sixties relics unite

[click image]

.
Degenerate peace faggots forever....

I did this because I ran out of room for the labels to today's main post....

So, if yer confused, sorry, deal with it.
.

naomi wolf is voting with her feet

[click image]

.
It's what I love about her, beside how smart she is and how much she loves everyone. I got an email from her that she's merging the American Freedom Campaign into the Bill of Rights Defense Committee. I see she is now on their advisory board, along with a bunch of good people from liberal, conservative and libertarian political leanings. I see they really are about CONCRETE ways people can take action to put the Bill of Rights back and restore the LONG LOST rule of law.

This is music to my eyeprints, you guys.

This Hatfield and McCoy crap on the intertubes mortifies me, depresses me SO badly. I'm not kidding. It hurts like holy hell to witness it, let alone try to get along in it. So HERE is a possible route to justice at last, IF people put as much energy into it as they do into bashing their ideological fake adversaries.
.

OUTSTANDING interview OUTSTANDING

[click image]

.
Lew Rockwell interviewed Naomi Wolf—and sort of vice versa—shortly before the 2008 presidential election and I never heard it until today. It is SERIOUSLY important stuff.

Jesus.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH EVERYBODY?
.

One thing that pissed me off was when they got to the part about having kids and needing to keep one's head down on account of the kids. This HORSESHIT has been drilled into us over the course of decades—and since it's been repeated often enough even people this intelligent believe it—just as though no one with children ever participated in a war or a protest or a strike where there were very possibly lethal consequences. We do it FOR our kids. Whut? Have yer kids turned into yer reason to do this all-hat-and-no-cattle trip? Ain't that sweet. Nice work if you can get it.

IS THIS WHY IT'S OKAY WITH YOU THAT WE'RE SLAUGHTERING MOTHERS AND FATHERS AND CHILDREN AND AUNTS AND UNCLES AND COUSINS AND GRAMPAS AND GRAMMAS EVERY MOTHERFUCKING DAY?

I want to go postal on people who keep pleading that their jobs and families are more important than paying attention to actuality, let alone to DO anything about it. You ONLY have jobs and families because people went out and died to get them and keep them for you. And for those of you taking refuge in relief that the dying is being done by foreigners for our lifestyles, guess again. Let the stats smacking you in the face every day sink in.
.

sing it, naomi!

[click image]

.
What a marvelous thing to wake up to! If you don't want to register at OpEd News, you can just hit the iTunes button and listen to it on iTunes.

AND, OF COURSE, YOU REALLY SHOULD, BECAUSE IT'S NAOMI, AND SHE'S RIGHT!

Of course, as usual.

It's a little irritating because they keep making her stop to explain terms like "oligarchy" and "open vs. closed society" but... if that's what it takes... fine!

GO NAOMI!

Back before Jeans West/GAP bought the Banana Republic, which was this WONDERFUL little boutique in Mill Valley that sold outrageously chic military surplus clothes, their bags had this wonderful doodle all over them, with a big peace sign and a bunch of other stuff, and the logo read: DON'T BE STUPID — CHOOSE LOVE. I saved their bags and tacked them up on my walls.

Naomi must have shopped there too....
.

WTF do you think?

[click image]

.
Fucking OBVIOUS, you liberal SHEEP.

Sorry. Sorry.

[Maybe all is not lost with the Tea Party thing.... Probably, but maybe not....]

Sing it, Naomi!
.

And, dammit, watch these two videos, PLEASE.

DON'T BE STUPID.

Sorry. Sorry.

Just snap out of it.
.

[Today's Keiser Report....]
.

naomi's other job

[click image]

sorry, running out of days

[click images]

I'm sorry. Sorry to be so explicit about it, sorry to have to go into this much detail, and sorry to have to update with even more, but I just got the creepy feeling these pieces might disappear, the links go dead, and so I'm updating from my 7:15pm post with the full text of all three pieces here, formerly only linked, just in case, and then having to rant, and update again with the news of the freak of the Bush Crime Family coming out of the woodwork, probably due to this... so, I am sorry. Okay? But it just gets too awful, and you HAVE to get a handle on this, filthy as it is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abu Ghraib abuse photos 'show rape'

Photographs of alleged prisoner abuse which Barack Obama is attempting to censor include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse, it has emerged.

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent and Paul Cruickshank
Last Updated: 8:21AM BST 28 May 2009 | Telegraph, UK


At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.

Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.

Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

The graphic nature of some of the images may explain the US President’s attempts to block the release of an estimated 2,000 photographs from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan despite an earlier promise to allow them to be published.

Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.

“I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one and the consequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan.

“The mere description of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it.”

In April, Mr Obama’s administration said the photographs would be released and it would be “pointless to appeal” against a court judgment in favour of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

But after lobbying from senior military figures, Mr Obama changed his mind saying they could put the safety of troops at risk.
Earlier this month, he said: “The most direct consequence of releasing them, I believe, would be to inflame anti-American public opinion and to put our troops in greater danger.”

It was thought the images were similar to those leaked five years ago, which showed naked and bloody prisoners being intimidated by dogs, dragged around on a leash, piled into a human pyramid and hooded and attached to wires.

Mr Obama seemed to reinforce that view by adding: “I want to emphasise that these photos that were requested in this case are not particularly sensational, especially when compared to the painful images that we remember from Abu Ghraib.”

The latest photographs relate to 400 cases of alleged abuse between 2001 and 2005 in Abu Ghraib and six other prisons. Mr Obama said the individuals involved had been “identified, and appropriate actions” taken.

Maj Gen Taguba’s internal inquiry into the abuse at Abu Ghraib, included sworn statements by 13 detainees, which, he said in the report, he found “credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses.”

Among the graphic statements, which were later released under US freedom of information laws, is that of Kasim Mehaddi Hilas in which he says: “I saw [name of a translator] ******* a kid, his age would be about 15 to 18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [name] who was wearing the military uniform, putting his **** in the little kid’s ***…. and the female soldier was taking pictures.”

The translator was an American Egyptian who is now the subject of a civil court case in the US.

Three detainees, including the alleged victim, refer to the use of a phosphorescent tube in the sexual abuse and another to the use of wire, while the victim also refers to part of a policeman’s “stick” all of which were apparently photographed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pentagon denies report Iraq prison photos show rape
Thu May 28, 2009 12:58pm EDT

(Updates with denial; previous LONDON)

WASHINGTON, May 28 (Reuters) - The Pentagon on Thursday denied a British newspaper report that photographs of Iraqi prisoner abuse, whose release U.S. President Barack Obama wants to block, include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Daily Telegraph newspaper had shown "an inability to get the facts right".

"That news organization has completely mischaracterized the images," Whitman told reporters. "None of the photos in question depict the images that are described in that article."

Thursday's Telegraph quoted retired U.S. Army Major General Antonio Taguba, who conducted a 2004 investigation into abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, as saying the pictures showed "torture, abuse, rape and every indecency."

The newspaper said at least one picture showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Others were said to depict sexual assaults with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

In an interview with the New Yorker magazine published in 2007, Taguba was quoted as saying that he saw a video of a male American soldier in uniform sodomizing a female detainee.

Photographs of abuse at the jail outside Baghdad that were published in 2004 damaged the image of the United States as it fought an escalating war against insurgents in Iraq that caused deep resentment throughout the Muslim world.

Whitman said he did not know if the Telegraph had quoted Taguba accurately. But he said he was not aware that any such photographs had been uncovered as part of the investigation into Abu Ghraib or abuses at other prisons.

OBAMA BLOCKING PICTURES' RELEASE

He said the Telegraph also wrongly reported earlier this month that some of the images whose release Obama is trying to block had previously been aired on Australian television.

"I would caution you whenever you see a subsequent story on photos in this particular publication," he told reporters. "They now have, at least on two occasions, demonstrated an inability to get the facts right."

Taguba, who retired in January 2007, included allegations of rape and sexual abuse in his report.

Earlier this month, the Obama administration reversed course and decided it would fight the release of the photographs, which the American Civil Liberties Union is seeking to obtain through legal action.

In April, the administration said it would comply with a court order to release the pictures. But Obama changed course after military commanders warned of a backlash in Iraq and Afghanistan that could add to the danger facing U.S. troops.

Taguba was quoted in the Telegraph as saying he supported Obama's decision not to release the pictures.

"I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one," he said. "The sequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan."

He added: "The mere depiction of these pictures is horrendous enough, take my word for it." (Reporting by Andrew Gray in Washington and Luke Baker in London; Editing by David Storey)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Acknowledged and What Remains Unknown: Sexual Torture
by DAVID ROSEN

15 May 2009

"Removal of clothing was authorized by the Secretary of Defense [Rumsfeld] for use at GTMO [Guantánamo] on December 2, 2002," acknowledges the recently released U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee report on the use of harsh interrogation techniques. It also reports that the use of prolonged nudity proved so effective that, in January 2003, it was approved for use in Afghanistan and, in the fall of 2003, was adopted for use in Iraq.

"Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody"

The Senate report came out shortly after a secret International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) report on CIA torture techniques used as part of its detention program was leaked by Mark Danner of the "New York Review of Books." These reports provoked a storm of media attention, much of it focused on the use of waterboarding (or what the ICRC more aptly calls "suffocation by water") and, in particular, its use on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times and Abu Zubaydah 83 times.

The media paid less attention to the host of what the ICRC calls the other "methods of ill-treatment." The Senate report identifies these techniques as: use of military dogs, stress positions and physical training, sleep adjustment/sleep management, sensory deprivation and removal of clothing. The ICRC identifies them as: prolonged stress standing, beating by use of a collar, beating and kicking, confinement in a box, sleep deprivation and use of load music, exposure to cold temperature/cold water, prolonged use of handcuffs and shackles, threats, forced shaving, deprivation/restricted provision of solid food and prolonged nudity.

These reports, together with the recent release of Bush-administration "torture memos," helped focus national attention on a shameful, if not illegal, aspect of mad king George’s War on Terror. However, these reports are "official" documents based on revelations of a very limited number of sources. The information gathered, while invaluable, is limited by these sources.

The limited sources limit the public’s knowledge of the full scope of the torture committed by American intelligence agents, military officers and private contractors. Focusing on the issue of sexual torture, which includes prolonged nudity, reveals what has been made public but also what has yet to become publicly acknowledged.

Failure to publicly acknowledge the full scope of sexual torture, along with all the other "harsh" interrogation techniques, creates a sanitized, "official," history. Americans will never know what torture was committed in their name, nor be able to hold accountable those who ordered and executed these actions unless they go beyond "official" sources.

* * *

The ICRC conducted interviews with fourteen "enemy combatants" from eight countries. The detainees were arrested over a nearly three-year period, from March 2002 through May 2005. Eleven of the detainees were subject to prolonged nudity "during detention and interrogation, ranging from several weeks continuously up to several months intermittently."

The ICRC recounts what it calls the "alleged" experiences of seven detaineesm subject to prolonged nudity:

• Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – kept naked for one month in Afghanistan.

• Abu Zubaydah– kept naked for two-and-a-half weeks in Afghanistan after recovering at a Pakistan hospital; he reports subsequently being repeatedly provided with clothing and then stripped naked for weeks at a time.

• Walid Bin Attash – kept naked two weeks in Afghanistan and again for a month in a second but unknown detention facility.

• Encep Nuraman (aka Hambali) – kept naked for four or five days in Thailand and a week in Afghanistan, followed by intermittent periods of being clothed and naked.

• Majid Khan – kept naked for three days in Afghanistan and seven days in his third place of detention.

• Mohammed Nazir Bin Lep – kept naked three to four days in Thailand and nine days in Afghanistan.

• Unnamed detainee – kept naked for two to three months in Afghanistan and then faced intermittent periods of being clothed and naked.

The sources of these reports were interviews with the detainees.

The Senate report provides a far different assessment on what it calls "removal of clothing." It makes clear that the use of prolonged nudity found strong support within the CIA and military as an interrogation technique. It reports that nudity was imported into Iraq, especially Abu Ghraib prison, from Afghanistan and GTMO.

It states that this technique served a number of critical interrogation purposes, including to "humiliate detainees," to "renew 'capture shock’ of detainees" and as an incentive for good behavior. It use was extensive, as indicated by two of the many officers interviewed. COL Jerry Philabaum, the Commander of the 320th MP, reports seeing "between 12-15 detainees naked in their own individual cells." CPT Donald Reese, the Commander of the 372nd MP Company, acknowledged that prolonged nudity was "known to everyone" and it was "common practice to walk the tier and see detainees with clothing and bedding." Other officers made similar statements.

Like the ICRC report, the Senate report draws extensively on interviews, but these interviews are with Army officers from the Military Police and intelligence. In addition, the Senate report draws on a number of publicly released military report, most notably by Major General George Fay, known as the Fay Report. One of its quotes is remarkably candid, perhaps more revealing than originally intended: detention created an "environment that would appear to condone depravity and degradation rather than humane treatment of detainees." The report also makes a single passing reference to Major General Antonio Taguba’s report on Abu Ghraib.

* * *

The first "enemy combatants" arrive at Guantánamo on January 11, 2002, nearly a year before Rumsfeld officially authorized the use of sexual torture. According to a CBS timeline, a "U.S. Air Force plane from Afghanistan touches down at Guantanamo carrying 20 prisoners, marking the start of the detention operation." [CBS News Gitmo Timeline, August 24, 2004] In the Senate report, SMU [Special Mission Unit] TF [Task Force] Commander [name blacked out] states that when he "took command [of Guantánamo] he 'discovered that some of the detainees were not allowed clothes’ as an interrogation technique [blacked out] said he terminated the practice in December 2003 or January 2004."

The disclosures about prolonged nudity received little public discussion. Compared to the many far worse techniques employed, most notably "suffocation by water," head beating, kicking, stress positions, uses of dogs and sleep deprivation, sexual torture seems rather modest. But its purpose was, along with the other techniques, clear. As the ICRC notes, it "was clearly designed to undermine human dignity and create a sense of futility … resulting in exhaustion, depersonalization and dehumanization."

However, drawing upon other sources paints a different picture, one far less sanitized and much more sadistic. What is not known is whether these additional techniques were approved by U.S. military and civilian leaders or were the improvised actions of frontline officers and contractors? A few examples illustrate these techniques.

The best single source on the use of sexual torture at Abu Ghraib remains the Taguba report. In the report’s executive summary, the following "sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses" are identified as having been used at the prison:

* forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time;

* videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees;

* forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing;

* forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear;

* forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped;

* arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;

* positioning a naked detainee on a MRE [meals ready to eat] Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture;

* placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female soldier pose for a picture;

* sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.

