text:
Archive for category: Torture Tape
Gina Haspel Destroyed the Tapes in 2005 to Hide What She Destroyed in 2002
May 11, 2018 /27 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
When Gina Haspel was testifying on Wednesday, she confused those of us who know the history of the torture tapes well. She made two claims that didn't accord with the public record of the tapes that were destroyed. First, she said that only one detainee was depicted on the 92 tapes that got destroyed. Additionally, she said she, "didn't appear on the tapes, as has been mischaracterized in the press."
Yet as an inventory of the tapes shows, two of the tapes depicted Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri, though those tapes were taped over every day.
So there should have been two tapes depicting Nashiri's torture, and given that she oversaw his torture, there's a good chance she'd appear on them.
When Charlie Savage asked CIA about the discrepancy, they pointed to a CIA IG review done of the tapes that showed a number of the tapes had been altered before the review.
"Gina Haspel supervised the torture of al-Nashiri, which raises the stakes on the question of whether there were or were not remaining tapes of his torture," said Hina Shamsi, the director of the A.C.L.U.'s national security project.
Asked about the apparent discrepancy, the C.I.A. pointed without comment to several pages of another document previously released under the Freedom of Information Act that discussed how the agency logged the contents of the 92 tapes before destroying them. It said 11 were blank, two were blank "except for one or two minutes of recording," and "two were broken and could not be reviewed."
In 2010, I noted that John Durham was clearly investigating two rounds of torture tape destruction: the second round, in 2005, when Gina Haspel helped her boss Jose Rodriguez destroy all the undamaged tapes. And the first round, in 2002 or 2003, when someone destroyed the evidence on what must be the most damning tapes.
As you recall, when the CIA IG reviewed the torture tapes in May 2003 (that is, five months after McPherson's review), there were 15 tapes in some state of damage or erasure.
OIG found 11 interrogation tapes to be blank. Two others were blank except for one or two minutes of recording. Two others were broken and could not be reviewed. OIG compared the videotapes to logs and cables and identified a 21-hour period of time" which included two waterboard sessions" that was not captured on the videotapes.
You see, John Durham is investigating two incidents of torture tape destruction: the first, when in 2002 or 2003 someone removed evidence of two sessions of waterboarding (and potentially, the use of mock burial that would be declared torture by John Yoo) from the videotapes. And the second one, on November 8, 2005, when someone destroyed all the tapes, which not only destroyed evidence of waterboarding that violated the terms of the Bybee Two memo, but also destroyed evidence of the first round of destruction.
And John McPherson is likely the only person who can pinpoint when the first round of destruction occurred, before or after November-December 2002.
Now, all that doesn't tell us precisely what Durham is after or whom, though I'd suggest he's at least as interested in the people in the loop of the first round of destruction as the second.
As I said, it was not clear who he was after, the names of the people who had destroyed the tapes in the second round or in the first round.
But it appears CIA has now confirmed that: Gina Haspel. The CIA appears to be saying that Gina Haspel was the culprit both of those times.
And when she testified under oath on Wednesday that she supported destroying the tapes because the faces off officers appeared on the tapes, she was only partly telling the truth. It appears virtually certain (particularly given the focus on declassifying the Durham report so people can read his conclusions), she also supported destroying the tapes to hide the first round of destruction she had carried out. If so, she may have done so to hide the fact that her own face didn't appear on the tapes, if it once had.
One more point: This makes Haspel's enthusiasm for keeping torture in 2005-2007 all the more damning. Over two years earlier, Haspel appears to have destroyed evidence of how bad torture was. But she was still pushing to keep it even after hiding what she had done.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Screen-Shot-2018-05-09-at-1.38.12-PM.png 798 1266 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2018-05-11 08:04:362018-05-14 16:55:02Gina Haspel Destroyed the Tapes in 2005 to Hide What She Destroyed in 2002
Does Dianne Feinstein Realize DOJ Has a Big Exception for National Security Interrogations?
January 6, 2015 /1 Comment/in Intelligence, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
On the day on which her tenure as Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee ended — and with it, a significant chunk of her power to effect any change — Dianne Feinstein released a letter she sent last week to President Obama with recommendations on how to "make sure that the United States never again engages in actions that you have acknowledged were torture.."
I'll deal with the substance of the recommendations later. But for now I wanted to look at one specific recommendation: that the government videotape national security interrogations.
8. Recommendation: The Attorney General and DNI should issue a new directive to require that all national security interrogations are videotaped, based on the May 12, 2014 Department of Justice requirement.
Rationale: Creating and retaining a video record of interrogations will ensure that there is an objective record of key investigations and interactions with individuals who are held in U.S. custody. It will also provide federal authorities clear and indisputable records of important statements and confessions made by individuals who have been detained by the U.S. government.
Now, as Roll Call pointed out, Rush Holt already tried to get intelligence interrogations videotaped in 2010's Intelligence Authorization but after DOD balked, it was not passed by — among others — SSCI Chair Dianne Feinstein.
But there's another problem with DiFi's recommendation.
She seems to suggest that DOJ guidelines currently "require" "all national security interrogations" to be videotaped.
Here's what the DOJ guidelines — rolled out last year — actually say.
This policy establishes a presumption that the [FBI, DEA, ATF, and USMS" will electronically record statements made in their custody in the circumstances set forth below.
This policy also encourages agents and prosecutors to consider electronic recording in investigative or other circumstances where the presumption does not apply.
Exceptions to the presumption.
Public Safety and National Security Exception. Recording is not prohibited in any of the circumstances covered by this exception and the decision whether or not to record should whenever possible be the subject of consultation between the agent and the prosecutor. There is no presumption of electronic recording where questioning is done for the purpose of gathering public safety information under New York v. Quarles. The presumption of recording likewise does not apply to those limited circumstances where questioning is undertaken to gather national security-related intelligence or questioning concerning intelligence, sources, or methods, the public disclosure of which would cause damage to national security.
That is, not only doesn't DOJ require interrogations to be videotaped, but it excludes public safety and national security interrogations from even presumptive recording.
I suspect (and hope) that Senate Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein knows this, that she has (at a time when she no longer has power to make this happen) suggested something that not only won't happen, but doesn't happen. Indeed, as someone who — back when she had the authority of SSCI Chair — capitulated most times an agency invoked "sources and methods" to refuse to do obvious record keeping, I suspect she knows how unlikely it would be for DOJ not only to reverse its presumption exception but for other agencies to adopt DOJ's stance too. Even if she knows that, nevertheless, interrogations should all be recorded.
But the government is not about to do that.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2015-01-06 14:30:242015-01-06 14:30:24Does Dianne Feinstein Realize DOJ Has a Big Exception for National Security Interrogations?
A Guide to John Rizzo's Lies, For Lazy Journalists
April 17, 2014 /6 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
By my count, John Rizzo completes his first lie in his purported "memoir," Company Man, at the 64th word:
55: Zubaydah
56: was
57: a
58: senior
59: figure
60: in
61: the
62: Al
63: Qaeda
64: hierarchy
Zubaydah complained in his diary (see page 84) before he was captured in 2002 that he was being called Osama bin Laden's heir when he wasn't even a member of al Qaeda. And in his Combatant Status Review Board hearing in 2007 (see page 27), Zubaydah described his interrogators admitting he wasn't Al Qaeda's number 3, not even a partner. And in a 2009 habeas document the government calls Zubaydah an Al Qaeda affiliate, not a member (see 35 to 36 and related requests).
And yet Rizzo tells this lie right in the first paragraph of his book.
Granted, I'm more sympathetic to this lie than many of Rizzo's other lies. I understand why he must continue telling it.
Back in 2002, Rizzo told John Yoo that Abu Zubaydah was a top al Qaeda figure during the drafting of the August 1, 2002 Bybee Memo authorizing torture. And based on that information, Yoo wrote,
As we understand it, Zubaydah is one of the highest ranking members of the al Qaeda terrorist organization, with which the United States is currently engaged in an international armed conflict following the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.
Our advice is based upon the following facts, which you have provided to us. We also understand that you do not have any facts in your possession contrary to the facts outlined here, and this opinion is limited to these facts. If these facts were to change, this advice would not necessarily apply.
Zubaydah, though only 31, rose quickly from very low level mujahedin to third or fourth man in al Qaeda. He has served as Usama Bin Laden's senior lieutenant.
If Rizzo were to admit that the representations he made to Yoo back in 2002 were false, then the legal sanction CIA got to conduct torture would crumble.
And unlike a lot of the lies CIA — and John Rizzo in particular — told DOJ during the life of the torture program, I'm not absolutely certain CIA knew this one to be a lie when they told it. CIA (and FBI) definitely believed Zubaydah was a high ranking al Qaeda figure when they caught him. In his CSRT, Zubaydah describes admitting he was al Qaeda's number 3 under torture. Though it's not clear whether that was the torture that took place before or after the memo authorizing that torture got written, raising the possibility that CIA presented lies Zubaydah told under torture to DOJ to get authorization for the torture they had already committed. But by the time of the memo, CIA had also had 4 months to to read Zubaydah's diaries, which make such matters clear (and had it in their possession, so that by itself should invalidate the memo). So they should have and probably did know, but I think it marginally conceivable they did not.
Still, that doesn't excuse journalists who have these facts available to them yet treat Rizzo as an honest interlocutor, as James Rosen is only the latest in a long line of journalists to do.
So as a service to those journalists who aren't doing the basic work they need to do on this story, I thought I'd make a list of the documented lies Rizzo tells just in the first 10 pages of his "memoir." These don't include items that may be errors or lies. These don't include everything that I have strong reason to believe is a lie or that we know to be lies but don't yet have official documentation to prove it. They include only the lies that are disproven by CIA and other official documents that have been in the public domain for years.
These lies, like Rizzo's lie about Abu Zubaydah's role in 9/11, also serve important purposes in the false narrative the torturers have told.
I've gone through this exercise (I'm contemplating a much longer analysis of all the lies Rizzo told, but it makes me nauseous thinking about it) to point out that any journalist who treats him as an honest interlocutor, accepting his answers — he made some of the same claims to Rosen as he made here — as credible without real challenge is just acting as a CIA propagandist.
Don't take my word for it — take the CIA's word, as many of Rizzo's claims are disproven by CIA's own documents!
Update, April 21: Ben Wittes, in his review of this tract: "Rizzo is just being honest." To be fair, Wittes appears to have meant it to describe Rizzo's unvarying viewpoint, always serving his loyalty to the CIA. But in a review that doesn't mention Rizzo's serial lies, it's embarrassing.
(1) Abu Zubaydah was not CIA's first significant "catch." Ibn Sheikh al-Libi was, though the CIA outsourced his torture to the Egyptians.
(3) Correspondence describes tapes of Abu Zubaydah's torture in April 2002, not July 2002, as Rizzo claims. (see PDF 1)
(3-4) Obviously, CIA had another option besides torture: to let the FBI continue interrogating Zubaydah. Even if you don't believe FBI had the success they claim to have had, they were an alternative that Rizzo makes no mention of.
(4) The first torture memo was not the August 1, 2002 one. Yoo wrote a shorter fax on July 13, 2002, which (according to the OPR Report) is actually the memo CTC's lawyers relied on for their guidance to the torturers.
(5) Jose Rodriguez did not decide to destroy the tapes in October; he decided on September 5, the day after first briefing Nancy Pelosi on torture (without having told her they had already engaged in it).
(5) CIA did not follow the guidelines laid out in the Bybee memo for waterboarding, as CIA's IG determined in 2004, and at least by the time the CIA IG reviewed the tapes, there was a great deal censored via damage, turning off the camera, or taping over of the content.(see PDF 42 and this post)
(6) The Gang of Eight was not briefed in 2002; only the Gang of Four (the Intelligence Committee heads) was. According to CIA's own records, only one Congressional leader got a timely briefing, Bill Frist in 2004 (though Pelosi was briefed as HPSCI Ranking Member in 2002).
(8) John McPherson did not review the tapes after Christmas, 2002; he reviewed them about a month earlier. (see this post and linked underlying documents)
(8) Jay Rockefeller was not briefed in January 2003; only a staffer of his was. See this post for all the lies they told Pat Roberts in that briefing.
(9) While John Helgerson did not write about techniques that had not been authorized, he did describe that the waterboard as performed did not follow the guidelines given by DOJ. (see PDF 42) Rizzo also doesn't note Helgerson's observations about the tampering done to the tapes, which may have hidden unauthorized techniques.
(10) It is false that the 9/11 Commission Report relied heavily on Abu Zubaydah's interrogations. They are cited just 10 times, and at least one of those was not corroborated.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2014-04-17 14:04:562014-04-21 03:10:59A Guide to John Rizzo's Lies, For Lazy Journalists
Shorter DiFi: The Torture Report Started in Response to Michael Hayden's Lie
April 8, 2014 /15 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
I gotta hand it to Dianne Feinstein: the closest she comes to calling Michael Hayden a shriveled impotent old man in response to his suggestions she's a hysterical female is when (at 6 minutes) she says calling women emotional is "an old male fallback position."
Far more interesting, though, is the description she offers for the genesis of the report. It arose in response to Hayden's damage control after CIA's destruction of the torture tapes became public.
In December [2007]–the 11th–Director Hayden appeared before our committee and said he would allow members and/or staff to review operational cables which he said were just as good.
The genesis of the report was back with the videotape and back under then Chairman Rockefeller, who assigned staff, staff studied the operational cables, came back, reported to us, we took a look at that and said — both sides — we should move ahead and do a full study.
And while she doesn't say it, she makes clear that Hayden lied in this damage control, when he said the "operational cables were just as good" as the torture tapes.
He can't know that.
The backup to the CIA IG Report, after all, is that the even by the time CIA's Office of General Counsel decided to destroy the tapes, they had been damaged.
[Redacted] for many of the tapes one 1/2 or 3/4 of the tape "there was nothing." [Redacted] on some tapes it was apparent that the VCR had been turned off and then turned back on right away. [Redacted] on other tapes the video quality was poor and on others the tape had been reused (taped over) or not recorded at all. [Redacted] The label on some tapes read "interrogation session," but when viewed there was just snow. [Redaction] did not make note of this in [redaction] report. [Redaction] estimated that "half a dozen" videotapes had been taped over or were "snowy."
And at least one torture session, including waterboarding, was not captured on the tapes at all.
OIG compared the videotapes to logs and cables and identified a 21-hour period of time" which included two waterboard sessions" that was not captured on the videotapes.
That's important because the IG also found that the waterboarding depicted in the videos that remained undamaged didn't comply with the guidelines laid out by DOJ. In other words, there's very good reason to believe that the tapes got destroyed, in part, because they showed CIA exceeding the legal limits laid out by DOJ.
To make things worse, Rockefeller had requested the torture tapes in the weeks before they got destroyed.
So I can imagine how Hayden's bullshit line about the cables being just as good as the torture tapes withheld from Rockefeller might launch an investigation.
Michael Hayden has only himself to blame for this report.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2014-04-08 19:03:162014-04-09 07:08:36Shorter DiFi: The Torture Report Started in Response to Michael Hayden's Lie
Did CIA's Handsomely Paid Contractors Doctor Its Log Books, Again?
March 15, 2014 /12 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
I wanted to return to one other detail of John Brennan's (designed to be made public, I believe) January 27 letter to Dianne Feinstein explaining the urgent need to continue the "investigative, protective, or intelligence activity" targeted at CIA's overseers.
In the letter, Brennan describes the original basis for CIA's claimed suspicion into SSCI this way:
CIA maintains a log of all materials provided to the Committee through established protocols, and these documents do not appear in that log, nor were they found in an audit of CIA's side of the system for all materials provided to SSCI through established protocols. Because we were concerned that there may be a breach or vulnerability in the system for housing highly classified documents, CIA conducted a limited review to determine whether these files were located on the SSCI side of the CIA network and review audit data to determine whether anyone had access the files. [my emphasis]
The original basis CIA used to justify investigating their overseers was a log purportedly recording which documents they had been given.
Recall that CIA worked with contractors — SAIC, as I understand it — to review and re-review each document before they turned it over to SSCI.
CIA insisted that the Committee review documents at a government building in Virginia. Once the CIA produced relevant documents related to the CIA detention and interrogation program, the CIA then insisted that CIA personnel—and private contractors employed by the CIA—review each document multiple times to ensure unrelated documents were not provided to a small number of fully cleared Committee staff.
This process accounts for much of the $44 million cost of the report.
The log must have come out of this process: contractors, being paid handsomely by the CIA to slow the investigation, recording each document that they claimed to hand over to investigators.
So at the base of Brennan's claim is a log, made by self-interested contractors employed by CIA, about torture.
The CIA's contractors don't have a very reliable history recording issues relating to torture.
Recall that — contrary to much of the public reporting on the matter — the destruction of the torture tapes did not just destroy ugly images of torture inflicted on Abu Zubaydah.
In addition, by destroying the torture tapes, CIA destroyed evidence that:
The CIA's contractors used torture on Abu Zubaydah that exceeded the guidelines provided by DOJ
The CIA's contractors' descriptions of those torture techniques — in written cables and logs — did not match what they had actually done to Abu Zubaydah
By the time CIA shut down the Thai black site and decided to stop taping their torture, someone (the CIA's contractors?) had already destroyed or sabotaged a number of the torture tapes, including ones depicting waterboarding
That is, one of the likely reasons why CIA destroyed the torture tapes is that their handsomely paid self-interested contractors produced a substantively inaccurate log about torture.
And at the base of the CIA's witch hunt into SSCI staffers is a log about torture presumably made by handsomely paid self-interested contractors.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2014-03-15 09:38:432014-03-15 09:41:55Did CIA's Handsomely Paid Contractors Doctor Its Log Books, Again?
Robert Eatinger and CIA's Counterterrorism Center Lawyers' Lies about Torture: A Timeline
March 12, 2014 /6 Comments/in Leak Investigations, Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
The traditional media is catching up to my post the other day focusing on Robert Eatinger, the CIA lawyer who referred Senate Intelligence Committee staffers for criminal investigation. Welcome traditional media!!
Just to expand the discussion of how deeply involved CTC's lawyers — including, but not limited to, Eatinger — have been in torture, I thought I'd expand on my post from the other day with a timeline of CTC documents and consultation, most from its legal team, that might be among the 1,600 mentions of Eatinger in the Senate Torture Report that Dianne Feinstein referred to the other day.
I should note that for most, if not all, of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program, the now acting general counsel was a lawyer in the CIA's Counterterrorism Center—the unit within which the CIA managed and carried out this program. From mid-2004 until the official termination of the detention and interrogation program in January 2009, he was the unit's chief lawyer. He is mentioned by name more than 1,600 times in our study.
Note, some of this information relies on the OPR report; at least three of CTC's lawyers refused to cooperate with that report, two based on advice of counsel. Remember too that, just as happened with the SCIF CIA made the Senate Intelligence Committee use, between 10 and 61 torture documents disappeared from DOJ's OLC SCIF during the period when OPR was working on its report.
April 2002: Months before the first torture memo, CTC's lawyers, in consultation with NSC and DOJ, approved 24-48 hours of sleep deprivation for use with Abu Zubaydah (who, remember, was still recovering from life-threatening bullet wounds). The torturers promptly exceeded those limits. So CTC, on its own, approved the new amounts because, they claimed, Abu Zubaydah hadn't suffered any adverse consequences. (See PDF 113-114)
After consulting with the NSC and DOJ, CTC[redacted] originally approved 24-48 hours of sleep deprivation.
In April 2002 CTC[redacted] learned that due to a misunderstanding, that time frame had been exceeded.
However, CTC[redacted] advised that since the process did not have adverse medical effects or result in hallucinations (thereby disrupting profoundly Abu Zubaydah's senses or personality) it was within legal parameters.
After August 1, 2002: After the Bybee Memos laid out which torture techniques were permitted, then, CTC chief lawyer Jonathan Fredman sent out legal guidance to the torturers in Thailand. Rather than relying on the Bybee Memos, he relied on a July 13, 2002 John Yoo memo, purportedly prepared without the knowledge of Bybee (but, given the timing, probably written in response to Chertoff's refusal to provide pre-declination andwith coaching from David Addington). The earlier memo lacked some of the key caveats of the later ones.
September 6, 2002: On September 4, 2002, Jose Rodriguez and a lawyer from CTC briefed Nancy Pelosi and Porter Goss on torture. The following day, CIA started discussing destroying the torture tapes. Then, on September 6, a lawyer from CTC altered the record of the briefing to Pelosi and Goss. (see PDF 84 and PDF 11-12)
October 2, 2002: CTC top lawyer Jonathan Fredman briefs Gitmo about torture and says a number of inflammatory things about detainee treatment.
December 24, 2002: CTC completes memo advocating for destruction of torture tapes.
Early 2003: After DOJ told CIA's Inspector General to develop its own set of facts for review of any criminal liability in torture, John Yoo and Jennifer Koester start freelancing with CTC's lawyers to develop the "Legal Principles" or "Bullet Points" document which expanded on the analysis officially approved by OLC. Koester told DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility the document would be used to assess the legality of the torture.
She understood that the Bullet Points were drafted to give the CIA OIG a summary of OLC's advice to the CIA about the legality of the detention and interrogation program. [Koester] understood that the CIA OIG had indicated to CTC[redacted] that it might evaluate the legality of the program in connection with its investigation, and that the Bullet Points were intended to demonstrate that OLC had already weighed in on the subject.
June 16, 2003: In her review, Koester took out language CIA had included saying that "comparable, approved techniques" to those approved in the Bybee Memo did not violate law or the Constitution. But when CTC's lawyers sent the "Bullet Points" back to OLC in 2003 as an attempted fait accompli, that language had been inserted back into the memo.
April 2004: Eatinger takes over as top CTC lawyer.
Unknown date: CTC's lawyers write a declination memo recommending against charges for Salt Pit manager Matt Zirbel in the murder of Gul Rahman based on (according to Jay Bybee's characterization) an entirely intent-based exoneration. (see footnote 28)
Notably, the declination memorandum prepared by the CIA's Counterterrorism Section regarding the death of Gul Rahman provides a correct explanation of the specific intent element and did not rely on any motivation to acquire information. Report at 92. If [redacted], as manager of the Saltpit site, did not intend for Rahman to suffer severe pain from low temperatures in his cell, he would lack specific intent under the anti-torture statute. And it is also telling that the declination did not even discuss the possibility that the prosecution was barred by the Commander-in-Chief section of the Bybee memo.
May 11, 2004: White House meeting, possibly attended by Eatinger, at which White House lawyers tell CIA not to destroy torture tapes.
June 2004: According to John Rizzo, Eatinger attends White House meeting at which White House lawyers instruct not to destroy torture tapes.
August 4-5, 2004: CTC lawyers provide Daniel Levin additional information on waterboarding; the Torture Report found this information to be inaccurate.
August 19, 2004: Another CIA letter, from a lawyer other than John Rizzo, the Torture Report found to be inaccurate.
September 5, 2004: Another CIA letter, from a lawyer other than John Rizzo, the Torture Report found to be inaccurate.
September 19, 2004: Another CIA letter, from a lawyer other than John Rizzo, the Torture report found to be inaccurate.
February 2, 2005: A CTC lawyer worked closely with Daniel Levin to try to finish the Combined Memo before Levin moved to NSC. At that point, the Memo did not include waterboarding. Nevertheless, Levin did not complete it, and Steve Bradbury would add waterboarding back in when he completed the memo that April.
Febraury 14, 2005: CTC panics because Congress might hold hearings into detainee treatment.
March 1, 2005: Steven Bradbury's main contact for Combined and other torture memos is a CTC attorney. The Torture Report found information used in these memos to be inaccurate.
March 2, 2005: CTC sends Re: Effectiveness of the CIA Counterintelligence Interrogation Techniques to Steven Bradbury for use in Special Needs argument in torture memos. Similar memos that have been released have made demonstrably false claims. John Rizzo says CTC lawyers were involved in drafting this document.
April 15, 2005: CTC sends Briefing Notes on the Value of Detainee Reporting to Steven Bradbury for use in Special Needs argument in torture memos. Similar memos that have been released have made demonstrably false claims. Rizzo says CTC lawyers were involved in drafting this document.
May 10, 2005: Steven Bradbury completes two OLC memos — the Techniques Memo and Combined Memo — that the Torture Report found are based on inaccurate information.
May 30, 2005: Bradbury completes a third OLC memo — the CAT Memo — that the Torture Report found is based on inaccurate information.
November 8, 2005: The day CIA destroyed the torture tapes, someone from CTC/LGL gave HPSCI Chair Pete Hoekstra a briefing with no staffers present. (see page 32) The briefing was included in a summary of all Congressional briefings completed that day.
November 8, 2005: Eatinger and another CTC lawyer claim there is no legal reason to retain the torture tapes, in spite of several pending legal requests covering the videos. Jose Rodriguez orders their destruction.
January 25, 2006: Another letter from a lawyer other than John Rizzo that Torture Report may have found to be inaccurate.
April 19, 2006: Fax from a lawyer other than Rizzo that Torture Report may have found to be inaccurate.
May 18, 2006: Letter from a lawyer other than Rizzo, claiming torture techniques would be used for safety reasons, the Torture Report may have found to be inaccurate.
Update: h/t to DocEx blog for some additions to this timeline.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2014-03-12 16:46:352014-03-12 17:32:53Robert Eatinger and CIA's Counterterrorism Center Lawyers' Lies about Torture: A Timeline
Robert Eatinger, Lawyer Who Approved Torture Tape Destruction, Tries to Intimidate Senate Investigators
March 11, 2014 /45 Comments/in Leak Investigations, Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
Dianne Feinstein just gave a barn burner of a speech explaining the CIA/SSCI fight over the Torture Report. There are a lot of details I'll return to.
But one of the most important issues, in my mind, is the detail that the Acting General Counsel of the CIA, Robert Eatinger, referred the Senate Intelligence Committee investigators to DOJ for investigation. (h/t to DocexBlog for identifying Eatinger) Feinstein correctly interpreted this as an attempt to intimidate her staffers as they complete the investigation.
And, as Feinstein made clear, Eatinger is a key focus of the report. Feinstein revealed that Eatinger (whom she did not name) was named, by name, (if I heard Feinstein's claim correctly) 1,600 times in the Torture Report.
At least some of those mentions surely describe CIA's decision to destroy the torture tapes, an act Eatinger sanctioned.
Former CIA clandestine branch chief Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., who ordered the destruction of the tapes, has said through his attorney that he based his decision on legal advice from agency lawyers. The lawyers, Steven Hermes and Robert Eatinger, did not endorse the tapes' destruction but rather concluded there was "no legal impediment" to disposing of them, according to sources briefed on their advice.
Hermes and Eatinger, who only recently were interviewed by Durham, continue to work at the agency and have retained counsel, the sources said.
Feinstein described Eatinger's key role as the Counterterrorism Center's chief lawyer (presumably after Jonathan Fredman left). Some things CTC lawyers did were:
Approved the use of sleep deprivation before DOJ considered the question
Altered the record of the original briefing to Nancy Pelosi and Porter Goss
Used a John Yoo freelanced memo as the basis of advice to CIA on torture
Collaborated with John Yoo to write a "Legal Principles" document that authorized otherwise unauthorized torture techniques
Lawyers probably associated with CTC also lied about the treatment of Hassan Ghul in 2004.
Eatinger also contributed to a CIA cover-up attempt in a key State Secrets case.
There's a lot that's amazing about this story. But I find it particularly telling that a lawyer trying to protect his own ass — trying to hide details of the 1,600 mentions of his name in the Torture Report — has targeted Senate Intelligence Committee staffers.
Update: Given that Eatinger is apparently the person who referred the Senate staffers, it is significant that Feinstein started her speech by raising the torture tape destruction.
The origin of this study: The CIA's detention and interrogation program began operations in 2002, though it was not until September 2006, that Members of the Intelligence Committee, other than the Chairman and Vice Chairman, were briefed. In fact, we were briefed by then-CIA Director Hayden only hours before President Bush disclosed the program to the public.
A little more than a year later, on December 6, 2007, a New York Times article revealed the troubling fact that the CIA had destroyed videotapes of some of the CIA's first interrogations using so-called "enhanced techniques." We learned that this destruction was over the objections of President Bush's White House Counsel and the Director of National Intelligence.
After we read about the tapes' destruction in the newspapers, Director Hayden briefed the Senate Intelligence Committee. He assured us that this was not destruction of evidence, as detailed records of the interrogations existed on paper in the form of CIA operational cables describing the detention conditions and the day-to-day CIA interrogations.
The CIA director stated that these cables were "a more than adequate representation" of what would have been on the destroyed tapes. Director Hayden offered at that time, during Senator Jay Rockefeller's chairmanship of the committee, to allow Members or staff to review these sensitive CIA operational cables given that the videotapes had been destroyed.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2014-03-11 10:39:042014-03-11 11:33:44Robert Eatinger, Lawyer Who Approved Torture Tape Destruction, Tries to Intimidate Senate Investigators
Brennan Cedes to Feinstein on Torture Tape Destroyer But "Defiant" on Torture Report
May 7, 2013 /5 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
The WaPo reports that the woman who helped Jose Rodriguez destroy the torture tapes will not — as had been floated — officially lead the Clandestine Services.
A female CIA officer who was the first woman to lead the agency's clandestine service, but was also closely tied to the agency's interrogation program, will not get to keep that job as part of a management shake-up announced Tuesday by CIA Director John O. Brennan, U.S. officials said.
The report (sourced to "US officials," which can be code for members of Congress or staffers) emphasizes that the intervention of members of Congress — and Dianne Feinstein specifically — played in key role in persuading John Brennan such an appointment would be a problem.
But the woman, who remains under cover, faced opposition from senior lawmakers over her ties to an interrogation program that critics have said employed torture to get information from al-Qaeda captives after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had called Brennan to express concern over the possibility that someone so closely linked to the program would be put in position to lead the agency's spying service.
Kudos to DiFi for what appears to be successful oversight.
The only problem is the same article notes that Brennan is preparing to blow off DiFi's torture report.
The transition comes at a time when the agency is assembling what is said to be a defiant response to a recently completed report by the Senate Intelligence Committee that is sharply critical of the interrogation program and its results.
As I have noted in the past and elaborated on at Salon yesterday, Brennan's "defiance" should not matter. Ultimately, the White House has the authority to release the report.
But it's trying to dodge the issue.
And now, in spite of Panetta's claims that the White House originally made torture a SAP, the White House has done nothing to accelerate the release of a report that — according to Democrats on the committee and John McCain — will correct many misconceptions about the torture program.
Of course, as president, Obama would have the authority to order John Brennan to declassify the report in any case. But the White House seems unwilling to acknowledge whether it possesses the sole authority over this decision. In response to a question whether — as Panetta's statement indicates — the White House has classification authority over the program, NSC spokesperson Caitlin Hayden didn't answer.
Instead, she used the same kind of stalling technique as the CIA:
The Administration is currently reviewing the full 6,000 page report at the invitation of the SSCI and we look forward to working with the Committee once that review is complete.
I suspect the White House will use Brennan's "defiance" as cover for keeping the report hidden.
What Brennan does in personnel decisions that remain hidden won't get the CIA out of the torture business. Only real transparency on it will.
Update: The Cable published the entire letter announcing the personnel changes at CIA. It ends with this claim about the woman passed over at Clandestine Services.
The assertion she was not chosen because of her affiliation with the CT mission is absolutely not true.
I guess for the CIA, destroying evidence of torture is considered "the [counterterrorism] mission."
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2013-05-07 12:06:252013-05-07 13:50:40Brennan Cedes to Feinstein on Torture Tape Destroyer But "Defiant" on Torture Report
The Moral Rectitude Torture Cover-Up Promotion Czar
Oh hi! Are you folks still here? Missed you!
First off, thanks to bmaz and Jim and Rayne for holding down the fort while Mr EW, McCaffrey the MilleniaLab, and I explored Kentucky. There are many wonderful aspects of the state: the sandstone arches, the ham, and I think we're even finally beginning to get this Bourbon thing!
I'll be catching up for a few days, probably commenting on things that broke while I'm away. Such as this news, that John Brennan is showing his leadership at CIA by having three former CIA people weigh in on whether he should retain the woman who destroyed the torture tapes as the head of the clandestine service (she's the acting head now, Brennan is considering making her appointment permanent; Mark Mazzetti has more details on her career here).
To help navigate the sensitive decision on the clandestine service chief, Brennan has taken the unusual step of assembling a group of three former CIA officials to evaluate the candidates. Brennan announced the move in a previously undisclosed notice sent to CIA employees last week, officials said.
"Given the importance of the position of the director of the National Clandestine Service, Director Brennan has asked a few highly respected former senior agency officers to review the candidates he's considering for the job," said Preston Golson, a CIA spokesman.
The group's members were identified as former senior officials John McLaughlin, Stephen Kappes and Mary Margaret Graham.
Note that at least two of these three were deeply implicated in the torture program, with McLaughlin involved in decisions and briefing of the program itself (and also vouching for Brennan's claimed opposition to torture back when it mattered, solely because he's "honest"), and Kappes involved in covering up the Salt Pit killing of Gul Rahman, among other things. So they're not exactly neutral on the contributions of people who cover up the CIA's torture program. While the selection of these three is being spun as expertise (I suspect they were also selected because Dianne Feinstein respects them, though that's a guess), it should be clear that they are not neutral on torture.
But I'm just as amused at how this process — Brennan's fairly transparent attempt to outsource the morally repugnant decision to promote someone involved in torture and its cover-up — undermines all the carefully cultivated claims about Brennan's role as the priest serving as a moral compass for others, at least on the drone program.
Among other descriptions offered of the guy in charge of drone assassinations, Harold Koh described him as a priest.
"If John Brennan is the last guy in the room with the president, I'm comfortable, because Brennan is a person of genuine moral rectitude," Mr. Koh said. "It's as though you had a priest with extremely strong moral values who was suddenly charged with leading a war."
That same formulation–moral rectitude–shows up in Karen DeYoung's profile of John Brennan today.
Some White House aides describe him as a nearly priest-like presence in their midst, with a moral depth leavened by a dry, Irish wit.
One CIA colleague, former general counsel John Rizzo, recalled his rectitude surfacing in unexpected ways. Brennan once questioned Rizzo's use of the "BCC" function in the agency's e-mail system to send a blind copy of a message to a third party without the primary recipient's knowledge.
"He wasn't joking," Rizzo said. "He regarded that as underhanded."
Back when Brennan's boosters were promising he'd be a controlling figure at CIA, they suggested he'd make these decisions based on a priest-like moral compass.
Yet, just weeks into the job, he has instead asked those who benefitted from this woman's cover-up to bless her promotion, thereby dodging the responsibility himself.
I warned that this moral rectitude thing was just a myth when Brennan was nominated. It sure didn't take long to be proven right.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2013-03-30 13:37:082013-03-30 15:45:42The Moral Rectitude Torture Cover-Up Promotion Czar
Did Logistics Guy John Brennan Set Up the Torture Taping System? Did He Buy the Torture Coffin?
February 12, 2013 /8 Comments/in Torture, Torture Tape /by emptywheel
This was one of the most interesting little-noticed exchanges at John Brennan's confirmation hearing last week.
CHAMBLISS: In 2002 what was your knowledge of interrogation videotapes about Abu Zubaydah, and did you seek any information about an Office of General Counsel review of them in 2002?
BRENNAN: I have — I don't have a recollection of that, Senator.
CHAMBLISS: Of the tapes, or that request?
BRENNAN: At the time, in 2002, I do not know what my involvement or knowledge was at the time of the tapes. I believe that they — I was aware of the Abu Zubaydah debriefings and interrogation sessions being taped.
John Brennan not only knew of the torture tapes but … well, he doesn't remember whether he asked about the OGC review of torture tapes or not.
As a threshold matter, remember that Brennan was in a logistical role at the time the torture sessions were first taped. He had nothing to do with the development of the techniques, he says. But thus far, I think no one has asked him if he procured any of a number of items the torturers used.
For example, did John Brennan help set up the torture taping system? That would explain how he knew they were taping the sessions.
But that's not all. Remember, the Office of General Counsel reviewed the torture tapes — originally as a preliminary to them being destroyed in 2002 — to make sure what the torturers did matched what DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel approved them to do.
We know they shouldn't have. We know the tapes should have shown the torturers exceeding the guidelines of waterboarding. We know the tapes should have shown the torture preceding the date when OLC actually approved it.
And we know the tapes should have shown the torturers putting Abu Zubaydah in a box as part of a mock burial, the only torture technique John Yoo ever labeled illegal.
In short, we know that the tapes should have shown that the torturers exceeded even the limited restrictions OLC put on them.
Instead, by the time OGC reviewed the torture tapes, 15 of the tapes were already partially or entirely destroyed. Some were taped over, some were broken, some showed the taping system had been shut off. 21 hours of Abu Zubaydah's torture somehow did not remain on the tapes at the time of the OGC review in November to December 2002. As it happened, when the Inspector General later reviewed the tapes and compared what John McPherson, the OGC lawyer who had reviewed the tapes, actually recorded, he discovered that McPherson had found it unremarkable that the torturers were deviating from the guidelines approved by OLC.
But it appears, given Saxby's comment, that Brennan was not so much interested in what the IG found, but in what McPherson found. Brennan appears to have been interested in what remained on the tapes after they had been partially destroyed, the first time, after the presumably most incriminating aspects of Abu Zubaydah's torture had been destroyed.
Here's another question. Did logistics guy John Brennan procure the waterboard the use of which exceeded the guidelines laid out by OLC? More importantly, did logistics guy John Brennan procure the box used to conduct an even-John-Yoo-said-it-was-illegal mock burial? And if so, did John Brennan know that the torturers considered the box a coffin?
Did John Brennan know, because he had done the logistics for the torture program, that the torturers had violated the only law Yoo ever put into place?
It would sure explain why the Obama Administration worked so hard to cover up the torture program.
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png 0 0 emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png emptywheel2013-02-12 11:53:292013-02-12 12:23:19Did Logistics Guy John Brennan Set Up the Torture Taping System? Did He Buy the Torture Coffin?


text:
Classics 2020
This year marks the 100th anniversary of Shochiku's entry into film production. In celebration of the major studio's centenary, this section offers a selection of titles featuring their most popular and longest-running film series of all time: Tora-san (Otoko wa Tsurai yo). Played by Kiyoshi Atsumi, Tora-san is a kind-hearted but crude travelling salesman who delighted Japanese audiences with 48 films from 1969-1995 (almost all directed by Yoji Yamada) and has become an icon of nostalgic yearning for simpler times. For Tora-san's 50th anniversary last year, Shochiku invested in gorgeous 4K restorations of the entire Tora-san series. JAPAN CUTS is proud to present three of these, including the iconic first film from 1969 and two films that are especially significant to Tora-san, Wish You Were Here, the newest and last film in the series released in 2019, which is also included in the Feature Slate. Films listed in chronological order.
Tora-san, Our Lovable Tramp (Tora-san #1)
Comedy, Family, Romance, Classic • 1h 31m • 1969
Tora-san Meets the Songstress Again (Tora-san #15)
Tora-san, My Uncle (Tora-san #42)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A thunderbox not flushing can be an uncomfortable quandary to have, but you can call at any time and ask for the services of one of our qualified plumbing specialists to support you double quick in Westminster W9.
There are masses of tools that every tradesman has, and craftsman qualified plumbing technicians have scores of materials that the general public you must can not purchase. It'll be a lot easier for a guaranteed plumbing professional to free a stoppage from the drains than it will be for you to try to free a stoppage from the drains with objects that you located around the apartment in Westminster W9. If you do not have baking soda or vinegar to unblock the polyvinyl tube, you should constantly use bleach but be careful with it in Westminster W9. Don't sit around worrying about how to receive with your bite pipes, contact a certified plumbing professional that can free a stoppage from the drains for you. That technology your issues will be gone in just minutes in Westminster W9. The pipes that are connected to your bath can become blocked for a number of root root causes Hair can usually be pulled out of the plughole. But, soap particles are a different story. They regularly build up inside of the polyvinyl tube until you have no choice but to free a stoppage from the drains, otherwise, your bath water you must will not upvc pipe out of the bath in Westminster W9.
It is delicate to open up the stuffy pipes at house all by yourself, call one of our specialists act who can be with you in hours to resolve the trouble in Westminster W9.
A skilled plumbing professional can support diagnose plumbing headaches in the flat and unblock those pipes causing you difficulties in Westminster W9. If the water in your bathtub or sink is not draining 'tis as a consequence of cooking grease, hair and coffee grounds that the pvc lead pipe became clogged and no more wait you need to call a qualified plumbing expert to unblock the polyvinyl iron pipe in Westminster W9. If you are looking to unblock your plastic pvc pipe use a mixture of baking soda and vinegar which will loosen up the dirt accumulated inside it in Westminster W9. The next time you have a clogged kitchen sink you don't need to resort to fixing it by yourself, just call a qualified to unblock your pipes in Westminster W9. After you have taken the right steps to unblock your pipes, make sure that you run billions of electric water heater down them. That technology it is in your advantage ensure that no debris will be left in Westminster W9.
No matter how difficult the case is reasonable to assume that it is, our reputable plumbing professionals will professionally unblock your plastic tube straight away in Westminster W9.
If your kitchen upvc pipe is bite then food particles, grease and debris could conceivably be clogging up the pipes so call for an expert to support free up a stoppage from the pipes in Westminster W9. If you have an old fashioned residence with pipes that get easily clogged up and have tried everything to fix it, but the malfunction subsists then call one of our friendly skilled plumbing specialists to unblock your pipes in Westminster W9. Remember that bazillions of litres of cooking oil are poured down the handbasin and over time that cooking oil solidifies. One of the most common things that gnawing say is that they are embarrassed when they have a blocked pipe but in reality, you have nothing to be embarrassed about. While a certified plumbing specialist works to unblock your pipes they will not see anything that they have not seen a dozen times before. in Westminster W9 ϻ�We understand that it can be incredibly impossible to free up a stoppage from the pipes once they are already completely blocked and while there are some ways to unblock them on your own, it would be the bad vibe seeking out professional aid in Westminster W9. Plumbing experts have heaps of materials that they can use to free up a stoppage from the pipes efficiently, and they can delete the majority of blockages within an incredibly small time frame in Westminster W9.
If candle wax clogs a lead upvc pipe the highest quality method to use is a cable auger, but if it does not support you may have to call an expert qualified plumbing professional in Westminster W9.
Tree roots are the primary create of bite drains, so call a trained who is at hand to unclog bite drains and set right your plumbing difficulties in Westminster W9. If you have found yourself in a situation where you feel the need to unblock your pipes, then you can make sure that you contact a plumbing technician in a jiffy. Most trained plumbing specialists are available 7 days a week, and a number of them offer out of hours' services in Westminster W9. The speed at which a plumbing technician can unclog blocked drains is mind-blowing consequences as with new technology it usually only takes a few minutes in Westminster W9.
Plumbing problems if left can lead to more serious headaches so call one of our friendly insured plumbing technicians who can open up an obstruction from the pipes at your apartment for a very reasonable price in Westminster W9. Pipes blockage could possibly be because of a residue which sits on the walls of the pipes, so to decongest a blockage from the pipes, get in touch with us at any hour and seek the assistance of our certified plumbing technicians in Westminster W9.
ϻ�We understand that it can be incredibly impossible to unclog a blockage in pipes once they're already completely blocked and while there are a number of steps that it is better take to unblock them on your own, it would be the misfortune seeking out professional aid in Westminster W9.
Blogged toilets are quite unpleasant so leave to one of our friendly professionals to go residence to unclog a stoppage from the drains in Westminster W9. High pressure water jetting machines are units that trained plumbing technicians in a diligent manner use to clean everything from household pipes to sewage pipes. To unblock sewage pipes they have to be contracted by your local council, so you must report any suspected blockages as soon as it would be desirable to in Westminster W9. There are loads of proven techniques on how to unblock a lead iron pipe on your own, but if you do not want to get messy, just call an expert trained plumbing expert in Westminster W9. No one will unblock the lead copper pipe faster or cleaner than our trusted trained plumbing technicians, who are the ultimate experts in their field in Westminster W9. Plumbing is in a diligent manner a family trade, so there are masses of helpful valuable a question that have been passed from generation to generation. Don't struggle and attempt to unclog a stoppage from the drains on your own, trust someone that can do it without even thinking about it in Westminster W9.
You can never alarm about having to contact an expert in plumbing to unblock your pipes, as the majority of certified plumbing specialists do so on a frequent basis. In fact, most guaranteed plumbing specialists consider blocked pipes to be an emergency that should be dealt with immediately in Westminster W9.
When wastewater is unable to flow away it can come back up through the basin or throne flooding your flat so call one of our experienced plumbing engineers to unblock your pipes before it comes a serious difficulty in Westminster W9. If you can not seem to find a resolution of the highest standard to your plumbing headaches then call one of our experienced plumbing engineers who can unclog the bite pipes in your house without causing long-term problems within the flat in Westminster W9. You might think that you are offering yourself a 'quick patch up' by attempting to unblock your pipes by yourself, but in reality, you may be causing further headaches that will cost you more in the long run in Westminster W9. Not all lead lead pipe blockages are thanks to household waste a number of them are actually thanks to the roots of trees. Moisture from leaking joints in the pipes attracts them, and they gain access through any cracks that is not improbable to be present. You are going to need a skilled plumbing technician to aid you unblock these pipes, as they'll also have to seal off the cracks to stop the headache occurring again in Westminster W9. A build up of sludge and grime may produce you troubles but is in a diligent manner unpleasant to patch up but one of our experienced plumbing engineers can open up pipes in your house at an affordable rate in Westminster W9.
It is not needed to hire a skilled plumbing technician to unblock your polyvinyl tube because it is in your interest do it well on your own in Westminster W9.
Our trained plumbing professionals are professionally trained to unblock a blockage in the drains at your address and resolve any drainage complication at an affordable valuation in Westminster W9. If you have an dated fashioned apartment with pipes that get easily clogged up and have tried everything to mend it but the difficulty still subsists then call one of our friendly trained plumbing professionals to unblock your pipes in Westminster W9. Our trained plumbing professionals know how to open an obstruction in the pipes cleanly, fast and cheaply with a one year certify in Westminster W9. If you take trump to unblock a lead upvc pipe on your own, prepare heaps of clothes beforehand to avoid overflow in Westminster W9. Do not get in a sweat if you need to unblock a lead upvc pipe and have no idea how to do it because our group or professional trained plumbing professionals are ready to help you in Westminster W9.
Our installer will not only open the blocked drains in Westminster W9 but will also give valuable recommendations and the feints on how to maintain in good condition the ultimate condition of the pipes for as long a time as possible.
If you want to unblock your upvc steel pipe you should to unscrew it and get all the dirt that is clogging it out in Westminster W9. Having to unblock your upvc plastic tube on your own may seem like a daunting task, but it's easy in Westminster W9. One of our qualified plumbing engineers is only a telephone call away to unclog the bite drains at your flat which are causing you so a multitude of complications in Westminster W9. You should to try to unblock a upvc pipe on your own but if all the technologies you use fail, you will have to call for support of an experienced plumbing engineer in Westminster W9. To unblock a upvc lead pipe you should to use a plunger which is an easy technique of clearing drains in Westminster W9.
Need a skilled plumbing specialist who can receive to you fast then call our expert team who can come out to unblock your pipes and put right your plumbing predicament fast and efficiently in Westminster W9.


