Friday, November 09, 2007

Can We Please Get On With the Capital Crimes Trial of George W. Bush?

...before Bush starts World War III! Word is Israel is planning to strike Iran. That takes the heat off Bush while giving him the war he wants in the Middle East. Scenario: Israel strikes Iran. [See:Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran] Iran retaliates. The US joins Israel and Bush get his jollies watching mushroom clouds from afar! Gog Magog, my ass! Bush is psychotic and so are his clients.
ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.

Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.

The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.
The debate about whether "waterboarding" is or is not "torture" is another GOP red herring. Waterboarding was practiced by the Spanish Inquisition precisely because it was torture! Anyone who denies waterboarding is torture should prove it's not by publicly submitting themselves to it. That just might end another stupid obfuscation by the GOP. Then again, it doesn't really matter what it's called --especially by the liars of Bush's illegitimate regime. By any defintion, it is a violation of Due Process of Law and the various international conventions to which the US is bound. At last, waterboarding is only one of numerous atrocities carried out at Abu Ghraib, one of numerous US gulags. There is no evidence that US practices --in secret --have changed in response to exposes by Seymour Hersh et al. Chances are, as long as Bush continues to stink up the White House, the US is, as we write, carrying out a program of US sponsored, cold-blooded murder, torture and other crimes at taxpayer expense. Count on it!

I have yet to find anything in the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the various treaties to which the US is bound by law and convention that gives anyone in the US --including persons who call themselves "President" --a right to violate the persons of anyone. There are numerous laws which bind the US to the Geneva Convention despite unconstitutional attempts by both Bush and Congress to exempt Bush from Geneva but only after he had already violated it! The statute, in effect at the time Bush committed the crime, makes Bush a war criminal, subject to prosecution for capital crimes. Congress may change the law but the Constitution forbids they "back date it".
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

--Article 1, US Constitution

Now --can we please get on with the capital crimes trial of George W. Bush?

Bush is a Bigger Threat Than "Terrorists"!!

The charges against Rumsfeld are a good first step! My goal is to see the lot of them in the dock ---Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Ashcroft!!! Americans: let me put this bluntly. The Bush administration is not a legitimate administration. It is a crime syndicate, in office because the GOP helped them steal two elections. Being illegitimate, nothing done by this gang is legal or has the force of law. Let me put this yet another way: a criminal occupies the White House and presumes to rule by decree. In the words of Che, the peace must be considered "already broken".

The World Wide Campaign to
Bring Bush's War Criminals to Trial

Bush's arrest for his seemingly endless list of crimes and outrages is long overdue.

The Movement to Bring Bush to Justice

The right not to have one's person violated is inviolate. Bush has clearly committed crimes against humanity. There is no evidence, that anyone tortured by George "Torguemada" Bush or his minions in crime, has ever been connected with terror at any time, in any way. There is absolutely no evidence that torture has ever been effective in any way at any time. Clearly --anyone who is tortured will tell whatever story is sought. Richard Topcliffe --during the reign of Elizabeth I --most certainly succeeded only in getting bogus information from persons desparate to escape unbearable atrocities. It is hard not to conclude that Bush prefers to torture outside the law, beyond public scrutiny.

Show me some evidence! Show me a single "terrorist" that Bushco has ever brought to justice! Show me something other than bullshit!

'King' Bush no longer honors right that dates to Middle Ages

Mike Aivaz and Nick Juliano
Published: Friday November 9, 2007

Newly confirmed Attorney General Michael Mukasey will not rein in President Bush, who views himself as having the nearly unchecked executive power of a monarch, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) says.

"Are we just going to have another attorney general that's just going to kowtow to the king -- the president. I'm sorry I get those terms kinda confused here when I'm talking about Bush; I don't know if he's king or president," Harkin told his colleagues from the Senate floor Thursday.

"According to the last attorney general (Bush) was king, and maybe this one believes the same thing, he can do whatever he wants to," Harkin continued. "But even in 1215, the King of England was held to the standard of habeas corpus. I guess we want to turn the clock back to before the Magna Carta."

