Saturday, January 10, 2009

Batshit Crazy

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Since 1980, US public life has been defined and dominated by three psychopathic personalities: Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush. It is no coincidence that the United States is poised upon the edge of an economic and moral abyss. Joining forces with the likes of the GOP is a Faustian bargain. It's midnight in America.
“A new CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll found that only 27 percent of Americans approve of Bush’s job performance. [. . .]”

“The anti-Bush group argues that most of his major policies have failed, that people trusted him but he let them down, especially in the Iraq war, and that has been too arbitrary and inflexible. [. . .]”

“On the anti-Bush side, Angusr of CA wrote, ‘Of course he is changing his colors. He does not want to be indicted for war crimes.’ . . . [‘]It is no surprise to me that President Bush destroyed the nation’s resolve, economy, and status throughout the world.’ And a reader in Ohio wrote, ‘Bush is still an idiot.’”

--He's [Bush] Still Divisive
There is a measure of Schadefreude to be found in Bush's ignominious retreat from the absolute dictatorship that he had asserted with various stupid statements not the least of which remains: "The Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper". Even so, it must be asked: why do the American people continue to 'elect' or facilitate election theft by the likes of a 'party' that is more accurately compared to crime syndicates and kooky, perverted cults.

One joining the GOP literally sells his soul. I can speak authoritatively on this point. I was offered lots of money to run for public office in my state, possibly State Rep or State Senate. I have never regretted saying no thanks! I might have ended up compromised and evil like Tom DeLay or George W. Bush. DeLay began his dubious career as a State Rep, gerrymandered the state, built up his 'machine'. At that point, he set his sites upon the US Congress. Kafka's character awakened as an insect but it cannot be said that he had planned to do so. DeLay, by contrast, was a roach killer who became a roach by choice. If as you follow someone you hear crunching noises you are obviously following a Republican who is molting.

Many folk who wind up in the GOP are just plain evil to begin with. These people, short sighted and utterly devoid of empathy, are attracted to a party of like-minded psychopaths who care nothing for anyone or anything but their own self-interests and greed which, they are taught, are 'good'. Recall the movie "Wall Street". The aptly named Gecko said: "GREED IS GOOD!"

GOP-types are in fact very fearful and insecure. They fear loss of property and status and will do anything to protect both. They are threatened by other 'classes' and resent improvements made by others in education or housing. The ascent of Ronald Reagan owed much to the many fears and insecurities of the GOP very rank and conformist file. About Reagan, a gopper opined: "he made us feel good about ourselves!" Upon hearing that, I suppressed the urge to puke. The remark was made from the floor of the GOP National Convention held in Houston in 1992.

GOP fears and insecurities manifest themselves as 'night terrors' and 'nightmares' which, as a study at Stanford University revealed are statistically high among the GOP. Those fears likewise manifest themselves in policies that are clearly of psychopathic origin, policies like aggressive war, imperialism and, most odious of all, state sanctioned murder and torture.
"Republicans have scarier and more frequent nightmares than Democrats concludes one prominent dream researcher. "Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats to experience nightmares when they dream," Kelly Bulkeley, who teaches at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif., claims in findings to be released Wednesday at the 18th Annual International Conference of the Association for the Study of Dreams in Santa Cruz.

"Half of the dreams of Republicans in my study were classified as nightmares, compared to only about 18 percent of the dreams of Democrats," Bulkeley reports. While Republicans and Democrats may agree with the survey's results, they are divided on the causes of the GOP's troubled sleep. Both parties, however, blame the man at the top."

The presidency of Ronald Reagan benefited by the fact that the 'loyal opposition' was entirely too cooperative, entirely too willing to give Herr Reagan the benefit of doubt. It was widely believed, even among Democrats, that Reagan, though wrong, would, at least, govern in 'good faith'. In other words, Reagan, it was believed, would not tell a lie KNOWING that it was a lie. Reagan, it was believed, may have been wrong but sincere.

He wasn't! Reagan was like every other Republican, that is, a cultist, a psychopath, a liar. He differed from Bush only because he got away with it for longer. He was, after all, an actor. The 'Presidency' was his biggest role. Reagan could fake sincerity better than any other gopper, setting a standard that, with any luck, the GOP may never again match.

I submit that we embrace an earlier attitude, that is, there should be consequences for being wrong and greater consequences for being wrong knowingly but persisting in spite of it. While Reagan was never held to this austere standard of responsibility, George W. Bush has, at least, accomplished what the smooth talking gran'pa figure could never have done. Bush has demonstrated just how idiotic was the 'pass' given the GOP. Bush has proven conclusively that the GOP is the party of bad intentions and equally bad outcomes.

I would hope that in the world apres Bush, the American people will refuse to be fooled by propaganda and linguistic tricks like 'support the troops', a cynical focus group approved phrase designed to divide the nation into war hawks on the one hand and traitors of everyone else. The fact of the matter is this: you CANNOT support troops who are actively involved in the commission of war crimes. This is especially true of an all volunteer military. Did I support the troops in Iraq? Absolutely not! I was no more supportive of US troops perpetrating war crimes in Fallujah and elsewhere than I might have been of Nazis razing Lidice. Get real, folks! You don't have the luxury of having it both ways!

It may be helpful at this point to review the characteristics of sociopathic 'spellbinders' as they are sometimes called. Dean Lawrence R. Velvel has described Bush's many symptoms:
  1. rigid judgmentalism;
  2. irritability;
  3. impatience;
  4. grandiosity;
  5. obsessive thought patterns;
  6. incoherent speech;
  7. immense anger;
  8. exploitativeness;
  9. arrogance;
  10. utter lack of empathy;
  11. difficulties arising from relationships with his father (George H.W. Bush);
  12. not caring about the suffering of others;
  13. sociopathic behaviours;
  14. serial failures;
  15. lack of competence;
  16. alcohol problems;
  17. narcissistic personality;
  18. doing anything to protect his psyche from the destruction of being shown wrong;
  19. inability to feel guilt; etc.
You've read my take on Bush. Here's another 'indictment' that is even more damning.
George Bush’s presidency is the culmination of a lifelong history of sadistic practices that he must deny in order to maintain his fragile psychological equilibrium. Since childhood, Bush was labeled a bad child, a troublemaker, and a delinquent. He stuck firecrackers into frogs and exploded them; he shot and wounded his little brothers with a b-b gun; he branded fraternity pledges at Yale with red-hot coat hangers; he mocked others and was a verbal bully, irreverent about anything serious.

What do bad boys do when they grow up? They stop; they change. But Bush never stopped being a bad boy; he only did it in more subtle, arguably socially acceptable ways.

Now, as this bad-boy president prepares to leave office, many of his critics are pinning his failures on bumbling incompetence. The conventional wisdom holds that Bush is either a good hearted guy who got in way over his head—or the puppet of Dick Cheney. But if he were simply good-hearted he wouldn’t have mocked his own reasons for committing our young men and women to war; if he were a puppet, he was a puppet who chose his puppeteers. In my psychoanalytic exploration, the trail of destruction wrought by Bush over the last eight years is the direct consequence of handing a man with a destructive personality profile tremendous power.

What do bad boys do when they grow up? They change. But Bush never stopped.

Bush is leaving office immensely satisfied with his presidential accomplishments: Not merely wreaking havoc worldwide – actively destroying Iraq, and passively turning his back on New Orleans – he became feared both abroad and at home, where Congress and the press have yet to muster the courage to confront him. Now, the financial devastation of his policies seems to be hurtling the globe ever faster towards an economic Judgment Day.

The secret sadist in Bush greets all this as wonderful news, made even better by the possibility that he won’t get caught or punished, and that others will at least have to clean up his mess if they can. He may look and sound uncharacteristically sheepish of late, but his sense of self as president remains unchanged at its core. His primary concern remains self-regard, not history’s.

Evading responsibility has always been a central element of the pleasure he takes in the suffering of others. His evasion has taken many forms, from colluding with questioners to let him off the hook, asking “Ken who?” when asked about Enron’s Ken Lay, to making light of his cruel deeds, casually dismissing the fraternity branding as nothing worse than a “cigarette burn,” or insisting that the United States does not torture when confronted by reporters about Abu Ghraib.

Sadism serves purposes besides giving the sadist pleasure at the pain he inflicts on others. For Bush, the roots of his bad-boy sadism run deep. As a young boy, he identified with his harsh and often cruel mother, whose inability to provide necessary maternal early nurturing culminated in her withdrawal after George’s young sister’s illness and untimely death. He was a ruthlessly-teased, learning-disabled little boy who was criticized by teachers for not being able to keep up in class. And he was left behind by an emotionally distant father who reinforced the message from his mother that it was pathetic for a seven-year-old to show grief about his sister’s death. All of these factors contributed to an unrelenting self-hatred that made him feel weak and ashamed, things he tried to deny by posing as superior, exploiting weakness in others and becoming a bully. This process of externalizing his damaged sense of self, which he then attacked, became so strong later in life that it could only be partly managed by daily exercise and prayer.


