BushCo crimes - lets do the world a favour

--

A teaser:

War support strategy based on Duke professor's poll analyses.

Washington -- There could be no doubt about the theme of President Bush's Iraq war strategy speech on Wednesday at the Naval Academy. He used the word victory 15 times in the address; "Plan for Victory" signs crowded the podium he spoke on; and the word heavily peppered the accompanying 35-page National Security Council document titled, "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq. [/teaser]

Lets all go for a ride on the Spin O' Rama with "W", Not!

December 11, 2005
One of the many benefits of the Bush Administration is that it demonstrates, over and over again, just how big a bunch of hypocrites Americans are. The United States has always been involved in attacking sovereign countries. Iraq is novel only in the fact that it was done out in the open, in blatant contravention of international law (rather than covert contravention of international law). Americans, in particular, the CIA and the Pentagon, have always been involved in torture. The School of the Americas is, amongst other things, a school for torture (and see also here and here). The only difference between the Bush Administration and other previous administrations, including those with Democrat Presidents, is that the Bush Administration is proud of what it is doing, and no longer attempts to hide it (plus we have photos). Americans are like the racist suburbanite who doesn't want 'those people' living in his neighborhood, but finds the Ku Klux Klan offensive. It's not the racism, its the in-your-face celebration of racism that is the problem. Similarly, its not the torture, its the pleasure that officials like Rice and Cheney seem to have in advocating it. Most Americans support the use of torture, they just don't like to be reminded of it. The lowest point in the short history of the American Empire has to be Rice going to Europe and insisting that the Americans won't put up with Europeans applying their own laws against torture (not that...

Quote has been trimmed

\
My friend keeps reminding me that its not the American PEOPLE who are psychopathic, its not them we dislike.
Its their government, which isn't really "their" government because they didn't vote this government in. {They installed themselves, more or less].

There is no dout as to the messsage being right on tho.

I think there would have been no way GWBushboy would have gotten to that position of Pres. unless he had given his handlers/overseers gaurantees of going "all the way to Baghdad". Its like a JOB he was contracted to do.

With that in mind, we can see the SPIN more clearly. He LIES because, well, he knows he just has to hang in there for 3 more years and it doesn't matter what gets exposed as lies or whatever - as long as the deed is being done.

Thats why he can lie like this and still smirk.

Thats why he can be so STUBBORN about admitting mistakes.

He doesn't give a SH*T about his credibility, he has THE contract!

maybe we won't have to arrest Bush for War Crimes afterall, the USA citizens might remove him themselves.

Could it possibly happen? Wow, it would be like the earth-shifting on its axis

the wanna be king.

--


now, that might be his next 'business " objective: declare himself king and grant himself NO LIMITS ,NO checks and balances to the powers available to him.

with each "acknowledgement " or "taking of responsibility" he does now........AFTER THE FACT.........he is just spitting in the American public's face. He has used them as he has used everything else to HIS OWN AGENDA........and lies are just part of this whole scenario.

going by the silence of the american public.......one has to assume it approves of their idiot king wanna bee doing as he wishes ... amazing how the dumbing down process has worked in the US.

--

By ordering the National Security Agency -- the N.S.A, so secretive that in Washington its initials are said to stand for "No Such Agency" -- to wiretap and eavesdrop on thousands of American citizens without a court order, Bush committed actions specifically forbidden by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Passed in 1978 after the Senate's Church Committee documented in detail the Nixon administration's widespread use of U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on the anti-Vietnam war movement and other political dissidents, FISA "expressly made it a crime for government officials 'acting under color of law' to engage in electronic eavesdropping 'other than pursuant to statute.'", as the director of the Center for National Security Studies, Kate Martin, told the Washington Post this past weekend

Bush not only acknowledged, and defended, this illegal eavesdropping in a Saturday radio address, he went further in a Monday morning press conference, saying he'd "suggested" it.

U.S. Operated Secret ‘Dark Prison’ in Kabul

(New York, December 19, 2005) – Accounts from detainees at Guantánamo reveal that the United States as recently as last year operated a secret prison in Afghanistan where detainees were subjected to torture and other mistreatment, Human Rights Watch said today.
" The U.S. government must shed some light on Kabul’s ‘dark prison’ "
John Sifton, terrorism and counterterrorism researcher at Human Rights Watch


Also Available in
German

Related Material

Audio: John Sifton on NPR's Morning Edition
Audio Clip, December 19, 2005

Summary of International and U.S. Law Prohibiting Torture and Other Ill-treatment of Persons in Custody
Special Focus, May 24, 2004

Free Email Newsletter

Contribute to Human Rights Watch
Eight detainees now held at Guantánamo described to their attorneys how they were held at a facility near Kabul at various times between 2002 and 2004. The detainees, who called the facility the “dark prison” or “prison of darkness,” said they were chained to walls, deprived of food and drinking water, and kept in total darkness with loud rap, heavy metal music, or other sounds blared for weeks at a time.

The detainees offer consistent accounts about the facility, saying that U.S. and Afghan guards were not in uniform and that U.S. interrogators did not wear military attire, which suggests that the prison may have been operated by personnel from the Central Intelligence Agency.

The detainees said U.S. interrogators slapped or punched them during interrogations. They described being held in complete darkness for weeks on end, shackled to rings bolted into the walls of their cells, with loud music or other sounds played continuously. Some detainees said they were shackled in a manner that made it impossible to lie down or sleep, with restraints that caused their hands and wrists to swell up or bruise. The detainees said they were deprived of food for days at a time, and given only filthy water to drink.

The detainees also said that they were held incommunicado and never visited by representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross or other independent officials.

“The U.S. government must shed some light on Kabul’s ‘dark prison,’” said John Sifton, terrorism and counterterrorism researcher at Human Rights Watch. “No one, no matter their alleged crime, should be held in secret prisons or subjected to torture.”

The detainees’ allegations were communicated to Human Rights Watch by their attorneys and are contained in attorneys’ contemporaneous notes. Human Rights Watch was unable to interview the detainees directly, since the United States has not allowed human rights organizations to visit detainees at Guantánamo or other detention sites abroad. However, Human Rights Watch believes that the detainees’ allegations are sufficiently credible to warrant an official investigation. The detainees are of different nationalities and have different attorneys. None claimed to have been detained at the secret facility for more than six weeks at a time, and did not otherwise make extraordinary claims.

Most of the detainees said they were arrested in other countries in Asia and the Middle East, and then flown to Afghanistan. Detainees who arrived by airplane said they were driven about five minutes from a landing field to the prison. Afghan guards told some of them that the facility was located near Kabul. Some detainees who were kept at the facility were transferred at various times to and from another secret facility near Kabul. The detainees said they were later transferred to the main U.S. military detention facility near Bagram, where many other Guantánamo detainees say they were initially held.

Human Rights Watch said that the “dark prison” may have been closed after several detainees were transferred to the Bagram facility in late 2004.

M.Z., a detainee arrested in another country in 2002 (name and identifying details withheld at his attorney’s request), said he was held at the “prison of darkness” for about four weeks. He says he was sent to “an underground place, very dark” where there was “loud music” playing continuously. He said he was held in solitary confinement, where it was “pitch black... no light.” M.Z. said that when he was interrogated he was taken to a room with a strobe light, and shackled to a ring on the floor. During the interrogations, he says, an interrogator threatened him with rape.

Benyam Mohammad, an Ethiopian-born Guantánamo detainee who grew up in Britain, said he was held at the “dark prison” in 2004 and described his experience to his attorney in English:

It was pitch black no lights on in the rooms for most of the time.... They hung me up. I was allowed a few hours of sleep on the second day, then hung up again, this time for two days. My legs had swollen. My wrists and hands had gone numb.... There was loud music, [Eminem’s] “Slim Shady” and Dr. Dre for 20 days.... [Then] they changed the sounds to horrible ghost laughter and Halloween sounds. [At one point, I was] chained to the rails for a fortnight.... The CIA worked on people, including me, day and night.... Plenty lost their minds. I could hear people knocking their heads against the walls and the doors, screaming their heads off.

J.K., another detainee (name withheld at attorney’s request), also alleged that he had been held in the dark, shackled to the wall and subjected to weeks of sleep deprivation and constant loud music and noise, as well as being beaten during interrogations. “People were screaming in pain and crying all the time,” he told his attorney.

Abd al-Salam Ali al-Hila, a Yemeni whose arrest and transfer to Afghanistan was previously documented by Human Rights Watch Guantanamo: New “Reverse Rendition” Case, said he was kept at the “dark prison” at various times in 2003. He told his lawyers he had been chained to the wall, kept in almost constant darkness, and subjected to sleep deprivation and constant noise.

Similarly, attorneys for Hassin Bin Attash, Jamil el Banna and Bisher al Rawi, three other detainees who said they were previously held at the “dark prison,” said their clients made allegations about constant darkness, shackling, sleep deprivation, inadequate food and water, and beatings during interrogations. One other detainee provided similar information through his attorney, who requested that the client’s name and nationality be kept confidential.

On November 18, ABC News reported that several CIA officials told ABC that the CIA had operated a secret facility in Kabul, and voiced concerns about interrogations there. The CIA officials, who requested anonymity from ABC, said that CIA officials authorized six techniques for use against detainees with “high-level” intelligence value, including long-term sleep deprivation, exposure to cold for more than 40 hours, and “waterboarding,” in which interrogators poured water over the detainee’s face until he believed he would suffocate or drown. The officials told ABC that the CIA had authorized these techniques in March 2002 and that they were used at the Kabul facility and elsewhere.

The accounts given by the Guantánamo detainees about the Kabul facility are also consistent with stories told by four detainees, who in July escaped from U.S. military custody at Bagram, on a videotape obtained by ABC News and Al-Arabiya. On the videotape, the detainees said they were held at “the dark prison” before being sent to Bagram, and describe being subjected to loud music and total darkness, as well as physical abuse.

Human Rights Watch has previously identified 26 “disappeared” persons believed to be held in secret facilities operated or used by the U.S. A “disappearance” is an unlawful detention in which the detaining authorities deny holding the person or refuse to disclose his or her whereabouts. Human Rights Watch said today that the U.S. may have used the facility near Kabul to hold “disappeared” detainees at various times.

Human Rights Watch said that the alleged torture and other mistreatment of detainees, if proven, would amount to serious violations of U.S. criminal law, such as the War Crimes Act and the Anti-Torture Statute, as well as the laws of Afghanistan. The mistreatment of detainees also violates the Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which the United States has ratified, and the laws of war. (Summary of statutes)

Human Rights Watch has long called for a special prosecutor to investigate alleged mistreatment of detainees in U.S. detention facilities abroad.

“We’re not talking about torture in the abstract, but the real thing,” said Sifton. “U.S. personnel and officials may be criminally liable, and a special prosecutor is needed to investigate.”

Human Rights Watch called on the United States to move “disappeared” persons into known detention facilities, articulate the legal basis under which detainees are held, and allow access to all detainees by independent monitors.

“It’s time for the Bush administration to shut the secret prisons and stop holding people illegally,” said Sifton.

The law states that any person who violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is guilty of a felony.

The New York Times indicated that there was somewhere between several hundred and maybe several thousand people that were affected by this. But apparently, it's been going on at least since 2001, so there's probably quite a few people out there that have been surveilled, and have no knowledge about it, and again, without any court order.

Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and the Art of Deception
Sam Hamod, Ph.D.



December 21, 2005

Secretary of Defense, actually it should be called Secretary of War because America is not interested in defense as much as making war these days, Donald Rumsfeld is at it again. He is a master of deception in the use of semantics and language.

First, he told us the war was almost won in Iraq; this when there are more attacks on U.S. troops every day and more casualties than in previous months.

Then, he told us the "war in Afghanistan" was won, and that America could "draw down troops", even though we have no solid foundation to claim a "victory" in Afghanistan because the warlords from all over Afghanistan have taken over 95% if the country and large parts of Kabul aside from President Karzai’s compound and offices, and the opium poppy crop this year will be the largest in the past 20 years!

Then of course, yesterday, he said he’d draw down more troops from Iraq—but said, it will be later, but soon.

Obviously, if you try to pin Mr. Rumsfeld down to any meaning of his words, he moves away from definition to obfuscation and circular speech that finally leads to nowhere—just like his explanations for "victory", for "war," for "we are winning," and "democracy," and "freedom." Somehow, no Iraqi or Afghani believes that the "freedom" we brought them by destroying their homes, their hospitals, their electricity, their water supplies, their schools, their museums, their mosques, their administrative buildings is really "freedom," in the traditional sense of the word. They know that it is "terrorism" that was visited on their countries, on their families and their homes—and that we continue to terrorize these people.

But in Rumsfeld-speak, we are doing a great job, and when his minions in the military speak and send letters home to sympathetic ears who want to believe his lies, his minions use the same language about how "we’ve rescued these people," how we’ve "brought them democracy," and "freedom"—but not one Iraqi (unless he or she is on the take) or Afghani (aside from Karzai and his circle) believes this—but too many Americans have been taken in by this double-speak, Rumsfeld-speak, and the ridiculous, bordering on idiotic Bush-speak. The mastermind behind all of this, I am told by Washington insiders is none other than the holier than thou, VP Dick Cheney. So, when I write about this double-speak, Cheney is always in the equation.

Some say these men are out of touch with reality; I don’t think so, but it may be the case with Bush because he’s so ignorant. But as for Rumsfeld and Cheney, both of whom are continually attacking others’ credibility, it is one semantic distortion after another because while they flail their arms in the air to trumpet their deceptions, the troops on the ground who are being wounded and killed everyday know they are misleading the American public—and the Iraqis and Afghanis who are suffering know that Cheney and Rumsfeld are lying—most major American media simply will not tell the truth and allow these deceivers to continue deceiving the public.

Thus it is, most Americans don’t know the truth because of men like Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney—and they are helped along by most of the major American media. The killings of Americans, Iraqis and Afghanis go on, with these men and their minions guilty of some of the most heinous crimes in history.

"Bush surely is deserving of impeachment."
Here's a partial list of what should be ample ammunition for the House and Senate to serve justice on one of the most corrupt, tyrannical and treasonous presidents in history:

1. Falsifying intelligence and providing false information to Congress to unjustly and illegally invade Iraq, a sovereign nation.
2. Lying about Niger/Iraq uranium connection in 2003 State of the Union speech.
3. Diverting money appropriated by Congress for Afghanistan to planning the Iraq war.
4. Authorizing the use of taxpayer funds to pay for war-propaganda campaign in Iraq.
5. Authorizing of torture and Geneva Convention violations at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
6. Inhumane, illegal treatment of detainees in the "War on Terror"
7. Leaking a covert CIA agent's identity as retaliation against a political enemy.
8. Illegally spying on Americans within the United States.
9. Illegal use of taxpayer funds to pay for Armstrong Anderson/No Child Left behind propaganda.

December 22, 2005
Calling all impeachment activists - "Impeachment is "in" :
http://tinyurl.com/d44w8


Spying, the Constitution — and the ‘I-word’
2006 Nixon-era nastiness and a chorus of calls to impeach Bush :
--


December 21, 2005
Wanted for War Crimes - Why are we just talking impeachment? :
http://tinyurl.com/akkrg

--------------------------------------------------


December 21, 2005
"It's Time to Impeach Bush for These Blatant Violations of the Law"
http://tinyurl.com/dnou3

Quote:

"Bush surely is deserving of impeachment."
Here's a partial list of what should be ample ammunition for the House and Senate to serve justice on one of the most corrupt, tyrannical and treasonous presidents in history:

1. Falsifying intelligence and providing false information to Congress to unjustly and illegally invade Iraq, a sovereign nation.
2. Lying about Niger/Iraq uranium connection in 2003 State of the Union speech.
3. Diverting money appropriated by Congress for Afghanistan to planning the Iraq war.
4. Authorizing the use of taxpayer funds to pay for war-propaganda campaign in Iraq.
5. Authorizing of torture and Geneva Convention violations at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
6. Inhumane, illegal treatment of detainees in the "War on Terror"
7. Leaking a covert CIA agent's identity as retaliation against a political enemy.
8. Illegally spying on Americans within the United States.
9. Illegal use of taxpayer funds to pay for Armstrong Anderson/No Child Left behind propaganda.

-----------adding to that list: "9-11"

K - "why did bldg #7 fall down"

9-11 as an impeachment issue if it was "on purpose", and used for the Bush Agenda of "going all the way to Baghdad".

Bldg#7 may be the easiest example of a coverup that belies the agenda: it wasn't hit by a plane yet it fell down, there was an explosion heard by several people - it appears to have been a demolision.

As were the big towers... how could they fall straight down after being hit on oine side? Great care has to be taken to ensure that any building falls straight down, it doesn't happen twice in one day like that without help.

Demo means on purpose, for agenda. I would love to see that in court with Bush answering the charges!!
Canadian court? - if possible, that would be the most fun for me.

Bldg#7 may be the easiest example of a coverup that belies the agenda: it wasn't hit by a plane yet it fell down, there was an explosion heard by several people - it appears to have been a demolision.

As were the big towers... how could they fall straight down after being hit on oine side? Great care has to be taken to ensure that any building falls straight down, it doesn't happen twice in one day like that without help.

Demo means on purpose, for agenda. I would love to see that in court with Bush answering the charges!!
Canadian court? - if possible, that would be the most fun for me.

PRESIDENT NOT ABOVE THE LAW

Democrats and Republicans in Congress are fuming over the revelation that President George W. Bush secretly authorized domestic eavesdropping without court approval. Senators Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) said they intend to hold hearings on the matter.

For the record, we owe Senator Feingold a debt of appreciation for how he single-handedly (at first) stood up against a broadside assault against our Bill of Rights in the form of the USA Patriot Act which was passed by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and was (and still is) intensely lobbied for by the White House. Feingold's stubborn resistance to the Patriot Act was rewarded last week when senators from both parties rallied in sufficient numbers to support his filibuster, thus stopping the Patriot Act (for the moment) dead in its tracks. Thank you, Senator Feingold!

--