Where's the Outrage Over Spying on Muslim Civil Rights Leaders?

[Jefferson23]

Michael Ratner: NSA and FBI spying on the lawful political activity of Muslim Americans, as revealed by The Intercept, is no different than the surveillance of Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, and other black civil rights leaders

July 13, 14

Transcript

Where's the Outrage Over Spying on Muslim Civil Rights Leaders?JESSICA DESVARIEUX, TRNN PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Jessica Desvarieux in Baltimore. And welcome to this edition of The Ratner Report.

Now joining us is the man behind the report, Michael Ratner. He's the President emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights, and he's a regular contributor to The Real News.

Thanks for being with us, Michael. So, Michael, what are you working on this week?

RATNER: Well, this week was an important week in terms of NSA, FBI spying. A particular story came out in the new online magazine called The Intercept. It was by Glenn Greenwald and--I think his name is Murtaza Hussain. And it was about NSA and FBI spying on Muslim leaders, particularly Muslim leaders who were lawyers, civil rights leaders, and academics. And he focused on the spying that was really email spying--as far as we know, all of their emails for certain periods--of these five really important Muslim American leaders, all U.S. citizens, as I said, lawyers, academics, and civil rights activists, none of them were accused of a crime. None of them were even under suspicion of a crime. It was spying, I would say, pure and simple, but not so pure and simple. It was spying on lawful political activity of these people, spying on people who were advocating for the rights of Muslims, and for the rights, in one case, a Palestinians. It was also spying on a lawyer who represented various people in the context of what the U.S. considers terrorism cases. But the key fact linking them all is that they were Muslims.

Now, the story came out of a very long list of emails that Snowden had apparently revealed to the journalists. It was something like, I mean, thousands of emails of people who were surveilled in some way, their email accounts. On that list were 202 Americans. They couldn't identify everybody on the list--it was only the emails. But they were able to identify certainly these five.

Of course, in my view, as a human rights lawyer, it should make no difference whether one is an American citizen or not. Why should American citizen have any higher degree of privacy than someone overseas? But under our Constitution, at least the way the courts have interpreted it, it's more serious when you spy on an American citizen. And so the fact that these five were American citizens is of some significance in our country. Of course, that they were Muslims is to me of great significance as well.

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=12099

[Thinkingabout]

1. Maybe the outrage occurred sometime between 2002 and 2008 when the surveillance

Was happening. There was talk about the warrantless wiretapping Bush was doing because of his war powers.

[Pholus]

2. Considering the demonstrable lies, you'd think that the Bushies would get prosecuted...

instead of keeping their cushy NSA jobs. But that only happens in justice-land, which is the next exit farther down from fantasy-land.

In reality-land we got "looking forward" which seems to have done jack and shit to stop anything about the growth of the corporate surveillance gravy train.

[Thinkingabout]

3. There has been corporate surveillance happening for many years.

Seems like corporations thinks they are entitled to know where their employees are and what they are doing, like the supervisor responsibility. Also, there are those who needs to be prosecuted and it has nit happened.

[Pholus]

4. Yup. When they claim the right to "drone strike" their employees I'll worry.

But the day the USG shirks its morality and relies on a "But we're not the only ones shitting on you" excuse is a very, very sad day indeed.

Are you saying it is a very, very sad day today?

[Thinkingabout]

5. Nope, never said it was a sad day and do not know of drone strikes on employees.

[Pholus]

6. Sorry you missed the word "when" in that post title.

Corporate surveillance is abhorrent. I certainly don't work for them or support them in their endeavors. Why the hell should I be happy about the USG doing the same things?

Let's start from your premise that the outrage was during Bush. If it were truly illegal, it was a problem to be solved. If you were an idealist who naively bought the campaign rhetoric, you might even have presumed that pains would be taken to change the culture and bring the lawlessness under control.

Instead, after 2009 they kept the same management, the same operations, legalized many questionable practices and then even threw in an increased budget which has nearly doubled since 2004.

Without humor, the investigation of all those outrageous Bushie abuses thus largely went like this:

Oh well. If, maker forbid, the Rethugs worm their way back into power you'll figure out why it was relevant.

[Thinkingabout]

7. Which corporations are you talking about.

[Pholus]

8. Man, we do want a deflection don't we? Okay, I'll play. Let's start with Booz Allen Hamilton.

I can work my way down the REST of Comrade Eddie's resume if you want...all those Beltway Bandits who did such a masterful job of showing burning twin tower pictures to our politicians in all those flashy sales powerpoints adorned with the red, white and blue.

But enough about corporations. They all suck. It's strange you're taking that tack to deflect but then again it does hint about your premises...

But anyway I answered your question. Let's get an answer from YOU now!

We deliberately shut down any and all prosecutions of the Bushies excesses, commenting famously that we were "looking forward, not backwards."

If you believe comments made by the dean of the UCLA law school, Chris Edley, who was involved in the transition of administrations this position was taken largely to ensure Republican cooperation during the President's first term.

My questions to you:

1) Do you think that trade was worth it?

2) By letting politics trump the rule of law, is it possible that further abuses can occur?

[Thinkingabout]

9. Are you saying the Bushes is part of a corporation?

[Pholus]

10. Are you saying they are not?

It appears you don't seem to eager to answer my questions even after I went off topic to answer yours.

[Thinkingabout]

11. If you are talking while he was president tben I have not seen USA, INC.

There is a difference. The USA government is not incorporated.

[Pholus]

12. Uh. Okey-dokey then.

You are absolutely correct. "The USA government is not incorporated." I think I'll just back towards this here door very slowly while maintaining eye contact.