Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

Some Public Figures Do Care About The truth

may also include historical analysis and perspective

This Is Not America

Unread postby socrates » Mon Aug 20, 2007 2:23 pm

Abu Ghraib abuse just tip of the iceberg: author
AFP News: Aug. 19th, 2007

Those people truely to blame for the degrading treatment of Iraqi prisoners in Baghdad's infamous Abu Ghraib jail remain in the shadows, while such abuses continue unchecked and unseen.

That's the view of American author Tara McKelvey, who sought to uncover the truth behind the 2004 scandal in her book "Monstering: Inside Americas Policy of Secret Interrogations and Torture in the Terror War."

Asked who was really responsible ahead of the trial of the only US military officer charged with tormenting Iraqis at the jail, McKelvey replied: "That's the million dollar question. That's what everyone wants to know."

Lieutenant Colonel Steven Jordan, 51, goes on trial on Monday on charges which include cruelty and mistreatment of detainees, making false statements, obstruction of justice and disobeying orders.

McKelvey hopes the hearing will provide some answers as to why US soldiers forced their Iraqi prisoners to strip, form naked human pyramids, parade on all fours with leashes chains on their necks, and threatened them with dogs.

"These court-martials have been very useful in the sense that they allow people to ask questions. And they forced people to account for their behavior when they were at the prison," she told AFP.

"They are one of the few venues where things things are out in the open."

So far attempts to the blame the affair on US President George W. Bush, who ordered the invasion of the Iraq in March 2003, his Vice President **** Cheney or former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the main architects of the war, have come to nothing.

"People try to blame Bush, they blame Cheney, they blame Rumsfeld. But chasing that chain of command is difficult, partly because so much of these documents and the photographs have been withheld from the public," said McKelvey.

She added the "smoking gun" in the scandal could lead to John C. Yoo, who was a lawyer in the office of legal counsel at the Justice Department, and was one of the authors of a key departmental memo.

"In that memo, he defines torture to allow all sorts of abuse and techniques, and that was one of the key points in this entire debate," McKelvey said.

"People say often: torture and abuse have taken place in every war. And it's true, if you look at My Lai or some of the incidents in Vietnam that were horrific.

"But the difference now is that this is codified. There have been allowances made for these things to occur."

The Abu Ghraib scandal first came to light in 2004 when photographs the grinning soldiers had taken of themselves dishing out the abuse to their prisoners shot round the world.

But McKelvey believes the abuse was more widespread than was ever revealed and is probably still continuing in other places and situations.

"It's true you can say the scandal exists because of the photographs, but what you saw on the pictures was really only a fraction of the abuse that was taking place. And certainly not the worst of it," she said.

"There is no question in my mind that the extent was far greater than it was acknowledged at that time. In December 2003, there was something like 12,000 detainees in Iraq," she said.

But there were thousands who were never registered and held in short-term facilities such as schools or police stations, she added.

"Today, polls show that a sizable number of soldiers think that torture is OK in certain conditions, that they won't report abuse if it takes place.

"And I think the sad truth is that these things are still taking place but the difference between now and April-May 2004 is that people aren't taking pictures."

No wonder we are despised around the world for being hypocrites.
John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales are pond scum.
Until we get beyond the ideas of impeachment and start to understand that war crimes have been going on, we will continue to be characterized as an evil nation. Thanks to the scumbags in power.

Anyone going to Europe and elsewhere, tell folks you are from Canada or Ireland. Why risk the abuse that none of us deserve?
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Unread postby socrates » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:53 pm

Congressman inquires if it's legal to use spy satellites on Americans
Jason Rhyne Published: Wednesday August 22, 2007

A Democratic congressman is seeking answers after revelations that the US plans to use spy satellites against American citizens.

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), who chairs a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, has written Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to ask a series of detailed questions about the new spying initiative. The congressman's letter, which was first reported by Secrecy News, outlines a string of inquiries about the legality of the domestic spying program and seeks assurances that American civil rights will be protected once the program becomes operational.

