Monday, March 30, 2009

Bush /Cheney & Their Fuhrer's Law- Providing A Legal Veneer For Criminal Actions & Battlestar Gallactica at the UN

UPDATE: 11:14 March 30, 2009

Let's begin with a bit on race and its function as a political tool. There is only one race the Human Race.

Wonderful sentiment on the issue of race at the United Nations -March 18, 2009

Edward James Olmos, on his authority as Admiral of the Battlestar Galactica, tells the assembled crowd at the United Nations there is no race but the human race (so say we all).

For instance this may help to explain the Indifference on the part of America's leaders and the Main Stream Media and the American people to the deaths of over one million (1,000,000) Iraqi citizens since they are considered to be part of a different "Race" as Arabs or Kurds they are of little consequence since they are of an inferior breed . Even Obama and the members of his administration tend to downplay the number of dead and severely wounded Iraqis since the only lives that really matter are American lives. In the same way Americans have little interest in the abuse and torture of Iraqis or Afghans .

For instance the massive bombings of densely populated cities such as Bagdad or Fallujah were in fact celebrated by the Americans and their allies . They of course did not have to hear the screams of those innocent civilians being blown to pieces instead it was Party Time for those at CNN and Fox News etc. They forget that the images on their TV Screens were not a Hollywood Movie or the latest video game but that Shock and Awe caused the deaths of thousands and led to the destruction of most of Iraq's infrastructure which has still not been repaired six years later. Nor do they accept that these targets were not according to International Law legitimate military targets but it was "Great Eye-Candy " for the Folks at home who felt they were getting their revenge for the attacks on 9/11 (which had nothing to do with Iraq or Saddam). Besides it was great for CNN's ratings as was the First Gulf War which merely highlights the depraved state of Western Civilization as it were. The war was a disaster for the Iraqi people but it was a boon for KBR and Haliburton and Blackwater to name a few. As for the US soldiers these poor bastards were just cannon fodder to Bush and Cheney and the Neocons .

Bush Regime commits War Crimes and the West Applauds Them -
Darfur Regime of Omar al-Basheer Commits War Crimes & is indicted by International Criminal Court-

Is it because Bush is an American or because he is a Christian Evangelical or because he believes in Capitalism and so for one or all of these reasons that he can not be even accused of committing criminal acts ???

Colonialism and Capitalism
Greed and Avarice - True Western Values
Capitalism and Rugged Individualism versus morality and ethics

Instead those who accuse Bush and his gang are characterized as UnAmerican, UnCanadian or anti-Western, anti-Democracy, anti-Christian or as pro-Terrorist , or in what is seen as an insult to be called Pro-Islamic, Pro-Arab , Pro-Pashtun, Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Gaza- Heaven forbid we insist on fair treatment for all and justice for all or that the same standards of justice be applied to everyone whether they are Arab or Muslim or Christian or Jew or American or Israeli or Iraqi or Afghan
Meanwhile we each day more is revealed about the crimes and machinations of the Bush Regime & its allies who claim moral superiority over everyone else-
The Bush Regime being a clever bunch reshaped the laws of America to allow them to do whatever they wanted to under the guise of legality-
Just because an action is considered legal does not make it right or moral-

Remember the Western Powers esp. the US defended ruthless , brutal, sadistic dictators for decades including General Pinochet of Chile, The Shah of Iran, Saddam of Iraq, or various dictators of Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Argentina, Venezuela the Philippines, Indonesia , Vietnam, South Africa, etc, etc, etc,- and yet the Western Powers claim to be in favor of Democracy and Freedom well except when it gets in the way of Profits- The West main value is that of Greed and avarice while crushing any populist movement which threatens Western Hegemony in any way shape or form. For instance the British Empire was far from being the benevolent power which the revisionists now claim that it was. When the people of India rose up against the British in the nineteenth century the British had no qualms about killing a couple of Million citizens of India so they would in the future be reluctant to rise up against their "Task Masters " or Oppressors or enslavers.

But even to mention such things these days is also considered a form of Heresy. In the same way no one is permitted to question the superior morality of the American Empire or enterprise from the early years of the colonies in the sixteenth century down to the present time. The European/American mass murder of the Native Americans or First Nations was necessary because the Indians of North America were just a bunch of savages who prayed to Pagan Gods and were of an inferior race who deserved to be wiped out. There are in fact millions of Americans and Canadians who truly believe such propaganda - besides it eases their conscience that is if they have such a thing- for when Greed , Avarice and the lust for land is upon human beings it seems their very souls are extinguished and they develop religious beliefs and a theology to defend the indefensible.

We in the West cannot indict one of our own is that the case- well Hitler was one of our own- Mussolini & Franco were both ruthless dictators who operated in the West. All three claimed to be good Christians who supported the Eternal values of Western Civilization - ie Christian and European values.

Of course these days the history of Western Civilization is being rewritten by conservative Christian revisionists who claim the West was never really anti-Semitic before the rise of Hitler & the Nazis. In fact many now equate anti-Semitism with the Arabs and Islam. Yet historically the Jewish people were treated far better in Islamic countries than they were in Christian countries. In European Christian countries they were locked in Ghettos , prevented from holding certain jobs or becoming professionals or from pursuing higher education and at times were expelled en mass from various European countries or just killed off or given the choice to convert or die. Hitler and the NAZIS for the most part played upon ancient anti-Semitism of Christianity which was embedded in Christian beliefs from the its very beginnings. But of course even to point to such facts these days is considered " heresy ".

For the accepted newly revised view of many Westerners now is that the Jews were never treated that badly by Christians as part of an ongoing policy of anti-Semitism but rather anti-Semitism only occurred if it did in the bad old days of the darkest period of the Dark Ages or Middle Ages.

Whereas the belief that now is pushed as part of a Christian Propaganda War against Islam is that it is the Muslims who were always more hostile to Judaism and the Jews. But the Prophet Muhammad said that the Jews should not be mistreated & should be shown respect by all Muslims because they, he said were "The People Of The Book " and were the children of Abraham & Moses etc. But such facts are not permitted to get in the way of the Hysteria being fomented against all Muslims by Western Christians who now demonize all Muslims as being potential terrorists who follow a religion of Warfare and violence. Too bad some of these Westerners wouldn't spend sometime studying the bloody and brutal history of Christianity or the History of the Israelites of ancient Judea.

What is appalling is that the Bush Deadenders Defenders still continue to claim Bush & Co. did not lie and it appears millions of Americans still believe that the Bush Regime was telling the truth. Just watch Sean Hannity , Bill O'Reilly, FOX NEWS etc.
Odd that Americans like those on FOX NEWS Red Eye dare to belittle Canadians and for someone who is supposedly well informed like Tucker Carlson would call Canadians retarded yet he and many supposedly intelligent Americans still believe Bush , Cheney , Rumsfeld etc. never lied to the American People or to the World about Saddam 's WMDS , connections to Al Qaeda & Osama Bin Laden and to the 9/11 attack. So who's bloody retarded. But then again the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his gang of Neoconservatives and Fundamentalists Christians still believe Bush was one of America's greatest Presidents and the Ronald Reagan was either the Messiah or Elijah . Harper too believes that whatever we do is by definition sanctified by God or the Gods of Capitalism . Harper like Bush & Co. still doesn't see anything wrong with invading sovereign nations in order to subdue them and to eventually rob them of all their resources . Harper has said that he would have taken Canada into Iraq with the US since he either believed everything Bush , Rumsfeld & Cheney said or he knew and agreed with their secret agenda- oil , or war for the profiteers such as Halibuton or just a matter of revenge to teach the Arab and Muslims who really controls the Middle East.

Jonathan Turley argues that Obama shouldn't refer to Cheney's admissions of torture as merely a difference in policies. Rather Turley argues Obama should call Cheney out and allow a serious investigation by the DOJ of Cheney & others who allegedly committed War Crimes. Instead of Obama taking action against Cheney, Bush , John Yoo, Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice etc. he has been preventing such investigations from taking place. Obama's excuse is that he wishes to move forward and not look back. But after what the Bush Regime has done why should anyone trust any US administration since it appears they are always as Cheney put it working in the shadows. US administrations prior to Bush and Cheney often worked in the shadows hoping not to get caught. The difference is that Bush and Cheney were in fact more upfront about what they were doing . They in effect went public with their criminal actions and expected and usually received the OK from the Mainstream Media and a significant proportion of the American public.

Obama criticizes Cheney - Maddow

Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Powell- the lies uncovered Mar 21-09

Lawrence Wilkerson on the Mosaic Philosophy of Dick Cheney- keeping people in Guantanamo who are innocent just because they may know something.
Former Bush Official Snitches on Dick Cheney- The Young Turks March 20, 2009
Cenk Uygur

Over-the-top FOX News Teaser "Asks" If Obama Could Destroy Us
What FOX NEWS continues to do on a daily basis attacking Obama

Even with mounting evidence that the Bush Regime was prepared to move even further towards dictatorial powers the Republicans still have the audacity to claim that Obama worse than Bush. They claim Bush did what he had to after the attacks on 9/11 which they keep reminding us of and then go on to explain why it was necessary to round up people based upon flimsy intelligence and to then abuse and torture these persons to get more intelligence. That so called intelligence led to the rounding up of more people that is thousands in Afghanistan and some 100,000 or more in Iraq.Meanwhile anyone who spoke out against the Iraq War or the indefinite internment of people without due process etc. were branded as disloyal and were secretly investigated, their phones tapped , their E_Mails monitored , they were harassed all in the name of National Security.

In order to carry out their criminal or unethical activities the Bush Regime spent a great deal of time manufacturing a legal veneer believing this was enough to protect them. To a great extent they were right since even President Obama seems to accept this legal veneer as somehow legitimate. We also see this in the case of the Robber Barons and shysters on Wall Street who claim their abuses of the system were legal in some sense and therefore acceptable . But where was their sense of common decency or their sense of loyalty to their country and to their Fellow Americans. It seems the very notion of a good or responsible corporate citizen is an Oxymoron and this doesn't in the least bother those who are such defenders ( IE Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians, Fox News Rush Limbaugh etc. ) of Capitalism and the Wall Street speculators. They see nothing inherently wrong with making a buck in any way that one can.So knowingly selling stocks at over-inflated prices that have little to do with their actual value is OK. Telling people to invest in a mismanaged failing corporation is OK they say. "You pays your money you take your chances" they say but change their tune when it is their company which is in need of a bail out. Then they go crying to the government for help while belittling the average citizen who loses their job or their home through no fault of their own. It's like Bush's attitude and many Americans after Hurricane Katrina you know let them drown, let them die of hunger or from lack of clean water because America stands for rugged selfish self-serving Individualism and does not stand for any socialist notions like community or having the haves help out the have-nots unless they feel like it.So next time there's fires raging in California tell those people to put them out themselves and don't expect help from the State or Federal Government since that's not its role.

If you can't pay your mortgage because suddenly the payment has sky-rocked then that's too bad you lose your house even Evangelicals like John Hagee believe this to be God's plan & if you lose your job and are starving don't expect Pastor Hagee to help you cause he says that's part of God's plan.

" Do the Secret Bush Memos Amount to Treason? Top Constitutional Scholar Says Yes " By Naomi Wolf, AlterNet. Posted March 25, 2009.

Legal expert Michael Ratner calls the legal arguments made in the infamous Yoo memos, "Fuhrer's law."

-- from one of the nation's top constitutional scholars (and most steadfast patriots), Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been at the forefront of defending the detainees and our own liberties...

Michael Ratner: What they mean is that your book looks moderate in respect to those issues now. This -- what is in the memos -- is law by fiat.

I call it "Fuhrer's law." What those memos lay out means the end of the system of checks and balances in this country. It means the end of the system in which the courts, legislature and executive each had a function and they could check each other.

What the memos set out is a system in which the president's word is law, and Yoo is very clear about that: the president's word is not only law according to these memos, but no law or constitutional right or treaty can restrict the president's authority.

What Yoo says is that the president's authority as commander in chief in the so-called war on terror is not bound by any law passed by Congress, any treaty, or the protections of free speech, due process and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The First, Fourth and Fifth amendments -- gone.

The military can disregard the Posse Comitatus law, which restricts the military from acting as police in the the United States. And the president can, in the name of wartime restrictions, limit free speech. There it is in black and white: we are looking at one-person rule without any checks and balances -- a lawless state. Law by fiat.

Who has suspended the law this way in the past? It is like a Caesar's law in Rome; a Mussolini's law in Italy; a Fuhrer's law in Germany; a Stalin's law in the Soviet Union. It is right down the line. It is enforcing the will of the dictator through the military.

Part of this plan was actually implemented: for instance, they tried to keep people like Padilla from getting to a magistrate. They engaged in the wiretapping, because according to these memos there was no Fourth Amendment.

They had to be planning some kind of a takeover of the United States to be saying they could simply abolish the First Amendment if the president believed it was necessary in the name of national security. It lays the groundwork for what could have been a massive military takeover of the United States.

How the U.S. Tried to Bribe a Gitmo Prisoner into Silence By Willam Fisher, IPS News. Posted March 25, 2009.

As a condition for his release, the U.S. government told Binyam Mohamed to plead guilty, deny torture, and not to talk to media.

NEW YORK, Mar 24 (IPS) -- A British court ruled Monday that U.S. authorities had asked a Guantanamo Bay detainee to drop allegations of torture in exchange for his freedom.

A ruling by two British High Court judges said the U.S. offered Binyam Mohamed a plea bargain deal in October. Mohamed refused the deal and the U.S. dropped all charges against him later last year.

Mohamed is an Ethiopian who moved to Britain when he was a teenager. He was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and claims he was tortured both there and in Morocco. He was transferred to Guantanamo in 2004. He was finally returned to Britain in late February 2009, with no charges against him.

He is suing the British government, charging that its intelligence services were complicit with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in facilitating his "extraordinary rendition" and torture while in custody.

The court said the plea bargain also asked Mohamed to plead guilty to two charges and agree not to speak publicly about his ordeal.

Zachary Katznelson, legal director of Reprieve, a legal action charity that has represented Mohamed for four years, told IPS, "In Binyam Mohamed’s case, the United States clearly prized secrecy over justice. It simply did not want the truth to get out."

He added, "That has nothing to do with national security, but everything to do with the potential for national embarrassment. If we are to truly combat terrorism, we must use the tools of democracy -- openness, fairness, justice -- not abandon them, then desperately try to cover up our wrongs."

In their ruling Monday, the British judges revealed how the U.S. government tried to get Mohamed to sign an agreement stating that he had never been tortured, to promise not to speak with the media upon his release, and to plead guilty as a condition of his release back to Britain -- all without his lawyers being allowed access to evidence that would help prove his innocence.


No comments: