essays is not the solution. ("Deborah T. Poritz and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey" and "Another Mafia Sweep in New Jersey and Anne Milgram is Clueless.")

Pamela Dow, time to send the letter that says: "It has come to our attention that terrible mistakes and violations of your rights have taken place for which New Jersey is responsible. We wish to acknowledge these errors and make amends for them, to provide all records kept from you, and resolve these matters expeditiously. Kindly respond to our request for a meeting discreetly and promptly." Is that so difficult, Pam?

"Last week when a British court released secret intelligence material relating to the torture allegations of a former Guantanamo prisoner, Binyam Mohammed, it was clear that [the motive was to cover up "crimes against humanity"] when both the Bush and Obama administrations and some high ranking British officials tried to prevent the disclosure."

"Mr. Mohammed, an Ethiopian-born British resident, is a victim of President George W. Bush's extraordinary rendition program, under which foreigners were KIDNAPPED and flown to other countries for interrogation and torture. He was subjected to physical and psychological abuse in Pakistan, Morocco and a C.I.A.-run prison outside Kabul before being sent to Guantanamo. His seven-year ordeal ended when he was freed last February."

Seven years is nothing. For me, it will be twenty-two years in November, 2010. ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture.")

"At issue in the British court were seven paragraphs derived from American intelligence documents. The Bush administration claimed the material contained top-secret information and threatened to cut off intelligence sharing with Britain [absurd] if it was released. Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham-Clinton repeated those threats, despite President Obama's campaign promises of openness and the rule of law in his detainee policy." (emphasis added)

It is not sufficient to "press" and "insist" that China abide by our wishes, we must now "threaten" Britain. We will "inspect" Iran; monitor the military activities of North Korea; "demand" improvements in human rights in Latin American countries; we "insist upon" changes in Japan's monetary policy and in China's currency rates. Our attitude will create the opposite of the reaction that we desire.

" ... what [the documents] contain is the assessment by British intelligence that [Binyam Mohammed's] treatment violated legal prohibitions against torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners."

We live in a democracy whose government's actions are the actions of the citizenry. Hence, your government's decision to rape detainees with broomsticks, to beat men to death, to keep men naked and subjected to regular assaults, the assistance of medical personnel with hypnosis-based interrogations intended to bring about psychosis or suicide -- all of these are YOUR actions. ("Nihilists in Disneyworld.")

International prohibitions of torture championed by the U.S. emerged after the Holocaust and Nuremberg trials. We find ourselves making arguments to justify torture that are strikingly similar to those offered by Herman Goring and other defendants confronted with the images of the victims of Hitler's "Final Solution."

I am not equating Nazi Germany and America. I am suggesting that dehumanization is a dangerous principle that we have chosen to embrace which will have unforeseen consequences. We are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in the Middle East and for systematic torture of many innocent persons. The only word for such actions -- no matter who is responsible for them or why they are undertaken -- is "evil." ("U.S. Courts Must Not Condone Torture.")

Do we believe that these tactics will make for a safer world? Is it likely that America's enemies will be motivated to greater or lesser hatred by these tactics? Will we win the hearts and minds of billions of observers of these events? Do we enjoy great credibility on human rights issues in other countries? You decide. ("Fidel Castro's 'History Will Absolve Me'" and "Havana Nights and C.I.A. Tapes.")

"A spokesman for Mr. Obama expressed 'deep disappointment' in the court's decision, which might have been shocking except that Mr. Obama has refused to support any real investigation of Mr. Bush's lawless detention policies. His lawyers have tried to shut down court cases filed by victims of those policies, with the same extravagant claims of state secrets and executive power that Mr. Bush made."

Government functionaries will always champion "secrecy" because the word means their "asses are covered." ("New Jersey's Office of Attorney Ethics" and "Crimes Against Humanity in America.")

" ... Then there is the case of Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen who was seized at Kennedy Airport by federal agents acting on bad information. After being harshly interrogated he was sent to Syria, where he was tortured. In November, Mr. Arar's civil suit was dismissed by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which essentially bought the Bush administration's bogus national security claims, extended under Mr. Obama. Mr. Arar has appealed to the Supreme Court. Rather than fight, the Obama administration should offer an apology and a monetary settlement like Canada did three years ago."

The four Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court will decide against the appellant, the liberals will be divided, and Republican appointee Justice Anthony Kennedy will "concur in part while dissenting in part" with the result that this poor victim of American atrocities will be denied all justice.

"It has always been true that a real accounting of the Bush administration's abuses is vital if Mr. Obama truly wants to repair them and try to prevent them from recurring." -- Abuses are still taking place, every day. -- "It is more important than ever now, when the Republican right is trying hard to turn the clock back to those dark times [when Bush created a "torture free zone" in American law] by painting Democrats as 'soft on terror' during an election year."

Is America's first African-American president soft on slavery?