AND NOW THE APOCALYPSE!

Living In A World Full Of Corporate-Neo-Fascist Lies



FABLED ENEMIES, by Jason Bermas












"Dissent is the ESSENTIAL

aspect of patriotism"!

--Thomas Jefferson



International A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Click Here to A.ct N.ow and Ask
Click here to go to International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition's website!
S.top W.ar and E.nd R.acism!
(! "Mouse-Over" Pic to See Another !)




We are all relevant. Even the delusional NeoCons in the White House right now would be relevant if not for the fact that they are mass-murdering thousands of innocent non-combatants in the name of corporate-fascist world domination. But because they are the opposite of a force for good in this world, they are not relevant except as they are the most-serious terrorist threat to the U.S. and the whole world, and must be non-violently resisted. Therefore, this blog is a relevant "counter-action" to their psychopathic blight on this entire country and world.




PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: All entries are in descending order by the date(s) that they were posted, and in some cases are in ascending order by the date(s) that they were written.]






 

 

FABLED


ENEMIES


"Excellent documentary giving a great
deal of the evidence that 9-11 was
an 'inside job' perpetrated by the
U.S. government itself through its
'intelligence' and/or 'national
security' agencies, branches of
the U.S. military, and others"

VERY important that you watch now!
(View for FREE below)

Posted on 7 December 2009
by S. Wolf Britain
"And Now The Apocalypse!"
http://www.wolfbritain.com/

[Copyright (c) 2009-2012 in the U.S.A.
and Internationally by
Jason Bermas and "Alex Jones Productions",
"InfoWars.com: Because There Is A War On
For Your Mind (And Soul)"
, and
"FabledEnemies.com".
All rights reserved.]


 


 

Proof of the FEMA concentration camps
all over the U.S., in every state
including Alaska and Hawaii:

http://www.campfema.com/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index
.php?context=va&aid=7763

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=
us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=
118135173934136151745.00045
bc25ee928a8872d0&z=3

Now please watch next video, as follows....

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 12/7/2009 8:46 PM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
Three Videos: 1.) FALL OF THE REPUBLIC; 2.) THE OBAMA DECEPTION; and 3.) ENDGAME: BLUEPRINT FOR GLOBAL ENSLAVEMENT

 

 

 

FALL OF THE


REPUBLIC


Excellent documentary on the grave
situation that now faces us in the
United States and the World

VERY important that you watch now!
(View for FREE below)

Posted on 14 November 2009
by S. Wolf Britain
"And Now The Apocalypse!"
http://www.wolfbritain.com/

[Copyright (c) 2009-2012 in the U.S.A.
and Internationally by
"Alex Jones Productions", "InfoWars.com:
Because There Is A War On For
Your Mind (And Soul)"
, and
"FallOfTheRepublic.com".
All rights reserved.]


 


 

Proof of the FEMA concentration camps
all over the U.S., in every state
including Alaska and Hawaii:

http://www.campfema.com/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index
.php?context=va&aid=7763

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=
us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=
118135173934136151745.00045
bc25ee928a8872d0&z=3

Now please watch next video, as follows....

 

 

 

THE OBAMA


DECEPTION


Excellent documentary on the grave
situation that now faces us in the
United States and the World

VERY important that you watch now!
(View for FREE below)

Posted on 14 November 2009
by S. Wolf Britain
"And Now The Apocalypse!"
http://www.wolfbritain.com/

[Copyright (c) 2008-2012 in the U.S.A.
and Internationally by
"Alex Jones Productions", "InfoWars.com:
Because There Is A War On For
Your Mind (And Soul)"
, and
"ObamaDeception.net".
All rights reserved.]


 


 

Proof of the FEMA concentration camps
all over the U.S., in every state
including Alaska and Hawaii:

http://www.campfema.com/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index
.php?context=va&aid=7763

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=
us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=
118135173934136151745.00045
bc25ee928a8872d0&z=3

Now please watch next video, as follows....

 

 

 

ENDGAME:


BLUEPRINT FOR


GLOBAL


ENSLAVEMENT


Excellent documentary on the grave
situation that now faces us in the
United States and the World

VERY important that you watch now!
(View for FREE below)

Posted on 14 November 2009
by S. Wolf Britain
"And Now The Apocalypse!"
http://www.wolfbritain.com/

[Copyright (c) 2007-2012 in the U.S.A.
and Internationally by
"Alex Jones Productions", "InfoWars.com:
Because There Is A War On For
Your Mind (And Soul)"
, and
"EndgameTheMovie.com".
All rights reserved.]


 


 

Proof of the FEMA concentration camps
all over the U.S., in every state
including Alaska and Hawaii:

http://www.campfema.com/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index
.php?context=va&aid=7763

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=
us&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=
118135173934136151745.00045
bc25ee928a8872d0&z=3

Now please read my article(s), as follows....

 

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 11/23/2009 8:39 PM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
'TERRORSTORM' DELUXE HIGH QUALITY VIDEO, by Alex Jones

 




 

 

 

TERRORSTORM

Written and Directed
by
Alex Jones

[Copyright (c) 2006 in the U.S.A. and
Internationally by
InfoWars Productions ,
PrisonPlanet.com , and/or Alex Jones .
All rights are reserved.]

 

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 9/8/2006 4:37 PM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
'IMPEACH BUSH NOW!' DO-IT-YOURSELF IMPEACHMENT ACTION, by ImpeachForPeace.org

 

 

DO-IT-YOURSELF IMPEACHMENT

 

Impeach Bush Yourself!Impeach for Peace, a Minnesota-based impeachment group, has researched a method for impeaching the president using a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the House of Representatives ( "Jefferson’s Manual" ) . This document actually empowers individual citizens to initiate the impeachment process themselves.

 

"Jefferson's Manual" is an interpretive guide to parliamentary procedure, and is included (along with the Constitution) in the bound volumes of the Rules of the House of Representatives. The section covering impeachment lists the acceptable vehicles for bringing impeachment motions to the floor of the House.

Before the House Judiciary Committee can put together the Articles of Impeachment, someone must initiate the impeachment procedure. Most often, this occurs when members of the House pass a resolution. Another method outlined in the manual, however, is for individual citizens to submit a memorial for impeachment.

After learning this information, Minnesotan and Impeach for Peace member (Jodin Morey) found precedent in an 1826 memorial by Luke Edward Lawless which had been successful in initiating the impeachment of Federal Judge James H. Peck. Impeach for Peace then used this as a template for their "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment." Now any citizen can download the DIY Impeachment Memorial and submit it, making it possible for Americans to do what our representatives have been unwilling to do. The idea is for so many people to submit the Memorial that it cannot be ignored.

Feel free to download it, print out TWO copies, fill in your relevant information in the blanks (name, State, etc.), and send in two letters today (One to the head of the Judiciary, and the other to John Conyers lead Democrat in the House Judiciary). There's also extra credit for sending a DIY Impeachment to your own representative.

 

Hold on to the other copy of the two letters until October 12th when we're having everyone send them in.


That's right — to make a big impact, we're having everyone send it in on the same date (Over 30,000 downloads so far). We hope to flood the Judiciary Committee and John Conyers office with sacks of mail and cause a newsworthy event to further pressure the Congress to act on the memorials. Although, it's important to keep in mind that in the 1826 precedent, impeachment resulted as a result of a single memorial. Yours might be the one.

 

Get the (form) to send in, and DIRECTLY initiate the impeachment of Bush:


•Regular Version [pdf] •(html version)

•Extra Credit (your representative) [pdf] •(html version)

•For folks in District of Columbia [pdf] •(html version)

•District of Columbia Extra Credit!! [pdf] •(html version)

 

Frequently Asked Questions and Answers


Impeach Bush Yourself!

Questions from a supporter:


"Why are you waiting until October 12th? That’s too late to force an impeachment before the elections."

Actually, we’re asking people to send in the Do-It-Yourself Impeachment Memorials twice — once immediately, and again in October. Originally we were asking people to send the petitions in October only, but we realized that the situation is just too urgent to wait. We also wanted the time to get the word out about DIY Impeachment, however, so we thought this was the best compromise.


"Why did you choose October?"

October was chosen because of its potential effect on the elections. With a Republican Congress, impeachment seems unlikely, so we're hoping to influence the vote. If we have sacks of mail all arriving at once, we hope it will hit the news in a big way, reminding people of all the corruption and crime in Bush’s administration and the rest of the Republican Party. We want people walking into the polls with these facts on their minds. This also is a few days after an October 5th national protest across the nation. We're planning on marketing this idea during those protests to get hoards more people to send it in.


"Won't the new irradiation process (due to the anthrax scare) delay your mailings past election time?"

According to the USPS's website, “U. S. Mail is still being irradiated, [causing] a two day delay [in] the process from start to finish. The mail is irradiated for all government mail for zip codes in 202- 205 areas." This covers the zip code for Conyers and Sensenbrenner listed on the Memorial.

We also called Betty McCullum (one of our organizer's Representatives), and she told us it takes 1-2 weeks for her to receive U.S. Mail.


"Why didn't you include Cheney and Rice? They’ll become president if Bush is found guilty?"

Cheney and Rice were deliberately not included because we need a focused message. Adding more people to the initiation of the impeachment process complicates the issue. Some people may not agree on impeaching Cheney or Rice because their crimes are less reported than Bush’s, but we want all the help we can get. However, Cheney and Rice will be impeached along with Bush when the investigation reveals their crimes.


"Who finances Impeach For Peace?"

We receive donations from our organizers, and from our supportive friends. We also receive some online donations.


"Why did you change the address to which we're sending the memorials?"

We discovered some potential procedural problems with having the memorial(s) go exclusively to Conyers. While we haven’t yet completely cleared this up, our current system of sending it to both Sensenbrenner and to Conyers will solve the issue one way or the other. We don't wish to send it exclusively to Sensenbrenner, as his agenda opposes ours, and he may never even acknowledge having received them. Conyers, however, is actively pursuing impeachment, and he’s a member of the Judiciary (the body which will need to eventually act on impeachment). It’s important that he know how many letters have been sent so that he can fight for us.


"I find no mention -- or means of locating -- the form for requesting a waiver so that I may file in forma pauperis."

"IN FORMA PAUPERIS -- Someone who is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a lawsuit or criminal defense (and the process by which they request a waiver of court fees and costs). Upon the court's granting of this status the person is entitled to waiver of normal (court fees and) costs, and/or appointment of counsel [but (the latter) seldom in other than a criminal case]."

(The) impeachment process isn't carried out in a normal court room, indeed, it is not even a legal indictment, but a political process. The "trial," if you will, would be carried out in the Senate. The memorialist (i.e., you and me), would not be prosecuting a "case." Rather, we are "praying" that our representatives take up the matter on our behalf on the floor of the House and Senate. Feel free to read the precedents on the "DIY Impeachment" page (etc.) for historical examples. The costs for the running of the House of Representatives, and any matter they wish to discuss/act upon are taken from our taxes.

We are petitioning our government, we can not be sued or fined for this. This is not the same process (requiring the same expense) as suing the government.


"Is there a way to gather signatures and have a single filing done in the names of ALL of the signatories?"

Maybe. Feel free to research it and start one. However we are having each citizen do it individually. Why? Merely because that is the historical precedent, and therefore we know this method has been effective in the past. It is also more empowering.


"On a federal form with a place for a notary's signature, why do you emphasize that it isn't necessary? Surely you realize that ANY excuse will be used here, or could be (to not process these memorials accordingly). I would think that any base(s) that can be covered should be."

The form is not a "federal form." It is one we developed based upon another individual citizen's memorial to congress. That historical memorial was not notarized. The inclusion of the notary section was initially placed there over confusion as to whether it was necessary due to more recent developments. According to the lead parliamentarian of the House of Representatives, there is no such need for the notary. However, we still think it's a good idea. So, we left it on and encourage people to do it. However, we wish for people to send their memorial in even if they're not going to go to that effort.

 

(Do you have additional) concerns over the strategy of pushing for impeachment in this way? See the 'Arguments Against Impeachment' at the bottom of the main page.

 

Audio, provided with permission from the "Mike Malloy Show".

 

EMAIL ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT THIS!!

 

We would especially like to thank ImpeachBush.tv for their support, and whose charges related to impeachment we used in the creation of this document.

 

Also, if you're interested:


Information regarding the Impeachment procedure.

Precedent: Judge Peck's Impeachment supplied by the U.S. House of Representatives and PolicyReview.org.

House rules that allow for the submission of the memorial.

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 9/5/2006 5:29 AM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
'CALL (FOR) ACTION' ON SEPTEMBER 1ST FOR IMPEACHMENT, by Impeachnet.net

 

 

 

CALL TO ACTION

Starting at noon on September 1 2006, participating websites and blogs will replace their front pages with the single word “Impeach” in simple white text on a black background. (See this page for an example.) For 24 hours, web surfers and blog readers will see that word first when they visit their favorite sites. In this way, we hope to get the public talking about the one tool guaranteed by the Founders to restore our Constitutional Democracy.


About

What can I do? If you run a website or blog, then on September 1 2006, replace your home page with the single word “Impeach” in bold Times New Roman white text on a black background. Feel free to help yourself to the code here (getting a single word to display in the center of a page in all browsers is a little trickier than you might think). Back up your existing home page first (often index.html) and display this new one for 24 hours, from noon September 1 to noon September 2. If you use the provided code , we have made the “period” a link which you can customize to allow visitors to enter the rest of your web page.

If you don’t have your own webpage or blog but still think that this is a good idea, then please send this information to your favorite sites and convince them to participate ( click here for a sample message ). Additionally, please feel free to leave a comment here and/or on the Impeachnet.net blog . Just as important as replacing your home page for one day is letting your website visitors know why, so please publicize this both beforehand and afterward. Also, let us know that you plan to participate and we will include a link to your site in our blogroll.

For additional impeachment resources, visit AfterDowningStreet.org ; and/or, ImpeachForPeace.org/ .


Frequently Unasked Questions

Why just the one word? It is the word. Everyone who sees it will know exactly who and what we are talking about. And it is the one word that most of our elected leaders are afraid to utter.

Doesn’t talk of impeachment just play into the Republican Party’s hands? That’s what they want us to think. Nancy Pelosi, for one, seems to have bought that argument. We don’t. We think that many thoughtful Republicans are looking at the abridgements of Constitutional Democracy perpetrated by this administration against the citizens and the Congress of the United States and understand that impeachment is a very real solution, and they are scared.

Could Bush really be impeached? Yes, and we have a moral obligation to carry this through. It is not necessary for us to list here all of the High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed by this White House. You know them all. The most critical point is this: as bad as this administration is, if we don’t stop them now, then the bar will be set even lower for the next group of criminals that takes over the White House. This is not a partisan issue. This is a citizen’s issue.

But do we really want a President Cheney? Well, no, he’s next. But we would rather have a Cheney who is afraid of us than the other way around.

Why September 1? It’s good timing. It gives us enough weeks to get this proposal off the ground and to reach out to webmasters and bloggers across the globe. September 1 is an easy date to remember. It is also a Friday, a good day to plan a large event in time for the weekend news cycle. We need the press and the public to be talking about this for at least a week before the White House takes over the airwaves with their fifth anniversary 9/11 celebrations commemorations.


This project was inspired by The Freeway Blogger , the great "outlaw" artist who has posted over 2500 freeway signs protesting the war and inspired a legion of followers, and The Center for Constitutional Rights . Both entities have worked tirelessly to bring the word “impeach” back into the public lexicon.

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 8/27/2006 6:21 AM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
THE VERY IMPORTANT LAST FIVE TRUTHOUT (.ORG) ARTICLES OF MARJORIE COHN

 

 




 

      In honor of Marjorie Cohn, Professor of Law at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, California, and her TruthOut (.org) articles, which she has been absent from writing and posting for the past two months, I hereby post the following series of her last five excellent and very important articles leading up to that absence, as her at-least-weekly articles of truth have been very much missed on TruthOut and by this blogger, myself:



 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Read more of Marjorie Cohn's columns.

For background, see:
Marjorie Cohn | Big Brother Bush Is Listening
Marjorie Cohn | Bush Mouthpiece Defends Illegal Spying

 

Click here to go to t r u t h o u t ' s 'Marjorie Cohn' Page!    THE HAYDEN CHARADE
    ("Big Brother" is Watching
    All of Us to See Who is a
    "Good Citizen" or "Not")
    By Marjorie Cohn
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Monday, 22 May 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by t r u t h o u t (.org)
    and/or Marjorie Cohn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    In his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, General Michael Hayden promised to promote autonomy and objectivity in the CIA if confirmed as its new director. Hayden assured the senators he would provide "hard-edged assessments" and be tolerant of dissenting views on intelligence matters. "When it comes to speaking truth to power," Hayden declared, "I will lead CIA analysts by example. I will... always give our nation's leaders the best analytic judgment."

    The evidence, however, suggests precisely the opposite. As head of the National Security Agency, this 4-star general walked in lockstep with his commander in chief, George W. Bush. Hayden helped designed the illegal program of spying on our telephone calls and emails and then repeatedly defended it when interrogated by the senators at his hearing, citing "legal" opinions of Bush's hired guns in the Justice Department.

    Rather than providing the White House with a neutral assessment of Iran's nuclear capabilities, we can expect Hayden to give Bush the "intelligence" the president seeks to justify his war on Iran. Things did not run as smoothly as Bush would have wished under the last two CIA directors. He had to dispatch Dick Cheney to the CIA several times to furnish the "intelligence" he needed to rationalize his war on Iraq.

    Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) asked Hayden if he was "comfortable" with under secretary of defense for policy Douglas Feith's personal intelligence-analysis cell, which hyped a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Hayden said he wasn't comfortable with it and protested that he wasn't aware of a lot of the activity going on leading up to the Iraq war.

    But when questioned about Colin Powell's use of false WMD information to support his infamous appearance before the United Nations in the run-up the war, Hayden made a telling admission.

    In response to Levin's question about the legal standard for declassifying information in the public interest, Hayden said, "We used that in Powell's speech. George [Tenet] had to call me for three tapes." Hayden was right in the middle of the preparation for Powell's disingenuous presentation.

    Hayden, who will be the third director of the CIA in two years, will salute and march to Bush's agenda. The nation's chief spook will shape the "intelligence" to fit Bush's policy of regime change in Iran.

    Hayden vowed to "reaffirm CIA's proud culture of risk-taking and excellence." Not one of the senators, from either party, interrogated Hayden about the CIA's checkered past.

    There was no mention of the CIA's 1953 coup that ousted Iran's democratically-elected president Mohammed Mosadeq and replaced him with the US-friendly tyrant, the Shah Reza Pahlavi. The 1979 Iranian revolution lead to the overthrow of the Shah's regime and the rise of Islamic fascism under the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini, providing a model of theocracy for much of the Muslim world.

    Absent was any reference in the hearing to the CIA's support for Osama bin Laden in his fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The defeat of the USSR there, and the rise of the Mujahedin, enabled the Taliban to come to power....

    Today we are reaping what the CIA sowed in Iran and Afghanistan.

    None of the senators asked Hayden about the CIA's torture manuals, which have been utilized by myriad Latin American dictators to repress their people.

    Much of the CIA's risk-taking is nothing to be proud of. There is no indication that Hayden will bring new integrity to the CIA.

    Hayden's defense of the NSA's warrantless surveillance program was incredible. When questioned about the Fourth Amendment's standard for searches and seizures, Hayden assured the senators that he had consulted with his relatives who are in law school for legal advice.

    The Fourth Amendment says the people shall be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause. For more than a century, the Supreme Court has held that in order to be reasonable, a search or seizure must be supported by a search warrant based on probable cause and issued by a judge. Only when certain narrowly-defined exceptions apply can the government dispense with a warrant.

    Hayden and his law student relatives have reversed that presumption. He told the senators that only reasonableness, not a warrant, is necessary to intercept our private communications. Hayden said the NSA uses a probable cause standard. But the Supreme Court has consistently declared that a judge must determine whether probable cause exists.

    When confronted with USA Today's report that the NSA is collecting data on tens of millions of Americans, monitoring the calls we make and receive, Hayden refused to confirm or deny it.

    Two of the long-distance companies named in that article, Verizon Communications and BellSouth, both facing lawsuits for invasion of privacy, have denied giving the government these records. AT&T has refused comment.

    Interestingly, Bush issued an executive order on May 5 that allows Director of Intelligence John Negroponte - Michael Hayden's boss - to authorize a company to conceal activities related to "national security." Thus, we cannot trust the denials by Verizon and BellSouth.

    Like Bush's warrantless eavesdropping on calls where one party is abroad, the NSA's massive data collection is illegal.

    Both of these programs violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, which clearly requires a warrant issued by a FISA court judge.

    It is illegal for the NSA to collect phone numbers from phone companies unless the FISA court authorizes it.

    Telephone records that show what numbers have called a specific telephone are captured by a "trap and trace" device. A "pen register" shows what number a specific telephone has called.

    The law on pen registers and trap and trace devices requires that a court order be obtained either under FISA or Title III, the criminal wiretap law.

    In order to intercept communications, the NSA would have to demonstrate to the court that the person whose calls are being targeted is an agent of a foreign power or that the information is relevant to an ongoing terrorism investigation.

    The Patriot Act allows the FBI to use a national security letter - a kind of administrative subpoena - to obtain these records. But Congress specifically withheld this subpoena power from the NSA, which must convince the FISA court that the information is relevant.

    There is no evidence that NSA has obtained court orders before obtaining the phone records of millions of Americans.

    There is evidence, however, that the FBI is using national security letters to go after journalists critical of the administration. Brian Ross from ABC News told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! that the government's methods are changing the way he operates. It makes his work "very, very difficult," he said. "And, you know, you sort of have to start thinking, I guess, like some sort of Mafia capo," Ross noted. "You make your phone calls with bags of quarters at pay phones, if you can find them anymore. It's chilling to say the least." So much for a free press.

    Last year, the FBI issued a total of 9,254 national security letters, targeting 3,500 citizens and legal residents.

    In October 2002, while serving as NSA director, Hayden misled Congress about the extent of the NSA's warrantless domestic surveillance. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) told Hayden at the hearing, "I now have a difficult time with your credibility."

    Earlier this year, Hayden made more misleading statements in an appearance before the National Press Club. He said, "The intrusion into privacy is also limited: only international calls." In fact, the NSA is collecting data on millions of purely domestic calls.

    Hayden ducked several questions, deferring his answers to the closed session that followed the public hearing on Thursday. Senators who hear his secret testimony are forbidden to publicize it. Hayden refused to publicly answer seven questions posed by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) about whether the NSA has sought FISA warrants for pen register and trap and trace devices; whether terror suspects in secret CIA prisons are likely to remain incommunicado until the war on terror ends; whether there is periodic review of what useful intelligence can be gathered by interrogations of terrorists held for years with no contact with Al Qaeda; whether "water boarding," recently classified as torture by the UN, is acceptable; whether the CIA will obey laws and treaties in light of the Detainee Treatment Act; whether Hayden agreed with the CIA inspector general's conclusion that certain interrogation techniques constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment prohibited by the Convention Against Torture; whether Hayden agreed with estimates that Iran is some years away from nuclear weapons capability; and whether the CIA has received new guidance from the Justice Department about acceptable interrogation techniques since the passage of the Detainee Treatment Act.

    Although Hayden pledged objectivity in his opening statement, he let slip his real intention under questioning by Levin. Hayden said the war on terror "is fundamentally a war of ideas. And we have to skew our intelligence to support the other elements of national power as well." Hayden admitted he will skew the intelligence to fit Bush's agenda.

    During the hearing, Wyden nailed it. He asked Hayden, "Where is the independent check, General, the independent check that can be verified on these programs that the newspapers are reporting on?"

    James Madison wrote in 1822: "A popular Government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance. And a people who mean to be their own Governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."

