Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: ACLU Pushing for Investigation

Posted 1 year ago on July 23, 2013, 9:48 a.m. EST by TikiJ (-38)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

27 Comments

27 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Did the FBI execute Ibragim Todashev ? He appears to have been shot seven times while being interviewed at home in Orlando, Florida, about his connection to one of the Boston bombing suspects. Among the shots was the assassin's hallmark : a bullet to the back of the head. What kind of an interview was it ?

An irregular one. There was no lawyer present. It was not recorded. By the time Todashev was shot, he had apparently been interrogated by three agents for five hours. And then ? Who knows ? First, we were told, he lunged at them with a knife. How he acquired it, five hours into a police interview, was not explained. How he posed such a threat while recovering from a knee operation also remains perplexing.

At first he drew the knife while being interviewed. Then he acquired it during a break from the interview. Then it ceased to be a knife and became a sword, then a pipe, then a metal pole, then a broomstick, then a table, then a chair. In one account all the agents were in the room at the time of the attack; in another, all but one had mysteriously departed, leaving the remaining officer to face his assailant alone.

If – and it remains a big if – this was an extrajudicial execution, it was one of hundreds commissioned by US agencies since Barack Obama first took office. The difference in this case is that it took place on American soil. Elsewhere, suspects are bumped off without even the right to the lawyerless interview Ibragim Todashev was given.

In his speech two days after Todashev was killed, President Obama maintained that "our commitment to constitutional principles has weathered every war". But he failed to explain which constitutional principles permit him to authorise the killing of people in nations with which the US is not at war. When his attorney general, Eric Holder, tried to do so last year, he got himself into a terrible mess, ending with the extraordinary claim that "'due process' and 'judicial process' are not one and the same … the constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process". So what is due process if it doesn't involve the courts? Whatever the president says it is?

Er, yes. In the same speech Obama admitted for the first time that four American citizens have been killed by US drone strikes in other countries. In the next sentence, he said: "I do not believe it would be constitutional for the government to target and kill any US citizen – with a drone, or a shotgun – without due process." This suggests he believes that the legal rights of those four people had been respected before they were killed.

Given that they might not even have known that they were accused of the alleged crimes for which they were executed, that they had no opportunities to contest the charges, let alone be granted judge or jury, this suggests that the former law professor's interpretation of constitutional rights is somewhat elastic. If Obama and his nameless advisers say someone is a terrorist, he stands convicted and can be put to death.

Left hanging in his speech is the implication that non-US citizens may be killed without even the pretence of due process. The many hundreds killed by drone strikes (who, civilian or combatant, retrospectively become terrorists by virtue of having been killed in a US anti-terrorism operation) are afforded no rights even in principle. As the process of decision-making remains secret, as the US government refuses even to acknowledge – let alone to document or investigate – the killing by its drones of people who patently had nothing to do with terrorism or any other known crime, miscarriages of justice are not just a risk emerging from the deployment of the president's kill list. They are an inevitable outcome. Under the Obama doctrine, innocent until proved guilty has mutated to innocent until proved dead.

The president made his rejection of habeas corpus and his assumption of a godlike capacity for judgment explicit later in the speech, while discussing another matter. How, he wondered, should the US deal with detainees in Guantánamo Bay "who we know have participated in dangerous plots or attacks, but who cannot be prosecuted – for example because the evidence against them has been compromised or is inadmissible in a court of law"? If the evidence has been compromised or is inadmissible, how can he know that they have participated? He can suspect, he can allege, but he cannot know until his suspicion has been tested in a court of law.

Global powers have an antisocial habit of bringing their work back home. The British government imported some of the methods it used against its colonial subjects to suppress domestic protests and strikes. Once an administrative class becomes accustomed to treating foreigners as if they have no rights, and once the domestic population broadly accepts their justifications, it is almost inevitable that the habit migrates from one arena into another. If hundreds of people living abroad can be executed by American agents on no more than suspicion, should we be surprised if residents of the United States began to be treated the same way ?

~

veritas vos liberabit ...

~

This article was originally published at 'The Guardian' & is copied above verbatim under 'Fair Use' from :

A fully referenced version of this excellent article can also be found at http://www.monbiot.com/ & see Twitter : https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot . Thanx for your very important link & bravery in posting it !

fiat lux et fiat pax ...

[-] 1 points by summerbummer (-33) 1 year ago

and from another source...

(There is a little known side story to all of this. Ibragim Todashev had a 19 year-old roommate, Tatiana Gruzdeva, who is a Russian citizen here on a student VISA. She had overstayed her visit and was ordered to leave the country by July 1st but she has apparently been under arrest by the Feds since they murdered Ibragim. She may in fact have been a witness to the shooting. Several independent news outlets claimed she was “quietly deported” but in fact, she wasn’t. ICE granted her an extension to remain in the country for a little longer though I doubt she requested it because she is currently still being held by the Feds.

“The removal office of ICE then granted her an extension until the end of July, without giving any explanation, although the immigration judge has ordered Gruzdeva to remain behind bars until she leaves, the Globe reported.” Ria Novosti

So the Feds, the same Feds who recently refused to release Ibragim Todashev autopsy, the same Feds who are running their own internal “investigation” into the shooting, are holding a Russian citizen against her will for being a witness to the shooting or some other aspect of their investigation. http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/aclu-calls-for-new-investigations-into-todashev-death/

Something really stinks about this, but then again, the whole Boston Bros thing stinks. I am still waiting to see the video of the boys placing the bombs. Everyone says they are guilty and there is not one shread of evidence.

I'd also like to see the media questioning the one-sided shoot out at the boat. That kid was not supposed to live to go to trial.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

There's much in what you say here. Guess you are on the right forum :-)

pax ...

[-] 2 points by summerbummer (-33) 1 year ago

I am an independent.....I swing both ways ;-)

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

I'm into chicks but strictly 'dependent' on one in particular and hang to the left :-)

vale ...

[-] 0 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

The entire system is completely out of control right now.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Very sadly, I'm forced to concur & in support and compliment, I append :

caveat ...

[-] -2 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

The force feeding of people who simply want to die is one of the sickest things I have heard.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

The cold blooded killing of people who simply want to live is no less sick :

multum in parvo ...

[-] -2 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

Very true indeed.

Look on the bright side, Wall St just hit ANOTHER record today!!

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

The ONLY reason for such ''irrational exuberance'' (as Greenspan termed it) is massive injections of ultra-cheap money which is looking for something to do and the huge quantity of 'Bolivian Marching Powder' the soulless mthrfkrs are hoovering up and thus, fyi :

pax et lux ...

[-] 1 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

85 billion a month. 28 million per county per month being robbed...

People have no idea what a county can do with 85 million. Its been going on since November, so thats over 700 million per county.

The tornado in OK has topped 25 million. That would be no problem at all with 700mill dumped on them.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/29/19206355-disaster-assistance-for-deadly-oklahoma-tornadoes-tops-25m?lite

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Perhaps the ACLU should push some more as : ''There's an extremely important vote taking place in Congress Wednesday 24 July that, if successful, would shut down the program under which the NSA indiscriminately collects the phone records of literally every US citizen and resident. The bipartisan amendment, proposed by Representative Justin Amash (Republican, Michigan), would forbid the NSA from expending any of its funds on the bulk collection of Americans' records, including our phone records collected pursuant to the program revealed in June by this newspaper.

''Under that program, the NSA has forced American telecommunications providers – like AT&T, Sprint and Verizon – to turn over details about every single call that every single American makes "on an ongoing daily basis". The program is not limited to suspected terrorists, foreign agents or even everyday criminals. The NSA is collecting everything.

''Did you call someone today? If so, the NSA has a record of it.'' - excerpted from :

minima maxima sunt ...

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6287) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I just read that Guardian article and have crossed my fingers that clearer heads will prevail. However, . . . . well, you know. Call me a skeptic.

"It could put video cameras on every street corner, it could install microphones in every home and it could even remotely copy the contents of every computer hard drive."

Hmmm, . . .

  1. They're doing that as we speak.

  2. They've already done that (cell phones and cable/game boxes).

  3. They do that already (thanks, Gates, you globalist p.o.s.).

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Ok ! You sceptic you !! But sadly you were right !!! In confirmation of your comment and in logical follow on from my previous link, I append and recommend :

multum in parvo ...

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6287) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

That's a damn fine piece from The Guardian, shadz. A profuse thanks and worthy of linking and relinking for all to read, comprehend and contemplate. There's much quote-worthy in it, but I'll leave it up to others to take the initiative to read the whole article. But:

"One of the worst myths Democratic partisans love to tell themselves - and everyone else - is that the GOP refuses to support President Obama no matter what he does. Like its close cousin - the massively deceitful inside-DC grievance that the two parties refuse to cooperate on anything - it's hard to overstate how false this Democratic myth is. When it comes to foreign policy, war, assassinations, drones, surveillance, secrecy, and civil liberties, President Obama's most stalwart, enthusiastic defenders are often found among the most radical precincts of the Republican Party."

"None of this should be surprising. Remember: this is the same Nancy Pelosi who spent years during the Bush administration pretending to be a vehement opponent of the illegal Bush NSA warrantless eavesdropping program after it was revealed by the New York Times, even though she was secretly briefed on it many years earlier when it was first implemented. . . So the history of Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi isn't one of opposition to mass NSA spying when Bush was in office, only to change positions now that Obama is. The history is of pretend opposition - of deceiving their supporters by feigning opposition - while actually supporting it." (emphasis mine)

And, finally and sadly true: "If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy," (Ron Wyden) said. . . ."

It's a long, steep hill we have to climb, my friend, to reach the summit. But climb we must.

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

''The future lies in building bridges within and between the millions of exploited, excluded and dispossessed who have lost everything and have finally recognized that only via the class struggle can they recover their humanity and a dignified standard of living.'' from :

Thanx for your excellent excerpts 'g' & I append & recommend this article especially in the light of your ''emphasis'' above. Solidarity and indeed ''climb we must''.

per ardua ad astra ...

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6287) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Good evening, Mr. 'S' ;-)

I forwarded that ICH piece from Glen Greenwald to TikiJ and after insisting that he read it (lol), he was impressed enough that he made it a post all it's own. "Each one teach one," as he says. Hey, that reminds me, I have another article in a similar vein that I saved a couple months ago but was temporarily lost in the multitude. I'll post it there instead of here to hopefully gain a little more coverage.

Now, I'm off to read your newest link. I also have a response coming to you about the last links of yours I perused yesterday, including that "wee" little YT clip that ends with a fine quote from Indian writer and activist Arundhati Roy. And since there's no time like the present, I'll quote her here:

"Our strategy should be not only to confront empire, but to lay siege to it. To deprive it of oxygen. To shame it. To mock it. With our art, our music, our literature, our stubbornness, our joy, our brilliance, our sheer relentlessness – and our ability to tell our own stories. Stories that are different from the ones we’re being brainwashed to believe.

The corporate revolution will collapse if we refuse to buy what they are selling – their ideas, their version of history, their wars, their weapons, their notion of inevitability.

Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them.

Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing."

Inspiring. And in the spirit of brotherhood and solidarity, another quote, this time from her 1999 book The Cost of Living:

"To love. To be loved. To never forget your own insignificance. To never get used to the unspeakable violence and the vulgar disparity of life around you. To seek joy in the saddest places. To pursue beauty to its lair. To never simplify what is complicated or complicate what is simple. To respect strength, never power. Above all, to watch. To try and understand. To never look away. And never, never to forget."

I like that.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

"Our strategy should be not only to confront empire, but to lay siege to it. To deprive it of oxygen. To shame it. To mock it. With our art, our music, our literature, our stubbornness, our joy, our brilliance, our sheer relentlessness – and our ability to tell our own stories. Stories that are different from the ones we’re being brainwashed to believe.

''The corporate revolution will collapse if we refuse to buy what they are selling – their ideas, their version of history, their wars, their weapons, their notion of inevitability.

''Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them.

''Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing."

~

Beautiful. Inspiring. Moving. True. Thanx 'g' & Arundhati Roy's wonderful words warranted repeating. Also, to follow my previous link, I append and recommend :

I loved your final AR excerpt too but sadly my following excerpts from GG's article above, won't be as heart warming and indeed, may require a big barf bucket :

''With a few rare and noble exceptions, the Intelligence Committees in both houses of Congress are filled with precisely those members who are most slavishly beholden to, completely captured by, the intelligence community over which they supposedly serve as watchdogs. Many receive large sums of money from the defense and intelligence industries.

''There is a clear and powerful correlation between NSA support and amounts of money received by these members from those industries, as Wired's Dave Kravets adeptly documented about last week's NSA vote and has been documented before with similar NSA-protecting actions from the Intelligence Committee. In particular, the two chairs of those committees - Democrat Dianne Feinstein in the Senate and Republican Mike Rogers in the House - are such absolute loyalists to the NSA and the National Security State generally that it is usually impossible to distinguish their behavior, mindset and comments from those of NSA officials.

''Just as Democrats went from vehement critics of Bush's due-process-free War on Terror policies to vocal cheerleaders of Obama's drone kills and even Guantanamo imprisonments, the leading defenders of the NSA specifically and America's Surveillance State generally are now found among self-identified Democrats. That was embodied by how one of the most vocal Democratic NSA critics during the Bush years - Nancy Pelosi - in almost single-handedly saved the NSA from last week's House vote. If someone had said back in 2007 that the greatest support for NSA surveillance would be found among Democrats, many would find the very idea ludicrous. But such is life in the Age of Obama: one of his most enduring legacies is transforming his party from pretend-opponents of the permanent National Security State into its most enthusiastic supporters.''

veritas vos liberabit ...

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

don't private companies already back log peoples phone calls?

it's always been on my phone bill

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Not sure Matt but here's one for you : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35643.htm .

''Snowden harmed no one except the liars and traitors in the US government. Contrast Washington’s animosity against Snowden with the pardon that Bush gave to Dick Cheney aide, Libby, who took the fall for his boss for blowing the cover, a felony, on a covert CIA operative, the spouse of a former government official who exposed the Bush/Cheney/neocon lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

''Whatever serves the tiny clique that rules america is legal; whatever exposes the criminals is illegal.''

fiat lux ...

[-] 0 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

And thats whats up.

Important votes, no one knows about, and all the pigs go along with it.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

Talking of ''pigs'', grit your teeth and consider :

''What Americans have learned in the 21st century is that the US government lies about everything and breaks every law. Without whistleblowers, Americans will remain in the dark as “their” government enserfs them, destroying every liberty, and impoverishes them with endless wars for Washington’s and Wall Street’s hegemony.

''Snowden harmed no one except the liars and traitors in the US government. Contrast Washington’s animosity against Snowden with the pardon that Bush gave to Dick Cheney aide, Libby, who took the fall for his boss for blowing the cover, a felony, on a covert CIA operative, the spouse of a former government official who exposed the Bush/Cheney/neocon lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

''Whatever serves the tiny clique that rules america is legal; whatever exposes the criminals is illegal.

''That’s all there is to it.''

multum in parvo ...

[-] -1 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

There's a still a few throughout the country who endorse this stuff too...It's quite the spectacle.

The more corruption people see, the more some need to latch onto whoever seems to offer them the best hope.

We dont need rulers. We are the rulers.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19980) 1 year ago

IF ''we are the rulers'' - then it's high time we all measured up !!! Geddit ?!! We need to keep on laughing in the face of tyranny 'cause that way the joke's on them in the long run !

Here you go, consider that we're between 'Iraq ... and a Hard Place' ;-)

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] 1 points by Illuminated (5) 1 year ago

"from 1993 to 2011, the F.B.I. deemed its agents’ use of force justified in the 150 instances in which an F.B.I. agent fatally shot or wounded someone."

Only 150? Wow! That's a really small number considering the danger these folks put themselves in the way of like infiltrating mexican drug cartels. If they've only shot 150 people then I think I'll take them at their word that they aren't goin around executin' folk like John Wayne.

[-] 0 points by TikiJ (-38) 1 year ago

The ol self investigation.