Spintested: 12/03/10

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Friday, December 3, 2010

U.S. Military Tries to Intimidate Soldiers Into Not Reading Wik!Ieaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

PayPaI bans WikiLe@ks after US government pressure

Wikileaks just announced that at its Tw!tter account.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

PayPal bans WikiLeaks after US government pressure

Wikileaks is announcing that at its twitter account.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Wikileaks on Twitter

They've been posting how to access them there.
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

From Wikileaks on Twitter:

PayPal bans WikiLeaks after US government pressure

http://is.gd/ibbwG

Support us: http://wikileaks.ch/support.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

More documents were classified and fewer were declassified in FY 2009 than in FY 2008.

Obama's administration is less transparent than Bush's.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=22720

And this is what Obama did, when the judicial branch of the United States ordered Obama to release the photos (as Obama had pledged to do as a candidate in 2008):

He used Joe Lieberman to slip into legislation expanded powers for the Secretary of Defense to circumvent the Freedom Of Information Act and bury forever the photographic evidence of the t0rture & abuse of uncharged, unconvicted, detainees in US custody.

http://www.truthout.org/1022095

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/143322/outrage:house_sneakily_passes_bill_banning_release_of_photos_showing_detainee_abuse/

http://www.truth-out.org/topstories/111409jl01
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Because it seems like a good time -

Speaking of transparency, Obama in his own words:

Transparency Will Be Touchstone:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72g7qmeP1dE

"On transparency", "About inviting the people back into their government again", & "Part of the job of the next American president is making Americans believe that our government is working for them, because right now they don't feel like it's working for them. They feel like it's working for special interests & it's working for corporations:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K97hvOOdy_I

"Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public, no more secrecy.....No more secrecy.....":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQbQTrm_pSA

"Clintons did health care the wrong way, behind closed doors":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvyharXBI0Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBtIKgGHYPQ

"We need a president who sees the government not as a tool to enrich well connected friends & high-priced lobbyists, but as a defender of fairness & opportunity for every single American. That's what this country's been about and that's the kind of president I intend to be:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEMxfme7OQI

"The American people are the answer":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2cvru2TH-s

Obama's Transparency Problem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IODbwOhZYEM
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

I apologize about the formatting of this comment; this isn't how I typed it. I don't know what the story is with Atch Peeeee tonight. They seem to be doing everything they can to make information harder for people to read and use.
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

That's a great point.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

I agree, and if the comments that are pending ever get published, people will see the history of this unhoIy alliance (Obama and Lieberman). All of my comments on this subject have been scrvbbed here in the last few days.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Assange didn't release the cables through just one venue. He covered his bets by sending the material to the Guardian, Der Spiegle, El Pais, Le Monde, etc. What I've found interesting is that while mainstream media in the US is condemning him, they're also saying that "There's nothing ground-breaking here", and "It's also quite flattering to the State Department". You really have to stand on your head to understand their logic.
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

That's the most interesting part, I agree. They're real big on things 'preemptive'. http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/05/22/preventive_detention
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Does anybody know which HP m0derators are on tonight?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

I'm surprised that Joe Lieberman and Obama haven't been more of a focus of the condemnation here and at other websites. Obama has been using Joe Lieberman to hide behind, to do his d!rty work, for some time now. Whether it's: 1) taking single payer universal health care, a public option, investigations and prosecutions of Bvsh-Chen#y, etc., off the table, OR 2) continuing the Bvsh-Chen#y policies and going Bvsh-Chen#y one better by asserting that presidents have the right to k!II American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and 'preventive detention' (the right of a president to imprison anyone indefinitely because he thinks they might commit a crime, or using Joe Lieberman to hide behind and duck out on his campaign pledge of transparency ( http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/13/evening-buzz-prisoner-photo-flip-flop/ ) while he guts the FOIA ( http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/143322/outrage:house_sneakily_passes_bill_banning_release_of_photos_showing_detainee_abuse/ ), how does any real Democrat defend Obama? What Obama did with Lieberman, how he did it (sneakily, deceptively, and also not the first time) should have all Democratic voters, if not all Americans, demanding their heads. Few know about this: After the court ordered Obama's DoD release the torture and abuse photos of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan that Obama pledged during the 2008 campaign to release and then flip-flopped on after he got into the White House, Obama had Lieberman slip into legislation the empowerment of the Secretary of Defense to gut FOIA and bury the evidence forever. And after Obama signed that legislation into law, away from the fanfare of cameras, he waited until he was out of the country two weeks later for Gates to exercise the power of that legislation which buried those photos forever. Obama has been going to great lengths to distance himself from his actions and his orders, insulating himself from ramifications of his decisions. Obama's going to Afghanistan now, while the fight is on to let the Bush tax cuts expire, not using the power of the presidency, of the bully pulpit to fight for the poor and middle classes, is exactly what Obama did during the healthcare debate. That was when he made his last secret trip to Afghanistan. If you want to see patterns, go into newspaper archives and see what happens here at home every time Obama is overseas. Look with an eye on what happens in Congress, what Democrats do or don't do, and how Obama uses these trips to take advantage of the rule of thumb about not criticizing a president when he's on foreign soil.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

