Informing Hawaii's voters
Submitted by Guest on Sun, 01/25/2015 - 22:02
A well-known German journalist with a major German newspaper admits that he cooperated with the CIA for years in manipulating the news. He says he regrets the role he played and is willing to face any punishment that will be dealt him for going public.
Submitted by Guest on Fri, 01/23/2015 - 23:03
Submitted by Guest on Fri, 01/23/2015 - 01:45
By Jack De Feo
January 20, 2015
(Nanakuli, Hawaii) At today's Nanakuli-Maili Neighborhood Board meeting, Board members voted against the future use of Makua Valley for live-fire training.
In a unanimous decision, board members voted to take a position that the military should not use Makua Valley for live-fire training ever again. The Board's decision follows on the footsteps of Malama Makua's recent celebration of no live-fire in the valley for 10 years and the continued legal hold-up preventing the Army from resuming their live-fire training in the valley. In December, the Waianae Coast Neighborhood Board passed a similar motion; both Boards represent the Leeward Coast of Oahu.
Board members and community members supported the Army's need for live-fire, but felt that Makua does not provide an adequate facility for the Army's needs, particularly for the Stryker Brigade. One testifier cited specific limitations with the facility that prevents Army units from experiencing realistic training that the Army desperately needs at the company-level in a Combined Arms Live-Fire Exercise (CALFEX).
The CALFEX range was built in 1988, many years before the Army developed the Stryker vehicle and stationed a Stryker brigade at Schofield Barracks. The current range does not accommodate off-road use of the Strykers and limits the Commander to employing only 5 vehicles out of the 21 vehicles assigned.
Moreover, the live-fire experience is crippled by nighttime restrictions, preventing commanders from practicing the critically needed task of integrating and coordinating a variety of weapon systems during periods of limited visibility.
One community member testified that Brigades deployed from Oahu in recent years in a combat ready status without using Makua Valley, contradicting the importance of the live-fire range at Makua.
Only one community member, who provided the historical importance of Makua for training Army units for WWII and Korea, testified in support of Makua live-fire. A testifier responded that today's company size units have ten to twenty times the combat power that units had 70 years ago and that Makua was just too small and inadequate.
The Nanakuli-Maili Neighborhood Board's position has no enforceable effect on the military's use of Makua, but it sends a clear signal to the Army that the community wants it to find another place to train.
Petition to downsize Army on Oahu
Hawaii studies on Strykers, Makua done [Honolulu Advertiser] Jan 14, 2008
Submitted by Guest on Thu, 01/22/2015 - 23:49
Why the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii and our Congressional delegates have it wrong
The Hawaii Independent
By Bart Dame
January 22, 2015
As the discussion continues over whether the U.S. military will downsize its Hawaii-based personnel, Hawaii’s Congressional delegation maintains that defense is a critical economic sector for Hawaii. In a recent article from Washington, D.C.-based outlet The Hill, members of the delegation talk about their strategy for regaining the defense and national security influence the Hawaii delegation once enjoyed under the leadership of Senator Daniel Inouye.
Senator Brian Schatz was recently awarded a spot on the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, once chaired by Inouye, while Senator Mazie Hirono was named the ranking member on the Senate Armed Service Committee’s Seapower subpanel last week. In the House, U.S. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Mark Takai, have both been named to the “influential” Armed Services Committee and both are Iraq War veterans.
The Hill reports that Sen. Schatz said the members of the delegation are pleased with the opportunities they have to shape Pentagon policy, including the “pivot” in U.S. military forces toward the Pacific.
Read more . . .
Petition to downsize Army on Oahu
Submitted by Guest on Tue, 01/20/2015 - 19:37
Published on YouTube Jan 20, 2015
Russia Today introduction: The NSA's mass surveillance program appears to have been just the tip of the iceberg. According to documents leaked by Edward Snowden, the US is now getting ready for a full-blown digital war, in which dominating the Internet will be the focus. RT talks to Marc Rogers head of security for the DefCon hacker conference.
Submitted by Guest on Mon, 01/19/2015 - 20:05
Kioni Dudley, Ph.D.
By Kioni Dudley, Ph.D.
Kioni Dudley is the president of the Friends of Makakilo and is active in the effort to save farmland and promote farming in leeward Oahu. He is vice chair of the Makakilo-Kapolei-Honokai Hale Neighborhood Board.
Today, we stand at a threshold of another burst of growth on O’ahu. Kaka’ako is afire, racing to build as many high-rises as it can hold. Koa Ridge is prepped and ready to build 3,500 units. The City is rushing Ho’opili through the zoning process, chafing to build 12,000 houses on the best farmland in the world, farmland we will need for our survival.
So much building, all at once, will take more workers than we have. So we will bring workers from the mainland to build houses primarily for rich people who don’t yet live here, starting a whole new round of in-migration and of building to meet its needs.
And where will island people live? The City Council is considering changes to ‘ohana housing rules, so that more locals can be crammed together on less land.
Is all of this what the people want?
With developers, unions, banks, big business, and Pacific Resource Partners controlling our government, we can do little but watch as they pave over and destroy Paradise for their own profit.
Yet suddenly, there is a chance for change. The Army must reduce its numbers and its expenses. Installations in Hawai’i are extremely costly, training for troops is limited, and direct deployment to battlefields is impossible. Unless it meets with strong opposition, the plan is to withdraw 19,800 troops from Hawai’i in the next few years. Schofield Barracks and Wheeler Army Airfield would be vacated.
What good effects could come from this? On-post at Schofield there are 3,600 houses that have all been built or refurbished in the last ten years that would suddenly be empty. Off-post, thousands more homes currently rented by soldiers would also be freed up. This could suddenly eliminate pressure to build in Kaka’ako, or at Ho’opili or Koa Ridge. There would be plenty of housing for years to come. With a surplus of units, house prices and rent prices would ease. Buyers and renters could have more money in their pockets for a better life. There would be no need to import building-trades workers from the mainland.
The housing on-post at Schofield could serve many needs. It could provide homes at affordable rent for young people now living with parents. Other on-Post houses might become legal bread and breakfasts, filling a need for alternative tourism, reducing the demand for more hotels, and keeping Turtle Bay traffic from growing. The barracks buildings themselves might become apartments, college dorms, new boarding schools, or nursing homes.
Businesses in Wahiawa would never have to worry about mass deployments again. And people living at Schofield who would finally shop in town.
A myriad of new business opportunities for locals would open up. Opportunities to take over gas stations, markets, motels, clinics, auto shops, craft shops, and pre-schools. Church buildings would become available. Office spaces for businesses. Cocktail clubs, a movie theatre, fields for all kinds of sports programs all would await entrepreneurs to purchase or run them.
The city would not need to provide fire stations, police stations, water and sewage, or maintenance yards. They’re already there, ready to use, as is a second access road to the Leeward Coast (Kolekole).
Wheeler offers a full airfield with possibilities for new flying schools, cargo flights, sight-seeing businesses, and inter-island carriers.
There are also acres of farmland where crops that thrive in the upland can be grown.
Best of all, perhaps, if there is no need for Ho’opili and Koa Ridge, people on the West side could be spared an additional 15,000 cars to freeway rush hour traffic, and saved from the daily gridlock that would come with it.
Downsizing is good for our people. But it must be all 19,800 troops or nothing. Keeping 10,000 might feel good, but Schofield would then stay open, and none of the advantages mentioned above would be possible. Everybody would lose. If you support army downsizing, let your voice be heard. Sign the petition at www.OC4AD.com.
Submitted by Guest on Mon, 01/19/2015 - 19:21
Paul Craig Roberts
Where is his replacement?
January 19, 2015
By Paul Craig Roberts
Today (January 19) is Martin Luther King Day, a national holiday.
King was an American civil rights leader who was assassinated 47 years ago on April 4, 1968, at the age of 39. James Earl Ray was blamed for the murder. Initially, Ray admitted the murder, apparently under advice from his attorney in order to avoid the death penalty, but Ray soon withdrew his confession and unsuccessfully sought a jury trail.
Documents of the official investigation remain secret until the year 2027.
As Wikipedia reports, “The King family does not believe Ray had anything to do with the murder of Martin Luther King. . . . The King family and others believe that the assassination was carried out by a conspiracy involving the U.S. government, and that James Earl Ray was a scapegoat. This conclusion was affirmed by a jury in a 1999 civil trial against Loyd Jowers and unnamed co-conspirators.”
The US Department of Justice concluded that Jowers’ evidence, which swayed the jury in the civil trail, was not credible. On the other hand, there is no satisfactory explanation why documents pertaining to the investigation of Ray were put under lock and key for 59 years.
There are many problems with the official story of King’s assassination, just as there are with the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy. No amount of suspicion or information will change the official stories. Facts don’t count enough to change official stories.
Many Americans will continue to believe that having failed to tar King as a communist and womanizer, the establishment decided to remove an inconvenient rising leader by assassination. Many black Americans will continue to believe that a national holiday was the government’s way of covering up its crime and blaming racism for King’s murder.
Certainly, the government should not have fomented suspicion by settling such a high profile murder with a plea bargain. Ray was an escapee from a state penitentiary and was apprehended at London’s Heathrow Airport on his way to disappear in Africa. It seems farfetched that he would imperil his escape by taking a racist-motivated shot at King.
We should keep in mind the many loose ends of the Martin Luther King assassination as we are being bombarded by media with what Finian Cunningham correctly terms “high-octane emotional politics that stupefies the public from asking some very necessary hard questions” about the Charlie Hebdo murders, or for that matter the Boston Marathon Bombing case and all other outrages that prove to be so convenient for governments.
Those gullible citizens who believe that “our government would never kill its own people” have much understanding to gain from knowledge of Operation Gladio and Northwoods Project, about which much information is available on the Internet and in parliamentary investigations and officially released secret documents.
The Northwoods Project was presented to President John F. Kennedy by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. It called for shooting down people on the streets of Washington and Miami, shooting down US airliners (“real or simulated”), and attacking refugee boats from Cuba in order to create an atrocity case against Castro that would secure public support for a full-fledged invasion to bring regime change to Cuba. President Kennedy refused the plot and removed the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, an action that some researchers conclude led to his assassination.
Operation Gladio was revealed by the prime minister of Italy in 1990. It was a secret operation coordinated by NATO and operated by European military secret services in cooperation with the CIA and British intelligence.
Parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium and testimony by secret service operatives have established that Gladio, originally established as a “stay-behind” secret army to resist Soviet invasion, was used to commit bombing attacks on Europeans, especially women and children, in order to blame communists and keep them from gaining political power in Europe during the Cold War era.
In answer to questioning by judges about the 1980 bombing of the central train station in Bologna resulting in the deaths of 85 people, Vincenzo Vinciguerra said: “There exists in Italy a secret force parallel to the armed forces, composed of civilians and military men . . . a super-organization with a network of communications, arms and explosives [which] took up the task, on NATO’s behalf, or preventing a slip to the left in the political balance of the country. This they did, with the assistance of the official secret services and the political and military forces.”
Vinciguerra told the UK newspaper The Guardian that “every single outrage that followed from 1969 fitted into a single, organized matrix . . . mobilized into the battle as part of an anti-communist strategy originating not with organizations deviant from the institutions of power, but from within the state itself, and specifically from within the ambit of the state’s relations within the Atlantic Alliance.”
There is no doubt about Gladio’s existence. The BBC did a 2.5 hour documentary on the secret terrorist NATO organization in 1992. There are a number of books, articles and reports in addition to the parliamentary investigations and testimonies from participants.
There are reasons to believe that, although exposed, Gladio is still in operation and is behind terrorist attacks, such as Charlie Hebdo, in Europe today. Of course, today Washington has such control over Europe that no parliamentary investigations comparable to those that exposed Operation Gladio are possible.
With the documented and officially admitted existence of many official government conspiracies against their own peoples resulting in numerous deaths, only witting or unwitting agents of government conspiracies respond to valid questions about alleged terrorist events by trying to shout down truth-seekers.
The function of shutting down suspicion of official stories has been well performed by the “mainstream” print and TV media in the Western world. This presstitute function has been joined by many tabloid internet sites, such as Salon, and other such sites that originate in money or desire for profit.
Money flows to those who serve the establishment. The way to riches is to cover for the powerful private interest groups that comprise the One Percent and control the government.
Many websites unwittingly contribute to the power of the One Percent to control explanations and to discredit truth-seekers. This is the main function of comment sections on Internet sites where paid trolls operate.
Studies have concluded that the largest percentage of a population is too insecure to take a position different from peers. Most Americans simply do not know enough to have confidence in making independent decisions. They go with the flow and rely on their peers to tell them what is safe to think.
Trolls are hired for the purpose of making disparaging and ad hominem attacks on those who diverge from accepted opinion. For example, I am constantly attacked in personal terms in comment sections by people hiding behind first names and aliases. Others employ left-wing and progressive hatred of Ronald Reagan to discredit me on the grounds that anyone so wicked and evil as to serve in the Reagan administration cannot be trusted. Many of my denigrators worship the ground that Hillary Clinton walks on.
Today in the so-called “western democracies,” it is permissible to be politically incorrect against Muslims and to invoke denigration and hatred against them. However, it is not permissible to criticize the government of Israel for indiscriminate and murderous attacks on Palestinian citizens. The position of the Israel Lobby and its obedient and well-intimidated presstitutes is that any criticism whatsoever of Israel is anti-semitism and an indication that the critic desires a new holocaust. In other words, the Israel Lobby defines any critic of any Israeli government policy as an incipient mass murderer.
This effort to silence all critics of Israeli policies applies also to Israelis and Jews themselves. Israelis and Jews who legitimately criticize Israeli policies in hopes of steering the Zionist State away from self-destruction are branded “self-hating Jews” by the Israel Lobby. The Lobby has demonstrated its power to destroy academic freedom and to reach into private Catholic universities and public state universities and both block and withdraw tenure appointments of candidates, both Jews and non-Jews, who have incurred the Lobby’s disapproval.
I see Martin Luther King as an American hero. Whatever his personal failings, if any, he stood for justice and for the safety of every race and gender under law. King actually believed in the American dream and wanted to achieve it for everyone. I am confident that had I confronted King with criticism, he would have considered my case and responded honestly regardless of any power he might have held over me.
I cannot expect the same consideration from any western government or from the trolls that operate in comment sections provided by Internet sites in hopes of boosting their readership.
Gullible and credulous people are incapable of defending their liberty. Unfortunately these traits are the principal traits of western peoples. Western liberty is collapsing in front of our eyes, and this makes absurd the desire by Vladimir Putin’s Russian opponents to integrate with the collapsing western states.
Copyright © Paul Craig Roberts 2014
About Paul Craig Roberts
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments and his Internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West and How America Was Lost.
Submitted by Guest on Mon, 01/19/2015 - 00:46
PressTV [owned by Iranian government]
By Finian Cunningham
So America's top diplomat John Kerry wants to give France "a big hug" to condole over the recent spate of alleged terror attacks in that country. Speaking in Paris while laying a wreath for the 17 victims of violence, Kerry said that "America feels the pain of our oldest ally."
Kerry's words, accompanied by James Taylor's mawkish song 'You've Got a Friend', is typical of the new politics of high-octane emotion that is inducing people to take leave of their senses.
Since the violent attacks that hit Paris last week, the French authorities have orchestrated full-court national and international mourning. Massive marches for "unity" and "free speech", candlelit vigils, medal-of-honor ceremonies, and somber eulogies and paeans to "French values" - all such events and media coverage have sought to bolster the support for state authorities.
The trouble with this "high-octane emotional politics" is that it stupefies the public from asking some very necessary hard questions of the authorities. By buying into weeping and self-indulgence, the public are at risk of being manipulated like never before.
Just as John Kerry was offering a big hug "to all of France", the US government this week announced a significant step-up in its military involvement in Syria. The Pentagon unveiled plans to send 500 military personnel to train "moderate rebels" to fight against the elected government forces of President Bashar al Assad.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are to provide the US with training grounds on their territories to furnish a "new rebel army" of 15,000 fighters. The previous "moderate rebels" became subsumed into the ranks of the extremist Al Nusra and ISIS, taking their American weapons with them.
It is widely acknowledged, even in the Western mainstream media, that the conflict in Syria has fuelled extremism across the Middle East, which is finding its way into Europe. As troops go on high-alert counter-terror operations in France and Belgium this weekend, there is an unequivocal correlation between the conflicts in Syria, Libya and Iraq - and new threats of terrorism in Europe.
The latest troop dispatch by the US to train "rebels" in Syria will inevitably lead to more conflict and terrorism. So much for John Kerry's big hug and emotive pleas of "you've got a friend". Kerry is like an arsonist paying his respects to families of charred victims.
That conclusion should be a no-brainer. But as the masses are swooning with emotion - and a lot of that crocodile tears too - some basic facts become blinded, conveniently for the authorities.
One basic fact is that the Western states' covert war for regime change in Syria is criminal and in violation of several international laws. Western political leaders crying over victims in Paris should be prosecuted for war crimes from their four-year-long military adventurism in Syria involving proxy extremist networks. These terror networks are feeding directly back into European societies. American and Western media deception of "training moderate rebels" should be dismissed with the contempt that it deserves. Washington and its European allies are up their necks with terror networks.
Days after the apparent terror killings in Paris, French President Francois Hollande made one of many emotive speeches that week proclaiming the supposed virtues of Western values - while on board the aircraft carrier Charles De Gaulle. The largest vessel in the French fleet was then deployed to join NATO forces in the Persian Gulf to step up bombing campaigns in Syria and Iraq "to defeat terrorism".
With tears running down the nation's cheeks, the French authorities are thus stoking more violence in the Middle East than they have already done along with their Western allies. How crass can it get? But in the new lachrymose politics of emotions, the public surrenders to the crassness.
However, it is precisely at this juncture that we need to avoid emotional over-reaction and instead to pursue rational, critical questions. As several respected commentators have already noted there are gaping doubts in the official French version of what took place in Paris last week.
Michel Chossudovsky has pointed out that the French police chief, Elric Fredou, who was looking into the attack on the Paris magazine Charlie Hebdo, in which 12 people were killed, was himself found dead in an apparent suicide on the night following that incident. The timing is highly suspicious, but the wider public, misled by the non-inquiring media, appear to be disinterested in the circumstances of the police commissioner's untimely death. Was it really suicide? Was he being shut-up over damaging revelations about who were the real perpetrators of the attack on Charlie Hebdo?
Paul Craig Roberts has also pointed out several incongruities in the official narrative, including the way that the French state security forces executed the Kouachi brothers and the kosher supermarket gunman Amedy Coulibaly, instead of capturing them, thus removing any possibility for the public to hear their accounts. Were they set up by French military intelligence to take the rap for the earlier terror attacks? Roberts notes that the professional behaviour of the masked gunmen in the Paris attacks does not match the bumbling behavior of the Kouachis at the later, fatal shoot-out.
Also, as Peter Koenig recently argued, the spate of French alleged terror attacks, as well as the recent fatal incident in Belgium this weekend, is being used as a "shock and awe" device to manufacture public opinion into accepting more coercive state police powers and foreign military interventions - the very policies that are fueling terrorism.
Western governments and their pliable news media are audaciously playing politics with public emotions. Proven Western state involvement in Middle East conflicts and false flag terrorism needs to be rigorously interrogated and exposed more than ever.
But the public seems too occupied shedding tears, singing the Marseilles, and accepting big hugs from the likes of John Kerry, to otherwise be able to think straight and to hold the authorities to account. Ironically, in the political climate of high-octane emotions, the people are turning for protection from the very authorities who are placing them in increasing danger.
Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Originally from Belfast, Ireland, he is now located in East Africa working as a freelance columnist for Press TV and Strategic Culture Foundation (Moscow).
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
War through Deception [Hawaii Political Info collection of articles]
Submitted by Guest on Mon, 01/19/2015 - 00:19
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the dollar has lost over 97 percent of its purchasing power, the US economy has been subjected to a series of painful Federal Reserve-created recessions and depressions, and government has grown to dangerous levels thanks to the Fed’s policy of monetizing the debt. Yet the Federal Reserve still operates under a congressionally-created shroud of secrecy.
No wonder almost 75 percent of the American public supports legislation to audit the Federal Reserve.
The new Senate leadership has pledged to finally hold a vote on the audit bill this year, but, despite overwhelming public support, passage of this legislation is by no means assured.
The reason it may be difficult to pass this bill is that the 25 percent of Americans who oppose it represent some of the most powerful interests in American politics. These interests are working behind the scenes to kill the bill or replace it with a meaningless “compromise.” This “compromise” may provide limited transparency, but it would still keep the American people from learning the full truth about the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy.
Some opponents of the bill say an audit would somehow compromise the Fed’s independence. Those who make this claim cannot point to anything in the text of the bill giving Congress any new authority over the Fed’s conduct of monetary policy. More importantly, the idea that the Federal Reserve is somehow independent of political considerations is laughable. Economists often refer to the political business cycle, where the Fed adjusts its policies to help or hurt incumbent politicians. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Arthur Burns exposed the truth behind the propaganda regarding Federal Reserve independence when he said, if the chairman didn’t do what the president wanted, the Federal Reserve “would lose its independence.”
Perhaps the real reason the Fed opposes an audit can be found by looking at what has been revealed about the Fed’s operations in recent years. In 2010, as part of the Dodd-Frank bill, Congress authorized a one-time audit of the Federal Reserve’s activities during the financial crisis of 2008. The audit revealed that between 2007 and 2008 the Federal Reserve loaned over $16 trillion — more than four times the annual budget of the United States — to foreign central banks and politically-influential private companies.
In 2013 former Federal Reserve official Andrew Huszar publicly apologized to the American people for his role in “the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time” — the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing program. Can anyone doubt an audit would further confirm how the Fed acts to benefit economic elites?
Despite the improvements shown in the (government-manipulated) economic statistics, the average American has not benefited from the Fed’s quantitative easing program. The abysmal failure of quantitative easing in the US may be one reason Switzerland stopped pegging the value of the Swiss Franc to the Euro following reports that the European Central Bank is about to launch its own quantitative easing program.
Quantitative easing is just the latest chapter in the Federal Reserve’s hundred-year history of failure. Despite this poor track record, Fed apologists still claim the American people benefit from the Federal Reserve System. But, if that were the case, why wouldn’t they welcome the opportunity to let the American people know more about monetary policy? Why is the Fed acting like it has something to hide if it has nothing to fear from an audit?
The American people have suffered long enough under a monetary policy controlled by an unaccountable, secretive central bank. It is time to finally audit — and then end — the Fed.
Copyright © 2014 by RonPaul Institute.
Submitted by Guest on Sat, 01/17/2015 - 22:39
ACLU of Hawaii Foundation
January 16, 2015
Screening of the award-winning documentary “Citizenfour” followed by a live conversation with Edward Snowden (via video link from Moscow, Russia) and his attorney Ben Wizner will be held next month in Honolulu. The ACLU of Hawaii Foundation is presenting the Davis Levin First Amendment Conference featuring the topic Can Democracy Survive Secrecy?
Sat., 2/14/15, Hawai‘i Convention Center, Kal?kaua Ballroom A, 9:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
$5.00 entry fee (student scholarships available)
Program: 9:00 a.m. Registration
9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.: Screening of Snowden documentary, Citizenfour
Noon to 1:30 p.m.: Live conversation with Edward Snowden, Ben Wizner
HONOLULU – Can democracy survive secrecy? What is the future of the First Amendment in a surveillance society? These questions will be the focus of a rare and provocative public discussion at the Davis Levin First Amendment Conference (“Conference”) happening Saturday, February 14th in Honolulu, Hawai‘i.
Edward Snowden’s release of documents detailing massive government surveillance sparked a raging global debate which continues to this day. Choosing not remain anonymous, Snowden traded home and career for a life in exile, fleeing the U.S., and eventually taking residence in Russia.
A high-level intelligence analyst based in Hawai‘i, in 2013, Snowden provided documents to the press proving the existence (previously shrouded by government as highly sensitive state secrets) of multiple NSA programs that even today collect and use data on ordinary Americans on an extraordinary scale.
The program will also feature Snowden’s attorney and Director of the national ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, Ben Wizner. Speakers will share their views on whistleblowing, balancing government secrecy in wartime against the public’s right to know, and the possible futures facing free speech in America. Moderated by Aviam Soifer, Dean of the University of Hawai‘i William S. Richardson School of Law.
Seating is limited. Tickets are $5.00. RSVPs are requested no later than Tuesday, 2/10/15. Pay by check to the ACLU of Hawai‘i Foundation, or via Visa or Mastercard by phone. To reserve, call (808) 522-5906, neighbor islands call toll-free, 1-877-544-5906. Email office(at)acluhawaii(dot)org, or mail reservations to First Amendment Conference/P.O. Box 3410, Hon., HI 96801. Parking at the Hawai‘i Convention Center is $10.00, also served by major bus lines. Please visit http://www.thebus.org for more information.
The Hawai‘i Convention Center is ADA-accessible. Request special accommodation no later than Tuesday, 2/10/15. The ACLU of Hawai‘i will always try to meet requests.
The Davis Levin First Amendment Conference is a lively, civil discussion between prominent constitutional thinkers fostering awareness & dialogue about the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, underwritten by the Davis Levin Livingston Charitable Foundation. Established as a public education project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawai‘i Foundation in 1997 with grants from the Robert M. Rees Trust & the law firm of Davis Levin Livingston, the Conference is named for attorneys Mark S. Davis & Stanley E. Levin for their work defending the First Amendment in Hawai‘i. Prior speakers: Daniel Ellsberg, Kenneth Starr, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Ralph Reed, Nadine Strossen, and Jay Sekulow.