An infinite enemy…

The US air force has released documents under a Freedom of Information Act revealing they investigated one of their own analysts to determine whether she had also released documents to Wikileaks.

One might not be surprised by the investigation, or the suspicion, the analyst was reported to have shown sympathy for Bradley Manning, and had expressed she wanted to leave the air force. The report is detailed and a lot of information on the “subject” were correlated, interviews were held and eventually the air force dropped the case without charge.

Whats more worrying about this relatively small episode, (smaller still as it wont be in the MSM) are the suspicions of the US, and the possible charges the analyst could have faced. The matters alleged by the department of special investigations are “communicating with the enemy”, a crime which carries a maximum sentence of the death penalty. So who is the enemy? Wikileaks? Julian Assange? Or is the US now fully using the idea that any secret information released to the public is “communicating with the enemy” simply on the premise that “the enemy” can read a newspaper or log on to the internet?


Odd enough that the US deem it necessary to bracket Wikileaks in the same group as organisations such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban, more worrying is the fact the US feels it can now define its own enemies whenever it wants under the bracket of the “war on terror” including its own citizens and military personnel.

The fact that Wikileaks are now more or less openly described as an enemy of the US should speak for itself. Calling an organisation that holds to account politicians and our rulers an enemy, an enemy of whom? Certainly not the public. It seems Obama’s quest for secrecy knows no bounds. I wonder when the administration will start cracking down on human rights groups, instead of just ignoring them…

Obama’s attitude on public freedoms is becoming a continuing factor in his administrations policies, with the breathless attack on the judge that has upheld her decision to permanently outlaw the NDAA, the administrations attempts to instill a law that would have given Obama the right to detain individuals, including US citizens militarily and indefinitely on the basis of being “associated¬† forces” or to “substantially support” any known terrorist groups ie: Al Qaeda etc. Whatever those charges cover, was never found out as the administration refused to answer specifically what those terms meant, in my opinion it could mean whatever they want. Fortunately for the US public judge Forrest bravely upheld her decision and Obama’s infringements on personal freedoms will have to fight this one another day, an appeal was immediately lodged calling the judgement “vastly troubling” and even asking for the injunction to be lifted on the ruling until the appeal.
Are Americans letting the destruction of due process and the installation of indefinite detention happen right before their eyes? With the rhetoric and threat of “the war on terror” are people willing to leave such decisions in the hands of the President and his cronies? with no accountability? It seems the fear factor is working and the Obama administration is looking to capitalise and increase its powers over its own citizens in the name of the “war on terror”.

About these ads

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s