Detroit, ore 10,30 (16,30 in Italia) Continua...

«Obama Decried, Then Used, Some Bush Drilling Policies»
(Titolo del Wall Street Journal)

La notizia è uscita sul New York Times un paio di giorni fa, e non è certo una novità per chi legge questo blog, epperò sembra passata in allegria:
"The Obama administration has sidelined efforts to close the Guantánamo prison, making it unlikely that President Obama will fulfill his promise to close it before his term ends in 2013".
Sì, avete capito bene. Guantanamo non solo non è stato chiuso il primo giorno di presidenza (vi ricordate, no? – Poi non dite che non ve l'avevo detto), non è stato chiuso nemmeno un anno dopo e non chiuderà neanche da qui alla fine del primo mandato (2013).

Sulla detenzione a tempo indefinito e senza processo dei terroristi di Guantanamo:
«This language strongly suggests a break with the ad hoc and at times lawless approach of the George W. Bush administration. But it is a shameless smoke screen. President Obama has come not to bury the Bush approach but to embrace it».
(Primo editoriale del Washington Post di oggi)

"Special Operations forces have grown both in number and budget, and are deployed in 75 countries, compared with about 60 at the beginning of last year. In addition to units that have spent years in the Philippines and Colombia, teams are operating in Yemen and elsewhere in the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia".
(Washington Post, articolo dal titolo: U.S. 'secret war' expands globally as Special Operations forces take larger role)

"The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region, according to defense officials and military documents".
(Apertura del New York Times, 25 maggio)

Non so se sia chiaro:
Obama, dunque, ha ordinato un'ampia espansione delle attività militari clandestine – "autorizzando l'invio di truppe delle Forze Speciali americane in paesi alleati e ostili in Medio Oriente, Asia centrale e Corno d'Africa". L'ordine, scrive il Times, "consente ricognizioni che potrebbero aprire la strada a possibili attacchi militari in Iran se le tensioni sulle sue ambizioni nucleari dovessero peggiorare". Il Nobel per la Pace comincia davvero a guadagnarselo, ora.
I siti dei giornali italiani non hanno ancora dato la notizia (con l'eccezione, timida, del Corriere)

“Congratulations to the United States and Barack Obama for winning the power to abduct people anywhere in the world and then imprison them for as long as they want with no judicial review of any kind” Continua...

"Unfortunately, President Obama isn’t discarding the Bush-Cheney playbook that has given jihadist recruiters such effective talking points. Quite the contrary: the White House thinks the moral of the Shahzad story may be that we should get more aggressive in Pakistan, possibly putting more boots on the ground. And already Obama has authorized the assassination of al-Awlaki".
"What is surprising is that Barack Obama, who became the Democratic nominee for president largely because he had opposed the Iraq war, seems increasingly to be taking his cues from the people who so disastrously supported it".
(New York Times, pronto già ad accusare Obama di fare una politica che crea terroristi)

Oltre Bush:
"President Obama’s legal advisers are considering asking Congress to allow the government to detain terrorism suspects longer after their arrests before presenting them to a judge for an initial hearing, according to administration officials familiar with the discussions".
"Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, assailed the Obama administration for considering such ideas. He noted that the administration of President George W. Bush, which was heavily criticized by civil-liberties groups, never proposed such modifications to criminal procedures"

"To eavesdrop on the terrorism suspect who was added to the target list, the American-born radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is hiding in Yemen, intelligence agencies would have to get a court warrant. But designating him for death, as C.I.A. officials did early this year with the National Security Council’s approval, required no judicial review".

"In the fullest administration statement to date, Harold Koh, the State Department’s legal adviser, said in a March 24 speech the drone strikes against Al Qaeda and its allies were lawful as part of the military action authorized by Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, as well as under the general principle of self-defense. By those rules, he said, such targeted killing was not assassination, which is banned by executive order".
(New York Times, 13 maggio)

Grande agitazione, tra i liberal, per la conferma della Croce Rossa che l'Amministrazione Obama ha istituito una "prigione segreta" a Bagram, dove nei confronti dei detenuti della guerra al terrorismo sarebbero applicati gli stessi metodi di quando c'era er puzzone:
"The White House has institutionalized a level of torture that was introduced by the previous administration".

Obama è pronto a modificare, in senso poco garantista, la Miranda rule:
"In an interview on CNN, Mr. Axelrod said Mr. Obama was “open to looking at” changing the Miranda rule, which generally bans prosecutors from using as evidence statements made by suspects in custody before they have been warned that they have a right to remain silent and to consult a lawyer".

"To the disappointment of many liberals who thought they were electing an antiwar president, Mr. Obama clearly rejects the argument that if he doesn’t stir the hornets’ nest, American cities will not get stung. His first year in office he authorized more Predator strikes — more than 50 — than President Bush did in his last four years in office. In December, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama stated that sometimes peace requires war".
(New York Times, 9 maggio 2010)

Vi ricordate di quando l'Amministrazione Bush chiamò a testimoniare sotto giuramento il premio Pulitzer del Times James Risen per conoscere chi fossero le sue fonti d'intelligence per il suo libro sulla Cia e la guerra al terrorismo? Ricordate che Risen riuscì a non testimoniare, in nome della libertà di stampa e di protezione delle fonti? Bene, ora ci prova l'amministrazione Obama.