Weapon of mass dissent.

By now you may have heard of the story that the New York Times was asked to withhold. The paper did so for a while, but now they've come forward with (part of) the news: the president authorized monitoring phone conversations for as many as 500 people -- without a warrant to do so.

The Times' story is long, and even I didn't read the entire thing. You can, if you like.

These two paragraphs get the brunt of it. The "agency" referred to is the National Security Agency, or NSA (a Department of Defense org tasked with monitoring US and foreign airwaves for intelligence):

"Since 2002, the agency has been conducting some warrantless eavesdropping on people in the United States who are linked, even if indirectly, to suspected terrorists through the chain of phone numbers and e-mail addresses, according to several officials who know of the operation. Under the special program, the agency monitors their international communications, the officials said. The agency, for example, can target phone calls from someone in New York to someone in Afghanistan.

Warrants are still required for eavesdropping on entirely domestic-to-domestic communications, those officials say, meaning that calls from that New Yorker to someone in California could not be monitored without first going to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court."

From: David
To: Saqib
When: December 12, 2005, 7:30 p.m.

I really thought that there was a possibility Arnie would take advantage of this opportunity. Of course, I was wrong. I thought Arnie might even use it as an opportunity not only to grant clemency, but to issue a moratorium on the death penalty in California. That, of course, was never a possibility, I suppose.

There is little discussion in the media about Williams' claim to innocence. And the fact that he hasn't "atoned" or apologized for his crimes was used by Arnie and death penalty advocates as a reason not to grant him clemency. What about the possibility that he didn't atone because, well, he's innocent. It's not so far-fetched. Juries are not infallible, and more to the point, they're not required to be certain of a defendant's guilt. Even they must admit there's a possibility of innocence (even if it is unreasonable doubt).

I must admit, I am now anti-death penalty. For two reasons. My first is still the possibility of error-- irreversible in the case of the death penalty. There is literally no way to PROVE guilt (evidence is not proof), at least not in our system. DNA isn't 100%, and labs make mistakes. The only way 12 jurors could be sure would be if they saw it with their own eyes. But even then we'd all have to take their word for it (a person that saw the crime wouldn't be allowed on the jury, of course). Any possibility of killing an innocent man is too great.

The other is for moral reasons. It seems absurb to me that the state, in a civilized nation, could use its power to end a life, of one of its own citizens no less, especially given the potential for error. I will also admit that Aaron's work had something to do with this. Aaron, your stories of prisoners who have souls, who have changed, who have friends and hopes and gentle sides, who are afraid of talking to pretty lawyers/interns helped humanize even the ugliest souls. Clearly, Tookie Williams has reformed to some degree. The man would RATHER spend the rest of his life in prison (I can't say that I'd prefer prison for life over death), probably so he can continue to influence people's lives in POSITIVE ways. It is narrow-minded of us to believe that a man would be so overwhelmingly evil as to deserve death (or any other cruel punishment).

There are other reasons to oppose the death penalty. Its disproportionate effect on minorities, and the unfairness of that. The other lives it destroys, like family members of the felon. The practical reasons, like the cost, the fact that it's not a deterrent. Lastly, we're simply outdated. All other civilized nations have gotten rid of the death penalty. As Aaron pointed out the other day, some even have systems that do not include life imprisonment, assuming that people will change over the years. Our system was supposed to be about reform. And now when someone has actually reformed (which is hard to do in prison), it doesn't end up mattering.

Thanks for letting me vent.
David

For those of you who live in the LA area: http://www.slate.com/id/2130978/

Los Angeles has a way of inuring us to highways and streets that resemble moving parking lots. For Bowers, a spurious switch to a bike showed him another city. There's more than what you can see from the teeming asphalt, you know.

And for my Northern brethren, a reminder that we don't live in Camelot, where none want: a UCLA survey found that 410,502 people in Santa Clara County "are affected by hunger and food insecurity." That is about 43% of San Jose's population and about 10.6% of Los Angeles'. Read Nancy Tivol's brief column about what we can do--individually and as a humane society.

Wishing you a happy Thanksgiving.

Peace,
Saqib

From: Saqibr
To: Mum
Date: 11/20, 8:47 p.m.
Subject: Plame Scandal link

Mom,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair

This is a reputable source. It's a long page, but you only really have to read the first page to get the basics down. The important points:

-In July 2003, American diplomat Joseph Wilson wrote an op-ed in the New York Times. In it, he basically argued that the Bush White House had overstated Iraq's access to nuclear material...why? So that they could get support for the war, he said.

-Soon after, a columnist named Robert Novak outed Valerie Plame as a CIA agent. He said that his sources were two senior administration officials.

-Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has been tasked with finding out who talked to Novak. He also has to find out who talked to the other six** journalists who knew Plame's name & occupation, such as NYTimes' Judith Miller and Time's Matt Cooper (http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/06/reporters.contempt/).

-There's a long list of suspects, and some of them are high-ranking. Karl Rove and Dick Cheney are the highest-ranking suspects. This link
(http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/july-dec05/libby_11-03.html) from early November confirms that Rove is still being investigated for possible charges.

-Only Lewis Libby, Cheney's top staff member, has actually been indicted. He plead not guilty. He is basically being charged with lying to prosecutors and the grand jury about knowing Plame was CIA. He is NOT being charged with leaking Plame's name. However, Fitzgerald has said
(Video embedded in article here) that, according to current evidence, Libby is likely the guy who first leaked Plame's name.

**One other journalist, editor Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, recently confessed that he has also known about Plame for over two years. He hasn't named his source, but he did say that Libby wasn't it. This won't get Libby off the hook for lying, but it may get him off the hook for being the first guy to leak Plame's name. And it makes Woodward the journalist who knew about Plame the earliest.

A full timeline: http://www.factcheck.org/article337.html

Peace,
Saqib

"There is no God. There is only military force." The speaker is seven years old.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4187924.stm

http://www.ssireview.com/pdf/2005SU_15minutes_paulfarmer.pdf

"It's comforting to think of a world in which a small number of social and economic rights--the right to health care, housing, food, and primary education, and also the right to be free from abuse of one's human rights--were seen as the only way of really being human. And humane.

Sorry I've been so absent. I assure you, I've many ideas for the page. I've also been spending substantial time driving my new L-class.

http://www.theonion.com/slideshow/index.php?show=8&slide=8&issue=4126