Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (105175)	7/13/2003 9:58:33 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thank you for posting those links- this was especially interesting- "UPDATE: I was in a rush when I posted this -- literally getting ready to walk out the door -- and neglected to thank Clayton Cramer for emailing me the link to this story, which I had entirely missed. I should also note that, although Judge Merritt is both smart and honest, he could of course be wrong, or deceived, here. I wonder, though, why this story hasn't gotten more attention, given that it doesn't seem to have been discredited anywhere." I think anyone who reads it has to wonder why the story isn't very much of a story- if it is true.

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (105175)	7/13/2003 10:12:53 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Perhaps this gag order issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority might have something to do with keeping the story quiet. The judge doesn't seem to be too happy about it. The story has appeared in the New York Post and the Tennessean and that's it so far, I think. <<<< 'Gag' order contradicts U.S. value Iraqis like By GILBERT S. MERRITT For The Tennessean Federal appellate judge Gilbert S. Merritt of Nashville is in Iraq as one of 13 experts selected by the U.S. Justice Department to help rebuild Iraq's judicial system. Merritt, 67, has made trips to Russia and India to work with their judicial systems. He has been sending periodic reports to The Tennessean about his experiences in Iraq and filed this dispatch recently: This is my last story from Baghdad. The so-called Coalition Provisional Authority, or CPA, acting through its head, L. Paul Bremer, issued a ''gag'' order two days ago that says: ''Speaking To The Media. To insure the effective co-ordination of the CPA's message, any plan for a member of the CPA to talk to the media should first be coordinated with the Directorate of Strategic Communication.'' The Directorate of Strategic Communication, according to the order, was a ''recent creation designed with the intention of delivering a coherent strategic information for the CPA.'' The CPA is organized into many separate agencies covering governance, justice, transportation and communication, health, oil, police, culture, finance and several others. All persons working or helping these agencies carry out their tasks are apparently covered by the order prohibiting speaking to the press unless the speech is cleared first by the Directorate of Strategic Communication. I have been informed that this includes any article I may write, or verbal utterance I may speak, to any members of the press, including my hometown newspaper. In my opinion, this is a clear violation of the First Amendment to our Constitution, which says that our government may not impose any law, regulation or directive ''abridging the freedom of speech.'' The First Amendment covers any attempt by our government to control the speech of a civilian citizen of the United States, with only a few exceptions. There are many cases in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals — more than 2,000 — that hold that the Free Speech Clause covers state and federal officials and employees. Those cases secure to such employees the right to speak on matters of public concern broadly defined and to converse with the press and others without abridgment or control. It is true that the government may restrict the release of classified information by its employees, and it may regulate speech that could create — in the words of an old Supreme Court case — a ''clear and present'' danger for its citizens. But this limitation on speech is far broader than that. It includes all speech — ''any plan for any member of CPA to talk to the media.'' Although the order is clearly unconstitutional, in my view, I intend to comply with its terms from now until I leave Iraq and am no longer subject to it. I will be leaving in a few days to meet my wife, Robin, in Istanbul for a few days' vacation before returning home to Nashville. It is, to say the least, ironic that, as a federal judge, I was asked to come here to try to help erect and establish constitutional values for the Iraqis, including the rights of free speech and other civil liberties. Americans are entitled to speak their minds, especially on matters involving government, politics, law, foreign policy and other public concerns. We value robust debate because our founding fathers believed that open debate was good in itself and would lead to better public policy, more scientific and technological progress and better artistic expression. That is what the Iraqis admire about us and wish to have for themselves. They are thankful that we have liberated them from the tyrant so that they may now have prosperity through freedom of contract and free speech. Yet, irony of ironies, our own citizens here must now clear our own speech with CPA so that our American values and policies, according to the directive, ''are launched in a coherent and coordinated manner'' pleasing to the Directorate of Strategic Communication of the Coalition Provisional Authority. Having ''launched'' our bombs and won the war quickly, I do not think that this kind of control of free speech is the kind of free speech policy most Americans want us to ''launch'' in Iraq. <<<< tennessean.com

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (105175)	7/13/2003 10:17:48 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 281500

<no new sources have turned up> Nothing is fact, until confirmed by multiple ideologically opposing sources. If it's on both commondreams and the American Enterprise Institute websites, it's real. If it's on Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post, it's real. Until then, it's just somebody seeing what they want, expect, need, or are paid to, see. Sometimes I forget this.

To: Noel de Leon who wrote (105175)	7/14/2003 10:49:56 PM
From: NickSE	Respond to of 281500

The list held by Judge Merritt was published in Uday Hussein's paper, Babil, and got pulled from the newstands by Saddam's henchmen after it circulated. Raed, a blogger in Baghdad, confirmed the 'honors list' currently held by Merritt actually ran in the paper. Paper of Saddam's son pulled from newsstands Rajiv Chandrasekaran The Washington Post Monday, November 25, 2002 iht.com BAGHDAD Perhaps it was the headline calling King Abdullah II of Jordan a "tyrant." Or the one asserting that the "clique" controlled by President Hosni Mubarak monopolizes political power in Egypt. Or maybe it was the "Honors List" it published a week ago listing the names of hundreds of officials who reportedly have been threatened by the exiled Iraqi opposition. The Information Ministry is not saying exactly why, but on Wednesday it suspended the publication of Babel, the country's most popular - and most controversial - daily newspaper. Officials said the tabloid would be shut down for a month. [cont'd.....]