The Huffington Post: Is Rand Paul Going Neocon on Iran?

Two years ago, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), after giving a foreign policy speech at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Service, said, “Iran has a large undercurrent of people who like the West. They like our music, our culture, our literature, and so I think we can influence people in those ways. I’d rather do that than go to war with Iran.”

This statement was lauded by those–including myself–who seek a diplomatic solution with Iran.

Less than a year later, in March 2012, Sen. Paul put his money where his mouth is by standing up to his colleagues in Senate. He attempted to block a non-binding resolution that he felt would give the President carte blanche to preemptively attack Iran.

In October, I was able–along with another fellow Iranian-American from Kentucky–to meet with one of Sen. Paul’s senior staff members.

“Sanctions don’t have a history of working. All they do is lead us down a path to war,” the staffer said, almost scoffing at the current within Congress to increase sanctions. I walked away feeling positive that diplomacy may actually get a chance.

What a difference a year makes.

Last Friday, I received an email from Rand Paul’s office. He was, ostensibly, responding to my letter urging the Senate to oppose a new resolution that would call for the U.S. to enforce sanctions and provide economic, political, and military support if Israel attacked Iran. I opened it assuming that I’d read an email about how Senator Paul remained committed to standing strong against the push for war and sanctions. Boy was I wrong.

Ten months after sitting with what I assumed was a sympathetic ear, I read the following:

Iran continues to pose a threat to the region and the world as it continues nuclear development in the face of international sanctions and pressure to halt this aggressive behavior. Though a nuclear Iran would be a threat on the global scale, there is also concern that a nuclear Iran would aggressively target our ally Israel.

The United States and Israel have a special relationship. With our shared history and common values, the American and Israeli people have formed a bond that unifies us across many thousands of miles and calls on us to work together toward peace and prosperity. This peace is not only between our two nations, but also our neighbors.

In February 2013, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) introduced S.Res.65, a Senate resolution stating it is the sense of Congress that the United States and international organizations should continue the enforcement of sanctions against Iran. In addition, S.Res.65 reiterates the policy of the United States to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and our continued support of our ally Israel.

I supported S.Res.65, which passed both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the full Senate unanimously.

He goes on to mention that he got language included in the resolution stating that it does not authorize war. But I admittedly had to re-read the letter a few times. Here was a letter from Sen. Rand Paul, a supposed anti-sanctions, anti-war isolationist, that was basically doing a complete 180 degree turn away from what Paul’s been advocating since before his election.

I guess Sen. Paul is no longer an anti-sanctions, anti-war stalwart. Instead, he’s claiming sanctions and war threats are a vital part of preventing Iran from building a nuclear weapon, despite the intelligence community’s continued analysis that indicates Iran has still not decided to build one.

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-shams/is-rand-paul-going-neocon_b_3784998.html

 

The Guardian: NSA loophole allows warrantless search for US citizens’ emails and phone calls

The National Security Agency has a secret backdoor into its vast databases under a legal authority enabling it to search for US citizens’ email and phone calls without a warrant, according to a top-secret document passed to the Guardian by Edward Snowden.

The previously undisclosed rule change allows NSA operatives to hunt for individual Americans’ communications using their name or other identifying information. Senator Ron Wyden told the Guardian that the law provides the NSA with a loophole potentially allowing “warrantless searches for the phone calls or emails of law-abiding Americans”.

The authority, approved in 2011, appears to contrast with repeated assurances from Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials to both Congress and the American public that the privacy of US citizens is protected from the NSA’s dragnet surveillance programs.

The intelligence data is being gathered under Section 702 of the of the Fisa Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the NSA authority to target without warrant the communications of foreign targets, who must be non-US citizens and outside the US at the point of collection.

The communications of Americans in direct contact with foreign targets can also be collected without a warrant, and the intelligence agencies acknowledge that purely domestic communications can also be inadvertently swept into its databases. That process is known as “incidental collection” in surveillance parlance.

But this is the first evidence that the NSA has permission to search those databases for specific US individuals’ communications.

A secret glossary document provided to operatives in the NSA’s Special Source Operations division – which runs the Prism program and large-scale cable intercepts through corporate partnerships with technology companies – details an update to the “minimization” procedures that govern how the agency must handle the communications of US persons. That group is defined as both American citizens and foreigners located in the US.

“While the FAA 702 minimization procedures approved on 3 October 2011 now allow for use of certain United States person names and identifiers as query terms when reviewing collected FAA 702 data,” the glossary states, “analysts may NOT/NOT [not repeat not] implement any USP [US persons] queries until an effective oversight process has been developed by NSA and agreed to by DOJ/ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].”

The term “identifiers” is NSA jargon for information relating to an individual, such as telephone number, email address, IP address and username as well as their name.

The document – which is undated, though metadata suggests this version was last updated in June 2012 – does not say whether the oversight process it mentions has been established or whether any searches against US person names have taken place.

—-

Click below for the full article.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/nsa-loophole-warrantless-searches-email-calls#

Politico: Al Qaeda’s return complicates civil liberties debate

From left: Rand Paul, Ron Wyden, Ted Cruz, Mark Udall and Justin Amash are pictured in this composite image. | AP Photos, Reuters

Al Qaeda’s back, and its timing couldn’t be worse for the Republicans who are  taking on the national security wing of their party.

Edward Snowden reignited a debate over privacy and civil liberties that had  fizzled in recent years. Just last week, civil libertarians were even picking up  momentum on proposals to restrict the NSA’s mass collection of Americans’ phone  records thanks to renewed attention in the media.

But that was before the serious new Al Qaeda threats that have  forced the shuttering of exploding clothes — because this is exactly the time when  they say the public needs to be reminded not to undermine the privacy rights of  law-abiding Americans.

—-

Click below for the full article.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/civil-liberties-debate-challenged-by-al-qaedas-return-95354.html?hp=t1

 

The Washington Post: Here’s how Iran censors the Internet

Discussion of Internet censorship usually focuses on China and its “Great Firewall.” But the Chinese Communist Party isn’t the only regime that censors its Internet. Iran does too.

Little is known about Iran’s censorship system because Iranian citizens who probe the network from inside the country risk reprisals from the government. But earlier this year, two anonymous Iranians teamed up with Alex Halderman, a computer science professor at the University of Michigan, to conduct one of the first systematic studies of Iranian Internet censorship to be published outside Iran. Halderman presented his findings at a Tuesday talk at the Usenix Security conference in Washington, D.C.

Iran has an extensive list of blacklisted sites. Users who attempt to visit a banned site see a notice that looks something like this:

Screen Shot 2013-08-15 at 9.55.18 AM

What gets censored? To find out, the researchers attempted to visit the sites on Alexa’s top 500 lists in various categories. Almost half of the 500 most popular sites on the Internet are censored. Unsurprisingly, the theocratic Iranian regime censors pornographic Web sites most heavily. But a high percentage of sites in the “art,” “society,” and “news” categories are also blocked:

iran_censorship

In addition to banning particular sites, the Iranian network also filters traffic based on its content. In one test, the researchers created a file called sex.htm that was hosted outside the United States. Access to this page from inside Iran was blocked.

The Iranian Internet is also configured to discourage the use of certain encrypted protocols. Web traffic is allowed through at full speed. Traffic that uses the encrypted SSH protocol, which can be used to “tunnel” other types of traffic out of the country, run at less than 20 percent of the network’s full speed. Traffic the Iranian firewall doesn’t recognize is throttled even more dramatically, and gets cut off altogether after about 60 seconds.

——

Click below for the full article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/15/heres-how-iran-censors-the-internet/

Reason.com: Man Who Could’ve Been Facing Third Strike After Being Caught Sleeping in His Car Alleges Police Brutality in Lawsuit

Like mandatory minimums, three strike laws were passed in an effort by politicians to appear “tough on crime” by limiting the ability of judges perceived as being too lenient from determining appropriate sentencing. Combined with anti-drug laws, such sentencing laws help keep US prisons overcrowded.

Today’s example of the intersection of drug laws, tough sentencing, and police encounters via the Houston Chronicle:

Police Chief Henry Porretto said [Reginald] Davis had been convicted on two previous drug charges and was facing a possible third strike. He said Davis grabbed something from the seat of the car and put it in his pocket before fleeing. An internal police investigation completed before Davis filed a complaint determined that officers used necessary force, Poretto said.
The lawsuit [filed by Davis] alleges that on March 19 Davis was asleep in his car on the seawall, illegal in Galveston without a camping permit. Santos allegedly awakened Davis at 1:45 a.m. and asked him to place his hands on the hood of the police car. Davis ran onto the beach, was tased and tackled as he staggered to his feet, according to the lawsuit. Davis alleges that Santos, Chapman and three other officers beat him as he lay in the surf and forced his head under water.

In the lawsuit, Davis says he was unaware of the city ordinance when he parked at the seawall to sleep after realizing he was a lot more tired than he thought.

Click below for the full article.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/14/galveston-man-who-couldve-been-facing-th