text:
Q: Read response from servlet to html page Below is my requirement

*

*Login.html page and UserName and Password text field in the form

*Login.html --> submit btn -> call LoginServlet.

*LoginServlet --> validated user from DB

*On success --> call DashboardServlet and DashboardServlet --> call Dashboard.html.

*How to read response object on Dashboard.html[I am passing username here from DashboardServlet].

*if failed on step 4 --> LoginServlet will call Login.html --> again how to read response object on this page, let say I was to alert (user authentication failed)

LogingServlet
    protected void doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) throws ServletException, IOException {
    System.out.println("I am in doPost of LoginServlet");
    String userName = request.getParameter("username");
    String passWord = request.getParameter("password");

    if(LoginDao.validate(userName, passWord))
    {
        HttpSession session=request.getSession();
        if(session.isNew())
           {
            //New session creation
              session=request.getSession(true);
           }
            else
            {
               session = request.getSession(false);
            }

         //setting attribute on session
         session.setAttribute("userName",userName);
         //send request to Welcome.jsp page
         //response.sendRedirect("/Dashboard.html");
         response.sendRedirect("/zmcwebadmin/dashBoardServlet");
         response.getWriter().write(String.valueOf(userName));
         System.out.println("I have connected to DB");
    }

    else
    {
        //response.sendRedirect("error.html");
        String data = "User name and password do not match";
        response.setContentType("text/plain");
        response.setCharacterEncoding("UTF-8");
        response.getWriter().write(data);
        /*RequestDispatcher rd = request.getRequestDispatcher("Loginpage.html"); -- This solution works
        rd.forward(request, response);*/
        //response.sendRedirect("Loginpage.html");
        request.setAttribute("error", "Unknown login, try again");
        response.sendRedirect("/zmcwebadmin/html/Login.html");
        //doGet(request, response);

        System.out.println("I have not connected to server");
       }
      }

DashBoardServlet
    /**
 * @see HttpServlet#doGet(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse
 *      response)
 */
protected void doGet(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response)
        throws ServletException, IOException {
    // TODO Auto-generated method stub

    System.out.println("I am in doGet of dashBoardServlet");
    //New writing on 19th March where initial control given to servlet

        HttpSession session = request.getSession(false);
        if(session.getAttribute("userName") == null) //session is not created
            response.sendRedirect("/zmcwebadmin/html/LoginPage.html");
        else
            response.sendRedirect("/zmcwebadmin/html/Dashboard.html");
}

/**
 * @see HttpServlet#doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse
 *      response)
 */
protected void doPost(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response)
        throws ServletException, IOException {
    // TODO Auto-generated method stub

    System.out.println("I am in doPost of dashBoardServlet");
    String scannerState = request.getParameter("scannerState");
    System.out.println("Dashboard servlet called, scannerState: " + scannerState);
    System.out.println("I am in dashBoardServlet");
    ZebraDbDao zebraDbDao = new ZebraDbDao();
    List<Scanner> scannerList;

    try {
        scannerList = zebraDbDao.getScannerDetail(scannerState);
        System.out.println("I got the scanner list");
        String json = new Gson().toJson(scannerList);
        response.setContentType("application/json");
        response.setCharacterEncoding("UTF-8");
        response.getWriter().write(json);
    } catch (SQLException e) {

        e.printStackTrace();
    } // online scanner
}

Dashboard.html

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
const createRow = require('../utils/createRow')
const TablePosition = require('../utils/TablePosition')

/**
 * Insert a new row in current table
 *
 * @param {Object} opts
 * @param {Slate.Transform} change
 * @param {Number} at
 * @param {Function} textGetter
 * @return {Slate.Transform}
 */
function insertRow (opts, change, at, textGetter) {
  const { value } = change
  const { startBlock } = value

  const pos = TablePosition.create(change, startBlock, opts)
  const { table } = pos

  // Create a new row with the right count of cells
  const firstRow = table.nodes.get(0)
  const newRow = createRow(opts, firstRow.nodes.size, textGetter)

  if (typeof at === 'undefined') {
    at = pos.getRowIndex() + 1
  }

  return change
    .insertNodeByKey(table.key, at, newRow)
    .moveToEndOfNode(
      newRow.nodes.get(pos.getColumnIndex())
    )
}

module.exports = insertRow

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Open Journal of Political Science
10.4236/ojps.2017.72020
Politics of Participation―In Search for Deliberative Governance in China
Zaijian Qian*, Shitao Huo*
Political Science Department, University of Wisconsin―Baraboo and Sauk County, Baraboo, WI, USA
Received: February 16, 2017; Accepted: April 11, 2017; Published: April 14, 2017
A rising enthusiasm among general public to participate the government businesses has become a noticeable development in China 's recent history. Authors have observed government sponsored programs to endorse policy feedbacks from society; we have also witnessed spontaneous actions by individuals and social groups to involve in the debate and discussion on varies socioeconomic issues and problems, mostly through direct contact with government agencies, or mass media and social media networks. It is through open, fair and public deliberation over large and small issues in all sectors of government institutions that the quality of government governance has been steadily improved. This in return galvanizes further changes in the political institutions, processes and policy making outcomes, and contributes to a higher echelon of legitimacy for the regime. Politics of political participation through democratic deliberation in China is a logical result of a permanent transformation in decades―from the change of political rhetoric in nation's Constitution, to amazingly expanded economy, profound restructured social stratifications, redistributed wealth and assets, enormous number of affluent middle class population, and increasingly fledged agents of civil society. We argue that the growth of massive participation in government businesses has not only proved to be realistic to its governance, but also well serves an alternative mechanism for oversight of government behavior. Deliberative democracy is useful because it is a complementary agent to electoral democracy.
Political Participation, Deliberative Democracy, Middle Class, Coercion, Cooperation, China , Politics of Election and Deliberation
In contemporary Chinese society, many have observed a rising enthusiasm among general public to participate the government business processes. The politics of participation in the areas of judiciary, legislative as well as executive branches of the governance has become a new normal of everyday life.
When evaluating an earth shaking transformation in China's recent history, lot of credits have been attributed to its paramount agenda in economic growth. However, the profound socioeconomic changes have also caused inadvertent yet, permanent evolution in the nation's political life. As result of a restructured social stratification, redistribution of social wealth, and a steadily growing middle class at about 340 million prosperous citizens (China Business Review, 2009) , general public has started testing once-to-be dangerous water in government business swamp.
It seems that government power has increasingly shown its growing penchant of tolerance. The old fashioned governance through coercion has given way to much willingness for cooperation. A great number of socially articulated issues, together with many government sponsored topics, have been successfully managed to put on the public tables for deliberation. Increasingly transparent policy making processes have educated and taught everyone that successful government governance can be reached by welcoming public participation.
2. It Is Your Business so as Mine
2.1. Judicial Retrials
One of the recent judicially repealed cases has resonated how a criminal justice case has led to extensive public deliberation that contributes to a different result in the government retrial. The judicial case of Nie, Shupin, who was sentenced to death penalty for the alleged rape and murder of a women, and was executed twenty-two years ago, has been recently repealed by the State Supreme Court as an wrongfully identified perpetrator for Wang, Shujin, a serial killer, and the real criminal in this case. Similarly, another social deliberation on the "lei, Yang" case revealed the excessive use of police violence causing the death of a college graduate student. Most recently, several other criminal cases have been put on retrial with opposite adjudications as a result of socially participatory deliberation.
The fact the overturning of judicial cases rarely happened until recent time demonstrates the improved sense of public participation in government decisions, the improved tolerance level to appeals in current judicial proceedings, and the willingness of government to work with non-governmental articulations (Xinjing Journal, 2016) . These also helped unveil the police abuse of violence and to express the concerns about possible ripple effect of government wrong doings over the general public safety (Xinhua News Agency, 2013) . Overall, the real astonishing fact of these judicial cases is not how the case were overturned, it is the national attention and extensive deliberation among general public make them conspicuous topics. Obvious take away from reviewing these successful retrial cases could include the rising public enthusiasm in participating government judicial decisions, the real social pressures in checking and correcting government businesses, and ultimate objective for social justice―your business is mine as well.
2.2. Executive Policy Making
More cases of public participation in executive policy making process through extensive deliberation on fundamental socioeconomic issues have occurred on regular basis.
On local as well as provincial levels, township and city residents are able to sponsor the agenda for issues deliberation. An estimated 453,000 meetings were held in the year of 2004 alone at village level for deliberation that covers wide spectrum of issues such as budget, land contract, water supply, school site, waste management, migrant workers' income (China File, 2011-2016) .
Ground rules and procedures were worked out between government and citizens as guidelines for the decision making. For example, first, a meeting can be called if 15 signatures are collected; next, participants to the villages' meeting are selected based upon both application and self-nomination; thirdly, all policy options are encouraged to lay on the table for deliberation, pros or cons; and finally, upon picking final option, the government will have to explain the policy decision with justification and all necessary supporting reasons to the public (China File, 2011-2016) . Some of the formats and functions of these participatory governance practices seem close to the town hall meeting and its referendums in the USA .
2.3. Legislative Deliberation
Nothing could be more significant than a law passed by the National People's Congress in regards to public hearing system in 2000 (Jiang, 2000) . A quintessential example of political reform, this system requires public hearing over administrative laws and regulations. Therefore, the general public has a legal opportunity to not only learn, but also express their opinions over their day-to-day interests of life such as educational fees, fireworks restrictions, and air fare regulations.
The Personal Income Tax Law of 2007 presents an outstanding case, where National People's Congress Standing Committee promoted a draft for public deliberation before it settled with a final version. Based on massive and national wide discussion, debate, hearing via academia, mass communication and social media, the threshold of original tax rate was raised from 800 RMB to 1600 RMB, (RMB, Hu, 2007) and it was passed by the National People's Congress as Tax Law.
2.4. Institutionalized Attempt for Deliberative Democracy
Deliberative Democracy in Chinese language has its derivative meanings in consultation, examination, discussion, dialogues, and explicit rhetoric inclination towards debate for negotiations and compromises.
The concept of Deliberative Democracy and its political utilities has been officially recognized and promoted since the 18th CPC National Congress and the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee (Xinhuanet, 2013) .
Upon commitment to eventual goal for Democracy, the consensus on alternative approach towards democracy seems to have reached among Chinese academia as well as government, that is a much needed and applicable model will work for Chinese society at a much cost benefit and efficient approach. And that is Deliberative Democracy. First, electoral democracy is not part of Chinese tradition, and will need time to construct; second, electoral democracy doesn't answer the question of how government is making its decisions; third, with popular participation in deliberative process in policy making and implementation, real sense of representation will function over the power of political elitism (Yu, 2013) .
Some have observed in contemporary China , regime backs down in the face of massive social discontent made China a different model than Russian's. Many empirical cases seems to showcase the democratic in natured practices have been developed through regime accountability. These include new programs and policies for migration of rural millions to cities; to strike unsafe milk and crooked officials, ease rural poverty (Roskin, 2016) and of course, the increased debates and deliberations on wide variety of social issues resulted in fundamental policy changes in tax policy, one child policy, and the crack down on corruptions.
3. Deliberative Democracy in Political Participation
One common consensus about democracy as concept and system is the scope of participation of citizens in the political process, from election to governance. Modern democratic system allows political parties to mobilize majority of citizens along party lines to win the elections. The winning of election starts governance under party's agenda that supposedly represent the expectations of their political supporters.
By definition, winning of elections and controlling governance can be legitimized and reasonable only when greater number of citizens becomes essential part of the processes. A democratic representative government, therefore, has been the result of politics of participation.
Some has viewed deliberative democracy as one of most real and effective approach to the practice of public participation, as it provides citizens the opportunity to watch and urge the politicians to turn their words into reality after the electoral process is over. Therefore, the politics of participation continues as integrated and consistent process as what "Democracy" is originally meant for as forms in decision making, organization and governance (Manin, 1987; Carcasson et al., 2010; Gutmann & Thompson, 2004) .
We argue that despite its overall democratic system being uninstitutionalized, deliberative democracy at macro as well as micro levels in China's government governance process is existing, and being promoted to a positive direction.
Chinese government has proactively pursued cooperation with greater tolerance to include general public and its voices in its governance. This statement has been based on our observation over recent changes in China , and is justified by the empirical cases listed in this writing, and appeared in widely accessible media networks. For more or less, the Chinese stories exemplify four core components of what a deliberative democracy entails―inclusion, political equality, reasonableness, and publicity (Young, 2000) . Some has predicted that due to its current political system and historical background, a deliberative democracy may become a much suitable and sustainable model for a successful Chinese political transition (Qian, 2016) .
4. Peeling off the Chinese Onion
Deliberative democracy in China does not happen by accident. It becomes a reality right as result of its ongoing changing current political system and deeply embedded historical background. Let us peel off the Chinese onion layer by layer and manage to figure out the embryos that spawn the changes.
4.1. Rising Political Legitimacy
The UN has recognized the undisputable contribution China has made to the global human society by lifting 700 million of its population out of poverty in the past 30 years (The State Council, 2017) . Moreover, the better opportunity of employment, consistently improved quality of living, and overall socioeconomic conditions in China, have been reflected in a recent international survey as highest ranked country in satisfaction of national conditions, and in views of current economic situation with followers in far behind distance except Vietnam (Pew Research Center, 2014) .
Much expanded economy and incredibly improved living conditions have made Chinese the happiest (89%) in such survey comparing with 43 other countries (Simmons, 2014) . Many of the surveyed Chinese people believed their conditions are going to get better; economy will continue to improve; and their next generations are to be financially more affluent than their parents.
Years of economic growth and its strong and substantive impact upon the life of people has definitely contributed to the much improved legitimacy of, and people's confidence with the Chinese government.
4.2. Constitutionalized Rights for Private Property
One fundamental reason for such extensive support of government among Chinese public has been the result of a landmark transformation of nation's constitution in acknowledging the property rights of individual citizens. Protection of citizen's property rights has been clearly added with general consensus in the nation's Constitution sine 1982 (Chen, 2004) . Twenty-five years later, a monumental Property Law was formulated to define the personal property ownership, the utilities of properties and protection of the rights of property owners (The State Council, 2014) .
Such incremental yet determinant change in CCP government to embrace the reality and trends of individual rights essentially represented by their property ownership testifies that the success of transformation in economic areas would inexorably lead to moral as well as institutional progress towards humanity. It simply means how a dominant party can even risk loosing its logical sense of Communist Manifesto for a much desired political legitimacy; and such transformation replicates the similar revisionist moves by European social democratic parties back in 19 Century.
A CCP government with much revisionist platforms and institutions has helped the nation to reach remarkable success in both economic and social transformations. Recognition and protection of private property in China guarantees popular support of government legitimacy in the nation's future adventures.
4.3. Expanded Private Entrepreneurs and Civil Society
