If Only ONE Fact Can Shoot Down G.W. Bush's Conspiracy Theory of 911 This is the One!

By Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

A 757 is said to have struck the Pentagon on 911! If that is true, then a miracle occurred on 911: an airliner vanished completely at the Pentagon!  It was a miracle that competes with the Old Testament, a miracle that defied the law of the Conservation of Matter and Energy.

The most obvious miracle involves aircraft engines. A 757 has two large turbo-fans made of hardened industrial steel capable of withstanding very high temperatures inside the engine. They would have survived any fire short of a nuke! They may be capable of suviving a nuke. But kerosene (jet fuel) --no sweat!

Only ONE survived and was found

The only turbo-fan found and photographed is about 1/3 the size of a 757 turbo-fan. It is, however, the right size to have been left behind by a U.S. GLOBAL HAWK, a payload carrying missile that had earlier been flown from the American west coast to Australia (where it landed) completely by remote control. It was the Global Hawk --not an airliner --that crashed into the Pentagon. Even Rumsfeld referred to '...the missile that struck this building."

Rumsfeld was right!

Bush lied! But both men should be indicted for at least two crimes: 1) high treason 2) mass murder!

---

---

The Rise of Fascism in Bush-Perry Texas

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Recently --Texas Gov Rick Perry's boisterous audience of schizoid GOP idiots were caught waving US flags: SECEDE! Perhaps, because of what the GOP has made of it, Texas should secede. By presiding over the deterioration of public education in Texas, the Bush/Perry GOP has created a fascist model in which the profits of huge, right-wing inclined corporations rise as TX educational standards decline; a model in which illiteracy rises concurrently with corporate profits; a model in which the living conditions of millions deteriorate as the lifestyles of a dwindling few grow opulent beyond the ability of even oil barons to imagine.

Texas is about 50 years behind the US. As Bush-Perry neglected education, crime rates rose, most noticeably --murder! Drop-outs account for most, if not all, increases in violent crimes. Minorities --primarily black and Hispanic --are meanwhile disproportionately represented in the Texas gulag system but under represented in the State legislature, the various city councils, and the state judicial system.

Texas is about 50 years behind the US, much more so if compared to Europe. Minorities --primarily black and Hispanic --are disproportionately represented in the Texas gulag system but under represented in the State legislature, the various city councils, and the state judicial system.

Texas was once a Great State and, as a native Texan, I mourn its passing!

Declines in education and jobs are of no concern to the current Governor --Rick Perry, called Governor Good Hair by Molly Ivins, a real Texan, a patriot and brilliant writer. During the Bushy - Hair era, Texas became a gulag state by beating out Mississippi for dead last in high school graduations. A matter of considerable concern among intelligent, thoughtful people but for the axis of Bush-Perry it means more fodder for the corporate owned and run state prison system. The word for this is fascism! There is, in Texas, a corporate gulag of GOP making. One fears that the Texas model will be replicated across America:

1. subvert public education
2. exploit the resulting rise in crime to elect more GOP candidates
3. lock up the victims in corporate-owned prison hell-holes.

That is how Texas became the lab study, the 'fascist model' upon which a fascist state is built. This model is not new. Hitler tried it with concentration camps. The primary corporate beneficiaries were I.G. Farben and Thyssen/Krupp.

These basic fascist principles have inspired movies --good, bad, and ugly. The 'bad' summons up memories of a horrible movie: Judge Dredd, a fascist 'wet dream' in which so-called 'judges', having murdered 'due process of law' could pass sentences on the spot! Fascists, red necks, Bush, Perry were most surely inspired by a single line summing up so many GOP aspirations: “The justice system works swiftly in the future now that they've abolished all lawyers.”

The rise of Fascist-Goppism in Texas was signaled by the constant anti-trial lawyer drumbeat. Soon --trial lawyers will be out of a job and no one will be allowed to present a defense. No problem --Judge Dredd and Gov Perry will just fill up those corporate hell-holes with fresh meat!

