President Barack Obama, referring to the violent attacks on protesters against the controversial election results in Iran's just-completed presidential election, this week lectured Iran's government, saying, "Peaceful dissent should never be subject to violence."
Referring to the tens and hundreds of thousands of frustrated and angry Iranians who have taken to the streets accusing Iranian authorities of rigging the election in favor of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Obama said that "the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected."
But there is a certain hypocrisy going on here.
Just days ago, the ACLU of Northern California issued a press release announcing that it had filed a complaint over a Pentagon anti-terrorism training manual. That training manual, aimed at Pentagon personnel, describes domestic protests as "low-level terrorist activity."
As Staff Attorney Ann Brick and ACLU Washington National Security Policy Council member Michael German write in their complaint letter to the Department of Defense, "For the DoD to instruct its employees that lawful protest activities should be treated as 'low-level terrorism' is deeply disturbing in and of itself. It is an even more egregious insult to constitutional values, however, when viewed in the context of a long-term pattern of domestic security initiatives that have attempted to equate lawful dissent with terrorism."
The ACLU has documented that the government has been and continues a policy of spying on legitimate peaceful protest organizations--particularly those that have been opposing America's wars and its military policies, and the new president has said nothing and done nothing about terminating this egregious assault on First Amendment freedom of speech and assembly. Given that President Obama has also done nothing since taking office to undo the USA PATRIOT Act, which codifies much activity that traditionally would have been called dissent as a crime, or to publicly reverse the policy of the last eight years during which non-violent protest organizations have been spied on and infiltrated by agents of the military and by the FBI, and during which actual protesters have been harassed, penned into fenced-off "free speech zones," assaulted by armed police and arrested, his pontificating to Iran about the sanctity of dissent rings particularly hollow.
Imagine, if you will, what this government's response would be to having hundreds of thousands of American protesters gather in the center of Washington, DC without a permit, to protest the policies of the national government. There would be riot police in the thousands, some mounted on horseback. There would be federal troops. There would be police charges against demonstrators. There would be tear gas and arrests.
How do we know this? It happens every time there are major protests in Washington--even when protests are granted permits.
This writer spent three days in the Federal Detention Center at Occoquan, VA, back in 1967 for participating in a peaceful anti-war protest at the Pentagon that year. I was one of hundreds at that event who found himself, as a peaceful demonstrator, confronting armed federal troops with fixed bayonets at that event. Not much has changed since '67, as others have met the same fate over the years in Washington and around the country. Certainly there is every reason to assume that, if the public finally loses patience over the current administration's continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, its failure to really tackle the health care crisis, and its limp response to the economic crisis, and if people descend on Washington or perhaps New York City en masse to protest, those people will be met with the same kind of draconian, police-state style response that protesters have met in the past--or that protesters are being met with in Iran today.
If the Pentagon is teaching its people to equate protest with "low-level terrorism," how different, really, is Washington from Tehran?
_______
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
i think maybe the point slipped by you?
this article, to me, doesn't seem to criticize the way Obama is dealing with the Iran situation, at least not directly. i think that it's trying point out that Obama's recent rhetoric with regards to the situation in Iran is at odds with current US policy dealing with protests and peaceful dissent. if it is critical to Obama's reaction, it is only so because of the contradiction between what he seems to be preaching to the Iranian powers and what he is practicing (or not practicing) here at home.
"shut up" is exactly what these types of policies want us to do.
He's not faulting Obama for
He's not faulting Obama for electoral upsets in Iran he's merely pointing out that when Americans take to the streets in peaceful protest they are just as likely to find themselves at the wrong end of a billy club, or a taser, or a gun as the people of Iran.
My you Obamanites are touchy.
Think about what you are saying.
If you want to put all your faith into any person to champion your ideals, you are setting yourself up for failure, dejection and disappointment at the least. If Obama is half the man you think he is, he won't be sidetracked by Dave Lindorff or any other critics. If he isn't, then he may have to listen.
In either case, it is a citizen's duty to speak up to keep the government from making mistakes or from being victimized by corruption, bad policies and anything Unconstitutional. Shut up isn't in the Constitution.
Hyperventilating
"Just days ago, the ACLU of Northern California issued a press release announcing that it had filed a complaint over a Pentagon anti-terrorism training manual. That training manual, aimed at Pentagon personnel, describes domestic protests as "low-level terrorist activity.""
Let's take a deep breath here and relax.
1) It's hard to tell from any of the press materials or the press release, but this was not an Obama Administration initiative. Who knows when this training manual was written and published. It takes time in the Federal Govt to put training courses together and implement them. More than 5 months anyway.
2) DoD is not authorized (for the most part) to act inside the US. The Government has reflexively looked at Anti-US demonstrations as "low level terrorism" for many years.
3) Yes, it's insensitive, neoconish rubish and it ought to be changed immediately.
_______"There's always more to it. This is what history consists of. It's the sum total of all the things they aren't telling us." Don DeLillo
DMML
2) DoD is not authorized (for the most part) to act inside the US. The Government has reflexively looked at Anti-US demonstrations as "low level terrorism" for many years.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
_______Zwoman
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -- Thomas Paine, US patriot & political philosopher (1737 - 1809)
Not sure
what you find so hysterically funny... I did leave out the word "abroad" in the second sentence. The tanks haven't rolled through the streets a la Hungary 1956 in quite a while.
Dave states that:
"I was one of hundreds at that event who found himself, as a peaceful demonstrator, confronting armed federal troops with fixed bayonets at that event. " The federal troops were specifically surrounding the Pentagon, which is a military facility. National Guard were present at a number of antiwar rallies (notably Kent State) in the Vietnam era, not usually with bayonets out. But for the most part, even in that era, it was the local police.
"Not much has changed since '67, as others have met the same fate over the years in Washington and around the country." Really Dave? Not much has changed? Now, it may be difficult to say, since we haven't had anything like these Tehran protests since the Vietnam era.
Obviously, after the last eight years, it is clear that the dark side of the American psyche has not left us, but I think we've made some progress.
_______"There's always more to it. This is what history consists of. It's the sum total of all the things they aren't telling us." Don DeLillo
Wake up!
The Boston Globe has been reporting about how small town police departments in Massachusetts have been using the Pentagon’s surplus weapons program to acquire some ridiculously high-powered weaponry. The paper found that 82 police departments across the state have obtained more than 1,000 military-grade weapons over the last 15 years.
National Journal reported in 2000 that between 1997 and 1999 alone, 3.4 million orders for military equipment from 11,000 domestic police agencies, The Petagon gave away $727 million worth of stuff designed for use in war to be used in American streets and neighborhoods, against American citizens.
In a 1997 60 Minutes segment on the trend toward militarization of police departments, the CBS news magazine profiled the Sheriff’s Department of Marion County, Florida, the county sheriff proudly showed reporter Lesley Stahl the department’s 23 military helicopters, two C-12 luxury executive aircraft …a motor home, several trucks and trailers, a tank, and a “bomb robot.” This, in addition to an arsenal of military-grade assault weapons.
Go back to sleep...
"The Petagon gave away $727 million worth of stuff designed for use in war to be used in American streets and neighborhoods, against American citizens."
No, to be used against similarly heavily armed criminals, since we have no effective gun control in the US.
Take a deep breath and relax. Most cops have absolutely no interest in attacking the American citizenry. Do you actually know any personally?
_______We are all fucked. It helps to remember that.
George Carlin
Yeah, cops need tanks,
Yeah, cops need tanks, military helicopters and armored personal carriers because of a lack of gun control. Of course if you make guns illegal they will just go away like all those illegal drugs have.
My brother inlaw is retired cop.
I also used to ride with some Blue Knights (Cop motorcycle club).
From USA Today
WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors are targeting a rising number of law enforcement officers for alleged brutality, Justice Department statistics show. The heightened prosecutions come as the nation's largest police union fears that agencies are dropping standards to fill thousands of vacancies and "scrimping" on training.
Cases in which police, prison guards and other law enforcement authorities have used excessive force or other tactics to violate victims' civil rights have increased 25% (281 vs. 224) from fiscal years 2001 to 2007 over the previous seven years, the department says.
During the same period, the department says it won 53% more convictions (391 vs. 256). Some cases result in multiple convictions.
Federal records show the vast majority of police brutality cases referred by investigators are not prosecuted.
Police Brutality
"Cases in which police, prison guards and other law enforcement authorities have used excessive force or other tactics to violate victims' civil rights have increased 25% (281 vs. 224) from fiscal years 2001 to 2007 over the previous seven years, the department says."
This is pretty good evidence against the Bush/Cheney lawlessness, Patriot Act and the war on terriers. No question we need to turn the battleship around and the Obama Administration needs to be held to account for how much progress (or lack thereof) they make on these issues.
_______"There's always more to it. This is what history consists of. It's the sum total of all the things they aren't telling us." Don DeLillo
Non sequitur
No doubt there is police brutality. Always has been. As for it being on the rise, well the population keeps increasing, doesn't it, so it follows that there will always be more cases. But be that as it may, these statistics lend absolutely no support to your wild theory of local police forces all over America arming themselves for that day when they will start rounding up dissenters wholesale. Most cops just like to play with guns and such. Do you really get any sense of a growing underground cop insurrection from your brother-in-law or biking buddies?
BTW, I have no interest in making guns "illegal," just in keeping assault and military weapons out of the hands of criminals. Big difference. But, judging by your moniker, I'm guessing you may not get nuance.
We are all fucked. It helps to remember that.
George Carlin
Yes and no
The Obama administration is approving warrentless wiretapping by the NSA, has not put a halt to DoD spying, or FBI spying, has not told the CIA it cannot operate domestically, and has done nothing to undo the PATRIOT Act.
When you inherit bad policies, whether they are wars or spying programs, and you don't put a stop to them, as a leader they become yours.
Obama is no longer a new president. He is president. Period. He owns what he hasn't disowned.
Dave Lindorff
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
_______Zwoman
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -- Thomas Paine, US patriot & political philosopher (1737 - 1809)
He owns what he hasn't disowned
I mostly agree. I just think you're hanging a lot on a training manual. Wiretapping and spying certainly. Iraq and Afghanistan certainly. And what's with the WH visitor logs?
However, there's always going to be lots of little stuff going on that a President or even a Cabinet Secretary will never know about unless the ACLU or somebody else brings it to public notice.
_______"There's always more to it. This is what history consists of. It's the sum total of all the things they aren't telling us." Don DeLillo
It's a Done Deal -- Obama a Failure
Well, at least that's what Newt Gingrich concluded. It's all over folks, time to put the GOP back in power since they did so great from 1994 to 2008 with a two-year burp in which the Democrats held a weak, ineffective majority. I say majority facetiously since Joe Lieberman, so-called Independent, was in the G. W. Bush, John McCain camp in his support for never-ending war in Iraq.
It's true that Obama didn't fly into a rage and threaten one of the Axis of Evil triads with all-out nuclear war just because Democracy didn't prevail. But, some of the more hysterical types seem to believe that should be the only response. "See?" the Chicken Littles all wail, "Obama is weak and that's why the Iran election was a farce."
Obama hasn't turned our country 180 degrees around in the five months he's been in office. Well, duh! I'd say he has his hands full trying to deal with the detritus of the Bush 8-year fiasco which included two wars, neither of which can be won under present troop strength or diplomacy.
As far as the jack-booted thugs rounding up protesters being punished in any way because they didn't like Obama's economic policies, I don't recall all those millions who participated in very open public tea bag demonstrations (sponsored by Fox News) free speech being squelched. The demonstrations had virtually nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with Hate Obama. Nor were any, as near as I know, mistreated or even arrested.
Comparing Iran's or any other dictatorship-theocracy with the Obama administration of course is a favorite pastime and blood sport of the out-of-touch, Party of No Republicans who are doing everything they can to undermine our democracy, subvert our government and threaten the president of the United States with physical harm.
Barack Obama's approval among the majority of Americans has held steady at about 60% while disapproval is around 32% according to a June 13-15 Gallup poll. There's a reason for those polls staying steady. Most people, myself included, are giving Obama a lot of slack and as much support as we can, given the horrendous mess he inherited from 8 years of the Bush-Cheney oligarchy, read corrupt corporations and Wall Street swindlers, who used (and are still using) the U.S. Congress as their handmaidens.
As much as I detested G.W. Bush and what he did to our country I never believed for one minute he could get away with throwing U.S. citizens in prison for protesting against his policies. I sure don't think for one minute that Obama would either.
There is one thing I have said and say still: I wish Nancy "Stepford Democrat" and Harry "Milquetoast" Reid would simply go away. It's time the Democrats got some leadership with cojones.
golf game
That article is so great! I really appreciate it. Thanks a lot. But aside from that breaking information, let me share something new to you. Some people spend a lot of time perfecting their golf game. A successful golf game takes time to practice, and a lot of money as golf is terrifically expensive, though some people devote their time to things like paying off credit card debt, or curing their arachnophobia or sleepwalking. Not to disparage the game – it's a fine sport indeed, and a lot of people spend their lives just trying to make it to Q School, or the qualifying rounds of amateur tournaments that qualify (what the Q stands for) a person to try and make the PGA Tour, which few are able to do. Many would get enormous personal loans to take part in a professional golf game.
Actually...
It seems to me that the Bush Administration - and its lapdog media - had their own way of dealing with protesters: ridicule and indifference.
And it worked.
Follow us
Become a fan
Subscribe
Shut up Lindorff
Obama has peddled a very careful and intelligent path - verbally - as he deals with Iran and all that is going on there. I don't know where you and a slew of other opportunists can fault Obama regards the electoral upsets in Iran. Just shut the fuck up is the best I can come up with as the cards are played out in Iran amongst themselves.