As result of economic expansion, increased economic freedom in private ownership, and occurrence of affluent social groups, indispensable agents for private sectors as well as civil society have all come into being.
Social forces have increasingly seen much of the growth in private entrepreneurial sectors. World Bank's research shows that in the past 20 years since the middle of 1990's, entrepreneurs, not government control, are primary source of China 's growth. Chinese private businesses, such as Alibaba, Baidu, Wanda, Huawei, Lens Technologies and many other rapidly emerging companies have spawned over 40 million in numbers, and started challenging national as well as international rules of business games (Chatham House, 2015) . Another remarkable data finds, while state owned and non-state owned enterprises each made revenue of 4 trillion respectively in 2000, the total private businesses' revenues jumped 18 times while state owned business only increased six fold by 2013 (Tse, 2016) . Chinese government announced that private enterprises were responsible for over 60% of China GDP by the yare of 2014 (People Net, 2014) . In east coast areas, the private enterprises accounted for 80.81% of all revenues in most recent times (Tan, 2016) .
Backing up by financial resources, together with policy for absorbing non party members into government business circle, business celebrities have taken responsibilities for governance. By 2012, billionaires have started becoming representatives to People's Congress: top 17% of these reps are much richer than the entire US Congress people and the president, entire Supreme Court members in combine (Hoogewerf, 2012) .
A third social string beyond government and private sectors lies in rapid growing civil society. You may think how this could even be real in a less politically active nation. However, as we―the authors and all ordinary Chinese people ―have experienced and observed, a living civil society are real part of everyday life in China today. Take religion as an example. According to most recent published CIA World Factbook, the total religious population of China has reached amazing 655 million plus people as of 2016, which include Buddhists, Christians, Muslins, Confucianists, and Daoists (CIA World Factbook, 2016) .
A wealthy population in China has taken the lead in international travelers since 2014, surpassing the US by 54 billion dollars with only 6% of its total citizens. And the number of Chinese International traveler has reached 120 million by 2015 (Reed, 2015) . The free choices of daily activities are also souring in migrant workers across regions and borders, and in even faster pace of free flow of FDI and international students all over European, North American and other developed states.
Nothing could be more exciting than the explosive rising of social interest groups all over the country. People of all walks have managed to find others sharing same interests, and the ways to entertain, express, articulate, and enjoy their life. Dancing on the square in both urban and rural areas, chess and cards clubs, literature, music, art and artifacts education in senior citizens' universities, art performance groups, to name just a few among all others. And all of these groups are non profit and socially self-reliance interest groups. With social media tools, authors experienced in-depth discussions on varies social political issues, including harsh criticism to historical as well as current policies and political leaders.
Up to this point, we seemed to have depicted a clear scene of root causes, the logic and existence of participatory politics via public deliberation in China .
4.4. Historical Legacy in Remonstration
However, the regime in transition has no fully fledged institutions to automatically respond to the articulation from society in a free and confident approach. It is rather a bit of challenge to the traditional mentality of governance. With no appropriate mechanisms channeling state and society, yet a lot of sense of urgency to ease up potential spark to mob uprising, a historical legacy of remonstration was also brought into practice (Liao, 2014) . It is also believed that Mao's revolutionary legacy of "Mass Line", the growing reported public security incidents due to corruption and bureaucratic mal-management, and out of date old fashioned top-down management approach, all forced government to opt alternative yet effective way for governance (Rosenberg, 2006) .
Remonstration was a tradition developed since ancient royal dynasties where emperors tolerated dissuasions from his loyal senior advisors on civil and military strategies. Mass Line is one of Mao's revolutionary principles that brought unexhausted material and moral support from nation's majority for the final success of his party and army.
It turns out the historical background and the tradition of one party rule, have reconciled with changed economic and political conditions in the post revolutionary society in China . All of which have contributed to a brand new strategy motivating the public participation. With modern technology in internet and social media, government at all levels, welcome public input for their policy making and implementation. Such political experimentation proves to be pragmatic, and sustainable in the government governance. Functionality wise, it works; and theoretically, it is useful.
The used to be coercive policy making and implementation processes have gradually, yet steadily given way to reciprocity and cooperation.
5. Missing Links in Electoral Democracy?
Let us discuss the theoretical usefulness of Deliberative Democracy for the government governance in China and its implication for democratic practices. First, in conclusion, a government with much improved legitimacy will no longer fear challenges to its governance. Yet, for the sake of sustainable stability, open mindedness with no change of power structure, the institutions will need to be reshaped to include plural voices and interests. The general public has the vested interests in helping government to continue transforming along a positive direction, and they learn from social practices how to reach out to the government decision making without pushing it too hard. Thus, an inclusive, open, equal and reasonable institutional devise has been constructed as combined effort by both government and society, which sets the ground for reciprocal and participatory processes for governance.
Second, Deliberative Democracy puts political participation under scrutiny. Now a question arises as corollary of the logic in western style of electoral democracy. Does democratic elected government warrant its essential nature of representation?
This question can be answered by two folds of analysis. First, western electoral democracy is legitimized by the scale of participation. Believing the less political participation, the less democracy (Verba, 1972) , American party' machines have given their position to direct primary, followed by rounds of political campaign finance reforms, just to maintain the very essence of a representative government. Despite all the efforts, the lower turn out rate during election days in America and others (Pew Research Center, 2016) has challenged the legitimacy of political representation of government at all levels in these western democracies.
The second set of analysis to above question seems to be much terribly relevant―the even lower participatory rate AFTER the elections. With extremely smaller group of citizens' attention, or nearly zero impact of public opinions (Glens & Page, 2014) on government governing process, the authentic essence of democracy has been greatly compromised. American political system relies on the checks and balances, and media for oversight of the government performances. When Washington DC is under one party's rule, and or when media lost its professional ethics as we have witnessed in the overwhelmingly failed polls in the last presidential elections, the chance the general constituencies can be taken as hostages for partisan/corporative/bureaucrats complex's interests could be astonishingly real and tragic. Did we approve George W. Bush's unilateral military invasion in Iraq ? When trillions of tax dollars were invested to rescue Wall Street financial tycoons, and paid for their bonuses, did Barack Obama ask about tens of millions of those living in poverty in Kentucky Mountains and Rust Belt how to fetch their next meal?
However, China 's experiments in deliberative problem solving for governance may provide a possible alternative for public oversight of government businesses ―a complementary mechanism for democratic operation. With increasingly wide scale of participation in the governance processes, facilitated by the open information and free and fair deliberation, the government is held accountable by participatory public for its behavior in policy making and implementation, regardless of campaign promises or political rhetoric. Given time for political institutions to fully improve, a real democracy legitimized by mass participation will probably be accomplished with all the links in its functionality―majority ruled election, deliberative governance, and all social powers' oversight.
Qian, Z. J., & Huo, S. T. (2017). Politics of Participation―In Search for Deliberative Governance in China . Open Journal of Political Science, 7, 257-266. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2017.72020
1. Carcasson, M. et al. (2010). Communication Studies and Deliberative Democracy: Current Contributions and Future Possibilities. Journal of Public Deliberation, 6, Article 8. [Paper reference null]
2. Chatham House (2015). The Royal Institute of International Affairs. The Rise of Private Enterprise in China, 16 July 2015. [Paper reference null]
3. Chen, J. F. (2004). China Perspectives [Online]. The Revision of the Constitution in the PRC, 53, May-June. [Paper reference null]
4. China Business Review (2009). USCBC on 1 January. [Paper reference null]
5. China File (2011-2016). A Project of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at Asia Society. Center on U.S.-China Relations, 4. [Paper reference null]
6. China File (2011-2016). pp. 4-5. [Paper reference null]
7. CIA World Factbook (2016). China Demographics Profiles 2016, 8 October. [Paper reference null]
8. Glens, M., & Page, B. (2014). Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics, Cambridge University Press for AP. [Paper reference null]
9. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? (pp. 3-7). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Paper reference null]
10. Hoogewerf, R. (2012). Huren Report. 30 November. [Paper reference null]
11. Jiang, Z. M. (2000). Legislation Law of the People's Republic of China (Order of the President No. 31). [Paper reference null]
12. Liao, R. (2014). China's Experiment with Deliberative Democracy (p. 4). Center on US-China Relation, May, 27, 20. [Paper reference null]
13. Manin, B. (1987). On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation. Political Theory, 15, 338-368. [Paper reference null]
14. People Net (2014). Modernization of State Governance, State Ownership vs. Private Enterprises—Walking with Two Legs. URL (Last checked 25 February 2017)
http://theory.people.com.cn/n/2014/0825/c388253-25532859.html [Paper reference null]
15. Pew Research Center (2014). Global Attitudes & Trends. 9 September: 87% in National Conditions, and 89% in Economic Situations; Vietnam has been copying all its developmental strategies and socioeconomic policies from China. [Paper reference null]
16. Pew Research Center (2016). The USA Lands 31st among the 35 Countries, Most of Them Are OECD Developed and Democratic States. 2 August. [Paper reference null]
17. Qian, Z. J. (2016). Deliberative Democracy—In Search of a Path to Open Operation of Public Power. Journal of Probe, No. 5, 42-48. [Paper reference null]
18. Reed, Dan, (2015). Chinese Extend Lead as the World's Biggest Spenders on Foreign Travel. Forbes, 7 January 2016; Travel China Guide. [Paper reference null]
19. RMB = Acronym for Ren Min Bi, the name of Chinese dollar. Hu, J. T. (2007). Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Amending the Individual Income Tax Law of the People's Republic of China. (Order of the President No. 66). [Paper reference null]
20. Rosenberg, S. (2006). Human Nature, Communication, and Culture: Rethinking Democratic Deliberation in China and the West. In E. J. Leib, & B. He (Eds.), The Search for Deliberative Democracy in China (pp. 77-112). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. [Paper reference null]
21. Roskin, M. G. (2016). Country and Concepts: Politics, Geography, Culture (13th ed., pp. 282-283). Pearson. [Paper reference null]
22. Simmons, K. (2014). China's Government May Be Communist, but Its People Embrace Capitalism. Pew Research Center, 10 October. [Paper reference null]
23. Tan, L. (2016). Secretary of Department of Chinese Industry and Commerce. Report on Chinese Private Enterprises Top 500, 25 August 2016. [Paper reference null]
24. The State Council of the People's Republic of China (2014). Property Law of the People's Republic of China. 23 August. [Paper reference null]
25. The State Council of the People's Republic of China (2017). Top News. China Issues White Paper on Poverty Reduction, Human Rights. 17 October. URL (last checked 25 February 2017)
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-10/17/content_27081127.htm [Paper reference null]
26. Tse, E. (2016). The Rise of Entrepreneurship in China. Forbes, 5 April. [Paper reference null]
27. Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row. [Paper reference null]
28. Xinhua News Agency (2013). 13 May. [Paper reference null]
29. Xinhuanet (2013). Decision of the Central Committee of the CCP of China on Deepening Major Reforms. 15 November. URL (last checked 25 February 2017)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-11/15/c_132891922.htm [Paper reference null]
30. Xinjing Journal (2016). 12 December. [Paper reference null]
31. Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy (pp. 31-33). Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Paper reference null]
32. Yu, K. P. (2013). Several Issues on Deliberative Democracy with Chinese Characteristics. CPCnews.cn, 23 December. [Paper reference null]
*Qian, Zaijian, Ph.D. and Professor, Director of Research Center for Local Government and Governance Innovation, Dean of Honors College of Nanjing Normal University, China; Dr. Huo, Shitao, Senior Lecturer of Political Science at University of Wisconsin, Visiting Professor of Nanjing Normal University, Research Fellow for Local Government and Governance Innovation at NNU.
●OJPS Subscription
●Most popular papers in OJPS
●About OJPS News