"Recent media reports of an unprecedented expansion of access to imagery from United States satellites for domestic surveillance purposes raise significant questions about the scope of this new program, its legal basis...the privacy safeguards in place to prevent abuse and related issues," the letter begins.

Markey goes on to ask why current spy satellite protocols, which according to press reports grant U.S security officials access to satellite images on a case-by-case basis, are inadequate. "How many of these requests were denied, if any?" he asks.

"How does the [Department of Homeland Security] plan to ensure Americans' privacy and civil rights are protected once this new program becomes operational?" the congressman continues later in the letter, requesting a copy of materials that explain what "policies and procedures are currently used to guide the use and dissemination of information obtained through the use of spy satellites."

Eyeing the legality of the proposed spy plan, Congressman Markey inquires as to what "memoranda, opinions or analyses have been prepared" to evaluate the new program, and asks specifically if the spying would violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which regulates the use of the U.S. military for non-military purposes.

"If reviews of the program uncover improper usage of the program in a manner that undermines Americans' privacy and civil liberties," Markey asks, "will the Department convey such information to the Congress and the public? If not, why not?"

A copy of the Aug. 16 letter, which requests a response from the Department of Homeland Security no later than Sept. 7, can be found at this PDF link.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

People of Honour

Unread postby socrates2 » Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:31 pm

Some current events:

Dennis Kucinich appears to be the candidate worthy of our vote. Too bad the elections seem to be rigged.


People Who Are Astroturfing Pond Scum:


BradBlog- Interview with Sibel Edmonds:

BLOGGED BY Brad Friedman ON 10/29/2007 5:30AM
EXCLUSIVE: FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds Will Now Tell All - and Face Charges if Necessary - to Any Major Television Network That Will Let Her
She's Prepared to Name Names, Including Those of Two 'Well-Known' Congress Members Involved in Criminal Corruption
The 'Most Gagged Person in U.S. History' Tells The BRAD BLOG She's Now Exhausted All Other Channels...

-- By Brad Friedman


Word is google is censoring this story.

BRAD BLOG Sibel Edmonds Article 'Disappears' from Google News

BradBlog update on the "don't taser me bro'" dude:

Criminal Charges Dropped Against Tasered Florida Student in Exchange for Apology

Our Leaders Are War Criminals.

Scholar links Bush's US and Hirohito's Japan

Ok. This last one is off-topic.

The Andy Kaufman Show

Anyone Who Speaks The Truth Gets Trolled

Unread postby socrates » Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:22 pm

May41970, I agree with your recent pm that it could be time to simply ignore the trolling. I think we should appreciate what we have come up with across this whole board. The attacks are so ludicrous and widespread, that it becomes a distraction.

Here's a good one from RawStory. A whistleblower has stepped forward and exposed further the extent of the Big Brother activities. These fockers push us so far into the fascism. They have given away that one of their main goals is to induce fear in the public to keep silent. But there are just too many of us who are not afraid.

AT&T whistleblower: I was forced to connect 'big brother machine'
David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Wednesday November 7, 2007

{education purposes}
A former technician at AT&T, who alleges that the telecom forwards virtually all of its internet traffic into a "secret room" to facilitate government spying, says the whole operation reminds him of something out of Orwell's 1984.

Appearing on MSNBC's Countdown program, whistleblower Mark Klein told Keith Olbermann that a copy of all internet traffic passing over AT&T lines was copied into a locked room at the company's San Francisco office -- to which only employees with National Security Agency clearance had access -- via a cable splitting device.

"My job was to connect circuits into the splitter device which was hard-wired to the secret room," said Klein. "And effectively, the splitter copied the entire data stream of those internet cables into the secret room -- and we're talking about phone conversations, email web browsing, everything that goes across the internet."

Asked by Olbermann how he knew what was being sent along those particular lines, Klein said it was all part of his former job:

"As a technician, I had the engineering wiring documents, which told me how the splitter was wired to the secret room," Klein continued. "And so I know that whatever went across those cables was copied and the entire data stream was copied..."

According to Klein, that information included internet activity about Americans.

"We're talking about domestic traffic as well as international traffic," Klein said. " And that's what got me upset to begin with."

Previous Bush administration claims that only international communications were being intercepted aren't accurate, Klein says.

"I know the physical equipment, and I know that statement is not true," he added. "It involves millions of communications, a lot of it domestic communications that they're copying wholesale, sweeping up into that secret room."

When Olbermann asked Klein if being involved in the process reminded him of a scene in the film Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the former technician said he had another movie in mind.

"Actually, I'm a little older so my thought was George Orwell's 1984 and here I am forced to connect the big brother machine," he said. "And I felt I was in a funny position, but I needed my job, so I didn't want to make a fuss a the time. But after I retired, I thought about it some more." According to ABC News, Klein believes AT&T has similar operations in place in as many as 20 other sites.

He is in Washington to lobby Congress not to pass a proposed telecom immunity bill, which would provide legal immunity to companies who secretly participated in NSA warrantless eavesdropping programs. Some of the nation's largest telecommunications companies are currently facing an array of class-action lawsuits related to the matter.

The following video is from MSNBC's Countdown, broadcast on November 7, 2007....
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:45 pm

John Edwards has called for the use of paper ballots. I think that this dude has been going through a tough time with his wife's illness. When mortality, reality, whatever you want to call it comes to one's awareness, that is when one realises that it is up to each of us to do the right thing. We can keep buying into this material, wasteful, selfish, evil system for just so long until even if one is "successful," they realise that things are focked up beyond being able to ignore it. Our leaders are war criminals who need to be prosecuted. George Bush, **** Cheney, and many others are war criminals.

You cannot start illegal wars and mayhem based on lies.

Why Tuesday? Candidate Challenge
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Daniel Ellsberg

Unread postby socrates » Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:35 pm

American Free Press
Daniel Ellsberg, the former Defense Department analyst who leaked the secret Pentagon Papers history of the Vietnam War, offered insights into the looming attack on Iran and the loss of liberty in the United States at a recent American University symposium. What follow are his comments from that speech. They have been edited only for space.

By Daniel Ellsberg

Let me simplify . . . and not just to be rhetorical: A coup has occurred. I woke up the other day realizing, coming out of sleep, that a coup has occurred. It’s not just a question that a coup lies ahead with the next 9-11. That’s the next coup that completes the first.

The last five years have seen a steady assault on every fundamental of our Constitution . . . what the rest of the world looked at for the last 200 years as a model and experiment to the rest of the world—in checks and balances, limited government, Bill of Rights, individual rights protected from majority infringement by the Congress, an independent judiciary, the possibility of impeachment.

There have been violations of these principles by many presidents before. Most of the specific things that Bush has done in the way of illegal surveillance and other matters were done under my boss Lyndon Johnson in the Vietnam War: the use of CIA, FBI, NSA against Americans.

All these violations were impeachable had they been found out at the time but in nearly every case the violations were not found out until [the president was] out of office so we didn’t have the exact challenge that we have today.

That was true with the first term of Nixon and certainly of Johnson, Kennedy and others. They were impeachable. They weren’t found out in time. But I think it was not their intention, in the crisis situations that they felt justified their actions, to change our form of government.

It is increasingly clear with each new book and each new leak that comes out, that Richard Cheney and his now chief of staff David Addington have had precisely that in mind since at least the early 1970s. Not just since 1992, not since 2001, but [they] have believed in executive government, single-branch government under an executive president—elected or not—with unrestrained powers. They did not believe in restraint.

When I say this, I’m not saying they are traitors. I don’t think they have in mind allegiance to some foreign power or have a desire to help a foreign power. I believe they have in their own minds a love of this country and what they think is best for this country—but what they think is best is directly and consciously at odds with what the Founders of this country [and the Framers of the Constitution] thought.

They believe we need a different kind of government now, an executive government essentially, rule by decree, which is what we’re getting with ‘signing statements.’

