FBI Papers Show Terror Inquiries Into PETA, Other Rights Groups. FBI counterterrorism investigators are monitoring domestic U.S. advocacy groups engaged in antiwar, environmental, civil rights and other causes, the American Civil Liberties Union charged yesterday as it released new FBI records that it said detail the extent of the activity. Read the rest of this entry »

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts. Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Once again, Bush has ignored the Constitution. And once again, Congress has been all too willing to let it happen. Read the rest of this entry »

Who Owns Your CD/DVD Collection? Perhaps the least salutary development in the digitization of entertainment is that the big companies have begun to see themselves as selling not works such as music, movies, or TV shows, but objects: CDs, DVDs, downloadable episodes, even texts. Determined to sell as many of these totemic things as they can, they’re moving aggressively to control what we buyers can do with them.

This column is valuable in several ways. It explains the landscape in clear language, for one thing.

But the most important aspect of the piece is where it appears: in the Los Angeles Times. The newspaper has tended in recent years to be more a mouthpiece for Hollywood and the entertainment cartel — and not sufficiently a skeptical observer of all sides of the issues — when it comes to coverage of this vital topic. Read the rest of this entry »

Whereas the Iraqi election of December 15, 2005, the first to take place under the newly ratified Iraqi Constitution, represented a crucial success in the establishment of a democratic, constitutional order in Iraq; and

Whereas Iraqis, who by the millions defied terrorist threats to vote, were protected by Iraqi security forces with the help of United States and Coalition forces: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That–

(1) the House of Representatives is committed to achieving victory in Iraq;

(2) the Iraqi election of December 15, 2005, was a crucial victory for the Iraqi people and Iraq’s new democracy, and a defeat for the terrorists who seek to destroy that democracy;

(3) the House of Representatives encourages all Americans to express solidarity with the Iraqi people as they take another step toward their goal of a free, open, and democratic society;

(4) the successful Iraqi election of December 15, 2005, required the presence of United States Armed Forces, United States-trained Iraqi forces, and Coalition forces;

(5) the continued presence of United States Armed Forces in Iraq will be required only until Iraqi forces can stand up so our forces can stand down, and no longer than is required for that purpose;

(6) setting an artificial timetable for the withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Iraq, or immediately terminating their deployment in Iraq and redeploying them elsewhere in the region, is fundamentally inconsistent with achieving victory in Iraq;

(7) the House of Representatives recognizes and honors the tremendous sacrifices made by the members of the United States Armed Forces and their families, along with the members of Iraqi and Coalition forces; and

(8) the House of Representatives has unshakable confidence that, with the support of the American people and the Congress, United States Armed Forces, along with Iraqi and Coalition forces, shall achieve victory in Iraq.

On Hill, Anger and Calls for Hearings Greet News of Stateside Surveillance. Bush declined to discuss the domestic eavesdropping program in a television interview, but he joined his aides in saying that the government acted lawfully and did not intrude on citizens’ rights. “Decisions made are made understanding we have an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the American people,” Bush said on “The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer.”
Lewis Carroll: Through the Looking Glass: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

In their coverage of the Stanley Tookie Williams execution and debate over the death penalty, many journalism organizations have informed their readers, listeners or viewers that Williams had been nominated for the Nobel Prize. Of all the details in these stories, none has been so basically empty of true meaning — and they’ve betrayed either journalistic ignorance or laziness, or both.

People seem to think the Nobel Prizes are administered like the Academy Awards, where the nomination means the nominee is a finalist. They are not.

AnyoneLots of people can nominate others for a Nobel. (For the Peace Prize, that includes, among others, “professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology” — a huge number of people around the world.) Having been nominated means close to zero in judging the quality of the nominee unless the person doing the nominating is of sufficiently excellent character to warrant the mention. This is hardly an exclusive club of nominators, or evidence that the nomination can be taken seriously.

I don’t know what motivates Williams’ supporters to make a big deal about this. Some, perhaps, don’t realize the insignificance of the nominations. Others may be trying to spin the news coverage.

Now, I wish Williams’ sentence had been commuted. The death penalty is wrong. It’s imposed inconsistently, and innocent people find themselves on death row. More fundamentally, it’s barbaric; state-sponsored murder demeans us all. Read the rest of this entry »

Launch of advertainment assailed by Twin Cities critics. This spring KARE will be the first in the nation to convert its long-running morning news show into a long-running commercial, called “Showcase Minnesota.” You’ll see anchor hosts sitting in comfy chairs, with guests snuggled next to them, to talk up the latest in food, fashion and gadgets. Guests will pay to be on the new show and the anchors will act like inquisitive hucksters.

Pentagon Rolls Out Stealth PR. A $300 million Pentagon psychological warfare operation includes plans for placing pro-American messages in foreign media outlets without disclosing the U.S. government as the source, one of the military officials in charge of the program says.

Dishonesty. Disclosure. A shrug of official shoulders. Then more dishonesty. This is how the Bush administration works with information flow. Contemptible, for sure, but also dangerous.

The story says:

Military officials involved with the campaign say they’re not planning to place false stories in foreign news outlets clandestinely. But the military won’t always reveal its role in distributing pro-American messages, Furlong says.

“While the product may not carry the label, ‘Made in the USA,’ we will respond truthfully if asked” by journalists, Furlong told USA TODAY in a videoconference interview.

Let’s assume this is true — that they’ll answer honestly if asked — something I doubt. How can people know what to ask about?

This program poisons journalism. It means that every story relating to U.S. policies in every foreign outlet should be considered propaganda, bought and paid for by the U.S. taxpayers via their government, until someone proves that to be untrue.

The administration is undoubtedly proud of this initiative. The rest of us should be disgusted.

House Endorses Senate-Passed Ban on Mistreating Terror Suspects. In a symbolic move, the House endorsed a Senate-passed ban on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of foreign terrorism suspects Wednesday as negotiations between the White House and Sen. John McCain over the provision appeared at an impasse. Approved 308-122, the procedural vote puts political pressure on House negotiators — but does not require them — to include the ban and another provision standardizing interrogation techniques used by U.S. troops in a final wartime military spending bill. Read the rest of this entry »

Many of the articles that appear in scientific journals under the bylines of prominent academics are actually written by ghostwriters in the pay of drug companies. These seemingly objective articles, which doctors around the world use to guide their care of patients, are often part of a marketing campaign by companies to promote a product or play up the condition it treats.

Now questions about the practice are mounting as medical journals face unprecedented scrutiny of their role as gatekeeper for scientific information. Last week, the New England Journal of Medicine admitted that a 2000 article it published highlighting the advantages of Merck & Co.’s Vioxx painkiller omitted information about heart attacks among patients taking the drug. The journal has said the deletions were made by someone working from a Merck computer. Merck says the heart attacks happened after the study’s cutoff date and it did nothing wrong.

If the medical journals want to be taken seriously in the future, they’ll have to do something about this sleazy behavior. If they don’t, let’s hope that new publications arise to offer honest medical journalism.