Supreme Court Likely to Endorse Obama’s War on Whistle-Blowers

[Better Believe It]

Supreme Court Likely to Endorse Obama’s War on Whistle-Blowers
by Chris Hedges
September 12, 2012

The Espionage Act was used only three times before President Barack Obama took office. Ellsberg’s case was dismissed. The second use of the act saw Alfred Zehe, a German physicist, plead guilty to giving U.S. information to East Germany. The third case saw Samuel Morison, a onetime U.S. intelligence professional, convicted in federal court on two counts of espionage and two counts of theft of government property. He was sentenced to two years in prison on Dec. 4, 1985, for giving classified information to the press, and in 1988 the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal. President Bill Clinton pardoned Morison on the last day of his presidency.

Obama, who serves the interests of the surveillance and security state with even more fervor than did George W. Bush, has used the Espionage Act to charge suspected leakers six times since he took office. The latest to be charged by the Obama administration under the act is John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer accused of disclosing classified information to journalists about the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, an al-Qaida suspect. Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, which published the cables and video clips allegedly provided by Manning, is expected to be the seventh charged under the act.

The Obama administration, to make matters worse, has mounted a war not only against those who leak information but those who publish it, including Assange. The Obama administration is attempting to force New York Times reporter James Risen to name the source, or sources, that told him about a failed effort by the Central Intelligence Agency to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program. Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer, is charged under the Espionage Act for allegedly leaking information about the program to Risen. If Risen confirms in court that Sterling was his source, Sterling probably will be convicted. A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Espionage Act would also remove the legal protection that traditionally allows journalists to refuse to reveal their sources.

Obama, a constitutional lawyer, has a far better grasp of the dramatic erosion of civil liberties his administration is cementing into place than his hapless predecessor. Obama, however, dissembles with an icy cynicism. He assured the public in January that the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) would not be used to detain and hold American citizens without due process, although the act’s latest version, which became law this month, clearly states the opposite. And Ellsberg, along with Noam Chomsky and other activists, has joined me as a plaintiff in suing the president and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta over the NDAA. We are scheduled to appear in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 29. When Obama was questioned in 2011 about the difference between the release of the Pentagon Papers and the cables turned over to WikiLeaks he answered: “Ellsberg’s material was classified on a different basis.” “That’s true,” Ellsberg said ruefully in our conversation last week. “Mine were top secret. The cables released in WikiLeaks were secret.”

Read the full article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/03/12-2

[JoePhilly]

1. And another manufactured outrage widget hits the shop room floor!!!

:thud:

[Webster Green]

3. The outrage is genuine.

Trust me on that.

[think]

5. And growing stronger /nt

[bluestate10]

6. I have never seen a remotely positive Obama post by the thread's author.

Sometime the most danger is close. Be careful about who you follow fellow DUERs.

[think]

9. Blindly following any leader or party is not good either. I'll leave that for the Republicans

to do.

[WillyT]

13. "Sometime the most danger is close."

Thank You Senator McCarthy.

[Luminous Animal]

14. Thank you for pointing that out. It reminded me to rec the OP.

[girl gone mad]

17. Why does it matter whether or not one has made a..

"remotely positive Obama post"

Is this a discussion forum or a personality cult? Real question.

[TheMadMonk]

8. When your ONLY choice is with or without lube, take it dry....

...it might, just might make you mad enough to actually do something about the situation.

It's too fucking easy to just sit there and console yourself with "It could be worse." Ask the Germans how that worked out for them.

[90-percent]

2. Must read

Chris Hedges is an excellent journalist and I am continually disappointed that our Constitutional Professor of a President continues to ratchet up even more unconstitutional stuff our government can do, when instead he should be doing the exact opposite; eliminating all the unconstitutional stuff our government can do.

I mean, really and definitively, how many constitutional Rights are currently null and void, since 9/11 changed everything?

-90% Jimmy

[pscot]

10. I pinned a lot of completely unjustified hope

on that "Constitutional Professor" bullshit. I sometimes wonder if he's ever read the document.

[kenny blankenship]

4. Obama is in so many ways the caretaker of the Bush Crime Gang's legacy

But in this area, the war of the ruling elites against transparency, the public's right to know and the 1st Amendment protection of a free press, he relegates his predecessor to also-ran status.

[TheKentuckian]

12. Thats pretty much what I have to say about that.

[rudycantfail]

7. A great read.

Thank you.

[WillyT]

11. K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[woo me with science]

15. K&R Wake up, America.

[hifiguy]

16. The truth is what it is.

And this is the truth.