Neocon Imperialism, 9/11, & After-Attacks

Politics International Politics
21

[quote][quote=“TainanCowboy”]I’m waiting for the Pizza Delivery Driver Union to chime in with their position before I draw any hard conclusions.[/quote]You have every right to wait for (who? red Smith?) someone to come behind your point(?)[/quote]TainanCowboy, have you waited long enough to post some worthwhile comment on the topic? Did the retreat of chickenhawk fanclub members signal to you a loosing battle? Standing for the WoT/neocon-9/11 lies we know is difficult and can be quite costly.[quote=“San Francisco Bay Guardian”]The war on trial: an Army officer risks prison to argue that Bush’s war is illegal[/quote]Is it honorable to make excuses for lies, American-taxpayer funded terrorists and their strategic murders (9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq)?[quote=“TainanCowboy”]wow…I’m impressed…its considered poor ‘netiquette’ to post only part of an item and change its context to fit ones personal agenda.[/quote]As everyone can read the postings, you’ve selectively quoted the least embarrassing part of the AHA resolution, and bolded the first action point to say their professional (not political) comments were taken out of context, for my “personal agenda”. Sorry, no snaps for half-attempting to discredit the information. Instead you could have commented about WHY the American Historical Association has in fact, condemned the neocon Bush/Cheney/PNAC/AIPAC administration for what it has done since 2001. Or you could have even posted WHY the AHA SHOULDN’T condemn the administration. Either reply may have boosted your ratings.

But lets pretend for amusement that TainanCowboy has some point to posting his consideration of poor ‘netiquette’, and is temporarily nominated as a Vice-Spokesperson for the newly formed “Forumosa Linguistic Action Police (FLAP)” or maybe the “Super Netiquette Objection Team (SNOT)”.
“TainanCowboy, will you offer comments on this previous quote?”[quote][quote=“U.S. Army Major General Paul D. Eaton (Ret.) March 9, 2007, via live video broadcast”]“And, we have to get a message through to every soldier, every family member, every friend of soldiers that the Republican party, the Republican dominated Congress has absolutely been the worst thing that’s happened to the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps.”[/quote][/quote]Is there any chance General Eaton’s comments are taken out of context? This and the AHA’s professional condemnation both directly point to exposing “Neocon Imperialism, 9/11, & After-Attacks”.

Whew, how long will it take for Americans to embrace the scrutinization of the terrorists pretending to be honorable and noble American leaders? vulcan, I appreciated your post. You might like this.[quote=“Paul Craig Roberts”]
Americans Have Lost Their Country

The Bush-Cheney regime is America’s first neoconservative regime. In a few short years, the regime has destroyed the Bill of Rights, the separation of powers, the Geneva Conventions and the remains of America’s moral reputation, along with the infrastructures of two Muslim countries and countless thousands of Islamic civilians. Plans have been prepared, and forces moved into place, for an attack on a third Islamic country, Iran, and perhaps Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well.

This extraordinary aggressiveness toward the U.S. Constitution, international law and the Islamic world is the work not of a vast movement, but of a handful of ideologues - principally Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Lewis Libby, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, Zalmay Khalilzad, John Bolton, Philip Zelikow and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales…[/quote]Should we begin a list of known neocons and upcoming neocon candidates?[quote=“Paul Craig Roberts further”]…These are the main operatives who have controlled policy. They have been supported by their media shills at The Weekly Standard, National Review, Fox News, The New York Times, CNN and the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and by “scholars” in assorted think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute.
…
Why is the United States spending $1 trillion on wars, the reasons for which are patently false? What is going on?

There are several parts to the answer. Like their forebears among the Jacobins of the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks of the communist revolution and the National Socialists of Hitler’s revolution, neoconservatives believe that they have a monopoly on virtue and the right to impose hegemony on the rest of the world. Neoconservative conquests began in the Middle East because oil and Israel, with which neocons are closely allied, are both in the Middle East.

American oil giant UNOCAL had plans for an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan, but the Taliban were not sufficiently cooperative. The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was used to install Hamid Karzai, who had been on UNOCAL’s payroll, as puppet prime minister. U.S. neoconservative Zalmay Khalilzad, who also had been on UNOCAL’s payroll, was installed as U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan.

Two years later, Khalilzad was appointed U.S. ambassador to Iraq. American oil companies have been given control over the exploitation of Iraq’s oil resources.

The Israeli relationship is perhaps even more important. In 1996, Richard Perle and the usual collection of neocons proposed that all of Israel’s enemies in the Middle East be overthrown. “Israel’s enemies” consist of the Muslim countries not in the hands of U.S. puppets or allies. For decades, Israel has been stealing Palestine from the Palestinians such that today there is not enough of Palestine left to comprise an independent country. The U.S. and Israeli governments blame Iran, Iraq and Syria for aiding and abetting Palestinian resistance to Israel’s theft of Palestine.

The Bush-Cheney regime came to power with the plans drawn to attack the remaining independent countries in the Middle East and with neoconservatives in office to implement the plans. However, an excuse was required. Neoconservatives had called for “a new Pearl Harbor,” and 9-11 provided the propaganda event needed in order to stampede the public and Congress into war. Neoconservative Philip Zelikow was put in charge of the 9-11 commission report to make certain no uncomfortable facts emerged[/quote]“Neoconservative Philip Zelikow was put in charge of the 9-11 commission” AFTER the White House appointed fellow neocon liar and terrorist, Henry Kissinger, stepped down after families of 9/11 victims asked about his conflicts of interest: Saudi clients named bin Laden. See 9/11: Press for Truth or Kissinger Vs. the 9/11 Families[quote=“Paul Craig Roberts further”]The neoconservatives have had enormous help from the corporate media, from Christian evangelicals, particularly from the “Rapture Evangelicals,” from flag-waving super-patriots and from the military-industrial complex, whose profits have soared. But the fact remains that the dozen men named in the second paragraph above were able to overthrow the U.S. Constitution and launch military aggression under the guise of a preventive/pre-emptive "war against terrorism."

When the American people caught on that the “war on terror” was a cloak for wars of aggression, they put Democrats in control of Congress in order to apply a brake to the regime’s warmongering. However, the Democrats have proven to be impotent to stop the neoconservative drive to wider war and, perhaps, world conflagration.

We are witnessing the triumph of a dozen evil men over American democracy and a free press.

– Paul Craig Roberts is an economist and a nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate. He served as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. He is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service…[/quote]FLAP / SNOT remarks about my non-netiquetted quotes or comments are welcome for discussion. http://www.creators.com/opinion/paul-craig-roberts/americans-have-lost-their-country.html

22

You’ve painted them into a corner, obviously, because the only thing they can come up with are personal attacks that have nothing to do with the issue. Of course, I haven’t seen almost the entire first page being full of personal attacks before. You must have seriously hit some sensitive nerves to cause such a FLAP from the forumosan chickensquawks.

23

Painted whom in a corner? Do you seriously think that US actions have destroyed our Bill of Rights? Constitution? adherence to the Geneva Convention? Do you think that now have an official policy that promotes use of torture? It has been a long time since I have heard such ignorant rhetoric and for you to jump on this in support only shows how easily swayed by nonsense you are. Shame on you.

24

Painted whom in a corner? Do you seriously think that US actions have destroyed our Bill of Rights? Constitution? adherence to the Geneva Convention? Do you think that now have an official policy that promotes use of torture? It has been a long time since I have heard such ignorant rhetoric and for you to jump on this in support only shows how easily swayed by nonsense you are. Shame on you.[/quote]

Sort of. Being Eroded. Ignored. Not officially but you do. leave ImaniOU alone Freda, you fascist slimeball. She is much nicer than you, you bloated, be-blazered sad excuse for a human. No winky thing you thieving kleptomaniacal, dag on the arse of Forumosa.

There. That’s better.

Good afternoon Fred.

BroonAbuse

25

Good to see you back in true form Broon.

26

Broon Ale:

Hahahahahaha. So you found that your dog has nothing to listen to? eh? bloated and beblazered? haha That’s quite accurate but the thieving and kleptomaniacal in the same sentence is a bit redundant no?

27

Can “Neocon Imperialism” be a good thing for citizens of conscience?

We first remember that ONLY because of 9/11 did Neocon leaders capture overwhelming nationalist support for its aggressive foreign policy, giving birth to an undeclared yet endless War on Terror.

While attempts to examine the true causes of 9/11 still requires an honest investigation, this thread was started to share ideas about HOW the ‘After-Attacks’ due to Neocon Imperialism since 9/11 have unfolded and continue to unfold. “After-Attacks” crosses over a lot of other ongoing discussions: Wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria (ironically the US WoT has not targeted Saudi Arabia or Israel though); Patriot Acts; illegal domestic surveillance; habeas corpus; outing Plame; Sibel Edmonds’ Intel gag order; and so many many more. Feel free to add to the list…

Discussing the After-Attacks on Iraq, here are some excerpts to ponder: opinions of a former dissident of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

[quote=“Middle East Online”]
Nothing but Fascists

Middle East Online
2007-03-23

Never in modern history has country been forced to pay for its death, torture, and destruction with its own money - its own oil revenues. Iraq has become a country where thieves are entrusted with its richness and where murderous gangs are entrusted with its security, says Ali Al-Sarraf.
…
But how could the peoples of the invading countries support such immoral bombardments? If you were fighting a ‘dictator’ in the name of ‘democracy’ then somehow it was made acceptable to endure the needless loss of so many innocent civilians. The cheapness of the blood of ‘others’ is nothing new; just remember the millions of Germans calling out Hitler’s name as his forces commit crimes against humanity.

Instead of democracy, the US-lead has only built mountains of dead Iraqi bodies. Bodies that have become too many to even count accurately. Even the ‘Iraq Body Count’ organisation, which gives the lowest estimates, has failed to keep up the count. As for the US military, they don’t have a figure for civilian deaths. In the words of General Tommy Franks, “We don’t do body counts.”
…
Never in modern history has a country, who is also one of the founding members of the United Nations, faced such aggression under so many false pretexts. Even as one excuse after another for the war becomes exposed as a lie, the (public) insists on believing the next lie. We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction, there were no links whatsoever between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, and the whole idea of regime change was not to bring about democracy. Even the human rights propaganda by the US has become a joke after the Abu Ghraib scandal (among many), and the rise of death squads and sectarian bloodshed under the nose of US forces.
…
During the times of Hitler, you would see Germans gathered in perfect cohesion, chanting slogans in fervour. Today, those who support fascist leaders do not make such an effort. They can simply show their support by going to the ballot and voting for them once every four years instead. What happens later, which could include genocide or torture, they would watch calmly on TV.

Ali Al-Sarraf is the Editor of Al-Arab Weekly and a former dissident of Saddam Hussein’s regime. He can be reached at: alialsarraf@hotmail.com

Original Article[/quote]

Is Ali Al-Sarraf’s point really worthy of consideration? Does an outsider dare to describe the American voting process?[quote=“Ali Al-Sarraf”]Today, those who support fascist leaders do not make such an effort. They can simply show their support by going to the ballot and voting for them once every four years instead. What happens later, which could include genocide or torture, they would watch calmly on TV.[/quote]
If chickenhawks – or their children (pressuming of course they learned bravery somewhere) – experienced the daily horror of war (especially a war for lies and greed), they’d undoubtedly be screaming bloody murder (pun intended). Instead, they attack messengers with immature name-calling and FLAP / SNOT commentary. We understand why… because there is no honor in making excuses for (a) Lies, (b) Greed © American-taxpayer funded terrorists and (d) their Strategic Murders (9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq).

============================================

[quote=“Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, U.S. Marine Corps (ret)”][i]"This isn’t about party, it isn’t about Bush Bashing. It’s about our country, our constitution, and our future… Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it the more it looks as though they were murdered by our government, who used it as an excuse to murder other people thousands of miles away.

If you ridicule others who have sincere doubts and who know factual information that directly contradicts the official report and who want explanations from those who hold the keys to our government, and have motive, means, and opportunity to pull off a 9/11, but you are too lazy or fearful, or … to check into the facts yourself, what does that make you? Scholars for 9/11 truth have developed reams of scientific data. Michael Ruppert published an exhaustive account of the case from the viewpoint of a trained investigator. David Ray Griffin provides a context for the unanswered or badly answered questions that should nag at anyone who pretends to love this country.
Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can’t handle it? …
Do a little research. Google is a wonderful tool.
What does it all add up to? The Commission was, as was the Warren Commission before it, a dog and pony show … "[/i]
– Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), Retired U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot with over 300 combat missions flown. 21-year Marine Corps career.[/quote]
“Military men are just dumb, stupid, animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”
– Henry Kissinger, quoted in Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW’s in Vietnam.

“See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.”
– President Bush, May 24, 2005 in Rochester, NY.

“Do you realize that Exxon-Mobile is the second largest lifetime career giver to George W. Bush, the Bush family, only after Enron?”
– Greg Palast

Why was a proven liar and wanted man appointed by the White House to be in charge of the 9/11 investigation?
– Henry Kissinger

Chickenhawk n. A person enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it; particularly when that enthusiasm is undimmed by personal experience with war; most emphatically when that lack of experience came in spite of ample opportunity in that person’s youth.

28

[quote]Do you seriously think that US actions have destroyed our Bill of Rights? Constitution? adherence to the Geneva Convention? Do you think that now have an official policy that promotes use of torture? It has been a long time since I have heard such ignorant rhetoric…[/quote]This toothless remark attempting to protect the false virtues of the current Neocon administration deserves a few slaps of truth.

FIRST. The Neocon administration does not represent the majority of the American people. There is ample evidence of vote rigging and fraud, plus we remember it was a Sumpreme Court decision, not a Democratic process, that put these Neocons in power. So we first recognize that we are discussing a seperation between US actions from Neocon actions. Yes the Neocons have acted in the name of America, but they do not represent the values that Americans cherish. The slyness of Fred Smith to try and attach himself to some representation of American values, paints a grim picture for himself and his followers. This is certainly more embarrassing than when I had to point out that his use of ‘IslamoFascism’ is just an ugly attempt of weak people to influence weaker people.[quote=“In the thread ‘Iraq: definitely not according to plan’ I”]Claims by fevered neoconservatives that Muslim radicals plan to somehow impose a worldwide Islamic caliphate are lurid fantasies worthy of Dr. Fu Manchu and yet another example of the big lie technique that worked so well over Iraq.[/quote]


The Neocon adminstration hasn’t destroyed the Constitution, Bill of Rights or rule of law?
 By virtue of violating any or all of the Constitution without consequences, YES it has. If any rights granted and protected by the Bill of Rights are violated by the very Branch of government who’s duty it is to execute the protection thereof, those rights become unreliable.

Will Americans cross their hearts to pledge allegiance to the stars and stripes if they don’t believe their Constitutional rights should be guaranteed? This national pride stems from believing in the Declaration of Independance and Constitutionally afforded rights. When these rights are violated by the “protectors”, something incredibly horrible has occurred. And the real shame is on Neocon supporters for embracing the lies and fascism. Here are just some examples.

Some select examples from 14 Good Reasons to Impeach Bush AND Cheney

Extraordinary Renditions.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon adminstration authorized the arrest and transporting of prisoners to secret jails in Morocco, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Eastern Europe for detention and torture without trial.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 6th Amendment”]In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.[/quote]

Detentions without Trial.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon administration detained thousands of people at Guantanamo Bay without the possibility of trial and without access to effective counsel.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 6th Amendment”](see above).[/quote]

Torture.

George Bush and Dick Cheney’s Neocon administration has endoresed and argued the justification of performing torture on suspects illegally detained.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 8th Amendment”]Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[/quote]

Illegal wiretaps.

George Bush and Dick Cheney repeatedly bypassed the court system by ordering wiretaps without authorization from judges and without obtaining a warrant.
Law violated:[quote=“US Constitution’s 4th Amendment”]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.[/quote]

Lying to congress
– passing false information about Iraq’s WMD capacities.
George Bush and Dick Cheney passed false information to Congress about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities, to wit, their possession of chemical weapons, biological weapons, and delivery systems. Furthermore, George Bush and Dick Cheney passed false information to Congress by falsely stating that Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States and that military action was therefore necessary.
Law violated:[quote=“18 USC 1001”]Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.[/quote]See “14 Good Reason to Impeach Bush AND Cheney” for more examples.


The Neocon adminstration hasn’t really destroyed the US adherence to the Geneva Convention?
 Read for yourself and consider if the Neocon administration hasn’t deliberately and shamefully violated the conventions. Even American soldiers expect these conventions to be upheld.[quote=“Geneva Convention”]Geneva Conventions

A) Protocol I, Article 75: “(1)…persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict…shall be treated humanely in all circumstances…(2) The following acts are and shall remain prohibited…whether committed by civilian or by military agents: (a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons…(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault…and threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.”

B) Protocol I, Art. 51: “The civilian population…shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.” Art. 57: (parties shall) “do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects…an attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one…”

C) Protocol I, Art. 70: “The Parties to the conflict…shall allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel…even if such assistance is destined for the civilian population of the adverse Party.”

D) Protocol I, Art. 35: “In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties…to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited…It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the environment.”

E) Convention I, Art. 3: “Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms… shall in all circumstances be treated humanely…To this end, the following acts (in addition to those listed in Art. 75, above) are and shall remain prohibited:…the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.”

F) Convention III, Art. 5: “Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy (are prisoners of war under this Convention), such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.”

G) Convention IV, Art. 33: “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.”[/quote]From: West Point Grads Against the War

And for the history buffs on Forumosa, do any (or all) of these make a case for the Neocons being criminally prosecuted for the same crimes the Nazis were charged with?

[quote]Nuremberg Tribunal Charter

Principle VI: "The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace: Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties;

(b) War crimes: …murder, ill-treatment…of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war,…plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages…

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination…and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population…when such acts are done…in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."[/quote]Also from: West Point Grads Against the War

29

Um, can you explain to me how those involved in the renditions would be worthy of the rights guaranteed to US citizens under the US Constitution? There, be a good boy and run off and get something to back that up. I will be waiting…

30

That’s it?
You’re arguing that Extraordinary Rendition – specifically Kidnapping, Illegal Imprisonment & Immoral Torture – is OK as long as the victims aren’t holding a US citizenship? Who subscribes to this reasoning? Obviously someone with zero morals and with even less value for life or liberty. Is it love of money, or cowardice, or both that keeps you going? After reading your boasting of owning oil shares, this seems to be the only reason you continue to justify your enthusiastic support for murder and lies.

Yes, the US Constitution grants rights to American citizens, unless they have specific evidence that will put neocons directly in prison (Sibel Edmonds for example). The Neocon Bush/Cheney/PNAC administration’s actions (and its Patriot Acts) broadly abuse rights of anyone in their way, including Americans. Such positions of leadership are supposed protect these rights, NOT violate them then lie, gag and torture people in support of those violations.

If Americans accept Fred Smith’s position that Kidnapping, Illegal Imprisonment & Immoral Torture is OK for Fred Smith and anyone else who does not hold US citizenship, taking any oaths to serve and protect is worthless. If everyone like Fred Smith accepts that a foundation of values is unimportant, where will he/they hide from direct retribution? Actually, Fred Smith may be supporting a unique platform… and the new party affiliation needs a name. Suggestions? Here is a couple off the top of my head: FLAB (Formosans Loving American Brutality)? or maybe SLOB (Scandalous Lying Obnoxious Bigots)?

Does anyone really think the Bush/Cheney/PNAC administration is committed to fighting an endless War on Terror to spread Democracy or freedom? What kind of person can believe that the largest American violators of freedom and integrity are suitable of advancing anything of the like? Fred Smith, you must be getting paid to spew Neocon political dung, because there is no sane reasoning for your thoughts on this subject.

Extraordinary Rendition: Kidnap, Imprisonment & Torture - Includes 29 min. online documentary - possibly difficult to watch in one setting. Excerpts: [quote=“Louis Arbour, United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights said (not”]“The Rendition is actually the transfer of a person who is in custody of State A to State B with no judicial supervision.”[/quote][quote=“Michael Scheuer, Chief Architect of CIA Rendition Program said (not”]The goals of Rendition were only two at the beginning, and I think primarily they remain the same. They were one, to get individuals off the street who we knew who were senior in Al Qaeda or its allies, or who posed a threat to the United States. The second goal of the Rendition program was very simply at the time of the capture of an individual or the time a cell was disrupted, to seize whatever documents were available. Interrogation was never a central goal. After 9/11 the Rendition program shifted in a sense that we would be holding people ourselves."
…
Personally I think torture is counter-productive in terms of trying to get information that’s usable from any individual. Interrogation was always part of something that was gong to happen to someone who was Rendered. From 1995 forward. But it was never anything that was as high on the priority list as capturing them and getting their documents. Any interrogation you don’t conduct by yourself for yourself is very suspect and hard to use.[/quote]

You’re probably aware, but warrants inclusion: Italy indicts 31 linked to CIA rendition case

[quote]Extraordinary Rendition
The CIA is engaging in an unlawful practice – “extraordinary rendition” – abducting foreign nationals for detention and interrogation in secret overseas prisons. “Extraordinary rendition” must be stopped before more innocent victims are targeted. Americans cannot tolerate kidnappings and secret prisons.[/quote]

Is there someone who honestly still believes the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution? Please speak up and make your case heard.

?

31

Was it not your assertion that AMERICANS were losing THEIR constitutional rights because of the renditions? But if the persons in question are not in fact American, how does that make your case? And why should they be granted the same rights as Americans? That does not equal to saying they should be tortured but you appear to have a very confused view of what the US constitution says and what it protects and whom it protects. While it does make for a highly emotional diatribe, it really falls apart when given a bit of a push. Sorry but perhaps a course in Constitutional Law 101 might be just the remedial course needed to get you through this class?

32

The very reality of Neocon lies about 9/11 and the fabricated War on Terror have resulted in Extraordinary Rendition – specifically Kidnapping, Illegal Imprisonment & Immoral Torture, violently contradicts the values described in the 6th Amendment. No disagreement, correct? Then combine this with the obvious violations of additional Constitutional rights and numerous laws established to protect citizens (which you’re trying to escape from addressing even after attacking ImaniOU), such as Illegal wiretaps vs. 4th Amendment; Lying to Congress vs. 18 USC 1001; Blatant violation of Geneva conventions; and the Nazi Nuremberg Tribunal Charter applicable to the Neocon WoT. This very clearly makes the Constitutional rights we Americans desire to live under unreliable.[quote=“I”]If any rights granted and protected by the Bill of Rights are violated by the very Branch of government who’s duty it is to execute the protection thereof, those rights become unreliable.[/quote] So I ask you directly:
Do you honestly believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution?
Your analysis will probably make for an interesting strain on your exaggerated understanding of our Constitution.

Since your desire to lean towards the SLOB party appears greater than supporting the FLABs, answer this:
Why was a proven liar and a wanted man appointed by the White House to chair the 9/11 Commission, although he had to step down after being questioned about his clients named bin Laden?
– Referring to your neocon idol Kissinger.

33

Liars? in high places? Why would Bush appoint Bill Clinton to head up the commission? Now, THAT just does not make sense.

And as to losing any rights… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz I am zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz so zzzzzzzzzz worried zzzzzzzzzzzz I mean these terrible wire taps zzzzzzzzzzzzzz which were used to monitor calls to and from known terrorists and to and from Afghanistan and Pakistan. I mean it affects SOOOOO many innocent Americans… zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

34

While the powerful reenactment of your civics education (zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz) highlights your ignorance and contempt for American values and the lives sacrificed to protect them, I am doubting that you have any respect for your own position to even attempt to answer the questions.

How do you honestly believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution?

As for your attempt to avoid aswering for your heros in the White House by substituting Clinton for Kissinger, you may be pleased to know I too would love for Bill Clinton and his congressional husband to face a lie detector. So trying to skirt the reality of your unAmerican blather by pointing a finger elsewhere is all too pathetically characteristic. Go ahead, and exhibit some pride in being a neocon chickenhawk SLOB, and answer the question…

Why was a proven liar and a wanted man appointed by the White House to chair the 9/11 Commission, although he had to step down because of hidden clients named bin Laden?

(By the way, I should ask TainanCowoy, the proposed FLAP/SNOT vice-spokesperson, is it netiquettely acceptable to carry over self-proposed acronyms? Because it seems appropriate to carry over for Fred Smith his proposed new party affiliations: FLAB (Formosans Loving American Brutality) and SLOB (Scandalous Lying Obnoxious Bigots))

35

I think both scholl and the Fredbot needs some clarity on Constitutional Law. That is, Fredbot’s accusation that scholl needs to take a class on Con Law 101 should also be levelled against himself.

Namely, the US Constitution is the supreme law within the US. It has no direct authority/power or effect over people outside American sovereign lands, whether US citizen or not. (It of course has indirect effects such as the ability to wage war overseas, or to have a navy, etc.)

Thus, the foreign renditions, and those targeted do not have standing to invoke the protections of the Constitution or namely, Amendments like the 4th and 14th.

On the other hand, Fredbot incorrectly notes that one should be a citizen of the US to be afforded protection. This is clearly not the law, and has been clear since the 1800s. The Constitution, and through Supreme Court rulings, is clear the its protections are afforded to any PERSON within the US. (This is why the terror suspects are kept in Guantanamo which technically is not part of the US)

As for wiretaps in the US without warrants, this clearly impinges on 4th amendment rights. One might argue that, a la Japanese-Americans in WW2 treatment (Kobayashi? or something), the US military has greater leeway in times of war, rightly or wrongly. The counterargument is that we were not at war with Afghanistan.

36

That I did not know… Be sure and post a link on this. Sorry, but I would like to see a source on this. You are probably right and all but… I fully admit that I did not realize that the US constitution extended those same rights to ALL people in the US.

Pray tell how I am being hypocritical… I have no idea what you are talking about. Not as learned as he leads us to believe? haha. Is that the part where I am supposed to be hypocritical? Honestly, today, you are a bit frazzled no? Maybe a nice hot bubble bath to sooth those nerves, a cup of herbal tea, the latest copy of Vogue, some nice scented candles. There, there. Things will be better tomorrow and we do appreciate everything that you have been doing for us. We value you as a person and as a friend. You are special. You are someone. You are YOU!

37

Yes, but a quick question. Would it impinge on the 4th amendment rights of someone who is NOT a US citizen?

Are we at war with terrorists?

I would also point to some of the monitoring that occurred during the anti-racketeering efforts of the 1970s by way of precedent. My understanding was that federal and state officials were given some leeway here as well, no?

38

Thanks Jack, highlighting that the importance of the Constitution despite the Neocon Executive attempts to diminish its value is very timely. From my standpoint, Americans concerned about Americans’ rights when they are in the States need to wake up and understand the neocon imperalist policies do in fact contradict the very rights we hold so dear.

Of course an American standing in Tiannamen Square handing out pro-democracy leaflets has no protection from home. No one is suggesting otherwise, and it has no relevance to the point of this thread. But to say the Bush/Cheney Whitehouse fulfills its oath to protect the Constitution by violating the very principles it stands for – IS exactly the point.

Until there is someone willing to provide explanation “why they could believe the Neocon Bush/Cheney Administration has served America well in protecting the US Constitution” should Americans who care about America just be quiet and watch the greed and lies continue?

Will the US honor the extradition requests to convict CIA operatives for illegal kidnapping in Italy?

Will the US honor the extradition requests to convict Kissinger for terrorism and murder in South America?

Has Kissinger been indicted in the US for the evidence of terrorism?

Until there is a YES answer to any of these, the US War on Terror is simply a lie. Billions of dollars handed to crony corporations while neocon supporters chanting revenge! revenge! doesn’t change the fact that the WoT has not stopped US government harboring the most henious of terrorists in modern history.

39

Yes, but a quick question. Would it impinge on the 4th amendment rights of someone who is NOT a US citizen?
[/quote]

Yes, it would when that someone is in US territory. Citizenship is not the key, but physical presence ie physical jurisdiction.

And yes, let me try and find the case for you. But first since I recall you’re of the Scalia school of thought, I point you to the language of the Constitution itself. And since we’re talking about the 4th, read the 4th amendment. I bet you it doesn’t say “US citizen”. The use of the word [US] citizen is very limited in the Constitution see, e.g. privileges and immunities clause of the 14th, and qualifications of eligibility of the Presidency (ie born an American, can’t be a naturalised citizen), voting rights e.g. universal suffrage, but these are not relevant. Rather, we’re really focusing on the 4th Am.

Let me get back to you on the caselaw. Check out for now a more recent case:

Abel v. U.S., 362 U.S. 217 (1959).

See also United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990)

But the landmark one I’m thinking of involves a foreign seamen around the war of 1812 or something who was afforded protections under the Constitution.

40

Here’s to amplifying some parallel viewpoints on the illegitimate War on Terror.
It’s a good day to see the Neocon WoT propaganda being exposed for what it is and isn’t.

[quote=“Dr. John Moffett”]
Terror Me Once, Shame on You…

March 26th, 2007

Zbigniew Brzezinski has an important Op Ed at the Washington Post, that should be mandatory reading for all members of Congress, Republican or Democrat. Liberals have been saying for years that you can’t have a “war” against “terror”. Terror is a tactic used by many different groups around the world to disrupt and demoralize people, and you obviously can’t have a war on a tactic. Can you have a “war on flanking maneuvers”? A war on “overwhelming force”? No.

There is no war on terror. There is a concerted effort by our government to panic the American people so that BushCo can funnel billions to war profiteers, while simultaneously making a power grab for the oil wells in Iraq.

The only way to fight terrorism is with international law enforcement. You can’t find and kill small groups of terrorists with the US military. It is a sham, and the public needs to demand an end to the war in Iraq, and the obscene spending on the military.[/quote]

While previous questions remain pending, here’s a new one:

How does one argue that the Nuremberg Tribunal Charters should NOT apply to the Bush/Cheney/Rove/PNAC Neocon horde of imperialists?

[quote=“I”][quote]Nuremberg Tribunal Charter

Principle VI: "The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace: Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties;

(b) War crimes: …murder, ill-treatment…of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war,…plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages…

(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination…and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population…when such acts are done…in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."[/quote]Also from: West Point Grads Against the War[/quote]