October 1, 2006

George The Menace #2: Gutting Constitutional Rights and Creating a Banana Republic

Hello everyone!

Here is exceptionally a second large compilation this week for you. This is in large part related to the simultaneously issued new Meditation Focus #158: Preventing Nuclear Armageddon.

As you will see below, the corrupted US Congress and Senate have once again committed an act of gross negligence, if not outright complicity, through supporting a legislation whose ultimate consequences have been manifestly concealed from them.

Now it remains to be seen if the Bush Junta will use their freshly minted "bill to torture whomever they damn well please" against the people who will demonstrate to drive them out of office next October 5 (details at unless by some twist of fate their growing dictatorship is effectively countered, stopped and disbanded.

Please help to network this along with the new Meditation Focus as there is still time, but barely, to mount a successful new way out of this growing morass of immoral and inhumane criminality. More on this shortly...

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

P.S. Your feedbacks are as always welcomed and may be included in a coming compilation - unless you prefer they are not. Circulating this compilation (or any part of it) and personally inviting your correspondents to subscribe to this list would also help enlarge the circle of people who have access to this material. Please include the following note and the URL address for the archived copy below along with your forwards, so others may have the opportunity to explore the original copy, if they so choose.

Free subscription to a large weekly Earth Rainbow Network compilation by simply sending a blank email to

This compilation is archived at

STATS for this compilation: Over 18,300 words and 78 links provided.

To unsubscribe from the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver, or change your listing on it when you have a new email address, the simplest way is to do it yourself by sending a blank email at -- IMPORTANT: You MUST do it from the email account you wish to unsubscribe otherwise the system won't recognize your request.

NOTICE now included by many people in their emails: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (NSA) may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor protection...

Worthy of Your attention

Stick a ribbon on your SUV
Asylum Street Spankers Video

October 5 - Day of Mass Resistance
On October 5, people everywhere will walk out of school, take off work, and come to the downtowns & town squares and set out from there, going through the streets and calling on many more to join us - making a powerful statement: "NO! THIS REGIME DOES NOT REPRESENT US! AND WE WILL DRIVE IT OUT!" Below you can find a growing listing of protests across the country. CLIP

Jesus Camp
A growing number of Evangelical Christians believe there is a revival underway in America that requires Christian youth to assume leadership roles in advocating the causes of their religious movement. Recommended by Joyce A. Kovelman> who wrote: " It is .... disturbing." I concur!!

Deliver Us From Evil
The story of Father Oliver O’Grady, the most notorious pedophile in the history of the modern Catholic Church. A remorseless, and compulsive, sexual predator, O’Grady used his charm and authority as a religious leader to exploit Catholic families and rape dozens of children across Northern California - both physically and spiritually.

Many more trailers through


1. Detainee Bill and the Dawning of a Fascist America
2. Finally Standing Up as the Republic Crashes Down
3. Rushing Off a Cliff
4. US Congress legalizes torture and indefinite detention
5. The day the darkness descended
6. Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism
7. Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)
8. The Breaking Point
10. "SPYCHIPS" RELEASED Authors Predict Public Backlash as RFID Plans Reach Consumers En Masse

See also:

Many Rights in US Legal System Absent in New Bill
The military trials bill approved by Congress redefines the rules for the detention, interrogation, prosecution and trials of terrorism suspects. This bill gives the government extraordinary power to bar terrorism suspects from challenging their detention or treatment through traditional habeas corpus petitions. It allows prosecutors, under certain conditions, to use evidence collected through hearsay or coercion to seek criminal convictions. MUCH MORE ON THIS BELOW

Full copy of the USA Detainee Torture Act, HR 6166

In Case I Disappear
William Rivers Pitt writes: "I have been told a thousand times at least, in the years I have spent reporting on the astonishing and repugnant abuses, lies, and failures of the Bush administration, to watch my back. 'Be careful,' people always tell me. 'These people are capable of anything. Stay off small planes, make sure you aren't being followed.'" He continues: "I thought. I am a citizen, and the First Amendment hasn't yet been red-lined, I thought. Matters are different now."

George Bush vs. the Gospel of Matthew (27 September 2006)
According to the gospel of Matthew, it came to pass that Pontius Pilate said to Jesus, “ Do you not hear all this evidence that is brought against you?” for even in those days of rudimentary justice a man had the right to hear the charges of his accusers. Yet two thousand years later, under a bill urged by President Bush, a compliant Congress may agree to allow a prisoner of war to be tried without hearing all the evidence against him, some being held back in the name of “national security.” For what is more important, the life of one individual or the security of the State? Every totalitarian regime knows the answer to that. And so prisoners may be put to death, perhaps on false charges, without even knowing what wrong they are accused of. According to the gospel of Matthew, not long before his trial and while journeying to Jerusalem, Jesus took his disciples aside and told them he would be arrested in the city where he would be handed over to a foreign power, to be tried and crucified. And so, too, today, there are more than 400 captives in Guantanamo prison, removed from their homeland by a foreign power in defiance of Geneva, men who have been made to suffer for years in a strange land half a world away from their homes and families, without being charged, without a lawyer, without trial, every one of the uncharged denied due process and thus every one of them innocent. And others, even more unfortunate, have been abducted by the CIA against international law, handed over to a foreign power to be imprisoned, tortured, and, in some cases, crucified, with no trial, and the new bill urged by Mr. Bush allows the CIA to continue its practices.According to the gospel of Matthew, Jesus extolled those who showed mercy, saying, “ when I was naked ye clothed me; when I was ill ye came to my help, and when I was in prison ye visited me.” By some strange reversal of New Testament teaching, in the same way as Jesus was stripped of his clothing, captives in U.S. prisons have been stripped of theirs and confined naked in rooms of extreme temperature or threatened by dogs or stacked naked in human pyramids or mocked and scorned or sexually abused or beaten. Such actions, contradicting the words of Jesus, “That which ye do to the least of my brethren ye do also to me,” violate Common Article 3 of Geneva that forbids “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.” CLIP

Pinochet Also Thought He Could "Legalize" Torture And Immunize Himself (29 September)
On September 11, 1973, Gen. Augusto Pinochet headed a military coup that overthrew the democratically-elected government of President Salvador Allende. Chile at that time was one of the world's oldest constitutional democracies.In the months that followed, in a round up of "terrorists", Chilean military and intelligence officers arrested 30,000 Chileans and some foreign nationals. Virtually all were tortured, and 3,000 "disappeared", many dumped alive from military aircraft into the Pacific Ocean. The Junta's secret police also sought out its critics abroad, a few weeks later blowing up the former Ambassador, Orlando Letelier, in his car as he drove through downtown Washington, DC.In the years that followed, "President" Pinochet ruled through emergency "anti-terrorism" decrees, before he retired as a Senator for life. Before he left the presidential palace, however, the General assured himself that he would never be brought to trial for his crimes. While the country was still effectively controlled by the military Junta he headed, the runner-stamp legislature passed laws granting amnesty to those officials who had committed torture and murder during the "state of exception" to constitutional rule. The amnesty laws also granted lifetime "legislative immunity" to members of Parliament, including, of course, Senator Pincochet. CLIP

House OKs Expanded Wiretap Program (29 September 2006)
Washington - The House voted late Thursday to rewrite the nation's domestic wiretap laws, giving President Bush new power to monitor the e-mail and phone records of US citizens during terrorism investigations without having to obtain court approval. But lawmakers were unlikely to deliver final legislation to the White House before leaving this weekend for the election campaign, a setback for the administration, which has made national security a pillar of its strategy to maintain Republican control of Congress. The House measure would endorse the once-secret program Bush launched after Sept. 11, authorizing the National Security Agency to monitor international communications between terrorism suspects and people in the US without first obtaining warrants. It would also set new rules for warrantless surveillance during emergencies and give Congress a bigger role in monitoring the surveillance. The measure was approved, 232 to 191, with 18 Democrats supporting it. Thirteen Republicans opposed the bill. The action came as the Senate was immersed in approving another Bush priority: legislation setting procedures for trials of military detainees and interrogating terrorism suspects. Some lawmakers said the Senate could still take up the wiretap issue in a lame-duck session after the Nov. 7 election. Failing that, Bush would be deprived of congressional backing for what he has called one of the administration's most important anti-terrorism programs. CLIP

Keith Olbermann Terrorized and Gov Tries to Hide it (September 28, 2006)
Keith Olbermann is hitting home run after home run, taking on the Bush Cheney led right wing, immoral lie machine, pummelling them unmercifully with truth after truth. He is the strongest voice the left has in the mainstream media. Unlike Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, other strong voices, he does not couch his hard hitting messages in comedy. Last night, he did it again, presenting a chronology of Bush administration failures to do much of anything to respond to the clear warnings he documents that the Clinton administration left for the Bush administration. Now, in spirit, we won't call Condi Rice a liar, but she has her facts wrong. We have serious reason to worry about Olbermann's safety. Last night, he reported that he'd been threatened, apparently with some anthrax-like substance that required him to be subjected to 10 hours of detention in a hospital. He was discharged with a prescription for Cipro. Worse, he and his network were told to keep this off the air. CLIP

Keith Olbermann: A Textbook Definition of Cowardice
Keith Olbermann: "Our tone should be crazed. The nation's freedoms are under assault by an administration whose policies can do us as much damage as al Qaida; the nation's marketplace of ideas is being poisoned by a propaganda company so blatant that Tokyo Rose would've quit. Bill Clinton did what almost none of us have done in five years. He has spoken the truth about 9/11, and the current presidential administration."

Camp Democracy Delivers War Crimes Indictment
In December of 2005 and January of 2006, a war crimes tribunal in New York City heard testimony from dozens of witnesses. Jurors included 29-year military veteran Ann Wright and former CIA analyst Ray McGovern. They announced their verdict in a press conference on Wednesday, September 13, at Camp Democracy. They then hand-delivered the verdicts to the White House and the Justice Department.

Cindy Sheehan: Lift Your Head
(...) Above are recent headlines which show that North Americans, citizens of the USA, are getting fed up with bowing their heads to the criminals du jour who inhabit our White House. It has always been our birthright and absolute imperative to peacefully protest our government and to hold them accountable to represent us the way that we want to be represented. Through the Clinton years, when we thought we were peaceful and apparently prosperous, we were lulled into a comfortable complacency. Since 9/11, we have been bullied into being fearful of the boogeyman and our now-vindicated toiletry items that can rejoin us in airplane cabin. (...) Now it appears that people are not terrified to stand up for peace and justice. I am so proud of America for not buying into the bull crap that if you oppose the illegal occupation of Iraq, then you are exactly like a "Nazi sympathizer." (Who wants to be equated with Georgie's grandpappy, Prescott Bush). It makes me proud to be an American, because we are putting our bodies on the line for peace. It is now the time to stand up and be counted and tell this out of control government of ours that we are withdrawing our consent to be governed by them. CLIP

Treating Criminality as Daring Boldness
David Swanson writes: "Bush has launched an illegal war, lied to Congress to do so, and misused funds by beginning the war before asking for approval. Bush has targeted civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and used illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and the Napalm-like weapon found in Mark-77 fire bombs. Bush has arbitrarily detained Americans, legal residents and non-Americans without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel. To call this criminal is merely to agree with the US Supreme Court."

Revolt of the Generals
A revolt is brewing among our retired Army and Marine generals. This rebellion comes not because their beloved forces are bearing the brunt of ground combat in Iraq but because the retirees see the US adventure in Mesopotamia as another Vietnam-like, strategically failed war, and they blame the errant, arrogant civilian leadership at the Pentagon.

Congress okays joint project funding (Sept 30)
WASHINGTON: The US Congress approved an increase of $460 million in funding for joint Israeli-American defense programs over the weekend, including $20 million for the development of a short-range ballistic missile defense system which will provide protection from Katyusha rockets.The funding, approved as part of the defense appropriations bill, is double the amount the administration initially requested for joint projects.It is not part of the foreign aid package which Israel receives annually. CLIP

Web of Deceit: How Internet Freedom Got the Federal Ax, And Why Corporate News Censored the Story
The days are now numbered for surfing an uncensored, open-access Internet, using your favorite search engine to search a bottomless cyber-sea of information in the grandest democratic forum ever conceived by humankind. Instead you can look forward to Googling about on a walled-off, carefully selected corpus of government propaganda and sanitized information "safe" for public consumption. Indoctrinated and sealed off from the outer world, you will inhabit a matrix where every ounce of creative, independent thinking that challenges government policies and values will be squelched. Just a wild conspiracy theory, you say? No longer can this be rationally maintained. Federal government--from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to the White House--and corporate mainstream media have worked cooperatively to quietly block open access to cyberspace. Seizing its infrastructure, corporate mainstream media have censored and covered up its logistical moves˜including lobbies in Congress and the FCC, the filing of suits in state and federal courts, and quid pro quo with the highest government officials--to commandeer, monopolize, and turn the Internet into an extension of itself. From Fox News to CNN, there has been dead silence as the greatest bastion of democracy in history is being torn down and resurrected in its own image. Now, as the corporate newsrooms remain mum, it has gotten the green light from the highest federal court in the land. (...) Unless we are prepared to do something about it before it's too late! What can we, the people, do to save the Internet from becoming the latest casualty of the corporate mainstream media? Americans can no longer afford to sit back and permit others to defend freedom of speech for them. We are all the victims of the same concerted effort by the corporate political establishment to amass power and wealth for the few at the expense of the many. We can no longer afford to wait until all of our outlets of free speech have been shut down. The collective American voice can be a powerful one. There is great strength in numbers. This power can be harnessed if we all take the time to write letters to our congress persons, letting them know our opposition to corporate monopolistic control of the Internet. History has shown that these protests can produce change. In 2003, when it was deluged with millions of letters from constituents protesting the FCC's deregulation of corporate media ownership rules, Congress responded by legislatively reducing the FCC's proposed market ownership cap. Now, with the demise of open-access Internet hanging in the balance, this problem of media consolidation is more crucial than ever. By our collective efforts, we can make a difference. You should also send e-mail messages, including chain messages, to friends and associates alerting and educating them about the attack on the free architecture of the Internet. You can also join organized efforts such as the Center for Digital Democracy's Digital Destiny Campaign, a grass roots effort to protect Internet freedom and diversity. Other organizations like the Free Press have well organized and successful outlets for making your voice heard in Washington. While they last, you should support diversity in search engines by using alternative independent, search engines. Google is not the only comprehensive search engine, and by supporting alternatives, we make it harder for one search engine to usurp the authority of others. Given that there are biases internal to the selection criteria of search engines, reliance on one engine to the exclusion of all others renders us more vulnerable to organized attempts at censorship, propagandizing, and control over what we can know. CLIP

USA Absorbs Canada in Secret Talks in Banff Alberta (Sept 28)
While the media were busy obsessing over rumours of a budding romance between Condoleezza Rice and Peter MacKay last week, a more significant relationship was developing behind closed doors. Away from the spotlight, from Sept. 12 to 14, in Banff Springs, Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day and Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor met with U.S. and Mexican government officials and business leaders to discuss North American integration at the second North American Forum. (...) Since Paul Martin, Vicente Fox and George W. Bush signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership in March 2005, discussions on continental integration have gone underground. The media have paid little attention to this far-reaching agreement, so Canadians are unaware that a dozen working groups are currently "harmonizing" Canadian and U.S. regulations on everything from food to drugs to the environment and even more contentious issues like foreign policy. Make no mistake, this process of harmonization is not about improving food, environmental and other norms; it is about priming North America for better business by weakening the impacts of such perceived obstacles as environmental standards and labour rights.This is why the public has been kept in the dark while the business elite has played a leading role in designing the blueprint for this more integrated North America. In fact, they have been the driving force. In June this year, their power was formalized when our governments created the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), an advisory committee comprised of representatives from the largest corporations in North America including Wal-Mart, Chevron, General Motors, Lockheed Martin, Suncor and others. Their goal is to make North America more competitive globally, which means weakening our government’s ability to regulate industry, protect the environment or our social safety net. CLIP

Beijing secretly fires lasers to disable US satellites (Sept 26)
China has secretly fired powerful laser weapons designed to disable American spy satellites by "blinding" their sensitive surveillance devices, it was reported yesterday. The hitherto unreported attacks have been kept secret by the Bush administration for fear that it would damage attempts to co-opt China in diplomatic offensives against North Korea and Iran.Sources told the military affairs publication Defense News that there had been a fierce internal battle within Washington over whether to make the attacks public. In the end, the Pentagon's annual assessment of the growing Chinese military build-up barely mentioned the threat. "After a contentious debate, the White House directed the Pentagon to limit its concern to one line," Defense News said. The document said that China could blind American satellites with a ground-based laser firing a beam of light to prevent spy photography as they pass over China.According to senior American officials: "China not only has the capability, but has exercised it." American satellites like the giant Keyhole craft have come under attack "several times" in recent years. (...) There has been increasing alarm in parts of the American military establishment over China's growing military ambitions.Military experts have already noted that Chinese military expenditure is increasingly designed to challenge American military pre-eminence by investing in weaponry that can attack key systems such as aircraft carriers and satellites. At the same time, China is engaged in a large-scale espionage effort against American high-tech firms working on projects such as the multibillion-pound DD(X) destroyer programme. CLIP

Afghanistan: The Wild East:,1518,440017,00.html
Sheer desperation is driving many Afghans back into the arms of the fanatical Taliban movement. Once again, the holy warriors have taken control of entire regions and are seeking to ensnare the Western allies in a bloody guerilla war.

The Kay Griggs Interviews
Kay Griggs was a Southern divorcee who rented a room to Marine Corps colonel George Griggs in the late 1980s. She was impressed by his clipped manner, his education, his good looks. Two months later she married him. What she found out about world affairs as George Griggs' wife was astounding. Colonel Griggs was a Marine Corps Chief of Staff, as well as head of NATO's Psychological Operations. He was also, his wife realized, entirely mind-controlled. Kay, a self-declared Christian, became privy to the real workings of the United States military, leadership training, drug-running and weapons sales, and the secret worldwide camps that train professional assassins. These interviews with Pastor Rick Strawcutter of Adrian, Michigan were conducted in 1998, before September 11thand the installation of U.S. President George W. Bush. Kay Griggs' report of world events and the power elite paints a picture that begins to explain the hows and whys of our current global scenario. Quotes from Kay Griggs: "They took with them the most perverted aspects of Nazi Germany and brought them mover to the United States." "They get rid of the good guys. The Marine Corps are the assassins for the Mob. The military is run by the Mob. The military IS the Mob." "He told me what they did. They nurture--they cultivate--the sons of prominent families. They're called "rising stars." They rope them in. Then they "turn" them."

Kay Griggs Talks: Desperate Wives (Blackmail In US Government) Part 1-2 Kay Griggs, wife of colonel George Griggs, USMC (retired USMC Commandant): 29th Commandant of the Marine Corps, found her husband’s diary, which contains details of homosexual blackmail in the top ranks of the US Marine Corps and names leading politicians and military leaders. Kay Griggs’s information about the US government also comes from observations and people she met. She exposes initiation rituals, the raping of young men and blackmail and murders to keep people quiet. Much of this, according to Griggs, is related to secret society activity and she names figures like Henry Kissinger and a string of other top government individuals.
Part 1
Part 2

Diebold Added Secret Patch to Georgia E-Voting Systems in 2002
Top Diebold corporation officials ordered workers to install secret files in Georgia's electronic voting machines shortly before the 2002 elections, at least two whistleblowers are now asserting.

Omega-News Collection 30. September 2006



Detainee Bill and the Dawning of a Fascist America

Kurt Nimmo | September 29 2006

As Steve Douglas notes, “the Schmittian drives for the arrogation of all power into the hands of a ‘unitary executive’ Presidential dictatorship,” in the case of both Hitler and Bush, are “essentially, identical.”

In the wake of the Reichstag fire in early 1933, blamed on the Comintern, Hitler and the Nazis, with “the support of a terrified populace … suspended civil rights and civil liberties, fattened their war machine and rode the fascist tide into a full-blown dictatorship,” writes Harvey Wasserman.

After the Reichstag fire, Paul von Hindenburg signed the fateful emergency decree, thus providing Hitler’s SA and SS with the legality required to round up the opposition and throw them in makeshift concentration camps run by local Gauleiters and SA leaders. “The rest, as they say, is history,” notes Wasserman.

Bush, or rather his neocons, who subscribe to the Schmittian drive “for the arrogation of all power into the hands of a ‘unitary executive’ Presidential dictatorship,” have their own gesetzvertretende Verordnungen or “law-substituting decrees,” or rather Constitution-substituting decrees, in particular scrubbing the Fourteenth Amendment.

“The military trials bill approved by Congress lends legislative support for the first time to broad rules for the detention, interrogation, prosecution and trials of terrorism suspects far different from those in the familiar American criminal justice system,” explains the Washington Post. “President Bush’s argument that the government requires extraordinary power to respond to the unusual threat of terrorism helped him win final support for a system of military trials with highly truncated defendant’s rights…. Included in the bill, passed by Republican majorities in the Senate yesterday and the House on Wednesday are unique rules that bar terrorism suspects from challenging their detention or treatment through traditional habeas corpus petitions. They allow prosecutors, under certain conditions, to use evidence collected through hearsay or coercion to seek criminal convictions.”

Naturally, we are told this “arrogation of all power into the hands” of the unitary decider will apply only to “foreign nationals,” that is to say Muslims. Hitler said much the same.

The enemies of the fatherland were foreigners—and their German fellow travelers—members of the comintern (communist international), Hitler declared, and such subversion required austere measures, including interning thousands in concentration camps, subjecting them to interrogation, torture, and summary execution.

As Marty Lederman points out, the so-called “military commissions bill,” if read literally, “means that if the Pentagon says you’re an unlawful enemy combatant—using whatever criteria they wish—then as far as Congress, and U.S. law, is concerned, you are one, whether or not you have had any connection to ‘hostilities’ at all.”

This definition is not limited to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. It’s not limited to aliens—it covers U.S. citizens as well. It’s not limited to persons captured or detained overseas. And it is not even limited to the armed conflict against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, authorized by Congress on September 18, 2001. Indeed, on the face of it, it’s not even limited to a time of war or armed conflict; it could apply in peacetime.

For some, it is a relatively easy task to dismiss Lederman out of hand as a paranoid crank, or possibly another conspiracy nut.

However, even the Los Angeles Times warns of the draconian aspect of this law. “[T]he bill also reinforces the presidential claims, made in the Padilla case, that the commander in chief has the right to designate a U.S. citizen on American soil as an enemy combatant and subject him to military justice,” writes Bruce Ackerman, a professor of law and political science at Yale.

This atrocious, Hitlerian bill authorizes “the government to seize and detain indefinitely, without charge or trial, anyone who ‘purposefully and materially supported hostilities’ even if not engaged in armed conflict, including U.S. citizens arrested inside the United States,” explains Human Rights First.

“Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said that by including those who ’supported hostilities’—rather than those who ‘engage in acts’ against the United States—the government intends the legislation to sanction its seizure and indefinite detention of people far from the battlefield,” notes the Washington Post.

“In short,” writes John Dean, “this could include anyone the federal government (Bush and Rumsfeld will delegate and re-delegate this authority) labels ‘an unlawful enemy combatant.’”

Nazi Germany provides a historical example of what we can expect in the months ahead. William L. Shirer, author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, explains how tribunals operated under fascism. Hitler’s courts

consisted of three judges, who invariably had to be trusted party members, without a jury. A Nazi prosecutor had the choice of bringing action in such cases before either an ordinary court or the Special Court, and invariably he chose the latter, for obvious reasons. Defense lawyers before this court, as before the Volksgerichtshof, had to be approved by Nazi officials. Sometimes even if they were approved they fared badly. Thus the lawyers who attempted to represent the widow of Dr. Klausener, the Catholic Action leader murdered in the Blood Purge, in her suit for damages against the State were whisked off to Sachsenhausen concentration camp, where they were kept until they formally withdrew the action.

Under Bush’s Detainee bill, however, the secretly accused, snatched off the street and disappeared in classic Gestapo fashion, will not be allowed to select an attorney—one will be appointed by the Inquisition.

At least the Nazis bothered to construct a cover for their tactics, describing the detention of the opposition as Schutzhaft, or protective custody. Bush and the neocons offer no such cover, instead proffering the same old threadbare and transparent palliative—in order to protect the American people from ubiquitous and around-every-corner terrorism, promised to last for generations, the state is unfortunately forced to resort to eviscerating the Constitution, not that most Americans have an inkling of what the document spells out—the rights and the responsibilities—or will they particularly care so long as they are free to shop and watch football and sit-coms.

Of course, the neocons need big fat dossiers of intelligence on “homegrown” enemy combatants in order for the neocon Inquisitor Generals to proceed.

The NSA, Pentagon, and the FBI with its Joint Terrorism Task Force are in the process of gathering this crucial data and entering it into the Threat and Local Observation Notice (TALON) database, a project initiated back in 2003 by the neocon Paul Wolfowitz, now don of the World Bank loan sharking operation.

So keen are the neocons to gather intelligence on American “enemy combatants,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England issued a memorandum directing intelligence personnel to receive “refresher training on the policies for collection, retention, dissemination and use of information related to U.S. persons,” that is to say traitors, mostly involved in criminal plots to exercise constitutionally guaranteed liberties such as free speech and the right to assemble, now anathema to the fascist state, as it was to Hitler and his minions.

But never mind. Not only are most Americans blissfully unaware of the immense peril they face—thanks to a complicit and soft-pedal corporate media—many of them faithfully support the fascist state, as the German people did before them.

As the above quoted Shirer writes: “The overwhelming majority of Germans did not seem to mind that their personal freedom had been taken away, that so much of culture had been destroyed and replaced with a mindless barbarism…. The Nazi terror in the early years affected the lives of relatively few Germans and a newly arrived observer was somewhat surprised to see that the people of this country did not seem to feel that they were being cowed…. On the contrary, they supported it with genuine enthusiasm. Somehow it imbued them with a new hope and a new confidence and an astonishing faith in the future of their country.”

It will be too late on the day a predatory bureaucrat from the Ministry of Homeland security steals your land or appropriates your wife—a fate inflicted upon countless bovine vassals by rulers and their henchmen down through the dark shadow of history.

Our Machiavellian rulers, wearing expensive suits instead of the ermine of royal heraldic authority, are determined to reduce the planet to a hellish realm of corporate lords, worker drone vassals and serfs, and a small number of liege fiefs lording over the former.

Bush’s detainee bill is a large paving stone in that direction.

(To access the numerous links embedded in this article go at )


See also:

"A Total Rollback Of Everything This Country Has Stood For" - Sen. Patrick Leahy Blasts Congressional Approval of Detainee Bill
The Senate has agreed to give President Bush extraordinary power to detain and try prisoners in the so-called war on terror. The legislation strips detainees of the right to challenge their own detention and gives the President the power to detain them indefinitely.

A Personal Declaration of Independence
As a citizen of these United States for 70 years, I refuse to be ruled by a tyrant who imposes despotic, autocratic control on the citizens of these United States through a series of clandestine actions that usurp the rights of the people.

This Is What Waterboarding Looks Like (September 28, 2006)
(...) These photos are important because most of us have never seen an actual, real-life waterboard. The press typically describes it in the most anodyne ways: a device meant to "simulate drowning" or to "make the prisoner believe he might drown." But the Khymer Rouge were no jokesters, and they didn't tailor their abuse to the dictates of the Geneva Convention. They-- like so many brutal regimes--made waterboarding one of their primary tools for a simple reason: it is one of the most viciously effective forms of torture ever devised. The legislation backed by Bush and congressional Republicans would explicitly permit the use of evidence obtained through waterboarding and other forms of torture. Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and other top al Qaeda leaders have reportedly been subjected to this technique. They would certainly note--or try to note--that at any trial. But with this legislation, the White House is seeking to declare the use of waterboarding (at least in the past) as a legitimate practice of the US government. CLIP

Detainee Bill Shifts Power to President
Rather than reining in the formidable presidential powers Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have asserted since September 11, 2001, the detainee bill gives some of those powers a solid statutory foundation. In effect it allows the president to identify enemies, imprison them indefinitely and interrogate them - albeit with a ban on the harshest treatment - beyond the reach of the full court reviews traditionally afforded criminal defendants and ordinary prisoners.

Tracking the CIA Torture Flights
President George W. Bush admitted that the United States detains suspected terrorists in secret CIA-run prisons in foreign countries, but refused to disclose the location of said jails. "Doing so would provide our enemies with information they could use to take retribution against our allies and harm our country." A.C. Thompson and Trevor Paglen detail how the CIA transports these "detainees" around the globe. In These Times spoke with Thompson about how they tracked planes going to and from locations that don't officially exist.



Finally Standing Up as the Republic Crashes Down

By Chris Floyd

09/28/06 "Information Clearing House"

So the New York Times has finally roused itself and laid out the straight facts about the presidential tyranny that has been erected around the pathetic figure of George W. Bush:  Rushing Off a Cliff. The Times is to be lauded for this eloquent and powerful depiction of our degraded political state, and you should read it in full. But a few vital points must mitigate our praise of this otherwise remarkable editorial.

First, and most importantly: it comes very, very late in the game – perhaps too late. All of the tyrannical powers enumerated by the editorial were claimed – and put into practice – by Bush and Cheney five years ago. I began writing columns about these very claims in October 2001. In November 2001, I first wrote of Bush's claim that he could not only declare anyone on earth an "enemy combatant" and jail them forever in black holes without charges, but he could also have them summarily killed. This was not classified information that I got from some bold Ellsbergian whistleblower; these were claims being made openly and proudly by "senior Administration officials" to – the New York Times, among others. I'll be writing more on this point later in the week.

Second, the editorial, as strong as it is, doesn't go far enough: We not looking at "our generation's version of the Alien and Sedition Acts" as the newspaper puts it; things are much farther gone than that. What we are looking at is the death knell of the constitutional republic of the United States. Bush has long claimed dictatorial powers in secret; if Congress writes these liberty-gutting strictures into law, then the fundamental nature of the American state will be transformed. It will not be, in any sense – not even formally – a free country anymore. All of our rights and liberties will be the "gift" of the President, who can bestow them – or revoke them – as he sees fit.

Third, many legal experts note that the language of the laws in question here does not specifically exclude their application to citizens of the United States. Although Bush's willing executioners of liberty among the Senate leadership – such as Lindsay Graham, John McCain and the lipless, cat-torturing, money-grubbing excuse for a man named Bill Frist – insist that these draconian powers will apply only to "furreners" (as though that made it all OK), Cheney and his minions have in fact ensured that the measures can be used against American citizens as well – as they already have been, over and over, during the past five years.

The Times has taken a good, strong first step; now they need to march forward boldly and tell the rest of the truth. Bush's "War on Terror" is coming to the Homeland, and its target is the American people. Bush and his handlers want to destroy the ability of anyone to oppose their hard-right – and overwhelmingly unpopular – agenda. It's the only way the Faction can maintain its domination – and avoid prosecution for its many crimes. They're fighting for their freedom – so they'll take ours. They're fighting for their lives – so they'll take ours.

Next time, the NYT should put a piece like this on the front page – and end it with a call for mass marches in the street, exhorting the American people to rally for their liberty and bring down the bloodstained tyrants who have usurped the Republic and dishonored our name

Chris Floyd is an American journalist. He is the author of the book, Empire Burlesque: The Secret History of the Bush Regime . Visit his website:



Rushing Off a Cliff

New York Times Editorial

09/28/06 "New York Times" -- -- Here’s what happens when this irresponsible Congress railroads a profoundly important bill to serve the mindless politics of a midterm election: The Bush administration uses Republicans’ fear of losing their majority to push through ghastly ideas about antiterrorism that will make American troops less safe and do lasting damage to our 217-year-old nation of laws — while actually doing nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Democrats betray their principles to avoid last-minute attack ads. Our democracy is the big loser.

Republicans say Congress must act right now to create procedures for charging and trying terrorists — because the men accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks are available for trial. That’s pure propaganda. Those men could have been tried and convicted long ago, but President Bush chose not to. He held them in illegal detention, had them questioned in ways that will make real trials very hard, and invented a transparently illegal system of kangaroo courts to convict them.

It was only after the Supreme Court issued the inevitable ruling striking down Mr. Bush’s shadow penal system that he adopted his tone of urgency. It serves a cynical goal: Republican strategists think they can win this fall, not by passing a good law but by forcing Democrats to vote against a bad one so they could be made to look soft on terrorism.

Last week, the White House and three Republican senators announced a terrible deal on this legislation that gave Mr. Bush most of what he wanted, including a blanket waiver for crimes Americans may have committed in the service of his antiterrorism policies. Then Vice President Dick Cheney and his willing lawmakers rewrote the rest of the measure so that it would give Mr. Bush the power to jail pretty much anyone he wants for as long as he wants without charging them, to unilaterally reinterpret the Geneva Conventions, to authorize what normal people consider torture, and to deny justice to hundreds of men captured in error.

These are some of the bill’s biggest flaws:

Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.

The Geneva Conventions: The bill would repudiate a half-century of international precedent by allowing Mr. Bush to decide on his own what abusive interrogation methods he considered permissible. And his decision could stay secret — there’s no requirement that this list be published.

Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.

Judicial Review: The courts would have no power to review any aspect of this new system, except verdicts by military tribunals. The bill would limit appeals and bar legal actions based on the Geneva Conventions, directly or indirectly. All Mr. Bush would have to do to lock anyone up forever is to declare him an illegal combatant and not have a trial.

Coerced Evidence: Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses.

Secret Evidence: American standards of justice prohibit evidence and testimony that is kept secret from the defendant, whether the accused is a corporate executive or a mass murderer. But the bill as redrafted by Mr. Cheney seems to weaken protections against such evidence.

Offenses: The definition of torture is unacceptably narrow, a virtual reprise of the deeply cynical memos the administration produced after 9/11. Rape and sexual assault are defined in a retrograde way that covers only forced or coerced activity, and not other forms of nonconsensual sex. The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.

•There is not enough time to fix these bills, especially since the few Republicans who call themselves moderates have been whipped into line, and the Democratic leadership in the Senate seems to have misplaced its spine. If there was ever a moment for a filibuster, this was it.

We don’t blame the Democrats for being frightened. The Republicans have made it clear that they’ll use any opportunity to brand anyone who votes against this bill as a terrorist enabler. But Americans of the future won’t remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration.

They’ll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.



US Congress legalizes torture and indefinite detention

By the editorial board

29 September 2006

The legislation adopted by the House of Representatives Wednesday and the Senate Thursday, legalizing the Bush administration’s policy of torture and indefinite detention without trial, as well as kangaroo-court procedures for Guantánamo detainees, marks a watershed for the United States.

For the first time in American history, Congress and the White House have agreed to set aside the provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and formally adopt methods traditionally identified with police states.

This bill is the outcome of a protracted process of decay of American democracy, which has accompanied the immense growth in social inequality and reached a turning point in the stolen election of 2000. In early December of 2000, on the eve of the US Supreme Court ruling that halted the counting of votes in Florida and awarded the presidency to George W. Bush, who had lost the popular vote nationally to his Democratic opponent Al Gore, David North, the national secretary of the Socialist Equality Party of the US and chairman of the international editorial board of the World Socialist Web Site, in a report on the US election crisis said:

“What the decision of this court will reveal is how far the American ruling class is prepared to go in breaking with traditional bourgeois-democratic and constitutional norms. Is it prepared to sanction ballot fraud and the suppression of votes and install in the White House a candidate who has attained that office through blatantly illegal and anti-democratic methods?

“A substantial section of the bourgeoisie, and perhaps even a majority of the US Supreme Court, is prepared to do just that. There has been a dramatic erosion of support within the ruling elites for the traditional forms of bourgeois democracy in the United States.”

The Supreme Court ruling and the refusal of the Democratic Party to oppose it demonstrated that there remained no significant constituency within the American ruling elite for the defense of democratic rights.

The battery of police state measures enacted by the Bush administration, without any serious opposition from within the political establishment, has confirmed this analysis.

The Military Commission Act of 2006 will do far more than set down the procedures to be used to rubber-stamp the incarceration of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and other US-run detention camps throughout the world. It attacks the rights of all American citizens as well as all legal residents and other immigrants, who will now be subject to the threat of arrest and imprisonment for life, on the order of the president alone, without judicial review.

The legislation now goes back to the House of Representatives for a final vote Friday, to reconcile minor language differences between the two versions. President Bush is expected to receive the bill for signing by the weekend.

Under the terms of this law, the president may designate any person as an “unlawful enemy combatant,” to be rounded up by intelligence agents and jailed indefinitely without legal recourse. The law defines an “unlawful enemy combatant” as “an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States” who is not a regular member of an opposing army.

Given the Bush administration’s elastic view as to what constitutes “hostilities,” this definition has the potential to erase any legal distinction between an actual Al Qaeda terrorist, an Arab immigrant who makes a charitable donation to Lebanese relief, and an American college student who clashes with police during a protest demonstration against the Iraq war.

The legislation passed the House Wednesday with the support of 34 Democrats, who joined 219 Republicans in the lopsided vote of 253-168. The Senate adopted the bill the next day, by an even wider 65-34 margin, with 12 Democrats joining a near-unanimous Republican bloc.

Before voting on the overall bill, senators defeated four amendments: to restore habeas corpus rights for prisoners, defeated 51-48; to increase congressional oversight of the CIA torture program, which lost 53-46; to impose a five-year limit on the military commissions, which lost 52-47; and to ban specific, named torture techniques, which lost by a similar margin.

The sweeping legislation meets all the desires of the Bush administration except for an explicit repeal of the Geneva Convention. The White House agreed to slightly weaker language that gives the president the power to “interpret” the Geneva Convention to permit lesser forms of torture.

Its major provisions include:

* Authorizing the president to establish military commissions to prosecute detainees taken into US custody, either overseas or within the United States.

* Giving the military commissions power to determine punishment, up to and including death.

* Rules of evidence that permit hearsay evidence and testimony coerced from witnesses.

* Permitting the use of testimony obtained by “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” if the torture took place before December 30, 2005, when it was banned by Congress.

* Allowing prosecutors to withhold from defendants evidence given to a jury, if it involves classified information, and substitute unclassified summaries.

* Stripping US courts of jurisdiction over detainees, and stripping detainees of their right to seek a writ of habeas corpus.

Violations of the Constitution

Many of the provisions of this legislation are flagrant violations of the US Constitution. This was acknowledged by Republican Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who nonetheless voted for the bill after his amendment to restore habeas corpus rights was defeated.

Specter said in the debate that in denying habeas corpus rights for suspects detained in the “war on terror,” the bill “would take our civilized society back some 900 years” to the time before the adoption of the Magna Carta—the first elaboration of democratic principles under English law.

“What this entire controversy boils down to is whether Congress is going to legislate to deny a constitutional right which is explicit in the document of the Constitution itself and which has been applied to aliens by the Supreme Court of the United States,” he said.

Article I, Section 9 of the US Constitution declares: “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” No one in the Bush administration or the congressional Republican leadership has suggested that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 constituted such an invasion. They simply ignore the clear language of the Constitution.

The bill’s other provisions also violate the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, which spell out the requirements of a fair trial, based on the colonists’ bitter experience with the injustices of the British Crown. The Amendment reads:

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

Prisoners in Guantánamo and other US concentration camps will face trial by a panel of military officers, can be denied the right to see the evidence or witnesses against them, and will have lawyers hamstrung by being under the direct surveillance of the military and working under the authority of the commander-in-chief.

From the standpoint of the Bush administration and the congressional Republican leadership, these gross constitutional violations are not a regrettable necessity but a positive good. They are whipping up public fear of terrorism not merely for short-term electoral purposes, but to lay the basis for a permanent shift to authoritarian forms of rule in the United States.

The role of the Democrats

The votes on four amendments Thursday allowed Senate Democrats to posture as defenders of civil liberties and constitutional freedoms. Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, for instance, denounced the elimination of habeas corpus protection for 12 million legal resident immigrants, as well as for immigrants without legal papers. The provision “makes a mockery of the Bush-Cheney lofty rhetoric about exporting freedom across the globe,” he said, adding, “What hypocrisy!”

Senator Carl Levin of Michigan said, “The habeas corpus language in this bill is as legally abusive of rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the actions at Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo and secret prisons that were physically abusive of detainees.”

But Leahy and Levin did not explain why they and other Democratic leaders refused to block a vote on the legislation through a filibuster, which requires only 40 votes to sustain. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid reached an agreement Wednesday evening with Majority Leader Bill Frist to allow votes on the four amendments in return for the Democrats refraining from any filibuster—although the Democrats filibustered on much less weighty issues, such as the appointment of a number of federal appeals court judges.

In his Senate floor speech, Leahy declared, “We are about to put the darkest blot possible on the nation’s conscience. This is so wrong. . . . It is unconstitutional. It is un-American.” Apparently not so wrong, or so dark a blot, as to impel the Democrats to actually oppose the Bush administration one month before an election.

Instead, Democrat after Democrat facing close contests sided with the Bush administration. The 12 Democratic senators who voted for final passage of the bill included, besides such open right-wingers as Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, liberals facing re-election contests such as Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Bill Nelson of Florida.

The 34 House Democrats included a number of right-wing Southern Democrats, but also several members of the Congressional Black Caucus and two congressmen who are Democratic candidates for the US Senate in next month’s election—Harold Ford of Tennessee and Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

Brown, a liberal, has sought to appeal to antiwar sentiment in Ohio, a state which has lost a disproportionate number of young men and women in Iraq, including two dozen from a single National Guard unit based in the Cleveland suburb of Brook Park. In an interview with, Brown said that detainees “are not soldiers, not combatants representing a government, these are terrorists.”

Of course, the ostensible purpose of a judicial proceeding is to determine, on the basis of evidence, whether the accused are actually guilty of the charges against them. Brown, like the Bush administration, assumes that all those seized by the CIA and the US military are guilty, and uses that presumption of guilt to justify star-chamber proceedings.

Brown rejected criticism of his complicity with the Bush administration, saying, “Some people just don’t want me to agree with George Bush on anything.”

The New York Times observed, in its editorial deploring in advance the passage of the bill, the year 2006 will go down in history for the passage of “a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.” But the newspaper did not attempt to give a serious explanation for this turn toward tyranny, or suggest a basis for fighting against it.

Nor could it, since the Times, along with the rest of the establishment media and both political parties of the American corporate elite, supports the so-called “war on terror,” which is a political fig leaf for the use of militarism and war in pursuit of the global aims of US imperialism. A policy of military aggression and conquest abroad is ultimately incompatible with democracy at home.

The struggle against authoritarian methods of rule must be taken up by the working class, the only social force within American society that retains a deep attachment to the defense of democratic rights. The prerequisite for this struggle is a break with the two parties of the American ruling elite and the building of a mass socialist movement of the working class.


See also:

Former Pollster Describes 2000 Election Theft
Former UNH professor and pollster David Moore contends that his new book about the 2000 presidential election - titled "How to Steal an Election" - is not partisan. Moore said he knows it's a "hard sell," but he argues the book simply explains how George W. Bush took the presidency that was rightfully won by Al Gore.


Forwarded by Arthur Bond> on Sept 30


The day the darkness descended

September 28th, 2006

The Senate today passed the Torture and Indefinite Detention Authorization Act of 2006. This is black day for the country and for humanity. Several thousand years of attempts to control arbitrary authority and to reduce brutality were thrown overboard. All but one member of the Torture Party voted in favor. Twelve members of the Spineless Party also supported the measure. Others in the Spineless Party made lovely speeches before departing for dinner. As far as I can tell, not one Senator bothered to attempt a filibuster. Freedom wasn’t worth it. After all, if the Spineless Party lies down and lets themselves be run over enough times, they might be granted the keys to the torture chambers one day.

In response, some people say we should vote for more of the Spineless Party. They seem to have a theory that adding on invertebrates will somehow add up to a spine. They neglect to say how this miracle would occur. Of course, if you are in the majority, it’s even more essential to show that you can be “responsible,” that you won’t challenge the Torture Party in any but the most minor of ways.

The country is in such bad shape that I’ll probably root for the Spineless Party, but holding my nose will not be enough to keep out the stench of internal rot.

Glenn Greenwald gives an example of the Profiles in Infamy that occurred today:
Jay Rockefeller (who voted for this bill) is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. When he was defending the amendment he introduced to compel the CIA to disclose to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees information about their interrogation activities, he complained that the White House has concealed all information about the interrogation program and that the Intelligence Committee members (including him) therefore know nothing about it. His amendment to compel reports to Congress was defeated with all Republicans (except Chafee) voting against it. He proceeded to vote for the underlying bill anyway, thereby legalizing a program he admits he knows nothing about (and will continue to know nothing about).

During the debate on his amendment, Arlen Specter said that the bill sends us back 900 years because it denies habeas corpus rights and allows the President to detain people indefinitely. He also said the bill violates core Constitutional protections. Then he voted for it.

He goes on to make clear that the Spineless Party lacks more than a spine. They also lack a brain [and a heart]:

But it is still difficult to understand the Democrats’ strategy here. They failed to try to mount a filibuster because they feared being attacked as coddlers of the terrorists. But now they voted against the bill in large numbers, thereby ensuring those exact accusations will be made anyway — and made loudly (the White House already started today). Yet they absented themselves the whole time from the debate (until they magically appeared today), spent the last several weeks only tepidly (at most) opposing the President’s position, and thus lost the opportunity to defend and advocate the position they took today in any meaningful way. As a result, the Democrats took a position today (opposition to this bill) which they have not really defended until today.

They make this same mistake over and over. Isn’t this exactly what happened when they sort-of-supported-but-sort-of-opposed the Iraq war resolution in 2002 because they were afraid of being depicted as soft on terrorism, only to then be successfully depicted as soft on terrorism because they were too afraid to forcefully defend their position? It’s true that fewer Democrats voted for the President’s policy this time around, but it’s equally true that they found their voice only on the last day of the debate — on the day of the vote — after disappearing for weeks while they let John McCain “debate” for them.

To be fair, unlike me, Greenwald sees a silver lining:

Nonetheless, it is fair to say, given how lopsided this vote was (both in the House and the Senate), that the Republicans are the party of torture, indefinite and unreviewable detention powers, and limitless presidential power, even over U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. By contrast, Democrats have opposed these tyrannical, un-American and truly dangerous measures. Even if Democrats didn’t oppose them as vociferously as they could have and should have, this is still a meaningful and, at this point, critically important contrast.

Unfortunately, I think he’s grasping at straws, straws which have already broken into a multitude of nearly invisible pieces.

In any case, September 28, 2006 will go down as the day that the abolishment of freedom began and the torture descended on what was once a noble experiment.



Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism

Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth of the dictatorship

Paul Joseph Watson - September 29 2006

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.

Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

For an individual to hold an allegiance or duty to the United States they need to be a citizen of the United States. Why would a foreign terrorist have any allegiance to the United States to breach in the first place?

This is another telltale facet that proves the bill applies to U.S. citizens and includes them under the "enemy combatant" designation. We previously cited the comments of Yale law Professor Bruce Ackerman, who wrote in the L.A. Times, "The compromise legislation....authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."

The New York Times stated that the legislation introduced, "A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted."

Calling the bill "our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts," the Times goes on to highlight the rubber stamping of torture.

"Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses."

Since with this bill, in the aggregate, Bush has declared himself to be above the Constitution and the laws of the United States, the allegiance of American citizens is no longer to the flag or the freedoms for which it stands, but to Bush himself, the self-appointed dictator, and any diversion from that allegiance will mandate arrest, torture and conviction in a military tribunal under the terms of this bill.

Similar to the UK's Glorification of Terrorism law, which top lawyers have slammed as vague, open to interpretation and a potential weapon for the government to kidnap supposed subversives, the nebulous context of "wrongfully aiding the enemy," could easily be defined to include publicly absolving an accused terrorist of involvement in a terrorist attack.

That renders the entire 9/11 truth movement an aid to terrorist suspects and subject to military tribunal and torture. In addition, Bush's recently cited National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which is available on the White House website, labels conspiracy theorists as terrorist recruiters.

This should leave us with no doubt as to which parties are the target of the government's torture and intimidation campaign.

Could protesting a war approved by the government and their bootlickers in Congress and the Senate be considered breaching an allegiance to the United States? Could campaigning against the bombing of a target country be considered wrongfully aiding the enemy?

When the USA PATRIOT act was rushed through at the height of an anthrax scare without any members of Congress even having time to read it, we were assured that it was to fight terrorists and would not be used against the American people.

Since then a plethora of cases whereby the USA PATRIOT act was used against U.S. citizens emerged, including the internment without trial for over three years of Jose Padilla, an American citizen who was finally released after no evidence of terrorism was uncovered.

The so-called "compromise" before the bill was passed and the media acclaim of John McCain as some kind of human rights champion is one of the biggest con jobs ever inflicted upon the American people.

Shortly after the bill was finalized it was spun by Bush security advisor Stephen Hadley as "good news and a good day for the American people." McCain said that it safeguarded "the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions."

In truth the legislation does the exact opposite, giving Bush carte blanche to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions."

In addition, under the bill, "No person may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas corpus or other civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States is a party as a source of rights in any court of the United States or its States or territories."

The bill also allows hearsay evidence (obtained via phony confessions after torture) to be considered by the military tribunal and bars the suspect from even having knowledge of the charges against him - making a case for defense impossible. This is guaranteed to produce 100% conviction rates as you would expect in the dictatorships of Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe and other torture protagonists who are in many cases allied with the Bush administration and provide phony confessions obtained from torture that allow the U.S. government to scare its people with the threat of imaginary Al-Qaeda terror cells waiting to kill them.

Following the Supreme Court's ruling to previously strike down Bush's shadow penal system, Alberto Gonzales is already out threatening federal judges to shut up and get behind the dictator or face the consequences.

Gonzales has the sheer gall to attack judges for even considering to "overturn long-standing traditions or policies without proper support in text or precedent," which is exactly what Gonzales, Bush and the rest of the White House criminals are doing themselves by de facto abolishing the Bill of Rights!

This is a dark day for the United States, the day America died and the bastard birth of a literal dictatorship.

(To access the numerous links embedded in this article go at


See also:

Bush Given Authority To Sexually Torture American Children
The "horror of the shrieking boys" gets a rubber stamp from the boot-licking U.S. Congress & Senate as America officially becomes a dictatorship

Note from Jean: For a critical media perspective on this ignominious bill, go at this URL above, scroll down and listen to what the CNN commentator Cafferty has to say on this...

Gonzales Cautions Judges on Interfering (Sept 29)
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who is defending President Bush's anti-terrorism tactics in multiple court battles, said Friday that federal judges should not substitute their personal views for the president's judgments in wartime.He said the Constitution makes the president commander in chief and the Supreme Court has long recognized the president's pre-eminent role in foreign affairs. "The Constitution, by contrast, provides the courts with relatively few tools to superintend military and foreign policy decisions, especially during wartime," the attorney general told a conference on the judiciary at Georgetown University Law Center."Judges must resist the temptation to supplement those tools based on their own personal views about the wisdom of the policies under review," Gonzales said. And he said the independence of federal judges, who are appointed for life, "has never meant, and should never mean, that judges or their decisions should be immune" from public criticism. CLIP -- Too bad no one told them that when the Supreme Court gave the presidency to Bush over Gore - who actually won the elections! - in 2000, a profoundly undemocratic decision at best!



Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)

By Molly Ivins

With a smug stroke of his pen, President Bush is set to wipe out a safeguard against illegal imprisonment that has endured as a cornerstone of legal justice since the Magna Carta. 

09/29/06 "TruthDig" -- -- AUSTIN, Texas—Oh dear. I’m sure he didn’t mean it. In Illinois’ Sixth Congressional District, long represented by Henry Hyde, Republican candidate Peter Roskam accused his Democratic opponent, Tammy Duckworth, of planning to “cut and run” on Iraq.

Duckworth is a former Army major and chopper pilot who lost both legs in Iraq after her helicopter got hit by an RPG. “I just could not believe he would say that to me,” said Duckworth, who walks on artificial legs and uses a cane. Every election cycle produces some wincers, but how do you apologize for that one?

The legislative equivalent of that remark is the detainee bill now being passed by Congress. Beloveds, this is so much worse than even that pathetic deal reached last Thursday between the White House and Republican Sens. John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The White House has since reinserted a number of “technical fixes” that were the point of the putative “compromise.” It leaves the president with the power to decide who is an enemy combatant.

This bill is not a national security issue—this is about torturing helpless human beings without any proof they are our enemies. Perhaps this could be considered if we knew the administration would use the power with enormous care and thoughtfulness. But of the over 700 prisoners sent to Gitmo, only 10 have ever been formally charged with anything. Among other things, this bill is a CYA for torture of the innocent that has already taken place.

Death by torture by Americans was first reported in 2003 in a New York Times article by Carlotta Gall. The military had announced the prisoner died of a heart attack, but when Gall saw the death certificate, written in English and issued by the military, it said the cause of death was homicide. The “heart attack” came after he had been beaten so often on this legs that they had “basically been pulpified,” according to the coroner.

The story of why and how it took the Times so long to print this information is in the current edition of the Columbia Journalism Review. The press in general has been late and slow in reporting torture, so very few Americans have any idea how far it has spread. As is often true in hierarchical, top-down institutions, the orders get passed on in what I call the downward communications exaggeration spiral.

For example, on a newspaper, a top editor may remark casually, “Let’s give the new mayor a chance to see what he can do before we start attacking him.”

This gets passed on as “Don’t touch the mayor unless he really screws up.”

And it ultimately arrives at the reporter level as “We can’t say anything negative about the mayor.”

The version of the detainee bill now in the Senate not only undoes much of the McCain-Warner-Graham work, but it is actually much worse than the administration’s first proposal. In one change, the original compromise language said a suspect had the right to “examine and respond to” all evidence used against him. The three senators said the clause was necessary to avoid secret trials. The bill has now dropped the word “examine” and left only “respond to.”

In another change, a clause said that evidence obtained outside the United States could be admitted in court even if it had been gathered without a search warrant. But the bill now drops the words “outside the United States,” which means prosecutors can ignore American legal standards on warrants.

The bill also expands the definition of an unlawful enemy combatant to cover anyone who has “has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.” Quick, define “purposefully and materially.” One person has already been charged with aiding terrorists because he sold a satellite TV package that includes the Hezbollah network.

The bill simply removes a suspect’s right to challenge his detention in court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215. That pretty much leaves the barn door open.

As Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, wrote, an intelligence service free to torture soon “degenerates into a playground for sadists.” But not unbridled sadism—you will be relieved that the compromise took out the words permitting interrogation involving “severe pain” and substituted “serious pain,” which is defined as “bodily injury that involves extreme physical pain.”

In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: “The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit.”

Fellow citizens, this bill throws out legal and moral restraints as the president deems it necessary—these are fundamental principles of basic decency, as well as law.

I’d like those supporting this evil bill to spare me one affliction: Do not, please, pretend to be shocked by the consequences of this legislation. And do not pretend to be shocked when the world begins comparing us to the Nazis.



The Breaking Point

By Mike Whitney

09/29/06 "Information Clearing House" -- - It was another bad week in Iraq. While bodies were piling up in the Baghdad morgue and the militia fighting steadily intensified, the Bush administration was hit with a rash of PR scandals that are bound to erode public support for the war. The worst of these is the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) which was leaked to the New York Times and which stated that “the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the 9-11 attacks.”

The NIE carries great weight because it represents the unanimous judgment of all 16 of the American intelligence agencies. The document’s findings cast doubt on the central tenet of the war on terror, that is, that terror originates from a radical ideology (Islamo-fascism) which fosters an irrational hatred for modernity, western-style democracy, and personal freedom. The NIE proves that the Bush-Blair theory of terror is hopelessly flawed and that violent jihad is actually fueled by occupation and injustice. Terrorism is a reaction to foreign policy. It has nothing to do with “hating our freedoms”. The NIE confirms this simple truism.

The long-term effects of the report are impossible to calculate. The Bush agenda is predicated on the “Big Lie”, that we are under attack and that “We must fight them there, if we don’t want to fight them here.” The administration has manipulated the “perception of a threat” to justify its endless “preemptive” wars, curtailed civil liberties and enhanced powers of the executive. The NIE shows that the war on terror is a sham that only generates more violent extremism.

The administration will now have to counter the report’s conclusions if it wants to revive support for the war on terror and continue its ongoing consolidation of power. We should anticipate another Karl Rove public relations campaign to reengage the public and perpetuate the global onslaught.

More Dismal News

The results from a number of polls appeared in last week’s news. In a University of Maryland survey the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that “71% of Iraqis want the US troops to leave within a year”. The poll also found that nearly 4 out of 5 Iraqis believe that the US military is “provoking more conflict than it is preventing” and that “60% of Iraqis approve of attacks on US-led forces.” The survey shows that popular support for the occupation has continued to dwindle while hostility towards the American presence is growing beyond all expectation.

In still another poll (Harris poll) showed that only 20% of Americans are “still confidant that US policies in Iraq will be successful”. Public support for the war is plummeting despite the enthusiastic efforts of the media and the political establishment.

Ironically, a “leak” from the Pentagon revealed that the Lincoln Group (which was the focus of an earlier investigation for planting “pro-occupation” stories in Iraqi newspapers) was just awarded another $6 million contract. According to the Kansas City Star, “The Washington-based group won a two year contract to monitor a number of English and Arabic media outlets and produce public relations products such as talking points or speeches for US forces in Iraq”.

The administration continues to (cynically) believe that their well-paid propagandists can prevail in the “hearts and minds” campaign by creating patriotic sound bytes and poignant anecdotes about devoted soldiers performing their duties. What’s needed, however, is a dramatic change of policy. The country is increasingly disillusioned with Iraq and is looking for signs of progress or a firm date for withdrawal. Rumsfeld’s scribes at the Lincoln Group will have no luck trying to rekindle the confidence they have already squandered. All of the prime indicators are now pointed in the opposite direction and a full 63% of the American people now feel that the war was a “mistake”.

Managing Perceptions of the ongoing War

In a fascinating article by Eric Boehlert, “The Press downplays Iraq during the Campaign Season. Again” the author shows how the media either “covers” or “doesn’t cover” the war depending on how close we are to the elections:

“Fact: In the 10 weeks prior to Election Day in 2004, the war in Iraq was the most reported story on the weekly news programs just twice, according to the media research of Andrew Tyndall. But immediately following Bush’s reelection, the war in Iraq instantly became the most covered story on the nightly news programs—for 7 weeks in a row.”

Boehlert also shows how the media has steadily reduced its coverage of the war to maintain the rapidly diminishing support:

“In 2003 ABC, NBC, and CBS nightly newscasts, on average, devoted 388 minutes each month to covering Iraq…By 2005, that monthly tally had decreased by more than 50%---to 166 minutes each month. Today, unless there is a dramatic late-September surge in coverage, the Big Three nightly newscasts will end up the month having devoted a total of 40 minutes to Iraq, or less than 15% of their airtime.”

15% less than 2003! And, Iraq continues to be the main issue on people’s minds going into the election season.

These figures tell the “hidden” story of Iraq. They expose how the mainstream media intentionally reduces its coverage to maintain support for the war. The figures fail to show, however, the omissions and diversions that the media provides on an hourly basis. The American people are prevented from seeing flag-draped coffins, disgruntled GIs, or the vast devastation caused by military occupation. Televised coverage is carefully limited to fashion a misleading narrative of sectarian warfare, which suggests that the main problem is “Iraqi killing Iraqi”. The real problem is US occupation, a fact that is unavoidably evident in every survey conducted in Iraq.

When we consider relentless maneuverings of the media, it is gratifying to see that Americans are finally beginning to recognize the truth behind the imagery. Fortunately, there are limits to the effectiveness of propaganda regardless of how adroitly it is employed.

Stretched to the Brink

In other news of the week, the Congressional Research Service announced that the “total cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and enhanced security at military bases since September 11, 2001, could reach $549 billion this year. The White House Office of Management and Budget estimated that the war will cost $110 billion for fiscal year 2007” (McClatchy Newspapers)

More than a half trillion dollars in 3 years.

Iraq is devouring resources at an unprecedented pace and producing nothing in return. There’s no more “happy talk” from officials in the Bush administration about how “Iraq will pay for itself” through oil revenues as Paul Wolfowitz foolishly stated prior to the invasion. Iraq has become a black-hole swallowing up boatloads of cash that otherwise would have been earmarked for education, health care, infrastructure and security. The war is bankrupting the nation while grooming the next generation’s terrorists. This is the very definition of failure.

The Iraqi mission is not only over-budget but overextended. The cracks and fissures in the military are quickly becoming gaping holes. The Army and Marines are trying to find creative ways to put more boots on the ground, but their only option is to increase deployments to the theatre. Some of the troops are presently on their 4th tour of duty and it is likely that even more of the National Guard will be called up, leaving the country vulnerable to terrorist attack or natural disaster.

The Washington Times reports that “The increased demand for troops comes at a time when military analysts say it is stressed to the breaking point….Non-deployed combat brigades are experiencing low-readiness ratings due mostly to lack of usable weapons and equipment. The wear and tear in Iraq is ruining M1A1 tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, Humvees and other equipment at such a fast pace that the Army has neither the money nor the industrial base to replace them.”

The military is in a shambles and headed for a calamity.

America’s enemies should be thrilled that Don Rumsfeld is still overseeing all operations in Iraq. His incompetence is only matched by his astonishing inability to learn from his mistakes. It’s plain that America will not prevail with Rumsfeld in command.

Overextended, over-budget and mismanaged. The war in Iraq is foundering and the war on terror has been exposed as a fraud. (the NIE report)

How much worse can it get?

There is no good news from Iraq. It’s all bad. The magnitude of America’s defeat is becoming clearer and clearer with each passing day. Rumsfeld’s cheery propaganda campaign has fallen on hard times and will have no effect on the wars’ final outcome. The problem is the policy; it is untenable and will require a thorough overhaul.

We should expect to see dramatic changes following the elections. The Iraq Survey Group, steered by committee-chair and Bush family friend James Baker, will release their findings right after the November balloting. Judging by their guarded comments, big changes are ahead. Perhaps, the troops will move to the perimeter and let the Iraqis kill each other in a full-blown civil war.

Whatever transpires, the first phase of the Iraqi fiasco is nearly over. The Bush administration will be compelled to protect its interests while limiting the exposure of its troops. They may choose to minimize their activities to bombing raids and counter-insurgency operations, further destroying the threadbare fabric of Iraqi society.

Security is not important. Lives are not important. Only oil and the people it enriches are important.


See also:

A Quarter Million Iraqis Flee Sectarian Violence
A quarter of a million Iraqis have fled sectarian violence and registered as refugees in the past seven months with an upsurge in attacks over Ramadan. In Baghdad, police found the bodies of 40 more victims - bound, tortured and murdered. The United States says violence in Iraq has surged in the last two weeks, and this past week saw the most suicide bombs of any week since the war began in 2003.




Sept 28, 2006



Nuclear specialists and governmental sources pointed out that one of its main missions would be to implement the 2001 nuclear strategy that includes an option of preemptive nuclear attacks on 'rogue states' with WMDs. (Japanese Economic Newswire, 30 December 2005)


JFCCSGS is in an advanced state of readiness to trigger nuclear attacks directed against Iran or North Korea.

The operational implementation of the Global Strike is called CONCEPT PLAN (CONPLAN) 8022. The latter is described as "an actual plan that the Navy and the Air Force translate into strike package for their submarines and bombers,' (Ibid).

CONPLAN 8022 is 'the overall umbrella plan for sort of the pre-planned strategic scenarios involving nuclear weapons.'

'It's specifically focused on these new types of threats -- Iran, North Korea -- proliferators and potentially terrorists too,' he said. 'There's nothing that says that they can't use CONPLAN 8022 in limited scenarios against Russian and Chinese targets.'(According to Hans Kristensen, of the Nuclear Information Project, quoted in Japanese economic News Wire, op cit)

The mission of JFCCSGS is to implement CONPLAN 8022, in other words to trigger a nuclear war with Iran.

The Commander in Chief, namely George W. Bush would instruct the Secretary of Defense, who would then instruct the Joint Chiefs of staff to activate CONPLAN 8022.

CONPLAN is distinct from other military operations. it does not contemplate the deployment of ground troops.

CONPLAN 8022 is different from other war plans in that it posits a small-scale operation and no "boots on the ground." The typical war plan encompasses an amalgam of forces -- air, ground, sea -- and takes into account the logistics and political dimensions needed to sustain those forces in protracted operations.... The global strike plan is offensive, triggered by the perception of an imminent threat and carried out by presidential order.) (William Arkin, Washington Post, May 2005)

The Role of Israel

Since late 2004, Israel has been stockpiling US made conventional and nuclear weapons systems in anticipation of an attack on Iran. This stockpiling which is financed by US military aid was largely completed in June 2005. Israel has taken delivery from the US of several thousand "smart air launched weapons" including some 500 'bunker-buster bombs, which can also be used to deliver tactical nuclear bombs.

The B61-11 is the "nuclear version" of the "conventional" BLU 113, can be delivered in much same way as the conventional bunker buster bomb. (See Michel Chossudovsky, , see also


Late April 2005. Sale of deadly military hardware to Israel. GBU-28 Buster Bunker Bombs:

Coinciding with Putin's visit to Israel, the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (Department of Defense) announced the sale of an additional 100 bunker-buster bombs produced by Lockheed Martin to Israel. This decision was viewed by the US media as "a warning to Iran about its nuclear ambitions."

The sale pertains to the larger and more sophisticated "Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28) BLU-113 Penetrator" (including the WGU-36A/B guidance control unit and support equipment). The GBU-28 is described as "a special weapon for penetrating hardened command centers located deep underground. The fact of the matter is that the GBU-28 is among the World's most deadly "conventional" weapons used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, capable of causing thousands of civilian deaths through massive explosions.

The Israeli Air Force are slated to use the GBU-28s on their F-15 aircraft.

(See text of DSCA news release at

See, this is proof that this has ALL BEEN PLANNED WAY IN ADVANCE FOR SO LONG!

Cheney Calls For US to Nuke Iran
... said the bush administration, under conplan 8022, had already placed the relevant mini-nukes under the control of ... theater military commanders, as part of a new global strike doctrine, a doctrine originally conceived ...

U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Capability
... warfare capabilities, including the so-called conplan 8022 mission for a global strike, according to publicly available military documents. conplan 8022 is a new strike plan that includes a pre-emptive nuclear ... of a ...

The U.S. Removes the Nuclear Brakes
... arms. remember the code name conplan 8022. last week, the washington post reported that this unintelligible nickname ... the world into nuclear war. conplan 8022 is a series of operational plans prepared by ...

Time is coming for Iran. Israel is behind it.





29th September 2006
Forget it! Iran has some military power and 1.7 Sadr Shia militias would attack immediately U.S. troops! China and Russia will never allow this attacks either and will open new fronts, by rooting out all American friendly movements in their vicinity.

Moreover Iran itself will attack the American troops in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States and this will wipe out all U.S. friendly regimes including the Musharraf Regime in Pakistan. Then the have their hands on ICBM’s in Pakistan and this way the can wipe out at least 100 American cities plus Israel. Even the American Neocons are criminals, but they would loose all business.


30th September 2006
While America may or may not be overly keen to engage Iran in a full-blooded invasion, they will certainly countenance the idea of a partial invasion, specifically of the oil rich southeast. This must first be preceded by a geographically much more penetrating air assault to ostensibly "degrade" Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. For such an assault to be meaningful, it must be effective; to be effective, it will likely require the use of tactical nuclear weapons, given the well publicised toughness of Iran’s underground, hardened facilities.

However, as we all know, the use of nuclear weapons in modern warfare is so beset by immense political objections as to be almost unjustifiable bar an unprecedented pretext event. Such an event would arrive if, for example, Iran were somehow able to launch a nuclear strike against Israel, or if terrorists demonstrably linked to Iran were able to detonate a real nuke in the USA / UK. The outcry caused by such a tumultuous event, even if the fatalities were low (as would be the case with a low yield nuclear device exploding in a small city), would effectively untie the hands of those keen on expediting a nuclear attack on Iran.


1 COMMENT from
Why Bush Will Nuke Iran, by Craig Roberts

27th September 2006

You are most likely correct. The Empire of the US has been outmaneuvered by the Chinese and the Russians, whose economies are growing at an accelerated clip (11.5% and 6.8% respectively, easily outstripping the US’s 3.2% annual growth, which is well below the GDP annual growth rate for the entire world, which last year was 5.5%). These powerful nations have all the oil they will need in and around the Caspian Sea, they need not worry about sustaining their economies growth for lack of oil. For those who don’t know, and I know most Americans would rather not know (they truly do think that the Ryder’s Cup is more important than our economic future) the Chinese, the Russians, the Indians and now their new partner, Iran, are all part of a new economic common market known as SCO, which started up in 2001.

Google it if you don’t believe me. Google: Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Wikipedia has an excellent article about this new Asian Common Market.

Too many American analysts look only to this nation’s military prowess and forget the most important things: without a vibrant healthy economy our military doesn’t amount to a hill of beans in the long run, and a country whose central government cannot operate without trillions of dollars in foreign investments ANNUALLY is setting itself up for a fool’s fall. The Russians and the Chinese have political leaders who actually look after their country’s economic interests. All we have are a bunch of parasites who scream ’FREEDOM’ and ’FREE MARKETS" all the while they have been selling us out to giant conglomerates whose only concern is the Almighty Dollar, a dollar I should add, that will soon suffer a catastrophic devaluation if the Feds continue to do nothing about our nation’s enormous debt..

The Russians and the Chinese have already performed numerous military exercises together since last year and have been doing a considerable amount of trade together, mostly in high tech, an important industry where the US has been losing ground, no thanks to a Federal Government that allows so many jobs to be outsourced to guess where? Yes, India and China.

An attack on Iran will be considered as an attack on an ally by the members of SCO, and although they may not respond with military actions against the US, they will most definitely respond ECONOMICALLY, simply by buying more gold, precious commodities, dumping as much of the soon-to-be useless US dollars that they have in their reserves. But, if you are really keeping up to date on these events, they are already doing this. Also, an attack on Iran will accelerate the withdrawal of funds by SCO members in the US Treasury. Last year alone the US Treasury had over $2.1 trillion in foreign holdings, money without which the Federal Government will not be able to operate. The Chinese alone have over $300 billion invested in the US Treasury, and they will definitely withdraw all of these funds if the US attacks Iran.

How far can the US military run with no money, I ask you?

The US has put itself in this monstrous hole,let’s not forget that we have a national debt that is close to $9 trillion, a humongous debt. More and more foreign investors are realizing the US will never be able to pay back this debt. Of what use is pouring more funds into a national economy that will never pay back on investments? The Chinese no longer need the US consumer market to sell their goods. The countries of SCO have together, a vast middle class that dwarfs ours, and they have a middle class that continues to grow, while ours stands stagnant. Is it any wonder that the rest of the world regards this country’s political and economic leaders as fools?


See also:

Consult America – Before the Next War (September 26, 2006) by Patrick J. Buchanan
(...) Even if Tehran is seeking a nuclear capacity, should the United States wage war to stop her? Is a nuclear-armed Iran more of an intolerable threat than was a nuclear-armed Stalin or Mao, both of whom America outlasted without war?Today, Republicans and Democrats are competing in calling Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a Hitler who will complete the Holocaust, a terrorist with whom we cannot deal. But the Iran he leads has not started a war since its revolution, 27 years ago, and knows that if it attacks America, it will invite annihilation as a nation.Bismarck called preemptive war committing suicide out of fear of death – not a bad description of what we did in invading Iraq.Today, President Bush does not have the constitutional authority to launch preemptive war. Congress should remind him of that, and demand that he come to them to make the case and get a declaration of war, before he undertakes yet another war – on Iran.Before any air strikes are launched on Iran's nuclear facilities, every American leader should be made to take a public stand for or against war. No more of these "If-only-I-had-known" and "We-were-misled" cop-outs.

Nuking Iran Is Not Off the Table (July 6, 2006)
The (for any rational human being) bizarre possibility of a U.S. nuclear strike against Iran first reached public consciousness in early April 2006, when investigative reporter Seymour Hersh wrote in the New Yorker magazine that it was one of six plans being considered by the administration. Now Hersh reports that the plan is off the table. Hersh is wrong on both counts. The "nuclear option" against Iran was, and still is, the only game in town. (...) The opposition of the military to the nuclear strike option is confirming the nuclear hawks' worst nightmare: nuclear weapons are becoming unusable, and as a consequence, they are not "credible" as a "deterrent." Today, Iran is not deterred from continuing its enrichment program by the threat of a U.S. nuclear strike, because, as the Hersh article tells us, such an action would be "politically unacceptable."Fast forward five years into the future, a news report of July 2011: "The White House is considering a tactical nuclear strike against underground facilities of [fill in your favorite 'rogue state'] suspected of hiding WMD, in what would be the first use of a nuclear weapon in a conflict since Natanz. The leadership of [rogue state] is very worried." And in October 2011: "In what was hailed as a major victory for U.S. strong-arm diplomacy, [rogue state] agreed to close down its underground facilities. Democrats and Republicans in Congress praised the president for having achieved an important U.S. goal without the use of force."Indeed, a 2006 low-yield nuclear strike on Natanz or any other Iranian underground facility that causes relatively little "collateral damage" will achieve the key objective: to make the U.S. "nuclear deterrent" against relatively minor nuisances credible.The memories of the extensive death and destruction inflicted in the first and last uses of nuclear weapons in war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, are still seared in the public consciousness and are associated with any kind of nuclear weapon. These memories will not disappear, and the passage of time only reinforces the general view that nuclear weapons are unusable, making a new use increasingly more difficult. Once a " reduced collateral damage" hit on a facility using a low-yield nuclear bunker buster has been accomplished, it will establish the credibility of the new U.S. nuclear posture, and future adversaries will be effectively dissuaded "from undertaking military programs or operations that could threaten U.S. interests or those of allies and friends."Both Democrats and Republicans will be happy that the U.S. nuclear arsenal will effectively play from then on its designated role [.pdf] as a "credible deterrent."The U.S. secretary of defense is on a mission to transform the military so that the United States can achieve its military objectives "on the cheap." There is no cheaper way than the threat, and if necessary the use, of our nuclear arsenal. We have already spent over $5 trillion for it, so why waste it? CLIP


Forwarded by "Stephanie">

" What lies before us and what lies beyond us is tiny compared to what lies within us. "

September 28, 2006


Authors Predict Public Backlash as RFID Plans Reach Consumers En Masse

As the Penguin/Plume paperback version of the award-winning book "Spychips" hits bookstores this week, the authors are anticipating an intensified consumer backlash against companies like Procter & Gamble and Wal-Mart. "You can't read the offensive corporate schemes revealed in this book and not be infuriated with them," say authors Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre.

The eye-opening work about the downsides of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) has already shaken the industry and prompted legislative initiatives worldwide. Now that a newly updated version is being distributed by a division of Penguin, the second-largest English-language trade book publisher in the world, it will circulate to an even larger audience.

RFID is a controversial technology that uses tiny microchips to track everyday objects, animals, and even people from a distance. These RFID microchips have earned the nickname "spychips" because each contains a unique identification number, like a Social Security number for things, that can be read silently and invisibly by radio waves.

"We've caught major companies red-handed proposing uses for the technology that most people would find frightening and abhorrent," say the authors. "We combed over 30,000 documents in putting this book together, and the evidence is airtight. They can't deny the patent applications on file at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and they can't retract their own words."

Revelations in the book include IBM's "PERSON TRACKING UNIT" that can remotely scan the contents of women's purses and track unwitting members of the public through RFID-tagged objects they are wearing and carrying. IBM suggests that marketers and government agents could use the device to scan people in places like retail stores, libraries, theaters, elevators, and even public restrooms. Other companies like Procter & Gamble, Phillips, NCR, and Bank of America are also implicated in "Spychips" through public documents that detail their own people tracking plans.

The book's social impact has been likened to that of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring," which alerted a generation to the dangers of unbridled pesticide use. "Spychips" has earned critical acclaim and garnered a passionate following in privacy and civil liberties circles. Now its backing by Penguin/Plume and its availability in a low-cost paperback edition will take it to the next level of public awareness.

SPYCHIPS: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Purchase and Watch Your Every Move Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre On-Sale: September 26th, 2006/Price: $15.00/ISBN: 0-452-28766-9 A Plume Original Trade Paperback



"Spychips" is the winner of the 2006 Lysander Spooner Award for Advancing the Literature of Liberty and has received wide critical acclaim. Authored by recent Harvard graduate Dr. Katherine Albrecht and former bank examiner Liz McIntyre, the book is meticulously researched. "Spychips" draws on patent documents, corporate source materials, conference proceedings, and firsthand interviews to paint a convincing -- and frightening -- picture of the threat posed by RFID.

Despite its hundreds of footnotes and academic-level accuracy, the book remains lively and readable according to critics, who have called it a "techno-thriller" and "a masterpiece of technocriticism."

"A chilling story about an emerging future in which spychips run amok as Big Brother and Big Shopkeeper invade our privacy in unprecedented ways."

- Chicago Tribune

"Paints a 1984-ish picture of how corporations would like to use RFID tags to keep tabs on you."

- The Associated Press


Penguin Group (USA) Inc. is the U.S. affiliate of the internationally renowned Penguin Group, the second-largest English-language trade book publisher in the world. Penguin Group (USA) publishes under a wide range of prominent imprints and trademarks, including Plume, one of the pre-eminent trade paperback imprints.


See also:

You're welcome to duplicate and distribute this message to others who may find it of interest.


If you are not yet a subcriber to the Earth Rainbow Network emailing list and would like to subscribe to its automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, simply send a blank email at from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!