Harkin spoke shortly before the Senate voted to confirm Mukasey as attorney general, after the nominee weathered criticism of his refusal to declare waterboarding illegal torture. The Iowa Democrat criticized that position and the nominees refusal to commit to the notion that detainees in the war on terror -- including American citizens -- deserve habeas corpus guarantees, which require that anyone in captivity be charged with a crime or released. ...
And --today --we learned that the cowardly Democrats have confirmed yet another "torturer" as Atty General. Democrats, this is not good enough. How about the American people boycott this election and hold an alternative election? How about the people form a legitimate government under the law? At present, a lawless gang occupies Washington. What do the Democrats in Washington propose to do about it. I learned early in my broadcasting career that one was either a part of a solution or part of the problem. The cowardly Demos are quickly becoming a part of the problem, if not co-conspirators!

Now from the department of "Big Frickin' Deal"!!!

Democrats To Tie War Funding, Pullout

The AP reports, "Under pressure to support the troops but end the war, House Democrats said Thursday they would send President Bush $50 billion for combat operations on the condition that he begin withdrawing troops from Iraq." The proposal, "similar to one Bush vetoed earlier this year, would identify a goal of ending combat entirely by December 2008."

The Politico notes Speaker Pelosi "told reporters yesterday that the new proposal "would leave a small force in the country to pursue Al Qaeda, protect US interests and train Iraqi security forces." The New York Times says the plan "is certain to be opposed in the House by many Republicans as well as some strongly antiwar Democrats who want tougher restrictions on the president." The Hill notes Republicans "attacked Democrats for going to the well once again with votes calling for a withdrawal of troops." The measure "also caught many Democrats off guard. In the early afternoon, most legislators interviewed said they hadn't seen the legislation, even some who were actively trying to obtain a copy." ...

I am unimpressed! Democrats could have ended this war but haven't. The attitude is typified by Hilary who obviously believes that "Anti-war nut jobs" have no place to go.

In the meantime, it's time for Bush's criminal regime to put up or shut up! It's time Democrats grew a spine! It's time that the people of the US overthrew this government and replaced it with a lawful one under the Constitution.

In the meantime, Democrats have helped Bush get another torturer appointed to Attorney General. Bush will not have improved his horrible, criminal record with his appointment of 66 year old Michael Mukasy can be expected to follow the the example set by John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, two liars remembered for their contempt for the laws they swore to enforce and uphold. Congress has failed to find redemption.
Mukasey, 66, a former federal judge from New York, told senators he considers waterboarding "repugnant," but he could not categorically say whether the technique amounts to torture, which U.S. and international law bans.
(CBS) Waterboarding, a controversial interrogation technique that simulates drowning, dates back to at least the Spanish Inquisition, and has been used some of the world's cruelest dictatorships, according to Human Rights Watch.

Forms of waterboarding vary but generally consist of immobilizing an individual on his or her back - head inclined downward - and pouring water over the face to induce the sensation of drowning.

Other techniques include dunking prisoners head-first into water, as was used by Chadian military forces in the mid 1980s. The Khmer Rouge, responsible for the deaths of approximately 1.5 million Cambodians during the 1970s, strapped victims on inclined boards, with feet raised and head lowered, and covered their faces with cloth or cellophane. Water then was poured over their mouths to stimulate drowning.

Waterboarding, long considered a form of torture by the United States, produces a gag reflex and makes the victim believe death is imminent. The technique leaves no visible physical damage.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, considers waterboarding a form of torture. McCain has been quoted as saying that waterboarding is "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank."

--CBS News, Waterboarding: Interrogation Or Torture?

The single shred of good news:

U.S. Hawks Dive For Cover

Dennis Kucinich didn't vote for the 2002 resolution to invade Iraq. Several Democratic senators who voted for that resolution and who are currently presidential contenders for the 2008 election have expressed regrets; the only candidate who has not done so is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, amazingly the current Democratic front-runner. ...
As I wrote yesterday, this move by Kucinich puts more heat on Democrats than on the GOP. We know the GOP to be crooked war whores but we expected more from Democrats. Perhaps we should not have. We were taken for granted by a party that drinks from a poisoned well, a party that thinks we have no place to go.


Bush Corruption

Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine
Post a Comment