Why did this part of the Taguba report not appear in the Senate report? Its absence speaks to the way official reports are sanitized and an "inside the Beltway" history is written. [see "Sexual Terrorism: The Sadistic Side of Bush's War on Terror," CounterPunch, May 13, 2008]

The U.S. and international press revealed disturbing episodes of sexual terror used by American forces. For example, The Associated Press reported that a former inmate, Dhia al-Shweiri, was ordered by American soldiers to strip naked, bend over and place his hands on a wall; while not sodomized, he says he was humiliated: "We are men. It’s OK if they beat me," al Shweiri said. "Beatings don’t hurt us; it’s just a blow. But no one would want their manhood to be shattered."

Scotland’s "Sunday Herald" reported that a former Iraqi prisoner claimed that there is a photo of a civilian translator raping a male juvenile prisoner; he stated, "They covered all the doors with sheets. I heard the screaming, … and the female soldier was taking pictures."

London’s "Independent" reported on the experience of Hayder Sabbar Abd, immortalized as the man in the hood in infamous Abu Ghraib photo of Lynndie England. Abd alleges that he was ordered to masturbate as Ms. England "put her hands on her breasts," which he couldn’t; and to simulate fellatio with another prisoner, which he appears to have done.

The "Sydney Morning Herald" noted: "Female interrogators tried to break Muslim detainees at Guantanamo Bay by sexual touching, wearing a miniskirt and thong underwear and in one case smearing a Saudi man's face with fake menstrual blood, according to an insider's written account."

* * *

Sexual torture served two purposes on those subjected to such abuse: to physically harm and to emotionally scar. It was intended to break male inmates. It sought to inflict both pain and shame, to make the recipient suffer and loathe himself. Sexual torture attempted to break the victim both physically and spiritually, to leave scars on (and inside) the body and in the psyche.

With Obama’s election, the U.S. military has probably ceased employing "harsh interrogation techniques." Unfortunately, given Obama’s pragmatism, the Congress’ complicity, the military’s bureaucratic zealotry and the CIA’s (and private contractors’) immorality, one can only wonder what would happen if another September 11th occurred.

The full scope of "harsh interrogation techniques" used during the War on Terror is unknown. Nor is it fully known who within the Bush administration approved the use of such technique, not who within the U.S. military and intelligence community (along with private contractors) used such techniques. Answers to these questions should be the first task of any "official" investigation of the War on Terror. And those undertaking the investigation should use a far wider assortment of sources than those deemed "official." Only then will the American people understand what was done in their name and, hopefully, how to stop it from happening again.

David Rosen is the author of "Sex Scandal America: Politics & the Ritual of Public Shaming" and can be reached at drosen@ix.netcom.com.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know for sure if this much detail, not much, has finally hit the mainstream press and gotten a Pentagon denial, that it was even worse than this, way worse. I have been waiting for this since Hersh first let it slip at that ACLU event that I watched with my own eyes and heard with my own ears, and it has finally hit the MSM. Obama's little lie to go back on the court-ordered photo release has been exposed... beside the bald fact that he defied a court order to begin with, which doesn't seem to get talked about much.

I tell you, Obama is making a big mistake by not releasing everything, letting the entire world know in complete detail, and prosecuting everyone involved in ALL the war crimes of the past administration... even the ones who have not stopped the brutality despite his loophole-riddled order. Untold American lives are at stake and we will be subjected to torture wherever anyone who hates us can grab us if he does not get it all out in the open and ALL of the guilty prosecuted.

WE are the only ones who don't know about this.

He isn't fooling anyone out there.

He'd be SAVING our lives if he did it.

The part that horrifies me almost even more than this "controversy" over what is utterly UNcontroversial is that he has to know this... making me wonder if he, or whoever is calling his shots, wants this. Everywhere you turn there are signals for you to be terrified to leave home. In fact, terrified on our own streets. He's not just jeopardizing all our military POWs for decades, maybe hundreds of years, but civilians too. THAT is never discussed. That never gets talked about AT ALL.

You should start talking about it.

This means you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, yeah, "war is hell", always has been, get over it.... And, the old *, his little old cowpoke self, came out of hiding tonight to tell us so, joining Fudd on the stump for the efficacy of torture. It's true. This stuff has been going on all over the world since humans began. It is hugely symbolic of DOMINANCE... "full-spectrum dominance". It is brutal and feral and THE way to ruin your enemy's life, preferred largely over killing him. But it stopped with George Washington, and we sealed it with Nuremberg and the Geneva Conventions, which by our ratification became part of our Constitution. We prosecute for this or we are not America anymore, and people everywhere stop thinking our lives are worth more than dirt. They can't all be "terrorists".

WE'RE THE TERRORISTS.

Isn't this perfectly crystal clear to you yet?


Can you tell I'm pissed off?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There’s too much work and I’m spent
There’s too much pressure and I'm bent
I got no time to move ahead
Have you heard one thing that I’ve said

And all these little things in life, they all create this haze
There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days

And I can’t last here for so long
I feel this current it’s so strong
It gets me further down the line
It gets me closer to the light

And all these little things in life, they all create this haze
There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days

All these little things in life, they all create this haze
There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days

Well all these little things in life, they all create this haze
And now I’m running out of time; I can’t see through this haze
My friend tell me why it has to be this way
There’s too many things to get done, and I’m running out of days

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Refer back to the tip of the iceberg....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vets aren't happy about it either....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Naomi Wolf weighs in....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scott Horton weighs in....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoth Senator Lindsey Graham in 2004: The American public needs to understand, we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience. We're talking about rape and murder and some very serious charges.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't forget the "prolonged detention" torture....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And, everybody's making such a hairy deal out of Betraeus stating the obvious, just as though that would even start to cover it. DUH. Do you think saying it has any impact? No. Indicting and prosecuting perpetrators has impact. Ceasing to brutalize men and women who have been convicted of nothing has impact. Ceasing to kill innocent people has impact. Observing the Geneva Conventions, all of them, has impact. So, even though he gets another star for publicly stating the obvious, on Warmonger TV, no less, no, this isn't good enough by a couple light years.

yoo²

[click image]

Dear 99,

There was a time when the United States was the undisputed world leader when it came to upholding the rule of law. We lost that reputation under George W. Bush. And now, even under President Obama, we are being outclassed and outshone by other nations.

This morning, the Washington Post reported that the British government has launched a criminal investigation to determine whether British intelligence officers were involved in the torture of a British resident detained by the United States.

Notably, the British Attorney General initiated the investigation and called on the police to investigate "as expeditiously as possible given the seriousness and sensitivity of the issues involved." British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said, "I have always made clear that when serious allegations are made they have got to be investigated."

While the British are seeking to restore international respect for their nation by adhering to the rule of law, President Obama is "looking forward" and Attorney General Eric Holder is twiddling his thumbs. Twelve days ago, the world read leaked details from an International Committee of the Red Cross report concluding that the treatment to which detainees were subjected while under the control of the CIA "constituted torture." Was this enough to spur Holder to act? Shockingly, no.

Is this what we have become? Are we, as a nation, going to do nothing about the fact that our leaders authorized and employed torture? If President Obama and Attorney General Holder refuse to launch a criminal investigation, then they are accessories after the fact in the torture themselves. They are no better or worse than individuals like John Yoo, who bent the law to allow the torture in the first place.

Can we please get upset about this? At the very least, please take a minute to send an E-mail to the Department of Justice, asking AG Holder why he is covering up torture. Just use the following link to get started:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26948

Once you have sent your message, please forward this email widely to friends and family. In the alternative, you can use the "Tell-A-Friend" option on the AFC Web site that will appear after you have sent your message.

In the eyes of the world, the United States is now a nation that tortures. Unless past acts of torture are treated like crimes, that reputation will continue. We must have investigations and prosecutions now.

--American Freedom Campaign

WE ARE A FASCIST COUNTRY.

i'd welcome specter's atonement for the million perfidies of his career

[click image]

That would probably be the biggest single thing to resurrect the Republican Party in the estimation of Americans and the world, too. If THEY are the ones who initiate and insist upon the prosecution of the whole lot of criminals from the last administration, they could be back in the saddle by next election. Awful as they are, it might be worth it.

I mean, read the damn memos. Nail the bastids.

[If yer too uncomfortable with legalese, Naomi summarizes it for you....]

_____________________________________________________________

Dear 99,

It turns out the Bush years were far worse than we ever imagined - and we were not shy in our imaginings.

Previously classified internal legal memos released by the Obama administration earlier this week demonstrate that the Bush administration acted under the belief that it had virtually unchecked power after 9/11. The combined effect of the memos, which in theory gave the president the power to deploy the military on our soil, ignore Fourth Amendment protections of our privacy, and even proscribe First Amendment freedom of speech protections, led writer Scott Horton to declare that in the post-9/11 era "this country was a dictatorship."

American Freedom Campaign co-founder Naomi Wolf wrote a powerful piece for Huffington Post conveying her initial reaction to the contents of the memos. She concluded, "We need to stare [the memos] in the face and understand them: they are evidence that the groundwork was laid out that gave the president the legal power to effectively subvert the Republic."

While we are outraged by these memos, we do want to highlight one positive note. The American Freedom Campaign, led by members like you, helped to reverse one of the most objectionable policies - a memo declaring that the president had the power to deploy the military on our soil, a practice long prohibited under federal law. At the end of September 2008, a couple of small media outlets reported that President Bush had assigned the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team to be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army component of Northern Command (NorthCom). In response, AFC helped raise awareness about the potential dangers involved and encouraged members to take action. Just days later, the administration drafted a memo [pdf] repudiating the earlier memo's authorization of far-reaching domestic military operations.

But certainly the news is not all positive. If you continue to be outraged and disgusted by the actions of Bush administration officials, including John Yoo, who wrote a number of the administration's most notorious memos, such as those authorizing torture, you can take action through existing actions on the AFC Web site. Here are two options:

Send an E-mail to Attorney General Eric Holder, urging him to launch a full criminal investigation of Bush administration activities -- from torture to warrantless wiretapping and beyond -- with prosecutions where it is found that the laws of the United States have been violated. Click here to take action:


http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26685

Send a strongly worded E-mail to Christopher Edley, Jr, Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, urging the dismissal of John Yoo. While the pre-written E-mail on the site is torture-specific, the sentiment remains the same. Here is the link to that action:


http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=24188

We do not intend to let Bush administration officials ride off into the sunset after their widespread assault on our laws and our Constitution. We hope that you will join us as we continue to push for serious accountability.

Naomi Wolf, and her compatriots, among whom I want to be counted, are doing their best to sound the alarms and push for the America we all grew up believing... knowing... we were born in. Not only should we be signing all these things they put out for us, but as noted here at my blog before and now, even at P U L S E, we need to take this to a level that cannot be outright ignored or dismissed as a circus easily crushed by nasty "riot police".

naomi wolf keeps right on going

[click image, one hour video]

I love her.

sorry, pat, i tried, but naomi's right

[click image]

Dear 99,

The subject line of this email isn't an admission of weakness. Rather, it is a cry of frustration. We have grown sick and tired of the Bush administration getting away with murder - figuratively, if not literally. And we are done watching Congress spin its wheels merely talking about it.

The latest outrage? Earlier this week, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) called for the establishment of a "Truth Commission" to look into various unconstitutional actions by the Bush administration. As Leahy described the commission, "such a process could involve subpoena powers and even the authority to obtain immunity from prosecutions for anything accept perjury in order to get to the full truth."

We don't want the "truth." We want a full criminal investigation led by the Department of Justice, with prosecutions where it is found that the laws of the United States have been violated. If you agree, click on the following link to send an E-mail to the Department of Justice:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26685

Why should we waste our time looking for "the truth" when the man who produced the legal memo setting the stage for torture under President Bush, John Yoo, recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Bush -- on three separate occasions! -- authorized waterboarding, an interrogation technique universally recognized as torture? That is the truth. Now let's start the prosecution process.

Why should we waste our time looking for "the truth" when we have known for years that the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program was conducted outside of the legal boundaries established by the FISA laws? That is the truth. Now let's start the prosecution process.

We know Bush administration officials defied congressional subpoenas. Attorney General Michael Mukasey may have even violated the law by directing the U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia to ignore a statute providing that he "shall" bring a contempt citation issued by Congress to a grand jury. We don't need to go through the charade of watching Karl Rove defy congressional subpoenas again.

We don't need the truth. We need the Justice Department to do its job and launch a criminal investigation.

American Freedom Campaign

keep slugging

[click image]

Dear 99,

While we may have a new president dedicated to reversing some of the worst abuses of the Bush administration, there is at least one unconstitutional executive power President Obama is trying to protect. Congress must take action to ensure that the power to sign international agreements related to military activities does not rest solely in the hands of the executive branch.

Please take two minutes to tell your U.S. representative to co-sponsor a resolution declaring the recently signed U.S.-Iraq agreement merely advisory in nature unless it is submitted to Congress for approval. Just use the following link to take action:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26484

We cannot emphasize enough the importance of this issue. As things currently stand, the Bush administration deemed the U.S.-Iraq agreement a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a type of agreement that has always been used to establish basic legal standards related to the presence of the U.S. military in another nation. SOFAs do not require congressional approval. But the U.S.-Iraq agreement goes well beyond the traditional boundaries of a SOFA, dictating how long the U.S. military will stay in Iraq (up to three years at a possible cost of $10 billion per month) and even giving Iraq a measure of control over U.S. troops.

As the Obama administration seems satisfied with the current agreement, it may be tempting for members of Congress to leave well enough alone and move on to other matters. Part of the feeling, especially among Democrats, may be that the agreement is the best we are going to get at this point so there is no need to reopen the debate. But this misses the entire point.

If nothing is done today, then President Romney, President Palin, or - god forbid - President Cheney may sign a far-reaching "SOFA" of their own with Iran in 2014 or 2018. That may seem far off in the distance now, but in the span of this nation's history, nine years is nothing. This agreement, if Congress is not included in the process, will set a strong precedent for future presidents to cite. They will be able to say that congressional approval is not required for these kinds of agreements and will point to 2009 as their justification.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) has introduced a resolution (H.Res. 72) expressing the sense of the House that the U.S.-Iraq agreement will be considered merely advisory in nature absent congressional approval. Such action is needed to force President Obama to seek approval from Congress. Please click on the following link to urge your U.S. representative to co-sponsor this critically important piece of legislation:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26484

Once you have sent your message, please forward this email widely to friends and family. In the alternative, you can use the "Tell-A-Friend" option on the AFC Web site that will appear after you have sent your message.

Thank you so much for taking action.

Steve Fox
Campaign Director
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund

naomi wolf's campaign to turn back the fascism

[click image]

Dear 99,

We may soon be seeing one of history's greatest examples of adding insult to injury.

For eight years, we have been forced to sit by helplessly as President George W. Bush and top members of his administration eviscerated the Constitution, broke federal laws, and defied the will of Congress.

Now, President Bush is poised to give each and every one of his accomplices -- from Dick Cheney to Karl Rove to Alberto Gonzales -- a full pardon, ensuring that they will never receive the punishments they deserve for their activities.

Worse, Bush may issue a preemptive "blanket" pardon, covering all officials within his administration without disclosing either the names of the officials involved or the crimes for which they are being absolved.

If this kind of secretive pardon seems wrong to you, please take a moment and send an email to your representatives in Congress immediately:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26316

The American Freedom Campaign strongly opposes the issuance of preemptive blanket pardons for administration officials who sanctioned torture, rendition, warrantless wiretapping and more. First of all, if these individuals believe they were acting within the law, they have nothing to fear. If they broke laws, then they should suffer the consequences.

In addition, we believe the American people deserve to know which members of the administration were involved in illegal behavior. Should Bush issue a blanket pardon to all administration officials, it will set a precedent under which future presidents may direct illegal behavior for four or eight years and then give all participants in the illegal conduct secretive free passes on his (or her) way out of office.

Congress can, however, stop this most objectionable action before it occurs. The American Freedom Campaign has proposed a Pardons Disclosure Act*, which would force the president to specifically name any political appointees for whom pardons are granted along with the crime or crimes for which they are being pardoned.

To tell your representatives in Congress to support a Pardons Disclosure Act, click on the following link:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26316

Once you have sent your message to Congress, please forward this email widely to friends and family. In the alternative, you can use the "Tell-A-Friend" option on the AFC Web site that will appear after you have sent your message.

Thank you so much for taking action.

Steve Fox
Campaign Director
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund

* The following language could be the heart of a Pardons Disclosure Act:

"Any pardon issued by the President under Article II, section 2, clause 1, of the Constitution of the United States, if granted to the President, the Vice-President or any political appointees in the President's own administration, shall specifically identify each individual to whom a pardon is being granted along with the crimes committed or acts taken in the course of his or her official duties for which that person is being pardoned."

like the worst heist movie you ever saw

[click image]

So, basically, the whole thing is a complete botch...

from any angle.

AND ONCE AGAIN, YOU'LL WANT TO HEED NAOMI... truly, it explains the passage of the bailout despite massive popular resistance.

i think i need to train more undercover agents

[click image -- You're going to want to read this one right through to the end.]

My ops on the ground in Madison are working overtime and they can't keep up....

Really. I'm wondering if we shouldn't be finding, or creating, a network of people to start compiling a database of all the local reports about unAmerican police behavior....

AND GO BACK AND LISTEN TO NAOMI WOLF!!!

the end of america, the movie

[click image, 75-minute video, with commercials]

a reminder

[click image]

Won't Back Down, by Naomi Wolf
[From a YEAR ago]

I wish people would stop breaking into tears when they talk to me these days.

I am traveling across the country at the moment -- Colorado to California -- speaking to groups of Americans from all walks of life about the assault on liberty and the ten steps now underway in America to a violently closed society.

The good news is that Americans are already awake: I thought there would be resistance to or disbelief at this message of gathering darkness -- but I am finding crowds of people who don't need me to tell them to worry; they are already scared, already alert to the danger and entirely prepared to hear what the big picture might look like. To my great relief, Americans are smart and brave and they are unflinching in their readiness to hear the worst and take action. And they love their country.

But I can't stand the stories I am hearing. I can't stand to open my email these days. And wherever I go, it seems, at least once a day, someone very strong starts to cry while they are speaking.

In Boulder, two days ago, a rosy-cheeked thirtysomething mother of two small children, in soft yoga velours, started to tear up when she said to me: `I want to take action but I am so scared. I look at my kids and I am scared. How do you deal with fear? Is it safer for them if I act or stay quiet? I don't want to get on a list.' In DC, before that, a beefy, handsome civil servant, a government department head -- probably a Republican -- confides in a lowered voice that he is scared to sign the new ID requirement for all government employees, that exposes all his most personal information to the State -- but he is scared not to sign it: `If I don't, I lose my job, my house. It's like the German National ID card,' he said quietly. This morning in Denver I talked for almost an hour to a brave, much-decorated high-level military leader who is not only on the watch list for his criticism of the administration -- his family is now on the list. He has undertaken many dangerous combat missions in his service to his country over the course of his career, but his voice cracks when he talks about the possibility that he is exposing his children to harassment.

Jim Spencer, a former columnist for the Denver Post who has been critical of the Bush administration, told me today that I could use his name: he is on the watch list. An attorney contacts me to say that she told her colleagues at the Justice Department not to torture a detainee; she says she then faced a criminal investigation, a professional referral, saw her emails deleted -- and now she is on the watch list. I was told last night that a leader of Code Pink, the anti-war women's action group, was refused entry to Canada. I hear from a tech guy who works for the airlines -- again, probably a Republican -- that once you are on the list you never get off. Someone else says that his friend opened his luggage to find a letter from the TSA saying that they did not appreciate his reading material. Before I go into the security lines, I find myself editing my possessions. In New York's LaGuardia, I reluctantly found myself putting a hardcover copy of Tara McKelvey's excellent Monstering, an expose of CIA interrogation practices, in a garbage can before I get in the security line; it is based on classified information. This morning at my hotel, before going to the airport, I threw away a very nice black T-shirt that said `We Will Not be Silenced' -- with an Arabic translation -- that someone had given me, along with a copy of poems written by detainees at Guantanamo.

In my America we are not scared to get in line at the airport. In my America, we will not be silenced.

More times than I can count, courageous and confident men and women who are telling me about speaking up, but who are risking what they see as the possible loss of job, home or the ability to pay for grown kids' schooling, start to choke up. Yesterday a woman in one gathering started to cry simply while talking about the degradation of her beloved country.

And always the questions: what do we do?

It is clear from this inundation of personal stories of abuse and retribution against ordinary Americans that a network of criminal behavior and intention is catching up more and more mainstream citizens in its grasp. It is clear that this is not democracy as usual -- or even the corruption of democracy as usual. It is clear that we will need more drastic action than emails to Congress.

The people I am hearing from are conservatives and independents as well as progressives. The cardinal rule of a closing or closed society is that your alignment with the regime offers no protection; in a true police state no one is safe.

I read the news in a state of something like walking shock: seven soldiers wrote an op-ed critical of the war -- in the New York Times; two are dead, one shot in the head. A female soldier who was about to become a whistleblower, possibly about abuses involving taxpayers' money; shot in the head. Pat Tillman, who was contemplating coming forward in a critique of the war; shot in the head. Donald Vance, a contractor himself, who blew the whistle on irregularities involving arms sales in Iraq -- taken hostage FROM the US Embassy BY US soldiers and kept without recourse to a lawyer in a US held-prison, abused and terrified for weeks -- and scared to talk once he got home. Another whistleblower in Iraq, as reported in Vanity Fair: held in a trailer all night by armed contractors before being ejected from the country.

Last month contractors, immune from the rule of law, butchered 17 Iraqi civilians in cold blood. Congress mildly objected -- and contractors butchered two more innocent civilian Iraqi ladies on Tuesday -- in cold blood.

Today the New York Times reports that the State Department is not cooperating with Iraqi or FBI investigators into the matter of the Blackwater massacre of seventeen Iraqi civilians.

Pay attention to this. Readers who know `the blueprint' will be horrified but not surprised. `Step Two' in the closing down of an open society is for the State to showcase to civilians the fact that a paramilitary force is outside the rule of law. When SA began -- still illegally -- beating citizens in Germany, National Socialist strategists made sure that photographers and reporters were present. We must consider: if the State showcases to Americans the fact that it is protecting its own cadre of violent criminals in Iraq -- will Congress be courageous in confronting Blackwater violence when Blackwater manifests its well-documented plans to deploy more aggressively here at home? Or will this penumbra of unaccountable, State-defended violence be enough to intimidate lawmakers -- and the rest of us? Remember that Mussolini directed Blackshirts to intimidate Parlimentarians even before Italy was a dictatorship and Hitler used the same tactic in lining the halls of the still-functioning German Parliament with Brownshirts -- paramilitary forces that had established a reputation for brutality against civilians. And that was enough to cow lawmakers even as the trappings of democracy were still intact.

Remember that under current arrangements, the Department of Homeland Security can deploy Blackwater in your town tomorrow.

With this kind of messaging about the State's protection for what is its own paramility force of torturers and murderers, if Blackwater massacres seventeen civilians in Times Square -- or turns their guns on protesters at an antiwar rally -- in spite of the trappings of democracy, will anyone be brave enough to hold them accountable?

It is clear yet that violent retribution, torture or maybe worse, seems to go right up this chain of command? Is it clear yet that these people are capable of anything? Is it obvious yet that criminals are at the helm of the nation and need to be not only ousted but held accountable for their crimes?

Is it treason yet?

This is an open invitation to honorable patriots on the Right and in the center to join this movement to restore the rule of law and confront this horror: this is not conservatism, it is a series of crimes against the nation and against the very essence of America. Join us, we need you. This movement must transcend partisan lines. The power of individual conscience is profound when people start to wake up. TK Comey said No; history will look at this torture and disgrace the torturers. A judge today ruled that the US can't just ship prisoners out of Guantanamo to be tortured at will -- she said No. The Center for Constitutional Rights is about to file a civil lawsuit -- against Blackwater: they are saying No.

In Germany, according to historian Richard Evans, in 1931-1932, if enough Germans of conscience had begun to say No -- history would have had an entirely different outcome. If we go any further down this road the tears will be those of conservatives as well as progressives. They will be American tears.

The time for weeping has to stop; the time for confronting must begin.

denial doesn't work

[click image]

I'm thinking it'd be swell to hand them printouts of this thread as their RFID chips are bolted to their skulls....

i have to insist!

[click image, two hour, downloadable video]

If you've already watched Zeitgeist: Addendum, please do it again. You can't just move on from this. Reality, the kernel we need to be rational actors on the national stage, is here, right here.

And, repeatedly watch Naomi too.

I can't stress this enough.

Become free. Open your eyes and look.

I'm begging you.

do NOT miss this

[click image, half hour video]

My America Project

First we get terrified and then we get down to work.

Time to get down to work. I already posted this, but listen again in context. Protesters called "terrorists"....

No kidding.

SEE?

All Together Now

And just for good measure....