Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, March 17, 2006

Iraq: Press reports destroy President's defense over NSA and NSL secrecy

Central Command orchestrates another non-sense story

We're asked to believe that there was a "big plot" in Iraq. [Ref ]

Small problem: The information makes no sense. What's noteworthy is the contrast between what we are asked to believe about Iraq and America.

We are asked to believe certain things about the rule of law, information, and the justice system. If true, the story shows the President's unlawful conduct cannot be justified.

* * *

There's another problem with the story in how it is being disseminated. It is too well known but not challenged.

Also, if this were a real event if would have been blasted as soon as any hint were known; we are asked to believe that many details are not known -- but that they took time -- many weeks to gather things. This is not consistent.

Yet, we are also asked to believe that the "big scary story" is so important -- that nobody is willing to link their name to it in Iraq. That is not credible. If true, this news would get public attention, and the leadership would gladly stand by what they "just know" is to be true. We have no name; we can only conclude this story is a fabrication as was the story over Iraq's WMD.

The burden of proof rests with the White House: To explain why, in a country it controls, it can or cannot do things -- but in a country it governs it will not say anything.

This is a White House Staffer problem to be explained and justified, not for the media to chase ghosts in Iraq. Subsequent analysis and review will show the excuses make no sense. These are matters of criminal law. It is the job of Congress, the states, and the public to make adverse inferences when the White House refuses to cooperate with lawful inquiry.

We the People should use this anecdote as an example of what could be possible if the American Federal government asserted the rule of law: Compelling power to be lawfully used, and assenting to the Constitution. The story from Iraq is simple: We are asked to believe that some can do what this president refuses to do. It is time to call the bluff and force the Congress to explain -- as it failed to do over the UAE issue -- why it does not mandate consistency from the White House over matters in the NSA issue.

The disconnects are alarming not for what they say about Iraq, but what they show must be true in America: The reasonable "other lines of inquiry" -- that should occur if this were true in Iraq -- are not occurring; and they would fail if pursued.

The states need to make adverse judgments. This story cannot credibly be used to support any argument. Rather, it further undermines confidence that this congress is serious about seeing through the UAE and Iraq smokescreens to see the Constitution for what it is: Ignored.

The Constitution remains. The Congress must have the smoke cleared. The States and voters are competent enough to realize what is or isn't going on. Regardless the reasons there are reasonable alternatives that will vastly improve things.

This Federal Government refuses to embrace what must be embraced; rather it asserts what cannot be justified.

* * *

Some may accept this article as true, and as the basis to do or not do something.

Rather, the more prudent route to take, is to ask, "If this article were true, what should or should not be done in America." The answer is simple: Congress must inquire into the NSA; if they fail, the way forward is not to assent to the story, but to lawfully revoke the power that is not asserted: The power to ask a question.

* * *

The problem with the story is simple -- it doesn't match what we've been told.

The White House would have us believe that the "big scary people" at Guantanamo refuse to cooperate with interrogators. If true, this means that the "big scary people" during interrogations cannot be shown to have links to anything, not even AlQueda.

Yet, despite this reasonable conclusion, we are asked to believe the opposite in Iraq: That despite the "big scary training" AlQueda has openly done what they did not do in Guantanamo: Reveal themselves.

The other issue is the problem of the story. We have nothing to tell us why we should believe the 421 -- that's a phenomenal number: Yet, NSA didn't catch that? Get real. And how do we explain the "really big number" that dwarfs the number that we are asked to believe are at the black sites. The number is meaningless.

If the situation were true -- that there is a group of 421 AlQueda running around -- there would be no reason for the public to learn what the Government has refused to provide Americans: Details of what is going on.

This story cannot be believed: We are told too many things cannot be verified by unidentified sources.

It is our view the AP story -- the author we question on the basis of information and belief -- is a DoD sourced-story from Central Command.

* * *

We've previously reported on the author of the AP story. The press reports related to Iranian foreign fighters in Iraq have been discredited. The article authors are both BASSEM MROUE [ Ref ]

Curiously, the Joint Staff has confirmed there was no data to justify the assertions.

We judge the AP writer may be a close confidant of Central Command information warfare, and could be a pseudonym.

It remains to be understood the details on pronunciation of the author’s last name. It is curiously slightly different than what one might expect in Arabic. This remains to be further explored.

* * *

Here are some issues and questions others may wish to look into.

Why are these reasonable questions not being answered? The information should be known, not delayed. If this was announced as a real story -- then the facts should be known, not requiring time to "find" what should already be known.

Why are they revealing a specific plot in public? We have been led to believe that the "big scary plans" could not be presented in American Courts; if the story is true then the US Government lying about why NSLs have to be kept secret. Recall the JTTF regularly says, "We cannot reveal details" to "not let them know what we know." But they've revealed the details, undermining the US basis to not reveal information about those supposedly detained and under NSA surveillance. Rather, the real issue is the US government cannot explain why it violates the Constitution and has secret trials, all the while the "big scary people" are given front page news overseas. The US cannot explain why Americans under surveillance must assent to that violation of the law in secret, while those we fight for in Iraq are given greater access to the news, threats, and specifics. Either the Americans are lying about the NSA and have no basis to keep things secret; or the Iraqis are lying about what is or is not happening.

We have no real names of those supposedly jailed. Indeed the jailings are curious. Supposedly there are 421 involved, but we are asked to believe that only a few have been jailed. That is absurd: either the 421 are or are not involved. We cannot believe the story is true because if there was a real plot then all 421 would be in jail. Moreover, if this was true -- and there are some if not many out of jail -- they cannot explain why they are disclosing what is going on: This would tip off those who have not been jailed. Another problem for the White House: Why are Americans jailed in secret, but the "remaining 421" are running around? There is no answer because the White House violates the law, and the story is a fabrication.

It is far too dramatic to believe that the "entry of the 421" was subject to a single signature. Rather, a group of "big scary people" would not be linked or "not linked" on a single act. Rather, this story is most likely related to intimidate the corrupt Iraqi leadership to not do what the American Congress does: Rubber stamp unlawful conduct.

We're also asked to believe the plot was discovered "three weeks ago." Surely, if this were true -- at a time when the UAE was in place -- this would have grabbed headlines for Americans, "Big scary things". There was silence.

The article is designed to build the morale of the Iraqi military, to make them believe they are doing something. The problem is the article -- as it is released, and fully coordinated with the Americans -- is undermine the White House over the NSA issue, illegal domestic renditions, and violations of FISA. The two stories argue against each other -- a classic sign that DoD has bungled another effort to plant stories.

The story does not add up. The more you think about it, the more questions you will have. There was no reason to wait to tell us; but there's no reason to believe they are "more forthcoming" about details in Iraq, while they remain silent about the details at home.

This President is violating the law. He continues to use non-sense to justify secret programs. The Americans deserve to have public trials with open evidence. If things were really true in Iraq as we are to believe, then the White House must explain why they are not as open as the Iraqi government; and the Congress must demand to know why the Iraqis are given better information than the Congress about what is going on, who is involved, and what the details are.

The issue is Congress is not asking, they assent to this unlawful rebellion against the Constitution.


We judge the story to be a fabrication. Congress needs to apply the implications of this story to Press the President on the NSA unlawful conduct. There is no need to keep things secret. Rather, the secrecy requirements are there to hide unlawful conduct

Story: Judged to be highly unreliable, warranting many follow-up checks with the State Department, NSA, DoD, DoJ, JTTF, and Congress.

Iraq Foils Plot to Put Terrorists at Posts
Tuesday March 14, 2006 5:16 PM
AP Photo BAG120
Associated Press Writer