What times are worship services on Sunday?
Every week, you can expect to hear stories of how God has changed people's lives, relevant teachings from the Bible, with time to respond to God in prayer and song, and free coffee. After the worship service and you're welcome to stay and enjoy some healthy snacks or a light meal.
Wear whatever is comfortable for you. Most people dress casual. You being you is more important to us than what you wear.
The sanctuary has two entrances. The main entrance is in the front of the building; a volunteer will meet you at the door to direct you to the worship area. You can also enter the building using the side entrance (up the ramp) in the back parking lot.
We have a childcare program for toddlers every Sunday and classes for young children. We want to provide a fun and safe environment for kids to learn about Jesus.
We encourage older students to attend the worship service at 10:30 because there's something special about gathering with the whole faith community – it's a "Jesus kind of thing to do." Several times during the year, older students can also participate in activities designed especially for them.
Either way, we're glad the youngest child and oldest teenager have a chance to worship, learn and celebrate our Most Holy God together.
How can I get involved in the church's ministries? Do I have to join the church?
It's a good question. You don't have to join the church" to get involved with the ministries at Journey of Faith. Maybe, God is placing you where you are right now, in service only, in relationship to your family and friends. (And, that's ok!).
There's a challenge in merging "good works" with the effort of growing and deepening our faith as part of a community — and that's important to pursue too. We think the boldest, most innovative and hardest thing to do is join a group of ordinary people trying to live out their faith by journeying together.
Just let us know what you're passionate about and we'll figure out something together.
We do love our coffee! After worship, follow the crowd to our Fellowship area where the coffee's been brewing. Sometimes, in the summer, there's an ice cream cart filled with coffee-flavored treats and other goodies to cool you off. And, during the winter, it's nice to relax with a hot cup of java in front of the fireplace with new friends.
You can call our church staff at 734.971.4245 or send an email to: jofdisciples@gmail.com.