See other Resistance Articles
Title: How Should We Interpret the NSA's Investigation of Jane Harman?
Source:
4um
URL Source: [None]
Published: Apr 21, 2009
Author: Deasy
Post Date: 2009-04-21 21:43:24 by Deasy
Keywords: Harman, HR1955, Domestic Terror, Zionism
Views: 213
Comments: 11
Poster Comment: Article to appear below.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.
#1. To: All, christine (#0)
(Edited)
If America's liberties are ever peacefully restored, we may look back on the National Security Agency's investigation of congresswoman Jane Harman (D-CA, 36th district) as the turning of the tides of pro-Israel influence over the country's foreign policy. For decades, the Israel Lobby and its receptive politicians, as well as other "empire builders," have pushed for American blood and treasure to be expended overseas in the name of security. Often the same politicians are interested in tightening domestic security by imposing measures to include intelligence gathering on ordinary Americans, restrictions on firearms ownership, financial scrutiny, and special threat analysis procedures. In effect, these efforts deter dissidence. They violate the Constitution. And they strip Americans of their ability to effect change. Congresswoman Harman, who has spoken before the Council on Foreign Relations and has been widely interviewed on American television on subjects related to security, was herself swept up in wiretaps run by the NSA. The recordings caught her in a conversation peddling her influence. With the Harman Affair now widely publicized, the very intelligence agencies over which Zionists and other pro-war politicians have sought control have now been used to unmask them. To many American patriots, it has been clear that the increasing number of unconstitutional abuses were always intended to strengthen the government's ability to resist dissidents who opposed foreign wars and aid to Israel. The NSA's investigation of Jane Harman may be an early indication that American citizens inside the belly of the government beast have had enough, and where legal, are willing to take action to stop foreign interests from holding power in Washington D.C. Back in October 2006 Timothy J. Burger in a Time report outlined an alleged conversation Harman had with an unnamed person claiming to represent the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). According to Burger, he was tipped off by "knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government." Haim Saban, billionaire already then a contributor to at least one Harman campaign, and sponsor of a Brookings Institution Mideast policy center, was mentioned in the 2006 Time magazine article as being unwilling to comment on his relationship with Harman. On April 20, 2009 Neil A. Lewis and Mark Mazzetti in a New York Times article revealed Haim Saban as the person whose continued (or future) contributions Harman's caller had offered in exchange for her influence in obtaining lenience for AIPAC lobbyists Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman. They had obtained Defense Department secrets on the Mideast from Lawrence A. Franklin. Franklin is now serving more than 12 years in prison for his conviction under the Espionage Act, and the two AIPAC lobbyists have been dismissed from AIPAC. The justice department was considering dropping its case against them as of Monday, April 20. Over the past couple of days, CQ Politics's Jeff Stein has continued to report on the connection between the Harman wiretapping affair and its relationship with one of President Bush's most notorious cabinet members, attorney general Alberto Gonzales: This is the same Alberto Gonzales who was accused by fellow White House staffer Deputy Attorney General James Comey of pressuring John Ashcroft, while he was in the hospital, to sign unconstitutional documents related to espionage. This is the same Alberto Gonzales who approved of torture. This is the same Alberto Gonzales who said to senator Arlen Specter that the United States Constitution did not guarantee the right of Habeas Corpus to all Americans, which requires the government to make public its arrests. The tools of tyranny approved by these very conspirators against our liberty have now been used to bring their treason out into the sunlight. Questions remain, however. Harman has not yet been charged with a crime. And Salon magazine's Glenn Greenwald questions the Obama administration's decision to grant immunity to intelligence officials in his own excellent blog entry on the Harman wiretapping affair, and with good reason: where is the lesson to be learned? Although CQ Politics' David Nather: asks, "where were the NSA watchdogs?" someone in the NSA (or responsible for its oversight) did decide to reveal the truth about one of the Bush administration's most vocal champions in congress. However, oversight committee members may have actually attempted to suppress the facts of the Harman case when it was being investigated. The NSA program was under the so-called Gang of Eight, which according to Nather, would have included: The point is that employees inside the NSA, or someone who knew of the NSA's discoveries, came forward with damning evidence regarding one of the NSA's own most vocal supporters. Is this a case of citizens protecting their own liberty from within the government? Consider the popular blog authored by Stewart Rhodes and Dave Freeman called Oath Keepers. This attempted movement is a fledgling attempt to encourage law enforcement and intelligence agency patriots not to obey orders that violate their oaths to protect and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Here are the first three of the 10 promises the Oath Keepers make: It is our duty as American citizens to support and protect our actual government oath keepers in deed and word. Someday they may need more than just our moral support. Those who revealed the NSA's investigation into Jane Harman's influence dealing were such people. Jane Harman still serves in congress on the Homeland Security committee where she remains near the political controls over domestic spying. It is no wonder that people like Harman fear extremism among the American people. Jane Harman, possibly with assistance from the RAND corporation, was one of the sponsors of the H.R. 1955 Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill's language puts the focus of the war on terror onto American citizens themselves. If you oppose the income tax, the war, NAFTA, Zionism, the Patriot Acts, NSA spying, telecom immunity, and on and on — you might be a terrorist. This is a nation founded on resistance to tyrants by any means necessary. A word to the wise: if you think like Harman, you could be fomenting extreme reactions among your fellow citizens. The best way to prevent extremism in defense of liberty is not to infringe upon it.
Of course, the more pragmatic opponents of liberty just put a bullet in it. There's that school too.
There are no replies to Comment # 9. End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
According to two officials privy to the events, Gonzales said he "needed Jane" to help support the administration's warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to be exposed by the New York Times.
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.; Nancy Pelosi, initially the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, and later the House minority leader; Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.; Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and later Harry Reid, D-Nev., the Senate minority leaders at the time; Senate Intelligence Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan.; John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., the ranking Democrat on Senate Intelligence; House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich.; and Harman, who replaced Pelosi as the ranking Democrat on House Intelligence after Pelosi became minority leader.
#9. To: Deasy (#1)
The best way to prevent extremism in defense of liberty is not to infringe upon it.
Replies to Comment # 9.