The on-going investigation of the failed/ineffective bombings in London and at Glasgow Airport continues. Tantalizing hints have been provided almost from the start with no basis in fact to support them. Ongoing references to "Al Queda links" and "Al Queda-like" methods of operation serve only to raise the public's alarm level rather than to actually inform the public as to what is going on.
Obviously in such cases, law enforcement/counter-terrorism agencies are not going to report the minute details of what they know. However, dropping vague hints about the persons involved and where they may be from and who they may consort with has served no useful purpose here, except to raise suspicions about people based only on their ethnicity. The current emphasis on the known suspects being made up in whole or part by "Asian medical professionals" without any real supporting detail is unhelpful. Exhorting the public to report "suspicious activity" presumably being carried out by "Asian medical professionals" near you is apparently the goal.
I personally have no problem going a step further when I state that there is an attempt to continue to whip up a certain amount of xenophobia regarding the "threat" that these "foreigners" represent. Not only do they come to the West seeking jobs and presumably taking same away from the native-born, but now they are arriving pre-disposed to fomenting insurrection.
This scenario reminds me in no small way of the fear instilled in us here in America during the early part of the 20th century of "anarchists" arriving on our shores from such hotbeds of discontent as central and eastern Europe. Immigrants from those areas were viewed not only as unwelcome as they were inferior to our native-born population, but they were automatically disposed towards the use of violence to achieve their goal of the spread of socialism.
The lack of depth in the reporting and the inability of any reporter or commentator to provide the historical context here to help us understand what may be going on is appalling. What is more appalling is the willingness of the various governments involved to play up and play upon these fears.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Commuting a sentence
President Bush's recent decision to commute the prison sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby raises some interesting questions. These questions are further compounded by Bush's statement that he has not yet ruled out a full pardon.
As has been established, Libby was convicted for lying about leaking the identity of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame. At the time, the President stated that when he found out who was responsible for the leak, the person or persons would be fired. As the drama has played out, it has become clear that Libby and Karl Rove had done so, yet neither was fired. Further, the same President who so strongly believes in the "rule of law" and that we are a "nation of laws" that he turned down a request by the Pope to stop the execution of a Texas woman for murder, has quickly stepped in to limit the punishment that he feels has been so unfairly meted-out to Libby.
The President's actions are curious, to say the least. When one considers that it is a felony to expose the identity of an active CIA operative, one wonders where the push was from the White House to ensure that the Department of Justice moved to punish those leaking the identity of Ms Plame. Further, considering that this administration has gone well out of it's way to emphasize that the operations of the CIA and other Intelligence Agencies is vital to our national security, it would seem the Administration would be exercising extreme vigilance in protecting the individuals who, in many cases, risk their lives to carry out that goal.
Unless, of course, it becomes more important to protect one's own "reputation" in which case smearing Joseph Wilson for the crime of disagreeing with the Administration's assessment of Iraq's attempt to obtain nuclear weapons is an acceptable reason for exposing an agent. Then, it seems, all things are possible. One wonders what the incentive is for anyone to enter the Intelligence branches of our government if they cannot be sure that in the name of political expediency, their identities will be exposed to the general public and to those who they are working to protect us from.
As has been established, Libby was convicted for lying about leaking the identity of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame. At the time, the President stated that when he found out who was responsible for the leak, the person or persons would be fired. As the drama has played out, it has become clear that Libby and Karl Rove had done so, yet neither was fired. Further, the same President who so strongly believes in the "rule of law" and that we are a "nation of laws" that he turned down a request by the Pope to stop the execution of a Texas woman for murder, has quickly stepped in to limit the punishment that he feels has been so unfairly meted-out to Libby.
The President's actions are curious, to say the least. When one considers that it is a felony to expose the identity of an active CIA operative, one wonders where the push was from the White House to ensure that the Department of Justice moved to punish those leaking the identity of Ms Plame. Further, considering that this administration has gone well out of it's way to emphasize that the operations of the CIA and other Intelligence Agencies is vital to our national security, it would seem the Administration would be exercising extreme vigilance in protecting the individuals who, in many cases, risk their lives to carry out that goal.
Unless, of course, it becomes more important to protect one's own "reputation" in which case smearing Joseph Wilson for the crime of disagreeing with the Administration's assessment of Iraq's attempt to obtain nuclear weapons is an acceptable reason for exposing an agent. Then, it seems, all things are possible. One wonders what the incentive is for anyone to enter the Intelligence branches of our government if they cannot be sure that in the name of political expediency, their identities will be exposed to the general public and to those who they are working to protect us from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)