Signing statements are talked about as line-item vetoes which is one [way] of describing them which are unconstitutional in themselves, but in other ways are just saying the president says: ‘I decide what I enforce. I decide what the law is. I legislate.’

It’s [the same] with the military commissions, courts that are under the entire control of the executive branch, essentially of the president—a concentration of legislative, judicial, and executive powers in one branch, which is precisely what the founders meant to avert, and tried to avert and did avert to the best of their ability in the Constitution.”

* * *

Now I’m appealing to that as a crisis right now not just because it is a break in tradition but because I believe in my heart and from my experience that on this point the Founders had it right. It’s not just ‘our way of doing things’— it was a crucial perception on the corruption of power to anybody, including Americans.

On procedures and institutions that might possibly keep that power under control because the alternative was what we have just seen, wars like Vietnam, wars like Iraq, wars like the one coming.

That brings me to the second point. This executive branch, under specifically Bush and Cheney, despite opposition [even] from most of the rest of the branch, even of the cabinet, clearly intends a war against Iran, which, even by imperialist standards, [violates] standards in other words which were accepted not only by nearly everyone in the executive branch but most of the leaders in Congress.

The interests of the empire, the need for hegemony, our right to control and our need to control the oil of the Middle East and many other places. That is consensual in our establishment. …

But even by those standards, an attack on Iran is insane. And I say that quietly, I don’t mean it to be heard as rhetoric. Of course it’s not only aggression and a violation of international law, a supreme international crime, but it is by imperial standards, insane in terms of the consequences.

Does that make it impossible? No, it obviously doesn’t; it doesn’t even make it unlikely.

That is because two things come together that with the acceptance for various reasons of the Congress—Democrats and Republicans—and the public and the media, we have freed the White House — the president and the vice president—from virtually any restraint by Congress, courts, media, public, whatever.

And on the other hand, the people who have this unrestrained power are crazy. Not entirely, but they have crazy beliefs.

And the question is what then, can we do about this?

We are heading toward an insane operation. It is not certain. [But it] is likely.… I want to try to be realistic myself here, to encourage us to do what we must do, what is needed to be done with the full recognition of the reality. Nothing is impossible.

What I’m talking about in the way of a police state, in the way of an attack on Iran, is not certain. Nothing is certain, actually. However, I think it is probable, more likely than not, that in the next 15, 16 months of this administration we will see an attack on Iran. Probably. Whatever we do.

And . . . we will not succeed in moving Congress, probably, and Congress probably will not stop the president from doing this. And that’s where we’re heading. That’s a very ugly, ugly prospect.

However, I think it’s up to us to work to increase that small, perhaps—anyway not large—possibility and probability to avert this within the next 15 months, aside from the effort that we have to make for the rest of our lives.

* * *

Getting back the constitutional government and improving it will take a long time. And I think if we don’t get started now, it won’t be started under the next administration.

Getting out of Iraq will take a long time. Averting Iran and averting a further coup in the face of a 9-11, another attack, is for right now, it can’t be put off. It will take a kind of political and moral courage of which we have seen very little.

We have a really unusual concentration here and in this audience, of people who have in fact changed their lives, changed their position, lost their friends to a large extent, risked and experienced being called terrible names, ‘traitor,’ ‘weak on terrorism’—names that politicians will do anything to avoid being called.

How do we get more people in the government and in the public at large to change their lives now in a crisis in a critical way? How do we get Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for example? What kinds of pressures, what kinds of influences can be brought to bear to get Congress to do their jobs? It isn’t just doing their jobs. Getting them to obey their oaths of office.

I took an oath many times, an oath of office as a Marine lieutenant, as an official in the Defense Department, as an official in the State Department as a Foreign Service officer. A number of times I took an oath of office which is the same oath of office taken by every member of Congress and every official in the United States and every officer in the armed services.

And that oath is not to a commander in chief, which is not [even] mentioned. It is not to a Fuehrer. It is not even to superior officers. The oath is precisely to protect and uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Now that is an oath I violated every day for years in the Defense Department without realizing it when I kept my mouth shut when I knew the public was being lied into a war as they were lied into Iraq, as they are being lied into war in Iran.

I knew that I had the documents that proved it, and I did not put it out then. I was not obeying my oath, which I eventually came to do.

I’ve often said that Lt. Ehren Watada—who still faces trial for refusing to obey orders to deploy to Iraq which he correctly perceives to be an unconstitutional and aggressive war—is the single officer in the United States armed services who is taking seriously [the matter of] upholding his oath.

The president is clearly violating that oath, of course. [All the personnel] under him who understand what is going on — and there are myriad — are violating their oaths. And that’s the standard that I think we should be asking of people.

On the Democratic side, on the political side, I think we should be demanding of our Democratic leaders in the House and Senate—and frankly of the Republicans —that it is not their highest single absolute priority to be reelected or to maintain a Democratic majority so that Pelosi can still be speaker of the House and Reid can be in the Senate, or to increase that majority.

I’m not going to say that for politicians they should ignore that, or that they should do something else entirely, or that they should not worry about that.
Of course that will be and should be a major concern of theirs, but they’re acting like it’s their sole concern. Which is business as usual. “We have a majority, let’s not lose it, let’s keep it. Let’s keep those chairmanships.”

Exactly what have those chairmanships done for us to save the Constitution in the last couple of years?

I am shocked by the Republicans today that I read [about] in The Washington Post who threatened a filibuster if we … get back habeas corpus. The ruling out of habeas corpus with the help of the Democrats did not get us back to George the First it got us back to before King John 700 years ago in terms of counter-revolution.

I think we’ve got to somehow get home to them [in Congress] that this is the time for them to uphold the oath, to preserve the Constitution, which is worth struggling for in part because it’s only with the power that the Constitution gives Congress responding to the public, only with that can we protect the world from madmen in power in the White House who intend an attack on Iran.

And the current generation of American generals and others who realize that this will be a catastrophe have not shown themselves —they might be people who in their past lives risked their bodies and their lives in Vietnam or elsewhere, like [Colin] Powell, and would not risk their career or their relations with the president to the slightest degree.

That has to change. And it’s the example of people like those up here who somehow brought home to our representatives that they as humans and as citizens have the power to do likewise and find in themselves the courage to protect this country and protect the world. Thank you.”

(Issue #47, November 19, 2007)

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Mother Jones Exposes A Facility Practicing Torture

Unread postby socrates » Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:05 pm

Before linking to a recent article on some sickening bs place located in Massachusetts, I just wanted to link to stories concerning the recent disclosures made by former White House spokesperson Scott McClellan concerning the leak of Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA employee. By the way, I know Bob Marley said rasta don't work for no cia, but perhaps he would cut me some slack, if I said I wouldn't kick her out of bed for bread crumbs, or whatever that cliche is. :P

The following are from Raw Story, another website I recommend for news. It is the Keith Olbermann of websites, imho.

Publisher: McClellan isn't alleging Bush took part in 'conspiracy to mislead'
David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Wednesday November 21, 2007

A bombshell excerpt from a new book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan was not an allegation that President Bush helped to mislead the public about the outing of ex-CIA agent Valerie Plame, the book's publisher told CNN.

"I just got off the phone with the publisher of McClellan's new book, and he tells me that McClellan does not charge in the book that the president himself was involved in any kind of conspiracy to mislead the public," reported CNN correspondent Jessica Yellin. "But of course, in the publisher's words, 'Scott did go out to take bullets without the proper flak jacket on.'"

Joe Wilson: Bush either 'out of touch' or accessory to a crime
David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Wednesday November 21, 2007

President Bush is either "out of touch" or an accessory to a crime in connection to the outing of ex-CIA agent Valerie Plame, according to Plame's husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson....

Dodd calls for investigation into Bush role in Plame affair
Mike Aivaz and Jason Rhyne
Published: Wednesday November 21, 2007

Following the publication of an advance excerpt from a new book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Democratic presidential contender Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) on Tuesday called for a Justice Department investigation into President Bush's role in events surrounding the outing of ex-CIA agent Valerie Plame......

Now to the main reason I started this post. The following is simpling disgusting, and imho, is illegal and should be put to a stop immediately. I knew there was a reason I always felt B.F. Skinner was full of ****.

School of Shock
Eight states are sending autistic, mentally retarded, and emotionally troubled kids to a facility that punishes them with painful electric shocks. How many times do you have to zap a child before it's torture?

By Jennifer Gonnerman
August 20, 2007

Rob Santana awoke terrified. He'd had that dream again, the one where silver wires ran under his shirt and into his pants, connecting to electrodes attached to his limbs and torso. Adults armed with surveillance cameras and remote-control activators watched his every move. One press of a button, and there was no telling where the shock would hit—his arm or leg or, worse, his stomach. All Rob knew was that the pain would be intense.

Every time he woke from this dream, it took him a few moments to remember that he was in his own bed, that there weren't electrodes locked to his skin, that he wasn't about to be shocked. It was no mystery where this recurring nightmare came from—not A Clockwork Orange or 1984, but the years he spent confined in America's most controversial "behavior modification" facility.

In 1999, when Rob was 13, his parents sent him to the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center, located in Canton, Massachusetts, 20 miles outside Boston. The facility, which calls itself a "special needs school," takes in all kinds of troubled kids—severely autistic, mentally retarded, schizophrenic, bipolar, emotionally disturbed—and attempts to change their behavior with a complex system of rewards and punishments, including painful electric shocks to the torso and limbs. Of the 234 current residents, about half are wired to receive shocks, including some as young as nine or ten. Nearly 60 percent come from New York, a quarter from Massachusetts, the rest from six other states and Washington, D.C. The Rotenberg Center, which has 900 employees and annual revenues exceeding $56 million, charges $220,000 a year for each student. States and school districts pick up the tab.

The Rotenberg Center is the only facility in the country that disciplines students by shocking them, a form of punishment not inflicted on serial killers or child molesters or any of the 2.2 million inmates now incarcerated in U.S. jails and prisons. Over its 36-year history, six children have died in its care, prompting numerous lawsuits and government investigations. Last year, New York state investigators filed a blistering report that made the place sound like a high school version of Abu Ghraib. Yet the program continues to thrive—in large part because no one except desperate parents, and a few state legislators, seems to care about what happens to the hundreds of kids who pass through its gates....

I left a post in their reader comments section.
To all those shilling for this criminal activity, no one cares what you think or say. The truth is what it is, as the great philosopher Bill Belichick once said. What is wrong with these people that they are shilling for torture? Is the money that good? Or for those who say it helped a family member: You may think shilling for torture will take away your guilt and responsibility, but it won't. These sociopaths do not speak the truth. They would have made good nazis. I am disgusted.
Posted by:truthseekerNovember 19, 2007 10:30:45 PM
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:14 pm

Revolutionary air car runs on compressed air
Mike Aivaz and Muriel Kane
January 4th, 2008

BBC News is reporting that a French company has developed a pollution-free car which runs on compressed air. India's Tata Motors has the car under production and it may be on sale in Europe and India by the end of the year.....

Lawyers Stepping Up
Katrina vanden Heuvel

We are lawyers in the United States of America. As such, we have all taken an oath obligating us to defend the Constitution and the rule of law…. We believe the Bush administration has committed numerous offenses against the Constitution and may have violated federal laws…. Moreover, the administration has blatantly defied congressional subpoenas, obstructing constitutional oversight …. Thus, we call on House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy to launch hearings into the possibility that crimes have been committed by this administration in violation of the Constitution…. We call for the investigations to go where they must, including into the offices of the President and the Vice President. -- American Lawyers Defending the Constitution

Over one thousand lawyers – including former Governor Mario Cuomo and former Reagan administration official Bruce Fein – have signed onto the above statement demanding wide-ranging investigative hearings into unconstitutional and potentially criminal activity by the Bush administration.

In a conference call with reporters yesterday, Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and winner of the 2007 Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship, said: "The majority of lawyers in this country understand that the Bush administration has really gone off the page of constitutional rights and off the page of fundamental rights, and is willing to push the Congress to restore those rights." Ratner said he was "dismayed" that a Democratic majority has failed "to push on key illegalities… the torture program, and now the destruction of the tapes involving the torture program; the warrantless wiretapping, the denial of habeas corpus, the secret sites/rendition program, special trials, and of course what we now know is the firing of US Attorneys scandal…. The minimal that absolutely is needed to get us back on the page of law is to have serious investigative hearings that go up the chain of command and figure out who is responsible for what."

Ratner noted that even with regard to the US attorney's investigations, where Congressional committees held Harriet Miers, Josh Bolten, and Karl Rove in contempt, leadership has failed to enforce these actions by bringing the resolutions to a vote. "Just announcing that investigations will be held and subpoenas will be issued is terribly insufficient unless Congress is willing to enforce the subpoenas by issuing contempt citations," Ratner said. "Congress has a constitutional duty to oversee the activities of the executive branch and our entire system of government is threatened when Congress simply folds before an obstinate executive. Issuing contempt citations against Bolten, Miers, and Rove should be Congress's first order of business in 2008."

Marjorie Cohn, president of the National Lawyers Guild, discussed the administration's torture program violating three US-ratified treaties and the US torture statute; the illegal War in Iraq violating the US-ratified UN Charter as a war of aggression; and Attorney General Michael Mukasey's conflict of interest in overseeing investigations into the torture program and the destruction of the CIA interrogations tapes......
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:53 pm

No one should be above the law. No one is "more equal" than others.
We are in the Dark Ages as regards to social and environmental justice.

Countdowns Keith Olbermann Special Comment 01-31-08

There is a database robot which has been scurrying around the internet. It is called cuill. Its server is XO Communications. We are not the only nobodies who are speaking out about the spookiness going on. The ptb's thought it would be a cakewalk dominating the internet. Sure, they are everywhere and somewhat successful with their psy-ops. But there is something they have no control over, the grassroots and word of mouth.

Some other stories which may be of interest to people:

Porton Down victims awarded £3m
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) is to award £3m in compensation to 360 veterans of Cold War experiments at the Porton Down research centre.

Mukasey Hints at Wider CIA Probe
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 31, 2008; Page A02
A special Justice Department probe into the destruction of CIA videotapes could be expanded to include whether harsh interrogation tactics depicted on the tapes violated federal anti-torture laws, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey testified yesterday.

His testimony indicated that the CIA tapes probe, which Mukasey launched earlier this month, could go beyond the tape destruction itself to examine the actions of the current and former CIA employees who carried out coercive interrogations....
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:41 pm

Here is a story that was done on the Olbermann Special Comment embedded above.

Olbermann: Bush push for telco immunity 'textbook example of fascism'
David Edwards and Nick Juliano
Published: Friday February 1, 2008

In a blistering condemnation of President Bush's willingness to go to the wall for corporations he relies on to spy on Americans, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann says the president's message in his State of the Union address calling for immunity of telecommunications companies is a "textbook example of fascism."

Bush and Congressional Democrats are in a pitched fight over whether to free telecoms from legal liability as part of an overhaul of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The president says the companies should be rewarded for their cooperation in the war on terror; critics say legal immunity would preclude any oversight of Bush's warrantless wiretapping program that ensnared US citizens.

Olbermann accused Bush's threat to veto any bill without immunity of aiding the terrorists, when coupled with his threat that failing to act on a permanent FISA expansion would weaken US national security.

"You told Congress, if you do not act by Friday, our ability to track terrorist threats would be weakened, and our citizens would be in greater danger," Olbermann said. "Yet you you are willing to weaken that ability. You will subject us, your citizens, to that greater danger. This is simple enough for you to understand. If Congress approves a new FISA act without telecom immunity, and sends it to your desk, and you veto it, you, by your own terms and your own definitions, you will have just sided with the terrorists."

The host further excoriated Bush for refusing to even acknowledge corporate assistance, always couching his calls for immunity by describing companies "believed" or "alleged" to have assisted his still-classified program.

"If you, sir, are asking Congress and us to join you in this shameless, breathless, literal textbook example of fascism, the merged efforts of government and corporations who answer to no government, you still don't have the guts to say the telecom companies did assist you in your efforts?" Olbermann asked. "Will you and the equivocators who surround you like a cocoon never go on the record about anything? Even the stuff you claim to believe in?"

Ironically, Olbermann notes, that Vice President **** Cheney did go on the record about telecom involvement, when he spoke to conservative talker Rush Limbaugh Wednesday.

"The Vice President probably shouldn’t have phoned in to the Rush Limbaugh Propaganda-Festival yesterday. Sixth sentence out of Mr. Cheney’s mouth: The FISA bill is about, quote, 'retroactive liability protection for the companies that have worked with us and helped us prevent further attacks against the United States,'" Olbermann said. "Oops. Mr. Cheney is something of a loose cannon, of course. But he kind of let the wrong cat out of the bag there."

Some critics dismissed Olbermann as a hyberbolic ranter who relies on over-the-top rhetoric.

"The MSNBC host, who once scolded public figures who use Nazi references, made his own latest invocation of Nazi Germany, as he compared the telecoms to the Krupp family who were convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg," wrote conservative media critic Brad Wilmouth. "Olbermann: 'It begins to look like the bureaucrats of the Third Reich trying to protect the Krupp family industrial giants by literally rewriting the laws of Germany for their benefit. And we know how that turned out. Alfred Krupp and 11 of his directors were convicted of war crimes at Nuremburg.'"

Unable to reach a final agreement on how to update FISA and whether to give immunity to the telecoms, Congress this week passed a 15-day extension to the Protect America Act, a temporary FISA extension forced through Congress just before its August recess.

On Monday, the Senate will resume debate on the FISA expansion, after Republicans backed off their demands that all proposed amendments be subjected to a 60-vote majority, according to Congressional Quarterly. The subscription-only Capitol Hill journal reports:
Three amendments to be voted on next week will address retroactive immunity for companies being sued for allegedly assisting the National Security Agency in its warrantless surveillance program.

One, by Democrats Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, would simply remove the immunity provisions, which are a priority for the Bush administration.

Another, by Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., would substitute the federal government as the defendant in the lawsuits. Both would only need a simple majority for adoption.

A third, by Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would require the companies to justify their actions before the secret FISA court, which would then decide whether immunity was warranted. It would require 60 votes to be adopted.

Some critics see the move as just another GOP gambit to block immunity from passing.

"It seems rather clear what happened here. There are certain amendments that are not going to get even 50 votes -- including the Dodd/Feingold amendment to strip telecom immunity out of the bill -- and, for that reason, Republicans were more than willing to agree to a 50-vote threshold, since they know those amendments won't pass even in a simple up-or-down vote," writes Glenn Greenwald, a prominent blogger covering the FISA fight.

"But then, there are other amendments which might be able to get 50 votes, but cannot get 60 votes -- such as Feinstein's amendment to transfer the telecom cases to the FISA court and her other amendment providing that FISA is the "exclusive means" for eavesdropping -- and, thus, those are the amendments for which the GOP insisted upon a 60-vote requirement."

During his comment, Olbermann reiterated the revelation from former AT&T technician Mark Klein, who blew the whistle on his former company's collusion with the National Security Agency, that he connected a "Big Brother machine" to funnel every piece of communication crossing AT&T's wires into an NSA database.

"This isn't about finding that kind of needle in a haystack, this isn't even about finding that haystack" Olbermann said. "This is about scooping up every piece of hay there ever was."

This video is from MSNBC's Countdown, broadcast January 31, 2008.

User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests