punditman says...Here's Keith Olbermann interviewing Jonathan Turley about the Obama administration's Department of Justice protecting former Bush administration officials like Attorney General Ashcroft against liability for their War on Terror abuses—such as arbitrary detention of Muslim immigrants. It gets worse: the present administration wants to enshrine in law their ability to do exactly the same things. In the words of Turley, "This precedent will bare a horrible fruit."
Showing posts with label war on terror. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war on terror. Show all posts
8/27/10
Breaking up a terror plot
Peacenik says this is not a reason for Canada to stay in Afghanistan. Peacenik says this does not justify Guantanamo, torture, unlawful surveillance, war crimes, bloated military budgets or the war on terror. Just watch Harper and his acolytes cranking up the fear machine. There is less dissent in society today than there was in the 60's. And there are more reasons for dissent today. Peacenik says bring the troops home now.
The “Toronto 18” conspiracy may have been Canada’s first major homegrown terror threat after 9/11, but if police are to be believed it is far from being the last.
While some worry about being targeted by “foreign” terrorists linked to Al Qaeda or other extremist groups, we can hardly afford to be complacent about perils close at hand. Three more Canadians now stand accused of plotting bombings in Ottawa. And the fact that one of them appears, bizarrely, to have been involved in a goofy song-and-dance act on Canadian Idol hardly detracts from the gravity of the charges.
The RCMP reported yesterday that police had been watching the trio’s network for a year and swooped down on them Wednesday. That prevented them from sending money to conspirators abroad for weapons to use against Canadian troops and allies in Afghanistan. It also prevented them from leaving the country, and from building bombs and staging attacks on the nation’s capital. Rightly, police put public safety first by acting when they did.
10/9/09
A Historian's Account of Democrats and Bush-Era War Crimes
It's Friday before the long weekend and as Peacenik started to scan the news Peacenik was hoping to find something upbeat to post. Or something amusing. Or something entertaining. Maybe even something absurd. But the very first goddamn article Peacenik sees is this one. And it sickens Peacenik. It bums peacenik out. Peacenik will push this item back into Peacenik's memory banks,and Peacenik will enjoy the long weekend. Peacenik hopes you enjoy the long weekend. Obama, and Lieberman and Graham? They can go fuck themselves.
by Glenn Greenwald
The American Propsect's Adam Serwer notes that, yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman successfully inserted into the Homeland Security appropriations bill an amendment -- supported by the Obama White House -- to provide an exemption from the Freedom of Information Act's mandates by authorizing the Defense Secretary to suppress long-concealed photographs of detainee abuse. Two courts had ruled -- unanimously -- that the American people have the right to see these photographs under FOIA, a 40-year-old law championed by the Democrats in the LBJ era and long considered a crowning jewel in their legislative achievements. But this Lieberman amendment, which is now likely to pass, undermines all of that and -- as EBay founder Pierre Omidyar put it today -- its central purpose is to "legalize suppression" of evidence of American war crimes.
What made those detainee photographs so important from the start is that they depict brutal abuse well outside of the Abu Ghraib facility and thus reveal to Americans -- and the world -- that America's torture was not, as they've been constantly told, limited to rogue sadists at Abu Ghraib and the waterboarding of three bad guys. Instead, our torture regime was systematic, pervasive, brutal, fatal, and -- becuase it was the by-product of conscious policies set at the highest levels of government -- common across America's "War on Terror" detention regime. These photographs would have documented those vital facts; combated the false denials from torture apologists; fueled the momentum for accountability; and revealed, in graphic and unavoidable terms, what was truly done by America's government. But a Democratic-led Congress, at the urging of a Democratic President, are now taking extraordinary steps -- including an act of Congress which has no purpose other than to suppress evidence of America's war crimes -- to ensure that this evidence never sees the light of day.
Read on...
by Glenn Greenwald
The American Propsect's Adam Serwer notes that, yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman successfully inserted into the Homeland Security appropriations bill an amendment -- supported by the Obama White House -- to provide an exemption from the Freedom of Information Act's mandates by authorizing the Defense Secretary to suppress long-concealed photographs of detainee abuse. Two courts had ruled -- unanimously -- that the American people have the right to see these photographs under FOIA, a 40-year-old law championed by the Democrats in the LBJ era and long considered a crowning jewel in their legislative achievements. But this Lieberman amendment, which is now likely to pass, undermines all of that and -- as EBay founder Pierre Omidyar put it today -- its central purpose is to "legalize suppression" of evidence of American war crimes.
