Facing Jail for telling the truth

[jamiroguy1]

For telling the truth...

By Norman Solomon

Originally published December 14, 2003

FEW AMERICANS have heard of Katharine Gun, a former British intelligence employee facing charges that she violated the Official Secrets Act. So far, the American press has ignored her. But the case raises profound questions about democracy and the public's right to know on both sides of the Atlantic.

Ms. Gun's legal peril began in Britain on March 2, when the Observer newspaper exposed a highly secret memorandum by a top U.S. National Security Agency official. Dated Jan. 31, the memo outlined surveillance of a half-dozen delegations with swing votes on the U.N. Security Council, noting a focus on "the whole gamut of information that could give U.S. policy-makers an edge in obtaining results favorable to U.S. goals" - support for war on Iraq.

The NSA memo said that the agency had started a "surge" of spying on diplomats at the United Nations in New York, including wiretaps of home and office telephones along with reading of e-mails. The targets were delegations from six countries considered to be pivotal - Mexico, Chile, Angola, Cameroon, Guinea and Pakistan - for the war resolution being promoted by the United States and Britain.

The scoop caused headlines in much of the world, and sparked a furor in the "Middle Six" countries. The U.S. government and its British ally - revealed to be colluding in the U.N. surveillance caper - were put on the defensive.

A few days after the story broke, I contacted the man responsible for leaking the huge trove of secret documents about the Vietnam War known as the Pentagon Papers more than three decades ago. What was his assessment of the U.N. spying memo?

"This leak," Daniel Ellsberg replied, "is more timely and potentially more important than the Pentagon Papers." The exposure of the memo, he said, had the potential to block the invasion of Iraq before it began: "Truth-telling like this can stop a war."

Full Article

[xpyrate]

They Came for the Muslims, and I Didn't Speak Up

By Stephen Rohde

First they came for the Muslims, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Muslim.

Then they came for the immigrants, detaining them indefinitely solely on the

certification of the attorney general, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an immigrant.

Then they came to eavesdrop on suspects consulting with their attorneys,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a suspect.

Then they came to prosecute noncitizens before secret military commissions,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a noncitizen.

Then they came to enter homes and offices for unannounced "sneak and peak" searches,

and I didn't speak up because I had nothing to hide.

Then they came to reinstate Cointelpro and resume the infiltration and surveillance

of domestic religious and political groups, and I didn't speak up because I no longer

participated in any groups.

Then they came to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely without any

charges and without access to lawyers, and I didn't speak up because I would never be arrested.

Then they came to institute TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System)

recruiting citizens to spy on other citizens and I didn't speak up because I was afraid.

Then they came for anyone who objected to government policy because it only aided

the terrorists and gave ammunition to America's enemies,

and I didn't speak up ... because I didn't speak up.

Then they came for me, and by that time, no one was left to speak up.

[pattbateman]

the UN is becoming more and more useless. they serve no purpose anymore.

[pattbateman]

every country on that table lies and decieves every other nation. and everyone has a secret agenda. the truth has been spoken.

[jamiroguy1]

Originally posted by pattbateman

the UN is becoming more and more useless. they serve no purpose anymore.

New world order.