That's another convenient dodge for Obama then, isn't it? That it's not his fault -- "The dev!l/Dick Cheney/the Bilderbergs/etc. made me do it". That he's not where the buck stops. Even if there is a cabal threatening Obama, telling Obama what to do, that's his choice. He has the power as the president to issue the orders. If he chooses to be threatened, bullied, blackmailed, etc., the order still comes from him. You and I can speculate about that all day and night, but until there's some definitive declaration that the president of the US is merely a figurehead carrying out orders from elsewhere, the buck does stop at the office of the president.
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

What has happened to the rich text ability for pundits on this thread? And the links of all URLs?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Do you recall this?: http://lamontblog.blogspot.com/2006/09/thousand-words.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Who is Joe Lieberman to be bullying Amazon and other companies to drop Wikileaks from its servers? He wouldn't be doing this without having gotten the go-ahead from the White House.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

I'm surprised that Joe Lieberman and Obana haven't been more of a focus of the condemnation here and at other websites. Obama has been using Joe Lieberman to hide behind, to do his dirty work, for some time now. Whether it's, 1) taking single payer universal health care, a public option, investigations and prosecutions of Bush-Cheney, etc., off the table, or 2) continuing the Bush-Cheney policies and going Bush-Cheney one better by asserting that presidents have the right to k!ll American citizens with no due process, no oversight ( http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/25/assassinations/index.html ), and 'preventive detention' which is the right of a president to imprison anyone indefinitely because he thinks they might commit a crime ( http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/05/22/preventive_detention ), or using Joe Lieberman to hide behind and duck out on his campaign pledge of transparency ( http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/13/evening-buzz-prisoner-photo-flip-flop/ ) while he guts the FOIA ( http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/143322/outrage:house_sneakily_passes_bill_banning_release_of_photos_showing_detainee%20_abuse/ ), how does any real Democrat defend Obama? What Obama did with Lieberman, and how he did it, sneakily and deceptively (and also not the first time) should have all Democratic voters, if not all Americans, demanding their heads: Few know about this: After the court ordered Obama's DoD release the torture and abuse photos of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan that Obama pledged during the 2008 campaign to release and then flip-flopped on after he got into the White House, Obama had Lieberman slip into legislation the empowerment of the Secretary of Defense to gut FOIA and bury the evidence forever. And after Obama signed that legislation into law, away from the fanfare of cameras, he waited until he was out of the country (two weeks later) for Gates to exercise the power of that legislation and bury those photos forever. Obama has been going to great lengths to distance himself from his actions and his orders -- To insulate himself from his decisions. Going to Afghanistan now, while the fight is on to let the Bush tax cuts expire, not using the power of the presidency, of the bully pulpit to fight for the poor and middle classes, is exactly what Obama did during the healthcare debate. That was when he made his last secret trip to Afghanistan.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

"Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat" - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/01/us/politics/01bai.html
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Apparently the top one, http://wikileaks.ch/, isn't working. :-(
About Wikileaks
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

