text:
Ex-German FM Hails Iran's Approach towards Syria
TEHRAN, Nov. 26, 2013 (FNA)- Former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, in a meeting with Chairman of the Iranian Parliaments National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Alaeddin Boroujerdi, underlined that Iran has adopted a rational and correct approach towards Syria.
Fischer pointed to the Syrian crisis, and said, "We also agree with Irans approach that there is only a political solution to the existing cul-de-sac in Syria, otherwise many dangers would be posed to the region."
The former German foreign minister called for further cooperation between Iran and Germany on important regional and strategic issues in future.
Boroujerdi pointed to the Syrian crisis, and said, "We had the rational belief since the beginning of the Syrian crisis that it does not have a military solution and we can be hopeful that there is an end to this countrys problems through political and diplomatic methods."
The Iranian legislator said that all countries, including big powers, have now realized that Irans approach towards the Syrian crisis is correct.
Iranian officials have repeatedly underlined that Tehran is in favor of negotiations between the Syrian government and opposition groups to create stability in the Middle Eastern country.
In November 2012, Iran hosted a meeting between the representatives of the Syrian government and opposition to encourage them to start talks to find a political solution to their problems. The National Dialogue Conference kicked off work in Tehran mid November with the motto of No to Violence, Yes to Democracy".
The meeting brought together almost 200 representatives of various Syrian ethnicities, political groups, minorities, the opposition, and state officials.
Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011 with organized attacks by well-armed gangs against the Syrian police, border guards, statesmen, army and the civilians being reported across the country.
Thousands of people have been killed since terrorist and armed groups turned protest rallies into armed clashes.
The government blames outlaws, saboteurs, and armed terrorist groups for the deaths, stressing that the unrest is being orchestrated from abroad.
In October 2011, calm was almost restored in most parts of the Arab state after President Assad started a reform initiative in the country, but Israel, the US and its Arab allies brought the country into chaos through every possible means. Tel Aviv, Washington and some Arab capitals have been staging various plots in the hope of increasing unrests in Syria.
The US daily, Washington Post, reported in May, 2012 that the Syrian rebels and terrorist groups battling Assads government have received significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, a crime paid for by the Persian Gulf Arab states and coordinated by the United States.
The newspaper, quoting opposition activists and US and foreign officials, reported that Obama administration officials emphasized the administration has expanded contacts with opposition military forces to provide the Persian Gulf nations with assessments of rebel credibility and command-and-control infrastructure.
According to the report, material was being stockpiled in Damascus, in Idlib near the Turkish border and in Zabadani on the Lebanese border.
Opposition activists who several months ago said the rebels were running out of ammunition said in May that the flow of weapons - most bought on the black market in neighboring countries or from elements of the Syrian military in the past - has significantly increased after a decision by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Persian Gulf states to provide millions of dollars in funding each month.


Get access to the Ellipse Partner Site, our password-protected section dedicated exclusively to those operating Ellipse systems.
The Ellipse Partner Site gives you access to a comprehensive download area. The download area provides clinical information that will help you to get the best results from your system. Marketing materials, including before-and-after photos, will help you to promote your Ellipse treatments to your clients.
I accept to receive newsletters by e-mail from Ellipse A/S. I also accept that the proprietary information on Ellipse4Physicians is for my own personal use and may not be passed on to third parties.
You will find the serial number on the rear side of your system.
Once we have confirmed the serial number of your Ellipse system your personal password will be activated and you can enter your selected user club.
To get access to your user club type in your user name and password in the login fields in the lower left hand corner of the screen picture.
Please note, that it may take up to 5 working days to process your request and activate your password.


text:
Dodgers News: Mat Latos Aware Of What Changes Are Necessary
by Staff Writer 08/14/2015, 2:27 PM
For a second consecutive outing with the Los Angeles Dodgers, Mat Latos failed to make it through five innings. His start Thursday was marginally better than the Aug. 8 trip to the mound as he threw 4.2 innings compared to four innings against the Pittsburgh Pirates.
"Obviously, this wasn't what we wanted and not what he wants either," Dodgers manager Don Mattingly said of his right-hander's performance. "First couple of innings were OK. Then it unraveled a little bit." Latos worked around an Alberto Callaspo error in the first inning that put the leadoff man aboard and struck out the last two batters faced in the second inning.
A Tucker Barnhart leadoff double in the third spelled trouble for Latos as the Cincinnati Reds went on to take a 2-0 lead behind a pair of RBI singles in the inning. "I'm healthy. I feel healthy," a visibly frustrated Latos said.
"The ball is coming out of my hand good. It's just a matter of stringing together pitches and string together innings. It's what I'm having a tough time doing right now." The matchup was his first time facing the Reds since the club traded him to the Miami Marlins in December of last year.
Latos accused the Reds medical staff of rushing him back from injury, which unsurprisingly didn't sit well some in the Cincinnati organization, including Skip Schumaker. "Who cares? Turn the page," Latos said. "It's done and it's over with. I've got to worry about what I've got to worry about here."
That worry includes getting away from being too dependent on offspeed pitches. "I just need to get back to pitching like me instead of trying to fool everybody and throw too many breaking pitches," Latos said.
"I need to go back and look at a couple years back when I was throwing more fastballs and locating better." This season he's thrown a fastball 63 percent of the time, followed by a slider at 16 percent, curveball eight percent and changeup four percent.
There's also been an adjustment to learning on the fly with new batterymates Latos said, likening the transition to Spring Training. When the Dodgers traded for Latos, he arrived with 4-7 record, 4.48 ERA, 3.35 FIP and 1.25 WHIP in 16 starts.
He had better results after being reinstated from the disabled list, going 3-3 over his last seven starts (45.2 innings) before the trade with a 2.96 ERA and 43 to nine strikeout to walk ratio.
However, since being traded to Los Angeles, Latos is 0-2 with a 6.75 ERA, 4.40 FIP and 1.43 WHIP over three starts. He's struck out eight batters and walked three, along with giving up two home runs.
[divide]
Kiké Hernandez Growing More Comfortable In Role With Dodgers
Tyler Nelson on
Dodgers: Justin Turner Takes Some Swings at a Local Practice Facility

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Nunatsiavut Assembly Audio Feed
The Path to Self-Government
About Nunatsiavut Government
Nunatsiavut Assembly
Constructed at a cost of $9.4 million, the Nunatsiavut Assembly Building officially opened in Hopedale on September 4, 2012.
Eligibility & Enrolment
Non-Insured Health Benefits
Approximately 70% of funding for PSSSP and Non-Insured Health Benefits is spent on Beneficiaries outside of Nunatsiavut.
Labrador Inuit
Explore Labrador
Nunatsiavut Tourism
The Torngat Mountains National Park received an award for second place for Responsible Tourism. The National Park placed second within the world
The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement is the only Land Claims Agreement in Atlantic Canada, and it sets the precedent for any future Land Claims Agreement.
Departments	Resources	Media
Search Nunatsiavut Government
Stay up to date with the Nunatsiavut Government via RSS
Translation Options
Inuttitut
We will strive to keep you informed and up to date on Nunatsiavut Government programs, services, initiatives and events, etc.
In This Section The Latest
The Latest Most Popular
News posted in May, 2015.Clear
Sorry, no articles could be found.
Type Your Question Below
25 Ikajuktauvik Road
P.O. Box 70, Nain
NL Canada A0P 1L0
Enter your e-mail below
Subscribe to Nunatsiavut Government
Copyright © 2021 Nunatsiavut Government
JAC. We Create.


Do you love your IT provider? Are they a partner in your business success?
If not, consider partnering with us.
how to leverage the latest in cloud technology, network security and backup solutions.
We are quick to respond, patient and thorough, getting the job done right the first time.
Installing and setting up a new VoIP system is easier and more affordable than you might expect.
We'll manage all of your IT services for a flat-rate fee so you can focus your efforts on spurring your revenues to grow.
running when you need it.
If you are looking for reliable and responsive IT support services, Fusion Technology Solutions can help you today!
Maybe you're concerned with the current rising costs of your IT services, or maybe you are just running short on time because of your expanding business and need to hand over the reins of some services to someone else.


Team Orange is the Penny Appeal fundraising family. We're passionate about helping the poor and needy and do all we can to transform lives worldwide.
With Team Orange there's something for everyone, so whether you want to bag pack at your local supermarket, run a charity dinner or even climb the highest mountain in the world - We've got new and exciting experiences and opportunities for you!
Sign up to #TeamOrange using the REGISTER NOW button above. You can start thinking about your own events straight away by clicking to DOWNLOAD OUR IDEAS BOOKLET and as soon as you know what you want to do click below to register your event.
Whatever you get up to as part of #TeamOrange you won't be alone - we'll be there to support you every step of the way.
You can contact us at teamorange@pennyappeal.org and keep in touch on social media for the latest news on our events and challenges.


This lot offers a tranquil setting in the beautiful PNW forest! Property slopes so is ideal for two story home with daylight basement. Properties rear boast quaint creek and partial green belt for privacy. Beautiful setting! Affordable opportunity for a custom home or contractor spec home! All utilities readily available. Area amenities include golf course, marina & more.


Size: on tag: Petite (X-Small), but seems to run bigger.
Description: Cute and girly, this cropped jacket is made out of plush faux fur material and features 3/4 sleeves and small pockets on the chest. It closes with snaps in the front and there are matching snaps on the pockets and on the small decorative 'flaps' on the sides at the bottom. Perfect over black turtlenecks for a stylish pin-up girl look, this will be a great addition to your casual retro wardrobe! Please note that the jacket if fully lined but is not meant for cold weather.
Measurements: Bust up to ~ 37" (94cm); Underbust (the Bottom of the Jacket) ~ 32" (81cm); Sleeve ~ 17" (43cm); Shoulder to Hem ~ 13.5" (34cm). Please note that there is no stretch.


US disputes lawyers are seeking their next hunting ground as the wave of financial crisis litigation nears its end. Legal Business asks what the next big prize will be.
'I remember a science class in high school where I watched a snake swallow its prey. Its body became distended where the food was stuck, before moving slowly towards the end of the snake. That's where we are with the financial crisis litigation. We are really getting towards the end of the snake with all these cases.' So says Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's New York co-head and former global co-chair of litigation, Mark Kirsch, summing up the disputes market in Manhattan today.


text:
Rihanna Is 'Back Making Music Again,' A$AP Rocky Confirms
By Dani Medina
Please don't stop the music, Rihanna! She won't — if her boyfriend A$AP Rocky has anything to say about it.
In a recent interview, the "Praise The Lord" rapper confirmed that new Rihanna music is on the way. "I'm so glad that my lady's back making music again and whatnot, and getting back out there. It's just incredible," he said, adding how proud he is that Rihanna is performing at the Super Bowl LVII halftime show. "The Super Bowl is huge, and her being the creative she is, she going to bring it, man. I'm excited. I'm more excited than everybody else, honestly."
A$AP's revelation comes about two months after Rihanna addressed her fans about the possibility of new music. "That's not true," Rihanna said about a new album dropping in 2023. "Super Bowl is one thing. New music is another thing. Do you hear that, fans?" Since her statement, however, she's been spotted at the studio several times.
Rihanna has remained pretty tight-lipped about her Super Bowl performance, but did hint that it's going to be star-studded. Back in September, TMZ reported Rihanna is looking at over 50 artists to potentially join her on the big stage. Among those on the list are past collaborators like Drake, Calvin Harris and JAY-Z, and others.
"I'm nervous, but I'm excited," she said a month later about her looming performance.
The new music doesn't stop with Rihanna. A$AP himself revealed his new album is almost finished. "Especially for both of us, it is a good year for both of us to be more active and be out there," he said.


Kauvar says a dermatologist's recommendations can help consumers make informed decisions. "People shouldn't hunt and peck for products," she adds. "Not knowing what type of skin you have is why so many people try unnecessary products that can often do more harm than good."
An expert in laser procedures, Kauvar says that, in the past, techniques for improving aging skin required invasive laser or surgical procedures, which produced open wounds and required long recovery times. Today, she says, people can choose from a variety of non-ablative (non-wounding) laser treatments that are designed to reverse, improve or erase the early signs of aging, take very little time to perform, and have a minimal, if any, recovery time.


infoMETRICS Consulting Engineers L.t.d was founded in 2007 in order to provide integrated solutions in the areas of Earth Observation, Environmental Modeling and Geographical Information Systems. The company's primary goal is to enhance the use of remote sensing images in different sectors of economy.
infoMETRICS has been early established strong collaborations with big enterprises of construction, wind energy and defense market. The use of specialized services ensures company's economical stability with an increasing amount of sales.
infoMETRICS has been involved in design, monitoring and development of numerous construction projects as a technical consultant using GPS, 3D Laser Scanner, terrestrial and UAV-based photogrammetry and satellite image processing technologies utilizing state-of-the-art computer vision, image processing and statistical data processing techniques.
Moreover, infoMETRICS has contributed to the design and development of several wind farms and small hydro plants. The company has been involved in the licensing phase of more than 250MW of wind energy and SHP projects. infoMETRICS has been a pioneer consultant in energy market by extensively using satellite remote sensing data for energy resource assessment.


Six people were hurt Saturday afternoon when two Pasadena Police helicopters collided with one another on a helipad. Authorities believe that one helicopter was landing and the other was preparing for take off when the accident occurred, the San Jose Mercury News reports.
All involved suffered minor injuries and were taken to nearby hospitals. The injured included the two pilots, their observers, and two police officers on the ground. The helicopters sustained major body damage, with one aircraft left with a crumpled tail and broken blades and the other also losing blades. Officers say the landing helicopter had just completed routine patrol and the helicopter about to leave was assigned to cover traffic following the UCLA-USC football game at the Rose Bowl.
The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating the accident. The weather, which was cloudy and drizzly when the crash occurred, may have been a factor.
While air travel has statistically shown to be more safe than traveling by car, several aviation accidents still occur each year. Many of these accidents could have been prevented if the pilot, airline, or its staff did not act recklessly or negligently. If you have been injured in an aviation accident, a lawsuit against the guilty party could help you receive the financial compensation you deserve for your pain and suffering.


You are beginning a path of Reconciliation by visiting ConnectR and choosing to answer some of the calls to action listed here. Share your learning journey on social media and challenge your friends and family to get involved! Use the hashtag #beaconnectr and find us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Hashtags are a great way to follow and become involved in online conversations around Reconciliation. Try #myreconciliation; #readtheTRCreport; #reconciliation; and #myreconciliationincludes.
Memes are often photos with captions that are intended to be funny—but we can also use memes to virally disseminate ideas around Reconciliation or more serious issues. Take a look online and try your hand at creating a meme that can promote Reconciliation.
Promote Reconciliation through your social media posts. Link to Reconciliation events, articles, and websites. Invite your online community to get involved. Looking for content to post about? Visit these links for great sources of news, events and more.
Recognize dates that honour Indigenous peoples and stories. Follow these links for a good starting point and post on social media on those dates to increase awareness and start conversations.
Apps can offer a great way to learn and continue being engaged in the work of Reconciliation. Learn about language, stories, culture and history.
When you attend an event, meeting or workshop around Reconciliation, share your journey online with event organizers and your own community. Inspire others to get involved.


text:
Tag Archive for: Rand Paul
The RNC and the Dead-Enders
January 26, 2014 /10 Comments/in FISA /by emptywheel
If you've spent much time in political party conventions, you likely know that the resolution process largely serves as an opportunity for active members to vent. While party resolutions might represent where the ideological base of the party is, nothing prevents the elected leaders of the party to blow off resolutions (though at times resolutions are deemed toxic enough for leaders to undermine by parliamentary stunts).
Which is why I find the response to the RNC's resolution renouncing the NSA's "Surveillance Prorgam" (it mentions PRISM and, implicitly, the phone dragnet) so interesting.
There are responses like this, from Kevin Drum, who spins it as pure politics.
I get that politics is politics, and the grass always looks browner when the other party occupies the Oval Office. And there are plenty of liberals who are less outraged by this program today than they were back when George Bush and Dick Cheney were in charge of it.
But holy cow! The RNC! Officially condemning a national security program that was designedby Republicans to fight terrorism!
Benjy Sarlin, in the account Drum linked, got the politics more clear, reading this, in part, as the influence of libertarians who largely gained ascendance as part of a backlash against Bush policies or at least failures.
But the resolution also is a sign of the increasing influence of the libertarian wing of the party, especially supporters of Ron Paul and his son, Rand Paul, who have made government overreach in pursuit of terrorists a top issue. Both Orrock and fellow Nevada Committeeman James Smack, who presented the resolution on her behalf, supported the elder Paul's presidential campaign.
But I also think there's more to it.
There is certainly a great deal of opportunism here (note, Democrats' utter disdain for tech companies' concerns about the dragnet make this a monetary, as well as political opportunity for the GOP, one already bearing fruit). And while the GOP establishment is still cautiously trying to regain control over the Tea Party forces that it once encouraged, there has also been a slow change in traditional conservatives' stance, too, which I measure through Amash-Conyers opponent Bob Goodlatte's changing position.
Goodlatte has issued three statements in recent weeks (January 9, January 17, and January 23) calling for reform (including more civil liberties protections and attention to tech companies' concerns) and more transparency. In the most interesting of the statements, Goodlatte suggested that if Obama wanted to keep the dragnet he'd have to explain what purpose it was really serving and then argue that that purpose
Over the course of the past several months, I have urged President Obama to bring more transparency to the National Security Agency's intelligence-gathering programs in order to regain the trust of the American people. In particular, if the President believes we need a bulk collection program of telephone data, then he needs to break his silence and clearly explain to the American people why it is needed for our national security. The President has unique information about the merits of these programs and the extent of their usefulness. This information is critical to informing Congress on how far to go in reforming the programs. Americans' civil liberties are at stake in this debate. [my emphasis]
As I've been pointing out for some time, no dragnet defenders have yet to explain what purpose it really serves, and I'm struck that Goodlatte seems to suggest the same. Note, too, that Goodlatte was among the 6 Representatives who attended Bruce Schneier's briefing on what NSA was really doing, along with leading GOP dragnet opponents Jim Sensenbrenner and Justin Amash and 3 Democrats.
I would suggest to Democrats who see this resolution exclusively as an overly cynical attack on Obama there may, in fact, be things that could explain why Republicans specifically or reasonable Americans more generally might have good reason to oppose the dragnet.
Now back to the resolution. As Sarlin notes, "Not a single member rose to object or call for further debate, as occurred for other resolutions." (I like to think that had Michigan's retrograde Dave Agema been able to participate rather than fending off calls for his resignation, he might have spoken up for authoritarianism.)
Instead of opposition from the Republican Party then, came first this quote to Sarlin,
"I think it probably does reflect the views of many of the people who really want to turn out the vote and who are viewing the world through the prism of the next election," Stewart Baker, a former Bush-era Homeland Security official, told msnbc in an email. "It's a widespread view among Republicans, but I think the ones that know this institution best and for whom national security is a high priority don't share this view."
Then what Eli Lake reports as a letter (Lake doesn't say to whom) from just one elected official — KS Representative and House Intelligence Committee member Mike Pompeo — and 7 Bush officials (including Baker) blasting the resolution. Part of the letter, apparently, serves to waggle National Security seniority, as Baker already had.
Their letter says: "The Republican National Committee plays a vital role in political campaigns, but it has relatively little expertise in national security."
And part of it serves to correct a technical inaccuracy that may not be one.
In particular the letter takes issue with the resolution's claim that the NSA's PRISM program "monitors searching habits of virtually every American on the internet."
"In fact, there is no program that monitors the searches of all Americans," the letter says. "And what has become known as the PRISM program is not aimed at collecting the communications of Americans. It is targeted at the international communications of foreign persons located outside the United States and is precisely the type of foreign-targeted surveillance that Congress approved in 2008 and 2012 when it enacted and reauthorized amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."
At issue is the language of the resolution, which starts by discussing PRISM, but then talks about what is clearly the phone (though it would encompass the Internet) dragnet, but then explicitly returns to both, by name of the authority that govern them.
WHEREAS, the secret surveillance program called PRISM targets, among other things, the surveillance of U.S. citizens on a vast scale and monitors searching habits of virtually every American on the internet;
WHEREAS, this dragnet program is, as far as we know, the largest surveillance effort ever launched by a democratic government against its own citizens, consisting of the mass acquisition of Americans' call details encompassing all wireless and landline subscribers of the country's three largest phone companies.
RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee encourages Republican lawmakers to enact legislation to amend Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, the state secrets privilege, and the FISA Amendments Act to make it clear that blanket surveillance of the Internet activity, phone records and correspondence — electronic, physical, and otherwise — of any person residing in the U.S. is prohibited by law and that violations can be reviewed in adversarial proceedings before a public court;
RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee encourages Republican lawmakers to call for a special committee to investigate, report, and reveal to the public the extent of this domestic spying and the committee should create specific recommendations for legal and regulatory reform ot end unconstitutional surveillance as well as hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible for this unconstitutional surveillance; [my emphasis]
7 Bush officials and 1 HPSCI member (but not, oddly enough, the always boisterous Mike Rogers) have weighed in to say that the NSA doesn't monitor the searches of some Americans and then trots out the tired "targeted at foreign persons" line, without addressing the question of blanket surveillance of communications more generally.
Sarlin, in his piece, similarly retreats to "targeting" claptrap, claiming only that "lawmakers have accused the agency of overreaching."
Somehow both the Bush dead-enders and Sarlin neglect to mention backdoor searches, which allow the NSA to use metadata collected under a range of dragnets to obtain US content without even Reasonable Articulable Suspicion.
And while it's not all that surprising that Sarlin chose not to discuss how NSA can get domestic content, as I will show in a follow-up post the collection of dead-enders (Lake fleshed out the list here) who weighed in to deny that the NSA dragnet gets US person content is particularly instructive, as I'll show in a follow-up post.
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 emptywheel2014-01-26 13:00:072014-01-26 13:00:07The RNC and the Dead-Enders
DOJ Responds to Non-Intell Committee Member of Opposition Party, But Not Intell Committee Member of President's Party
July 30, 2013 /4 Comments/in Drones, FISA, PATRIOT /by emptywheel
On June 20, Rand Paul started seeking more information about how the FBI used drones. On July 9, he sent a second letter to find out about the FBI's use of drones. After placing a hold on Jim Comey's nomination to be FBI Director, Paul got results, with an unclassified letter admitting FBI had used drones 10 times, and a classified letter that presumably provided more detail. While Paul wasn't satisfied with that information — he sent a follow-up asking when the FBI considers drones to impinge on reasonable expectations of privacy — he at least did get a letter. He released his hold and voted against Comey's nomination.
Compare that to Ron Wyden, a member of the Intelligence Committee and of the President's own party.
After meeting with Comey on July 18, Wyden sent Comey (care of DOJ's Legislative Affairs Office) a letter on July 22 asking:
Whether the program that led to the hospital confrontation was the Internet metadata program and whether his concerns about it had been adequately address
Whether the Comey was satisfied with the way the government carried out surveillance activities during his tenure as Deputy Attorney General or whether he wished he had done more to rein them in
Whether the 2001 AUMF allowed the President to collect communications of Americans inside the US without a warrant
Whether collection of Americans' phone record has any impact on their privacy and whether it is justified even if does not provide unique value
Whether he commits to giving a straight answer about how much evidence the FBI needs to track geolocation
DOJ's Office of Legislative Affairs wrote Wyden back on July 29, basically saying, "Mr. Comey is not in a position to respond to the additional questions in your letter" in part because he "is not able to determine whether your questions implicate information that remains classified."
Of course, several of these questions go to Comey's fitness to be FBI Director and pertain to activities he knows better than anyone else. Others ask about his belief, something that doesn't require classified information to share.
Wyden voted "present" for Comey's nomination.
Mind you, Wyden didn't wait as long as Paul before he got a far less responsive response. And he didn't place a hold on Comey's nomination (though given the almost unanimous support for Comey, a hold really wouldn't have done much to delay the nomination).
Still, Wyden asked Comey questions that go far more directly to Comey's own qualifications to be FBI Director. He asked Comey questions that he, as a member of the Intelligence Committee, should be able to get answers on.
And he got squat.
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 emptywheel2013-07-30 17:59:052013-07-30 18:16:29DOJ Responds to Non-Intell Committee Member of Opposition Party, But Not Intell Committee Member of President's Party
FBI's Warrantless Drone Surveillance
July 26, 2013 /9 Comments/in Drones /by emptywheel
The FBI has responded to Rand Paul's request for information on how it uses drones.
It provides several paragraphs detailing the use: They've used drones in kidnapping, drug interdiction, fugitive, and search and rescue cases, for a total of 8 criminal and 2 national security cases. Use of drones is governed by the Fourth Amendment, the Privacy Act, FAA rules, DIOG, and a bunch of other rules.
But here's the core of the letter:
Every request to use UAVs for surveillance must be approved by FBI management at FBI Headquarters and in the relevant FBI Field Office. Without a warrant, the FBI will not use UAVs to acquire information in which individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment. To date, there has been no need for the FBI to seek a search warrant or judicial order in any of the few cases where UAVs have been used.
Ultimately, this means the FBI has, on 10 occasions, claimed that drones — with what could be far superior sensor equipment and more persistent (and less apparent) surveillance than planes or helicopters — equate to naked eye surveillance. And based on that claim, it has chosen not to have a court review its determination that US persons don't have a reasonable expectation to be free of this heightened surveillance.
Perhaps the FBI is correct in judging (itself, in secret) that drones, unlike infrared surveillance but like overhead plane surveillance, don't go beyond people's reasonable expectation of privacy.
But it is notable that they chose to make such determinations without asking either Congress in general or specific courts to review their determination.
That's not in the least surprising. It is consistent with what they have done, for example, with GPS tracking. But it does show that even with something as contentious as drones the FBI — and the government generally — continues to pursue a surveil first ask permission later approach.
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 emptywheel2013-07-26 10:30:342013-07-26 10:48:18FBI's Warrantless Drone Surveillance
In These Times We Can't Blindly Trust Government to Respect Freedom of Association
July 7, 2013 /39 Comments/in FISA, Labor, PATRIOT, WikiLeaks /by emptywheel
One of my friends, who works in a strategic role at American Federation of Teachers, is Iranian-American. I asked him a few weeks ago whom he called in Iran; if I remember correctly (I've been asking a lot of Iranian-Americans whom they call in Iran) he said it was mostly his grandmother, who's not a member of the Republican Guard or even close. Still, according to the statement that Dianne Feinstein had confirmed by NSA Director Keith Alexander, calls "related to Iran" are fair game for queries of the dragnet database of all Americans' phone metadata.
Chances are slim that my friend's calls to his grandmother are among the 300 identifiers the NSA queried last year, unless (as is possible) they monitored all calls to Iran. But nothing in the program seems to prohibit it, particularly given the government's absurdly broad definitions of "related to" for issues of surveillance and its bizarre adoption of a terrorist program to surveil another nation-state. And if someone chose to query on my friend's calls to his grandmother, using the two-degrees-of-separation query they have used in the past would give the government — not always the best friend of teachers unions — a pretty interesting picture of whom the AFT was partnering with and what it had planned.
In other words, nothing in the law or the known minimization rules of the Business Records provision would seem to protect some of the AFT's organizational secrets just because they happen to employ someone whose grandmother is in Iran. That's not the only obvious way labor discussions might come under scrutiny; Colombian human rights organizers with tangential ties to FARC is just one other one.
When I read labor organizer Louis Nayman's "defense of PRISM," it became clear he's not aware of many details of the programs he defended. Just as an example, Nayman misstated this claim:
According to NSA officials, the surveillance in question has prevented at least 50 planned terror attacks against Americans, including bombings of the New York City subway system and the New York Stock Exchange. While such assertions from government officials are difficult to verify independently, the lack of attacks during the long stretch between 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings speaks for itself.
Keith Alexander didn't say NSA's use of Section 702 and Section 215 have thwarted 50 planned attacks against Americans; those 50 were in the US and overseas. He said only around 10 of those plots were in the United States. That works out to be less than 20% of the attacks thwarted in the US just between January 2009 and October 2012 (though these programs have existed for a much longer period of time, so the percentage must be even lower). And there are problems with three of the four cases publicly claimed by the government — from false positives and more important tips in the Najibullah Zazi case, missing details of the belated arrest of David Headley, to bogus claims that Khalid Ouazzan ever planned to attack NYSE. The sole story that has stood up to scrutiny is some guys who tried to send less than $10,000 to al-Shabaab.
While that doesn't mean the NSA surveillance programs played no role, it does mean that the government's assertions of efficacy (at least as it pertains to terrorism) have proven to be overblown.
Yet from that, Nayman concludes these programs have "been effective in keeping us safe" (given Nayman's conflation of US and overseas, I wonder how families of the 166 Indians Headley had a hand in killing feel about that) and defends giving the government legal access (whether they've used it or not) to — among other things — metadata identifying the strategic partners of labor unions with little question.
And details about the success of the program are not the only statements made by top National Security officials that have proven inaccurate or overblown. That's why Nayman would be far better off relying on Mark Udall and Ron Wyden as sources for whether or not the government can read US person emails without probable cause than misstating what HBO Director David Simon has said (Simon said that entirely domestic communications require probable cause, which is generally but not always true). And not just because the Senators are actually read into these programs. After the Senators noted that Keith Alexander had "portray[ed] protections for Americans' privacy as being significantly stronger than they actually are" — specifically as it relates to what the government can do with US person communications collected "incidentally" to a target — Alexander withdrew his claims.
Nayman says, "As people who believe in government, we cannot simply assume that officials are abusing their lawfully granted responsibility and authority to defend our people from violence and harm." I would respond that neither should we simply assume they're not abusing their authority, particularly given evidence those officials have repeatedly misled us in the past.
Nayman then admits, "We should do all we can to assure proper oversight any time a surveillance program of any size and scope is launched." But a big part of the problem with these programs is that the government has either not implemented or refused such oversight. Some holes in the oversight of the program are:
NSA has not said whether queries of the metadata dragnet database are electronically recorded; both SWIFT and a similar phone metadata program queries have been either sometimes or always oral, making them impossible to audit
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 emptywheel2013-07-07 11:44:472013-07-07 11:55:09In These Times We Can't Blindly Trust Government to Respect Freedom of Association
OMIGOD James Clapper Has Our Gun Purchase Records
June 28, 2013 /21 Comments/in PATRIOT /by emptywheel
It's a testament to Ron Wyden's good faith that this letter — asking James Clapper for more information about the government's secret use of the Section 215 provision of the PATRIOT Act — didn't try to inflame the NRA.
It's not until the third paragraph in until Wyden (and the 25 other Senators who signed on) say,
It can be used to collect information on credit card purchases, pharmacy records, library records, firearm sales records, financial information, and a range of other sensitive subjects. And the bulk collection authority could potentially be used to supersede bans on maintaining gun owner databases, or laws protecting the privacy of medical records, financial records, and records of book and movie purchases. [my emphasis]
And while Wyden is right that the letter is bipartisan, I really wonder how it is that only four Republicans — Mike Lee, Dean Heller, Mark Kirk, and Lisa Murkowski — signed a letter raising these issues. Seriously. Not even Rand Paul?
I'll come back to the loaded questions Wyden asks (I'm frankly still working on some loaded questions he asked 6 months ago — it has turned into a nearly fulltime beat).
But in the meantime, why isn't the NRA screaming yet?
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 emptywheel2013-06-28 14:16:462013-06-28 14:35:49OMIGOD James Clapper Has Our Gun Purchase Records
Obama's Headlong Rush to Counterterrorism Transparency
May 20, 2013 /14 Comments/in Drones, Gitmo Show Trials, Indefinite Detention, Leak Investigations, Terrorism /by emptywheel
By my count, Thursday will be the 100th day since Obama promised, in his State of the Union Adress delivered February 12, "to engage Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world."
Back then there were, officially at least, just a handful of Gitmo detainees on hunger strike. And it's possible — if DOJ used the two 45-day gags on subpoenas they permit themselves — a subpoena seizing the phone records for 21 AP phone lines had already been issued.
After Obama promised more transparency on drones and other counterterrorism programs, Members of Congress continued to have to demand minimal transparency. On February 20, Rand Paul sent his third request for that information. On February 27, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte repeated that Committee's request to see OLC's drone targeting memos; he also expressed anger that the Administration had refused to send a witness to the hearing.
On March 7, Eric Holder hinted that we would "will hear from the President in a relatively short period of time" on drones and transparency and counterterrorism. On March 8, guards at Gitmo shot non-lethal bullets at detainees. The following day US conducted a drone strike in Pakistan, one of two strikes that month.
On March 11, Progressive Members of Congress sent a letter asking for information on drone targeting.
On April 9, McClatchy reported that most drone strikes had hit low level militants, contrary to public claims; it also revealed the intelligence reports themselves were false.
On April 10, the House Judiciary Committee finally threatened to subpoena the OLC memos authorizing the killing of an American citizen; that was at least the 23rd request for such information from Congress. A week later the Committee would finally get a promise to see just those memos, memos squarely within the Committee's oversight jurisdiction.
On April 13, the military locked down Gitmo, effectively depriving most detainees of the human company they had enjoyed for years. On that day, 43 men were hunger striking.
On April 14, Samir Haji al Hasan Moqbel described, in a NYT op-ed, "I've been on a hunger strike since Feb. 10 and have lost well over 30 pounds. I will not eat until they restore my dignity." That same day, the US launched one of two drone strikes in Pakistan that month.
On April 15, the Tsarnaev brothers attacked the Boston Marathon, reportedly in retaliation for treatment of Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq.
April 17, a US drone struck the Yemeni village of a Yemeni, Farea al-Muslimi, already scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about how drones turn Yemenis against the US.
On April 21, the number of hunger strikes at Gitmo reached 84 — over half the men there. Six days later, on April 27, that number reached 100. Three more men have since joined the hunger strike.
As those numbers were growing, on April 25, Dianne Feinstein called on Obama to transfer those detainees who have been cleared. On April 30, Obama renewed his promise to close Gitmo. The next day, the White House made clear that the moratorium preventing almost half the detainees, men who have been cleared for transfer, to return home to Yemen, remained in place.
On May 10, the AP learned that DOJ had seized phone records from 21 phone lines with no notice, potentially exposing the sources of up to 100 journalists.
On May 16, in a hearing querying whether Congress should eliminate or expand the September 18, 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force, Assistant Defense Secretary Michael Sheehan testified the war on terror would last at least 10-20 more years. He also said DOD won't be taking over CIA's side of the drone war anytime soon.
Saturday, a drone strike killed at least 4 thus far unidentified men in Yemen.
Which brings us to Thursday when, the WaPo details, Obama will give a speech telling us once again the drone strikes are legal, his desire to close Gitmo is real, and leaks his new CIA Director exacerbated are serious. He will, apparently, also tell us how he plans to make his counterterrorism plan look more like what he promised it would look like 4 years ago.
President Obama will deliver a speech Thursday at the National Defense University in which he will address how he intends to bring his counterterrorism policies, including the drone program and the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in line with the legal framework he promised after taking office.
In the interim between when he promised this transparency and when he'll start to sort of deliver it (but not, apparently, any actions to close Gitmo), about 7% of his second term will have passed.
Some of the delay, apparently, comes from the need to address the issues that have been festering during the delay.
Obama was prepared to deliver the speech earlier this month, but it was put off amid mounting concerns over a prisoner hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay and more recently the Justice Department leaks investigation — both of which the revised speech may address.
But otherwise, it appears it has taken 100 days to be able to craft a speech good enough to make his paranoia about secrecy and lip service to human rights in counterterrorism look like something else.
Ah well, at least they've sharply curtailed drone strikes while they've been writing a speech.
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 emptywheel2013-05-20 07:00:352013-05-20 11:41:53Obama's Headlong Rush to Counterterrorism Transparency
That Makes Over 21 Requests by 31 Members of Congress, Mr. President
March 11, 2013 /16 Comments/in Drones /by emptywheel
Adding the letter that Barbara Lee, as well as a list of all Members of Congress who have, at one time or another, requested the targeted killing memos.
February 2011: Ron Wyden asks the Director of National Intelligence for the legal analysis behind the targeted killing program; the letter references "similar requests to other officials." (1)
April 2011: Ron Wyden calls Eric Holder to ask for legal analysis on targeted killing. (2)
May 2011: DOJ responds to Wyden's request, yet doesn't answer key questions.
May 18-20, 2011: DOJ (including Office of Legislative Affairs) discusses "draft legal analysis regarding the application of domestic and international law to the use of lethal force in a foreign country against U.S. citizens" (this may be the DOJ response to Ron Wyden).
October 5, 2011: Chuck Grassley sends Eric Holder a letter requesting the OLC memo by October 27, 2011. (3)
November 8, 2011: Pat Leahy complains about past Administration refusal to share targeted killing OLC memo. Administration drafts white paper, but does not share with Congress yet. (4)
February 8, 2012: Ron Wyden follows up on his earlier requests for information on the targeted killing memo with Eric Holder. (5)
March 7, 2012: Tom Graves (R-GA) asks Robert Mueller whether Eric Holder's criteria for the targeted killing of Americans applies in the US; Mueller replies he'd have to ask DOJ. Per his office today, DOJ has not yet provided Graves with an answer. (6)
March 8, 2012: Pat Leahy renews his request for the OLC memo at DOJ appropriations hearing.(7)
June 7, 2012: After Jerry Nadler requests the memo, Eric Holder commits to providing the House Judiciary a briefing–but not the OLC memo–within a month. (8)
June 12, 2012: Pat Leahy renews his request for the OLC memo at DOJ oversight hearing. (9)
June 22, 2012: DOJ provides Intelligence and Judiciary Committees with white paper dated November 8, 2011.
June 27, 2012: In Questions for the Record following a June 7 hearing, Jerry Nadler notes that DOJ has sought dismissal of court challenges to targeted killing by claiming "the appropriate check on executive branch conduct here is the Congress and that information is being shared with Congress to make that check a meaningful one," but "we have yet to get any response" to "several requests" for the OLC memo authorizing targeted killing. He also renews his request for the briefing Holder had promised. (10)
July 19, 2012: Both Pat Leahy and Chuck Grassley complain about past unanswered requests for OLC memo. (Grassley prepared an amendment as well, but withdrew it in favor of Cornyn's.) Leahy (but not Grassley) votes to table John Cornyn amendment to require Administration to release the memo.
July 24, 2012: SSCI passes Intelligence Authorization that requires DOJ to make all post-9/11 OLC memos available to the Senate Intelligence Committee, albeit with two big loopholes.
December 4, 2012: Jerry Nadler, John Conyers, and Bobby Scott ask for finalized white paper, all opinions on broader drone program (or at least a briefing), including signature strikes, an update on the drone rule book, and public release of the white paper.
December 19, 2012: Ted Poe and Tredy Gowdy send Eric Holder a letter asking specific questions about targeted killing (not limited to the killing of an American), including "Where is the legal authority for the President (or US intelligence agencies acting under his direction) to target and kill a US citizen abroad?"
January 14, 2013: Wyden writes John Brennan letter in anticipation of his confirmation hearing, renewing his request for targeted killing memos. (11)
January 25, 2013: Rand Paul asks John Brennan if he'll release past and future OLC memos on targeting Americans. (12)
February 4, 2013: 11 Senators ask for any and all memos authorizing the killing of American citizens, hinting at filibuster of national security nominees. (13)
February 6, 2013: John McCain asks Brennan a number of questions about targeted killing, including whether he would make sure the memos are provided to Congress. (14)
February 7, 2013: Pat Leahy and Chuck Grassley ask that SJC be able to get the memos that SSCI had just gotten. (15)
February 7, 2013: In John Brennan's confirmation hearing, Dianne Feinstein and Ron Wyden reveal there are still outstanding memos pertaining to killing Americans, and renew their demand for those memos. (16)
February 8, 2013: Poe and Gowdy follow up on their December 19 letter, adding several questions, particularly regarding what "informed, high level" officials make determinations on targeted killing criteria.
February 8, 2013: Bob Goodlatte, Trent Franks, and James Sensenbrenner join their Democratic colleagues to renew the December 4, 2012 request. (17)
February 12, 2013: Rand Paul sends second letter asking not just about white paper standards, but also about how National Security Act, Posse Commitatus, and Insurrection Acts would limit targeting Americans within the US.
February 13, 2013: In statement on targeted killings oversight, DiFi describes writing 3 previous letters to the Administration asking for targeted killing memos. (18, 19, 20)
February 20, 2013: Paul sends third letter, repeating his question about whether the President can have American killed inside the US.
February 27, 2013: At hearing on targeted killing of Americans, HJC Chair Bob Goodlatte — and several other members of the Committee — renews request for OLC memos. (21)
March 11, 2013: Barbara Lee and 7 other progressives ask Obama to release "in an unclassified form, the full legal basis of executive branch claims" about targeted killing, as well as the "architecture" of the drone program generally. (22)
All Members of Congress who have asked about Targeted Killing Memos and/or policies
Ron Wyden
Saxby Chambliss
Chuck Grassley
Pat Leahy
Tom Graves
Jerry Nadler
John Conyers
Bobby Scott
Ted Poe
Trey Gowdy
Mark Udall
Dick Durbin
Tom Udall
Jeff Merkley
Mark Begich
Bob Goodlatte
Trent Franks
James Sensenbrenner
Raul Grijalva
Donna Edwards
Mike Honda
Rush Holt
James McGovern
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 emptywheel2013-03-11 18:00:012013-03-11 21:39:08That Makes Over 21 Requests by 31 Members of Congress, Mr. President
"Engaged in Combat"
March 7, 2013 /27 Comments/in Drones /by emptywheel
Last night, Rand Paul said this:
Well, words do make a difference, and I would feel a little more comfortable if we would get in writing a letter that says he doesn't believe killing people not actively engaged in combat with drones in America, on American soil, is constitutional.
Today, Eric Holder wrote Paul this letter.
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question. "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Aside from noting that Holder took out the "actively" modifier in Paul's statement (though Paul said some version of this so many times last night that Holder's formulation might be justified by one of those other ones), I'd have to say that Paul has only managed to move the pea under a different shell in this shell game.
Because now we need a definition of what "engaged in combat" means.
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 emptywheel2013-03-07 14:33:222013-03-07 14:33:22"Engaged in Combat"
Democrats Refuse Non-Binding Resolution Limiting Presidential Drones against Non-Combatants, Too
March 6, 2013 /9 Comments/in Drones /by emptywheel
I noted earlier that Eric Holder suggested that a law prohibiting the use of drones against non-combatant Americans in the US would be unconstitutional.
Grassley: Do you believe Congress has the Constitutional authority to pass a law prohibiting the President's authority to use drone aircraft to use lethal force against Americans on US soil and if not, why not?
Holder: I'm not sure that such a bill would be constitutional. It might run contrary to the Article II powers that the President has.
That's interesting background for a move Rand Paul tried at roughly hour 8 of his filibuster.
He proposed a non-binding resolution saying precisely what Grassley had laid out 10 hour earlier, voicing the position of the Senate to be opposed to the "use of drones to target Americans on American soil who pose no imminent threat."
As I understand it, the resolution was independent from the Brennan nomination (so it would not disrupt that, aside from a vote).
But — as just one of two Democrats to show up during this filibuster (Ron Wyden showed up in support during the 3:00 hour) — Dick Durbin showed up to oppose Paul's unanimous consent to call for that resolution.
Durbin promised his subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee would hold a hearing on drones. Nevertheless, he objected to Paul's resolution. He suggested more Constitutional review of this simple measure was needed.
A leader of the Democratic party (and the President's fellow Chicagoan) opposed a non-binding resolution prohibiting the use of drones in the US against non-combatants out of Constitutional concerns.
I've got a lot of theories why that might be. A belief this is all about making trouble for another nomination. insistence that nothing limit potential Article II claims.
But I keep thinking about the fact that there's a wrongful death suit out there, with state secrets as the fallback claim crumbling with the public discussion.
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 emptywheel2013-03-06 22:37:202013-03-07 07:52:18Democrats Refuse Non-Binding Resolution Limiting Presidential Drones against Non-Combatants, Too
Incapacitating Terrorists in the US: the FBI's Job
Remember when I suggested that a targeted killing in the US would look a lot like the killing of Imam Luqman Abdullah in 2009 (though I'm not saying that Abdullah's killing was a targeted killing), in which bunch of FBI's Hostage Rescue Team members flew in from around the country, set up an "arrest" operation, sicced a dog on him, and then shot him 21 times as he tried to hold off the dog?
Here are three assertions in the letters Eric Holder and John Brennan made in response to Rand Paul's question about whether "the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a US citizen on US soil, and without trial," each addressing a different agency which might conceivably conduct targeted killing.
It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the Untied States.
I can, however, state unequivocally that the agency I have been nominated to lead, the CIA, does not conduct lethal operations inside the United States — nor does it have any authority to do so. Thus, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed as CIA Director, I would have no "power" to authorize such operations.
As a policy matter, moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat. We have a long history of using the criminal justice system to incapacitate individuals located in our country who pose a threat to the United States and its interests abroad. Hundreds of individuals have been arrested and convicted of terrorist-related offenses in our federal courts.
All three answers are interesting. Paul is upset that Holder said the President could use lethal military force in the US. Holder invoked Pearl Harbor and 9/11, during the latter of which the Vice President, on his sole authority, ordered DOD to shoot down domestic aircraft in the US. If Paul has a problem, he should probably also have a problem with Dick Cheney's order on 9/11.
Brennan's answer about the CIA is a masterpiece of misdirection. Brennan doesn't answer whether the CIA can operate in the US, which is broadly covered by other questions Paul asked so easily could and should have been included in his answer. He uses very interesting scare quotes around power. He makes it very clear that this answer does not address the legal question of whether the CIA could do this (he says DOJ will answer that, but Holder in fact didn't address whether CIA could be ordered to kill in the US). Most importantly, however, Brennan answers a question Paul didn't answer: Whether the CIA Director could order the CIA to use lethal force in the US.
The CIA, of course, conducts covert operations based on Presidential authorization, not CIA Director authorization. And Brennan stopped well short of answering whether the President could authorize the CIA to conduct lethal operations in the US, and whether the Executive Branch believed the President could authorize such strikes based on his own authority. And as I said, Holder quite simply didn't answer that question at all.
Finally, though, I love the way Eric Holder discusses trials only after talking about using law enforcement — like the FBI — to incapacitate terrorists and other evil-doers twice.
Holder didn't comment, one way or another, on whether the President could authorize law enforcement authorities to conduct targeted killings in the US. And since the precedents for using lethal force in the white paper are domestic law enforcement cases, that use of lethal force would come with the most cover from legal precedent.
In short, none of these assertions constitutes a denial that a particular agency could, under certain circumstances, could conduct targeted killing in the US. All they say, in conjunction, is that were a targeted killing to be conducted in the US, it would most likely be conducted by law enforcement.
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 emptywheel2013-03-06 07:37:582013-03-06 16:54:57Incapacitating Terrorists in the US: the FBI's Job
"HOLD. THE. LINE!!!" DOJ's Late Research into Brandon Straka's Grift
Guest Post: The Tie that Binds the Conspiracies
earlofhuntingon on Bennie Thompson to Ivanka: Come In from the Conspiracy
BobCon on Bennie Thompson to Ivanka: Come In from the Conspiracy
Rita on Bennie Thompson to Ivanka: Come In from the Conspiracy
earlofhuntingdon on Drive for Show, Putt for Dough, Cheat for Tax Deductions
bmaz@bmazExtremely nice work by @steve_vladeck And I think it may not be his last foray into the Political Question Doctrine… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…7 minutes ago21 January 2022
Jim White@JimWhiteGNVRT @PerryFingal: @DemFromCT @JimWhiteGNV He has really gone off the rails with his mad ambition.11 minutes ago21 January 2022
bmaz@bmazYeah, that ought to do the trick. twitter.com/axios/status/1…13 minutes ago21 January 2022
emptywheel@emptywheelRT @Nanbp: As usual, a great point here by @emptywheel / Bennie Thompson to Ivanka: Come In from the Conspiracy -…22 minutes ago21 January 2022
Jim White@JimWhiteGNVJust showing @ptoemmes the level of technology my guy employs for setting up the wall tile which will go part way… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…1 hour ago21 January 2022
Jim White@JimWhiteGNVRT @EricTopol: For the 1st time, @cdc has posted data for hospitalizations partitioned by booster, 2-shots, or no vaccination. Age groups (…2 hours ago21 January 2022


