Juan Cole, The CIA and The Bush White House

If this is true, we may be looking at both Constitutional violations, and violations of the CIA charter.

WASHINGTON — A former senior C.I.A. official says that officials in the Bush White House sought damaging personal information on a prominent American critic of the Iraq war in order to discredit him.

Glenn L. Carle, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information on Juan Cole, a University of Michigan professor who writes an influential blog that criticized the war.

While intelligence officials are disputing the account, it remains unclear whether any information was ever gathered about Professor Cole, or if anything ever reached the White House. 

Juan Cole writes the widely read blog Informed Comment, and has taught in the History Department at the University of Michigan since 1984. In 2006 a joint appointment by the History and Sociology Departments at Yale University was approved for Professor Cole, but evidently a senior appointments committee at the University overruled those votes and he remains at the University of Michigan.

Needless to say, very disturbing.

Since a series of Watergate-era abuses involving spying on White House political enemies, the C.I.A. and other spy agencies have been prohibited from collecting intelligence concerning the activities of American citizens inside the United States.

“These allegations, if true, raise very troubling questions,” said Jeffrey H. Smith, a former C.I.A. general counsel. “The statute makes it very clear: you can’t spy on Americans.” Mr. Smith added that a 1981 executive order that prohibits the C.I.A. from spying on Americans places tight legal restrictions not only on the agency’s ability to collect information on United States citizens, but also on its retention or dissemination of that data.

Rachel Maddow, herself a PH.D. in Political Science, is on the story and expects to continue reporting on it.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

While it is only The New York Times reporting on this story right now, it is not going to go away.

Two Elections and a Protest

Polar opposite election results this weekend. From Peru:

LIMA, Peru — Ollanta Humala, a nationalist former military officer who vows to expand antipoverty programs, seemed headed to a narrow victory in the presidential election against his rival, Keiko Fujimori, according to incomplete official returns.

Mr. Humala’s victory would be a rebuke of the economic model that has driven robust growth in Peru, even as millions of citizens who are mired in poverty have felt left out.

Mr. Humala, 48, toned down his once-radical views and retooled his image into that of an admirer of the former Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a moderate leftist.

Of course, having the last name Fujimori was not a good way to start off in the election. Keiko Fujimori is the daughter of former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori, who is serving a 25-year prison sentence for human rights abuses. Either way, this election was about the disaffected poor. Despite Peru’s recent economic growth, there is general discontent that policies have not focused on reducing poverty and lifting many out of dire economic circumstances. Mr. Humala campaigned in part, on raising taxes on mining companies and asserting a bigger government role in some sectors of the economy.

And this from Portugal. The emphasis is mine:

Portugal's Social Democrats have unseated the governing Socialists with a resounding parliamentary election victory, giving the next government a strong mandate to enact a tough austerity program in return for a €78 billion ($A106 billion) international bailout.

Pedro Passos Coelho, leader of the Social Democrats, is expected to be the next prime minister, at the helm of a centre-right coalition government with the conservative Popular Party.

With about 80 per cent of votes counted, the Social Democrats had won 39 per cent of votes compared with 28 per cent for the Socialists led by Prime Minister Jose Socrates. The Popular Party had 12 per cent.

Blackmail.

And all this in light of the protests in the streets of Greece. More blackmail. Again, my emphasis.

ATHENS (Dow Jones)--Tens of thousands of Greeks demonstrated outside parliament Sunday in a massive protest that comes just days before the government is due to introduce new austerity measures that Greece has promised its international creditors.

The protesters held banners demanding popular resistance to the new measures and calling on the Greek government to reject a 110-billion-euro ($159 billion) loan memorandum it signed last year to rescue the country from default.

Taking place in a peaceful, almost carnival-like atmosphere, the demonstrators also directed their message at Greece's political leaders, gesticulating at the parliament building and shouting: "Thieves, Thieves, Thieves" in unison.

The demonstration is the largest protest in 12 days since a new, grassroots movement of self-proclaimed "indignant" citizens began staging daily protests in the central square of Athens. Greek media estimates of the crowd size ranged from 40,000 to more than 100,000.

The movement, organized over the Facebook social-networking site, is modeled on a similar grassroots protest in Spain known as Los Indignados, and brings together a wide segment of society, ranging from youth to retirees.

Forget two Americas. It's two (or three) different worlds.

As The CIA Goes, So Goes The War

This can't be good:

WASHINGTON — The Central Intelligence Agency has inserted clandestine operatives into Libya to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and to contact and vet the beleaguered rebels battling Col.Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces, according to American officials.

While President Obama has insisted that no American military ground troops participate in the Libyan campaign, small groups of C.I.A. operatives have been working in Libya for several weeks as part of a shadow force of Westerners that the Obama administration hopes can help bleed Colonel Qaddafi’s military, the officials said.

Does this mean it's a real war, yet?

On The Street Where You (Can't) Live

Former Arkansas governor, and likely 2012 Republican Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee would justifiably be very upset if as an American, he was restricted with regards to where he could make his home in this country. He spoke of it as he addressed a crowd in East Jerusalem this week.

He continued by saying “I cannot imagine as an American being told that I could not live in certain places in America because I was Christian, or because I was white, or because I spoke English. I would be outraged if someone told me that in my country, I would be prohibited and forbidden to live in a part of that country, for any reason.”

Further, he believes Jews should be able to live anywhere in Israel – anywhere that “God gave them.” The emphasis is mine.

“In many ways, it’s probably appropriate that the weather was acting against us because there is no doubt but that many forces acted against the Jewish people in returning to their homeland, being able to live in the place that God gave them,” he said. “It is inconceivable in many ways that we would have to even argue and debate whether or not Israelis could live in Israel, not just in parts of Israel but anywhere in Israel they wished to live.”

Not so much for non-Jewish Israelis. OK to tell them where not to live. Restrict.  Relocate.  Transfer.

"There are vast amounts of territory that are in the hands of Muslims, in the hands of Arabs. Maybe the international community can come together and accommodate," he said in a meeting with reporters.

Welcome to the nightmare of Republican foreign policy, 2012-style. As he says, inconceivable to argue and debate whether or not Israelis could live in any part of Israel. Someone needs to (publicly) remind the good governor that non-Jewish citizens of Israel are Israeli, too. Just Arab Israelis, for the most part.  Muslim and Christian alike.  Does he not know this?  I suspect he does.

Say what you mean: that only Jewish Israelis should be able to live where they like. Arab Muslim Israelis, not so much.

The Uneasy Road To Havana

So, the Cuban government isn’t exactly ecstatic about the Obama administration’s easing of American travel restrictions to Cuba.

From a statement by the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

These measures confirm that there is no will to change the policy of blockade and destabilization against Cuba. When announcing them, United States Government officials made it clear that the blockade will remain intact and that they intend to use the new measures to strengthen the instruments of subversion and interference in Cuba’s internal affairs. This confirms the Foreign Affairs Ministry statement on January 13.

Cuba has always favored exchanges with the American people, its universities, and academic, scientific and religious institutions. All the obstacles to visits by Americans to Cuba have always been, and are still today on the United States government side.

If there is a real interest in expanding and facilitating contacts between our peoples, the United States should lift the blockade and eliminate the prohibition that makes Cuba the only country that Americans cannot travel to.

No surprises here.

Tunisia On The Map

Where in the world is Tunisia?

An odd take from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the popular revolution taking hold in Tunisia this weekend.

Speaking during the cabinet's weekly meeting in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said that recent turmoil in Tunisia was an example of "how unstable Israel's region is."

"There are several centers of instability in our region and we hope that peace and security return to the region," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu added that the Tunisian unrest also highlights an important issue regarding a possible Middle East peace treaty, saying that there is doubt whether or not such an agreement would be followed by all sides in the long run in view of the pervasive political instability in the region.

"We don't know if a peace agreement would be respected and so any peace deal would have to include on-the-ground security arrangements," the premier said.

For one thing, Tunisia is not part of the Middle East. Neither is Algeria or Morocco. North Africa, last time I looked. It is hard to imagine what Tunisia would directly have to do with treaties in the Middle East, or more importantly the real issue at hand – negotiations regarding a Palestinian State.

Secondarily, although it is too early to tell what will come of the popular revolt in Tunisia, this could be a very good thing – and a positive example for the Arab world. Free elections. Transparent rule. What could be bad, especially in the long run, no? Not unless there are underlying reasons for some in the Israeli government to wish to perpetuate the status quo, and see the Arab world remain as it.

Well, he got called to task on the editorial pages of the left-leaning Haaretz this weekend, but not so much for the potential ramifications of having the opportunities to make peace with Arab democracies, but for his own fear of social unrest coming from the left in Israel.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday characterized the popular revolution in Tunisia as an example of "instability in our region." While Western leaders (and the Arab League!) praise the great achievement of the freedom struggle and the ousting of a tyrannical despot, Netanyahu does not see achievement in civil protest. He only wants "stability to return," with or without freedom.

Perhaps he actually does see, and that is why he didn't say anything. Dr. Daniel Zisenwine is a research fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, of Tel Aviv University, specializing in North Africa. He explained in an interview that it was not the political opposition that brought down President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali: "They are only fragments of parties, in a very weak position ... and mainly busy fighting among themselves." Sound familiar? The strong elements in Tunisia, Zisenwine said, are the trade unions and nongovernmental organizations, which "suddenly woke up and could awaken public life in the country a little more." Maybe that's why Netanyahu is backing up Lieberman's remarks and actions with regard to human rights organizations. He is "afraiiid," as Netanyahu once famously said about the left.

A very interesting analysis.  A lot to ponder.

Easing Travel Restrictions to Cuba

The Obama administration is easing travel restrictions to Cuba.

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration Friday said it will allow for more U.S. travel to Cuba, making it easier for schools, churches and cultural groups to visit the island.

A senior Obama official told The Miami Herald the much-expected move to expand cultural, religious and educational travel to Cuba is part of the administration's continuing ``effort to support the Cuban people's desire to freely determine their own future.

President Barack Obama is also restoring the amount of money ($2,000) that can be sent to nonfamily members to the level they were at during part of the Clinton and Bush administrations. There will be a quarterly limit on the amount that any American can send: $500 per quarter to ``support private economic activity.''

Cuban-American elected officials from South Florida are already condemning the move.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Florida, said in a statement that the “changes undermine U.S. foreign policy and security objectives and will bring economic benefits to the Cuban regime.”

Said Ros-Lehtinen, “Loosening these regulations will not help foster a pro-democracy environment in Cuba. These changes will not aid in ushering in respect for human rights. And they certainly will not help the Cuban people free themselves from the tyranny that engulfs them.”

Freshman Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., also voiced opposition to the changes, saying the “weaken U.S. policy towards Cuba.”

By next week we should have more information on what this all means. A good place to keep up with the policy implementation is at The Latin American Working Group, www.lawg.org

The Last Man Standing

A very tragic story out of Pakistan, yesterday. The high-profile governor of Punjab Province, Salman Taseer was assassinated in broad daylight and at close range by one of his own bodyguards. According to the assassin – who immediately turned himself in – he committed the murder because the governor had been engaged in a campaign to amend the country’s blasphemy laws.

Salman Taseer had very publicly taken to defending a Christian, Pakistani woman who had been sentenced under the country’s blasphemy laws. He had even been photographed with her. Her sentence? Death.

Today, amid growing political unrest, Salman Taseer was eulogized and buried with full military honors in Lahore.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Interior Minister Rehman Malik represented the government and the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party amid tight security. But Mr. Taseer’s close friend and ally, President Asif Ali Zardari, did not attend.

Also absent were opposition politicians Nawaz Sharif and his brother Shahbaz Sharif, fierce political rivals of Mr. Taseer, and religious party leaders and clerics, some of whom called for a boycott of the funeral because of Mr. Taseer’s stance against the religious parties over the country’s strict blasphemy laws.

Chris Hayes did a remarkable tribute to Salman Taseer last night, as guest host on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show. You can watch here.  The emphasis is mine.

In speeches and protests across Pakistan on Friday religious leaders warned the government about altering the blasphemy law, the one with the mandatory death sentence.  Most politicians tried to placate the religious extremists by assuring them that the government did not intend to change or repeal the law.  One politician did not do that.  One politician said he was unimpressed and called the protestors abusive.  That kind of honesty and courage is rare.  That kind of honesty and courage is especially rare in a place that is being torn apart by religious extremism.  Three years after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.  Nearly ten years into the war that the U.S. is raging right next-door if not increasingly inside of Pakistan.  Friends of governor said he knew he was risking his life by speaking out.  Fatwas were issued against him.  Today gunned down by his own bodyguard for defending a woman against a mandatory death sentence.  It cost him his life.  And he suspected it would.  And that is worthy of tribute.  That is worthy of the title of martyr.

“Worthy of tribute,” as Chris Hayes said. “Worthy of the title of martyr.”

Worthy of re-assessing whatever the hell we think it is we are doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Get Out of Jail Card

Standing up for what’s right.

From Michael Moore:

Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.

Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

“Rough work, iconoclasm, but the only way to get at the truth.” -- Oliver Wendell Holmes

Famous Last Words

Note to Obama administration: A little class, please.

From The HuffingtonPost:

The Obama administration said Tuesday that the reported last words of veteran diplomat Richard Holbrooke, its point person on Afghanistan and Pakistan who passed away this week, were meant as humor.

Administration officials sought to clarify that, according to people who were present, Holbrooke's final words, "You've got to stop this war in Afghanistan," were part of a jovial back-and-forth with the medical staff.

Somehow, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke never struck me as the joking kind. Not on things like this, and not on his deathbed.

Note to Obama administration:  Stop this war, please.

Condoleeza Rice, MIA

Secretaries of State for the past five Republican presidents published an essay in the Washington Post this week. Henry Kissinger. George Shultz. James Baker. Lawrence Eagleburger. Colin Powell. All Republicans.

They urge more critical thinking, and less playing politics.

Obviously, the United States does not sign arms control agreements just to make friends. Any treaty must be considered on its merits. But we have here an agreement that is clearly in our national interest, and we should consider the ramifications of not ratifying it.

Whenever New START is brought up for debate, we encourage all senators to focus on national security. There are plenty of opportunities to battle on domestic political issues linked to the future of the American economy. With our country facing the dual threats of unemployment and a growing federal debt bomb, we anticipate significant conflict between Democrats and Republicans. It is, however, in the national interest to ratify New START.

But where was Condoleezza Rice on this one? I imagine at some point she will have something to say. Looking forward to hearing whether it will be playing politics, or not.

Puppeteering

Could it be time to install a new puppet regime in Afghanistan?

Per Ahmed Rashid, in the New York Review of Books:

Karzai’s new outlook is the most dramatic political shift he has undergone in the twenty-six years that I have known him. Although it is partly fueled by conspiracy theories, it is also based on nine years of ever growing frustration with the West.

He no longer supports the war on terrorism as defined by Washington and says that the current military surge in the south by the United States and its NATO allies is unhelpful because it relies on body counts of dead Taliban as a measure of progress against the insurgency, which to many would be a throwback to Vietnam and a contradiction of Petraeus’s new counterinsurgency theory to win over the people. In particular he wants an immediate end to the night raids conducted by US Special Operations forces—a demand that has put him in direct conflict with US commander General David Petraeus. According to Karzai, these raids—which in the last three months have killed or captured 368 mid-level Taliban leaders and killed 968 foot soldiers—are counterproductive because they antagonize the civilian population. Indeed, no one knows how many civilians are included in the casualty figures, which are provided by the US military.

At the NATO summit, President Obama dismissed Karzai’s concerns about night raids, according to press accounts. “If we’re ponying up billions of dollars to ensure that President Karzai can continue to build and develop his country,” Obama said, “then he’s got to also pay attention to our concerns as well.”

How long until the next NATO summit meeting?