Our government at work - University students are being warned about WikiLeaks. An email from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs reads: =="Hi students, We received a call today from a SIPA alumnus who is working at the State Department. He asked us to pass along the following information to anyone who will be applying for jobs in the federal government, since all would require a background investigation and in some instances a security clearance. The documents released during the past few months through Wikileaks are still considered classified documents. He recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter. Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government. Regards, Office of Career Services."== That’s the email to Columbia University students at the School of International and Public Affairs. Another memo that Democracy Now! has obtained has been sent to employees at USAID (thousands of employees) about reading the recently released WikiLeaks documents from the Department of State warning their own employees: =="Any classified information that may have been unlawfully disclosed and released on the Wikileaks web site was not 'declassified' by an appopriate authority and therefore requires continued classification and protection as such from government personnel... Accessing the Wikileaks web site from any computer may be viewed as a violation of the SF-312 agreement... Any discussions concerning the legitimacy of any documents or whether or not they are classified must be conducted within controlled access areas (overseas) or within restricted areas (USAID/Washington)... The documents should not be viewed, downloaded, or stored on your USAID unclassified network computer or home computer; they should not be printed or retransmitted in any fashion."== The State Department has warned all their employees, "you are not to access WikiLeaks, not only at the State Department, which has been blocked, but even on your home computers. Even if you’ve written a cable yourself, one of these cables that are in the trove of the documents, you cannot put your name in to see if that is one of the cables that has been released." This warning is going out throughout not only the government, but to prospective employees all over the country, about what they may do on their home computers.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Unfounded Allegations About US Response to WikiLeaks Present Threat Abroad

All Americans ought to be appalled that Hillary Clinton ordered US diplomats to spy on other nations' representatives at the UN, just as Condoleeza Rice ordered diplomats during her stint as SoS. The State Department is NOT the CIA or any of the other couple of dozen 'intelligence' services we've created since 9/11. It's not a spy service. It's bad enough that the CIA camps out in our embassies around the world, but to have our diplomatic service's (a government agency where honesty and trust is the coin of the realm) top political appointee ordering our diplomats to spy in what should be (and what used to be) the model for how nations work cooperatively makes Hillary no better than John Bolton, and Obama no better than Bush.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks' Online Presence Imperiled By Attacks

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

I think the only solution will be when the people rise up to demand that their elected representatives repair the system, either through electing representatives who will repair it, or eventually through civil unrest.

The People already rose up and demanded, first in 2006 after Democrats said that if the People wanted CHANGE, they'd have to put Democrats in the majority. We did. No change, and Nancy Pelosi took impeaching Bush-Cheney off the table. Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the best that was possible with the constraints they placed on us (DSSS & DCCC fielding Blue Dog candidates): We gave them 60 for a Democratic Caucus, and the White House.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate, tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at de@th's door. So Obama should have moved his butt to get as much as he could through, kamikaze style, as Bush did after the Supreme Court put him in the White House. But instead, Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies and his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate and 435 in the House, and they and Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People. And then try to blame it on Republicans.
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

I think the only solution will be when the people rise up to demand that their elected representatives repair the system, either through electing representatives who will repair it, or eventually through civil unrest.

You'd better hope it doesn't deevolve into civil unrest, because it's We the People who will lose, BIG TIME.

The laws that have been put into place since 9/11 (and even in the years leading up to 9/11, that laid the groundwork for post-9/11 laws) are written to address civil unrest. They're not being used against 'terr0r!sts'. Since passage, they've most frequently been used in drug trafficking, but they easily adapt to quick pivoting by politicians wishing to designate any group or situation a threat to the nation's security.

I sometimes wonder where people like you were during the first Gulf War, and if you missed Arthur 'Scud Stud' Kent's reporting from his hotel room balcony in Iraq, as US scud missiles whizzed by him to land within 6 inches of its target. Or during Ruby Ridge or Waco. If the US government wants you, the US government doesn't stop until it gets you (except if you're Osama Bin Laden). We're not spending more than the next 20 largest nations combined for weapons that don't work.

KEEP READING

About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

We won't solve the nation's problems through this kind of debate, disagreeing amongst ourselves or voting for third party candidates, who are very unlikely to win, in my opinion.

=======================================

This kind of debate is all we have.

And if you don't want Republicans to win, you'd better get busy in one of two ways. Either:

#1 - Convince Obama and Democrats to deliver on their campaign promises, stop continuing Bush-Cheney policies, end rendition and torture (it's still going on), denounce 'preventive detention' and the k!lling of Americans by presidential order without due process, start governing in the People's interests and not the transnational corporations', quit threatening other nations about their enforcing their own and international laws against BushCo, restore the Constitution in the only way possible: Enforce the rule of law against BushCo, OR,

#2 - Start working your butt off to make sure that independent candidates win in 2012, all offices including the presidency.

Because I don't vote for politicians who support Republican policy, no matter what initial they have after their names.

You need to stop presuming that yours is "the way and the light" -- Your way is diluting our votes and keeping corrupt and dishonest politicians in power. You're either for CHANGE or you're standing in the way of it. MOVE!

KEEP READING

About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

"..parents can behave like dictators of sorts, at least until the children become adolescents, the president can't.
The president can't simply banish the kids to their rooms, put the tipped over glass in the sink, remove the other glasses before they tip over, and then proceed to mop up the floor. He has to try to deal with the situation in motion as it evolves.

==============================================

The presidential equivalent of the solution that you're suggesting would be his declaring Martial Law. My daughter's solution, and mine, and I think anyone who appreciates that the task at hand is to clean up the juice, and it doesn't require all that much muscle (and certainly not the imposition of Martial Law) -- You take the glasses off the tabletop, wipe down the top of the table, the legs, the floor, and you're done.

Where did this line ("presidents can't be or shouldnt' be dictators") continually crops up in Obama's 'most ardent supporters' comments originate?

What I find interesting is that, once again, you seem in denial as to things that Obama's done. On the one hand, Obama announces that it's "Congress's job to write the healthcare legislation", and then he unilaterally took single payer off the table, and prevented proponents of it and a public option from the negotiations. That's dictatorial.
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

I'll give you another one to show how disingenuous Democrats are.

If Democrats are really so "on the side of the People", wouldn't you think the problem of Blue Dogs would be one that they'd like to solve (Solve=Getting rid of them)? That is what's at the core of why they claim they can't deliver on their promises, isn't it? Google Chuck Hagel, ES&S, AIS (American Information Systems) and then let's talk.

If HP had no word limits, I'd use up all the bandwidth with examples for you.

I have absolutely no doubt at all that there are professional political operatives in the Democratic Party with good intentions. The problem is that they haven't got a chance. They will never get anywhere near being able to make the difference, save the day, the party and the country. At best, they're like Miep Gies. Perhaps a Raoul Wallenberg shows up every once in a while, but what's needed (a D-Day, a massive coordinated effort, an invasion and a purging) isn't going to happen. Obama was supposed to be that 'D-Day' that took the DLC out (the Clintons, Joe Lieberman), but he's was a quisling.

It becomes more impossible with each election cycle. We The People aren't even a factor any longer - If none of us showed up to vote, elections would still be declared valid, with winners and losers. The Citizens United decision took care of what the electronic voting machines with proprietary software didn't, and provides the cover for, "How is it possible that citizens would vote against their own best interests, time after time?"

Neither party has the desire or the intention of doing anything about Citizens United.
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

I don't consider all of this to be moot.
==============================

If the election apparatus can't be trusted (due to everything from election fraud like governors conspiring with their secretaries of state to purge legal voters from the election rolls or electronic voting machines that produce suspicious results such as more voters than actually exist in a district or negative votes for candidates, or too few machines available or voting precincts open in minority or non-rich neighborhoods to accommodate all who want to vote, to massive money being spent on campaigns by corporations or foreign national interests, etc.) and those in power (the politicians of both parties) refuse to repair it, yes, it's moot.

None of this should have happened once in the 'model of democracy' for the world, much less have become a habit and practice going on 7 election cycles now. That we know of.

You can "take issue with the notion that neither party is interested in doing what benefits the people", but that alone, what I just said about how Democrats have responded to what in any other reality would have everything that such a system produces nullified and begun all over again (after repairs and everything put right) I think should lead you to other conclusions if you weren't deeply in denial.

You don't even hear a peep out of Democrats about this, or anything else (Obama's pulling a George W. Bush in these days of deciding to let the Bush tax cuts expire by making a surprise visit to Afghanistan -- It's exactly what Obama did during the healthcare debate; hid out in Afghanistan).

You may enjoy chasing your tail, doing what I call "busy work" that gets you nowhere, but gives you the feeling that you're engage and making a difference, but if you ran a business like that you'd be bankrupt within a year. My daughter analogizes it, I think accurately, as trying to clean up the mess from a glass of juice that your rowdy kids knocked over by mopping the floor. The juice is still spilling down from the top of the table, the kids are still fighting at a table that has more glasses filled with juice tipping over.

Who solves problems like that? Better yet, who does that for more than a minute?

KEEP READING
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

MoveOn Calls On Obama To Stiffen Spine On Tax Cuts In National Ad

undefined

I assume this is a reply to my response to montn2.
======================================

No. It's a glitch in HP's system. I don't know how it happens, but it's somehow connected to the social networking programming, and 'replying' through it instead of on the actual page your and my comments show up on. I wrote the reply that follows in the space where the "undefined" appears ("This is actually pretty moot...."), and when I clicked on "Post Comment", what showed up was "undefined", so I had to go through the comment pages the long way to post.

About what you wrote to montn2 about swing/independent voters, I've said and written almost exactly what you posted many times over the years. I refer to them as "the mushy middle" who vote depending on which side got to them moments before they entered the voting booth.
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Unfounded Allegations About US Response to WikiLeaks Present Threat Abroad

I'm appalled that Hillary Clinton ordered US diplomats to spy on other nations' representatives at the UN.

The State Department is NOT the CIA or any of the other couple of dozen 'intelligence' services we've created since 9/11! It's not a spy service. It's bad enough that the CIA camps out in our embassies around the world, but to have our diplomatic service's (a government agency where honesty and trust is the coin of the realm) top political appointee ordering our diplomats to spy in what should be (and what used to be) the model for how nations work cooperatively makes Hillary no better than John Bolton.

And what does that make you, Ms. Buckwalter-Poza, defending the black-out of this information from the American people?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

WikiLeaks Cables Reveal "Profound Hatred for Democracy on the Part of Our Political Leadership"

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Unfounded Allegations About US Response to WikiLeaks Present Threat Abroad

I'm appalled that Hillary Clinton ordered US diplomats to spy on other nations' representatives at the UN. The State Department is NOT the CIA or any of the other couple of dozen 'intelligence' services we've created since 9/11! It's not a spy service. It's bad enough that the CIA camps out in our embassies around the world, but to have our diplomatic service's (a government agency where honesty and trust is the coin of the realm) top political appointee ordering our diplomats to spy in what should be (and what used to be) the model for how nations work cooperatively makes Hillary no better than John Bolton.

So what does that make you, Ms. Buckwalter-Poza, defending the black-out of this information from the American people?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Unfounded Allegations About US Response to WikiLeaks Present Threat Abroad

What extraordinary BS, Ms. Buckwalter-Poza.

There are so many issues raised by these leaks, on so many documents, it's hard to know where to begin. But what do you think about this one that Americans don't know about?:

In 2004, a German citizen was snatched in Macedonia and allegedly taken to a secret prison by the CIA. Agents had apparently mistaken him for an al-Qaeda suspect.

A 2007 cable from the US embassy in Berlin details the efforts the US made to persuade Germany not to issue international arrest warrants for the CIA agents accused of involvement.

Could you have been one of the many who responded to Americans' furor over Obama's and Democrats refusal to investigate and prosecute BushCo with assurances that "the international community will take care of them"?

Don't you think Americans have the right to know what elected officials in its government are doing behind Americans' backs, working at cross-purposes with the will of the People? What kind of deals are they making with other nations to change international laws, to save BushCo, and continue (and expand) the practices of the 'black arts' (t0rture)? Obama believes he has the right to k!ll Americans without due process. He believes he has the right to imprison anyone he wants, regardless of any criminal act, just because he thinks that person might be capable of committing a crime. With no due process, no oversight. 'Preventive detention'.

Shame on you, Ms.; you're collaborating with a criminal administration. Two criminal administrations.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost