Tikun Olam-תקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

A hat tip to Neocons Will Ban Me at Daily Kos for this alarming UPI story: U.S. prepares Iran strike. German journalists have noted visits by high-ranking U.S. national security officials to NATO countries, especially Turkey, which allegedly involved discussions of possible upcoming U.S. air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities:

The Bush administration is preparing its NATO allies for a possible military strike against suspected nuclear sites in Iran in the New Year, according to German media reports, reinforcing similar earlier suggestions in the Turkish media.

The Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel this week quoted “NATO intelligence sources” who claimed that the NATO allies had been informed that the United States is currently investigating all possibilities of bringing the mullah-led regime into line, including military options…

[Further,] the respected German weekly Der Spiegel notes “What is new here is that Washington appears to be dispatching high-level officials to prepare its allies for a possible attack rather than merely implying the possibility as it has repeatedly done during the past year.”

The German news agency DDP cited “Western security sources” to claim that CIA Director Porter Goss asked Turkey’s premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan to provide political and logistic support for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets. Goss, who visited Ankara and met Erdogan on Dec. 12, was also reported to have to have asked for special cooperation from Turkish intelligence to help prepare and monitor the operation.

The DDP report added that Goss had delivered to the Turkish prime minister and his security aides a series of dossiers, one on the latest status of Iran’s nuclear development and another containing intelligence on new links between Iran and al-Qaida…

In a December 23 report, the DDP agency quoted an anonymous but “high-ranking German military official” telling their reporter: “I would be very surprised if the Americans, in the mid-term, didn’t take advantage of the opportunity delivered by Tehran [via bellicose statements by the Iranian president]. The Americans have to attack Iran before the country can develop nuclear weapons. After that would be too late.”

The DDP report also said that several friendly Arab governments, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Pakistan, had also been informed in general terms that the Pentagon was preparing contingency plans, including “the option of air strikes,” in the event of the new Iranian government precipitating a crisis…

…German media speculation about the supposed U.S. plans has been fueled by a number of high-profile visits to Turkey this month, including trips by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, by the CIA’s Porter Goss and by the FBI Director Robert Mueller, who also delivered U.S. intelligence reports on Iranian backing for PKK operations aimed against Turkey. There have also been some significant Turkish visits to Washington, as reported by Der Spiegel.

“Two weeks ago, Yasar Buyukanit, the commander of the Turkish army and probable future chief of staff of the country’s armed forces, flew to Washington. After the visit he made a statement that relations between the Turkish army and the American army were once again on an excellent footing,” Der Spiegel reported Friday.

“Buyukanit’s warm and fuzzy words, contrasted greatly with his past statements that if the United States and the Kurds in northern Iraq proved incapable of containing the PKK in the Kurd-dominated northern part of the country and preventing it from attacking Turkey, Buyukanit would march into northern Iraq himself,” the German weekly added.

The CIA Director’s Dec. 12 call on the Turkish prime minister last[ed] for over an hour, far longer than customary for a mere courtesy call, and followed an even longer meeting with senior staff of MIT, Turkish intelligence. The Turkish Daily Cumhuriyet reported on December 13: “Goss also asked Ankara to be ready for a possible U.S. air operation against Iran and Syria.”

Der Spiegel noted Friday that the latest high-level visitor to the Turkish premier was NATO Secretary-General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer. This is not unusual, since Turkey is a member of NATO, but the coincidence of these various trips prompted Spiegel to comment “the number of American and NATO security officials heading to Ankara has increased dramatically.”

Hmmm. I note that “Western security sources” are the informants for some of these reports. Now, who could that be? Perhaps the U.S. itself trying to frighten the Iranian mullahs into compliance with U.S. wishes regarding its nuclear buildup? The article points to this possibility:

Other NATO sources have told United Press International that “all this may be mood music, a way to step up the diplomatic pressure on Tehran.”

It is possible that leaks from NATO and German security sources are part of a ploy to convince the Iranian government that the Americans and their NATO allies are in dead earnest when they say a nuclear-armed Iran would not be tolerated, and that Iran had better start negotiating seriously.

The most paranoiac among us talk about Bush as a military adventurist, as someone who would relish the idea of punching the ayatollahs in the nose while also diverting attention from his innumerable domestic woes. I try to keep my paranoia in check as much as possible. But this report really lets loose the reins of wild speculation. Can Bush really be seriously contemplating something like this in the wake of the abject failure of his Iraq war policy? Does he really want to risk turning the Arab view of the U.S. from a slow boil to a raging torrent of hatred? And has he allowed the wild-eyed, bloodthirsty Michael Ledeen (”Now is the time for Iranian liberation”) and AIPAC to assume control of his Iran policy? These two have been (along with Israel) advocating military action against Iran. But until now one didn’t know that they “owned” our Iran policy.

I want to make clear that the current Iranian government is something I have no use for whatsoever. Their president’s recent statements denying the Holocaust and suggesting that Israel be “moved” to Europe beggar belief. I also feel that Iran IS a potential nuclear threat which must be dealt with. But again we have the same problem we had before the Iraq war. The U.S. has turned to the UN to try to resolve this conflict. But since it has never overtly supported the UN initiative, it may turn around whenever it wishes (as it did with the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq) and say: “We tried and it didn’t work. Now our only choice is war.” And of course as we know with the runup to the Iraq war, Bush’s support for a UN effort to avert war was a sham all along. He wanted war and he got it while claiming that he “gave peace a chance” (fat chance).

It’s deja vu all over again. And what a horrible deja vu this would be. More shock and awe except this time over the skies of Iran. And what does Bush think the outcome of all this will be? Even if he succeeds in destroying Iran’s nuclear capability (which the Iranians have been doing their best to prevent by separating their facilities widely), he will turn Iran from a potentially angry enemy into a virulently angry enemy. Israel has felt the sting of Iran through it’s Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah. Imagine many Hezbollahs unleashed to target Americans throughout the world? Right now the Iraqi insurgents only have the capacity to hurt Americans in Iraq. But if we drag Iran into a similar death spiral with us then we could have a much more serious terrorist enemy, one with an entire government apparatus and international reach behind it.

Who’d have thought that after Bush’s abject failure in Iraq we’d have to once again gear up the anti-war movement to avert another Bush Mideast adventure? It’s so deeply sad and discouraging. But perhaps one slight silver lining is that Congress may take the idea of impeachment that much more seriously since an unpopular president prosecuting an increasingly unpopular war seems eager to get us into another one. Somebody’s got to stand up to this menace. I know Congress’ record on this score has been abysmal. But if some Republicans start getting worried about Bush’ penchant for military escapades and start making noises about their dissatisfaction (and interest in exploring appointment of a special prosecutor, for example), then perhaps Bush and Cheney might be brought up short. I know it’s a long-shot. But who else can stop him? The world can’t, even the American people can’t (since we can’t vote him our in three years). Someone’s got to do it.

tags aipac, ayatollahs, george_bush, iran, michael_ledeen, nuclear_weapons, u.s._mideast_policy

I’m pleased to announce that Steve Jobs has lost his long and bitter struggle to demolish the historic Jackling House in Woodside, CA. The house was built by Daniel Jackling, a mining magnate in 1923. It was designed by renowned California architect George Washington Smith (who was responsible for Santa Barbara’s “Spanish hacienda” style). For further background, see my earlier post about the campaign to save Jackling.

California Superior Court judge Marie Weiner ruled yesteday (December 28th) that the Woodside town council acted in bad faith in granting Jobs a demolition permit:

The administrative record reflects a severe lack of evidence supporting any and all findings that the EIR alternatives are “economically unjustifiable” or economically infeasible.

All of this is unknown to the Town Council and thus their finding of economic infeasiblity is not supported by substantial evidence, and was arbitrary and capricious. This was an abuse of discretion.

What the Town of Woodside has approved is the utter antithesis of its existing General Plan. .. The theme of the General Plan is one of conservation, preservation, and certainly maintenance of existing structures. It is arbitrary and capricious for the Town of Woodside to imply or interpellate the provisions of the General Plan contrary to its express components.

Such findings simply demonstrate the Town Council’s exaggerated efforts to find a means to the end that Jobs seeks.

In regard to the “conditions” placed upon the demolition permit [that Jobs take a year to find someone willing to move the house off-site] , there has been no showing that these conditions are actually enforceable. Jobs is the sole decision maker in determining whether or not to accept any proposals for relocation.

Woodside made a finding that the EIR alternative to have the house relocated to another site was not feasible, yet it required that efforts be made to see if the house could be relocated to another site to a willing taker. This demonstrates the absurdity of the “findings” of infeasibility made by Woodside.

Accordingly the finding of overriding consideration was not supported by substantial evidence, and the granting of the demolition permit by Woodside to Jobs was an abuse of discretion.

–decision provided by Uphold Our Heritage

This is a preliminary ruling which could be amended by the judge before it is made final in ten days. But it is almost a certainty that Jackling House is safe.

Jobs has owned the house for several decades and allowed it to fall into serious disrepair. Preservationists have speculated that Jobs deliberately allowed it to deteriorate in order to strengthen his claim that the only solution would be to tear it down.