--Justin Frank, Why Bush Loves Violence
Perhaps I am unfair to expect the vast majority of Americans to have seen through George W. Bush as I did. To be fair, the millions living outside the state of Texas could not have known or witnessed the wars waged by Bush upon the environment, education, the poor, the accused, in fact, anyone not living in River Oaks, Tom DeLay's Sugarland or some other Republican cultist ghetto. It's a jungle out there. I might be wrong to hold the American people responsible for not sizing Bush up. I could be wrong. But I don't think so.
The American people now know that George W. Bush can never be trusted. The United Nations is not stupid: Bush could not just “change his colors” and fool the United Nations into thinking that Bush had not committed war crimes. Bush is definitely an idiot.

--George W. Bush is the Worst President in US History
I had to read that twice. In other words, the American people --presumably among the best fed and best educated in the world (well, at least, the best fed) --required eight years of overt criminality, mass murder, torture, war crimes, incompetence, stupid public behavior and sheer idiocy before it learned that George W. Bush is an idiot??? If that is the case, then WHO is the idiot?

Additional resources

Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership, Global Issues, Updated: January 02, 2009




Add to Google

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Add to Google

Download DivX

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

The GOP Planned to Violate Federal Law, Use US Military Against Civilians

According to a planning document obtained by the ACLU, the Republican National Convention had planned to violate federal law by using federal troops to suppress and/or infringe the rights of free speech and assembly during the recent Republican national convention. According to the ACLU, several named agencies are military based, a violation of federal laws prohibiting the use of the military in domestic intelligence gathering activities. It is also a violation of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. [ACLU]

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which provides mapping tools and imagery intelligence that are obtained from the United State's military spy satellites, is named specifically in the report. The document obtained by ACLU supports the charge that the RNC had planned to exploit the capabilities of what is called "these top spying tools" to gather intelligence, spy on activists, media, demonstrators. It is feared that the GOP (the RNC) would have relayed this illegally obtained information to local officials or agencies in the federal government.

The GOP had planned to involve NORTHCOM, the Pentagon's Northern Command. Northcom would have assisted in planning crowd control strategies, dealing with potential civil unrest, clearly a violation of Federal Law.
November 25, 2008, NORFOLK (NNS) -- U.S. Fleet Forces Command's (USFF) staff enhanced its capabilities to support global regional combatant commanders while simultaneously supporting U.S. federal disaster response efforts as it wrapped up its participation in Vigilant Shield 2009 (VS09) Nov. 12-18.

--U.S. Fleet Forces Command Tailors Operational Support for Vigilant Shield 09
The Army Times, meanwhile, had reported that NORTHCOM had, in fact, deployed an active military unit inside the United States, the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment within U.S. Borders. Nevermind that it is a clear violation of the law. But, when the government itself is illegitimate, the 'rule of law' means nothing; the Constitution itself is just a 'goddamned piece of paper'.
In a barely noticed development, a US Army unit is now training for domestic operations under the control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. An initial news report in the Army Times newspaper last month noted that in addition to emergency response the force “may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control.” The military has since claimed the force will not be used for civil unrest, but questions remain. We speak to Army Col. Michael Boatner, future operations division chief of USNORTHCOM, and Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine.

In a barely noticed development last week, the Army stationed an active unit inside the United States. The Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Team is back from Iraq, now training for domestic operations under the control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The unit will serve as an on-call federal response for large-scale emergencies and disasters. It’s being called the Consequence Management Response Force, CCMRF, or “sea-smurf” for short.

--Democracy Now, Is Posse Comitatus Dead? US Troops on US Streets
Furthermore it appears that the FBI may have been using a station faking technology that would allow them to locate an individual through their cell phone. The ACLU is concerned with how this technology is used and if there was proper judicial oversight. In the USA Patriot ACT, this process for obtaining a track was made easier, and could allow for little to no judicial oversight. This tracking via cell phones could have been used during the RNC without the knowledge of even the phone companies.

"These behaviors are a radical departure from separation of civilian law enforcement and military authority, and could, quite possibly, represent a violation of law," said Teresa Nelson, ACLU of Minnesota. The ACLU-MN will continue to investigate and will use their findings in future lawsuits against law enforcement officials.

--Revealing RNC document leaked

A final observation: this will only get worse until the current government is crushed and brought to book. Frankly, I don't see that happening. The US, it's 'goverment' in particular, is broken, perhaps irreparably. The regime of George W. Bush was illegitimate from the outset. Restoring legitimacy to a government which is, in fact, controlled by the MIC and the numerous lobbies that are dependent upon it is probably beyond the ability of a new administration to repair.

These are the symptoms of the end of empire. The US couldn't even do that right. Some have estimated that the Roman empire lasted almost 400 years. The US is not even in the ball park. How ludicrous that Bush fancied himself a dictator, a new Caesar. The 'new Caesar' will be remembered as the effeminate dipshit who pranced around the deck of an aircraft carrier in a too tight flight suit, an escapee from the Village People. My personal message to George Bush: fuck you, you megalomaniacal idiot!


Subscribe in a reader

Download DivX

Add to Technorati Favorites

, , ,

Spread the word

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine

Sunday, January 04, 2009

Has the Time Come to Abolish the State?

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy 

A new book, Against the State by philosopher Crispin Sartwell, rejects with impeccable logic the traditional arguments in support of state legitimacy and power. Sartwell finds lacking all of the classics of Western political philosophy --Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Hume, Bentham, Rawls, Habermas and others. They were not only wrong, he says, but indefensible.

He lists three traditional arguments in support of state power:
  • social contract theories,
  • utilitarianism
  • justicial views
In the end, Sartwell argues, state power does not reside within the consent given it by the people but, rather, on coercion, primarily, the threat and use of deadly force. Sartwell argues that the state use of coercion does not follow from legitimacy. Rather, state use of coercion is without legitimacy and demonstrates the illegitimacy of the state. It is on this point, specifically, that I fully concur. I believe that only human beings have rights. States, like corporations, are mere legal abstractions. What right has a legal abstraction to require of any one of us anything whatsoever? What if 200 million people told the state to fuck off?

I might have welcomed a strong, centralized state had I been certain that it would exercise its awesome power only against those would subvert the liberties of individuals or rob them of the fruits of their labor, necessities, homes, families, educations, careers. Certainly, George W. Bush has proven as no other President in our nation's history has or could have done that there is, indeed, no state of any form that can be entrusted with the care of our rights or welfare. Americans have erred twice. We believed in the legitimacy of state power. We trusted the state.

Anarchist Philosophy

Sartwell Interview

Sartwell's critique of all forms of 'state' power are correct as far as they go. Until recently, it was easy enough to justify 'state power' generally as simply the best choice among few --none of which were good. Surely decision theory must have something to say about the nature of this no win proposition.

The rise to power of George W. Bush in a nation that likes to think of itself as 'Democratic' is cause enough to re-examine the legitimacy of every means by which state power is exerted, indeed the concept of 'state power' itself. Sartwell's skepticism is timely and well placed.

The very existence of someone like Bush is evidence if not proof that Democracies are as inclined as totalitarian states to war crimes, abrogations of 'civil liberties', subversion of the 'separation of powers' thought to be the institutional check against absolute power. The strongest case for Democracy has been compromised, perhaps shattered forever. As I have often put it: if my rights as a human being are violated what difference does it make to me whether those rights are violated by Adolph Hitler or George W. Bush? If wars of aggression, in violation of numerous international prohibitions and conventions, are perpetrated, what difference does it make whether the offending nation is a communist state or a beacon of free market capitalism and Democracy? If human beings are tortured, their persons violated, their lives taken upon callous orders by higher ups, what difference does it make to the victim whether the order should issue from Adolph Hitler or George W. Bush?

I might have welcomed a strong, centralized state if I were certain that it would exercise its awesome power only against those would subvert the liberties of individuals or rob them of the fruits of their labor, necessities, a home, a family, an education, a meaningful career. Certainly, George W. Bush has proven as no other President in our nation's history has or could have done that there is, indeed, no state of any form that can be entrusted with the care of our rights or welfare. As the guarantor of social justice, the Bush administration has failed miserably if not deliberately. It is for this reason that Sartwell's argument that Social contract models (Hobbes & Locke, primarily) rest upon 'submission rather than consent' is most powerful and especially well-timed. The very existence of a 'George Bush' supports Sartwell.

However attractive, it is hard to imagine anarchy as the solution. By definition, anarchy is no check against the rise of a repressive state which is sure to rise up in reaction. To create an institutional check is to end --by definition --the anarchy. A dialectic of that form tends to confirm Hegel and Marx.

Perhaps what Sartwell is really telling us is that we have at last arrived at that point in human evolution in which our species will fall victim to the 'states' of our own creation! Like the parasite which kills its host, states enabled the survival of our kind when other forces in the natural environment posed the greater threat. We found safety in numbers and for our survival made peace of sorts with tyrants. Is Sartwell telling us that all systems, pressed to their logical conclusions, fail?

Sign The War Crimes Petition Already!

Don't expect me to or even ask me to tell you why you should sign the petition.

You already know why you should sign the petition. You don't need me or anyone else to tell you why you should sign the petition.

Petition BadgeClick the Badge to read and sign the Formal Petition to Attorney General-Designate Eric Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes.
Get BadgeClick "Get Badge" to get the html code and post the badge on your blog or website so other people can find and sign the petition too.

There is no more debate on these matters. The only people who want to continue debating these matters are war criminals who want to be let off the hook and supporters of letting war criminals off the hook.

Obama's Duty To Prosecute Bush For War Crimes, Patriot Daily, December 29, 2008
Signing the petition drafted by budhydharma and Docudharma is not in defiance of our President-Elect Obama, but rather a sign of support for the difficult times that he and Holder will face when performing their clear constitutional duties.

As President, Obama will have the constitutional duty to faithfully execute our laws.

The constitutional oath of office will require President Obama to faithfully execute the office of President and preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. Our constitution also requires that our presidents "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The principle of the rule of law is partially based on this Faithfully Execute clause which requires our President to comply with laws, our Constitution and treaties because our Constitution established a government of laws, not of men and women.

The Geneva Convention is one of the laws which must be faithfully executed.

Our constitution mandates that treaties are one of the laws that the President must faithfully execute. Moreover, treaties are recognized as one of our supreme laws of the land alongside our Constitution and federal laws. For over 200 years, the federal courts have reaffirmed that our President is bound by the laws of war, which include conventions. In fact, both Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004) and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)addressed issues of whether the US government was violating the terms of the 1949 Geneva Convention. Yet, some will whine that it is partisan to not exempt Bush from 200 years of precedent that governed presidents from both parties.

The Geneva Convention imposes a duty to prosecute former presidents who committed war crimes.
You already have your own reasons why you should sign the petition.

All the reasons that built up, piled one on top of the other for that past eight years as these criminals hijacked the country, dismantled the constitution and the rule of law, made their criminal friends fabulously wealthy, were directly responsible for the deaths of more than a million Iraqis in an illegal and immoral invasion and occupation, destroyed the global economy, wrecked America's reputation around the world, and called you a traitor when you cried foul and set up schemes to spy on you and intimidate you into silence.

And tortured people in your name. Tortured people. In your name. Tortured people with the blackest, most heinous and most evil torture methods known to humanity. Tortured people with methods that America has pressed war criminal charges against other countries citizens for using. Tortured people with the most sadistic and evil methods the Spanish Inquisition and more recently the Khmer Rouge made a regular habit of using as an oppression tool. Tortured people with methods that have been universally condemned and outlawed by virtually every country and society on earth.

You already know. You already know all of your own reasons why you should sign the petition.

Enhanced Interrogation Methods? No, The Word Is "Torture", Bob Higgins, October 4, 2007
I am sick to death of all the pussyfooting around the subject that has occupied the media for the duration of this premeditated, illegal war of terror that we the people of the United States have allowed to be waged against the people of Iraq, in our name, for the last several years.

No matter how much lipstick and rouge we smear on the face of this war no matter how we attempt to dress up the evil and bestial acts that have been performed in its unholy name, it still has the hideous countenance of an evil swine from hell.

It is an illegal war, begun and conducted under false pretenses, by a group of criminal liars and thieves in the United States Government, abetted by a cowardly congress who abrogated their constitutional duties in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds and furthered by a complaisant press that ignored their obligation to remain independent from government, from their sponsors and report the facts.

The members of the completely rogue executive department acted in their own self interest in a quest for personal power and wealth, in concert with the usual domestic and international corporate pirates who, in the depths of their insatiable greed, continually amplify human conflict to their own ends and bring poverty, war, suffering and death down upon the world.

There is no such animal as extraordinary rendition, nor do I know of the existence of any beasts called enhanced interrogation methods.

The first is kidnapping, it is illegal, a felony and the second word is torture, its meaning is clear:

1. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
2. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish.

Torture is illegal in this country, a felonious act, it is illegal in the world at large, according to several conventions that we are legally bound by. Anyone committing torture, causing it to be committed, directing its commission, or training others in its techniques is guilty, guilty of war crimes, of crimes against humanity and crimes against "Nature's God.
Tens of thousands of people have signed the Petition for a Special Prosecutor for Bush War Crimes so far since we launched it on December 18, 2008, and Bob Fertiks "question" to Obama and the transition team at under "Additional Issues" is now is the lead question it its category.
"Will you appoint a Special Prosecutor [...] to independently investigate the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping?"
Why aren't there 13 million signatures on the petition instead of just 13 thousand? Mainstream media is avoiding this issue like it's leprosy. I would hope left blogs wouldn't.

We need to force this issue into the media. We need to beat this issue into the heads of leaders, both current and incoming, in Washington.
Summary of International and U.S. Law Prohibiting Torture and Other Ill-treatment of Persons in Custody
International and U.S. law prohibits torture and other ill-treatment of any person in custody in all circumstances. The prohibition applies to the United States during times of peace, armed conflict, or a state of emergency. Any person, whether a U.S. national or a non-citizen, is protected. It is irrelevant whether the detainee is determined to be a prisoner-of-war, a protected person, or a so-called "security detainee" or "unlawful combatant." And the prohibition is in effect within the territory of the United States or any place anywhere U.S. authorities have control over a person. In short, the prohibition against torture and ill-treatment is absolute.
A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture.

Torture is defined as an "act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control." A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim's death.
After January 20, 2009 there will be a new Attorney General of the United States, and Eric Holder Jr. will most likely be confirmed as that new Attorney general.

Mr. Holder has said that:
"Our needlessly abusive and unlawful practices in the 'War on Terror' have diminished our standing in the world community and made us less, rather than more, safe," Holder told a packed room at the ACS 2008 Convention on Friday evening. "For the sake of our safety and security, and because it is the right thing to do, the next president must move immediately to reclaim America's standing in the world as a nation that cherishes and protects individual freedom and basic human rights."
Eric Holder, Jr.
If Mr. Holder, when he becomes Attorney General, is to live up to his own statements and retain the personal and professional integrity he has displayed in his law career thus far, and not by acts of omission become an accessory along with Mr. Mukasey and Ms. Pelosi to the crimes of Bush, Cheney and others in the Bush administration, he will have no choice but to accept the demands of the thousands of US citizens who have signed the Docudharma/ Citizens Petition for a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute Bush administration war crimes.
Petition Badge
Get Badge

If he will not, Mr. Holder runs the risk of throwing away a lifetime of work in a so far illustrious career and all of his personal and professional integrity and becoming a fugitive with Mr. Mukasey and an accessory to these crimes along with and no better than the perpetrators and other conspirators.

Given his professional record, I have every confidence that Mr. Holder, as soon to be Attorney General of the United States, realizes that he can make no other choice than to do the right thing.

Mr. Holder knows. As Attorney General he will wear the badge as the highest ranking officer of justice in the United States.

He will have his own integrity on the line.

Mr. Holder knows that like any other accused criminals, Bush and Cheney deserve fair trials.

And Mr. Holder knows that failing to give them those fair trials would be convicting himself.

There must be war crimes investigations, prosecutions and trials. And sentencing.

It is the only way to "move forward".

Or else...
There was a fever over the land, a fever of disgrace, of indignity, of hunger. We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. Above all there was fear, fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, and fear of ourselves. Only when you understand that can you understand what Hitler meant to us, because he said to us:
"Lift your heads. Be proud to be German. There are devils among us, communists, liberals, Jews, gypsies. Once these devils will be destroyed your misery will be destroyed."
It was the old, old story of the sacrificial lamb.

What about those of us who knew better, we who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we take part? Because we loved our country. What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights? What difference does it make if a few racial minorities lose their rights? It is only a passing phase. It is only a stage we are going through. It will be discarded sooner or later. Hitler himself will be discarded -- sooner or later. The country is in danger. We will march out of the shadows! We will go forward. FORWARD is the great password.

And history tells how well we succeeded, Your Honor. We succeeded beyond out wildest dreams. The very elements of hate and power about Hitler that mesmerized Germany, mesmerized the world. We found ourselves with sudden powerful allies. Things that had been denied to us as a democracy were open to us now. The world said, "Go ahead. Take it. Take it! Take Sudetenland! Take the Rhineland! Re-militarize it! Take all of Austria! Take it!"

And then, one day we looked around and found that we were in an even more terrible danger. The ritual begun in this courtroom swept over the land like a raging, roaring disease. What was going to be a "passing phase" had become the way of life.
Decision of the Court:
The trial conducted before this Tribunal began over eight months ago. The record of evidence is more than ten thousand pages long, and final arguments of counsel have been concluded.

Simple murders and atrocities do not constitute the gravamen of the charges in this indictment. Rather, the charge is that of conscious participation in a nationwide, government organized system of cruelty and injustice in violation of every moral and legal principle known to all civilized nations. The Tribunal has carefully studied the record and found therein abundant evidence to support beyond a reasonable doubt the charges against these defendants.
The Power of One

by Nightprowlkitty, Docudharma, December 26, 2008

Crossposted at Docudharma, Daily Kos, My Left Wing, Open Left, The Sanctuary, and OOIBC
If you wish to repost this essay you can download a .txt file of the html here (right click and save). Permission granted.

Petition Badge
Get Badge

Give Bush and Cheney a fair trial -- something they have not bothered with since they stole office.

It's funny how the powers that be in the media and government are running around with their big fat excuses as to why we can't hold these criminals accountable for their crimes. It all boils down to "It's too hard!!!"

It's too hard. It would affect too many people. It would interfere with the crucial work of restoring our economy. Blah blah blah. Not one of these folks say, however, that no crime has been committed, no law has been broken. No one says that.

I find that stunning. We all know, at least those of us who have been paying attention, that Bush and his crew of crooks have broken the law over and over again.

And Cheney says "What you gonna do about it?" And Cheney says "oh, the Dems knew about this and approved it, hell they wanted us to be even tougher than we were!"

And we should believe Cheney ... why?

I don't want speculation any more. I want the truth, the facts, what really happened. Only a special prosecutor can get that information, someone who is inured to the politics of Washington D.C. by being given the independent power to investigate.

What I like about this petition is that it shows the power of the individual citizen. This is not a grassroots effort decided by committee. A couple of folks got together and came up with the text and others jumped in to work further on it and spread it around.

The power of the individual citizen.

I am extremely annoyed at the argument that we citizens are somehow childlike creatures who don't know all the real problems of our country and so we shouldn't cry and whine about our "pet issues" when the government knows so much more about what is important and should be made a priority.


We ARE the government. The only people who will take back power as citizens, are citizens! That's us.

To me, Obama's election is a signal that we can now start taking back that individual power, our individual rights. It's not for Obama or any elected representative to tell me what I should make a priority. I get to decide that for myself. They'll do their jobs, and I'll do mine.

The measure of our success with this petititon will be the resistance from the powers that be, the Dems, the Repubs, Obama, the media. The more we read about how this is not a good idea, getting a special prosecutor, the more we'll know we have them on the run.

Many of us have sent this petition to friends and family, whether they be politically agreeable to us or not. One by one people will sign. This isn't "organized" grassroots and it's netroots only insofar as the structure.

To me, this is about the power of each indviidual citizen, not resting happy with the decisions of our elected representatives but standing up for what we feel is right and making our voices heard.

We need to know the truth about the crimes committed in our names. We need to have every American citizen aware of what has been done so there can be no denials or excuses.

At this time, the only line between tyranny and freedom is an informed citizenry. By signing this petition and working to make it known we will not accept anything less than full accountability for torture being done in our name, we are exercising our power, not the power one step removed of the three branches of government.

We have power collectively and we also have power individually. I think the citizenry of this country are going to be tested enormously as we have to let our representatives know we are not asking for favors on our "pet causes" but taking our government back, of, by and for the people.

by Edger at Docudharma, Saturday, January 03, 2009, Also at Daily Kos

If you wish to repost this essay you can download a .txt file of the html here (right click and save). Permission granted.

Read the entire article at: Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus


 Subscribe in a reader

Download DivX

Add to Technorati Favorites

, , ,

Spread the word

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine