JCT: Last week, George Bush gave another speech before a
captive military audience who applauded his gutting the
Geneva convention against torture.

In his address to the R.O.A. (Reserve Officers Association),
I was shocked by the regular applause for torture in the
name of "Homeland Security," for invasion in the name of
pre-emption with never-ending offence, for never-ending war.
All avoid war in freedom-loving America, pre-emptive war
must be made all over the world in everyone gaelse's homes
and back-yards, not ours.

Of course, there are those of us who do not believe it was
Osama who ordered the US Air Force to stand down its
protection, only a Bushite could order that, so, Bush's
performance was an exercise in hypocritical double-speak and
double-think that makes non-believers truly roll-over-and-
puke nauseous. The man we think pulled the dirty deed
cheerleading the posse against innocent patsies. Truly
nauseous.

He can't realize what he looks like to posterity. Lying his
face off on tape as if he can ever undo it. Like Chavez
said, once there is peace, living the rest of his life will
be a nightmare with everyone knowing how his lying caused so
many innocent deaths. F.D. Roosevelt thought we'd never find
out he let Pearl Harbor happen to get the US into a war.
Lyndon Johnson died before it came out his Bay of Tonkin
attack was a P.R. fraud to start the Vietnam war. Bush is
still alive as the world learns he lied his nation into a
war against innocent nations. Why would he ever want to show
his face in any world finally at peace?

We already know what Bush has done. And they keep putting
him and is incredibly disingenuous face into TV history.
It's incredible. He really is a sick man. But a scary sick
man.

But it's when you hear the sustained applause for the
Senate's passing the "Torture Detainee methods" needed to
safety motherhood and apple pie that you realize that these
are the very soldiers who now benefit from the anti-torture
provisions in the Geneva Convention if they are caught. Are
these guys really favor of losing their POW rights too? Tese
very soldiers most likely to become Prisoners of War and
have done to themselves what Bush will be able to now do to
"them." So why are these Reserve Officers in support of
losing their POW rights too?

I noted how often the U.S. Commander-in-Chief was
interrupted by his soldiers for a round of applause. And
yet, I can't imagine any ordinary reserve officer
interrupting his Commander-in-Chief on TV. So someone was
cueing the applause since it wasn't canned like on TV. Or
was it. Would they use an "applause" track? When they sent
Bush over to Iraq to serve Thanksgiving turkey, he was
pictured with a phony turkey! So would they use canned
applause? Or is this simply a captive military audience
forced to applaud on cue just by being watched by their
superiors? These same soldiers who will be done to if
captured by the same torture methods they are now
applauding?

Note, no one ever expressed disapproval, no boes, only
approval. So who really orchestrated the approval spots.

It's about as Orwellian as can be imagined. Constant double-
speak. The main villain urging the patsy be brought
to justice. Hypocrisy to the max. I can't imagine what kind
of intellect could get on TV for posterity and argue for
torture and never-ending war.


>Subject: [catapult] Digest Number 2098
>Torture Bill states Non-allegiance to Bush is terrorism
>Date: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:00 pm (PDT)

Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth
of the dictatorship
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet.com | September 29 2006

JCT: Alex Jones, who demonstrated at this year's Bilderberg
conference in Ottawa the day before I and Mama Therese
Turmel made our 3rd Bilderberg picket, is even more
threatened by the expansion of what constitutes support for
terrorism because he's in Gulag Amerika than we outsiders
used to be, tells us what he's facing.

AJ: Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of
Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the
torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the
enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach thei
"allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his
government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture
and conviction in front of a military tribunal.

7:25PM CST UPDATE
After five hours of searching through the 80-plus page bill,
Alex Jones, who won the 2004 Project Censored award for his
analysis of Patriot Act 2, uncovered numerous other
provisions and definitions that make the bill appear as
almost a mirror image of Hitler's 1933 Enabling Act.

In section 950j. the bill criminalizes any challenge to the
legislation's legality by the Supreme Court or any United
States court. Alberto Gonzales has already threatened
federal judges to shut up and not question Bush's authority
on the torture of detainees.

"No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear
or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever,
including any action pending on or filed after the date of
the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006,
relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a
military commission under this chapter, including challenges
to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions
under this chapter."

The Bush administration is preemptively overriding any
challenge to the legislation by the Supreme Court.

The definition of torture that the legislation cites is US
code title 18 section 2340. This is a broad definition of
torture and completely lacks the specific clarity of the
Geneva Conventions. This definition allows the use of
torture that is, "incidental to lawful sanctions."

JCT: If you're arrested legally, they can now "incidentally
to lawful arrest torture you."

AJ: In alliance with the bill's blanket authority for
President Bush to define the Geneva Conventions as he sees
fit, this legislates the use of torture. The media has spun
the bill as if it outlaws torture - it only outlaws torture
for "enemy combatants," and in fact outlaws the retaliation
of any military against the United States as "murder." Those
deemed "enemy combatants" are not even allowed to fight back
yet the government affords itself every power including the
go-ahead to torture. Further actions that result in the
classification of an individual as a terrorist include the
following.
- Destruction of any property, which is deemed punishable by
any means of the military tribunal's choosing.
- Any violent activity whatsoever if it takes place near a
designated protected building, such as a charity building.
- A change of the definition of "pillaging" which turns all
illegal occupation of property and all theft into terrorism.
This makes squatters and petty thieves enemy combatants.

JCT: Sounds like they're getting ready for martial law.

AJ: In light of Greg Palast's recent hounding by Homeland
Security, after they accused him of potentially giving
terrorists key information about U.S. "critical
infrastructure" when filming Exxon's Baton Rouge refinery
(clear photos of which were publicly available on Google
Maps), sub-section 27 of section 950v. should send chills
down the spine of all investigative journalists and even
news-gatherers.

"Any person subject to this chapter who with intent or
reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the
United States or to the advantage of a foreign power,
collects or attempts to collect information by clandestine
means or while acting under false pretenses, for the purpose
of conveying such information to an enemy of the United
States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be
punished by death or such other punishment as a military
ctommission under this chapter may direct."

Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 -
Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the
following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an
allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and
intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of
the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a
military commission under this chapter may direct."

JCT: Any person anywhere who doesn't support the US can be
Bush-whacked.

AJ For an individual to hold an allegiance or duty to the
United States they need to be a citizen of the United
States. Why would a foreign terrorist have any allegiance to
the United States to breach in the first place? This is
another telltale facet that proves the bill applies to U.S.
citizens and includes them under the "enemy combatant"
designation.

We previously cited the comments of Yale law Professor Bruce
Ackerman, who wrote in the L.A. Times, "The compromise
legislation....authorizes the president to seize American
citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left
the United States. And once thrown into military prison,
they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of
the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."

JCT: Dictatorship by any other name...

AJ: The New York Times stated that the legislation
introduced, "A dangerously broad definition of "illegal
enemy combatant" in the bill could subject legal residents
of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in
their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite
detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give
the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted."

Calling the bill "our generation's version of the Alien and
Sedition Acts," the Times goes on to highlight the rubber
stamping of torture. "Coerced evidence would be permissible
if a judge considered it reliable "already a contradiction
in terms" and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that
exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005
Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses."
Since with this bill, in the aggregate, Bush has declared
himself to be above the Constitution and the laws of the
United States, the allegiance of American citizens is no
longer to the flag or the freedoms for which it stands, but
to Bush himself, the self-appointed dictator, and any
diversion from that allegiance will mandate arrest, torture
and conviction in a military tribunal under the terms of
this bill.
Similar to the UK's Glorification of Terrorism law, which
top lawyers have slammed as vague, open to interpretation
and a potential weapon for the government to kidnap supposed
subversives, the nebulous context of "wrongfully aiding the
enemy," could easily be defined to include publicly
absolving an accused terrorist of involvement in a terrorist
attack.
That renders the entire 9/11 truth movement an aid to
terrorist suspects and subject to military tribunal and
torture. In addition, Bush's recently cited National
Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which is available on the
White House website, labels conspiracy theorists as
terrorist recruiters.

JCT: And people who help terrorists by buying marijuana.

AJ: This should leave us with no doubt as to which parties
are the target of the government's torture and intimidation
campaign.

Could protesting a war approved by the government and their
bootlickers in Congress and the Senate be considered
breaching an allegiance to the United States? Could
campaigning against the bombing of a target country be
considered wrongfully aiding the enemy?

JCT: If smoking herb is helping terrorism, condemning Bush
would be too.

AJ: When the USA PATRIOT act was rushed through at the
height of an anthrax scare without any members of Congress
even having time to read it, we were assured that it was to
fight terrorists and would not be used against the American
people. Since then a plethora of cases whereby the USA
PATRIOT act was used against U.S. citizens emerged,
including the internment without trial for over three years
of Jose Padilla, an American citizen who was finally
released after no evidence of terrorism was uncovered. The
so-called "compromise" before the bill was passed and the
media acclaim of John McCain as some kind of human rights
champion is one of the biggest con jobs ever inflicted upon
the American people.

JCT: The Judas Goat we thought was opposing torture.

AJ: Shortly after the bill was finalized it was spun by Bush
security advisor Stephen Hadley as "good news and a good day
for the American people." McCain said that it safeguarded
"the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva
Conventions." In truth the legislation does the exact
opposite, giving Bush carte blanche to "interpret the
meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions."

JCT: As always with government lies, it does the exact
opposite of what they say.

AJ: In addition, under the bill, "No person may invoke the
Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas
corpus or other civil action or proceeding to which the
United States, or a current or former officer, employee,
member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United
States is a party as a source of rights in any court of the
United States or its States or territories."

JCT: No one has any rights against an Amerikan.

AJ: The bill also allows hearsay evidence (obtained via
phony confessions after torture) to be considered by the
military tribunal and bars the suspect from even having
knowledge of the charges against him - making a case for
defense impossible. This is guaranteed to produce 100%
conviction rates as you would expect in the dictatorships of
Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe and other torture protagonists who
are in many cases allied with the Bush administration and
provide phony confessions obtained from torture that allow
the U.S. government to scare its people with the threat of
imaginary Al-Qaeda terror cells waiting to kill them.

JCT: Just like the worst nightmares they painted of Russia.
A murdrous dictatorship right next door.

AJ: Following the Supreme Court's ruling to previously
strike down Bush's shadow penal system, Alberto Gonzales is
already out threatening federal judges to shut up and get
behind the dictator or face the consequences. Gonzales has
the sheer gall to attack judges for even considering to
"overturn long-standing traditions or policies without
proper support in text or precedent," which is exactly what
Gonzales, Bush and the rest of the White House criminals are
doing themselves by de facto abolishing the Bill of Rights!
This is a dark day for the United States, the day America
died and the bastard birth of a literal dictatorship.
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/290906torturebill.htm

JCT: Whick threatens Canadians and everyone else he declares
an "enemy combatant" too.

[... The bill also retroactively gives Bush, the Neo-Cons or
any of their henchmen immunity from war crimes charges
dating back to September 11. Ask yourself why they would be
so careful to protect themselves from accusations of war
crimes. Could that possibly be because they are knowingly
committing war crimes?

JCT: Oh right. CNN didn't mention that. I guess Soledad
doesn't know.

>From: "Larry "
>Subject: Re: HABEAS CORPUS, BILL O.RIGHTS, GOODBYE!
AMERICAN CITIZENS AS "ENEMY COMBATANTS"..
>Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 13:04:09 +0000
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=3D93589

L: "...BURIED IN THE complex Senate compromise on detainee
treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal
struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo
Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing
toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize
American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have
never left the United States. And once thrown into military
prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any
other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights..."

This dangerous compromise not only authorizes the president
to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our
troops "during an armed conflict," it also allows him to
seize anybody who has "purposefully and materially supported
hostilities against the United States."

JCT: Bush says "if you're not with us, you're against us,"
so my condemning the Bush dictatorship can now be construed
as supporting hostilities against the US. So Bushieman
could come after me as readily as he's going after Bin Laden
with Stephen Harper helping him.

L: This grants the president enormous power over citizens
and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy
combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle
Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a
military prison.

JCT: How about condemning his invasions and urging people to
resist?

L: Not to worry, say the bill's defenders. The president
can't detain somebody who has given money innocently, just
those who contributed to terrorists on purpose. But other
provisions of the bill call even this limitation into
question. What is worse, if the federal courts support the
president's initial detention decision, ordinary Americans
would be required to defend themselves before a military
tribunal without the constitutional guarantees provided in
criminal trials. Legal residents who aren't citizens are
treated even more harshly. The bill entirely cuts off their
access to federal habeas corpus, leaving them at the mercy
of the president's suspicions.

We are not dealing with hypothetical abuses. The president
has already subjected a citizen to military confinement.
Consider the case of Jose Padilla. A few months after 9/11,
he was seized by the Bush administration as an "enemy
combatant" upon his arrival at Chicago's O'Hare
International Airport. Full article at LaTimes

>Subject: [apfn-1] Digest Number 4381
>In Case I Disappear
>Posted by: "Skinny" theskinnyasiseeit@...
>Date: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:39 pm (PDT)

William Rivers Pitt / t r u t h o u t | September 29 2006

I have been told a thousand times at least, in the years I
have spent reporting on the astonishing and repugnant
abuses, lies and failures of the Bush administration, to
watch my back. "Be careful," people always tell me. "These
people are capable of anything. Stay off small planes, make
sure you aren't being followed." A running joke between my
mother and me is that she has a "safe room" set up for me in
her cabin in the woods, in the event I have to flee because
of something I wrote or said.

I always laughed and shook my head whenever I heard this
stuff. Extreme paranoia wrapped in the tinfoil of
conspiracy, I thought. This is still America, and these Bush
fools will soon pass into history, I thought. I am a
citizen, and the First Amendment hasn't yet been red-lined,
I thought. Matters are different now.

It seems, perhaps, that the people who warned me were not so
paranoid. It seems, perhaps, that I was not paranoid enough.
Legislation passed by the Republican House and Senate,
legislation now marching up to the Republican White House
for signature, has shattered a number of bedrock legal
protections for suspects, prisoners, and pretty much anyone
else George W. Bush deems to be an enemy.

So much of this legislation is wretched on the surface.
Habeas corpus has been suspended for detainees suspected of
terrorism or of aiding terrorism, so the Magna Carta-era
rule that a person can face his accusers is now gone. Once a
suspect has been thrown into prison, he does not have the
right to a trial by his peers. Suspects cannot even stand in
representation of themselves, another ancient protection,
but must accept a military lawyer as their defender.

Illegally-obtained evidence can be used against suspects,
whether that illegal evidence was gathered abroad or right
here at home. To my way of thinking, this pretty much
eradicates our security in persons, houses, papers, and
effects, as stated in the Fourth Amendment, against illegal
searches and seizures.

Speaking of collecting evidence, the torture of suspects and
detainees has been broadly protected by this new
legislation. While it tries to delineate what is and is not
acceptable treatment of detainees, in the end, it gives
George W. Bush the final word on what constitutes torture.
US officials who use cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment
to extract information from detainees are now shielded from
prosecution.

It was two Supreme Court decisions, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, that compelled the creation of this
legislation. The Hamdi decision held that a prisoner has the
right of habeas corpus, and can challenge his detention
before an impartial judge. The Hamdan decision held that the
military commissions set up to try detainees violated both
the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva
Conventions.

In short, the Supreme Court wiped out virtually every legal
argument the Bush administration put forth to defend its
extraordinary and dangerous behavior. The passage of this
legislation came after a scramble by Republicans to paper
over the torture and murder of a number of detainees. As
columnist Molly Ivins wrote on Wednesday, "Of the over 700
prisoners sent to Gitmo, only 10 have ever been formally
charged with anything. Among other things, this bill is a
CYA for torture of the innocent that has already taken
place."

It seems almost certain that, at some point, the Supreme
Court will hear a case to challenge the legality of this
legislation, but even this is questionable. If a detainee is
not allowed access to a fair trial or to the evidence
against him, how can he bring a legal challenge to a court?
The legislation, in anticipation of court challenges like
Hamdi and Hamdan, even includes severe restrictions on
judicial review over the legislation itself.

The Republicans in Congress have managed, at the behest of
Mr. Bush, to draft a bill that all but erases the judicial
branch of the government. Time will tell whether this
aspect, along with all the others, will withstand legal
challenges. If such a challenge comes, it will take time,
and meanwhile there is this bill. All of the above is
deplorable on its face, indefensible in a nation that prides
itself on Constitutional rights, protections and the rule of
law.

Underneath all this, however, is where the paranoia sets in.
Underneath all this is the definition of "enemy combatant"
that has been established by this legislation. An "enemy
combatant" is now no longer just someone captured "during an
armed conflict" against our forces. Thanks to this
legislation, George W. Bush is now able to designate as an
"enemy combatant" anyone who has "purposefully and
materially supported hostilities against the United States."

JCT: So Bush is declaring war on Canadians too.

L: Consider that language a moment. "Purposefully and
materially supported hostilities against the United States"
is in the eye of the beholder, and this administration has
proven itself to be astonishingly impatient with criticism
of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by this
legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and
refuse a hearing to any American citizen who speaks out
against Iraq or any other part of the so-called "War on
Terror."

If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you
could be deemed as purposefully and materially supporting
hostilities against the United States.

If you organize or join a public demonstration against Iraq,
or against the administration, the same designation could
befall you.

One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators
or House members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize
him, or organize investigations into his dealings could be
placed under the same designation. In effect, Congress just
gave Bush the power to lock them up.

By writing this essay, I could be deemed an "enemy
combatant." It's that simple, and very soon, it will be the
law. I always laughed when people told me to be careful. I'm
not laughing anymore.

In case I disappear, remember this. America is an idea, a
dream, and that is all. We have borders and armies and
citizens and commerce and industry, but all this merely
makes us like every other nation on this Earth. What
separates us is the idea, the simple idea, that life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness are our organizing
principles. We can think as we please, speak as we please,
write as we please, worship as we please, go where we
please. We are protected from the kinds of tyranny that
inspired our creation as a nation in the first place.

That was the idea. That was the dream. It may all be over
now, but once upon a time, it existed. No good idea ever
truly dies. The dream was here, and so was I, and so were
you.

JCT: A vision without action is called a day-dream; but action
without vision is called a nightmare. Jim Sorensen

So Bush can declare anyone anywhere an "enemy
combatant," try us in secret and then kill us. Gulag,
Amerika, land of the free. Har har.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics