A Senator’s Lonely Crusade to Learn the CIA’s Secrets
Conor Friedersdorf – 15 January, 2013 – The Atlantic

Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, has sent an extraordinary letter to top White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, President Obama’s choice to lead the CIA. The letter poses questions about executive power, like “How much evidence does the President need to determine that a particular American can be lawfully killed?” and “Does the President have to provide individual Americans with the opportunity to surrender before killing them?” We’re used to such questions from organizations like the ACLU, journalists like Charlie Savage, and various concerned citizens. And though rules that confer death should always be transparent, the fact that they’re being kept even from Wyden is especially indefensible.

The body he sits on, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is charged with providing “vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States,” to ensure “that they conform with the Constitution and U.S. law.” There is no one in America more justified in demanding to know the official legal rationale behind actions like targeted killings. Obama isn’t just keeping this information from the American people. He isn’t just hiding his legal reasoning from the U.S. Congress. He is stonewalling one of 15 senators that federal law establishes as the most important check on secret abuses by the CIA.

Understand that the CIA’s capacity to commit abuses is anything but theoretical. As Obama well knows, its history is rife with examples of its personnel using the cover of secrecy to do things that the American people and their elected representatives would have never willingly permitted. CIA abuses inspired the creation of the very same Select Committee on Intelligence in 1976. It began after the Church Committee discovered and revealed abuses as varied as secretly opening the mail of American citizens, attempting to assassinate foreign leaders, trying to monitor private citizens who opposed the Vietnam War, and illegal wiretapping.

Even after Congress committed to more vigilant oversight of the CIA, it continued to operate with far less transparency than other federal agencies. Little wonder that it continued to commit abuses. During the Reagan Administration, for example, the executive branch approved a CIA plan to secretly mine the most important harbor in Nicaragua. Members of the Senate committee claimed that they weren’t sufficiently notified and won a promise of greater cooperation.

Though the Iran-Contra affair was run out of the White House, the CIA was complicit in parts of it, and several agency staffers were disciplined in its aftermath for withholding information. Twelve CIA employees were disciplined in the mid-1990s for failing to adequately inform Congress of its activities in Guatemala. In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, the 9/11 Commission cited insufficient oversight of the CIA as a significant problem. And during the Bush Administration, CIA officers tortured prisoners by blindfolding them, strapping them to a board, and repeatedly forcing water into their lungs so that they’d be so terrified of drowning that they’d talk. Obama has acknowledged that waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques” institutionalized under his predecessor were torture, a judgment that hasn’t stopped him from nominating Brennan, then at the CIA, who has defended all but waterboarding.

The evidence is incontrovertible: On numerous occasions in recent American history, the executive branch and the CIA have used to cover of secrecy to commit immoral and illegal acts.

The law is clear too: In order to balance the CIA’s need for secrecy and the prudential need for oversight, Congress created a Senate committee and an analogue in the House. Later, “the Intelligence Oversight Act of 1980, as the law was known, established general reporting requirements for the Intelligence Community vis-à-vis the two oversight committees. The basic obligation imposed by the new law was the same one Carter had imposed on intelligence agencies earlier by executive order: to keep the two committees ‘fully and currently informed’ of their activities.”

Despite all that, Obama is stymieing oversight efforts. …more

The US Sold A Bunch Of Weapons To Bahrain During Its Brutal Crackdown
Michael Kelley – 15 January, 2013 – Business Insider

The U.S. has been selling arms to Bahrain amid the small Mideast nation’s increasingly repressive crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, Justin Elliot of ProPublica reports.

The sales, combined with allegations of censorship by U.S. media, seems to corroborate claims that America has turned a blind eye to the bloody repression inside the country.

The Bahraini uprising — which initially called for greater political freedom and equality for the majority Shia population — began peacefully in February 2011. It was met with a harsh response by the U.S.-backed Sunni ruling party as unarmed protesters were allegedly detained, tortured, targeted by “live ammunition air strikes from Cobra helicopters” and thrown in jail for life.

Defense Department documents released to ProPublica reveal that between February 2011 and February 2012 the U.S. sold the Sunni kingdom items relating to ammunition, combat vehicle parts, communications equipment, Cobra and Blackhawk helicopters, and an unidentified missile system.

Elliot notes that it’s unclear whether the arms have been delivered or if the names of the weapons listed may refer to maintenance or spare parts.

The State Department told ProPublica that the U.S. has only been selling Bahrain items “related exclusively to external defense, counter-terrorism, and the protection of U.S. forces.”

The circumstances surrounding Bahrain led Al-Jazeera to describe the uprising as “the Arab revolution that was abandoned by the Arabs, forsaken by the West and forgotten by the world.”

Former CNN reporter Amber Lyon helped create a series of investigative reports documenting the oppression in Bahrain, but she says the network pressured her to insert Bahraini government propaganda into her stories.

The three-time Emmy winner said she “saw first-hand that these regime claims were lies, and I couldn’t believe CNN was making me put what I knew to be government lies into my reporting.”

In one instance her team produced a hard-hitting 13-minute segment on Bahrain for CNN International, — the most-watched English-speaking news outlet in the Middle East — but the network has refused to broadcast the program.

…source

Western-backed treacherous Bahraini forces attack Muslim mourners
12 January, 2013 – Islamic Invitation

rahimi20130112085942677Bahraini security forces have opened fire on a group people, which had gathered to mourn the anniversary of the death of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

On Friday, the Saudi-backed regime forces attacked a gathering of mourners, firing teargas canisters and bullets to disperse them in the town of Sanabis.

Since a popular revolution began in Bahrain in mid-February 2011, scores have been killed, many of them under torture while in custody, and thousands more detained.

Bahraini authorities have also dismissed hundreds of people from their jobs for taking part in peaceful anti-regime demonstrations.

A report, published by the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry in November 2011, found that the Al Khalifa regime had used excessive force in the crackdown on protests, criticizing Manama for torturing political activists, politicians, and protesters.

Bahrainis say they will continue to hold anti-regime demonstrations until their demands for the establishment of a democratically-elected government and an end to rights violations are met. …source

Revealed: America’s Arms Sales To Bahrain Amid Bloody Crackdown
by Justin Elliott – ProPublica – 15 January, 15, 2013

Despite Bahrain’s bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, the U.S. has continued to provide weapons and maintenance to the small Mideast nation.

Defense Department documents released to ProPublica give the fullest picture yet of the arms sales: The list includes ammunition, combat vehicle parts, communications equipment, Blackhawk helicopters, and an unidentified missile system. (Read the documents.)

The documents, which were provided in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and cover a yearlong period ending in February 2012, still leave many questions unanswered. It’s not clear whether in each case the arms listed have been delivered. And some entries that only cite the names of weapons may in fact refer to maintenance or spare parts.

Defense Department spokesman Paul Ebner declined to offer any more detail. “We won’t get into specifics in any of these because of the security of Bahrain,” said Ebner.

While the U.S. has maintained it is selling Bahrain arms only for external defense, human rights advocates say the documents raise questions about items that could be used against civilian protesters.

“The U.S. government should not be providing additional military equipment that could make matters worse,” said Sunjeev Bery, Middle East advocacy director for Amnesty International USA.

There have been reports that Bahrain used American-made helicopters to fire on protesters in the most intense period of the crackdown. Time magazine reported in mid-March 2011 that Cobra helicopters had conducted “live ammunition air strikes” on protesters.

The new Defense Department list of arms sales has two entries related to “AH-1F Cobra Helicopters” in March and April 2011. Neither the exact equipment or services being sold nor the delivery timetable are specified.

The U.S. is also playing a training role: In April 2012, for example, the Army News Service reported that an American team specializing in training foreign militaries to use equipment purchased from the U.S. was in Bahrain to help with Blackhawk helicopters.

Bahrain’s ambassador to the U.S., Houda Nonoo, said the country’s military has not targeted protestors. Bahrain’s military “exists to combat external threats,” Nonoo told ProPublica. “[T]he potential for U.S. foreign arms sales to be used against protestors in the future is remote.”

The Obama administration has stood by Bahrain’s ruling family, who are Sunni, during nearly two years of protests by the country’s majority Shia population. Bahrain is a longtime ally and the home to a large American naval base, which is considered particularly important amid the current tensions with nearby Iran.

The itemized arms sales list does not include dollar values but a separate document says military equipment worth $51 million was delivered to Bahrain in the year starting in October 2010. (That period includes several months before the protests began.)

The U.S. has long sold weapons to Bahrain, totaling $1.4 billion since 2000, according to the State Department. The sales didn’t come under scrutiny until security forces killed at least 19 people in the early months of the crackdown in 2011. (Dozens have died since then.)

The administration put a hold on one proposed sale of Humvees and missiles in Fall 2011 following congressional criticism. But Foreign Policy reported that other unspecified equipment was still being sold without any public notification.

The new documents offer more details on what was sold during that period — including entries related to a “Blackhawk helicopter armament” in November 2011 and a missile system in January 2012.

In May 2012, the administration announced it was releasing some unspecified items to Bahrain’s military that “are not used for crowd control” while maintaining a hold on the Humvees and TOW missiles.

State Department spokesman Noel Clay told ProPublica, “We continue to withhold the export of lethal and crowd-control items intended predominately for internal security purposes, and have resumed on a case-by-case basis items related exclusively to external defense, counter-terrorism, and the protection of U.S. forces.”

The U.S. has also sold Bahrain a helicopter fit for the royal family.

In September, Missouri-based aviation services firm Sabreliner reported that, as part of an official government arms sale, it delivered to Bahrain a fully customized UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopter for “a variety of missions including transporting heads of state.” The aircraft was outfitted with a “clam shell door” for ease of entry, a “new VIP interior,” and a “custom Royal Bahraini” paintjob.

In other recent developments in Bahrain, the country’s highest court this month upheld lengthy prison sentences for 13 high-profile activists accused of plotting to overthrow the government.

In a rare occurrence in November, a series of homemade bombs were set off in the capital of Manama, killing two and leading some observers to argue that the opposition is growing more militant. Also in November, an Amnesty International report found that despite government promises, “the reform process has been shelved and repression unleashed.” …source

The state-sponsored Arab news networks in the Gulf have given scant coverage to the reform and protest movements in Bahrain, writes Ali Hashem.

The Bahrain Blackout in Arab Media
by Ali Hashem – 13 January, 2013 – Al Monitor

As one matures and ages, I discovered more about the world; the more I knew, the more I realized that what I thought was plated with gold was only rusty iron walls besieging people who live and suffer as we do; they share with us the same air we breathe; and most importantly, they don’t all eat with golden spoons.

It’s not to say that all Gulf States are ruled by tyranny. That would be an unfair judgment. Nevertheless, some of these states have minorities who have been and continue to go through what can be fairly described as “sectarian discrimination,” Bahrain being a blatant example.

On Feb. 14, 2011, a group of Bahraini activists were resolved that it was time to raise the volume. Building on what activists in Egypt and Tunisia achieved, people took to the streets demanding freedom and reform. Those long-suffering under the rule of the Khalifa dynasty demanded to feel they were citizens in their country, a feeling lost long ago.

Nabeel Rajab, Abdul Hadi, Zaynab, Maryam AlKhawaja and many others thought their movement will be embraced by Arab media as were the sister revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia. That was an illusion!

Arab channels were then busy covering the aftermath of the Egyptian revolution, and the first sparks in Libya. The illusion was that nothing drastic was occurring in the tiny Gulf state. Whatever news emerged from there failed to make headlines. That is the same situation today.

News outlets risked their teams’ lives sending them to Libya and Egypt, and later to Yemen and Syria, to secure uncensored coverage. Some lost staff members on the job, but this didn’t shake their determination to be the “voice of the voiceless.” Some reporters became heroes in the countries they risked their lives to report from.

When the uprising in Bahrain erupted, I was then still working for Al-Jazeera, the leading Arab news channel, that was covering on an hourly basis what was to be dubbed the Arab Spring. Grass-roots movements were happy to view fellow Arabs taking to the streets and toppling dictators minute by minute. Many intellectuals and media professionals, however, were questioning the standards the Qatari channel was abiding to in covering certain revolutions whilst ignoring others, namely Bahrain.

When faced with the allegations, seniors at the Qatari channel gave one answer: “We have no access” in Bahrain. That answer could have had some weight if Al-Jazeera’s English Channel hadn’t produced a masterpiece that will always be referred to as one of the best documentaries about Bahrain, Shouting in the Dark. The Al-Jazeera English Channel had undercover reporters in Manama covering the unrest, while the Arabic channel tended to derive its news from agencies. When a reporter was given the permission by the Bahraini authorities to cover, the reports seemed more like messages of reconciliation than field coverage of an ongoing uprising, a rhetoric that differs much from the one the channel adopted in approaching the Arab Spring.

Al-Jazeera’s main competitor, Saudi-owned Al Arabiya, had a different approach to the situation in Bahrain. The channel reflected the official point of view, accusing the activists of being Iranian proxies accusing demonstrators of being armed. The channel’s editorial line wasn’t of a surprise to many given the fact Saudi troops entered Bahrain, to help put an end to the ongoing unrest.
…more