Slavery is back! Perhaps it never left! Every fascist dictatorship is preceded with cries of : kill all the lawyers! Depriving them of a profession, a livlihood may be slower but just as effective.
Crimes rates --rising, falling, stagnate --never justify the death penalty. In fact, crime rates invariably increase in death penalty states. States without the death penalty have consistently lower murder rates.

The GOP in Texas might prefer you think they are stupid. Otherwise, you might conclude that because these facts may be easily obtained and verified that their heinous policies were chosen --not out of GOP incompetence --but deliberately for the purpose of filling up the prisons, thus enriching the corporations which own and run the prisons.
,
The death penalty is medieval, barbaric and ineffective. Throughout history, the death penalty has failed to deter crimes of any sort. There is, therefore, no rationale for the state murder of anyone accused of any crime. Increasingly fewer cases are 'proven' beyond a 'shadow of a doubt'. A disproportionate number are arrested for the crimes of being black and/or poor.

States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Records on Homicide Rates

A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," said the state's governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty."

--New York Times, 9/22/00, Death Penalty Information Center

Texas, notably, has not occupied a position of prominence with regard to petroleum production since it was discovered that bombing Iraq and killing civilians there was much, much cheaper than is the secondary recovery of oil. Why spend millions exploring for oil when you can just steal fields that are already productive?  The cost of bombing the crap out of the oil's rightful owners?? Hell --the taxpayer is stuck with that tab!

Because of rapacious oil development, the neglect of education and the hubristic disregard for human rights and environment, so-called 'free enterprise' has robbed millions of children of a decent education and as many poor of justice in a state ruled by goddamned liars, elites and their ass kissers: the GOP!

• Texas --Bush style --provides the residents of Texas with some of the nation's very worst crime and incarceration rates;
• Texas subjects the residents of Texas to deteriorating air quality and wanton ecosystem destruction;
• Texas can boast of the nation's very worst murder, crime and incarceration rates!
• Texas --a state that now leads the nation in pollution, crime, and illiteracy --should be studied by any other state wishing to avoid a similar disastrous fate.

Fascism --now dominating the political and cultural life of Texas --spawns crime and creates the conditions in which it is nurtured and thrives and, worse, benefits the GOP and its corporate sponsors.

Still, most people are now ashamed to admit that punishment is based on vengeance and, for that reason, various excuses and apologies have been offered for the cruelty that goes with it. Some of the more humane, or “squeamish,” who still believe in punishment, contend that the object of this infliction is the reformation of the victim. This, of course, cannot be urged of the death penalty or even punishment for life, or for very long-term sentences. In these cases there is neither inducement to reform nor any object in the reformation. No matter how thorough the reform, the prisoner never goes back to society, or he returns after there is no longer a chance for him to be of use to the world or to enjoy life.

--Clarence Darrow, Crime: It's Cause and Treatment

Tea Baggers are Scumbaggers!

If there is a real and widespread desire among Texans to secede, then, by all means, secede. But in fact, I believe secession talk is just another right wing smokescreen with which it exploits its base and deceives otherwise good citizens of Texas!

Power may corrupt, and absolute power may corrupt absolutely, but in the comics Judge Dredd is basically Dirty Harry on Overdrive, an incorruptible lawman obsessed with The Law and Justice. The official plot synopsis of the 1995 movie swallows the official line too: “In the Third Millennium a powerful and efficient hybrid of the police and judicial system has given birth to group of new guardians of the law with the power to dispense instant justice and punishment. These judges are law enforcer, jury and executioner. One of these judges, Judge Joseph Dredd is a living legend - six feet of armored justice with no outside interests besides his devotion to enforcing the law.” Why anyone would however want to make a sequel or (bullshit Hollywood jargon coming up) “re-imagining” of Judge Dredd is a bit of a mystery. The original film disappointed at the box office and made a mere $113 million world-wide. Audiences who didn’t know the character beforehand were baffled. “Considering that the movie was adapted from comic books, the least we should expect is a juicy battle between good and evil,” Anthony Lane wrote in The New Yorker, “but the conflict is, in fact, a matter of fine distinctions between shades of Fascism.”

--FROM PAGE TO SCREEN: JUDGE DREDD (2012)

Fascist Bullshit: "I AM the law!"

---

The Death Penalty for Murderous 'Corporate Persons'

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

If corporations are 'people', as SCOTUS has said they are, then, by law, a corporation committing murder should be executed! A corporation like Dow or Union Carbide perpetrating mass murder should be tried and when found guilty put to death! Because corporations are now 'people', the same criminal penalties must apply to them as well as to the rest of us. To do otherwise violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically, the 'equal protection' clause.

How do you put a corporation to death? How do you execute a corporation?

• You wipe the incorporation off the books; it no longer exists;
• you round up the major decision makers --the board, top execs etc --and you put them to the SAME punishment that would be exacted individuals for the same crime!

My friend David Tingley summed it up:

• Forfeiture of all company assets to the government. All stocks become worthless on conviction. Real estate, buildings and equipment auctioned off to the highest bidder - someone willing to turn them back into an honest business perhaps?
• All senior officers of the company surrender bonuses for the 5 years preceding the offense and salary for the last two. Officers involved in the decision process leading to the death face the same jail time as an armed robber who kills

If corporations are people then they must obey the same laws that apply to people who commit mass murder, armed robbery or any number of crimes that corporations may have gotten away with simply because they were not people. Times have changed. Corporations must now live in real world where 'evil doers' are locked up in a dank cell or worse -- getting the lethal needle in Texas. In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Supreme Court dramatically changed Fourth Amendment jurisprudence when it handed down its decision in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). Weeks involved the appeal of a defendant who had been convicted based on evidence that had been seized by a federal agent without a warrant or other constitutional justification. The Supreme Court reversed the defendant's conviction, thereby creating what is known as the "exclusionary rule." In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court made the exclusionary rule applicable to the states.

--Findlaw

The Fourth Amendment reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

How does this apply to corporations? Corporations are now people. Mapp v. Ohio [cited] specified the rights of 'people' to be secure against the described powers of the state. But are corporations people? It was the California Constitutional Convention of 1878-79 in which the state legislature's new constitution denied railroads [corporations] a right that had been granted real people, that is "...the right to deduct the amount of their debts [i.e., mortgages] from the taxable value of their property." Southern Pacific refused to pay up and challenged the law based upon what was called a 'conflicting federal statute' of 1866 giving them 'privileges' inconsistent with state taxation.

In a unanimous decision, SCOTUS ruled that the railroad was, indeed, 'privileged' and that the state of California had illegally assessed the total value of the railroad's property. It was a first, tentative step down the road to the conflicting notions of 'privilege' on the one hand and 'corporate personhood' on the other. Perhaps the court has not figured out that persons are not privileged. Our rights, as people, as enumerated in the Bill of Rights, are not 'privileges' in Anglo-American jurisprudential tradition. Rather, they follow from 'natural rights' as described by John Locke [See: Human Rights, Stanford University] and, much earlier, affirmed in Magna Carta. No such 'right' has ever been recognized as belonging to mere contracts, legal abstractions, combines or corporations!

I believe that 'corporate personhood' is but the first step to making of these United States a fascist state. In times past, the 'state' itself was considered to be and often called a 'corporation'. Thomas Hobbes described such a state in 'The Leviathan'.

The second part of the paper is mostly focused on Leviathan and deals with the consequences of such an interpretation to Hobbes's account of representation and persons of the sovereign, subjects and the state. It is argued that it is unlikely that Hobbes considered the person of the state as clearly separated from the sovereign?s person and that there can be no differentiation between the sovereign's private and public persons. Finally, it is suggested that the person of the state has to be viewed from different perspectives. For example, in the sphere of international relations Hobbesian commonwealth is a single natural person, whereas its citizens see it differently from the inside: as a personified combination of their own wills that is being unified and represented by the sovereign. The sovereign, on the other hand, acts as she would act in the state of nature, without any regard to the fact that her subjects consider her an artificial person.

--Marko Simendic', The Personhood of the State in Thomas Hobbes’s Political Philosophy [PDF]

Now, corporate 'papers' may be searched and/or seized upon the probable cause that the 'corporate person' has committed a crime. I suspect that the corporate crime wave since 1900 will produce millions of 'papers' proving all manner of crimes against 'real' people perped by corporations who got away with it only because they were not real people. Specific instances include deaths of thousands in Bhopal at the hands of Union Carbide and Dow Chemical et al.

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process f law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

--Fourteenth Amendment, Constitution of the United States of America

The Fourteenth Amendment followed a bloody Civil War. It defined citizenship in broad terms, overturning what has been called the worst Supreme Court decision in U.S. history --Dred Scott v Sandford of 1857. It was Dred Scott that robbed black persons of 'personhood' denying them every protection and every right that had been guaranteed in the Constitution. Until the recent decision 'creating' corporations people, Dred Scott had been the very worst decision in U.S. history. Clearly --the current court has no monopoly on stupidity!

These decisions are mirror images. The more recent ruling, which I shall call the Pinocchio Fiat, grants personhood to mere 'legal abstractions' as the earlier court had denied personhood to real people! We've come full circle and once again found idiocy and evil.

More recently, Jim Hightower reports another outrage by yet another corporation which will no doubt seek refuge in its 'privileged' position --being a person but only when it suits them. In the case of murder by a corporation, the corporation, the Leviathan, will most certainly not want to be a person.

A mass murder has taken place in another American workplace, taking 29 lives. The authorities know who did it, so shouldn't that person be made to pay for this heinous crime?

Yes! But the killer is one of America's largest coal corporations, Massey Energy Company, and you can't give the death penalty to a corporation. Can you? Well, the Supreme Court has ruled that a corporation is a "person" – so why not?

Massey – headed by its right-wing multimillionaire CEO, Don Blankenship – has spent millions of dollars on lobbyists and lawmakers to fend off any effective regulations to protect mine workers. By using its political clout to muzzle the federal watchdog, Massey has been able to flaunt the law. Last year, it had nearly 500 safety violations in just one of its mines, including life-threatening violations. It's punishment? Fines totaling a mere $168,000 – chump change to an outfit with $56 million in profits last year.

--Jim Hightower, Corporate Murder

It is ironic that the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment was to protect people's rights against the power of government at a time when corporations had been placed above the law. Now that SCOTUS has pulled a Pinocchio and created corporations 'real people', those provisions of the law that had applied only to people apply now to Corporations. If a corporation's heedless actions result in death despite warnings, that corporation must be put to death --just as persons are routinely executed in the GOP gulag state of Texas for much less!!

---

What Must Obama do about the Lie of the Century?

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Obama should get off his butt and insist upon war crimes trials of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condo Rice. That Iraq had WMD was a bald faced lie to justify the seizure of Middle East oil fields! Ergo --every Iraqi death following is one count in a WAR CRIMES INDICTMENT on the scale of those charged to Adolph Hitler and high mucky mucks in the murderous Third Reich.

TITLE 18 >(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

-- PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441, War crimes

I say let the trials begin with George W. Bush who believed himself above the law and that the US Constitution was just a 'goddamned piece of paper'!

The government official who wrote the first draft of the "dodgy dossier" that helped propel Britain into war in Iraq today admits, "We were wrong."

John Williams, a former Foreign Office aide, said last night that publication of his document would expose how members of Tony Blair's team were locked in a mindset that made military action inevitable.

On Wednesday, ministers will hit a deadline for publishing the 2002 document, after years of resistance.

The Williams draft was written in September 2002, only days after Mr Blair, then Prime Minister, announced that the Government would publish a dossier of intelligence showing that Saddam Hussein threatened the world with his weapons.

The draft was not disclosed at the Hutton inquiry into the death in 2003 of the former Iraq arms inspector David Kelly. The scientist had suggested the dossier was exaggerated to justify the UK joining the 2003 invasion.

--'Dodgy dossier' was 'wrong', its author says, The Independant

According to the Times of London, Ministers had been warned in July 2002 that it "had no choice but to find a way" of making the American-led invasion of Iraq legal. In other words, the government in Britain KNEW that what Bush was doing in and to Iraq was a prosecutable war crime but, instead of doing the right thing, Britain sought to 'make it legal'. The very phrase --'to make it legal' --speaks to guilt and pre-meditation of both the US government of George W. Bush and the British government of Tony Blair in whom so many hopes had been invested, later dashed by the corrupting influences of the worst and most criminal White House in US history.

Damn Liars and War Criminals!

If the nation had wanted another eight years of war, a total of some twenty years of quagmire, war crimes and other atrocities. it might have put two idiots in the White House --John McCain and the even stupider Sarah Palin.

Rather, the nation wanted change and expressed that hope by electing an articulate man of substance. Committing the nation to an quaqmire well underway is NOT what the nation voted for. Another eight years of Bush's war crime is NOT the path the US should be on if it wishes to restore its blackened image throughout the world.

Nope! No WMD under the podium!

Why I moderate comments

• SPAM: 'comments' that link to junk, 'get rich' schemes, scams, and nonsense! These are the worst offenders.
• Ad hominem attacks: 'name calling' and 'labeling'. That includes the ad hominem: 'truther' or variations!

Also see:

• A Spiritual Mind Movie
• How the US Became a Vassal State of China
  
• Terrorism is Worse Under GOP Regimes
  
• The US Army Document That Proves the US is the World's Number One Sponsor of World Terrorism
• Dissecting the Scrambled Brains of the GOP
  
• Why the CIA is the World's Number One Terrorist Organization
  [w/LINKS]
• Why the CIA is the World's Number One Terrorist Organization [PDF]
• How the GOP Pays Off its 'Base' of Elites
  

Published Articles on Buzzflash.net

Subscribe

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Spread the word

Mr. Obama, Bring Down the War Criminals!

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Among several sticky tar babies Bush left Obama the worst are: Guantanamo, torture, capital war crimes! The clock is ticking for Obama. The time for 'good faith' is running out! Unless Obama moves to close Guantanamo now and end the practice of torture while bringing war crimes charges against Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al., he risks being so charged himself!

Preventive detention is the classic defining characteristic of a military dictatorship. Because dictatorial regimes rely on fear rather than consensus, their priority is self-preservation rather than improving their people's lives. They worry obsessively over the one thing they can't control, what Orwell called "thoughtcrime" -contempt for rulers that might someday translate to direct action.

Locking up people who haven't done anything wrong is worse than un-American and a violent attack on the most basic principles of Western jurisprudence. It is contrary to the most essential notion of human decency. That anyone has ever been subjected to "preventive detention" is an outrage.

--Ted Rall, Resign Now

One hundred days have come and gone! There is still no strongly worded condemnation of the practice of torture! There is still no support for the bringing of war crimes charges against Bushco! The 'closing of Guantanamo' is merely confused --not resolved!

As the New York Times noted: "... the unresolved eight year nightmare will continue raining down drip by drip, disrupting Obama's high ambitions". If torture had not been wrong, illegal, immoral, then why did Bush spend so much of his time denying it, lying about it, conning the American people and the world?

Bush lied about US policies of torture and other war crimes because Bush knew it was wrong and deliberately set about to 'fool' the people! He failed because he was and remains a lousy liar, a cretin, an ignorant ass wipe who did not win the White House fairly. His morally bankrupt party stole the White House in what Republicans themselves boasted was a coup d'tat! Bush and his party are likewise 'credited' with Reaganesque and outrageous deficits which coupled with astronomical transfers of wealth upward to the elite have brought the nation to the very edge of financial collapse! We expected more and we deserve more from the Democrats! We held them to a higher standard! Will Obama prove us wrong to have done so?

Obama reversed himself with a declaration that no more photos of torture will be released! Is this not an admission that there are --indeed --more photos that SHOULD be released? Is this not an admission that the practices of torture, some of which should have resulted in capital crimes charges against Bush himself, are still underway? If Bush's orders resulting in death make Bush culpable for the death penalty, then where is the clause that absolves Obama of the same crime?

(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

--US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441

This federal law is still on the books! It is still ignored by the office of President of the United States, the office that is empowered by the US Constitution with the authority to enforce and uphold the laws of the United States. Does this basic concept no longer mean anything to the people and, most importantly, to those who are sworn to uphold the law? I want ...no! I demand to know when the laws of the United States came to mean absolutely nothing.

I find it significant that both public immorality and disregard for the 'rule of law' have increased with the rise of the religious right, radical fundamentalism and 'religiosity' in general. I find significant that support for war crimes, state sponsored murder, death squads, torture and other Nazi-like atrocities was extremely strong among the religious right, devotees of Pat Robertson and similar ilk. As I have stated, the 'religious right' is not just wrong but dead wrong and immoral. Pat Robertson, it may be recalled, advocated 'death squads' and the murders of foreign leaders with whom he disagreed! This is just evil --pure and simple!

Ever since he was released from Guantanamo in February after six years of due-process-less detention and brutal torture, Binyam Mohamed has been attempting to obtain justice for what was done to him. But his torturers have been continuously protected, and Mohamed's quest for a day in court repeatedly thwarted, by one individual: Barack Obama. Today, there is new and graphic evidence of just how far the Obama administration is going to prevent evidence of the Bush administration's torture program from becoming public.

In February, Obama's DOJ demanded dismissal of Mohamed's lawsuit against the company which helped "render" him to be tortured on the ground that national security would be harmed if the lawsuit continued. Then, after a British High Court ruled that there was credible evidence that Mohamed was subjected to brutal torture and was entitled to obtain evidence in the possession of the British government which detailed the CIA's treatment of Mohamed, and after a formal police inquiry began into allegations that British agents collaborated in his torture, the British government cited threats from the U.S. government that it would no longer engage in intelligence-sharing with Britain -- i.e., it would no longer pass on information about terrorist threats aimed at British citizens -- if the British court disclosed the facts of Mohamed's torture.

--Glenn Greenwald, Obama administration threatens Britain to keep torture evidence concealed

I demand that those government officials in both administrations be arrested, charged and tried for the capital crimes that are specifically and unambiguously the subject of the above cited federal law --US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441!

If the laws do not apply to elected officials, then they do not apply to us!
Government may not have it one way! Those governments that presume to be above the law are, in fact, outlaw governments. They are illegitimate.
Despite the Obama order that no more photos be released, there are still more photos to be seen! Certainly --the photos are evidence that US Codes were and continue to be violated with impunity. Orders that the photos be suppressed are obstructions of justice and are, in themselves, prosecutable! I will support the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate this order! Clearly, however, any move to impeach Obama is transparently hypocritical if the same charges are not brought against the gang of heinous war criminals who dared call themselves the 'Bush administration'!

The photos will be released --eventually! And the order to suppress them will look foolish if not criminal! Some of them have already been leaked. I am not interested in rationalizations that we hoped had bit the dust along with the failed Bush administration, primarily the cop out that Al Qaeda will be angered! Fuck Al Qaeda! I doubt that they are half as angered as am I! Secondly, I doubt that Al Qaeda exists as anything other than the CIA 'shill' organization that they were in their inception, the CIA 'shill' organization that they most certainly continue to be.

Obama refuses to hold responsible and accountable the very people who authorized and utilized a heinous and un-American program of torture, perhaps murder! It is imperative that the US prove to the world that it take these issues seriously! The entire world takes them seriously and will forever dismiss the US, a waning 'superpower' in any case if it should not! The US has no moral choice but to:

• expose and 'own up' to heinous practices of torture and state-sponsored murder!
• bring specific charges against individuals who have issued specific orders in specific cases;
• bring charges against the architects of these policies in both the Bush and the Obama administrations!

The country, the world is sick to death of talk, spin and propaganda! The world demands action! The world demands an immediate end to this bullshit!


Mr. Obama, TEAR DOWN THESE ILLEGAL PRISONS!

MR. OBAMA, BRING TORTURERS AND MURDERERS TO TRIAL!

MR. OBAMA, STOP THE WAR CRIMES, STOP THE MURDERS, STOP THE TORTURE! NOW!

A list of broken promises continues to grow! These crimes are but a continuation of Bush administration policies.

Mr. Obama --you were NOT elected to be Bush-lite!

You were elected to UNDO Bush's many failures!

You were elected to RIGHT the many wrongs that had been done by Bush!

You were elected to UPHOLD the rule of law!

You put your hand on a black book and swore to protect and defend the Constitution! That act meant nothing to Bush. We had hoped it meant more to you!

Mr. Obama, the commission of war crimes abroad is NOT authorized to any branch of the US government by the US Constitution! Either you will uphold the Constitution or you will not! If you will not, it is the moral responsibility of the US citizenry to remove you and replace you with someone who will.

---

Why George W. Bush Should Stand Trial for Capital Crimes

There is probable cause now to try George W. Bush for capital crimes in connection with the US program of torture at Abu Ghraib as well as the war of aggression against Iraq. There is evidence that George W. Bush ordered this program which most certainly resulted in numerous violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Nuremberg Principles.

(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

-US Codes, TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441; How Current is This?

Certainly, the Bush regime has sought to make 'legal' Bush's crimes ex post facto, after they had already been committed. The argument that Bush, as 'President', may pardon himself or grant himself retroactive immunity from prosecution is just silly. If that were the case, every President might have tried to get away with it by simply making it all up as one goes along --the very anti-thesis of the 'rule of law', indeed, 'Due Process of Law', guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. If mere Presidents were allowed this kind of power, they might as well rule by decree, as Bush has presumed to do. As I have pointed out not even European monarchs were permitted to get away with that. King Charles I was beheaded for less. [See: Why Bush Made Plans to Invade the Netherlands; Bush's Unitary Executive Ends the Rule of Law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Separation of Powers].

George W. Bush has never denied that 'torture' was conducted upon his order. Abu Ghraib was not only about 'waterboarding' it was about a panoply of torture procedures --all of them perpetrated upon Bush's order. Bush has never denied that he ordered any procedure that we associate with Abu Ghraib. He has merely tried to justify it, as he tried to do in the following interview with Matt Lauer of the Today Show.

Bush: Bully and War Criminal

Bush does not deny. He merely tries to justify 'alternative procedures' --in English: torture and murder. We are supposed to conclude that because he has an 'obligation to protect the American people', he is above laws that make his actions punishable by death. I suppose that anyone, having committed crimes for which death is the penalty, might try the same thing. Less privileged criminals, however, should not even think about trying to make their capital crimes legal by decree.

I have bad news for Bush. Even if his regime were 'legitimate' his various decrees bypassing both Congress and the Constitution are unlawful. Bush is not above the law, though he may think he is. Likewise, King Charles I of England may have thought himself above the authority of Parliament but found out otherwise but much too late to keep his head attached to his body.

Bush has clear legal responsibility for his torture policies, the war deaths in Iraq and the admitted murders he confessed to in the 2003 SOTU address.

All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. Many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way -- they are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies. (Applause.

---Bush Boasting of Having Ordered Mass Murder, State of the Union Address, 2003

And let's not forget his plans to murder civilian journalists in Qatar, testified to by two UK officials who were prepared to put their careers (and freedom) on the line to make sure the story got out. Bush discussed murdering these al jazeera journalists with Tony Blair.

If Bush had any confidence in his actions he would lay his cards on the table. He doesn't, so he won't. The Office of Legal Counsel is refusing to hand over legal advice provided to Bush that supposedly justifies his executive orders. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) was able to review three of these documents and was shocked by what he read:

An Executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new Executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous Executive order. Rather than violate an Executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.

The President, exercising his constitutional authority under article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President's authority under article II.

As [the] Whitehouse further notes...."In other words, the president can decide whether his own interpretation of the law is lawful."

And that's about the whole ball game, folks. Once the President becomes a fully fledged "unitary executive" the law disappears up the kazoo. It simply loses all meaning.

But Bush is aware that his actions would not stand the pesky scrutiny and the ordinary morals of ordinary citizens. And so he hides his handiwork. It's the same story on the just completed Pentagon report confirming that Saddam Hussein never had any connections to al Qaeda. It won't be published on the web since that would embarrass Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld and identify them as liars and war criminals. Instead, if people want a copy they can write to the Pentagon and the military will send them a CD of their findings in a plain sealed envelope. Isn't that nice? Clearly no frog-marching will be happening for Georgie Boy. And why should it? In his own words:

Damien, 70 Reasons to doubt

Photos from Abu Ghraib document or are, at least, evidence that these procedures resulted in death on occasion. A complete investigation should be mandatory. Bush's efforts to exempt himself from the law are themselves unconstitutional and may not provide the cover he needs to escape the consequences of a real and thorough investigation into the program of abuses at Abu Ghraib. Federal laws make Bush's orders to torture capital offenses. Let's cut to the chase; George W. Bush has committed capital crimes. I say let's get on with the trial.

As an expert witness in the defense of an Abu Ghraib guard who was court-martialed, psychologist Philip Zimbardo had access to many of the images of abuse that were taken by the guards themselves. For a presentation at the TED conference in Monterey, California, Zimbardo assembled some of these pictures into a short video.

Wired.com obtained the video from Zimbardo's talk, and is publishing some of the stills from that video here.

Many of the images are explicit and gruesome, depicting nudity, degradation,
simulated sex acts and guards posing with decaying corpses. Viewer discretion is advised.

--Awful New Photos from Abu Ghraib

Bush's attempts to justify torture citing his obligation to protect the American people. His case is not convincing. When all the stats are analyzed, it will be proven that by giving presumed enemies a cause celebre to wage war upon the US and its people, terrorism will have increased and the American people put in greater danger. Certainly, official FBI stats, compiled and published by the Brookings Institution, proved conclusively that while Ronald Reagan waged his equally absurd 'war on terrorism', terrorism, in fact, got much, much worse. Americans are endangered by these reckless right wing, GOP policies.

Federal Judges may convene Grand Juries on their own motions. I urge courageous and honorable Federal Judges to do precisely that. I would encourage such a judge to charge this panel with a full investigation of the capital crimes for which there is probable cause now to bring charges against Bush, to try him for his crimes. Bush should be subpoenaed to appear before such a panel and prosecuted for obstruction of justice if he refuses.

Bush's decrees designed to place himself above the law are null and void, themselves unlawful. Bush should be compelled under oath to tell the truth or risk an indictment for perjury. Should he perjure himself, he thus risks prosecution for capital crimes, and, likewise, should he decide to confess his complicity in war crimes for which the penalty is death. Bush must stand trial now for having committed capital crimes.

Additional resources

• Robert Fisk On Dictator Bush and the Swingin' Corpse of the Dictator We Created
• Should Blue States Refuse to Pay for Red State War Crimes, Follies, Profligacy
• States want to secede from the United States
• "Vermont Passed A Resolution To Secede From The US"
• States Most Likely to Secede

Subscribe

Bush, Capital Crimes, war Crimes, Torture

Spread the word