Ironies of the Espionage Act of (1917) from Schenck to Sheehan, Palmer to Rove

Karl Rove’s likely outing of Valerie Plame as a covert agent has provoked a great deal of discussion about the requirements of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 and the elements of perjury, the legal basis of most political scandals since Watergate or even Alger Hiss. Mention of engaging everyone’s favorite deputy chief of staff in trench warfare around the Espionage Act of 1917 rang a Pavlovian bell for me. As a long ago con law student, it reminded me of the most famous Espionage Act Case and the first significant Supreme Court test of the first amendment, Schenck v. United States and a former attorney general with presidential ambitions, Mitchell Palmer.

Charles Schenck was a socialist who opposed the draft during World War I. If you’ve ever taught high school history, one of the hardest questions to get students to comprehend is “Why did the United States get involved in World War I ?”
The actual reasons are complicated and remain somewhat controversial. Two incidents do stand out, the sinking of the Lusitania and the Zimmerman Telegram. In 1915, a German U-Boat torpedoed the British cruise ship Lusitania which happened to be carrying a large number of American passengers. One reason the Lusitania exploded so quickly was that the ship was carrying millions of rounds of ammunition, something that would have made it a legitimate wartime target. British intelligence played an active role in supressing the “munitions” issue, and the incident helped to sway America’s officially neutral sensibilities towards the allies. The ship was also carrying large quantities of aluminum powder, then used in the manufacture of explosives. Remember the claims in our times of "aliminum tubing imports".
Looking back, the Lusitania presents a serious question of who it was that actually endangered American lives that day.

The Zimmerman telegram was one of the first triumphs of modern codebreaking. The British interecepted a telegram from Zimmerman, the German ambassador to the US, to Mexico. In the telegram, the Germans assert that they hope to keep the US neutral in WW1, but in the event that the US entered the war it proposes a German-Mexican alliance with the promise of support for the reacquisiton of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas (which would have made the president Mexican). fwiw The Mexicans wrote back and indicated that they could never hold three state/provinces filled with hostile Americans. Talk about a Harry Turtledove alternate history plot though.
The British revealed it to the US, Zimmerman, German Ambassador to the US, made the mistake of trying to explain rather than deny the telegram. The US entered the war on the British side. The British never revealed that the actual telegram was lifted from a US “secure” diplomatic telegraph line. In other words, they were spying on the US themselves and had to do some contortions to cover over that fact so they could get the text of the telegram to Woodrow Wilson.

World War 1 was the first time the US and Britain formally allied in a major war. While we share a common language, the British remain the only country to have invaded the continental United States. In short, British intelligence played a huge role in getting the US into World War I and this link between British intelligence and the US runs through the British evidence cited about Uranium in Africa and the need to “fix intelligence” alluded to in the Downing Street Memos.
It is also the context for Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer two Philadelphia socialists who opposed the draft in the year of the Bolshevik Revolution. The actual pamphlet Schenck and Baer (at least two of the espionage act defendants were women. Remember that women didn’t yet vote in national elections in 1918) distributed some 15,000 pamphlets that advocated peaceful resistance to the draft on the grounds that a draft for a foreign war was precisely the sort of militarism that most Americans sought to escape. (one source of unhappiness in the colonies was being drawn into the French and Indian (Seven Years War) as combatants. Schenck and Baer were convicted for violating the Espionage Act of 1917 which then contained provisions making it unlawful to interfere with the draft in any way. Yes, this is the same Espionage Act that Karl Rove may have violated.
Schenck and Baer appealed by challenging the Espionage Act as a violation of their first amendment right to free speech. Their argument was essentially what most Americans consider to be the essence of the first amendment, “dissent was an American right even in wartime”. The unanimous Supreme Court led by Oliver Wendell Holmes upheld the Espionage Act by claiming that the pamphlet presented a “Clear and Present Danger”
The Schenck Decision
that went beyond protected speech during war time. While Americans routinely claim that one of the great things about our system is that it gives you the right to criticize your country even during wartime, it actually wasn’t true for many years. Schenck is surprisingly still good law, though it was narrowed considerably by Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1968 when the court decided to intercede on behalf of the right of the KKK to hold rallies as long as their speech did not present an “imminent” danger. I have no idea why pacifists fare worse in free speech cases than the KKK or the Nazis, but it’s been part of a long pattern.

Schenck went to prison for 6 months and Baer was sentenced to 90 days for the 1918 equivalent of blogging against the draft for a foreign war in which the United States had no clear immediate interest. As I track the many things written about Cindy Sheehan, even the president, unlike his shotgun firing dove hunting neighbor, seems to give lip service to the notion that we are free to demonstrate and dissent against an ongoing war.

Mitchell Palmer, a democrat, used the espionage act after the war (at the end of the war, the act stayed on the books) to round up Americans alleged to be Bolsheviks involved in a series of bombings in the US after World War 1 including one near his residence. (terrorism has a longer history in the US than most acknowledge). In fact, one of the bombings was a hundred pounds of dynamite detonated on Wall St. in front of the offices of J.P. Morgan, eerily thr rough equivalent of the WTC for the 1920's. At one point 10,000 individuals were arrested under the Espionage Act and the subsequent sedition act which essentially made dissent during war time illegal, and arrested and held without charge. Again, the truth is that Guantanomo isn’t all that un-American in a literal sense. fwiw Palmer was a quaker. Richard Nixon was another prominent quaker in American political history. Quakers were historically the one group considered legitimate Religious conscientious objectors to military service.

Palmer’s point man for this was a new wing of the federal government known as the Bureau of Investigation for the Justice Department, now the FBI, and its postwar director J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover began to keep dossiers on suspicious citizens most of whom had no criminal record. In other words, they started an early form of “profiling”. Palmer’s raids were directed largely at immigrants and radicals. In one 1919 roundup 249 individuals were simply put on a boat to Russia without being charged. One of the people on that boat was Emma Goldman. Palmer built his raids around a claim that there would be a Communist uprising in the US on May 1, 1920, kind of an early version of color-coded terror alerts.

Palmer used the notoriety from his Palmer Raids and the Red Scare to run for the democratic nomination in 1920. He lost to James Cox at least partly because May 1, 1920 never materialized. In 1921, Palmer eventually was caught for falsifying evidence and misappropriating government funds.

The Republicans took back the White House in 1920 behind a later scandal ridden governor of Ohio, Warren G. Harding who is mostly remembered for Teapot Dome an oil for national parks scandal. :} a sort of precursor to Halliburton in which US strategic oil reserves in a national park were leased to a private company without a competitive bid in exchange for a bribe.

Should Karl Rove be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, which though trimmed back, still survives in US Code, it would be one of history’s sweetest ironies and Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer would at least have to crack a smile.

chancelucky

Confessapedia (What I did when I was alone with the Wikipedia)

For some time, I’ve had this odd habit of looking up the oddest possible topics in the Wikipedia, the online user-administered source on all things that are potentially interesting. When I was a child, the Encyclopedia Britannica played a special role in a lot of homes. They were sold door to door as the gateway to having your child succeed in school and life. Most middle class Asian families couldn’t resist. The biggest patch of bookshelf space was the 34 volumes of the adult edition, though many families only bought the red-bound children’s version. We had both and naturally the almost unreadable entries in the adult Brittanica generally served as my research for almost all school papers.

The Wikipedia is literally open-ended. There’s no limit on the ultimate size of the document and it’s continuously revised, abridged, edited, and refined. This has resulted in considerable controversy about the quality of the information within the Wikipedia since most any volunteer editor can slip in most any slant he or she wants to a given article. The recursive process involved in moving towards wiki-consensus on what belongs and doesn’t belong in a wiki posting is fascinating in its own right. Despite the controversy, if I want to know the basics about something, I find the resource reliable enough that I usually start with the Wikipedia. For example, the other day my wife and I had found a new Mexican restaurant in town and we were arguing about the exact ingredients in Menudo.

It turned out that Ricky Martin wasn’t normally one of them, but tripe or cow stomach lining was. Is there a difference? Sorry Ricky. Where did you go anyway? Well, I looked it up and learned that tripe did indeed come from cow stomachs and was a key ingredient of the soup and that Ricky Martin performed at the 2006 Winter Olympics and World Cup. In addition, he also has a fan in Queen Noor of Jordan who talked him into doing a concert there. Who knew? Ricky Martin could be the key to peace in the middle east.

One thing my cousins and I used to do as kids was look up pictures of body parts in the Britannica. The sixties Britannica had this wonderful anatomically accurate plastic transparency of a nude male and female (both white, though they had a black woman too I think) under “Anatomy”. It also did have articles on sex, penis, vagina, etc. Yes, that was the sort of thing we found exciting in those days until our parents bought Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex, the Sensuous Woman, and the Joy of Sex and started leaving them on the coffee table. That sort of thing really couldn’t have happened back then?

Of course, there was always Playboy, but to be honest there was something much kinkier about finding prurient material in anything that was supposed to be as good for you in school as the Brittanica. I remember one highlight of the encyclopedia’s annual supplements, basically an excuse to keep charging you for updates, was its coverage of Christine Keeler and the Profumo Scandal, an event which made little to no sense to me. For years, I found the chairs from the famous Lews Morley photo terribly exciting for some reason.

In any case, the Wikipedia (or is it the Whackapedia?) goes way beyond the Brittanica. It includes articles not just about sex, but on about every sex act you could ever imagine, including a few I’d never heard of. Just, toss in a term or name and see what happens. There are biographies of hundreds even thousands of performers in adult movies. There’s a list of every centerfold to ever pose for Playboy Magazine. Making it even more fascinating, each of these wings of the Wikipedia tend to be edited not by some stuffy London-based character who strives to make it all sound as clinical as possible, but by the folk who generally obsess on this kind of arcana. In other words, every now and then the article contains some odd bit of trivia or just plain unexpectedly weird information, urban legend, etc. about the less-talked about aspects of sexual imagination.

At the same time, I’ve spent an equal amount of time (I’m sort of OCD when it comes to sexual repression) looking up religious history. This too is manned by enthusiasts. Look up things like "The meaning of Life" sometime on the Wikipedia. Some of the articles are very entertainingly written. Actually, Wikipedia's religious section has far more articles marked with a cautionary “controversial” than its sex portions. Of course, the weird thing is looking at the Old Testament (Eastern religion doesn’t tend to be quite as weird as the big book from the Middle East) constantly reminds me that it’s even kinkier than the “sex” corridors of the Wikipedia.

I’ve learned there that after the flood the seven and hundred and fifty year old Noah got so drunk that his sons saw him naked so one of the sons apparently took it upon himself to have sex with his mother. Noah then throws out the son and condemns all of his descendants to a life of slavery. You find out that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to rape the angels who came to warn Lot and his people away from plain with the five cities. Lot responds by offering to let the people of Sodom rape his daughters instead. After Lot’s wife looks back to see the Lord’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and gets turned into a pillar of salt, Lot’s daughters decide to have sex with him and both have children through the coupling.

If you wonder, why some of these deeply religious folk turn out to be child molesters or have odd sex lives, this is the reason. Too many of them read the Bible and take it literally. Btw, the wikipedia version of Bible stories tends to be much better because it doesn’t euphemize a lot of what’s going on.

I’m even in the wikipedia, or I was, but not for sexual or religious reasons. Two years ago, I found a mistake in an article about Mark Hannah, who was sort of Karl Rove’s role model. I wound up writing a posting about it and that wound up in a wikipedia article about articles about the Wikipedia. I also got in for making some technical correction about the Schenck Case.

So many years ago, the Brittanica seemed to be my window to the world. Even though I made a couple attempts to read entire volumes of the thing, I never remembered or understood most of what I read. In fact, that frustration made me think that the knowledge inside those 34 or so volumes was extraordinarily vast. It made such an impression on me that one of the first CD roms, I ever bought was Microsoft Encarta followed by a two disk text version of the Brittanica. I was amazed that something that once seemed so unconquerable could be reduced to two little silver disks. Fascinatingly, the wikipedia is a much better tool at least in part because it can't be physically contained in anything as static as a disk any longer. Though I think the Wikipedia physically exists on a set of servers in Tampa, Florida, it's clearly beyond those physical confines as an entity at this point and may be the closest thing we have to Gaia, the notion of a single mass of interconnected knowledge. I have no idea how big the whole thing is at any given moment or if any person could read any interation of the thing in a single lifetime. It literally contains more than any one of us could possibly know.

I imagine someday someone will do a serious study of the thing, kind of like climbing a Mount Everest of casual human knowledge. If they ever get to the top, they could check into things like finding the most searched topics on the Wikipedia, what the longest single article is, what article has been edited the most, etc. and I imagine it might tell us a most fascinating story about us.

If only I could type in a search term into my own mind and memories like that.


chancelucky