    General Michael Hayden as CIA director will see to it that we continue to be kept in the dark about how our liberties are swiftly vanishing. The future of our democracy is at stake. (Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)



    Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for the great and powerful t r u t h o u t website.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 

 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Read more of Marjorie Cohn's columns.

For background, see:
Marjorie Cohn | Setting the Conditions for War Crimes

 

Click here to go to t r u t h o u t ' s 'Marjorie Cohn' Page!    THE HADITHA MASSACRE
    (The U.S. Government Is Now
    Habitually Initiating and
    Perpetrating War Crimes)
    By Marjorie Cohn
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Tuesday, 30 May 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by t r u t h o u t (.org)
    and/or Marjorie Cohn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    They ranged from little babies to adult males and females. I'll never be able to get that out of my head. I can still smell the blood. This left something in my head and heart.
--- Observations of Lance Cpl. Roel Ryan Briones after the Haditha Massacre

    On November 19, 2005, Marines from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division based at Camp Pendleton allegedly killed 24 unarmed civilians in Haditha, Iraq, in a three to five hour rampage. One victim was a 76-year-old amputee in a wheelchair holding a Koran. A mother and child bent over as if in prayer were also among the fallen. "I pretended that I was dead when my brother's body fell on me, and he was bleeding like a faucet," said Safa Younis Salim, a 13-year-old girl who survived by faking her death.

    Other victims included girls and boys ages 14, 10, 5, 4, 3 and 1. The Washington Post reported, "Most of the shots ... were fired at such close range that they went through the bodies of the family members and plowed into walls or the floor, doctors at Haditha's hospital said."

    The executions of 24 unarmed civilians were conducted in apparent retaliation for the death of Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas when a small Marine convoy hit a roadside bomb earlier that day.

    A statement issued by a US Marine Corps spokesman the next day claimed: "A US Marine and 15 civilians were killed yesterday from the blast of a roadside bomb in Haditha. Immediately following the bombing, gunmen attacked the convoy with small-arms fire. Iraqi army soldiers and Marines returned fire, killing eight insurgents and wounding another."

    A subsequent Marine version of the events said the victims were killed inadvertently in a running gun battle with insurgents.

    Both of these stories were false and the Marines knew it. They were blatant attempts to cover up the atrocity, disguised as "collateral damage."

    The Marine Corps paid $38,000 in compensation to relatives of the victims, according to a report in the Denver Post. These types of payments are made only to compensate for accidental deaths inflicted by US troops. This was a relatively large amount, indicating the Marines knew something was not right during that operation, according to Mike Coffman, the Colorado state treasurer who served in Iraq recently as a Marine reservist.

    Congressman John Murtha, D-Pa., a former Marine, was briefed on the Haditha investigation by Marine Corps Commandant Michael Hagee. Murtha said Sunday, "The reports I have from the highest level: No firing at all. No interaction. No military action at all in this particular incident. It was an explosive device, which killed a Marine. From then on, it was purely shooting people."

    The Haditha massacre did not become public until Time Magazine ran a story about it in March of this year. Time had turned over the results of its investigation, including a videotape, to the US military in January. Only then did the military launch an investigation.

    These Marines "suffered a total breakdown in morality and leadership, with tragic results," a US official told the Los Angeles Times.

    "Marines over-reacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood," Murtha said.

    Murtha's statement both indicts and exonerates the Marines of the crime of murder.

    Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Premeditation and deliberation -- cold-blooded planning -- are required for first degree murder. Complete self-defense can be demonstrated by an honest and reasonable belief in the need to defend oneself against death or great bodily injury. The Marines might be able to show that, in the wake of the killing of their buddy Terrazas by an improvised explosive device, they acted in an honest belief that they might be killed in this hostile area. But the belief that unarmed civilians inside their homes posed a deadly threat to the Marines would be unreasonable. An honest but unreasonable belief in the need to defend constitutes imperfect self-defense, which negates the malice required for murder, and reduces murder to manslaughter.

    An honest but unreasonable belief in the need to defend constitutes imperfect self-defense, which negates the malice required for murder, and reduces murder to manslaughter.

    Many of our troops suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. Lance Cpl. Roel Ryan Briones, a Marine in Kilo Company, did not participate in the Haditha massacre. TJ Terrazas was his best friend. Briones, who was 20 years old at the time, saw Terrazas after he was killed. "He had a giant hole in his chin. His eyes were rolled back up in his skull," Briones said of his buddy.

    "A lot of people were mad," Briones said. "Everyone had just a [terrible] feeling about what had happened to TJ."

    After the massacre, Briones was ordered to take photographs of the victims and help carry their bodies out of their homes. He is still haunted by what he had to do that day. Briones picked up a young girl who was shot in the head. "I held her out like this," he said, extending his arms, "but her head was bobbing up and down and the insides fell on my legs."

    "I used to be one of those Marines who said that post-traumatic stress is a bunch of bull," said Briones, who has gotten into serious trouble since he returned home. "But all this stuff that keeps going through my head is eating me up. I need immediate help."

    A key quote from a Marine officer could be used to show premeditation -- and thus malice -- in support of a possible murder charge against the shooters. An article in yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune which is reprinted from the New York Times News Service, cites a report by "one Marine officer" that "inspectors suspected at least part of the motive for the killings was to send a message to local residents that they would 'pay a price' for failing to warn the Marines about insurgent activity in the area."

    Curiously, that paragraph is missing from the same story in both the print and online editions of yesterday's New York Times. For some reason, the Times had second thoughts about that paragraph, and removed it, after the copy had been sent to other papers over the wire.

    Regardless of how those who may ultimately be charged with murder fare in court, a more significant question is whether George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld will be charged with war crimes on a theory of command responsibility.

    Willful killing is considered a war crime under the US War Crimes Act. People who commit war crimes can be punished by life in prison, or even the death penalty if the victim dies. Under the doctrine of command responsibility, a commander can be held liable if he knew or should have known his inferiors were committing war crimes and he failed to stop or prevent it.

    Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are knowingly prosecuting a war of aggression in Iraq. Under the United Nations Charter, a country cannot invade another country unless it is acting in self-defense or it has permission from the Security Council. Iraq had invaded no country for 11 years before "Operation Iraqi Freedom," and the council never authorized the invasion.

    A war that violates the UN Charter is a war of aggression.

    Under the Nuremberg Tribunal, aggressive war is the supreme international crime.

    Hagee flew from Washington to Iraq last week to brief US forces on the Geneva Conventions, the international laws of armed conflict and the US military's own rules of engagement. He is reportedly telling the troops they should use deadly force "only when justified, proportional and, most importantly, lawful." This creates a strong inference that our leaders had not adequately briefed our troops on how to behave in this war.

    This, combined with the evidence that US forces are committing torture based on policies from the highest levels of government, as well as reports of war crimes committed in places such as Fallujah, served to put Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld on notice that Marines would likely commit war crimes in places such as Haditha. Our highest leaders thus should have known this would happen, and they should be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act.

    Murtha told ABC there was "no question" the US military tried to "cover up" the Haditha incident, which Murtha called "worse than Abu Ghraib." Murtha's high-level briefings indicated, "There was an investigation right afterward, but then it was stifled," he said.

    "Who covered it up, why did they cover it up, why did they wait so long?" Murtha asked on "This Week" on ABC. "We don't know how far it goes. It goes right up the chain of command."

    Murtha said the decision to pay compensation to families of the victims is strong evidence that officers up the chain of command knew what had happened in Haditha. "That doesn't happen at the lowest level. That happens at the highest level before they make a decision to make payments to the families."

    Haditha is likely the tip of the iceberg in Bush's illegal war of aggression in Iraq.

    "We have a Haditha every day," declared Muhanned Jasim, an Iraqi merchant. "Were [those killed in Haditha] the first ... Iraqis to be killed for no reason?" asked pharmacist Ghasan Jayih. "We're used to being killed. It's normal now to hear 25 Iraqis are killed in one day."

    "We have a Fallujah and Karbala every day," Jasim added, referring to the 2004 slaughter by US forces in Fallujah and bombings by resistance fighters in the Shiite city of Karbala.

    In Fallujah, US soldiers opened fire on houses, and US helicopters fired on and killed women, old men and young children, according to Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein.

    "What we're seeing more of now, and these incidents will increase monthly, is the end result of fuzzy, imprecise national direction combined with situational ethics at the highest levels of this government," said retired Air Force Col. Mike Turner, a former planner at the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Senator John Warner, R-Va., head of the Armed Services Committee, pledged to hold hearings on the Haditha killings at the conclusion of the military investigation. "I'll do exactly what we did with Abu Ghraib," he told ABC News.

    Warner's pledge provides little solace to those who seek justice. Congress has yet to hold our leaders to account for the torture by US forces at Abu Ghraib prison. Only a few low-ranking soldiers have been prosecuted. The Bush administration has swept the scandal under the rug.

    During the Vietnam War, the US military spoke of winning the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese people. But in 1968, US soldiers massacred about 400 unarmed elderly men, women and children in the small village of My Lai. A cover-up ensued, and it wasn't until Seymour Hersh broke the story that it became public.

    "America in the view of many Iraqis has no credibility. We do not believe what they say is correct," said Sheik Sattar al-Aasaaf, a tribal leader in Anbar province, which includes Haditha. "US troops are very well-trained and when they shoot, it isn't random but due to an order to kill Iraqis. People say they are the killers."

    Graffiti on one of the Haditha victims' houses reads, "Democracy assassinated the family that was here."

    So much for winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.

    We must pull our troops out of Iraq immediately, and insist that our leaders be held to account for the war crimes committed there. (Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)



    Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for the great and powerful t r u t h o u t website.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 

 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Read more of Marjorie Cohn's columns.

For background, see:
Marjorie Cohn | Bush Setting Up Attack on Iran
Marjorie Cohn | Aggressive War: Supreme International Crime

 

Click here to go to t r u t h o u t ' s 'Marjorie Cohn' Page!    STOP THE BEAST( ! )
    (The U.S. Government's Military-
    Industrial "Death Machine" is
    Completely Out of Control ! )
    By Marjorie Cohn
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Monday, 5 June 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by t r u t h o u t (.org)
    and/or Marjorie Cohn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    To date, the Iraq War represents the fullest and most relentless application of the Bush Agenda. The "freer and safer world" envisioned by Bush and his administration is ultimately one of an ever-expanding American empire driven forward by the growing powers of the nation's largest multinational corporations and unrivaled military.
--- Antonia Juhasz,
The Bu$h Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time

    In an annual security conference on Saturday, Donald Rumsfeld assured the audience, "We don't intend to occupy [Iraq] for any period of time. Our troops would like to go home and they will go home."

    Why, then, would the United States be building an enormous embassy in Baghdad and a base so large it eclipses Kosovo's Camp Bondsteel, which had been the largest foreign US military base built since Vietnam?

    The new embassy, which occupies a space two-thirds the area of the national mall in Washington DC, comprises 21 buildings that will house over 8,000 government officials. It has a huge pool, gym, theater, beauty salon, school, and six apartment buildings.

    The gargantuan military base, Camp Anaconda, occupies 15 square miles of Iraqi soil near Balad. The base is home to 20,000 soldiers and thousands of "contractors," or mercenaries. The aircraft runway at Anaconda is the second busiest in the world, behind only Chicago's O'Hare airport. And, depending on which report you read, between six and fourteen more US military bases are under construction in Iraq. It doesn't appear we'll be leaving anytime soon -- or anytime, really.

    Bush's trumped-up war on Iraq has claimed nearly 2,500 US military lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Thousands of US soldiers suffer in military hospitals, most with head injuries, many missing limbs. Thousands more have PTSD. Our economy is in shambles from the war and Bush's tax-cuts-for-the-rich. And America's moral standing in the world continues to plummet.

    So, with all the construction activity in Iraq, and with an overextended military and an under funded budget, how could the Bush administration possibly consider expanding the fight and attacking Iran? Logic and reason say it couldn't happen and shouldn't happen. But this administration has rarely paid much heed to logic and reason.

    The plan to attack Iran has long been in the works. Bush gave us a preview in January 2002 when he inaugurated it into his "axis of evil." His 2006 National Military Strategy says, "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran." On Saturday, Donald Rumsfeld called Iran the world's leading terrorist nation. Does any of this have a familiar ring to it?

    To understand why the US may attack Iran, one must consider the underlying motive of US militarism. The recent US strategy is calculated to maintain economic, political and military hegemony over oil-rich areas of the world. A 1992 draft of the Pentagon Defense Planning Guidance on post Cold War Strategy that was leaked to the New York Times said, "Our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in [the Middle East and Southwest Asia to] preserve US and Western access to the region's oil."

    Truthout writer Dahr Jamail, an independent journalist who spent eight months in occupied Iraq, told a gathering at Thomas Jefferson School of Law on Friday that the US has been conducting ongoing special operations inside Iran. He cited unmanned surveillance drones flying over Iran. Jamail predicts Bush will invade Iran before the November election.

    Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern agrees with Jamail's prediction, but thinks it will happen in June or July. "There is already one carrier task force there in the Gulf, two are steaming toward it at the last report I have at least -- they will be there in another week or so," McGovern said on the Alex Jones Show.

    Team Bush is following the same game plan used in the run-up to Iraq -- hyping a threat that doesn't exist and going through the motions of diplomacy.

    Bush & Co. are not motivated by rationality. They act in the interests of the huge corporations, at the expense of humanity. During the Bush years, oil companies have earned record profits. Dick Cheney's Halliburton has landed many of the juiciest contracts in Iraq. New Iraqi laws that US ambassador Paul Bremer put in place lock in significant advantages for US corporations in Iraq, including corporate control of Iraq's oil.

    Neoconservative Thomas Friedman, in a March 1999 New York Times article illustrated by an American flag on a fist, accurately summed up US foreign policy:

    For globalism to work, America can't be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is ... The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist -- McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

    As long as we allow our government to pursue this strategy, Abu Ghraibs and Hadithas will continue to emerge, our soldiers and thousands of people in other countries will continue to die, and our economy will continue toward bankruptcy. It is up to us to stop the beast -- now! (Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)



    Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for the great and powerful t r u t h o u t website.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 

 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Read more of Marjorie Cohn's columns.

For background, see:
Navy Judge Finds War Protest Reasonable

 

Click here to go to t r u t h o u t ' s 'Marjorie Cohn' Page!    FIRST (COMMISSIONED) OFFICER
    PUBLICLY RESISTS WAR
    (Totally Justified Refusal
    to Serve in Illegal Wars>
    is Growing Very Rapidly)
    By Marjorie Cohn
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Thursday, 8 June 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by t r u t h o u t (.org)
    and/or Marjorie Cohn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    Yesterday, US Army First Lieutenant Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly state his refusal to obey an order to deploy to Iraq. Lieutenant Watada said at a press conference in Tacoma, Washington, "The war in Iraq is in fact illegal. It is my obligation and my duty to refuse any orders to participate in this war." He stated, "An order to take part in an illegal war is unlawful in itself. So my obligation is not to follow the order to go to Iraq."

    Citing "deception and manipulation ... and willful misconduct by the highest levels of my chain of command," Lt. Watada declared there is "no greater betrayal to the American people" than the Iraq war.

    The "turning point" for Lt. Watada came when he "saw the pain and suffering of so many soldiers and their families, and innocent Iraqis." He said, "I best serve my soldiers by speaking out against unlawful orders of the highest levels of my chain of command, and making sure our leaders are held accountable." Lt. Watada felt he "had the obligation to step up and do whatever it takes," even if that means facing court-martial and imprisonment.

    Lt. Watada asked me to speak about the legality of the war at his press conference.

    I cited the Nuremberg Charter, which set forth the three most serious crimes: crimes against the peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The US Army Field Manual 27-10, art. 28, incorporates the prohibition against these three crimes. The United States is committing a crime against the peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in Iraq.

    The United States Is Committing a Crime Against the Peace in Iraq

    The Nuremberg Tribunal called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing ... to initiate a war of aggression ... is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

    A war of aggression, prosecuted in violation of international treaties, is a crime against the peace. The war in Iraq violates the Charter of the United Nations, which prohibits the use of force. There are only two exceptions to that prohibition: self-defense and approval by the Security Council. A pre-emptive or preventive war is not allowed under the Charter.

    Bush's war in Iraq was not undertaken in self-defense. Iraq had not attacked the US, or any other country, for 12 years. And Saddam Hussein's military capability had been effectively neutered by the Gulf War, 12 years of punishing sanctions, and nearly daily bombing by the US and UK over the "no-fly-zones."

    Bush tried mightily to get the Security Council to sanction his war on Iraq. But the Council refused to give its stamp of approval. Bush then cobbled together prior Council resolutions, none of which, individually or collectively, authorized the use of force in Iraq. Although Bush claimed to be enforcing Security Council resolutions, the Charter empowers only the Council to enforce its resolutions.

    Moreover, the Constitution gives only Congress, not the President, the authority to declare war. Congress cannot delegate that authority to the President. Even if Congress could delegate the war power to the President, it cannot authorize the President to execute an aggressive war.

    The United States Is Committing War Crimes in Iraq

    Violations of the laws of war, memorialized in the Hague and Geneva Conventions, constitute war crimes.

    All four Geneva Conventions have the same article 3, frequently referred to as Article 3 Common. Its terms apply to everyone, not just prisoners of war. It prohibits violence to life and person, murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, torture, and outrages upon personal dignity, particularly humiliating and degrading treatment. These prohibitions are memorialized in the Army Field Manual 27-10, art. 506. The Pentagon is trying to remove Article 3 Common from the newly revised instructions that go with the Manual. The implication is that the Defense Department intends to treat prisoners inhumanely.

    Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions constitute war crimes, for which individuals can be punished under the US War Crimes Act. Willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, and willfully causing great suffering or great bodily harm are grave breaches.

    The torture and inhuman treatment of prisoners in US custody at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere in Iraq are grave breaches of Geneva, and therefore, war crimes. The execution of unarmed civilians at Haditha and in other Iraqi cities are war crimes.

    Commanders in the chain of command, all the way up to the commander in chief, can be prosecuted for war crimes if they knew or should have known their inferiors were committing war crimes and failed to stop or prevent them. However, it is unlikely that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will charge Bush, Cheney or Rumseld with war crimes.

    The United States Is Committing Crimes Against Humanity in Iraq

    Inhumane acts against a civilian population are crimes against humanity and violate the Fourth Geneva Convention. The targeting of civilians and failure to protect civilians and civilian objects are crimes against humanity.

    The dropping of 2,000-pound bombs in residential areas of Baghdad during "Shock and Awe" were crimes against humanity. The indiscriminate US attack on Fallujah, which was collective punishment in retaliation for the killing of four Blackwater mercenaries, was a crime against humanity. The destruction of hospitals in Fallujah by the US military, its refusal to let doctors treat patients, and shooting into ambulances were crimes against humanity. Declaring Fallujah a "weapons-free" zone, with orders to shoot anything that moved, was a crime against humanity.

    Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal. He wrote: "No political or economic situation can justify the crime of aggression. If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us."

    The Uniform Code of Military Justice, in articles 90-92, sets forth the duty of military personnel to obey lawful commands. The Nuremberg Principles, which are part of US law, provide that all military personnel have the obligation not to obey illegal orders. The Army Field Manual 27-10, sec. 609 and UCMJ, art. 92, incorporate this principle. Article 92 says: "A general order or regulation is lawful unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the law of the United States ... "

    The Bush administration is committing crimes against the peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Iraq. Lieutenant Ehren Watada is correct when he says this is an illegal war. I salute his courage. (Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)



    Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for the great and powerful t r u t h o u t website.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 

 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Read more of Marjorie Cohn's columns.

For background, see:
Marjorie Cohn | UN to US: Close Guantanamo
Marjorie Cohn | US Force-Feeding Prisoners at Torture Camp
Marjorie Cohn | Bush Plays Politics With Guantanamo "Gulag"
Marjorie Cohn | Close Guantanamo Prison
Marjorie Cohn | Supremes Consider Kangaroo Courts

 

Click here to go to t r u t h o u t ' s 'Marjorie Cohn' Page!    SPINNING SUICIDE
    (By Telling Lie Upon Lie that
    Tortured Prisoners Committed
    Suicide as "An Act of
    Asymmetrical Warfare")
    By Marjorie Cohn
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Monday, 12 June 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by t r u t h o u t (.org)
    and/or Marjorie Cohn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    They are smart, they are creative, they are committed. They have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own. I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.
--- Rear Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., Commander, Joint Task Force, Guantanamo

    Three men being held in the United States military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, killed themselves by hanging in their cells on Saturday. The Team Bush spin machine immediately swept into high gear.

    Military officials characterized their deaths as a coordinated protest. The commander of the prison, Rear Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., called it "asymmetrical warfare."

    Colleen Graffy, the deputy assistant secretary of state for public diplomacy, said taking their lives "certainly is a good PR move."

    Meanwhile, George W. Bush expressed "serious concern" about the deaths. "He stressed the importance of treating the bodies in a humane and culturally sensitive manner," said Christie Parell, a White House spokeswoman.

    How nice that Bush wants their bodies treated humanely, after treating them like animals for four years while they were alive. Bush has defied the Geneva Conventions' command that all prisoners be treated humanely. He decided that "unlawful combatants" are not entitled to humane treatment because they are not prisoners of war.

    Article 3 Common to the Geneva Conventions requires that no prisoners, even "unlawful combatants," may be subjected to humiliating and degrading treatment. Incidentally, the Pentagon has decided to omit the mandates of Article 3 Common from its new detainee policies.

    Bush resisted the McCain anti-torture amendment to a spending bill at the end of last year, sending Dick Cheney to prevail upon John McCain to exempt the CIA from its prohibition on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners. When McCain refused to alter his amendment, Bush signed the bill, quietly adding one of his "signing statements," saying that he feels free to ignore the prohibition if he wants to.

    Bush & Co. are fighting in the Supreme Court to deny the Guantanamo prisoners access to US courts to challenge their confinement. The Court will announce its decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld by the end of this month.

    This hardly sounds like a man who believes in humane treatment for live human beings.

    The three men who committed suicide, Mani bin Shaman bin Turki al-Habradi,Yasser Talal Abdulah Yahya al-Zahrani, and Ali Abdullah Ahmed, were being held indefinitely at Guantanamo. None had been charged with any crime. All had participated in hunger strikes and been force-fed, a procedure the United Nations Human Rights Commission called "torture."

    "A stench of despair hangs over Guantanamo. Everyone is shutting down and quitting," said Mark Denbeaux, a lawyer for two of the prisoners there. His client, Mohammed Abdul Rahman, "is trying to kill himself" in a hunger strike. "He told us he would rather die than stay in Guantanamo," Denbeaux added.

    While the Bush administration is attempting to characterize the three suicides as political acts of martyrdom, Shafiq Rasul, a former Guantanamo prisoner who himself participated in a hunger strike while there, disagrees. "Killing yourself is not something that is looked at lightly in Islam, but if you're told day after day by the Americans that you're never going to go home or you're put into isolation, these acts are committed simply out of desperation and loss of hope," he said. "This was not done as an act of martyrdom, warfare or anything else."

    "The total, intractable unwillingness of the Bush administration to provide any meaningful justice for these men is what is at the heart of these tragedies," according to Bill Goodman, the legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of the Guantanamo prisoners.

    Last year, at least 131 Guantanamo inmates engaged in hunger strikes, and 89 have participated this year. US military guards, with assistance from physicians, are tying them into restraint chairs and forcing large plastic tubes down their noses and into their stomachs to keep them alive. Lawyers for the prisoners have reported the pain is excruciating.

    The suicides came three weeks after two other prisoners tried to kill themselves by overdosing on antidepressant drugs.

    Bush is well aware that more dead US prisoners would be embarrassing for his administration, especially in light of the documented torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and the execution of civilians in Haditha.

    More than a year ago, the National Lawyers Guild and the American Association of Jurists called for the US government to shut down its "concentration camp" at Guantanamo. The UN Human Rights Commission, the UN Committee against Torture, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, and the Council of Europe, have also advocated the closure of Guantanamo prison.

    Bush says he would like to close the prison, but is awaiting the Supreme Court's decision. At the same time, however, his administration is spending $30 million to construct permanent cells at Guantanamo. (Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)



    Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for the great and powerful t r u t h o u t website.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 8/13/2006 2:54 AM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
C-SPAN FIRESTORM: 9/11 Truth Symposium Gains Momentum, by Paul Joseph Watson

 




 

C-Span Firestorm: 9/11 Truth Symposium
Gains Momentum

Scholars symposium to re-air again on Tuesday

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | July 31 2006

Judging by the reaction on the web to C-Span's airing of the American Scholars Symposium, the 9/11 truth movement has been afforded another jolt of momentum in its quest to bring criminal proceedings against those complicit in the attack and its subsequent cover-up.

C-Span repeated the show Sunday and set to re-air it again Tuesday at 6:10PM EST, 5:10 CST.

The show is currently archived on C-Span's website and you can watch it for free here.

Webster Tarpley, one of the keynote speakers and panel members at the symposium, today calls for a concerted effort to use the C-Span broadcast to discredit phony left-right gatekeepers who have resolved to blindly accept the government's version of what happened on 9/11.

"Let us mobilize to organize the biggest audience ever by an incessant and sustained intervention in radio and television call-in talk shows, by blast emails, by direct personal contact alerts, by public signs, leaflets, and by every other means at our disposal," Tarpley wrote.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See extended highlights of the conference with full speaker presentations, subscribe, download and share with your friends!
Click here to subscribe!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Let us overwhelm Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Jerry Doyle, Glenn Beck, and the other fascist parrots of the airwaves with the announcement of the Tuesday broadcast. Let us confront Ed Shultz and the other Air America gatekeepers with reality of the Tuesday show. Please do the same in the rest of the world."

Before its initial screening on Saturday evening, many were concerned that the conference was so unrelenting in its hardcore stance on 9/11, that C-Span would be pressured into canning the show. This proved not to be the case and multiple repeats of the conference within days at peak times prove the program has received very favorable ratings.

This is another hammer blow to the establishment kingpins who had hoped questions about 9/11 would evaporate as we approach the 5th anniversary of the attack.

The 9/11 Blogger website is coordinating numerous activism campaigns in alliance with the C-Span coverage, including encouraging UN members to view the broadcast, targeting left and right radio and TV gatekeepers, and also a flyer campaign.

We implore everyone to get onboard with these campaigns and help spread 9/11 truth to the four corners of the world via the exemplary platform of the American Scholars Symposium.

Prison Planet.tv: The Premier Multimedia Subscription Package: Download and Share the Truth!

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 8/7/2006 4:15 AM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
REALITY IN LEBANON, Another Great 'ADE' Video Production by Kurt Nimmo

 

Reality in Lebanon

Produced and Directed
by Kurt Nimmo

[Copyright (c) 2006 in the U.S.A. and
Internationally by Another Day in
the Empire (kurtnimmo.com),
and/or Kurt Nimmo.
All rights reserved.]

 

 

 

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 7/29/2006 9:27 PM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
PATRIOTISM AND THE FOURTH OF JULY, by Howard Zinn

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

Also see below:
Jim Lobe | "Decent Respect" Might Help Image Woes Abroad

    Go to Original.

 

Click here to go to the HowardZinn.org website!    PATRIOTISM AND THE
    FOURTH OF JULY
    (True Patriotism Versus
    False Nationalism)
    By Howard Zinn
    AlterNet.org
    Tuesday, 4 July 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by AlterNet(.org)
    and/or Howard Zinn.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    The Declaration of Independence gives us the true meaning of a patriot, someone who supports a country's ideals, not necessarily its government.

    In celebration of the Fourth of July there will be many speeches about the young people who "died for their country." But those who gave their lives did not, as they were led to believe, die for their country; they died for their government. The distinction between country and government is at the heart of the Declaration of Independence, which will be referred to again and again on July 4, but without attention to its meaning.

    The Declaration of Independence is the fundamental document of democracy. It says governments are artificial creations, established by the people, "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," and charged by the people to ensure the equal right of all to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Furthermore, as the Declaration says, "whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it." It is the country that is primary---the people, the ideals of the sanctity of human life and the promotion of liberty.

    When a government recklessly expends the lives of its young for crass motives of profit and power, while claiming that its motives are pure and moral, ("Operation Just Cause" was the invasion of Panama and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" in the present instance), it is violating its promise to the country. War is almost always a breaking of that promise. It does not enable the pursuit of happiness but brings despair and grief.

    Mark Twain, having been called a "traitor" for criticizing the U.S. invasion of the Philippines, derided what he called "monarchical patriotism." He said: "The gospel of the monarchical patriotism is: 'The King can do no wrong.' We have adopted it with all its servility, with an unimportant change in the wording: 'Our country, right or wrong!' We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had -- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it, all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism."

    If patriotism in the best sense (not in the monarchical sense) is loyalty to the principles of democracy, then who was the true patriot? Theodore Roosevelt, who applauded a massacre by American soldiers of 600 Filipino men, women and children on a remote Philippine island, or Mark Twain, who denounced it? Today, U.S. soldiers who are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan are not dying for their country; they are dying for Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. They are dying for the greed of the oil cartels, for the expansion of the American empire, for the political ambitions of the president. They are dying to cover up the theft of the nation's wealth to pay for the machines of death. As of July 4, 2006, more than 2,500 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq, more than 8,500 maimed or injured. With the war in Iraq long declared a "Mission Accomplished," shall we revel in American military power and insist that the American empire will be beneficent?

    Our own history is enough to make one wary. Empire begins with what was called, in our high school history classes, "westward expansion,"a euphemism for the annihilation or expulsion of the Indian tribes inhabiting the continent, in the name of "progress" and "civilization." It continues with the expansion of American power into the Caribbean at the turn of the 20th century, then into the Philippines, and then repeated Marine invasions of Central America and long military occupations of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. After World War II, Henry Luce, owner of Time, LIFE, and Fortune, spoke of "the American Century," in which this country would organize the world "as we see fit." Indeed, the expansion of American power continued, too often supporting military dictatorships in Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, because they were friendly to American corporations and the American government. The record does not justify confidence in Bush's boast that the United States will bring democracy to Iraq.

    Should Americans welcome the expansion of the nation's power, with the anger this has generated among so many people in the world? Should we welcome the huge growth of the military budget at the expense of health, education, the needs of children, one fifth of whom grow up in poverty? Instead of being feared for our military prowess, we should want to be respected for our dedication to human rights. I suggest that a patriotic American who cares for her or his country might act on behalf of a different vision. Should we not begin to redefine patriotism? We need to expand it beyond that narrow nationalism that has caused so much death and suffering. If national boundaries should not be obstacles to trade---some call it "globalization"---should they also not be obstacles to compassion and generosity? Should we not begin to consider all children, everywhere, as our own? In that case, war, which in our time is always an assault on children, would be unacceptable as a solution to the problems of the world. Human ingenuity would have to search for other ways. [(Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)]



    Howard Zinn is a veteran of World War II and author of the bestselling book, A People's History of the United States. The preceding essay is an excerpt from Zinn's forthcoming book, A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 



 

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

    Go to Original.

 

Click here to go to the HowardZinn.org website!    "DECENT RESPECT" MIGHT
    HELP IMAGE WOES ABROAD
    (International Multilateralism
    Versus National Unilateralism)
    By Jim Lobe
    Inter Press Service
    (IPSNews.net)
    Tuesday, 4 July 2006
    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. & Internationally
    by Inter Press Service
    (IPSNews.net),
    and/or Jim Lobe.
    All rights reserved.]

 

    Washington -- It was in 1776 that a group of British colonists living along the Atlantic seaboard of North America felt compelled to offer a public justification for their "Declaration of Independence" from their mother country out of "a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind".

    That justification, a bill of particulars against King George II for a host of offences, including violations of what would come to be called human rights, was designed to rally British and European public opinion behind the colonists' cause.

    As the nation marks that occasion exactly 230 years ago Tuesday, a series of surveys from around the world over the past three years makes clear that contemporary "Mankind" believes that the United States no longer accords its opinions the "decent respect" that those who founded the country believe was its due.

    Those surveys suggest that the image of the U.S. as a benign hegemon that takes account of the interests and opinions of the peoples of other nations -- consciously cultivated by Washington for more than a century -- has been effectively shattered by the unilateralism of the administration of President George W. Bush and particularly its invasion of Iraq.

    "One of the reasons that people around the world are so upset with the U.S. is the perception that in the post-World War II era, the U.S. was the champion and leader of an international order based on international law and mutual constraints, when it could have created a form of great-power domination," said Steven Kull, director of the University of Marylands Programme on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

    "As the leader and promoter of such a system, the U.S. was expected to set the example for all the rest, but Washington is now perceived as violating the same rules it did so much to establish," according to Kull, who cited Bush's decisions to ignore the United Nations in going to war and the Geneva Conventions in treating detainees in its "global war on terror" as key moves that both defied and outraged public opinion abroad.

    Even after 16 months of vigorous efforts by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to reassure U.S. allies and potential rivals, such as Russia and China, that Washington cares about their views and is committed to multilateralism, public opinion abroad has remained stubbornly sceptical, according to former Foreign Affairs editor, Fareed Zakaria.

    Rice, he wrote in a Newsweek column coincidentally entitled "Why We Don't Get No Respect", has "engineered a broad shift in American diplomacy over the last year, moving policy toward greater multilateralism, cooperation, and common sense on Iran, North Korea and Iraq, and several other issues."

    "And yet it hasn't produced a change in attitudes towards the United States," he went on, citing surveys by the Pew Global Attitudes Project and the Financial Times (FT) released just last month.

    The FT poll found that the U.S. under Bush is considered by European public opinion to be more dangerous than either North Korea or Iran.

    The Pew survey of 14 foreign countries found that strong pluralities or majorities in all but two nations said that the Iraq war had made the world "more dangerous" and that the U.S. presence in Iraq was "more dangerous" to world peace than the alleged nuclear-arms ambitions of North Korea and Iran.

    These findings were broadly consistent with previous surveys, including a Globescan-PIPA poll of 35 countries released in February, and a Pew poll released in June 2005 that found a sharp drop in the belief by respondents in Europe and the Islamic world that Washington took into account the interests of their countries in making its foreign policy decisions compared to the period before the Iraq war.

    In yet another poll Globescan-PIPA poll released in January 2005, large pluralities and majorities of respondents in 18 of 21 countries said they believed Bush's re-election to office would have a negative impact on global peace and security.

    What was particularly surprising about the latest Pew poll was the degree to which Washington's image, particularly in Europe and the Middle East, had slipped since the year before, when Rice's campaign to put diplomacy and consultation first had just gotten underway.

    In May 2005, Pew had found a rebound in foreign attitudes toward the U.S. compared to its findings in surveys conducted in the year following the Iraq war when foreign views of Washington, and particularly Bush, plunged to the lowest level ever recorded. Most analysts had expected continued, if modest, improvement between 2005 and 2006.

    In fact, however, U.S. favourability ratings, as well as support for Washington's "global war on terror", resumed their post-Iraq war decline in both Western Europe and the Islamic world, with particularly steep declines found in Spain, Russia, Indonesia, Jordan, and Turkey.

    Zakaria blamed this on a number of factors, including a lag between the general public, particularly in Europe, and governments which, he insisted, have been very appreciative of Rice's -- and Bush's -- efforts.

    Other important factors, he noted, included the continuing presence in the administration of arch-hawks, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, who may be able to constrain Rice's flexibility, especially on Iran and North Korea.

    Moreoever, according to Zakaria, U.N. Amb. John Bolton's confrontational style has been particularly destructive and has contributed to the perception that the administration remains deeply divided and that its new emphasis on diplomacy and multilateralism has been dictated more by necessity than conviction. "In five minutes of posturing in front of a microphone, Bolton undoes five months of careful work by his boss, the secretary of State," he wrote.

    In fact, however, the problem lies much deeper---in the belief that the U.S., especially under Bush, still does not accord a decent respect to the views and opinions of other nations, whether it involves the invasion of Iraq and the refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions in the "war on terror" -- for which Bush remains unapologetic -- or global warming, the International Criminal Court, or the administration's doctrine of pre-emption.

    "An America that does not understand -- and makes little effort to understand -- why it has become so unpopular abroad is almost certain to find itself both disliked and ineffective in many parts of the world," noted political commentator David Rieff in a reflection on the latest Pew poll and U.S. "exceptionalism" that appeared in the New York Times Sunday Magazine this weekend. [(Subtitle and/or emphasis added by Wolf Britain.)]

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

 



MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 7/19/2006 4:29 PM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)
ON JULY FOURTH, READ 'THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE FOR IMPEACHMENT' OF BUSH & CO., by David Swanson


  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!

    Go to Original.

Click here to go to the AfterDowningStreet.org website!    ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, READ "THE
    DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
    FOR IMPEACHMENT" OF BUSH & CO.
    By David Swanson
    AfterDowningStreet.org
    Sunday, 02 July 2006

    [Copyright (c) 2006 in the
    U.S.A. and Internationally
    by AfterDowningStreet(.org)
    and/or David Swanson.
    All rights reserved.]


    Veterans for Peace has drafted a Declaration of Impeachment using nothing but excerpts from the Declaration of Independence (plus a few words in parentheses). It reads as follows, and should be read at picnics and protests on the Fourth of July:

    "... (W)henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends ['... that all (people) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these (Rights) are Life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of Happiness..., (and that) Governments are instituted among (the People), deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ...'], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their [Liberty,] Safety and Happiness ...

    "... (A)ll experience hath shewn, that (hu)mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations ... design(s) to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their DUTY, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security ...

    "The history of the present King (George)... is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States [and the world]. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  • ["He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for public good (and Liberty). He has forbidden his (more independent Lawmakers) to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to (obey) them (or to give his Assent that he must obey them) ...]

  • "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance ...

  • "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

  • ["He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of (false and fraudulent) Legislation: For quartering large bodies of armed troops (and domestic mercenaries) among us: For protecting them... from punishment for any Murders which they... commit on the Inhabitants of these States ...]

  • "(He has) ... deprive(ed) us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury ... transport(ed) us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences ... [taking away (recognition and observance of) our Charters (Treaties and International Laws), abolishing (or refusing to obey countless numbers of) our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Form(s) of our Government(s) ...]

  • "He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us ...

  • "He is at this time transporting large Armies ... to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

  • "He has constrained our fellow Citizens ... to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren [abroad], or to fall themselves by their Hands ... [and excited (and provoked) domestic insurrections amongst us ...]

    "[In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress (of Grievances under the First Amendment of the Constitution, and Article Three of the Bill of Rights, of these United States) in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury(ies).] A (President), whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. [Nor have We been wanting in attention to (the Bush administration). We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their ("Republican"/"Conservative") legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our (Freedom and Liberty) here (in this country). We have appealed to ... justice ... and we have (sought to influence) them by the ties of (Liberty and Freedom) to disavow these usurpations (of Freedom and Liberty), which would inevitably (destroy) our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguin(u)ity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of (hu)mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.]

    "WE, THEREFORE, [the (People) of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA] ... do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People [of these United States], solemnly publish and declare, That these ... FREE AND INDEPENDENT (PEOPLE) ... are Absolved from all Allegiance to the (Bush administration), and that all political connection between them and (this administration), is and ought to be totally dissolved ... AND for the support of this Declaration, [with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,] we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." [Emphasis, words in brackets ("[ ]"), mostly from the Declaration of Independence itself, which David Swanson left out (incorrectly in my opinion), and/or editing of the title, added by Wolf Britain.]



    David Swanson is creator of MeetWithCindy(Sheehan).org, co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, a writer and activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive Council of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997. His website is DavidSwanson.org.

  ________

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

  Print This Story  E-mail This Story

MORE >>
Posted by Wolf Britain at 7/4/2006 6:47 AM | View Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (0)