What made those detainee photographs so important from the start is that they depict brutal abuse well outside of the Abu Ghraib facility and thus reveal to Americans -- and the world -- that America's torture was not, as they've been constantly told, limited to rogue sadists at Abu Ghraib and the waterboarding of three bad guys. Instead, our torture regime was systematic, pervasive, brutal, fatal, and -- becuase it was the by-product of conscious policies set at the highest levels of government -- common across America's "War on Terror" detention regime. These photographs would have documented those vital facts; combated the false denials from torture apologists; fueled the momentum for accountability; and revealed, in graphic and unavoidable terms, what was truly done by America's government. But a Democratic-led Congress, at the urging of a Democratic President, are now taking extraordinary steps -- including an act of Congress which has no purpose other than to suppress evidence of America's war crimes -- to ensure that this evidence never sees the light of day.
Read on...
10/8/09
A War of Absurdity
Johnnyanon's comment yesterday captured the absurdity of the Afghan/Iraq war. The U.S. and Canada and NATO went to war against sovereign states because why? Because 100 or 1000 or 3000 criminals attacked the United States. Stateless criminals. And now there are apparently less than 100 al qaida operating in Afghanistan but the U.S. and Canada and NATO are still occupying the country.
Eight years is long enough. But not long enough correct a bad decision. Not long enough to justify a mistake. And too long to suffer the consequences of the mistake. Johnnyanon should be Canada's foreign minister. Peacenik says bring the troops home now.
by Robert Scheer
Every once in a while, a statistic just jumps out at you in a way that makes everything else you hear on a subject seem beside the point, if not downright absurd. That was my reaction to the recent statement of the president’s national security adviser, former Marine Gen. James Jones, concerning the size of the terrorist threat from Afghanistan:
“The al-Qaida presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”
Less than 100! And he is basing his conservative estimate on the best intelligence data available to our government. That means that al-Qaida, for all practical purposes, does not exist in Afghanistan—so why are we having a big debate about sending even more troops to fight an enemy that has relocated elsewhere? Because of the blind belief, in the minds of those like John McCain, determined to “win” in Afghanistan, that if we don’t escalate, al-Qaida will inevitably come back.
Read on...
Eight years is long enough. But not long enough correct a bad decision. Not long enough to justify a mistake. And too long to suffer the consequences of the mistake. Johnnyanon should be Canada's foreign minister. Peacenik says bring the troops home now.
by Robert Scheer
Every once in a while, a statistic just jumps out at you in a way that makes everything else you hear on a subject seem beside the point, if not downright absurd. That was my reaction to the recent statement of the president’s national security adviser, former Marine Gen. James Jones, concerning the size of the terrorist threat from Afghanistan:
“The al-Qaida presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”
Less than 100! And he is basing his conservative estimate on the best intelligence data available to our government. That means that al-Qaida, for all practical purposes, does not exist in Afghanistan—so why are we having a big debate about sending even more troops to fight an enemy that has relocated elsewhere? Because of the blind belief, in the minds of those like John McCain, determined to “win” in Afghanistan, that if we don’t escalate, al-Qaida will inevitably come back.
Read on...
9/24/09
For Mexico and Canada, the 'War on Terror' Is Over
Peacenik wishes this headline was telling the truth. But Peacenik doesn't see it. Don Cherry, on Hockey Night in Canada, will still have cart blanche to promote the war. Canadians are still afraid to criticize the war without the perfunctory "we support the troops but". Public vehicles are still adorned with ribbons. The Canadian anti-war movement remains invisible. The war on terror has, like the war on drugs, morphed into something sick. Canada needs to bring the troops home now and re-think Canada's foreign policy. Peacenik doesn't see Stephen Harper doing that.
by Louis Nevaer
MEXICO CITY- On the eighth anniversary of the United States declaring a global "war on terror" this September, America's continental neighbors - Mexico and Canada - have had enough.
When President George W. Bush addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, the nation - and much of the world - was still in disbelief that Islamic terrorists had successfully carried out the greatest attack on U.S. soil since Japan's assault on Pearl Harbor.
That night Bush rallied the nation to support a "war on terror" that was "global" in nature, and which would lead to the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Read on...
by Louis Nevaer
MEXICO CITY- On the eighth anniversary of the United States declaring a global "war on terror" this September, America's continental neighbors - Mexico and Canada - have had enough.
When President George W. Bush addressed a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, the nation - and much of the world - was still in disbelief that Islamic terrorists had successfully carried out the greatest attack on U.S. soil since Japan's assault on Pearl Harbor.
That night Bush rallied the nation to support a "war on terror" that was "global" in nature, and which would lead to the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Read on...
7/21/09
War Without Purpose
punditman says...This article by Chris Hedges outlines the utter disaster that is the Afghan War. The word quagmire comes to mind. Punditman has said from the beginning that you don't fight terrorists with armies who call in airstrikes that destroy villages full of civilians, or by pushing a button on the other side of the world that causes some drone to instantly vaporize people who did nothing to harm you. It's madness. But that is what armies do. Right from the beginning, the whole Afghanistan intervention, with its changing, nebulus justifications has turned into a series of blunders, scandals and slaughters.
Unfortunately, there is not much left of the antiwar movement because too many people think Afghanistan is a "good war" (unlike Iraq). The Obama Effect has essentially anesthetized critical thought. Was the movement against the Iraq War just an anti-Bush movement? You begin to wonder. Alex Cockburn over at counterpunch, sums up the pathetic state of the antiwar movement, thusly:
By Chris Hedges
Al-Qaida could not care less what we do in Afghanistan. We can bomb Afghan villages, hunt the Taliban in Helmand province, build a 100,000-strong client Afghan army, stand by passively as Afghan warlords execute hundreds, maybe thousands, of Taliban prisoners, build huge, elaborate military bases and send drones to drop bombs on Pakistan. It will make no difference. The war will not halt the attacks of Islamic radicals. Terrorist and insurgent groups are not conventional forces. They do not play by the rules of warfare our commanders have drilled into them in war colleges and service academies. And these underground groups are protean, changing shape and color as they drift from one failed state to the next, plan a terrorist attack and then fade back into the shadows. We are fighting with the wrong tools. We are fighting the wrong people. We are on the wrong side of history. And we will be defeated in Afghanistan as we will be in Iraq.
Unfortunately, there is not much left of the antiwar movement because too many people think Afghanistan is a "good war" (unlike Iraq). The Obama Effect has essentially anesthetized critical thought. Was the movement against the Iraq War just an anti-Bush movement? You begin to wonder. Alex Cockburn over at counterpunch, sums up the pathetic state of the antiwar movement, thusly:
Where are the mobilizations, actions, civil disobedience? Antiwar coalitions like United for Peace and Justice and Win Without War (with MoveOn also belatedly adopting this craven posture) don’t say clearly “US troops out now!” from Afghanistan. They whine about the “absence of a clear mission” (Win Without War), plead futilely for “an exit strategy” (UFPJ). One letter from the UFPJ coalition (which includes Code Pink) to the Congressional Progressive Caucus in May laconically began a sentence with the astounding words, “To defeat the Taliban and stabilize the country, the U.S. must enable the Afghan people…”To "defeat" the Taliban? With a peace movement like that, who needs a war movement? No wonder the war drags on and on. Even Western politicians have begun calls for negotiating our way out of this ill conceived mess.
By Chris Hedges
Al-Qaida could not care less what we do in Afghanistan. We can bomb Afghan villages, hunt the Taliban in Helmand province, build a 100,000-strong client Afghan army, stand by passively as Afghan warlords execute hundreds, maybe thousands, of Taliban prisoners, build huge, elaborate military bases and send drones to drop bombs on Pakistan. It will make no difference. The war will not halt the attacks of Islamic radicals. Terrorist and insurgent groups are not conventional forces. They do not play by the rules of warfare our commanders have drilled into them in war colleges and service academies. And these underground groups are protean, changing shape and color as they drift from one failed state to the next, plan a terrorist attack and then fade back into the shadows. We are fighting with the wrong tools. We are fighting the wrong people. We are on the wrong side of history. And we will be defeated in Afghanistan as we will be in Iraq.
The cost of the Afghanistan war is rising. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have been killed or wounded. July has been the deadliest month in the war for NATO combatants, with at least 50 troops, including 26 Americans, killed. Roadside bomb attacks on coalition forces are swelling the number of wounded and killed. In June, the tally of incidents involving roadside bombs, also called improvised explosive devices (IEDs), hit 736, a record for the fourth straight month; the number had risen from 361 in March to 407 in April and to 465 in May. The decision by President Barack Obama to send 21,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan has increased our presence to 57,000 American troops. The total is expected to rise to at least 68,000 by the end of 2009. It will only mean more death, expanded fighting and greater futility.
We have stumbled into a confusing mix of armed groups that include criminal gangs, drug traffickers, Pashtun and Tajik militias, kidnapping rings, death squads and mercenaries. We are embroiled in a civil war. The Pashtuns, who make up most of the Taliban and are the traditional rulers of Afghanistan, are battling the Tajiks and Uzbeks, who make up the Northern Alliance, which, with foreign help, won the civil war in 2001. The old Northern Alliance now dominates the corrupt and incompetent government. It is deeply hated. And it will fall with us.
6/10/09
Fear Rules
punditman says...Don't succumb to the fear. So now Haliiburton is building detention centers in Florida with no one there and no signs? Punditman is emailing someone he knows in Tallahassee...
Who Spent All That Money For What?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Who Spent All That Money For What?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
The power of irrational fear in the US is extraordinary. It ranks up there with the Israel Lobby, the military/security complex, and the financial gangsters. Indeed, fear might be the most powerful force in America.
Americans are at ease with their country’s aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, which has resulted in a million dead Muslim civilians and several million refugees, because the US government has filled Americans with fear of terrorists. “We have to kill them over there before they come over here.”
Fearful of American citizens, the US government is building concentration camps, apparently all over the country. According to news reports, a $385 million US government contract was given by the Bush/Cheney Regime to Cheney’s company, Halliburton, to build “detention centers” in the US. The corporate media never explained for whom the detention centers are intended.
Most Americans dismiss such reports. “It can’t happen here.” However, In northeastern Florida not far from Tallahassee, I have seen what might be one of these camps. There is a building inside a huge open area fenced with razor wire. There is no one there and no signs. The facility appears new and unused and does not look like an abandoned prisoner work camp.
What is it for?
Who spent all that money for what?
Keep Reading...
Americans are at ease with their country’s aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, which has resulted in a million dead Muslim civilians and several million refugees, because the US government has filled Americans with fear of terrorists. “We have to kill them over there before they come over here.”
Fearful of American citizens, the US government is building concentration camps, apparently all over the country. According to news reports, a $385 million US government contract was given by the Bush/Cheney Regime to Cheney’s company, Halliburton, to build “detention centers” in the US. The corporate media never explained for whom the detention centers are intended.
Most Americans dismiss such reports. “It can’t happen here.” However, In northeastern Florida not far from Tallahassee, I have seen what might be one of these camps. There is a building inside a huge open area fenced with razor wire. There is no one there and no signs. The facility appears new and unused and does not look like an abandoned prisoner work camp.
What is it for?
Who spent all that money for what?
Keep Reading...
6/2/09
Whence the Terror Hysteria? Follow the Money
By Philip Girardi
www.antiwar.com
One of the unique pleasures of living near our nation’s capital is to sit down with the first morning cup of coffee, open the Washington Post, and flip through the full-page ads placed by defense contractors. The ads almost always feature dedicated young soldiers, fierce bald eagles, and American flags. They extol our heroic warriors and note how they, the contractors, are on the front line defending freedom and the American way. They do not mention that the ads are paid for by the taxpayers, courtesy of the huge profits generated by unneeded defense spending. Their CEOs and shareholders must smile when they see the ads. The rest of us shouldn’t.
This is not to suggest that defense contractors don’t do a lot of good in the world. They support armies of lobbyists and contribute to congressmen who otherwise would have to find real work. They make sure that the pundits and ideologues who promote a vigorous defense of American interests at home and abroad are well-funded through their contributions to think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute, and Frank Gaffney’s ubiquitous Center for Security Policy. They hold gala dinners and invite Bush administration hacks and blue dog Democrats to speak, paying them generous honoraria to make sure they have comfortable retirements. They sometimes show incredible ingenuity, figuring out how to make gasoline that costs $1.13 per gallon in Kuwait cost $8 when it arrives in Iraq a day later. They produce ships and planes and missile systems that America doesn’t need, but doing so surely keeps workers in their factories in key congressional constituencies from having to file for unemployment. It’s a win-win.
And defense contractors know how to make people afraid and keep them that way. The next war, against Iran, will no doubt be prepped by claims that Tehran was involved in 9/11 and that it is the principal supporter of al-Qaeda. Those Persians are "killing our soldiers." And nothing much changes when you flip from Republican to Democrat. Even if the Global War on Terror (GWOT) is now being referred to as Overseas Contingency Operations, there has been no shift in how Washington approaches the terrorism problem. Overseas Contingency Operations are just as big a business as was GWOT; they are designed to make money and create good jobs for a lot of people. If one opens that same Washington Post featuring the full-page self-congratulatory ads and turns to the employment pages, the few jobs available in this recession-wracked economy are in the quarter-page listings for defense contractors. Squeezing money from the taxpayers or borrowing it from foreigners appears to be the entirety of Washington’s local economy.
Keep Reading...
Punditman says...Oh yeah, that's why we're here. This article is a great reminder of why punditman created punditman in the first place: The so-called war on terror and its complementary propaganda and the military industrial complex and its complementary propaganda and how they work in tandem—for profit. There are those who still can't see this connection or who refuse to. They prefer a much simpler narrative, like "They fight for our freedom." Perhaps some of these lost souls pop by here once in a while and learn a thing or two that changes their consciousness. One can hope.
Peacenik talks a lot about economic decline, doom and disaster. That's fair game, but then Philip Girardi summarizes the ever-present, incestuous connection between the US defence industry lobby and the highly leveraged Global War On Terror—and he nails it. There always seems to be money for the war makers even if the war is a fraud and everyone else's money is in tatters. Always. Unless you're talking Russian Revolution and WW I, or later, how the money the Soviet Union wasted on the arms race, war in Afghanistan, etc. contributed to its collapse. Surely the US is not immune to a similar fate...I think.
www.antiwar.com
One of the unique pleasures of living near our nation’s capital is to sit down with the first morning cup of coffee, open the Washington Post, and flip through the full-page ads placed by defense contractors. The ads almost always feature dedicated young soldiers, fierce bald eagles, and American flags. They extol our heroic warriors and note how they, the contractors, are on the front line defending freedom and the American way. They do not mention that the ads are paid for by the taxpayers, courtesy of the huge profits generated by unneeded defense spending. Their CEOs and shareholders must smile when they see the ads. The rest of us shouldn’t.
This is not to suggest that defense contractors don’t do a lot of good in the world. They support armies of lobbyists and contribute to congressmen who otherwise would have to find real work. They make sure that the pundits and ideologues who promote a vigorous defense of American interests at home and abroad are well-funded through their contributions to think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute, and Frank Gaffney’s ubiquitous Center for Security Policy. They hold gala dinners and invite Bush administration hacks and blue dog Democrats to speak, paying them generous honoraria to make sure they have comfortable retirements. They sometimes show incredible ingenuity, figuring out how to make gasoline that costs $1.13 per gallon in Kuwait cost $8 when it arrives in Iraq a day later. They produce ships and planes and missile systems that America doesn’t need, but doing so surely keeps workers in their factories in key congressional constituencies from having to file for unemployment. It’s a win-win.
And defense contractors know how to make people afraid and keep them that way. The next war, against Iran, will no doubt be prepped by claims that Tehran was involved in 9/11 and that it is the principal supporter of al-Qaeda. Those Persians are "killing our soldiers." And nothing much changes when you flip from Republican to Democrat. Even if the Global War on Terror (GWOT) is now being referred to as Overseas Contingency Operations, there has been no shift in how Washington approaches the terrorism problem. Overseas Contingency Operations are just as big a business as was GWOT; they are designed to make money and create good jobs for a lot of people. If one opens that same Washington Post featuring the full-page self-congratulatory ads and turns to the employment pages, the few jobs available in this recession-wracked economy are in the quarter-page listings for defense contractors. Squeezing money from the taxpayers or borrowing it from foreigners appears to be the entirety of Washington’s local economy.
Keep Reading...
Punditman says...Oh yeah, that's why we're here. This article is a great reminder of why punditman created punditman in the first place: The so-called war on terror and its complementary propaganda and the military industrial complex and its complementary propaganda and how they work in tandem—for profit. There are those who still can't see this connection or who refuse to. They prefer a much simpler narrative, like "They fight for our freedom." Perhaps some of these lost souls pop by here once in a while and learn a thing or two that changes their consciousness. One can hope.
Peacenik talks a lot about economic decline, doom and disaster. That's fair game, but then Philip Girardi summarizes the ever-present, incestuous connection between the US defence industry lobby and the highly leveraged Global War On Terror—and he nails it. There always seems to be money for the war makers even if the war is a fraud and everyone else's money is in tatters. Always. Unless you're talking Russian Revolution and WW I, or later, how the money the Soviet Union wasted on the arms race, war in Afghanistan, etc. contributed to its collapse. Surely the US is not immune to a similar fate...I think.
2/5/09
Endless Propaganda
The War on Terror is a Hoax
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
According to US government propaganda, terrorist cells are spread throughout America, making it necessary for the government to spy on all Americans and violate most other constitutional protections. Among President Bush’s last words as he left office was the warning that America would soon be struck again by Muslim terrorists.
If America were infected with terrorists, we would not need the government to tell us. We would know it from events. As there are no events, the US government substitutes warnings in order to keep alive the fear that causes the public to accept pointless wars, the infringement of civil liberty, national ID cards, and inconveniences and harassments when they fly.
The most obvious indication that there are no terrorist cells is that not a single neocon has been assassinated.
Keep Reading...
punditman says...Once in awhile, you need a dose of Paul Craig Roberts' truth serum to put your brain back on task. There...that feels better.
If America were infected with terrorists, we would not need the government to tell us. We would know it from events. As there are no events, the US government substitutes warnings in order to keep alive the fear that causes the public to accept pointless wars, the infringement of civil liberty, national ID cards, and inconveniences and harassments when they fly.
The most obvious indication that there are no terrorist cells is that not a single neocon has been assassinated.
Keep Reading...
punditman says...Once in awhile, you need a dose of Paul Craig Roberts' truth serum to put your brain back on task. There...that feels better.
10/8/08
Thousands of Troops Are Deployed on U.S. Streets Ready to Carry Out "Crowd Control"
By Naomi Wolf, AlterNet. Posted October 8, 2008.
Members of Congress were told they could face martial law if they didn't pass the bailout bill. This will not be the last time.
Background: the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1. Their stated mission is the form of crowd control they practiced in Iraq, subduing "unruly individuals," and the management of a national emergency. I am in Seattle and heard from the brother of one of the soldiers that they are engaged in exercises now. Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.
George Bush struck down Posse Comitatus, thus making it legal for military to patrol the U.S. He has also legally established that in the "War on Terror," the U.S. is at war around the globe and thus the whole world is a battlefield. Thus the U.S. is also a battlefield.
Read on...
Peacenik wonders if one brigade will be enough when people start going to their banks and find out their money has evaporated.
Members of Congress were told they could face martial law if they didn't pass the bailout bill. This will not be the last time.
Background: the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1. Their stated mission is the form of crowd control they practiced in Iraq, subduing "unruly individuals," and the management of a national emergency. I am in Seattle and heard from the brother of one of the soldiers that they are engaged in exercises now. Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.
George Bush struck down Posse Comitatus, thus making it legal for military to patrol the U.S. He has also legally established that in the "War on Terror," the U.S. is at war around the globe and thus the whole world is a battlefield. Thus the U.S. is also a battlefield.
Read on...
Peacenik wonders if one brigade will be enough when people start going to their banks and find out their money has evaporated.
7/21/08
Scott Horton Interviews Andy Worthington
punditman says...
Above is yet another great interview by Scott Horton, courtesy of antiwar.com. Download the mp3 here. (40:48)
Thus far, I have refrained from commenting on the Omar Khadr situation because, simply put, I can barely contain myself long enough to write about it.
As Andy Worthington points out, what is especially disturbing are the attitudes of a sizable number of Western citizens, who feel it is apparently okay to torture children just because they are deemed to be "terrorists" or "illegal foreign combatants" by an all powerful state. It is these crass souls--who feel obliged to actually sit down and gather their few remaining brain cells and bang out a hateful note--who worry me the most.
After all, it is one thing for this ilk to fire off a hateful harangue quite anonymously in a web forum, but quite another thing to attach their names to their embarrassingly misguided rants in the letters section of a national newspaper. Imagine trying to reason with these people over a few beers! I may have run into one or two over the past eight years, but shockingly, we now know that they can be found in ample supply. They either know nothing of the rule of evidence, international treaty obligations against torture, the rights of child soldiers--or they simply don't care. This can lead to only one conclusion: a sizable, grassroots, neo-fascist movement of dumbed-down creeps is lurking in the weeds.
****
Andy Worthington, author of The Guantánamo Files, discusses the recently released footage of Omar Khadr, the Canadian juvenile being held in Guantanamo, the dubious “charges” against him, the legal black hole of the made-up “enemy combatant” status, the evil and counterproductive nature of torture and the kangaroo court system in Guantanamo.
Andy Worthington is a historian based in London. He is the author of The Guantánamo Files, the first book to tell the stories of all the detainees in Guantanámo. He writes regularly on issues related to Guantánamo and the “War on Terror” on his Web site.
6/3/08
Bush's War on Civil Liberties
Legislating Tyranny
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
and LAWRENCE M. STRATTON
Frankly, the Bush administration’s policy evades any notion of procedural due process of law. Administration assurances that harsh treatment is reserved only for terrorists is meaningless when the threshold process for determining who is and who is not a terrorist depends on executive discretion that is not subject to review. Substantive rights are useless without the procedural rights to enforce them.
Terrorist legislation and executive assertions created a basis upon which federal authorities claimed they were free to suspend suspects’ civil liberties in order to defend Americans from terrorism. Only after civil liberties groups and federal courts challenged some of the unconstitutional laws and procedures did realization spread that the Bush administration’s assault on the Bill of Rights is a greater threat to Americans than are terrorists.
Keep Reading...
punditman says...Yes, keep reading folks. This is a good account of the United States' slide toward fascism.
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
and LAWRENCE M. STRATTON
www.counterpunch.org
Frankly, the Bush administration’s policy evades any notion of procedural due process of law. Administration assurances that harsh treatment is reserved only for terrorists is meaningless when the threshold process for determining who is and who is not a terrorist depends on executive discretion that is not subject to review. Substantive rights are useless without the procedural rights to enforce them.
Terrorist legislation and executive assertions created a basis upon which federal authorities claimed they were free to suspend suspects’ civil liberties in order to defend Americans from terrorism. Only after civil liberties groups and federal courts challenged some of the unconstitutional laws and procedures did realization spread that the Bush administration’s assault on the Bill of Rights is a greater threat to Americans than are terrorists.
Keep Reading...
punditman says...Yes, keep reading folks. This is a good account of the United States' slide toward fascism.
4/16/08
Bush Regime Normalcy
Arrogant Lies
by BRIAN CLOUGHLEY
www.counterpunch.org
by BRIAN CLOUGHLEY
www.counterpunch.org
Last month:
"an Egyptian citizen was killed when a [US] Navy-contracted ship fired warning shots at approaching motorboats in the Suez Canal. The United States Embassy in Cairo and the Navy initially maintained that, according to the security team aboard the ship, there had been no casualties. But on Wednesday, an embassy statement said it "appears that an Egyptian in the boat was killed by one of the warning shots." - Associated Press, March 27.
That report wasn't carried by any major US newspaper or TV channel but demonstrates the arrogance of Bush Washington which encourages knee-jerk lying, reluctant retraction when it becomes obvious that a lie was told, and making a grudging admission later. These are not just indications of dishonesty and evil in the Bush-Cheney administration : they are evidence of the deep and horrible malaise that has penetrated Washington's officialdom. Who killed the man? We don't know. We will never know. Nobody will ever be prosecuted for the slaughter of this Egyptian citizen. He is a non-person : just another raghead who got in the way of the United States of America. The lies about his murder by a "warning shot" didn't work, but who cares, anyway?
It doesn't matter that some poor Egyptian, trying to make a few cents by selling trinkets to people on passing ships in his country's Canal (a trade that has existed for over 130 years), is murdered by trigger-happy mercenaries. It's all part of the great con-trick, the idiot "war on terror". And it shows that the Bush-Cheney mentality is alive and thriving throughout the armed forces and intelligence agencies and among those responsible for anonymous brutal attacks which take place in Africa, the Middle East and, especially, Pakistan. Members of the special forces are accountable to nobody for what they do. These people are exempt from scrutiny of any sort, all in the sacred name of 'security', which is simply a cover for official permission to murder whom and when they want. (In a TV comedy series in the UK many years ago the actor playing a civil servant was asked about the Official Secrets Act which forbids revelation of uncomfortable facts. "The Official Secrets Act," he said, "is not there to protect Secrets--it's there to protect OFFICIALS." Humor is sometimes more ironic and accurate than intended.)
punditman says...To coin a phrase from someone else, it's "just another day in the empire."
11/2/07
No Time for Letter Writing
The Easy Way to Stop the Looming US Attack on Iran
By DAVE LINDORFF
Even as one faction of the American government, the military and the corporatocracy grow collectively more alarmed about the possibility of a US attack on Iran, the Bush/Cheney administration and its allies seem increasingly moving towards just such a new war.
Okay, so Sen. James Webb (D-VA) and 29 other US Senators who oppose such a mad plan have done what? They've written a letter to the president telling him that he cannot attack Iran without express approval in advance from the Congress.
A letter! Boy, that'll stop him.
What's the matter with these people?
A few months back, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution authored by war cheerleader Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), declaring the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be a "global terrorist organization." In President Bush's pathologically twisted view of his power, that resolution gave him all the go-ahead he needed, because Bush and his legal apologists claim that back on Sept. 18, 2001, Congress, in passing an Authorization for Use of Military Force against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, were actually declaring a War on Terror--a conflict without end and without borders. Under this crazy logic, any attack on a terrorist or terrorist organization is simply another battle in that "war."
If Sen. Webb and his colleagues really want to stop the president from further murderous madness, they need only revoke that 2001 AUMF. A simple resolution declaring it ended, and stating that the war on terror is not a war would do the trick.
Why hasn't the Congress done this?
7/10/07
The War on Terror as Fraud: Iraq al-Qaida group threatens Iran
CAIRO, Egypt - The leader of an al-Qaida umbrella group in Iraq threatened to wage war against Iran unless it stops supporting Shiites in Iraq within two months, according to an audiotape released Sunday.
More…
punditman says:
Let’s see if I get this straight: al-Qaida in Iraq (an organization that never existed before the US invaded), has threatenened Iran, accusing them of arming Shite insurgents in Iraq. Sound familiar? This pronouncement may as well have come straight out of a White House press conference. As usual, the interests of the neo-cons and those of their supposed enemy dovetail in rather convenient fashion.
Unfortunately, we should not be surprised. Lately, award-winning journalist Seymour Hersch has been writing about how the US has been secretly funding al-Qaida-linked groups in Iraq as part of a shifting strategy to confront Iranian (Shia) influence.
At the same time, the Bush administration has a history of accusing Iran of harbouring al-Qaida fighters. Confused? This, despite the fact that Iran handed hundreds of al-Qaida and Taliban detainees over to Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other Arab and European countries, after the US invaded Afghanistan. Iran hates al-Qaida and the US neo-cons sabatoged an opportunity to work closely with Iran in the war against al-Qaida and its Taliban sponsors, back in 2002. Moreover, it was revealed recently that the Bushies have a policy to blame Iran for any future al-Qaida attacks on the US and use it as an excuse to bomb them.
Gotcha! Your war on terror is a fraud. Future historians will debate just how deep the rot goes–-providing there is a livable world once the wackos of all stripes are done with it. But one thing is clear: these insane and deceptive ruses are part and parcel of the Bush administration’s MO–-contradiction and hypocrisy, mere tools of their deadly trade. Thinking people understand this, but they need to act decisively to expose all of the crimes and lies intended to instill fear, confusion and paralysis. Meanwhile, the rest of the population needs to escape from the matrix.
More…
punditman says:
Let’s see if I get this straight: al-Qaida in Iraq (an organization that never existed before the US invaded), has threatenened Iran, accusing them of arming Shite insurgents in Iraq. Sound familiar? This pronouncement may as well have come straight out of a White House press conference. As usual, the interests of the neo-cons and those of their supposed enemy dovetail in rather convenient fashion.
Unfortunately, we should not be surprised. Lately, award-winning journalist Seymour Hersch has been writing about how the US has been secretly funding al-Qaida-linked groups in Iraq as part of a shifting strategy to confront Iranian (Shia) influence.
At the same time, the Bush administration has a history of accusing Iran of harbouring al-Qaida fighters. Confused? This, despite the fact that Iran handed hundreds of al-Qaida and Taliban detainees over to Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other Arab and European countries, after the US invaded Afghanistan. Iran hates al-Qaida and the US neo-cons sabatoged an opportunity to work closely with Iran in the war against al-Qaida and its Taliban sponsors, back in 2002. Moreover, it was revealed recently that the Bushies have a policy to blame Iran for any future al-Qaida attacks on the US and use it as an excuse to bomb them.
Gotcha! Your war on terror is a fraud. Future historians will debate just how deep the rot goes–-providing there is a livable world once the wackos of all stripes are done with it. But one thing is clear: these insane and deceptive ruses are part and parcel of the Bush administration’s MO–-contradiction and hypocrisy, mere tools of their deadly trade. Thinking people understand this, but they need to act decisively to expose all of the crimes and lies intended to instill fear, confusion and paralysis. Meanwhile, the rest of the population needs to escape from the matrix.
5/11/07
Fighting Terror Selectively
Fighting Terror Selectively: Washington and Posada
punditman says:
Bush cries terror where there is none. I cry fraud! This article shows how the war on terror is completely politicized in terms of who is deemed a terrorist and who is not. In this case, with the notable exception of the LA Times, the media has played right along with the charade.
punditman says:
Bush cries terror where there is none. I cry fraud! This article shows how the war on terror is completely politicized in terms of who is deemed a terrorist and who is not. In this case, with the notable exception of the LA Times, the media has played right along with the charade.
4/13/07
War on Terror looks like a fraud
War on Terror looks like a fraud: It's becoming pretty clear that Iraq has been "pacified" solely for the purpose of economic aggression
"The law represents no less than institutionalized raping and pillaging of Iraq's oil wealth. It represents the death knell of nationalized Iraqi resources, now replaced by production sharing agreements, which translate into savage privatization and monster profit rates of up to 75% for (basically U.S.) Big Oil. Sixty-five of Iraq's roughly 80 oilfields already known will be offered for Big Oil to exploit."
punditman says:
No blood for oil.
"The law represents no less than institutionalized raping and pillaging of Iraq's oil wealth. It represents the death knell of nationalized Iraqi resources, now replaced by production sharing agreements, which translate into savage privatization and monster profit rates of up to 75% for (basically U.S.) Big Oil. Sixty-five of Iraq's roughly 80 oilfields already known will be offered for Big Oil to exploit."
punditman says:
No blood for oil.
4/12/07
How Syria Helped US in "War on Terror"
punditman says:
Syria, so goes the incessant yammering, is yet another terrorist-supporting-Muslim-dictatorship, that the West can't possible trust. Actually, the following piece, And How Bush Said "Thanks": How Syria Helped US in "War on Terror" has a rather different take on recent history and how this "pariah" state helped save American lives. The author, Jim Abourezk served as US Senator for South Dakota, 1974-1980 and visited Syria about five years ago.
Syria, so goes the incessant yammering, is yet another terrorist-supporting-Muslim-dictatorship, that the West can't possible trust. Actually, the following piece, And How Bush Said "Thanks": How Syria Helped US in "War on Terror" has a rather different take on recent history and how this "pariah" state helped save American lives. The author, Jim Abourezk served as US Senator for South Dakota, 1974-1980 and visited Syria about five years ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)