I recently joined Junco Sato Pollack in Lakemont, Georgia, not far from Lake Rabun and the Tallulah River, to learn more about the Kudzu plant and its many fiber applications. To have been able to observe and participate in this process was a great honor. As an initiate, my understanding of Kudzu is incomplete, although I learned much during my brief time with Junco. Many individuals are exploring this plant and its uses, particularly as it relates to textile process. If you haven't already done so, I invite you to peruse this blog for accounts of their experience and work. For my prosaic step-by-step reflections on the process itself (with images), please also see the "Processing Kudzu" page of this blog.
One potential bright spot in Kudzu's ongoing chronicle may be found in the Southeastern United States. Here, the vine is the epitome of "wild and abundant," as efforts to subdue since its introduction in the late 19th century it will attest. In our current context, Kudzu has much to teach us about sustainability and the laws of nature. While there are legitimate reasons to eradicate Kudzu in some areas (mostly relating to its impact on native habitats), there have been no successful attempts, thus far, to do so. Rather than struggle (through the use of biological, chemical and physical force) to remove Kudzu from the landscape for which it clearly has an affinity, we might endeavor to find a more appropriate relationship with it. This is not a new idea: the Japanese have known this for millennia, as have mountain dwellers of Southern Appalachia in more recent times. To live a sustainable life is to be in complete harmony with our environment – taking only what is needed, supporting renewal, creating little or no waste and leaving little or no impact. It remains to be seen whether we will be able to limit the impact of Kudzu on our environment in the future; however, it is possible to work with its presence in a more skillful manner now. In my own case, by taking the time to slow down and appreciate the vine's subtler qualities, my relationship to it has been permanently altered. I can imagine a time when, with mindfulness and acquired skill, the harvesting and preparation of Kudzu fiber for cloth production could represent a vibrant facet of the sustainable textile movement.
My weekend immersion with Junco introduced me to the art of Kudzu fiber preparation for cloth production, along with a survey of the plant's ecology, its human history, and uses. This was an invaluable learning experience. Kudzu harvest is a late-spring/summer activity. If you are interested in information on current or future workshop opportunities on the art of Kudzu fiber harvest and preparation with Junco Sato Pollack, please periodically check this blog for updates or use the "comments" section below to make contact.