Now Jobs is faced with some serious choices. Either he can sell the house, renovate it (which would be an interesting choice considering that he has publicly said that he “detests” it), or abandon it allowing its condition to worsen even further. The last choice would be quite cruel and mean-spirited (at least as far as the house is concerned), but Jobs has shown a great deal of malice during the campaign to save the house so I wouldn’t put it past him.

Great congratulations go to Clotilde Luce and Uphold Our Heritage for waging a brilliant campaign (with the help of Chatten-Brown Carstens, a law firm specializing in cases involving the California Environmental Quality Act). This is a huge victory for historic preservation. It should be a lesson for cities (like mine here in Seattle) which have essentially almost no housing regulations intended to preserve existing housing stock (and especially historic homes). Preserve it or lose it!

tags apple, clotilde_luce, historic_preservation, jackling_house, steve_jjobs, uphold_our_heritage

The ACLU ran a hard-hitting ad in the New York Times on December 22nd which noted the similarities between Nixon’s illegal wiretaps against alleged domestic “terrorists” and Bush’s warrantless NSA snooping against U.S. citizen he deems “terrorists.” The group calls for Attorney General Gonzales to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate these charges. Give your congressmember a call to tell them that you support not only Congressional hearings, but appointment of a special prosecutor and impeachment if it comes to that.

tags aclu, george_bush, impeachment, nsa, special_prosecutor, spying_scandal

Martin Garbus has been covering the legal/constitutional angle of the NSA scandal for Huffington Post. While he is a well-known First Amendment attorney, he is not the most elegant or thorough writer in the world (one wishes the HP staff would edit him a bit). But so far there are not many constitutional lawyers saying much about impeachment so he fills a useful niche in the political debate.

He came up with an arresting tidbit in tonight’s HP column:

…The public shall also learn about the FISA judges’ misuse of the FISA courts and their warrants. The courts were created to permit eavesdropping and electronic surveillance, not physical break-ins.

The facts will show that the Bush administration, with the knowledge, and at times, the consent of the FISA judges, conducted illegal physical break-ins - break-ins that to this day, the involved person, is unaware of.

There are a few problems with this statement. It is unsourced. One assumes that someone of Garbus’ legal background might have sources in the government apparatus or among lawyers representing some of those the NSA surveilled who might know more about this claim and possibly substantiate it further. Of course, there is a possibility that Garbus is pulling a Drudge on us and that his charge is unfounded. But I sure put enough credence in it to bring it to your attention.

****UPDATE: After I posted this as a diary entry at Daily Kos, an expert on FISA pointed me to the Cornell Law School website which contains all of the FISA statutes. The problem with what Garbus wrote above, at least as I read him, is that he is dead wrong. FISA DOES indeed permit physical searches (which Garbus calls “break-ins”). In fact, FISA statutes even permits warrantless physical searches:

“…the President, acting through the Attorney General, may authorize physical searches without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year”

If I’m misunderstanding what Garbus intended to say, then it’s possible there is some truth to his statement. But barring that, I think it’s incumbent on the progressive media to ensure that its claims are authenticated, accurate and credible. Otherwise, it’ll be too easy for the other side to dismiss us as cranks and hysterics.
*****

If the charge is true it means that not only has Bush co-opted the NSA to commit illegal acts; but he has now co-opted the FISA court to do so as well. Garbus is essentially accusing federal judges of condoning violations of federal law which is a damn serious proposition. I’d like to know what Garbus means by “illegal break-ins.” I don’t know FISA well enough to say what it permits and what it doesn’t; but I’m assuming that Garbus implies that the break-ins were warrantless or possibly approved due to prior illegal NSA snooping.

I sure hope Eric Lichtblau at the Times, who “owns” this story will address Garbus’ charge in future NSA-related articles in the NYT.

tags fisa, george_bush, impeachment, martin_garbus, nsa, spying

I wonder if one year ago (or however long ago the NY Times agreed to a request from the Bush Administration to mothball the Lichtblau-Risen story about NSA spying) Eric Lichtblau could’ve pictured himself one day well on the way to earning his first Pulitzer Prize. In fact, if I were on the Pulitzer Committee I’d just close down the category for Best Series because it’s got to go to this intrepid reporting team which first uncovered the scandal that will rock the Bush Administration perhaps till the end of its final term.

In today’s Times, Lichtblau amplifies on a report from Salon.com published December 23rd (which I just blogged about here), regarding Iyman Faris’ potential claim against Bush for using illegal NSA intercepts in its case against him:

Defense lawyers in some of the country’s biggest terrorism cases say they plan to bring legal challenges to determine whether the National Security Agency used illegal wiretaps against several dozen Muslim men tied to Al Qaeda.

The lawyers said in interviews that they wanted to learn whether the men were monitored by the agency and, if so, whether the government withheld critical information or misled judges and defense lawyers about how and why the men were singled out.

The expected legal challenges, in cases from Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Virginia, add another dimension to the growing controversy over the agency’s domestic surveillance program and could jeopardize some of the Bush administration’s most important courtroom victories in terror cases, legal analysts say…

David B. Smith, a lawyer for [Iyman] Faris, said he planned to file a motion in part to determine whether information about the surveillance program should have been turned over. Lawyers said they were also considering a civil case against the president, saying that Mr. Faris was the target of an illegal wiretap ordered by Mr. Bush.

When I write here and elsewhere that Bush’s NSA spying may cost him almost every one of the hitherto successful Justice Department prosecutions of U.S. supporters of Al Qaeda, I write this not out of vindication or triumph. The fact is that a good number of these people are real terrorists with real malevolent motives against this country and its citizens. We should all mourn that George Bush’s monarchical pretensions may have in effect destroyed his ability to fight terror effectively in this country. It seems highly likely to me that NSA intelligence would have been used in most or all of these cases. And once (notice I do not say “if”) Bush’s order is found to be illegal, any such cases go up in a whiff of smoke. And that is a tragedy, but one of Bush’s making and for which he must take responsibility (fat chance that happening).

There’s another point worth mentioning–this legal strategy is not a slam-dunk. The Justice Department will be fighting tooth and nail every single request for information about the NSA program and its relevance to individual cases. These defendants turned plaintiffs will first have to prove standing and then they’ll have to get a federal judiciary which often finds in favor of the executive in national security matters to find in favor of some very unsavory individuals who mean the United States no good. But in the end, these judges will realize that while the plaintiffs may be unsavory, the constitutional principle represented in their claim is intrinsic to our liberty as Americans. And that can never be unsavory.

tags al_qaeda, eavesdropping, george_bush, justice_department, national_security, nsa, spying

Salon carries a story about the only person who may currently have standing to challenge the constitutionality of Bush's executive spying order. He's Iyman Faris and he's not a pretty picture either as a plaintiff or human being. But he has several very important things going for him in terms of providing legal standing to strike back at George Bush's usurpation of civil liberties in federal court. First, he is one of the only individuals whom government officials explicitly admitted was a victim of the NSA's wholesale spying operation. Second, it would appear likely that some of the intelligence gathered about him came from these NSA intercepts and was used against him at trial. ...

In The Nation, Jonathan Schell publishes The Hidden State Steps Forward, a cogent blueprint for what he describes as an "embryonic" Bush dictatorship: (source: Salon.com) Bush's choice [to admit and defiantly defend his executive order] marks a watershed in the evolution of his Administration. Previously when it was caught engaging in disgraceful, illegal or merely mistaken or incompetent behavior, he would simply deny it. "We have found the weapons of mass destruction!" "We do not torture!" However, further developments in the torture matter revealed a shift. Even as he denied the existence of torture, he and his officials began to defend his right to order it. His Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, ...

Salon profiles James Bamford, a former Navy intelligence analyst and author of the first, and definitive book about the NSA from the inside out: The Puzzle Palace. Bamford is to the agency what Bob Woodward is to the presidency: a confidant, a chronicler and even perhaps a promoter at times. But Bamford is flat-out opposed to Bush's executive order. And Salon's Michael Scherer characterizes his unequivocal views: Bamford believes the president clearly broke the law, and he has called ...

The NSA spy scandal just seems to get bigger and messier with each passing day. Thanks to Slate for pointing me to today's [Los Angeles Times->http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-spy25dec25,0,1480152,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines], which suggests the likelihood that NSA spy satellites are pointed at the United States allowing NSA to intercept virtually all domestic telecommunications traffic. While the story's authors point out that they have not found anyone in government to specifically confirm these charges, a significant number of national security experts believe it is a virtual certainty that this is what the NSA is up to: (cartoon: Mike Lucovich/Atlanta Journal & Constitution "It's really obvious to me that it's a look-at-everything type program," said cryptography expert ...

The revelations from James Risen's and Eric Lichtblau's NSA expose in the NY Times keep coming. And the Times is parcelling them out in serial fashion just like Dickens used to release chapters of his novels in monthly magazine installments. In today's story, the NSA is revealed to have monitored broad swaths of U.S. telecommunications traffic thanks to the willing cooperation of our phone companies and internet providers: The NSA has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States...to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according ...