For archives, these articles are being stored on TheWE.biz website.
The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.

 
 
Times corrects a minor error, ignores the big one
A report by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, June 6, 2007
Reviewing the London-based anti-Iraq War play Fallujah, New York Times reporter Jane Perlez wrote (5/29/07),
"The denunciations of the United States are severe, particularly in the scenes that deal with the use of napalm in Fallujah, an allegation made by left-wing critics of the war but never substantiated."
She followed that complaint by reporting that the play's writer and director, Jonathan Holmes, "makes no pretense of objectivity," paraphrasing him as saying that he "strove for authority more than authenticity."
Unfortunately for the Times, which does make a pretense of objectivity, the U.S. government did use the modern equivalent of napalm in Iraq.   In a 2003 interview in the
San Diego Union-Tribune (8/5/03), Marine Col. James Alles described the use of Mark 77 firebombs on targets in Iraq, saying, "We napalmed both those approaches."
While the Pentagon makes a distinction between the Mark 77 and napalm — the chemical formulation is slightly different, being based on kerosene rather than gasoline — it acknowledged to the Union-Tribune that the new weapon is routinely referred to as napalm because "its effect upon the target is remarkably similar."
"You can call it something other than napalm, but it's napalm," military analyst John Pike told the paper.
In a column that appeared before his play premiered (
London Guardian, 4/4/07), Fallujah playwright and director Jonathan Holmes referred to it as a "napalm derivative."
But the major controversy over the use of incendiary weapons in Fallujah involved not napalm but white phosphorus.
As with napalm, U.S. officials initially denied that white phosphorus had been used as a weapon there.
In London, U.S. Ambassador Robert Tuttle told the Independent (11/15/05) that "U.S. forces do not use napalm or white phosphorus as weapons," only "as obscurants or smoke screens and for target marking."
After it was discovered that the military journal Field Artillery (3-4/05) had quoted veterans of the Fallujah campaign boasting that white phosphorus was such "an effective and versatile munition" that they "saved our WP for lethal missions," however, the U.S. government was forced to backtrack.
"Yes, it was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants," Col. Barry Venable told the BBC (11/15/05).
As Seth Ackerman documented (
Extra!, 3-4/06), the New York Times had accepted the initial denials of the use of white phosphorus as a weapon.
An article about U.S. intelligence monitoring the foreign press (11/13/05) cited such claims as examples of the flimsy anti-American charges in the overseas media, noting that "the mainstream American news media" had "largely ignored the claim," since its "reporters had witnessed the fighting [in Fallujah] and apparently seen no evidence” of white phosphorus weaponry.
After the Pentagon admitted using white phosphorus, however, the Times ran a strong editorial (
11/29/05) calling for a ban on its use.   "All of us, including Americans, are safer in a world in which certain forms of conduct are regarded as too inhumane even for war.   That is why...the United States should stop using white phosphorus."
Independent correspondent Dahr Jamail, whose reporting from Fallujah inspired one of the play's characters, wrote to the New York Times to take issue with Perlez's dismissal of the play's references to napalm.   Jamail pointed out that the use of white phosphorus in Fallujah was an "'allegation'...confirmed by the Pentagon itself nearly one year after it was initially reported by myself, as well as other outlets in the Middle East."
Jamail also noted out that Perlez had incorrectly described him as Canadian, when he is actually a U.S. citizen.   The Times ran a correction (6/7/07) on the nationality mistake, but declined to correct the more serious error of dismissing the U.S.'s incendiary weapons attacks as an "allegation" that was "never substantiated."
If Perlez meant to say that the U.S. military had only confirmed the use of a napalm-like weapon elsewhere in Iraq, not in Fallujah, while the only incendiary weapon admitted to have been used in Fallujah was white phosphorus, then that's a very slender technicality with which to call into question the "objectivity" and "authenticity" of a playwright.
It was good of the Times, in its November 2005 editorial, to condemn the use of inhumane weapons that burn their victims alive.   But it's too bad that its reporter didn't recall that editorial when presenting the use of similar weaponry as an unsubstantiated left-wing charge.
And it's especially unfortunate that, even when this lapse was pointed out to the paper, it couldn't bring itself to correct the record, choosing to be fastidious only when it comes to secondary details like nationality.
———————
If you feel compelled to take action regarding this issue,
click here
Posted by Dahr_Jamail at June 11, 2007 10:44 PM
FREEDOM IS NOT FREE
YOU CAN'T SAVE YOUR ASS AND YOUR FACE AT THE SAME TIME

IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE HOW MANY AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BUSH'S HANDLING OF THE IRAQ WAR.

IF THEY DON'T TAKE THEIR GUTS AND PUT IT ON THE STREET, IT DON'T MEAN SHIT.

FREEDOM FROM GEORGE BUSH IS NOT FREE.

Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
February 10, 2007
FREEDOM IS NOT FREE
YOU CAN'T SAVE YOUR ASS AND YOUR FACE AT THE SAME TIME
IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE HOW MANY AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF BUSH'S HANDLING OF THE IRAQ WAR.
IF THEY DON'T TAKE THEIR GUTS AND PUT IT ON THE STREET, IT DON'T MEAN SHIT.
FREEDOM FROM GEORGE BUSH IS NOT FREE.
        Photo and words: Mike Hastie         
         U.S. Army Medic         
         Vietnam 1970-71         
        February 10, 2007         
 
Ishaqi massacre
Photographs taken by Agence France Presse of Ishaqi massacre but never distributed by major US media.

Women and children including a 75-year old grandmother and a child under the age one were found bound in their blown-up home.

'The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.    Later the U.S. military said the troops acted 'Appropriately.''

'A senior Iraqi police officer said autopsies on the bodies, which included five children, showed each had been shot in the head.   Community leaders said they were outraged at the killings and demanded an explanation from the U.S. military,' Reuters reported.   'Television footage showed the bodies in the Tikrit morgue — five children, two men and four women.   Their wounds were not clear though one infant had a gaping head wound.'

AP/Hamza Hendawi And Kim Gamel

In Haditha, the Marines, enraged by the loss of a comrade, stormed into nearby homes in the area and allegedly shot occupants dead as well as several men in a taxi that arrived at the scene of the blast, according to U.S. lawmakers briefed by military officials.

In one of the homes, Marines ordered four brothers inside a closet and shot them dead, said the Haditha lawyer, Khaled Salem Rsayef.

Rsayef said he himself lost several relatives in the alleged massacre, including a sister and her husband, an aunt, an uncle and several cousins.   He and his brother, Salam Salem Rsayef, spoke to The Associated Press by telephone from the Euphrates River town of 90,000 late Thursday and Friday.  

Photo: Agence France Presse/9q9q.com


Photographs taken by Agence France Presse of Ishaqi massacre but never distributed by major US media.
Women and children including a 75-year old grandmother and a child under the age one were found bound in their blown-up home.
"The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.   Later the U.S. military said the troops acted 'Appropriately.'"
"A senior Iraqi police officer said autopsies on the bodies, which included five children, showed each had been shot in the head.   Community leaders said they were outraged at the killings and demanded an explanation from the U.S. military," Reuters reported.   "Television footage showed the bodies in the Tikrit morgue — five children, two men and four women.   Their wounds were not clear though one infant had a gaping head wound."
AP/Hamza Hendawi And Kim Gamel
In Haditha, the Marines, enraged by the loss of a comrade, stormed into nearby homes in the area and allegedly shot occupants dead as well as several men in a taxi that arrived at the scene of the blast, according to U.S. lawmakers briefed by military officials.
In one of the homes, Marines ordered four brothers inside a closet and shot them dead, said the Haditha lawyer, Khaled Salem Rsayef.
Rsayef said he himself lost several relatives in the alleged massacre, including a sister and her husband, an aunt, an uncle and several cousins.   He and his brother, Salam Salem Rsayef, spoke to The Associated Press by telephone from the Euphrates River town of 90,000 late Thursday and Friday.
Photo: Agence France Presse/9q9q.com
Photographs taken by Agence France Presse of Ishaqi massacre but never distributed by major US media.

Women and children including a 75-year old grandmother and a child under the age one were found bound in their blown-up home.

'The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.    Later the U.S. military said the troops acted 'Appropriately.''

'A senior Iraqi police officer said autopsies on the bodies, which included five children, showed each had been shot in the head.   Community leaders said they were outraged at the killings and demanded an explanation from the U.S. military,' Reuters reported.   'Television footage showed the bodies in the Tikrit morgue — five children, two men and four women.   Their wounds were not clear though one infant had a gaping head wound.'

AP/Hamza Hendawi And Kim Gamel

In Haditha, the Marines, enraged by the loss of a comrade, stormed into nearby homes in the area and allegedly shot occupants dead as well as several men in a taxi that arrived at the scene of the blast, according to U.S. lawmakers briefed by military officials.

In one of the homes, Marines ordered four brothers inside a closet and shot them dead, said the Haditha lawyer, Khaled Salem Rsayef.

Rsayef said he himself lost several relatives in the alleged massacre, including a sister and her husband, an aunt, an uncle and several cousins.   He and his brother, Salam Salem Rsayef, spoke to The Associated Press by telephone from the Euphrates River town of 90,000 late Thursday and Friday.  

Photo: Agence France Presse/9q9q.com


Photographs taken by Agence France Presse of Ishaqi massacre but never distributed by major US media.
Women and children including a 75-year old grandmother and a child under the age one were found bound in their blown-up home.
"The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.   Later the U.S. military said the troops acted 'Appropriately.'"
"A senior Iraqi police officer said autopsies on the bodies, which included five children, showed each had been shot in the head.   Community leaders said they were outraged at the killings and demanded an explanation from the U.S. military," Reuters reported.   "Television footage showed the bodies in the Tikrit morgue — five children, two men and four women.   Their wounds were not clear though one infant had a gaping head wound."
AP/Hamza Hendawi And Kim Gamel
In Haditha, the Marines, enraged by the loss of a comrade, stormed into nearby homes in the area and allegedly shot occupants dead as well as several men in a taxi that arrived at the scene of the blast, according to U.S. lawmakers briefed by military officials.
In one of the homes, Marines ordered four brothers inside a closet and shot them dead, said the Haditha lawyer, Khaled Salem Rsayef.
Rsayef said he himself lost several relatives in the alleged massacre, including a sister and her husband, an aunt, an uncle and several cousins.   He and his brother, Salam Salem Rsayef, spoke to The Associated Press by telephone from the Euphrates River town of 90,000 late Thursday and Friday.
Photo: Agence France Presse/9q9q.com
I am going to kill innocent people
Pvt. Anderson said he supported the war at first but changed his mind after he was ordered to shoot at a car speeding toward his checkpoint in Baghdad.   He held his fire and saw the car was carrying a family with two small children.
"I did the right thing because they were innocent, but my superior said I should have fired anyway," Anderson said.   "Right then I decided I'm not going to fire my weapon unless I absolutely have to."
He thought he had to when the tank he was riding in came under fire a few days later and he suffered a shrapnel wound in his side.   He tried to shoot back, but his gun's safety lock was on, and he saw that he almost shot a young boy who was running with a stick.
"I thought, 'That's just a kid running scared like I am right now,' " Anderson said.   "That's when I realized no matter how good my stance is, I am going to kill innocent people.   There's no way I can stop it."
Anderson returned to his mother's house in December 2004 with a Purple Heart and a second deployment order for Iraq.
During his Christmas leave, he told her what had happened in Iraq.   Together they decided she would drive him over the Canadian border.
Honorable Discard
From The U.S. Military
Vietnam to Iraq

Honorable Discard From The U.S. Military

Two Psyche Hospitalizations for suicidal behavior with plan.

Numerous trips to the VA Hospital Emergency Dept. for panic attacks.

Diagnosis: Pure hatred for the United States Government for conduct unbecoming of a country who betray its sons and daughters in time of war.

Otherwise known as:  PTSD

Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
Honorable Discard From The U.S. Military
Vietnam------------------------------------------------------->  Iraq
Two Psyche Hospitalizations for suicidal behavior with plan.
Numerous trips to the VA Hospital Emergency Dept. for panic attacks.
Diagnosis: Pure hatred for the United States Government for conduct unbecoming of a country who betray its sons and daughters in time of war.
Otherwise known as:  PTSD
        Photo and words: Mike Hastie         
         U.S. Army Medic         
         Vietnam 1970-71         
Tim Goodrich and Bill Mitchell

On Veterans Day Weekend 2005, Ron Kovic (author-Born on the Fourth of July), Tim Goodrich (Co-Founder Iraq of Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bill Mitchell who lost his son in Iraq joined others in speaking out against the war.

Chris Hume produced this report for truthout.org
Tim Goodrich and Bill Mitchell

On Veterans Day Weekend 2005, Ron Kovic (author-Born on the Fourth of July), Tim Goodrich (Co-Founder Iraq of Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bill Mitchell who lost his son in Iraq joined others in speaking out against the war.

Chris Hume produced this report for truthout.org
Tim Goodrich and Bill Mitchell

On Veterans Day Weekend 2005, Ron Kovic (author-Born on the Fourth of July), Tim Goodrich (Co-Founder Iraq of Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bill Mitchell who lost his son in Iraq joined others in speaking out against the war.

Chris Hume produced this report for truthout.org
Dennis Kyne, a veteran of the first Gulf War, speaks for about 6 minutes, first a little about his own experiences and then setting the stage for Darrell Anderson, the feature speaker of the evening and a member of the organization Iraq Veterans Against the War.
Darrell speaks about how he came to join the service, his experiences in Iraq and what led him to refuse redeployment and oppose the Occupation.
He also speaks about what other highly principled soldiers are doing to resist this Occupation and emphasizes how crucial it is that the anti-war movement escalates its support for their actions.
After some questions and comments from others present, including veterans of earlier U.S. wars, Dennis Kyne, who was trained by the Army in nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, reveals some shocking truths about the depleted uranium radioactive munitions banned by most countries and used in the U.S. war(s) in Iraq.
— Click Here
VIDEO
Sgt. Ricky Clousing | Army interrogator
He became a war resister after witnessing how the war was being fought.
Within months after returning home, he went AWOL and remained in hiding for a year.
We speak with Sgt. Clousing just hours before he plans to go to Fort Lewis to turn himself in to military officials.
22 year-old Kyle Snyder went to visit a friend in Vancouver last August on leave.   He also knew he would not return to an Army he says has lied to him.
A thin young man with a small soul patch, spiked hair and tattoos running down both arms, Kyle Snyder looks more like he's about to hop on a skateboard than talk about the life-changing events that brought him to Canada.   I talked with Kyle Snyder after he and other resisters spoke at Vancouver's World Peace Forum.
"I joined the military when I was 19 years old from a government program called Job Corps, in Clearfield, Utah," Snyder begins.
"I wasn't a good kid. I didn’t have a good background.   I was in foster homes from thirteen to seventeen, then when I was seventeen, I went through a government program called Job Corps.   So, from thirteen all the way up, I didn’t have parental figures in my life really.   My parents divorced; my father was really abusive towards my mother and he was abusive toward me.   I’ve still got scars on my back.   I was put in Social Services when I was thirteen.   I was an easy target for recruiters, plain and simple.
"The minute I graduated in 2003, Staff Sgt. Williamson came to me and he mentioned all the benefits military programs had to offer.   And, for the first time in my life, I saw that I could become something more.   I saw a man in a professional uniform, clean-cut, a very professional man coming up to me, wanting me, saying I could look just like him.   I wanted that.   I don’t know any other 19 year old that wouldn’t want that.

Army Private Kyle Snyder says he had a deal with the military that he would be discharged once he turned himself in.

Instead, military officials ordered him back to his original unit where his outcome would be decided.

Kyle Snyder joins us from Kentucky.

We are also joined by his attorney, Jim Fennerty.
Joshua Casteel at press conference of American Friends Service Committee of the Religious Society of Friends

Video Refusing to Serve — Sgt. Ricky Clousing Press Conference

Press conference to support Ricky Clousing before turning himself into the military

A U.S. Army Segeant, Ricky Clousing was interrogator who eventually refused to continue to serve in Iraq and after a year AWOL turned himself in to authorities.

This press conference also includes Joshua Casteel and Kelly Dougherty Iraq Veterans against the war.
A wave of soldiers are refusing to participate in the U.S. war against Iraq.

GI resisters are getting considerable support from other soldiers and veterans.

Following the press conference, a group of Iraq Veterans Against the War, along with former GI resisters and other supporters went with Ricky Clousing to Fort Lewis, where Ricky surrendered himself to military custody.
Young man - I had no choice but to join the military
Garrett Reppenhagen and Kelly Dougherty.

Iraq Veterans Against the War

100,000 people turn out to protest Iraq war in Washington DC

Hundred thousand people turn out to protest Iraq war in Washington DC

Iraq Veterans Against the War
Kelly Dougherty Iraq Veteran on Strategy to End the War Against Iraq.

Kelly Dougherty, Executive Director of Iraq Veterans Against the War, spoke on IVAW's strategy to end the war against Iraq in Chicago, IL June, 2007.

Iraq Veterans Against the War
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
Lancet report Iraq doctor denied visit to U.S. conference
Associated Press
The magnitude of that has been lost on the American people.   Both the British and U.S. governments have discounted these figures
Apr 20, 2007
SEATTLE — An Iraqi doctor who concluded that more Iraqi civilians have died in the war than has been reported has been prevented from attending a medical conference at the University of Washington.
Riyadh Lafta had been scheduled to give a lecture this evening at the Seattle campus but his visa to the United States has not been approved.
The State Department cited miscommunication as the reason for the delay.
Lafta is an epidemiologist who teaches at Al-Mustansiriya University College of Medicine in Baghdad.
He co-wrote an October 2006 article that concluded nearly 655,000 Iraqis have died since the war began in March 2003.
The article appeared in the British medical journal, The Lancet.
The findings were 10 times greater than other studies, said Tim Takaro, an associate professor of health sciences at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver.
"The magnitude of that has been lost on the American people. Both the British and U.S. governments have discounted these figures," said Takaro, who conducts research with Lafta.
The School of Public Health and Community Medicine at the UW asked Lafta to discuss the study, as well as elevated cancer levels in southern Iraq.
Last July, Lafta applied for a visa with the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Jordan.
Officials there tried contacting the doctor twice by e-mail, but never received a response, State Department spokesman Steve Royster said. Incomplete visa applications can be held.
They were stonewalling us
"This is a matter of a simple but unfortunate miscommunication," Royster said.
Amy Hagopian, a UW acting assistant professor who is conducting research with Lafta, believes the reason is more political.
"My hypothesis is the Bush administration was extremely threatened by The Lancet study," Hagopian said.
Hagopian said both Lafta and UW officials tried contacting federal officials when they hadn't heard anything about his visa.
The university was assisted by staff from the offices of both U.S. Representative Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), who visited Iraq in 2002, and Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
"They were stonewalling us," she said. "Any comments to the contrary are obfuscation."
British government denied a four-hour stopover transit visa
Lafta was invited to deliver his lecture today at Simon Fraser University so it could be broadcast by video to the UW. However, the British government this week denied him a four-hour transit visa for a stopover between the Middle East and Canada.
Les Roberts of Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, who worked with Lafta on the Iraqi death estimates, was scheduled to speak in his place at the UW.
Photo AP/ Mohammed Uraibi
       Civilian Death Toll in Iraq May Top 1 Million     
            —  ORB, a British polling agency, September 2007          
click here
This is what war criminals look like
US Terror State
April 20, 2007
Confined to a Dungeon Above the Ground
Desperation in Gitmo's Camp 6
By NICOLE COLSON
M ore detainees at the U.S. prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, are so desperate to end their suffering that they are going on hunger strike — willing to risk death if it means an end to their imprisonment.
According to press reports, at least 13 prisoners are on hunger strike in protest of the harsh conditions at "Camp 6," a new maximum-security section of the camp.
Two have reportedly been refusing food since August 2005, while most of the others began striking in January or February.
Most are forced to undergo daily force-feedings at the hands of their U.S. captors — an often brutal and dehumanizing process that lawyers and human rights advocates say is meant to make detainees suffer more.
According to "Cruel and Inhuman: Conditions of Isolation for Detainees at Guantánamo Bay," a report released earlier this month by Amnesty International, the situation inside Guantánamo is actually becoming worse for detainees — particularly the approximately 160 (out of a total of 385) detainees who are thought to be housed at Camp 6.
Abu Zubaydah now suffers seizures that affect his ability to speak and write
U.S. torture —
Horrific force feeding
Extreme isolation
Sensory deprivation
The most evil sadistic end in itself
All personnel involved need to be tried, convicted and executed.
According to the report, Camp 6 "has created even harsher and apparently more permanent conditions of extreme isolation and sensory deprivation in which detainees are confined to almost completely sealed, individual cells, with minimal contact with any other human being."
Prisoners in Camp 6 are confined to 8-by-10-foot cells for at least 22 hours a day, and are allowed out only infrequently to shower or to exercise in enclosed areas surrounded by high concrete-and-wire walls.
They are not able to speak to each other except by shouting through a narrow gap at the bottom of their steel cell doors.
There are no outside windows, and detainees have reported that air conditioning is left on high — making the metal cells intolerably cold.
Amnesty notes that U.S. authorities have described Camp 6 as a "state-of-the-art modern facility," which is supposedly "more comfortable" for the detainees, but one detainee said Camp was a "dungeon above the ground."
"They're just sitting on a powder keg down there," lawyer Sabin Willett recently told the New York Times.   "You're going to have an insane asylum."
It's no wonder that some detainees see a hunger strike as their only option.
As 27-year-old Yemeni hunger striker Adnan Farhan Abdullatif reportedly told his lawyer in late February, "My wish is to die.   We are living in a dying situation."
Extreme horror
All personnel need to be tried, convicted and executed
Recently released military documents showed that 13 detainees were on hunger strike—though last month there were at least 17, and lawyers for the prisoners say their clients report as many as 40 people on hunger strike.
All personnel involved need to be tried, convicted and executed
Naval Cmdr. Robert Durand, a Guantánamo spokesman, dismissed the hunger strike and prisoners' complaints as "propaganda," telling reporters that hunger strikes are a tactic taught in the al-Qaeda training manual — and that the number of strikers has dropped in the past when the media stopped covering them.
But Durand left out the main reason the U.S. was able to break down hunger strikers previously — brutal force feedings.
There have been several hunger strikes at Guantanamo since the camp opened in 2001.
The largest occurred in 2005, when at least 130 detainees were classified as hunger strikers — defined as having missed nine consecutive meals.
They force a tube up his nose
Most detainees were eventually broken from their strike through force-feeding techniques — in which they were strapped into restraint chairs, had feeding tubes inserted and then were left strapped down for lengthy periods of time.
Lawyers for some detainees described U.S. military personnel violently inserting feeding tubes to the point of drawing blood, and Physicians for Human Rights called the force feedings of inmates a "brutal and inhumane" tactic that violates international medical codes of ethics.
Sudanese detainee Sami al-Hajj, a former cameraman for al-Jazeera, had been on hunger strike for more than 95 days as Socialist Worker went to press —and was being routinely force-fed.
"At nine o'clock in the morning, they force feed him, and he is strapped to a chair," his lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, recently told Reuters.
"They force a tube up his nose.
It is excruciatingly painful.
That lasts about an hour...
Three times so far, according to what Sami has told me, they have put the tube in his lung...
And that is effectively drowning him."
Extreme US war crimes
In recent weeks, the Bush administration has pointed to the supposed confessions of several high-profile detainees as proof that the system at Guantánamo is working.
During the start of Combat Status Review Tribunals (CSRTs) for 14 "high-value" detainees last month, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the alleged "number three" man in the al-Qaeda network, was said to have confessed to:
Being involved in planning for more than 30 terrorist plots.
Including the September 11 attacks.
Personally killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002.
Plotting the assassinations of former Presidents Jimmy Carter.
And Bill Clinton.
And Pope John Paul II.
Walid Mohammed bin Attash is said to have confessed at his tribunal to helping plan the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, as well as the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole.
Australian detainee David Hicks also entered a guilty plea March 26 to a charge of providing material support to terrorists.
But as lawyers and human rights advocates point out, any confessions from detainees are questionable because of the conditions they've been exposed to in Guantanamo and elsewhere.
Both Mohammed and bin Attash, for example, were "rendered" — sent to other countries known to use torture for interrogations, before being brought to Guantánamo last year.
Additionally, though CSRTs are supposed to determine whether a detainee should be declared an "enemy combatant" — which means they then can be held indefinitely — the process is a kangaroo court.
Defense lawyers and the media are barred from the proceedings, and prisoners aren't allowed to see "classified" evidence against them.
 
US Terror State
'Honor bound to defend freedom'
Confessed when tortured — I think anyone in that position...
Last month, after being held at Guantánamo for more than five years, David Hicks pleaded guilty to a single, relatively minor count in exchange for a plea bargain that will allow him to return to Australia to serve out the remaining nine months of a 7-year sentence.
To get his plea deal, however, Hicks — who has grown his hair to waist length in order to block out the bright lights that shine 24 hours a day in his cell — had to agree to withdraw allegations that he had been abused during his detention, to a one-year ban on speaking to the media, and never to sue the U.S.
"It's a way to get home," Hicks' father Terry told Australian radio.
"He was desperate, he just wanted to get out.
"He's had five years of absolute hell, and I think anyone in that position, if they were offered anything, they would possibly take it
Another glimpse into the bizarre situation of the detainees came when Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, another "high-value" prisoner, went before his CSRT on March 14. U.S. authorities claim al-Nashiri confessed to having a role in the bombing of the USS Cole.
Yet at his CSRT, al-Nashiri said he confessed only after being tortured.
Since the Bush administration doesn't allow prisoners to detail allegations of torture publicly
Since the Bush administration doesn't allow prisoners to detail allegations of torture publicly, however, the following appears in the "transcript" of al-Nashiri's tribunal:
PRESIDENT [of the tribunal]: Please describe the methods that were used.
DETAINEE: [CENSORED] What else do I want to say? [CENSORED]
There were doing so many things. What else did they do? [CENSORED]
After that, another method of torture began. [CENSORED]
They used to ask me questions, and the investigator after that used to laugh.
And I used to answer the answer that I knew.
And if I didn't replay what I heard, he used to [CENSORED].
 
US Terror State
Confined to a Dungeon Above the Ground
By NICOLE COLSON
A s the New York Times commented, "Officials defended this censorship by arguing that interrogation methods are so secret they cannot be discussed, even by the prisoner.
But they also said that al-Qaeda members are trained to claim torture, and that Mr. Nashiri lied.
If so, why censor the transcript?...
"Tragically, the most likely answer is to spare United States intelligence agents and their bosses, who could face charges if the Military Commissions Act is ever repealed or rewritten.
The law gives a retroactive carte blanche to American interrogators for any abuse they may have committed."
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month decided not to hear a case brought by several Guantanamo detainees to determine whether the 2006 Military Commissions Act — which took away detainees' right to a trial in U.S. courts — violates the Constitution.
As Vincent Warren, the executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents several detainees, said in a statement:
"The Supreme Court has once more delayed the resolution of the fate of these detainees — three-quarters of whom the military admits it will never charge — who have languished without any meaningful way to challenge their detention for more than five years.
"The processes the government put in place are a sham — they allow the use of evidence obtained through torture and no real review of the facts...
We hope our clients survive until they finally get their day in court."
Nicole Colson is a reporter for the www.SocialistWorker.org
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
A Baathist looks at the big picture
Arablinks.blogspot.com
From the blowing up of bridges to the attempts to split the resistance: what's going on in Iraq?
April 18, 2007
Salah al-Mukhtar was a prominent Baathist in the late Saddam era, serving in diplomatic positions in India, Vietnam and the UN, and although he doesn't have an official position currently, he often comments on the Iraq war from a Baathist perspective.
This article was published on the resistance website albasrah.net April 15, and a commenter suggested this would be a good introduction to a point of view that doesn't get much coverage here in the anglosphere. And it is hard to argue with that.
One of his major points is that it seems to him that at the point when the Americans realized they were in trouble militarily, they came up with the idea of covertly helping the takfiris attack other Iraqis, as a way of helping turn the war against the occupation into an Iraqi-on-Iraqi war. Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, this writer implies, without mentioning the name, is a likely a nobody who rose to prominence with covert American aid.
His title is "From the blowing up of bridges to the attempts to split the resistance: what's going on in Iraq?"
Al-Mukhtar begins by talking about the recent blowing up of two major bridges over the Tigris in Baghdad, and the intensified popular sense of foreboding this caused, because it suggests to people the idea of Iraqi partition extending to the heart of Baghdad, and it suggests too the idea that there are some with a strategy of not leaving stone upon stone, and finishing the work of destruction that the Americans began.
The American Mukhabarat has undertaken another project, this one with the clear support of Iran
He then segues to the execution of Saddam and his associates, with its "artificial creation of a sectarian atmosphere", the idea being that these apparently separate events, and many others, are part and parcel of a scheme to foster sectarian warfare, split the resistance, and weaken the country to the point where the occupation can succeed.
The Saddam execution was followed by an attempt by a group in Syria to split the Baath, and American-led persecution of the Party and its members and supporters throughout Iraq. The writer goes on:
And in addition to the attempts to attack the name of the [Baath] Party, the American Mukhabarat has undertaken another project, this one with the clear support of Iran, whether by direct arrangement or by a meeting of the minds, namely the plan to cause fighting between factions of the Iraqi jihad, by encouraging Islamist takfiris within some of the factions to announce their intention to monopolize, from now on, the control of Iraq or at least of the field of jihad, giving the other factions the choice of having their necks cut, or pledging allegiance to them and proceeding under their leadership — and that even though they only represented a small group!
Likewise other members took to applying takfir to the progressive and arabist nationalist factions.
...And they went so far as to kill dozens of military cadres fighting against the occupation from among the Baathists and arabists, for the purpose of igniting a fight among the jihadi factions, serving in this way the primary purpose of America and Iran, namely the division of the Iraqi resistance, because that is the basic prerequisite for turning the American defeat in Iraq into victory.
'Moles'
The writer then explains the meaning of the expression "moles" in organizations like these.
And he says what has been going on is this:
(The Americans) Once they understood that they had well and truly fallen into the Iraqi trap, from which they wouldn't emerge safely unless they could come up with an elaborately thought-out scheme, started putting moles in specific factions, and via these moles they offered the groups generous material and PR support.
This enhanced the credibility of these moles, and raised their profile and role within these factions, and some of them came to have leadership roles within those factions.
Without mentioning names, it is pretty clear he is referring to people like Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, a person no one had ever heard of before, who suddenly emerged as the emir of the Islamic State of Iraq.
Overlooking this role of agents, the writer says, would be a fateful error no matter how you look at it. And he asks:
Are Allawi, Hakim, Chalabi the only agents?
Why is it that there was never, ever, any disclosure of any new American agents after the original disclosure of the roles of the old agents Allawi, Hakim, Chalabi and the others?
Are they the only agents, or are their other agents who are more important because they operate within the national ranks and haven't been exposed yet?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Waits for body of father
A Baathist looks at the big picture
Arablinks.blogspot.com
The writer then compares the role of moles in the jihadi organizations to that of Iran in the macro picture, in the sense that Iran
...appears with the appearance of opposing America for the good of the cause of Islam and Palestine...
[but] this is in preparation for dividing [Iraqis and Palestinians] and changing the fight from a fight for liberation against America and Israel, into sectarian fights between muslims, instead of focusing all guns on the Zionists and the Americans.
As far as Iraq is concerned, the writer says, the result has been that most attacks carried out by these groups are now against Iraqis, Shiite and Sunni, and not against the occupation forces except peripherally.
America has spent a lot on this war, and that in Afghanistan, but since success would give them control over the world's major oil reserves, and and with it a global dictatorship, the price will have been cheap considering the result.
It would be naive, the writer says, to think that everyone who fights America or Israel in Iraq or in Palestine is necessarily engaged in struggle or jihad.
Because you have to look at the final result, and not at half-way results.
You can't judge military efforts against the occupation except in the light of real aims and real results, and the one necessary condition for victory in Iraq is maintenance of the unity of the resistance, just as the one necessary condition for the occupation to succeed is to split the resistance.
Damaged Humvee
The writer offers a couple of observations in conclusion:
The first observation is that at the same time that the American Mukhabarat toughens its campaign against the Baath by various means...
[including] its extreme efforts to dry up the sources of funding for the Party and its resistance, and its arrest of tens of thousands of its fighters and mujahideen, at the same time it is making life easier in a remarkable way for the sectarian Sunni takfiris, offering them financial and military support, whether directly, or channeled via the Gulf, and this at a time when their takfir is being intensified against the nationalists and the patriots and the true Islamists....
People shouldn't lose sight of this for even a moment, the writer says, because what this American strategy amounts to as an attempt to change the war from one against the occupation to a sectarian Shiite-Sunni war, which will not stop until the sectarian takfiri power is the dominant one in Iraq.
Baghdad
And this is particularly ungent for Baathists to understand, because the first requisite for this American strategy is the crushing of the Baath Party, conceptually, organizationally, financially.
Because the Baath is the only nationalist party that covers all of Iraq and includes Sunnis, Shiites and others.
His second concluding observation is that Iran, even though it is naturally an enemy of the Sunni takfiris, still provides them with support and assistance in their attacks on Iraqi Shiites.
The reason is to make the Iraqi Shiites side with Iran, in a way that will ultimately further feed the conversion of this war into a sectarian one, in order to weaken the country.
BEHIND THE SCENE
Loup de Loup: The Deeper Darkness
Chris Floyd — www.chris-floyd.com
...If the neocons all hopped a spaceship for the Hale-Bopp comet tomorrow — indeed, if the cult had never arisen at all — we would still be right where we are today: neck-deep in the Big Muddy.
That's not to say, of course, that we weren't misled into Iraq, or that strings aren't being pulled for a war on Iran, or that flames aren't being fanned to widen the Middle East war — or that the gaggle of third-rate thinkers and first-class troublemakers loosely grouped under the rubric "neocon" aren't intimately involved in all of these affairs.
They are, in spades.
But to accuse them of playing the central role in America's on-going Gõtterdõmmerung gives them an importance they don't deserve — and unduly mitigates the guilt of the true culprits:
The good old-fashioned Anglo-Saxon boardroom buccaneers of the American Establishment, bred for generations to feast on war and rumors of war, and to regard the hoi polloi as mere cannon fodder and cash cows to be mulched and milked as needed.
For what's the underlying implication of the "neocons über alles" meme?
It's that hard-core, down-and-dirty inside operators like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld — who have spent their entire adult lives at the dark heart of the government-corporate-warbiz-spygame power nexus — are actually innocent lambkins led astray by the wicked blandishments of Richard Perle.
It's that the world-striding oil barons, Wall Street dynasts and CIA scions of the Bush Faction are just wide-eyed rubes bamboozled into acting against their own interests by the dazzling sophistry of William Kristol and Michael Leeden.
It's that no U.S. administration would ever undertake the kind of rapacious policies we've seen in the last five years — unless they'd been tricked into it by wily Zionists and their ideological outriders.
It is, in short, our old friend "American exceptionalism," decked out in dissident drag.
Shakespeare pegged the neo-cons' true place in the scheme of things more than 400 years ago in Julius Caesar.
Listen to Marc Antony dismissing his fellow triumvir Lepidus, and you will hear the authentic voice of Great Gamesters like Cheney, Rumsfeld and James Baker, dicing for world empire and using anything at hand — neo-cons, evangelicals, Caucasian despots, Arab tyrants, Israeli proxies, British lapdogs, Shiite death squads — to further their ambitions:
"This is a slight unmeritable man, meet to be sent on errands.
...and though we lay these honours on this man, to ease ourselves of divers slanderous loads, he shall but bear them as the ass bears gold, to groan and sweat under the business, either led or driven as we point the way.
And having brought our treasure where we will, then we take down his load and turn him off, like to the empty ass, to shake his ears and graze in commons."
Or at the World Bank, as the case may be.
Again, this is not to deny that neocon fingerprints are all over the various shivs and bludgeons that the Bush Regime has used in its whack jobs on the Constitution, the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, the Magna Carta and the Ten Commandments.
After all, the veritable blueprint for the whole godawful shebang — the infamous "Rebuilding America's Defenses" document of September 2000 — was concocted under the aegis of that quintessentially neocon think tank, the Project for the New American Century.
...But without the presence of long-time Establishment power players like Cheney and Rumsfeld on the PNAC board, the plan would have remained the pipe dream of a few curdled academics and comb-licking policy wonks.
Indeed, it was the Great Gamesters themselves who set the neocons to work on devising ways to extend the "unipolar moment" of unchallenged American power that arose after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The first version of the PNAC plan was drawn up at Cheney's order by Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter "Leaker" Libby in 1992, in the last months of the Bush I administration.
Under Bush II, the neocons were brought in as shock troops.
Their mindless zealotry was a perfect tool for implementing the plans drawn up by the real players in the new regime: Cheney's notorious "Energy Task Force" and the much lesser-known "Joint Task Force on Petroleum" formed by the Council on Foreign Relations and — who else? — the James Baker Institute at Rice University.
It was here that the final solution for Iraq was hammered out...
These are dark days, serious times.
The whiff of apocalypse is in the air.
For it will be virtually impossible for the Gamesters to carry off their next immediate goal, subduing Iran — much less their long-range aim of dominating the world throughout a "new American century" — without the use of nuclear weapons.
So let's be done with the comforting fairy tale that the vast crimes we are witnessing are the work of a few cranks who have somehow hijacked the noble U.S. government and are using it for their own purposes, or Israel's purposes, or whatever.
The reality is that Iraq was invaded because a powerful faction of the old-line American Establishment wanted to do it and the rest of the Establishment — the Democrats, the media, the "respectable" intelligentsia — countenanced the crime.
The belligerence and oppression that the Israeli government is inflicting in Lebanon and Palestine are receiving unquestioned — and armed — support from the United States because this suits the larger strategic purposes of the "global dominance" faction of the Establishment, and the domestic political purposes both of the Democrats, heavily reliant on Jewish-American backing, and the Republicans, dependent on their rabidly pro-Israel evangelical base.
[As many others have pointed out, whenever the Israelis try to do something that the American elite don't like -- such as sell sophisticated military technology to the Chinese — they are called on the carpet and forced to back down. ]
It is the American elite — pursuing, as always, the enhancement of its own power and privilege, heedless of the consent of the governed or the genuine interests of the American people (or the Palestinian people or the Israeli people or the Lebanese people or the Iraqi people) — that bedevils us.
The emergence of the cretinous neoconservative cult is just a symptom of a deeper moral corruption coursing through the dominant institutions and structures of American society.
The body politic is rotting from the head.
Response from Kewe:
Hello Mike.
Have placed this as an open letter, with your image on the website.
I guess you did, or you didn't, see my comment editorial in the circus page.
The Swiss model has it where a personal weapon of militia personnel is kept at home as part of military obligations.
Swiss males grow up expecting to undergo basic military training and a mandatory period of service in the Rekrutenschule.
When relieved of duty, militiamen have the choice of keeping their personal weapon and other selected items of their equipment.
The government sponsors training with rifles and shooting in competitions for interested adolescents.
The UK model is where all firearms are banned — which means only gangsters and unlawful firearms now permeate the cities.
The banning of knives is being introduced into Parliament, due to attacks by young people with knives.
There is the US model.
All three models have problems; none can be said to stand out as reducing home-local-problem-induced injury and death from weapons.
For me, the onus of whether to ban weapons is what is happening in the greater environment.
And importantly what might happen in the greater environment.
I believe if each citizen of a nation-state accepts responsibility for that citizenship:
Meaning seeing that in a democracy all votes are counted.
All are allowed to vote.
That all people who wish to run for office are allowed to get their message to the electorate.
That corporations are —
1) Not allowed to assume the identity of persons, given all rights under law as persons, as is presently the situation in many countries, including the USA.
2) Not allowed to use their enormous control of money to fund agreeable candidates.
If each citizen of a nation-state accepts responsibility for that citizenship, then the problems with guns will resolve into a personal, one-on-one, how is my neighbour feeling today, can I help him or her, situation.
When a citizen is truly empowered.
When the state is placed as a helping, not controlling, dominating modality.
You will not see what is happening in this broken system.
Control is not the option.
Have posted your image, with this comment next to it, on:
soldiers_against_the_war.htm
circus.html
Received this from Mike Hastie today:
Virginia Tech Massacre
Terrorism begins at home.
Mike Hastie
Vietnam Veteran
April 20, 2007
Received this from Mike Hastie today:

Virginia Tech Massacre

Terrorism begins at home.
Mike Hastie
Vietnam Veteran
April 20, 2007

Response from Kewe:

Hello Mike.

Have placed this as an open letter, with your image on the website.

I guess you did, or you didn't, see my comment editorial in the circus page.

The Swiss model has it where a personal weapon of militia personnel is kept at home as part of military obligations.

Swiss males grow up expecting to undergo basic military training and a mandatory period of service in the Rekrutenschule.

When relieved of duty, militiamen have the choice of keeping their personal weapon and other selected items of their equipment.

The government sponsors training with rifles and shooting in competitions for interested adolescents.

The UK model is where all firearms are banned — which means only gangsters and unlawful firearms now permeate the cities.

The banning of knives is being introduced into Parliament, due to attacks by young people with knives.

There is the US model.

All three models have problems; none can be said to stand out as reducing home-local-problem-induced injury and death from weapons.

For me, the onus of whether to ban weapons is what is happening in the greater environment.

And importantly what might happen in the greater environment.

I believe if each citizen of a nation-state accepts responsibility for that citizenship:

Meaning seeing that in a democracy all votes are counted.

All are allowed to vote.

That all people who wish to run for office are allowed to get their message to the electorate.

That corporations are —  

1)  Not allowed to assume the identity of persons, given all rights under law as persons, as is presently the situation in many countries, including the USA.

2) Not allowed to use their enormous control of money to fund agreeable candidates.   

If each citizen of a nation-state accepts responsibility for that citizenship, then the problems with guns will resolve into a personal, one-on-one, how is my neighbour feeling today, can I help him or her, situation.

When a citizen is truly empowered.

When the state is placed as a helping, not controlling, dominating modality.

You will not see what is happening in this broken system.

Control is not the option.
Kewe comment:
America's freedom to have guns will likely save what remains as freedom in the United States.
As Legislators, Courts, Administrative Branch criminalize so many people, placing them in horrific institutional situations, so it will also seek to criminalize those with firearms.
Fortunately many firearms likely mean many resisters.
The country is broken — do understand that.
Those who should follow the US Constitution have consistently ignored it — Legislators, Courts, the Administrative Branch.
All power institutions operated by the government are not to benefit you — they are to dominate you.
The 2nd Amendment is placed in its wisdom so you, when necessary, will have the ability to say NO to your government.
The 2nd Amendment is your last stand against overwhelming Government power.
The 2nd Amendment is your last stand against 'Elite' controlling tyranny.
December 30 / 31, 2006
Official Lies, Dogma and Unaccountable Power
The New Dark Age
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
I n her historical mystery, The Daughter of Time, Josephine Tey (a pen name of Elizabeth MacKintosh), has Scotland Yard Inspector Alan Grant, while confined to his hospital bed, solve the 15th century murder of the two York princes in the Tower of London.
The princes were murdered by Henry VII, and the crime was blamed on Richard III in order to justify the upstart Tudor's violent seizure of the English throne.
Tey makes the point that if a 20th century mystery writer can detect the truth about a 15th century murder, historians have no excuse to persist in writing in school textbooks that Richard murdered his nephews.
British historians remained loyal to the Tudor propaganda long after the Tudors were no longer around to be feared or served.
At the beginning of the scientific era, men had the hope that the ability to discover truth would free mankind from superstition, dogma, and the service of power.
The belief in truth was powerful.
End to status-based privileges
Truth would deliver justice and bring an end to status-based privileges and the falsehoods propagated by privilege.
The faith in truth was short-lived.
Today propaganda is everywhere in the ascendency
Every week another apologist for President Bush compares "Bush's fight for Iraqi freedom" to Abraham Lincoln's "fight to free the slaves."
The American civil war was not fought to "free the slaves," as Thomas DiLorenzo and other scholars have thoroughly documented, any more than the purpose of Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq was to "bring freedom to Iraqis."
The freedom excuse was invented after it became impossible to maintain the fictions about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein's connections to Osama bin Laden.
Bush has yet to tell the real reason he invaded Iraq.
In the US today, demonization and propaganda substitute for facts and analysis.
Professors and journalists are quick to lend their names and voices to the untruths that rule our lives.
Just as Hitler's foreign policy was based in propaganda, so is Bush's and Blair's.
Success of propaganda
The success of propaganda enhances government's illusion that it has a monopoly on truth.
It is the monopoly on truth that gives the Bush regime the right to define the "Iran problem," the "Syria problem," the "Lebanon problem," and the "Korea problem" and to apply coercion in place of understanding and negotiation.
Secure in its possession of truth, the Bush administration refuses to talk to the enemies it has manufactured.
It will only fight them.
When scholars, such as John Walt and Stephen Mearsheimer, or President Jimmy Carter who has tried harder than anyone else to achieve Arab-Israeli peace, point out that Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians is a cause of Middle East turmoil, they are immediately denounced as anti-semites.
Columnists and academics who know nothing about the Middle East or its troubles nevertheless know what they are supposed to say whenever anyone mentions Israel in any critical context.
And they have no compunction about saying it, the truth be damned.
Without commitment to truth, science, justice, and debate falter and disappear.
The belief in truth is fading from our society. It is unclear that scientists themselves any longer believe in truth or the ability to discover it.
The discovery of truth is no longer the purpose of our criminal justice system.
Once prosecutors believed that it was better for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent person to be wrongfully convicted.
Today prosecutors believe in high conviction rates to justify their budgets and re-election.
In the past police solved crimes.
Today they round up suspects and pressure them.
There was no debate in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, and none today in the US.
Many Americans, who imagine themselves to be conservatives even though they have never read, nor could they identify, a conservative writer, equate truth-telling with hatred of America.
They are of Bush's mindset: "you are with us or against us." Bush supporters respond to factual articles about Iraq and the rending of the US Constitution by suggesting that as the writer hates America so much, he should move to Cuba or China.
Injured man.

US invasion of Iraq.

Photo: www.afterdowningstreet.org
In America today each faction's "truths" are defined by the faction's dogma or ideology.
Each faction bans factual analysis that it doesn't want to hear.
This is as true within the universities as it is at political rallies.
The old liberal notion that "we shall follow the truth wherever it may lead" has long departed from America.
Think tanks reflect the views of the donors.
Studies are no longer independent of their financing.
In America, truth has become partisan.
All societies have elements of myth, untruths that nevertheless serve to unite a people.
Camouflage for evil
But many myths serve as camouflage for evil.
One of the greatest myths is that "GIs have died for our freedom."
GIs have died for American empire, for the American elite's commitment to England, and for the military-industrial complex's profits.
Some may have died in Korea for the freedom of South Koreans, and some may have died trying to save South Vietnamese from the North Vietnamese communists.
But it is hogwash that GIs died for our freedom.
There was no prospect of North Korea attacking America in the 1950s or Vietnam attacking America in the 1960s and none today.
The Nazis were defeated by Russia before US troops landed in Europe.
The US never faced any threat of invasion from Germany, Italy, or Japan.
America's wars have created hysteria that endanger our freedom. Abraham Lincoln shut down the freedom of the press and arrested editors and state legislators.
Woodrow Wilson arrested war critics. Franklin Roosevelt interred American citizens of Japanese descent.
George W. Bush has destroyed most of the Bill of Rights.
In 2006 Congress appropriated funds for building concentration camps in the US.
Recently, Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, said that freedom of speech is inconsistent with "the war on terror."
The country is lost
If it takes a police state to fight terror, the country is lost even if Muslim terrorists are defeated.
Americans have far more to fear from a homeland police state than from terrorists.
The vast majority of the world's terrorists are the recent creations of Bush's invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and of Israel's invasion of Lebanon and brutality toward the Palestinians.
Bush is simultaneously creating terrorists and a police state.
It serves no one but the police to make their power unaccountable.
On December 26 Jeff Cohen explained on Truthout how war propaganda took over TV news and demonized everyone who spoke the truth about Iraq, while pushing war fever to a frenzy.
Sold their integrity for dollars and TV exposure
Fox "News" was the worst with its ranks of generals and colonels who sold their integrity for dollars and TV exposure.
One of Fox's loudest voices for war was a retired general who sat on the board of a military contractor.
When the Clinton administration allowed the media concentration in the 1990s, the independence of the American media was destroyed.
Today there are a few large conglomerates whose values depend on broadcast licenses from the government.
The conglomerates are run by corporate executives who are not journalists and whose eyes are on advertising revenues.
They publish and broadcast what is safe.
These conglomerates will take no risks in behalf of free speech or truth.
The challenges that America faces are not terrorism and oil supply.
The challenges that we face are the police state that Bush has created and the disrespect for truth that is endemic in government, the universities, and the media.
The US has entered a dark age of dogmas and unaccountable power.
The Sunday Times — Magazine
August 27, 2006
Report
You wouldn’t catch me dead in Iraq
Scores of American troops are deserting — even from the front line in Iraq.   But where have they gone?   And why isn’t the US Army after them?   Peter Laufer tracked down four of the deserters
DARRELL ANDERSON
First Armored Division, 2-3 Field Artillery, at Giessen, Germany.   Age: 24
Darrell Anderson joined the US Army just before the Iraq war started.
“I needed health care, money to go to college, and I needed to take care of my daughter.   The military was the only way I could do it,” he tells me.   As we chat, basking in the sun on a peaceful Toronto street, he fiddles with his pocket watch, which has a Canadian flag on its face.   He’s wearing a peace-symbol necklace.
After fighting for seven months in Iraq, he came home bloodied from combat, with a Purple Heart that proved his sacrifice — and seriously opened his eyes.
“When I joined, I wanted to fight,” he says.   “I wanted to see combat.   I wanted to be a hero.   I wanted to save people.   I wanted to protect my country.” But soon after he arrived in Iraq, he tells me, he realised that the Iraqis did not want him there, and he heard harsh tales that surprised and distressed him.
“Soldiers were describing to me how they had beaten prisoners to death,” he says.   “There were three guys and one said, ‘I kicked him from this side of the head while the other guy kicked him in the head and the other guy punched him, and he just died.’ People I knew.   They were boasting about it, about how they had beaten people to death.”
Boasting of beating people to death
He says it again: “Boasting about how they had beaten people to death.   They are trained killers now.   Their friends had died in Iraq.   So they weren’t the people they were before they went there.”
I hate Iraqis
Anderson says that even the small talk was difficult to tolerate.
“I hate Iraqis,” he quotes his peers as saying.   “I hate these damn Muslims.”
At first he was puzzled by such talk.   “After a while I started to understand.   I started to feel the hatred myself.   My friends were dying.   What am I here for? We went to fight for our country; now we’re just fighting to stay alive.”
In addition to taking shrapnel from a roadside bomb — the injury that earned him the Purple Heart — Anderson says he often found himself in firefights.
I said, ‘It was a family!’
But it was work at a checkpoint that made him seriously question his role.
He was guarding the “backside” of a street checkpoint in Baghdad, he says.
If a car passed a certain point without stopping, the guards were supposed to open fire.
“A car comes through and it stops in front of my position.   Sparks are coming from the car from bad brakes.   All the soldiers are yelling.   It’s in my vicinity, so it’s my responsibility.   I didn’t fire.   A superior goes, ‘Why didn’t you fire? You were supposed to fire.’ I said, ‘It was a family!’ At this time it had stopped.   You could see the children in the back seat.   I said, ‘I did the right thing.’ He’s like, ‘No, you didn’t.   It’s procedure to fire.   If you don’t do it next time, you’re punished.’”
Anderson shakes his head at the memory.
“I’m already not agreeing with this war.   I’m not going to kill innocent people.   I can’t kill kids.   That’s not the way I was raised.”
He says he started to look around at the ruined cityscape and the injured Iraqis, and slowly began to understand the Iraqi response.
They’re 14-year-old boys, they’re old men
“If someone did this to my street, I would pick up a weapon and fight.   I can’t kill these people.   They’re not terrorists.   They’re 14-year-old boys, they’re old men.   We’re occupying the streets.   We raid houses.   We grab people.   We send them off to Abu Ghraib, where they’re tortured.   These are innocent people.   We stop cars.   We hinder everyday life.   If I did this in the States, I’d be thrown in prison.”
Birds are singing sweetly as he speaks, a stark contrast to his descriptions of atrocities in Iraq.
“I didn’t shoot anybody when I was in Baghdad.   We went down to Najaf with howitzers.   We shot rounds in Najaf and we killed hundreds of people.   I did kill hundreds of people, but not directly, hand-to-hand.”
Anderson went home for Christmas, convinced he would be sent back to the war.
He knew he would not be able to live with himself if he returned to Iraq, armed with his first-hand knowledge of what was occurring there day after day.
He decided he could no longer participate, and his parents — already opposed to the war —supported his decision.   Canada seemed like the best option.
After Christmas 2004, he drove from Kentucky to Toronto.
But he says he has had second thoughts about his exile.
Not that he is worried much about deportation: he has recently married a Canadian woman and that will probably guarantee him permanent residency.
But he plans to return to the US this autumn, and expects to be arrested when he presents himself to authorities at the border.
“The war’s still going on,” he told me.
“If I go back, maybe I can still make a difference. My fight is with the American government.”
It’s not only anti-war work that’s motivating him to go home; he’s thinking about his future.
“Dealing with all the nightmares and the post-traumatic stress, I need support from my family.”
Anderson expects to be convicted of desertion, and he says he will use his trial and prison time to continue to protest against the war.
He imagines that just the sight of him in a dress uniform covered with the medals he was awarded fighting in Iraq will make a powerful statement.
“I can’t work every day and act like everything is okay,” he says about his life in Toronto.
“This war is beating me down. I haven’t had a dream that wasn’t a nightmare since I came to Canada. It eats away at me to try and act like everything’s okay when it’s not.”
Not that he feels his time in Canada was a waste.
“There was no way I could have gone to prison at the time: I would have killed myself.
I was way too messed up in the head to even think of sitting in a prison cell.
I owe a lot to Canada.
It has saved my life.
When I came back and was talking about the war, Americans called me a traitor.
Canadians helped me when I was at my lowest point.”
Copyright 2006   Times Newspapers Ltd.
KILL A GOOK FOR CALLEY
KILL A GOOK FOR CALLEY

I took this picture in Vietnam shortly after Lt. William Calley was found guilty for his part in the My Lai Murders. 

504 Vietnamese civilians were massacred  at My Lai on March 16, 1968. When I went back to Vietnam in 1994, I stood next
to a ditch where 175 civilians were shot at point-blank range.

Women were raped, and infants were torn apart by automatic weapons. The My Lai Massacre was a U.S. military operation. It was being conducted by military brass in helicopters.

This kind of hell happened so many times throughout the war in Indochina. The U.S. military was on a rampage, especially with carpet bombing and artillery fire in Free Fire Zones.

Navy ships blew the hell out of everything. The Vietnam War, to include Laos and Cambodia, was 'Total Warfare.'

The reason the norms of society hate veterans who expose this kind of truth, is because we expose National Shame. 

'Total Warfare, is about destroying anyone or anything that supports the combatant. Geneva Convention Rules are for civilians back home who think there are rules against killing civilians in war. It is a massive lie!!

Over one million Iraqi civilians have been killed in both Iraq wars. The magnitude of this war is coming home to America like no other war in American history. I see this country crumbling before my eyes. Every area involving social services in our towns and cities is suffering because our government is spending more money on violence than on kindness.

I graduated from high school in 1963, and I know longer recognize this country. America has become an internal car bomb about to go off.

40,000 gang members in Los Angeles County. 80,000 homeless people in Orange County.

Intercity high schools in many large cities across America have a 40-50% dropout rate.

Drug addiction in America has become a daily newspaper. Fifty million people in America do not have health care.

The Gulf Coast of America is still in shambles.

How many high schools in America are on the edge of seeing more gun violence.

How many more little girls are going to be shot at point-blank range.

I have three grandchildren, and I doubt if they will ever see the quality of life I saw in my childhood.

So, from the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam, to the dinosaur war economy in America. One step for insanity, one giant step
toward oblivion.

If we do not work for world peace on a new born child's terms, we are doomed.

Greed now has the shortest shelf life in world history.

Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
February 8, 2007
KILL A GOOK FOR CALLEY
I took this picture in Vietnam shortly after Lt. William Calley was found guilty for his part in the My Lai Murders.
504 Vietnamese civilians were massacred  at My Lai on March 16, 1968.
When I went back to Vietnam in 1994, I stood next to a ditch where 175 civilians were shot at point-blank range.
Women were raped, and infants were torn apart by automatic weapons.
The My Lai Massacre was a U.S. military operation. It was being conducted by military brass in helicopters.
This kind of hell happened so many times throughout the war in Indochina.
The U.S. military was on a rampage, especially with carpet bombing and artillery fire in Free Fire Zones.
Navy ships blew the hell out of everything. The Vietnam War, to include Laos and Cambodia, was 'Total Warfare.'
The reason the norms of society hate veterans who expose this kind of truth, is because we expose National Shame.
'Total Warfare, is about destroying anyone or anything that supports the combatant. Geneva Convention Rules are for civilians back home who think there are rules against killing civilians in war. It is a massive lie!!
Over one million Iraqi civilians have been killed in both Iraq wars.
The magnitude of this war is coming home to America like no other war in American history.
I see this country crumbling before my eyes.
Every area involving social services in our towns and cities is suffering because our government is spending more money on violence than on kindness.
I graduated from high school in 1963, and I know longer recognize this country.
America has become an internal car bomb about to go off.
40,000 gang members in Los Angeles County.
IMPEACH BUSH FOR CRIMES AGAINST EVERYTHING

IMPEACH BUSH FOR CRIMES AGAINST EVERYTHING

Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
January 29, 2007
80,000 homeless people in Orange County.
Intercity high schools in many large cities across America have a 40-50% dropout rate.
Drug addiction in America has become a daily newspaper. Fifty million people in America do not have health care.
The Gulf Coast of America is still in shambles.
How many high schools in America are on the edge of seeing more gun violence.
How many more little girls are going to be shot at point-blank range.
I have three grandchildren, and I doubt if they will ever see the quality of life I saw in my childhood.
So, from the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam, to the dinosaur war economy in America.
One step for insanity, one giant step toward oblivion.
If we do not work for world peace on a new born child's terms, we are doomed.
Greed now has the shortest shelf life in world history.
        Photo and words: Mike Hastie         
         U.S. Army Medic         
         Vietnam 1970-71         
         February 8, 2007         
THE LESSONS OF TERROR
 
The principle reason that the United States was defeated in Vietnam was not the inadequacy of its military effort or the failure of its soldiers or even the superiority of the enemy it faced.

For the effort was enormous, American soldiers fought well, and the North Vietnamese, while dogged and well led, themselves admitted that they could not have won without the deterioration of domestic morale that occurred within the United States.

And that deterioration was not due to media influence or to social degeneracy: it was due to the fact that such American leaders as John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Henry Kissinger had given themselves over to
a repugnant and self-defeating philosophy.

They had become terrorists, and all in the cause of a political fallacy -- for when North Vietnam finally triumphed,
there were no waves of communist troops suddenly landing on the shores of Hawaii, as Lyndon Johnson had once publicly predicted.

There was simply a reunited Vietnam.

A great many dead soldiers.

And civilians.

And a heightened international perception of America as a nation that had no difficulty matching terror with terror.

That perception bred powerful resentment in many parts of the world, places where the continued American rationalization that their objectionable tactics were being employed in the name of freedom was rejected.

In such places, a new response to the overwhelming military might of the West began to emerge, especially after the Vietnam War: a particularly vicious type of unlimited warfare that would soon become known as international political terrorism.

Caleb Carr
The Lessons of Terror
A History of Warfare Against Civilians:
Why It Has Always Failed And Why It
Will Fail Again

Photo composite taken in Vietnam
by Mike Hastie U.S. Army Medic     

THE LESSONS OF TERROR
The principle reason that the United States was defeated in Vietnam was not the inadequacy of its military effort or the failure of its soldiers or even the superiority of the enemy it faced.
For the effort was enormous, American soldiers fought well, and the North Vietnamese, while dogged and well led, themselves admitted that they could not have won without the deterioration of domestic morale that occurred within the United States.
And that deterioration was not due to media influence or to social degeneracy: it was due to the fact that such American leaders as John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Henry Kissinger had given themselves over to a repugnant and self-defeating philosophy.
They had become terrorists, and all in the cause of a political fallacy -- for when North Vietnam finally triumphed, there were no waves of communist troops suddenly landing on the shores of Hawaii, as Lyndon Johnson had once publicly predicted.
There was simply a reunited Vietnam.
A great many dead soldiers.
And civilians.
And a heightened international perception of America as a nation that had no difficulty matching terror with terror.
That perception bred powerful resentment in many parts of the world, places where the continued American rationalization that their objectionable tactics were being employed in the name of freedom was rejected.
In such places, a new response to the overwhelming military might of the West began to emerge, especially after the Vietnam War: a particularly vicious type of unlimited warfare that would soon become known as international political terrorism.
Caleb Carr
The Lessons of Terror
A History of Warfare Against Civilians:
Why It Has Always Failed And Why It
Will Fail Again
Photo composite taken in Vietnam by Mike Hastie U.S. Army Medic
Sunday 12 March 2006
SAS soldier quits Army in disgust at 'illegal' American tactics in Iraq
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
((Filed: 12/03/2006)
An SAS soldier has refused to fight in Iraq and has left the Army over the "illegal" tactics of United States troops and the policies of coalition forces.
After three months in Baghdad, Ben Griffin told his commander that he was no longer prepared to fight alongside American forces.
Told commanders that he thought the Iraq war was illegal
Ben Griffin told commanders that he thought the Iraq war was illegal
He said he had witnessed "dozens of illegal acts" by US troops, claiming they viewed all Iraqis as "untermenschen" — the Nazi term for races regarded as sub-human.
The decision marks the first time an SAS soldier has refused to go into combat and quit the Army on moral grounds.
It immediately brought to an end Mr Griffin's exemplary, eight-year career in which he also served with the Parachute Regiment, taking part in operations in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan.
But it will also embarrass the Government and have a potentially profound impact on cases of other soldiers who have refused to fight.
On Wednesday, the pre-trial hearing will begin into the court martial of Flt Lt Malcolm Kendall-Smith, a Royal Air Force doctor who has refused to return to Iraq for a third tour of duty on the grounds that the war is illegal.   Mr Griffin's allegations came as the Foreign Office minister Kim Howells, visiting Basra yesterday, admitted that Iraq was now "a mess".
Mr Griffin, 28, who spent two years with the SAS, said the American military's "gung-ho and trigger happy mentality" and tactics had completely undermined any chance of winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi population.   He added that many innocent civilians were arrested in night-time raids and interrogated by American soldiers, imprisoned in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison, or handed over to the Iraqi authorities and "most probably" tortured.
Mr Griffin eventually told SAS commanders at Hereford that he could not take part in a war which he regarded as "illegal".
He added that he now believed that the Prime Minister and the Government had repeatedly "lied" over the war's conduct.
"I did not join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy," he said.   He expected to be labelled a coward and to face a court martial and imprisonment after making what "the most difficult decision of my life" last March.
Instead, he was discharged with a testimonial describing him as a "balanced, honest, loyal and determined individual who possesses the strength of character to have the courage of his convictions".
Last night Patrick Mercer, the shadow minister for homeland security, said: "Trooper Griffin is a highly experienced soldier.   This makes his decision particularly disturbing and his views and opinions must be listened to by the Government."
The MoD declined to comment.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006
If You Start Looking at Them as Humans, Then How Are You Gonna Kill Them?
They are a publicity nightmare for the US military: an ever-growing number of veterans of the Iraq conflict who are campaigning against the war.
Michael Blake is at the front of the march.   The 22-year-old from New York state is not quite sure how he ended up in the military; the child of "a feminist mom and hippy dad", he says he signed up thinking that he would have an adventure, never imagining that he would find himself in Iraq.
He served from April 2003 to March 2004, some of that time as a Humvee driver.
Deeply disturbed by his experience in Iraq, he filed for conscientious objector status and has been campaigning against the war ever since.
He claims that US soldiers such as him were told little about Iraq, Iraqis or Islam before serving there; other than a book of Arabic phrases, "the message was always: 'Islam is evil' and 'They hate us.'   Most of the guys I was with believed it."
Blake says that the turning point for him came one day when his unit spent eight hours guarding a group of Iraqi women and children whose men were being questioned.
He recalls: "The men were taken away and the women were screaming and crying, and I just remember thinking: this was exactly what Saddam used to do — and now we're doing it."
       Chain of Command:   The Road from 9/11       
       to Abu Ghraib         
Becoming a peace activist, he says, has been a "cleansing" experience.   "I'll never be normal again.   I'll always have a sense of guilt."   He tells us that he witnessed civilian Iraqis being killed indiscriminately.   It would not be the most startling admission by the soldiers on the march.
"When IEDs [Improvised Explosive Devices] would go off by the side of the road, the instructions were — or the practice was — to basically shoot up the landscape, anything that moved.   And that kind of thing would happen a lot."
So innocent people were killed?
"It happened, yes."   (He says he did not carry out any such killings himself.)
Blake, an activist with IVAW for the past 12 months, is angry that American people seem so untouched by the war, by the grim abuses committed by American soldiers.
"The American media doesn't cover it and they don't care.   The American people aren't seeing the real war — what's really happening there."
We are in a Mexican diner in Mississippi when Alan Shackleton, a quiet 24-year-old from Iowa, stuns the table into silence with a story of his own.
He details how he and his comrades in Iraq suffered multiple casualties, including a close friend who died of his injuries.   Then he pauses for a moment, swallows hard and says:
"And I ran over a little kid and killed him ... and that's about it."
He has been suffering from severe insomnia, but later he tells us that he has only been able to see a counsellor once every six weeks and has been prescribed sleeping pills.
"We are very, very sorry for what we did to the Iraqi people," he says the next day, holding a handwritten poster declaring: "Thou shall not kill."
Joe Hatcher, always sporting a keffiyeh and punk chains, reflects on his own time in the military and the hostility he has met from pro-war activists at home in Colorado Springs, Colorado, a town with five army bases where he campaigns against the war at town hall forums.
He says: "There's this old guy, George, an ex-colonel.   He shows up and talks shit on everybody for being anti-war because 'it's ruining the morale of the soldier and encouraging the enemy'.
"I scraped dead bodies off the pavements with a shovel and threw them in trash bags and left them there on the side of the road.   And I really don't think the anti-war movement is what is infuriating people."
      Excerpts from Inigo Gilmore and Teresa Smith article March 29, 2006     Guardian/UK      
The Sunday Times — Magazine
August 27, 2006
Report
You wouldn’t catch me dead in Iraq
Scores of American troops are deserting — even from the front line in Iraq.   But where have they gone?   And why isn’t the US Army after them?   Peter Laufer tracked down four of the deserters
JOSHUA KEY
43rd Company of Combat Engineers, at Fort Carson, Colorado.   Age: 28
We was going along the Euphrates river,” says Joshua Key, detailing a recurring nightmare that features a scene he stumbled into shortly after the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
“It’s a road right in the city of Ramadi.
We turned a sharp right and all I seen was decapitated bodies.
The heads laying over here and the bodies over there and US troops in between them.
I’m thinking, ‘Oh my God, what in the hell happened here?
What’s caused this?
Why in the hell did this happen?’
We get out and somebody was screaming, ‘We f***ing lost it here!’
I’m thinking, ‘Oh yes, somebody definitely lost it here.’”
Key says he was ordered to look for evidence of a firefight, for something to explain what had happened to the beheaded Iraqis.   “I look around just for a few seconds and I don’t see anything.”
Then he witnessed the sight that still triggers the nightmares.
“I see two soldiers kicking the heads around like soccer balls.
I just shut my mouth, walked back, got inside the tank, shut the door, and thought, ‘I can’t be no part of this.
This is crazy.
I came here to fight and be prepared for war, but this is outrageous.’”
He’s convinced that there was no firefight.
“A lot of my friends stayed on the ground, looking to see if there was any shells.
There was never no shells.”
He still cannot get the scene out of his mind:
“You just see heads everywhere.
You wake up, you’ll just be sitting there, like you’re in a foxhole.
I can still see Iraq just as clearly as it was the day I was there.
You’ll just be on the side of a little river running through the city, trash piled up, filled with dead.
I don’t sleep that much, you might say.”
His wife, Brandi, nods in agreement, and says that he cries in his sleep.
We’re sitting on the back porch of the Toronto house where Key and his wife and their four small children have been living in exile since Key deserted to Canada.
They’ve settled in a rent-free basement apartment, courtesy of a landlord sympathetic to their plight.
Joshua smokes one cigarette after another and drinks coffee while we talk.
There’s a scraggly beard on his still-boyish face; his eyes look weary.
Key rejects the American government line that the Iraqis fighting the occupation are terrorists.
“I’m thinking, ‘What the hell?’
I mean, that’s not a terrorist.
That’s the man’s home.
That’s his son, that’s the father, that’s the mother, that’s the sister.
Houses are destroyed.
Husbands are detained, and wives don’t even know where they’re at.
I mean, them are pissed-off people, and they have a reason to be.
I would never wish this upon myself or my family, so why would I wish it upon them?”
On security duty in the Iraqi streets, Key found himself talking to the locals.
He was surprised by how many spoke English, and he was frustrated by the military regulations that forbade him to accept dinner invitations in their homes.
“I’m not your perfect killing machine,” he admits.   “That’s where I broke the rules.   I broke the rules by having a conscience.”
And the more time he spent in Iraq, the more his conscience developed.
“I was trained to be a total killer.   I was trained in booby traps, explosives, landmines.”
He pauses.   “Hell, if you want to get technical about it, I was made to be an American terrorist.   I was trained in everything that a terrorist is trained to do.”
In case I might have missed his point, he says it again.   “I mean terrorist.”
Deserting seemed the only viable alternative, Key says.   He did it, he insists, because he was lied to “by my president”.
Iraq – it was obvious to him – was no threat to the US.
Key feels that some of his unit were trigger-happy.   He recalls another incident that haunts him.
He was in an armoured personnel carrier when an Iraqi man in a truck cut them off, making a wrong turn.
One of his squad started firing at the truck.
“The first shot, the truck sort of started slowing down,” Key recounts.   “And then he shot the next shot, and when he shot that next shot, it, you know, exploded.”
Key watched the truck turn to debris.   “It was very strange.   He was just going along and because he tried to cut in front of us... No kind of combat reasons or anything of such…”
Dead babies
Due to US
Bombing
Iraq
2003
Key seems still in shock at the utter senselessness of it all.
“Why did it happen and what was the cause for it?
When I asked that question, I was told, basically, ‘You didn’t see anything, you know?’
Nobody asked no questions.”
Assigned to raid houses, Key was soon appalled by the job.
“I mean, yeah, they’re screaming and hollering out their lungs.
It’s traumatic on both parts because you’ve got somebody yelling at you, which might be a woman.
You’re yelling back at her, telling her to get on the ground or get out of the house.
She don’t know what you’re saying and vice versa.
It got to me.
We’re the ones sending their husbands or their children off, and when you do that, it gets even more traumatic because then they’re distraught.
Of course, you can’t comfort them because you don’t know what to say.”
While the residents are restrained, the search progresses.
“Oh, you completely destroy the home – completely destroy it,” he says.
“If there’s like cabinets or something that’s locked, you kick them in.
The soldiers take what they want.
Completely ransack it.”
He estimates that he participated in about 100 raids.
“I never found anything in a home.
You might find one AK-47, but that’s for personal use.
But I never once found the big caches of weapons they supposed were there.
I never once found members of the Ba’ath party, terrorists, insurgents.
We never found any of that.”
A soldier’s life was never Joshua Key’s dream.   He was living in Guthrie, Oklahoma, just looking for a decent job.  
“We had two kids at the time and my third boy was on the way,” he says.
“There’s no work there.
There wasn’t going to be a future.
Of course you can get a job working at McDonald’s, but that wasn’t going to pay the bills.”
The local army-recruiting station beckoned.
Shortly after he finished basic training, he was en route to the war zone.
After eight months of fighting, he received two weeks’ leave back in the US.   At the end of that, he was due for another Iraq tour.
He didn’t report for duty.   Key and his wife packed up, took their children and ran, with the intention of getting as far from his base in familiar Colorado as possible.
The family ran out of money in Philadelphia, and Key found work as a welder.
They lived an underground lifestyle for over a year, frequently checking out of one hotel and into another, worried that if they stayed too long at one place they would attract attention.
“I was paranoid,” Key says, and he contemplated deserting to Canada.
The research was easy.   He went online and searched for “deserter needs help to go Awol”.
Up popped details about others who had escaped across the border.   He and Brandi decided to opt for a new life as Canadians.   George W Bush should be the one to go to prison, says Key.
“On the day he goes to prison, I’ll go sit in prison with him.   Let’s go.   I’ll face it for that music.   But that ain’t never going to happen,” he laughs.
Copyright 2006   Times Newspapers Ltd.
 
Published on Thursday, February 2, 2006 by the Independent/UK
'Marlboro Man' Turns Against War He Symbolised
by Andrew Buncombe
A cigarette hung from his mouth in the manner of John Wayne or Humphrey Bogart, his grime-covered face showed the exhaustion of battle.
A Los Angeles Times photographer shot Lance Cpl. James Blake Miller smoking a cigarette in Fallujah, Iraq, Tuesday, Nov. 9, 2004 after U.S. forces punched into the center of the insurgent stronghold.
A Los Angeles Times photographer shot Lance Cpl. James Blake Miller smoking a cigarette in Fallujah, Iraq, Tuesday, Nov. 9, 2004 after U.S. forces punched into the center of the insurgent stronghold.
This image of US Marine Lance-Corporal Blake Miller, taken during the battle of Fallujah, instantly captured the public imagination and for a while he was known simply as Marlboro Man.
But 15 months after that photograph appeared in more than 100 US newspapers, the 21-year-old is back from Iraq, back on civvy street and he is talking about the trauma of what he experienced and the scars he still bears, physical and mental.
The once unquestioning Marine is now also questioning whether US forces should be in Iraq.
Make the hair stand up on the back of your neck
The mental health experts who are treating him call his condition post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but Mr Miller describes it in more immediate language: nightmares, sleeplessness and periods when he will "blank out", not knowing where he is or what he is doing.
"I could tell you stories about Iraq that would make the hair stand up on the back of your neck.
And I could tell you things that were great over there.
But that would still not tell you what it was actually like.
You had to be there and go through it to really understand."
A third of US troops
Mr Miller is not alone.
The federal Veterans Affairs (VA) department revealed last week that up to a third of US troops returning from Iraq or Afghanistan - about 40,000 - suffer mental health problems.
It is to spend an extra $29m (£16.3m) on troops who have PTSD.
Days ago, The Independent reported the suicide of another veteran of the Iraq war, Doug Barber, a National Guardsman who took his life after struggling with his experiences of the war after he returned to civilian life.
He would be a threat to himself or his colleagues if he continued
Mr Miller, who received an honourable discharge last November after military psychologists decided he would be a threat to himself or his colleagues if he continued to serve, said there remained a stigma about mental health issues.
He told Knight Ridder Newspapers:
"I want people to know that PTSD is not something people come down with because they are crazy.
It's an anxiety disorder, where you've experienced something so traumatic that you're close to death."  
Mr Miller's photograph was taken in November 2004 during the battle for Fallujah, the insurgent stronghold.
The two-week operation resulted in the deaths of up to 50 US troops, an estimated 1,200 insurgents and an unknown number of civilians.
The former Marine says he now questions the US tactics and believes troops should have been withdrawn some time ago.  
He said:
"When I was in the service my opinion was whatever the Commander-in-Chief's opinion was.
But after I got out, I started to think about it.
The biggest question I have now is how you can make a war on an entire country when a certain group from that country is practising terrorism against you.
It's as if a gang from New York went to Iraq and blew some stuff up and Iraq started a war against us because of that."
[Iraq had nothing to do with an attack on the U.S. — TheWE.biz]
Mr Miller's image was captured by the Los Angeles Times photographer Luis Sinco.
At the time, he smoked five packs a day.
Now, recently married and looking to make a fresh start, he has cut down to just one.
 
US Army First Lieutenant Ehren K. Watada
Refuse illegal war.

US Army First Lieutenant Ehren K. Watada.

The court martial against Ehren Watada, who refused to fight in Iraq because he said the war was illegal, ended unexpectedly Wednesday in a mistrial.

'That I joined the military and I had only one duty and that was to obey what I was told, regardless of how I felt inside.

It really hurt me for a long time because I imprisoned myself by telling myself I didn't have a choice.

It didn't matter that I might be sent to prison.

I was already in prison, my freedom was already gone.

When I told myself that I do have a choice, I have a choice to do what is morally right, what is in my conscience, and what I can live with for the rest of my life  even though that comes with consequences, I do have that choice.

When I realized that, and when I chose what was right for me, I became free again.

And I think everybody has to remember that and to realize that is what is important in life.'

'To stop an illegal and unjust war, the soldiers can choose to stop fighting it.'
 
'If soldiers realized this war is contrary to what the Constitution extols — if they stood up and threw their weapons down — no President could ever initiate a war of choice again.'

'Should citizens choose to remain silent through self-imposed ignorance or choice, it makes them as culpable as the soldiers in these crimes.'

'We all take part in it — if you pay your taxes, you're taking part in this war.

'We all have a responsibility, as they determined after Nuremberg, whether you're the lowest soldier or the highest ranking general, or just a regular civilian, we all have responsibility...to resist and refuse enabling and condoning this criminal behavior.'

Words of Ehren Watada speaking at the Veterans for Peace annual convention in Seattle.

Photo: ThankYouLt.org

'To stop an illegal and unjust war, the soldiers can choose to stop fighting it.'
'If soldiers realized this war is contrary to what the Constitution extols — if they stood up and threw their weapons down — no President could ever initiate a war of choice again.'
'Should citizens choose to remain silent through self-imposed ignorance or choice, it makes them as culpable as the soldiers in these crimes.'
'We all take part in it — if you pay your taxes, you're taking part in this war.
'We all have a responsibility, as they determined after Nuremberg, whether you're the lowest soldier or the highest ranking general, or just a regular civilian, we all have responsibility...to resist and refuse enabling and condoning this criminal behavior.'
Words of Ehren Watada speaking at the Veterans for Peace annual convention in Seattle.
Photo: ThankYouLt.org
US Army First Lieutenant Ehren K. Watada
with his parents Carolyn Ho and Robert Watada
Refuse illegal war.

US Army First Lieutenant Ehren K. Watada with his parents Carolyn Ho and Robert Watada.

The court martial against Ehren Watada, who refused to fight in Iraq because he said the war was illegal, ended unexpectedly Wednesday in a mistrial.

'There was a long time when I went through depression because I told myself I didn't have a choice.

That I joined the military and I had only one duty and that was to obey what I was told, regardless of how I felt inside.

It really hurt me for a long time because I imprisoned myself by telling myself I didn't have a choice.

It didn't matter that I might be sent to prison.

I was already in prison, my freedom was already gone.

When I told myself that I do have a choice, I have a choice to do what is morally right, what is in my conscience, and what I can live with for the rest of my life  even though that comes with consequences, I do have that choice.

When I realized that, and when I chose what was right for me, I became free again.

And I think everybody has to remember that and to realize that is what is important in life.'

Photo: ThankYouLt.org     

'There was a long time when I went through depression because I told myself I didn't have a choice.
That I joined the military and I had only one duty and that was to obey what I was told, regardless of how I felt inside.
It really hurt me for a long time because I imprisoned myself by telling myself I didn't have a choice.
It didn't matter that I might be sent to prison.
I was already in prison, my freedom was already gone.
When I told myself that I do have a choice, I have a choice to do what is morally right, what is in my conscience, and what I can live with for the rest of my life even though that comes with consequences, I do have that choice.
When I realized that, and when I chose what was right for me, I became free again.
And I think everybody has to remember that and to realize that is what is important in life.'
Photo: ThankYouLt.org
      U.S. War Crimes — Falluja photos      
      US used chemical and thermobaric weapons in Fallujah     
Soldiers flee to Canada to avoid Iraq duty
Duncan Campbell
Tuesday March 28, 2006
Hundreds of deserters from the US armed forces have crossed into Canada and are now seeking political refugee status there, arguing that violations of the rules of war in Iraq by the US entitle them to asylum.
A decision on a test case involving two US servicemen is due shortly and is being watched with interest by fellow servicemen on both sides of the border.   At least 20 others have already applied for asylum and there are an estimated 400 in Canada out of more than 9,000 who have deserted since the conflict started in 2003.
Memorial at Camp Pendleton
Casualties of recent 12-month deployment
Ryan Johnson, 22, from near Fresno in California, was due to be deployed with his unit to Iraq in January last year but crossed the Canadian border in June and is seeking asylum.
"I had spoken to many soldiers who had been in Iraq and who told me about innocent civilians being killed and about bombing civilian neighbourhoods," he told the Guardian.
"It's been really great since I've been here.
Generally, people have been really hospitable and understanding, although there have been a few who have been for the war."
He is now unable to return to the US.
"I don't have a problem with that.
I'm in Canada and that's that."
Mr Johnson said it was unclear exactly how many US soldiers were in Canada but he thought 400 was a "realistic figure".
He had been on speaking tours across the country as part of a war resisters' movement and had come across other servicemen living underground.
Jeffry House, a Toronto lawyer who represents many of the men, said that an increasing number were seeking asylum.  
"There are a fair number without status and a fair number on student visas," he said, and under UN guidelines on refugee status they were entitled to seek asylum.
The first test cases involve Jeremy Hinzman, 26, who deserted from the 82 Airborne Division and Brandon Hughey from the 1st Cavalry Division.
A decision on their applications is due within the next few weeks.
If they are turned down the case will be taken to the federal appeal court and the Canadian supreme court, according to Mr House, a process that would last into next year at least.
Shouts
at US taxpayer paid
occupation forces
All deserters, past and present, are placed on an FBI wanted list.   Earlier this month, Allen Abney, 56, who deserted from the US marines 38 years ago during the Vietnam war, was arrested as he crossed into the US, a journey he had taken many times before without problem.   He was held in a military jail in California for a few days, then discharged.
"They have resuscitated long-dormant warrants," said Mr House.   "I know 15 people personally who have crossed 10 or more times without problems and then all of a sudden they are arresting people.   It seems like it would be connected to Iraq."
Lee Zaslofsky, 61, the coordinator of the War Resisters' Support Campaign in Toronto, said that he was impressed by the young men who were seeking asylum.   "Some have been to Iraq and others have heard what goes on there," he said.   "Mainly, what they discuss is being asked to do things they consider repugnant.   Most are quite patriotic ... Many say they feel tricked by the military."
During the Vietnam war between 50,000 and 60,000 Americans crossed the border to avoid serving.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
 
Published on Thursday, November 10, 2005 by Associated Press
Colorado Soldier Founds Anti-War Group
Sgt. Kelly Dougherty joined over 3,000 at a Fayetteville, North Carolina rally to mark two years of war and occupation in Iraq, March 19, 2005.

Photo: Jeff Paterson
Sgt. Kelly Dougherty joined over 3,000 at a Fayetteville, North Carolina rally to mark two years of war and occupation in Iraq, March 19, 2005.
Sgt. Kelly Dougherty went to Iraq in 2003, doubting that the war was just.
She returned in 2004, certain it was wrong, and co-founded Iraq Veterans Against the War.
"People say you are a traitor.   People say you are unpatriotic," said Dougherty, 27, about her anti-war work.   "We are doing this because we feel strongly about America.
"I really appreciate America, but we are capable of doing some very bad things."
Dougherty was stationed near Nazaria in southern Iraq for 10 months with the Colorado National Guard's 220th Military Police Co.   She saw action but never fired her weapon.
Dougherty said the thousands of innocent civilians who have been killed and the broken American promises about repairing water, electricity and sewage systems convinced her the troops should come home.
The faces of Iraqi civilians mirrored her growing doubts.
"At first, the Iraqis smiled and waved, but at the end of my 10 months there, they'd turn away or make rude gestures," Dougherty said.
After she came home in February 2004, and left the Guard after eight years with an honorable discharge, Dougherty embarked on a new mission.
She put her life and income on hold to talk to college students, high school classes and community groups across the country.
"The war in Iraq is not about protecting this country.   The war is about aggression," said Dougherty, who doesn't receive a salary for her work against the war.
At Regis College in Denver recently with the Wheels of Justice Tour, Dougherty said her unit was often ordered to burn broken-down civilian contractor trucks loaded with supplies rather than allow the impoverished Iraqis to loot them for the water, food, fuel and vehicle parts that could be sold.
"Most of us wanted to help the Iraqi people, but the only good we could do was give kids candy," she told six Regis students who gathered on a warm fall afternoon to listen to her.
"That's not what they need.   They need clean water and security."
The worst events she experienced involved civilians, including children, hit by contractor convoys that thundered along rural roads under orders to never stop.
"I wasn't protecting America.   I was protecting Halliburton trucks going to military bases," she said.
Dougherty said her MP unit provided security for investigators at rural crash scenes, including a fatality where a military convoy killed a boy.
"The family was there.   An older relative fell to his knees and collapsed on the ground.   There was nothing they could do," she said.
Dougherty said she had hoped that American troops would help rebuild power plants, water systems and schools, but the only construction she saw was at military bases.
"From what I saw, we just created more chaos and violence," she said.
"I became less and less convinced that we were there for a good purpose."
The rebuilding effort is the subject of a new report by the special inspector general for Iraq.
While noting problems in the $30 billion U.S.-financed effort, the report also cited "steady progress" in parts of the program, despite what was described as "the hazardous security environment, the fluid political situation and the harsh realities of working in a war zone," according to a story in a recent Sunday edition of the New York Times.
KILL
Unlikely soldier
Dougherty, whose parents divorced when she was a child, grew up in a working-class neighborhood in Canon City.   She was a good student who asked questions.
When she graduated from high school in 1996, she knew two things: that she wanted to go to college and that her parents couldn't afford to send her.
Her stepfather, Army veteran Jim Brenner, suggested she sign up for the National Guard for the college benefits.
Her father, Sean Dougherty, a Vietnam veteran, argued against it.
Nevertheless, Dougherty enlisted, along with her best friend, Elizabeth Spradlin, in the Colorado National Guard in Pueblo.
Her once-a-month service as a medic meshed with her classes at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs.   A biology major, she wants to work in health services.
She was deployed to Hungary for eight months in 1999 as an MP to escort troops to Bosnia.   She was activated again as an MP in January 2003 for duty in Iraq.
"Before I went, I told an officer that I had reservations because Iraq wasn't behind the 9/11 attack," she said.   "The officer said he had reservations, too."
That night, however, the officer told the platoon that Iraq was behind the 9/11 attack and that the country needed to strike back, Dougherty said.
"Our leader was misleading us," she said.
Her unit first went to Kuwait, where they huddled in a bunker for two days as alarms signaled incoming Scud missiles fired by the Iraqis.
"We were in full protective gear because we were told the missiles had chemical and biological weapons," Dougherty said.
The soldiers again were misled, she said.   The U.S. later said the Iraqis didn't have biological or chemical agents or weapons of mass destruction.
US bomber flies over Baghdad
in show of force
On the anti-war trail
At high schools across the country and especially in Colorado Springs, Colorado's military hub, Dougherty tells students to look at grants and other sources of tuition help rather than the military.
"I tell them to take what the military recruiters say with a grain of salt," she said.   "I tell them there are other options."
Dougherty, who wants to get a master's degree in public health, said most of the audiences she's talked to since July 2004 have been small and usually already agree with her stand.
But the Iraq Veterans Against the War itself has grown from Dougherty and her six-cofounders to 300 today.   National polls show dwindling support for the war as well.
She's found she's a frequent target of pro-war tirades on blogs.   Dougherty said she enjoys her discussions during speaking engagements with Iraq veterans who disagree with her.
"I say that I support them and my experience was different than theirs," she said.
Dougherty said she and her stepfather don't discuss her anti-war activities, but her father has become active in the movement.
At North Presbyterian Church in Denver recently, more than 75 people — the group's largest audience of the week — listened to Dougherty and two other Iraq veterans relate their experiences.
"There was a poll in Europe, rating the most dangerous countries.   America was rated as the most dangerous," Dougherty told the gathering.
One of the audience members, Matt Walsh, 25, said he hadn't heard about the large civilian losses or the lack of water and food that had turned many of the Iraqi people against the U.S.
"I don't know anyone who's in Iraq," said Walsh, who graduated from college this year.   "It could have been me that signed up to go to Iraq."
The audience gave Dougherty and the other vets a standing ovation.
"I came to find out from the ranks what has really gone on in Iraq," said John Addison, an Army veteran who was stationed in Germany during the Vietnam War.   "I was impressed with what these soldiers had to say," he said.
Raid by US occupation forces
Baghdad
Not all agree
During her talk, Dougherty said her few encounters with Iraqis, especially with the women, confirmed her belief that Iraqis are good people.
"It made me wish all the more that I was there in a different capacity than being part of the military," she said.
Jeff Chapman, a deacon at the church who wore an American flag tie and an American flag pin on his jacket lapel, listened, but disagreed.
"I feel more people would die here, in this country, if we didn't fight the Iraqi terrorists there," said Chapman, an Air Force veteran.
"But what these people are doing is great," he said.   "I fought for their right to say these things."
The Sunday Times — Magazine
August 27, 2006
Report
You wouldn’t catch me dead in Iraq
Scores of American troops are deserting — even from the front line in Iraq.   But where have they gone?   And why isn’t the US Army after them?   Peter Laufer tracked down four of the deserters
RYAN JOHNSON
211th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Barstow, California. Age: 22
Twenty-two-year-old Ryan Johnson meets me at his Catholic hostel in Toronto wearing a black T-shirt, blue jeans and black running shoes.
When Ryan went Awol in January 2005, he simply went home to Visalia, California.
“It was very stressful,” he says.
“I lived only four hours away from my home base.
I figured they could come get me at any time.
But they never came by.
They never came looking for me.
They sent some letters — that’s all they did.”
The military doesn’t devote significant manpower to chasing Awol soldiers and deserters, other than issuing a federal arrest warrant.
Those who get caught are usually arrested for something unrelated, their Awol status revealed when local police enter their names into the National Crime Information Center database — a routine post-arrest procedure throughout the United States.
Johnson moved to Canada because he was afraid that if he applied for a job, a background check would cause him to be arrested and give him a criminal record that would make it even more difficult for him to find work in the future. Voluntarily turning himself in to the US Army would not have improved his options, either.
“I had two choices: go to Iraq and have my life messed up, or go to jail and have my life messed up.
So I came here to try this out.”
Back at his base in the southern California desert, Johnson had listened hard to the stories told by soldiers returning from the war. “I didn’t want to be a part of that,” he says.
I remind him that, unlike in the Vietnam era, there was no draft when he became eligible to join the army.
He went down to the Visalia recruiting office and signed up.
Did he really not know then that the army was in the business of killing people?
“That’s true, yeah, they are,” he acknowledges.
“But what I didn’t understand is how traumatising it was to actually kill somebody or watch one of your friends get killed. I’ve never seen anyone die.
“When I joined,” he says, “I joined because I was poor.”
He says that jobs were hard to come by in Visalia and he lacked the funds for college.
The sign in the strip mall outside the recruiting office beckoned, despite the fact that war was already burning up the Iraqi desert and sending GIs home dead.
“I talked to the recruiters,” says Johnson.
“I said, ‘What are the chances of me going to Iraq?’
They said, ‘Depends on what job you get.’
So I said, ‘What jobs could I get that wouldn’t have me go to Iraq?’
And they named jobs.
I picked one of those and they said that I probably wouldn’t go to Iraq.”
US invasion of Iraq, 2003
Man was to be married
Johnson was too unsophisticated to ask probing questions at the army recruiting office, and he didn’t question many of the answers he did receive.
“I was 20 years old,” he says defensively.
“I thought we were rebuilding in Iraq.
I thought we were doing good things.
But we’re blowing up mosques.
We’re blowing up museums, people’s homes, all the culture.
I mean, I didn’t even realise Iraq was Mesopotamia, you know?
There’s all this culture and everything in Iraq.
I like to think of myself as pretty well educated for someone that didn’t even graduate high school, but I’ve never really known anything about history or other cultures.
“The soldiers that are going to Iraq, most of them aren’t patriotic,” he says.
They aren’t going to Iraq because our flag has red, white and blue on it.
They’re not going because they think that Iraq is posing a threat to us.
Most of us are going because we’re ordered to and our buddies are going.
That’s one of the reasons that I was going to go — because my buddies are over there.”
He is immediately wistful when asked how he feels about being safe in peaceful Toronto while those buddies are fighting and dying in the desert:
“I check the casualties list every day.
Every day I go on the internet and I check the casualties list to see if my friends are on there.
And as of yet.”
He pauses
“Seven people from my unit have died, and I knew four of them.”
Johnson is unwilling to consider a return to America and time in prison.
“It seems absolutely insane,” he says.
“They’ll put someone in jail for five years for not wanting to kill somebody.
I’m trying to avoid killing people.
I know if I went to Iraq I would kill somebody.
If I got put on patrol I would probably shoot somebody, because I would know that it’s them or me, you know?
And they feel the same way.
If I don’t kill these guys, they’re going to kill me.”
Johnson is hoping to feel at home in Canada.
His introduction to the new country when he drove across the border was unexpectedly welcoming.
He tried to give his ID to the border guard, but she was not interested in checking it.
She just said:
“‘Welcome to Canada.’
Yeah, that’s what she said.
She said, ‘Welcome to Canada.’
And I said, ‘Thank you!’ and then we crossed the border.
And my wife, Jennifer, screamed.”
However, Johnson is now appealing, as his initial request for refugee status in Canada has been rejected by the Canadian authorities.
Copyright 2006   Times Newspapers Ltd.
 
Published on Monday, January 17, 2004 by the Associated Press
Images Behind Soldier's Iraq Refusal
by Russ Bynum

HINESVILLE, Ga. - A young girl clutching her arm blackened by burns, dogs feeding off bodies in mass graves — the images still haunt Sgt. Kevin Benderman 15 months after he came home from Iraq.
Witnessing the brutal reality of war, Benderman stunned his commanders when he sought a discharge as a conscientious objector after 10 years in the Army.
In an interview with The Associated Press, the sergeant said he never grasped the misery that war inflicts on civilians as well as combatants until he saw it all first hand.
"Some people may be born a conscientious objector, but sometimes people realize through certain events in their lives that the path they're on is the wrong one," Benderman said.  "The idea was: Do I really want to stay in an organization where the sole purpose is to kill?"
Benderman's decision — choosing conscience over his commitment to fellow troops — has meant bearing the insults.
An officer called him a coward.  His battalion chaplain shamed him in an e-mail from Kuwait.  That's because Benderman, whose unit just deployed for a second combat tour in Iraq, refused to return to war.
Benderman, 40, filed notice in December, and his timing could hardly have been worse for the Army.  The Fort Stewart-based 3rd Infantry Division began deploying its 19,000 soldiers this month.
Benderman's unit, the 3rd Forward Support Battalion, was leaving for Kuwait on Jan. 5.  When commanders ordered him to deploy while they processed his objector application, he refused to show up for his flight.
He said he has his reasons, reflecting on time in Iraq.
Benderman told of bombed out homes and displaced Iraqis living in mud huts and drinking from mud puddles; mass graves in Khanaqin near the Iranian border where dogs fed off bodies of men, women and children.
He recalled his convoy passing a girl, no older than 10, on the roadside clutching a badly injured arm.  Benderman said his executive officer refused to help because troops had limited medical supplies.
"Her arm was burned, third-degree burns, just black.  And she was standing there with her mother begging for help," Benderman said.  "That was an eye opener to seeing how insane it really is."
Now Benderman, a mechanic who has been reassigned to a non-deploying rear detachment unit, could face a court-martial.  Fort Stewart officials have not decided whether to charge him.
Separately, he must convince commanders he is morally opposed to war in all forms, as Army regulations define conscientious objection, despite his lengthy military service and previous combat tour.
"If he went to Iraq and then comes back and says, `I'm now opposed to war,' the issue is are you opposed to all wars or just this one you don't want to go back to?" said Mark Stevens, a military defense lawyer and retired Marine Corps judge advocate.  "He wasn't opposed to war two years ago, why is he opposed to it now?"
Benderman said the officer who took his objector notice dismissed him as a coward.  His unit's chaplain offered little encouragement.
"You should have had the moral fortitude to deploy with us and see me here in Kuwait to begin your CO application," Army Chaplain Matt Temple said in a recent e-mail to Benderman.  "You should be ashamed of the way you have conducted yourself.  I certainly am ashamed of you."
Benderman's wife, Monica, said her husband hinted that he had doubts about taking part in the war in a letter he sent home that referenced scholars' belief that Iraq was home to the biblical Garden of Eden.
"He said, `Here I am in the Garden of Eden, and what am I doing here with a gun?'" she said.
Raised a Southern Baptist in Tennessee, Benderman keeps an open Bible on his living room table but said he's "more spiritual than religious."  After going to Iraq, he picked up the Quran and was struck by the similarities between Islam and Christianity.
He returned in September 2003 after serving eight months in Iraq with the 4th Infantry Division from Fort Hood, Texas.  As a mechanic who fixes Bradley armored vehicles, he said he never fired a weapon in combat.
Still, Benderman began questioning whether he could return to a war zone when he transferred to Fort Stewart in October 2003.  He said he never mentioned his doubts to soldiers in his new unit, but trained with them for a year as they prepared for a second tour.  By December, he had even packed his clothes and equipment for shipping overseas.
Benderman acknowledged that waiting more than a year, until right before deployment, may seem "out of the blue."  But he insisted his decision came from long deliberation, not desperation.
"People say, `You're abandoning these soldiers that depend on you,' and so that weighs on you," he said.  "But what's worse?  Going over there and participating in war, or maybe doing something that can help people figure out that you don't have to go to war?"

© Copyright 2005 Associated Press

Common Dreams © 1997-2005
War Resister Kevin Benderman Sentenced to 15 Months
A US Army mechanic who refused to go to Iraq while he sought conscientious objector status was acquitted yesterday of desertion but found guilty of a lesser charge during his court-martial.
Sgt. Kevin Benderman was sentenced to 15 months in prison on the charge of missing movement.
He also was given a dishonorable discharge from the military and a reduction in rank to private.
If he had been found guilty of desertion, he could have faced five years in prison.
Still, his sentence appears to be the harshest yet given to an Iraq war resister.
      www.democracynow.org      
      July 29, 2005      
Kevin Transferred to Ft. Lewis
Kevin was transferred on August 1, 2005 to Fort Lewis in Washington state.   He was released after 13 months in military prison.
      http://www.BendermanTimeline.com       
      http://www.topia.net/kevinbenderman.html      
Award of the Soldier’s Medal to
Sgt. Kevin Benderman (Regular Army)

By Direction and Authority of We the People,

this highest award for valor not involving deadly force, is transferred

from the undersigned recipient to Sgt. Kevin Benderman this

29th Day of July 2005.

Lt. Col. James Bo Gritz

Regular Army US Spl. Fcs, Ret.

Photo: http://www.topia.net/kbgritzaward.html
Award of the Soldier’s Medal to
Sgt. Kevin Benderman (Regular Army)
By Direction and Authority of We the People,
this highest award for valor not involving deadly force, is transferred
from the undersigned recipient to Sgt. Kevin Benderman this
29th Day of July 2005.
Lt. Col. James Bo Gritz
Regular Army US Spl. Fcs, Ret.
Friday, February 17th, 2006
Professor McCoy Exposes the History of CIA Interrogation, From the Cold War to the War on Terror
A startling expose of the CIA development of psychological torture from the Cold War to Abu Ghraib.
CIA mercenaries attempted to assassinate McCoy more than 30 years ago.
— Click Here
Preliminary conversation, interview already started:
ALFRED McCOY: 
  Oh, when I was researching that book in the mountains of Laos, hiking from village to village, interviewing Laotian farmers about their opium harvest.
They were telling me that they took it down to the local helicopter pad where Air America helicopters would land, Air America being a subsidiary of the C.I.A., and officers, tribal officers in the C.I.A.’s secret army would buy the opium and fly it off to the C.I.A.’s secret compound, where it would be transformed into heroin and ultimately wound up in South Vietnam.
And while I was doing that research, hiking from village to village, interviewing farmers, we were ambushed by a group of C.I.A. mercenaries.
Fortunately, I had five militiamen from the village with me, and we shot our way out of there, but they came quite close.
Then later on, a C.I.A. operative threatened to murder my interpreter unless I stopped doing that research.   And then when —
AMY GOODMAN:    How did you know they were C.I.A.?
ALFRED McCOY:    Oh, look, in the mountains of Laos, there aren’t that many white guys, okay!   I mean, the mercenaries?   First of all, the C.I.A. ran what was called the “Army Clandestine.”   They had a secret army, and those soldiers that ambushed us were soldiers in the secret army.
That, we knew.
AMY GOODMAN:    The Laotian army?
ALFRED McCOY:    The C.I.A.’s secret army.
AMY GOODMAN:    The Laotian mercenaries?
ALFRED McCOY:    Laotian mercenaries.   That, everybody was clear about that.   Nobody denied that.
They said it was sort of an accident, but, no, it was very clear that it was intentional.
Ultimately, when the book was in press, the head of covert operations for the C.I.A. called up my offices and my publisher in New York and suggested that the publisher suppress the book.
They then got the right to prior review — the publisher compromised.
AMY GOODMAN:    C.I.A. prior review.
ALFRED McCOY:    Prior review of the manuscript, and they issued a 14-page critique.
The publisher’s legal department, HarperCollins’s legal department reviewed the critique, reviewed the manuscript, published the book unchanged, not a word changed.
AMY GOODMAN:    And the contention of that book was that the C.I.A. was complicit in the global drug trade?
ALFRED McCOY:    Right.   In the context of conducting covert operations around the globe, particularly in the Asian opium zone, which stretched from the Golden Triangle of Vietnam and Laos all the way to Afghanistan, that in those mountains far away from home, when the C.I.A. had to mobilize tribal armies, the only allies were warlords.
When the C.I.A. formed an alliance with them, the warlords used this alliance to become drug lords, and the C.I.A. didn't stop them from their involvement in the traffic.
AMY GOODMAN:    Well, as a professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, you have not stopped looking at the C.I.A.
Now you've written this new book.   It's called A Question of Torture: C.I.A. Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror.
Give us a history lesson.
ALFRED McCOY:    Well, if you look at the most famous of photographs from Abu Ghraib, of the Iraqi standing on the box, arms extended with a hood over his head and the fake electrical wires from his arms, okay!   In that photograph you can see the entire 50-year history of C.I.A. torture.
It's very simple.   He's hooded for sensory disorientation, and his arms are extended for self-inflicted pain.
Those are the two very simple fundamental C.I.A. techniques, developed at enormous cost.
From 1950 to 1962, the C.I.A. ran a massive research project, a veritable Manhattan Project of the mind, spending over $1 billion a year to crack the code of human consciousness, from both mass persuasion and the use of coercion in individual interrogation.
What they discovered — they tried LSD, they tried mescaline, they tried all kinds of drugs, they tried electroshock, truth serum, sodium pentathol.
None of it worked.
What worked was very simple behavioral findings, outsourced to our leading universities — Harvard, Princeton, Yale and McGill — and the first breakthrough came at McGill.
It's in the book.   [Showing a page of book to Amy Goodman]   And here, you can see the — this is the — if you want show it, you can.   That graphic really shows — that's the seminal C.I.A. experiment done in Canada and McGill University —
AMY GOODMAN:    Describe it.
ALFRED McCOY:    Dr. Donald O. Hebb of McGill University, a brilliant psychologist, had a contract from the Canadian Defense Research Board, which was a partner with the C.I.A. in this research.
He found that he could induce a state of psychosis in an individual within 48 hours.   It didn't take electroshock, truth serum, beating or pain.   All he did was had student volunteers sit in a cubicle with goggles, gloves and headphones, earmuffs, so that they were cut off from their senses.
Within 48 hours, denied sensory stimulation, they would suffer, first hallucinations, then ultimately breakdown.
If you look at many of those photographs, what do they show?   They show people with bags over their head.
If you look at the photographs of the Guantanamo detainees even today, they look exactly like those student volunteers in Dr. Hebb’s original cubicle.
The second major breakthrough that the C.I.A. had came here in New York City at Cornell University Medical Center.
Two eminent neurologists under contract from the C.I.A. studied Soviet K.G.B. torture techniques.
They found that the most effective K.G.B. technique was self-inflicted pain.
You simply make somebody stand for a day or two.   And as they stand — okay, you're not beating them, they have no resentment — you tell them, “You're doing this to yourself.   Cooperate with us, and you can sit down.”
And so, as they stand, what happens is the fluids flow down to the legs, the legs swell, lesions form, they erupt, they suppurate, hallucinations start, the kidneys shut down.
Now, if you look at the other aspect of those photos, you’ll see that they're short-shackled — okay! — that they're long-shackled, that they're made — several of those photos you just showed, one of them with a man with a bag on his arm, his arms are straight in front of him, people are standing with their arms extended, that's self-inflicted pain.
The combination of those two techniques — sensory disorientation and self-inflicted pain — is the basis of the C.I.A.'s technique.
AMY GOODMAN:    Who has pioneered this at the C.I.A.?
ALFRED McCOY:    This was done by Technical Services Division.
Most of the in-house research involved drugs and all of the LSD experiments that we heard about for years.
But ultimately they were a negative result.
When you have any large massive research project, you get — you hit dead ends, you hit brick walls, you get negative results.
All the drugs didn’t work.   What did work was this.
AMY GOODMAN:    But when you talk about the ‘everyone knows the LSD experiments,’ I don't think everyone knows.
In fact, I would conjecture that more than 90% of Americans don't know that the C.I.A. was involved with LSD experiments on unwitting Americans.
Can you explain what they did?
ALFRED McCOY:    As a part of this comprehensive survey of human consciousness, the C.I.A. tried every possible techniques.
One of the things that they — at the time that this research started in the 1940s, a Swiss pharmaceutical company developed LSD.
Dr. Hoffman there was the man who developed it.
The C.I.A. bought substantial doses, and they conducted experiments.
One of the most notorious experiments was that Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, inside the agency, spiked the drinks of his co-workers, and one of those co-workers suffered a breakdown, Dr. Frank Olson, and he either was — I don't know whether he was pushed or jumped from a hotel here in New York City —
AMY GOODMAN:    His son has never stopped pursuing this case?
ALFRED McCOY:    Right, his son Eric Olson insists that his father was murdered by the C.I.A.
Eric Olson believes that his father did a tour of Europe, and he visited the ultimate Anglo-American test site, black site near Frankfurt, where they were doing lethal experiments, fatal experiments, on double agents and suspected double agents.
And that his father returned enormously upset by the discovery that this research was actually killing people.
Eric Olson argues his father was killed by the C.I.A., that he was pushed.
AMY GOODMAN:    And didn't they do experiments in brothels in the San Francisco area?
ALFRED McCOY:    They had two kind of party houses.   They had one in the San Francisco Bay Area, another in New York City.
What they did in San Francisco was they had prostitutes who go out to the streets, get individuals, bring them back, give them a drink, and there would be a two-way mirror, and the C.I.A. would photograph these people.
AMY GOODMAN:    So, the C.I.A. were running the brothel.
ALFRED McCOY:    They were running the brothel.   They were running all of these experiments, okay?
They did that on Army soldiers through the Army Chemical Warfare Division.
AMY GOODMAN:    What did they do there?
ALFRED McCOY:    Again, they gave them LSD and other drugs to see what effect they would have.
AMY GOODMAN:    And what did the soldiers think they were getting?
ALFRED McCOY:    They were just told they were participating in an experiment for national defense.
AMY GOODMAN:    Prisoners?
ALFRED McCOY:    No, these were —
AMY GOODMAN:    Right, but also on prisoners, were there experiments?
ALFRED McCOY:    There were some in prisons in the United States and also the Drug Treatment Center in Lexington, Kentucky.
The Federal Drug Treatment Center in Lexington, Kentucky, had this.
All of this research, all this very elaborate research —
AMY GOODMAN:    On unwitting Americans?
ALFRED McCOY:    Unwitting Americans, produced nothing, okay?
What they found time and time again is that electroshock didn't work, and sodium pentathol didn't work, LSD certainly didn't work.   You scramble the brain.   You got unreliable information.
But what did work was the combination of these two rather boring, rather mundane behavioral techniques: sensory disorientation and self-inflicted pain.
In 1963, the C.I.A. codified these results in the so-called KUBARK Counterintelligence Manual.
If you just type the word “KUBARK” into Google, you will get the manual, an actual copy of it, on your computer screen, and you can read the techniques.
— Read the report.   But if you do, read the footnotes, because that's where the behavioral research is.—
Now, this produced a distinctively American form of torture, the first real revolution in the cruel science of pain in centuries, psychological torture.
It's the one that's with us today, and it's proved to be a very resilient, quite adaptable, and an enormously destructive paradigm.
Let’s make one thing clear.   Americans refer to this often times in common parlance as “torture light.”
Psychological to torture, people who are involved in treatment tell us it’s far more destructive, does far more lasting damage to the human psyche than does physical torture.
As Senator McCain said, himself, last year when he was debating his torture prohibition, faced with a choice between being beaten and psychologically tortured, I'd rather be beaten.
Okay!   It does far more lasting damage.
It is far crueler than physical torture.
This is something that we don't realize in this country.
Now, another thing we see is those photographs is the psychological techniques, but the initial research basically developed techniques for attacking universal human sensory receptors: sight, sound, heat, cold, sense of time.
That's why all of the detainees describe being put in dark rooms, being subjected to strobe lights, loud music.
That’s sensory deprivation or sensory assault.
That was sort of the phase one of the C.I.A. research.   But the paradigm has proved to be quite adaptable.
One of the things that Donald Rumsfeld did, right at the start of the war of terror, in late 2002, he appointed General Geoffrey Miller to be chief at Guantanamo.
Because the previous commanders at Guantanamo were too soft on the detainees, and General Miller turned Guantanamo into a de facto behavioral research laboratory, a kind of torture research laboratory.
Under General Miller at Guantanamo, they perfected the C.I.A. torture paradigm.
They added two key techniques.
They went beyond the universal sensory receptors of the original research.
They added to it an attack on cultural sensitivity, particularly Arab male sensitivity to issues of gender and sexual identity.
Then they went further still.
Under General Miller, they created these things called “Biscuit” teams, behavioral science consultation teams, and they actually had qualified military psychologists participating in the ongoing interrogation.
These psychologists would identify individual phobias, like fear of dark or attachment to mother, and by the time we're done, by 2003, under General Miller, Guantanamo had perfected the C.I.A. paradigm.
It had a three-fold total assault on the human psyche: sensory receptors, self-inflicted pain, cultural sensitivity, and individual fears and phobia.
AMY GOODMAN:    And then they sent General Miller to, quote, "Gitmo-ize" Abu Ghraib.
Professor McCoy, we’re going to break for a minute, and then we'll come back.   Professor Alfred McCoy, professor of history at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.   His latest book is called A Question of Torture: C.I.A. Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror.
[break]
Continue with what you were saying, talking about the Biscuit teams, the use of psychologists in Guantanamo, and then Geoffrey Miller, going from Guantanamo to, quote, “Gitmo-ize” Abu Ghraib.
ALFRED McCOY:    In mid-2003, when the Iraqi resistance erupted, the United States found it had no intelligence assets; it had no way to contain the insurgency.
They — the U.S. military was in a state of panic.   At that moment, they began sweeping across Iraq, rounding up thousands of Iraqi suspects, putting many of them in Abu Ghraib prison.
At that point, in late August 2003, General Miller was sent from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib, and he brought his techniques with him.
He brought a CD, and he brought a manual of his techniques.
He gave them to the M.P. officers, the Military Intelligence officers and to General Ricardo Sanchez, the U.S. Commander in Iraq.
In September of 2003, General Sanchez issued orders, detailed orders, for expanded interrogation techniques beyond those allowed in the U.S. Army Field Manual 3452.
If you look at those techniques, what he's ordering, in essence, is a combination of self-inflicted pain, stress positions and sensory disorientation.
If you look at the 1963 C.I.A. KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Manual, you look at the 1983 C.I.A. Interrogation Training Manual that they used in Honduras for training Honduran officers in torture and interrogation.
Then twenty years later, you look at General Sanchez's 2003 orders.
There's a striking continuity across this forty-year span, in both the general principles, this total assault on the existential platforms of human identity and existence.
The specific techniques, the way of achieving that, through the attack on these sensory receptors.
Friday, February 17th, 2006
Professor McCoy Exposes the History of CIA Interrogation, From the Cold War to the War on Terror
A startling expose of the CIA development of psychological torture from the Cold War to Abu Ghraib.
CIA mercenaries attempted to assassinate McCoy more than 30 years ago.
— Click Here
AMY GOODMAN:    Rumsfeld's comment, when asked if it was torture, when people were forced to stand hours on end, that he stands at his desk?
ALFRED McCOY:    Right, he wrote that in one of his memos.
When he was asked to review the Guantanamo techniques in late 2003 or early 2004, he scribbled that marginal note and said:
“I stand at my desk eight hours a day.”
He has a designer standing desk.
“How come we're limiting these techniques of the stress position to just four hours?”
So, in other words, that was a clear signal from the Defense Secretary.
Now, one of the problems beyond the details of these orders is torture is an extraordinarily dangerous thing.
There's an absolute ban on torture for a very good reason.
Torture taps into the deepest recesses, unexplored recesses of human consciousness, where creation and destruction coexist, where the infinite human capacity for kindness and infinite human capacity for cruelty coexist.
It has a powerful perverse appeal.
Once it starts, both the perpetrators and the powerful who order them, let it spread, and it spreads out of control.
So, I think when the Bush administration gave those orders for, basically, techniques tantamount to torture at the start of the war on terror, I think it was probably their intention that these be limited to top al-Qaeda suspects.
But within months, we were torturing hundreds of Afghanis at Bagram near Kabul, and a few months later in 2003, through these techniques, we were torturing literally thousands of Iraqis.
You can see in those photos, beyond the details of the techniques that we've described, you can see how that once it starts, it becomes this Dantesque hell, this kind of play palace of the darkest recesses of human consciousness.
That’s why it’s necessary to maintain an absolute prohibition on torture.
There is no such thing as a little bit of torture.
The whole myth of scientific surgical torture, that torture advocates, academic advocates in this country came up with, that's impossible.
That cannot operate.
It will inevitably spread.
AMY GOODMAN:    And then they sent General Miller to, quote, "Gitmo-ize" Abu Ghraib.
Professor McCoy, we’re going to break for a minute, and then we'll come back.   Professor Alfred McCoy, professor of history at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.   His latest book is called A Question of Torture: C.I.A. Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror.
[break]
Continue with what you were saying, talking about the Biscuit teams, the use of psychologists in Guantanamo, and then Geoffrey Miller, going from Guantanamo to, quote, “Gitmo-ize” Abu Ghraib.
AMY GOODMAN:    So when, Professor McCoy, you started seeing these images, the first photos that came out at Abu Ghraib, the pictures we showed of the, you know, hooded man, electrodes coming out of his fingers, standing on the box, your response?
ALFRED McCOY:    Oh, I mean, the reason I wrote this book is when that photo came out in April 2004 on CBS news, at the Times.
William Safire, for example, writing in the New York Times said this was the work of creeps.
Later on, Defense Secretary Schlesinger said that this was just abuse by a few people on the night shift.
There was another phrase: “Recycled hillbillies from Cumberland, Maryland.”
In other words, this was the bad apple thesis.   We could blame these bad apples.
I looked at those photos, I didn't see individual abuse.   What I saw was two textbook trademark C.I.A. psychological interrogation techniques: self-inflicted pain and sensory disorientation.
AMY GOODMAN:    We read our first headline today.   It was about Maher Arar and the case — the judge has thrown out against him, the Canadian-Syrian man who was sent back to Syria — the U.S. government calls it “extraordinary rendition.”
He was kept in an underground “grave-like” cell, he described, very small.
He was held for almost a year.
As you showed, and I looked at the book, the pictures of the places where prisoners are kept, and in speaking to Maher, he’s described this level of sensory deprivation.
What about the shape and the size and the coffin-like nature of these rooms?
ALFRED McCOY:    The details are often left to the individual interrogators, but the manuals basically describe how you control the process, you control the environment right from the start when you pick somebody up.
So, for example, often times we see in Iraq of people when they're arrested, their arms are behind their back.
They're made to kneel in very uncomfortable positions, and they're hooded right away.
That's one of the things they always specify is the time and conditions of arrest.
You begin to break them down.
You create this artificial environment of control, and then the techniques always vary.
It can be extreme darkness or it can be extreme light; it can be absence of sound or a bombardment of sound.
AMY GOODMAN:    And that bombardment of sound is often joked about.
‘Oh, we played Britney Spears really loud,’ or whatever it is.
I don't know if it was her.   But that's become a joke when soldiers play loud music.
ALFRED McCOY:    That's one of the problems of talking about this topic in the United States.
We regard all of this panoply of psychological techniques as “torture light,” as somehow not really torture.
We're the only country in the world that does that.
The U.N. convention bars — defines torture as the infliction of severe psychological or physical pain.
The U.N. convention which bans torture in 1984 gives equal weight to psychological and physical techniques.
We alone as a society somehow exempt all of these psychological techniques.
That dates back, of course, to the way we ratified the convention in the first place.
Back in the early 1990s, when the United States was emerging from the Cold War, and we began this process of, if you will, disarming ourselves and getting beyond all of these techniques, trying to sort of bring ourselves in line with rest of the international community, when we sent that — when President Clinton sent the U.N. Anti-Torture Convention to the U.S. Congress for ratification in 1994, he included four detailed paragraphs of reservation that had, in fact, been drafted by the Reagan administration.
He adopted them without so much as changing a semicolon.
When you read those detailed paragraphs of reservation, what you realize is that the United States Congress ratified the treaty, but basically we outlawed only physical torture.
Those photographs of reservation are carefully written to avoid one word in the 26 printed pages of the U.N. convention.
That word is "mental."
Basically, we exempted psychological torture.
Now, another problem for the United States, as well, was when the U.S. Army re-wrote the Army Field Manual in 1992.
The same period, while, although let’s say the civil authorities were sort of skirting the law by exempting psychological techniques, the U.S. Army re-wrote their field manual with the intention of strictly observing the letter and the spirit of the U.N. Anti-Torture Convention and other similar treaties.
So what happened is that when the Defense Department gave orders for extreme techniques, when General Sanchez gave orders for his techniques beyond the Army Field Manual, what that meant is when the soldiers were actually investigated, they had committed crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
They would be prosecuted, and they’re all being sent to jail.
AMY GOODMAN:    Professor McCoy, you wrote a piece, “Why the McCain Torture Ban Won't Work: The Bush Legacy of Legalized Torture.”
ALFRED McCOY:    Right.   Most Americans think that it's over, that in last year, December 2005, the U.S. Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act 2005, which in the language of Senator McCain, who was the original author of that amendment to the defense appropriation, the author of that act, it bars all inhumane or cruel treatment, and most people think that’s it, that it’s over.
Actually, what has happened is the Bush administration fought that amendment tooth and nail; they fought it with loopholes.   Vice President Cheney went to Senator McCain and asked for a specific exemption for the C.I.A. McCain refused.   The National Security Advisor went to McCain and asked for certain kinds of exemptions for the C.I.A.   He refused.
So then they started amending it.   Basically what happened is, through the process, they introduced loopholes.
Look, at the start of the war on terror, the Bush administration ordered torture.
President Bush said right on September 11, 2001, when he addressed the nation, “I don't care what the international lawyers say.   We’re going to kick some ass.”
Those were his words, and then it was up to his legal advisors in the White House and the Justice Department to translate his otherwise unlawful orders into legal directives.
They did it by crafting three very controversial legal principles:
One, that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, could override laws and treaties.
Two, that there was a possible defense for C.I.A. interrogators who engage in torture, and the defenses were of two kinds.
First of all, they played around with the word "severe," that torture is the infliction of severe pain.
That's when Jay Bybee, who was Assistant Attorney General, wrote that memo in which he said, “’severe’ means equivalent to organ failure,” in other words, right up to the point of death.
The other thing was that they came up with the idea of intentionality.
If a C.I.A. interrogator tortured, but the aim was information, not pain, then he could say that he was not guilty.
The third principle, which was crafted by John Yoo, was Guantanamo is not part of the United States; it is exempt from the writ of U.S. courts.
Now, in the process of ratifying — sorry, passing the McCain torture — the torture prohibition, McCain’s ban on inhumane treatment, the White House has cleverly twisted the legislation to re-establish these three key principles.
In his signing statement on December 30, President Bush said —
AMY GOODMAN:    This was the statement that he signed as he signed the McCain so-called ban on torture?
ALFRED McCOY:    Right, he emailed it at 8:00 at night from his ranch in Crawford on December 30th, that he was signing this legislation into law.
He said, “I reserve the right, as Commander-in-Chief and as head of the unitary executive, to do what I need to do to defend America.”
Okay, that was the first thing.
The next thing that happened is that McCain, as a compromise, inserted into the legislation a provision that if a C.I.A. operative engages in inhumane treatment or torture but believes that he or she was following a lawful order, then that's a defense.
So they got the second principle, defense for C.I.A. torturers.
The third principle was — is that the White House had Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina amend McCain’s amendment by inserting language into it, saying that for the purposes of this act, the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay is not on U.S. territory, and last month —
AMY GOODMAN:    Ten seconds.
ALFRED McCOY:   
So, and then in the last month, the Bush administration has gone to federal courts and said, “Drop all of your habeas corpus suits from Guantanamo.”
There are 160 of them.
They've gone to the Supreme Court and said, “Drop your Guantanamo case.”
They have, in fact, used that law to quash legal oversight of their actions.
AMY GOODMAN:    We have to leave it there.   I want to thank you very much, Professor Al McCoy, for speaking with us, professor of history at University of Wisconsin, Madison, his book A Question of Torture: C.I.A. Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War On Terror.
There's every possibility of the newly liberated and democratic Iraq to slide info a Civil War!

Photo: www.aljazeerah.info/Amjad Rasmi, Arab News, 8/6/06
VIDEO
Sgt. Ricky Clousing | Army interrogator
He became a war resister after witnessing how the war was being fought.
Within months after returning home, he went AWOL and remained in hiding for a year.
We speak with Sgt. Clousing just hours before he plans to go to Fort Lewis to turn himself in to military officials.
June 5, 1967: Israel war paid for by US money using US weapons.
Resulting in the continuing enslavement of the Palestinian people.
Continuing occupation of Arab Lands, and the continuation of the policy to subjugate muslims
Rice's illusions about her NEW Middle East:

(in which Lebanon becomes a US Israel colony)

Photo: www.aljazeerah.info/Hamed Atta, Al-Khaleej, 8/6/06
Rice's illusions about her NEW Middle East:
(in which Lebanon becomes a US Israel colony)
VIDEO

Aidan Delgado | What I Saw in Iraq — 06.03.05

Part 1
QuickTime
DSL | 56K
Windows Media
DSL | 56K
Part 2
QuickTime
DSL | 56K
Windows Media
DSL | 56K
Threatened with death threats if they proceed, Luke Radowski and fellow 9/11 truth activists demand answers on collapse of towers
Giuliani, how do you sleep at night?
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
An intrepid group of Infowars reporters confronted Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani at a fundraiser he was attending in New York today to demand answers to unanswered questions surrounding the collapse of the three World Trade Center buildings on 9/11.
One activist, the relative of a firefighter killed in the collapses, asked the former NYC mayor, for an explanation as why no steel framed building in history has ever collapsed from fire damage except for on 9/11 and why people in the buildings including rescuers were not given warnings they were going to collapse when he was.
She then asked Giuliani "How do you sleep at night?"
Watch the video here
Previously Giuliani has previously admitted in interviews that he was given prior warning that the twin towers were going to collapse, something no one could possibly have known was going to happen. Yet firefighters and police were not given the same warnings.
INFOWARS.net         Copyright © 2002-2007 Alex Jones         All rights reserved.
 US militarism
US Terror State, Baghdad
Unknown if US taxpayer paid black budget special operations money is involved
Sometimes it takes years for betrayal to submerge, and start attacking the belief system
AmBush
 
Sometimes it takes years for betrayal to submerge, and start attacking the belief system.

We fight it off with denial and anger that is usually directed at others.

The anger builds and builds, until one day something hits a vulnerable pocket of pain.

Suddenly, a door opens, and all of that suppressed grief comes pouring out.

Like a huge red flash, 'Looking For A Few Good Men,' goes down the drain.

You can't stop crying.

You can't stop shaking.

In all of that frightening bereavement, the Truth is born.

You suddenly realize you were brutally betrayed by your government, and abandoned to die.

I felt like I walked into an ambush.

It was like having a lifelong mentor turn on me, and become my worst enemy.

All I wanted to do was run.

The only thing that stopped me, was I couldn't see from all of the crying.

The only glory in war is in the imagination of those who were never there.

These lies have been passed down from generation to generation.

My grief quickly turned into rage, as I saw how War Profiteering was behind all of that betrayal.

Door after door kept opening.

The War was staged from the very beginning.

Being USED for consumption, was the ultimate wound.

I was duped.

And, The War destroyed the lives of millions of people.

Empire is so clever.

I never knew what hit me.

Photograph:
 
This is a picture of a very close Vietnam veteran friend, who is on a brick walkway that is part of the 11 acres of the Oregon Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Portland.

He was severely wounded in Vietnam, when he found out that the radio transmits he was giving B-52 bomber pilots, were flight directions over civilian targets.

On the day that he finally saw the truth, he walked into his unit orderly room, and told his commanding officer that his tour in Vietnam was over.

He was sent back to the United States, where he received a psychiatric discharge.

He spent the next twenty years recovering from his guilt and betrayal.

He is now a very active member in the anti-war movement.

When it comes to the lies about the Vietnam War, he is relentless.

Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
March 9, 2007     

AmBush
Sometimes it takes years for betrayal to submerge, and start attacking the belief system.
We fight it off with denial and anger that is usually directed at others.
The anger builds and builds, until one day something hits a vulnerable pocket of pain.
Suddenly, a door opens, and all of that suppressed grief comes pouring out.
Like a huge red flash, 'Looking For A Few Good Men,' goes down the drain.
You can't stop crying.
You can't stop shaking.
In all of that frightening bereavement, the Truth is born.
You suddenly realize you were brutally betrayed by your government, and abandoned to die.
I felt like I walked into an ambush.
It was like having a lifelong mentor turn on me, and become my worst enemy.
All I wanted to do was run.
The only thing that stopped me, was I couldn't see from all of the crying.
The only glory in war is in the imagination of those who were never there.
These lies have been passed down from generation to generation.
My grief quickly turned into rage, as I saw how War Profiteering was behind all of that betrayal.
Door after door kept opening.
The War was staged from the very beginning.
Being USED for consumption, was the ultimate wound.
I was duped.
And, The War destroyed the lives of millions of people.
Empire is so clever.
I never knew what hit me.
Photograph:
This is a picture of a very close Vietnam veteran friend, who is on a brick walkway that is part of the 11 acres of the Oregon Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Portland.
He was severely wounded in Vietnam, when he found out that the radio transmits he was giving B-52 bomber pilots, were flight directions over civilian targets.
On the day that he finally saw the truth, he walked into his unit orderly room, and told his commanding officer that his tour in Vietnam was over.
He was sent back to the United States, where he received a psychiatric discharge.
He spent the next twenty years recovering from his guilt and betrayal.
He is now a very active member in the anti-war movement.
When it comes to the lies about the Vietnam War, he is relentless.
Photo: Photo and words: Mike Hastie
U.S. Army Medic
Vietnam 1970-71
March 9, 2007
An Arab Woman Blues — Reflections in a sealed bottle...
Monday, May 14, 2007
The Sound of Silence
Painting: Iraqi female artist, Betool Fekaiki.
...Oh wait...I can't believe my ears...I hear my own voice now on this tape.
I have recorded over "my little town" this poem which I wrote over 20 years ago.
It is not such a great poem but do you want to hear it?   I will share it with you if you wish.   My poem from my old dusty box.
It is called "Poem about America"
The people of Hiroshima
are still crying
blind eyes, tears of blood.
The people of Chile
are still bruised,
mutilated bodies.
The children of Vietnam
are still burnt
skins falling
incinerated bones.
The people of Palestine
are still castrated,
infertile.
In Lebanon,
the odor of the dead
saturates the streets.
In Guatemala,
the land is raped,
the stomachs empty.
In the Sahel,
the bodies are dry,
the eyes hollow.
In India,
the dustbins overflow
with corpses
and human decay.
Where to now my enemy?
Where to now my oppressor?
Your ghettoes are filled
with misery and suffering
Your prisons are filled
with hungry thieves
Your streets are filled
with headless bodies
Your brothels are filled
with torn women
Where to now?
Where to now?
Painting © Iraqi female artist, Betool Fekaiki.
A story of Vote Fraud:
2000
2004
2006
2008
A story to really turn your head
See how Karl Rove...
Monday, May 14, 2007
On a single day, December 7, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales demanded the resignations of 8 United States Attorneys — Click Here
GREG PALAST:  Well, even worse, what’s not covered there is that they covered up the active attack on legal voters.
I mean, you’re talking — the caging lists that we have, in the 500 sheets, the 500 emails, we have 70,000 names.
That’s one state.
This was a multimillion-dollar, gold-plated attack operation on the right of minority voters to vote.
And, obviously, Griffin knew it, because he was in charge of it.
So you actually have the guys who are supposed to be protecting voters are either actively covering up or even actively participating in knocking out legal voters.
I mean, it’s like the mob has grabbed the police department.
That’s the problem, by the way, with voter fraud — with real voter fraud, not the phony stuff of grabbing the [supposed voting of unregistered's] of New Mexico — if you win, you’ve now grabbed the apparatus of protection and enforcement.
It’s the perfect crime.
There are 120 million people that voted, and I can't find an actual case out of 120 of a prosecution that — a real prosecution of any single voter for voter identity theft.
There is like five cases in the country involving some minor offices.
That’s it.
So it’s a complete false prosecution set-up, kind of like the Soviet Union: just grab people, put them on show trials, maybe let them go later, maybe they languish in jail.
Three million people were challenged.
By the way, this isn't, you know, from the Democracy Now! black helicopter.
This is from the raw data of the United States Election Assistance Commission:
three million challenges.
These votes were basically lost.
What Jihadi groups do you see the US shoring up?
And what pro-democracy groups do you think should be shored up that are being sidelined? — Click Here
YANAR MOHAMMED
But we really need to push on the issue of the US troops leaving right away.
There will be some chaos for some time, but because the extremists do not have the strong support from the people that they should have -- most of the support came from either surrounding countries or the big powers in the world.
The US administration prefers to see moderate, so-called moderate, Islamists in power, and what’s moderate about somebody who looks at women as less than men, about somebody who thinks that people belonging to other sects of Islam are less of human beings, and about somebody who has no accountability?
I think it’s not news today when we speak that all the kidnappings in Iraq, most of them at least, are happening by police cars.
Many of the public executions against women are happening by -- are being administered by the militias who are affiliates of power.
So there is no accountability.
There is no respect for human rights.
And yet, they are governing us.
The US troops should leave, and they should not impose any political agenda on Iraq, and the support should not be given to the extremists.
The people of Iraq are still an integrated society.
The youth do not want to see the extremists in power.
We will have the dynamics that will make it work, be it by election, be it by the grassroots, who will be bring about the democratic sense into the country.
It should work, but all the solutions that are being brought by the US administration, be it a security plan, it didn't work.
It’s a total failure.
Read below and think about your government.
Remember, if you are a U.S. taxpayer you have been paying the people who bombed the USS Liberty
Paying to the tune of 15 million dollars a day.
Think — if the government could cover up the attack on the USS Liberty, what else WILL it do.
9/11?
A nuclear attack wiping out some city?
Martial Law — complete absorption of control by the elite through the tool of police, state and local, military, multiple government security agencies too numerous to place here.
Complete absorption of control!
We are there now!
When the shit hits the fan, those on the right who have guns will resist.
Those of the right who truly believe in freedom — many of them — will resist.
Will the left do what it usually does.
Stand unarmed, helpless, and watch!
June 8, 2007
Rockets, Napalm, Torpedoes & Lie
Israel's Attack on the USS Liberty, Revisited
By JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
I n early June of 1967, at the onset of the Six Day War, the Pentagon sent the USS Liberty from Spain into international waters off the coast of Gaza to monitor the progress of Israel's attack on the Arab states.
The Liberty was a lightly armed surveillance ship.
Only hours after the Liberty arrived it was spotted by the Israeli military.
The IDF sent out reconnaissance planes to identify the ship.
They made eight trips over a period of three hours.
The Liberty was flying a large US flag and was easily recognizable as an American vessel.
A few hours later more planes came. These were Israeli Mirage III fighters, armed with rockets and machine guns.
As off-duty officers sunbathed on the deck, the fighters opened fire on the defenseless ship with rockets and machine guns.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Napalm bomblets coating the deck with flaming jelly
A few minutes later a second wave of planes streaked overhead, French-built Mystere jets, which not only pelted the ship with gunfire but also with napalm bomblets, coating the deck with the flaming jelly.
By now, the Liberty was on fire and dozens were wounded and killed, excluding several of the ship's top officers.
The Liberty's radio team tried to issue a distress call, but discovered the frequencies had been jammed by the Israeli planes with what one communications specialist called "a buzzsaw sound".
Finally, an open channel was found and the Liberty got out a message to the USS America, the Sixth Fleet's large aircraft carrier, that it was under attack
Two F-4s left the carrier to come to the Liberty's aid. Apparently, the jets were armed only with nuclear weapons.
Get those aircraft back immediately
When word reached the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara became irate and ordered the jets to return.
"Tell the Sixth Fleet to get those aircraft back immediately," he barked.
McNamara's injunction was reiterated in saltier terms by Admiral David L. McDonald, the chief of Naval Operations: "You get those fucking airplanes back on deck, and you get them back down."
The planes turned around.
And the attack on the Liberty continued.
What
the
elite
has
done
to
one
country...
...it can
do to
yours
"Fuck you!"
After the Israeli fighter jets had emptied their arsenal of rockets, three Israeli attack boats approached the Liberty.
Two torpedoes were launched at the crippled ship, one tore a 40-foot wide hole in the hull, flooding the lower compartments, and killing more than a dozen American sailors.
As the Liberty listed in the choppy seas, its deck aflame, crew members dropped life rafts into the water and prepared to scuttle the ship.
Given the number of wounded, this was going to be a dangerous operation.
But it soon proved impossible, as the Israeli attack boats strafed the rafts with machine gun fire.
No body was going to get out alive that way.
After more than two hours of unremitting assault, the Israelis finally halted their attack.
One of the torpedo boats approached the Liberty.
An officer asked in English over a bullhorn: "Do you need any help?"
The wounded commander of the Liberty, Lt. William McGonagle, instructed the quartermaster to respond emphatically: "Fuck you."
The Israeli boat turned and left.
A Soviet destroyer responded before the US Navy, even though a US submarine, on a covert mission, was apparently in the area and had monitored the attack.
The Soviet ship reached the Liberty six hours before the USS Davis.
The captain of the Soviet ship offered his aid, but the Liberty's commanding officer refused.
Finally, 16 hours after the attack two US destroyers reached the Liberty.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
34 US sailors were dead and 174 injured
By that time, 34 US sailors were dead and 174 injured, many seriously.
As the wounded were being evacuated, an officer with the Office of Naval Intelligence instructed the men not to talk to the press about their ordeal.
The following morning Israel launched a surprise invasion of Syria, breaching the new cease-fire agreement and seizing control of the Golan Heights.
Within three weeks, the Navy put out a 700-page report, exonerating the Israelis, claiming the attack had been accidental and that the Israelis had pulled back as soon as they realized their mistake.
Defense Secretary Robert McNamara suggested the whole affair should be forgotten.
"These errors do occur," McNamara concluded.
 What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Bloodbath on board the Liberty tragic 'cautionary tale'
In Assault on the Liberty, a first-hand account by James Ennes Jr., McNamara's version of events is proven to be as big a sham as his concurrent lies about Vietnam.
Ennes's book created a media storm when it was first published by Random House in 1980, including (predictably) charges that Ennes was a liar and an anti-Semite.
Still, the book sold more than 40,000 copies, but was eventually allowed to go out of print.
Now Ennes has published an updated version, which incorporates much new evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate and that the US government went to extraordinary lengths to disguise the truth.
It's a story of Israel aggression, Pentagon incompetence, official lies, and a cover-up that persists to this day.
The book gains much of its power from the immediacy of Ennes's first-hand account of the attack and the lies that followed.
More than a little 'cautionary' for me — Kewe: TheWE.biz
Now, 35 years later, Ennes warns that the bloodbath on board the Liberty and its aftermath should serve as a tragic cautionary tale about the continuing ties between the US government and the government of Israel.
The Attack on the Liberty is the kind of book that makes your blood seethe.
Ennes skillfully documents the life of the average sailor on one of the more peculiar vessels in the US Navy, with an attention for detail that reminds one of Dana or O'Brien.
After all, the year was 1967 and most of the men on the Liberty were certainly glad to be on a non-combat ship in the middle of the Mediterranean, rather than in the Gulf of Tonkin or Mekong Delta.
But this isn't Two Years Before the Mast.
In fact, Ennes's tour on the Liberty last only a few short weeks.
He had scarcely settled into a routine before his new ship was shattered before his eyes.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Admiral McCain, father of the senator from Arizona, never forwarded the message to the ship
Ennes joined the Liberty in May of 1967, as an Electronics Material Officer.
Serving on a "spook ship", as the Liberty was known to Navy wives, was supposed to be a sure path to career enhancement.
The Liberty's normal routine was to ply the African coast, tuning in its eavesdropping equipment on the electronic traffic in the region.
The Liberty had barely reached Africa when it received a flash message from the Joint Chiefs of Staff to sail from the Ivory Coast to the Mediterranean, where it was to re-deploy off the coast of the Sinai to monitor the Israeli attack on Egypt and the allied Arab nations.
As the war intensified, the Liberty sent a request to the fleet headquarters requesting an escort.
Request denied, by Admiral William Martin.
The Liberty moved alone to a position in international waters about 13 miles from the shore at El Arish, then under furious siege by the IDF.
On June 6, the Joint Chiefs sent Admiral McCain, father of the senator from Arizona, an urgent message instructing him to move the Liberty out of the war zone to a position at least 100 miles off the Gaza Coast.
McCain never forwarded the message to the ship.
A little after seven in the morning on June 8, Ennes entered the bridge of the Liberty to take the morning watch.
Ennes was told that an hour earlier a "flying boxcar" (later identified as a twin-engine Nord 2501 Noratlas) had flown over the ship at a low level.
Ennes says he noticed that the ship's American flag had become stained with soot and ordered a new flag run up the mast.
The morning was clear and calm, with a light breeze.
At 9 am, Ennes spotted another reconnaissance plane, which circled the Liberty.
An hour later two Israeli fighter jets buzzed the ship.
Over the next four hours, Israeli planes flew over the Liberty five more times.
 What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
 
When the first fighter jet struck, a little before two in the afternoon, Ennes was scanning the skies from the starboard side of the bridge, binoculars in his hands.
A rocket hit the ship just below where Ennes was standing, the fragments shredded the men closest to him.
After the explosion, Ennes noticed that he was the only man left standing.
But he also had been hit by more than 20 shards of shrapnel and the force of the blast had shattered his left leg.
As he crawled into the pilothouse, a second fighter jet streaked above them and unleashed its payload on the hobbled Liberty.
At that point, Ennes says the crew of the Liberty had no idea who was attacking them or why.
For a few moments, they suspected it might be the Soviets, after an officer mistakenly identified the fighters as MIG-15s.
They knew that the Egyptian air force already had been decimated by the Israelis.
The idea that the Israelis might be attacking them didn't occur to them until one of the crew spotted a Star of David on the wing of one of the French-built Mystere jets.
Ennes was finally taken below deck to a makeshift dressing station, with other wounded men.
It was hardly a safe harbor.
As Ennes worried that his fractured leg might slice through his femoral artery leaving him to bleed to death, the Liberty was pummeled by rockets, machine-gun fire and an Italian-made torpedo packed with 1,000-pounds of explosive.
      JEFFREY ST. CLAIR      www.counterpunch.org      June 8, 2007
 
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
The cover-up had begun
By JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
A fter the attack ended, Ennes was approached by his friend Pat O'Malley, a junior officer, who had just sent a list of killed and wounded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel.
He got an immediate message back.
"They said, 'Wounded in what action?
'Killed in what action?'," O'Malley told Ennes.
"They said it wasn't an 'action,' it was an accident.
I'd like for them to come out here and see the difference between an action and an accident.
Stupid bastards."
The cover-up had begun.
Pentagon lied to the public from the very beginning
The Pentagon lied to the public about the attack on the Liberty from the very beginning.
In a decision personally approved by the loathsome McNamara, the Pentagon denied to the press that the Liberty was an intelligence ship, referring to it instead as a Technical Research ship, as if it were little more than a military version of Jacques Cousteau's Calypso.
The military press corps on the USS America, where most of the wounded sailors had been taken, were placed under extreme restrictions.
All of the stories filed from the carrier were first routed through the Pentagon for security clearance, objectionable material was removed with barely a bleat of protest from the reporters or their publications.
Predictably, Israel's first response was to blame the victim, a tactic that has served them so well in the Palestinian situation.
First, the IDF alleged that it had asked the State Department and the Pentagon to identify any US ships in the area and was told that there were none.
Then the Israeli government charged that the Liberty failed to fly its flag and didn't respond to calls for it to identify itself.
The Israelis contended that they assumed the Liberty was an Egyptian supply ship called El Quseir which, even though it was a rusting transport ship then docked in Alexandria, the IDF claimed was suspected of shelling Israeli troops from the sea.
Under these circumstances, the Israelis said they were justified in opening fire on the Liberty.
The Israelis said that they halted the attack almost immediately, when they realized their mistake.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
"The Liberty contributed decisively toward its identification as an enemy ship," the IDF report concluded.
This was entirely false, since the Israelis had identified the Liberty at least six hours prior to the attack on the ship.
Perhaps Liberty's flag had lain limp on the flagpole
Even though the Pentagon knew better, it gave credence to the Israeli account by saying that perhaps the Liberty's flag had lain limp on the flagpole in a windless sea.
The Pentagon also suggested that the attack might have lasted less than 20 minutes.
After the initial battery of misinformation, the Pentagon imposed a news blackout on the Liberty disaster until after the completion of a Court of Inquiry investigation.
The inquiry was headed by Rear Admiral Isaac C. Kidd. Kidd didn't have a free hand.
He'd been instructed by Vice-Admiral McCain to limit the damage to the Pentagon and to protect the reputation of Israel.
Kidd interviewed the crew on June 14 and 15.
The questioning was extremely circumscribed.
According to Ennes, the investigators "asked nothing that might be embarrassing to Israel and testimony that tended to embarrass Israel was covered with a 'Top Secret' label, if it was accepted at all."
Ennes notes that even testimony by the Liberty's communications officers about the jamming of the ship's radios was classified as "Top Secret".
The reason?
It proved that Israel knew it was attacking an American ship.
"Here was strong evidence that the attack was planned in advance and that our ship's identity was known to the attackers (for it its practically impossible to jam the radio of a stranger), but this information was hushed up and no conclusions were drawn from it," Ennes writes.
What
the
elite
has
done to
one
country...
...it can
do to
yours
Similarly, the Court of Inquiry deep-sixed testimony and affidavits regarding the flag.
Ennes, remember, had ordered a crisp new one deployed early on the morning of the attack.
The investigators buried intercepts of conversations between IDF pilots identifying the ship as flying an American flag.
It also refused to accept evidence about the IDF's use of napalm during the attacks and choose not to hear testimony regarding the duration of the attacks and the fact that the US Navy failed to send planes to defend the ship.
"No one came to help us," said Dr. Richard F. Kiepfer, the Liberty's physician.
"We were promised help, but no help came.
The Russians arrived before our own ships did.
We asked for an escort before we ever came to the war zone and we were turned down."
None of this made its way into the 700-page Court of Inquiry report, which was completed within a couple of weeks and sent to Admiral McCain in London for review.
McCain approved the report over the objections of Captain Merlin Staring, the Navy legal officer assigned to the inquiry, who found the report to be flawed, incomplete and contrary to the evidence.
Staring sent a letter to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy disavowing the report.
The JAG seemed to take Staring's objections to heart.
He prepared a summary for the Chief of Naval Operations that almost completely ignored the Kidd/McCain report.
Instead, it concluded:
"...that the Liberty was easily recognizable as an American naval vessel.
That its flag was fully deployed and flying in a moderate breeze.
That Israeli planes made at least eight reconnaissance flights at close range.
The ship came under a prolonged attack from Israeli fighter jets and torpedo boats."
 
Wanted to sink it and kill as many US sailors as possible
This succinct and largely accurate report was stamped Top Secret by Navy brass and stayed locked up for many years.
But it was seen by many in the Pentagon and some in the Oval Office.
There was enough grumbling about the way the Liberty incident had been handled that LBJ summoned that old Washington fixer Clark Clifford to do damage control.
It didn't take Clifford long to come up with the official line: the Israelis simply had made a tragic mistake.
It turns out that Admiral Kidd and Captain Ward Boston, the two investigating officers who prepared the original report for Admiral McCain, both believed that the Israeli attack was intentional and sustained.
In other words, the IDF knew that they were striking an American spy ship and they wanted to sink it and kill as many sailors as possible.
Officers follow orders
Why then did the Navy investigators produce a sham report that concluded it was an accident?
Twenty-five years later we've finally found out.
In June of 2002, Captain Boston told the Navy Times: "Officers follow orders."
It gets worse.
There's plenty of evidence that US intelligence agencies learned on June 7 that Israel intended to attack the Liberty on the following day and that the strike had been personally ordered by Moshe Dayan.
As the attacks were going on, conversations between Israeli pilots were overheard by US Air Force officers in an EC121 surveillance plane overhead.
The spy plane was spotted by Israeli jets, which were given orders to shoot it down.
The American plane narrowly avoided the IDF missiles.
Initial reports on the incident prepared by the CIA, Office of Naval Intelligence and the National Security Agency all reached similar conclusions.
Until Liberty sunk and all on board killed
A particularly damning report compiled by a CIA informant suggests that Israeli Defense minister Moshe Dayan personally ordered the attack and wanted it to proceed until the Liberty was sunk and all on board killed.
A heavily redacted version of the report was released in 1977.
It reads in part:
"[The source] said that Dayan personally ordered the attack on the ship and that one of his generals adamantly opposed the action and said, 'This is pure murder.'
One of the admirals who was present also disapproved of the action, and it was he who ordered it stopped and not Dayan."
So as not to embarrass Israel
This amazing document generated little attention from the press and Dayan was never publicly questioned about his role in the attack.
The analyses by the intelligence agencies are collected in a 1967 investigation by the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations.
Two and half decades later that report remains classified.
Why?
A former committee staffer said: "So as not to embarrass Israel."
 US out of our homeland
One Israel pilot identified and refused to attack USS Liberty — on return to air base was arrested
More proof has recently come to light from the Israeli side.
A few years after Attack on the Liberty was originally published, Ennes got a call from Evan Toni, an Israeli pilot.
Toni told Ennes that he had just read his book and wanted to tell him his story.
Toni said that he was the pilot in the first Israeli Mirage fighter to reach the Liberty.
He immediately recognized the ship to be a US Navy vessel.
He radioed Israeli air command with this information and asked for instructions.
Toni said he was ordered to "attack".
He refused and flew back to the air base at Ashdod.
When he arrived he was summarily arrested for disobeying orders.
US gives Israel money to give back to them to pay for damages to ship
How tightly does the Israeli lobby control the Hill?
For the first time in history, an attack on an America ship was not subjected to a public investigation by Congress.
In 1980, Adlai Stevenson and Barry Goldwater planned to open a senate hearing into the Liberty affair.
Then Jimmy Carter intervened by brokering a deal with Menachem Begin, where Israel agreed to pony up $6 million to pay for damages to the ship.
A State Department press release announcing the payment said, "The book is now closed on the USS Liberty."
It certainly was the last chapter for Adlai Stevenson.
He ran for governor of Illinois the following year, where his less than perfect record on Israel, and his unsettling questions about the Liberty affair, became an issue in the campaign.
Big money flowed into the coffers of his Republican opponent, Big Jim Thompson, and Stevenson went down to a narrow defeat.
McCain insists on complete quiet — confines and interrogates two sailors who do speak — MK Ultra style
But the book wasn't closed for the sailors either, of course.
After a Newsweek story exposed the gist of what really happened on that day in the Mediterranean, an enraged Admiral McCain placed all the sailors under a gag order.
When one sailor told an officer that he was having problems living with the cover-up, he was told: "Forget about it, that's an order."
The Navy went to bizarre lengths to keep the crew of the Liberty from telling what they knew.
When gag orders didn't work, they threatened sanctions.
Ennes tells of the confinement and interrogation of two Liberty sailors that sounds like something straight from the CIA's MK-Ultra program.
Sailors locked in psychiatric ward
"In an incredible abuse of authority, military officers held two young Liberty sailors against their will in a locked and heavily guarded psychiatric ward of the base hospital," Ennes writes.
"For days these men were drugged and questioned about their recollections of the attack by a 'therapist' who admitted to being untrained in either psychiatry or psychology.
At one point, they avoided electroshock only by bolting from the room and demanding to see the commanding officer."
Also been painted as anti-Semites
Since coming home, the veterans who have tried to tell of their ordeal have been harassed relentlessly.
They've been branded as drunks, bigots, liars and frauds.
Often, it turns out, these slurs have been leaked by the Pentagon.
And, oh yeah, they've also been painted as anti-Semites.
In a recent column, Charley Reese describes just how mean-spirited and petty this campaign became.
"When a small town in Wisconsin decided to name its library in honor of the USS Liberty crewmen, a campaign claiming it was anti-Semitic was launched," writes Reese.
"And when the town went ahead, the U.S. government ordered no Navy personnel to attend, and sent no messages.
This little library was the first, and at the time the only, memorial to the men who died on the Liberty."
For this plan to work, Liberty had to be destroyed, its crew killed
So why then did the Israelis attack the Liberty?
A few days before the Six Days War, Israel's Foreign Minister Abba Eban visited Washington to inform LBJ about the forthcoming invasion.
Johnson cautioned Eban that the US could not support such an attack.
It's possible, then, that the IDF assumed that the Liberty was spying on the Israeli war plans.
Possible, but not likely.
Despite the official denials, as Andrew and Leslie Cockburn demonstrate in Dangerous Liaison, at the time of the Six Days War the US and Israel had developed a warm covert relationship.
So closely were the two sides working that US intelligence aid certainly helped secure Israel's swift victory.
In fact, it's possible that the Liberty had been sent to the region to spy for the IDF.
A somewhat more likely scenario holds that Moshe Dayan wanted to keep the lid on Israel's plan to breach the new cease-fire and invade into Syria to seize the Golan.
It has also been suggested that Dayan ordered the attack on the Liberty with the intent of pinning the blame on the Egyptians and thus swinging public and political opinion in the United States solidly behind the Israelis.
Of course, for this plan to work, the Liberty had to be destroyed and its crew killed.
War crime Israel wanted to conceal from prying eyes
There's another factor.
The Liberty was positioned just off the coast from the town of El Arish.
In fact, Ennes and others had used the town's mosque tower to fix the location of the ship along the otherwise featureless desert shoreline.
The IDF had seized El Arish and had used the airport there as a prisoner of war camp.
On the very day the Liberty was attacked, the IDF was in the process of executing as many as 1,000 Palestinian and Egyptian POWs, a war crime that they surely wanted to conceal from prying eyes.
According to Gabriel Bron, now an Israeli reporter, who witnessed part of the massacre as a soldier: "The Egyptian prisoners of war were ordered to dig pits and then army police shot them to death."
The bigger question is why the US government would participate so enthusiastically in the cover-up of a war crime against its own sailors.
Well, the Pentagon has never been slow to hide its own incompetence.
And there's plenty of that in the Liberty affair: bungled communications, refusal to provide an escort, situating the defenseless Liberty too close to a raging battle, the inability to intervene in the attack and the inexcusably long time it took to reach the battered ship and its wounded.
 
Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft
But — most important — using US taxpayer money to buy the weapons
That's par for the course.
But something else was going on that would only come to light later.
Through most of the 1960s, the US congress had imposed a ban on the sale of arms to both Israel and Jordan.
But at the time of the Liberty attack, the Pentagon (and its allies in the White House and on the Hill) was seeking to have this proscription overturned.
The top brass certainly knew that any evidence of a deliberate attack on a US Navy ship by the IDF would scuttle their plans.
So they hushed it up.
In January 1968, the arms embargo on Israel was lifted and the sale of American weapons began to flow.
By 1971, Israel was buying $600 million of American-made weapons a year.
Two years later the purchases topped $3 billion.
Almost overnight, Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft.
US government partner in continuing killing of the people of Palestine — an attempt at slow, but speeding up, genocide
Perversely, then, the IDF's strike on the Liberty served to weld the US and Israel together, in a kind of political and military embrace.
Now, every time the IDF attacks defenseless villages in Gaza and the West Bank with F-16s and Apache helicopters, the Palestinians quite rightly see the bloody assaults as a joint operation, with the Pentagon as a hidden partner.
Thus, does the legacy of Liberty live on, one raid after another.
US air strike Baquba
Bodies of cousins Karim Suhail Abedand and Jassim Khalaf
U.S. warplanes dropping bombs twice that of a year ago
The supremacy of the central banking-warfare investment model that has ruled our planet for the last 500 years depends on being able to combine the high margin profits of organized crime with the low cost of capital and liquidity that comes with governmental authority and popular faith in the rule of law.
US air strike in Baghdad kills 14
At least 14 people killed, nine wounded, in US air strike attack
Our economy depends on insiders having their cake and eating it too and subsidizing a free lunch by stealing from someone else.
This works well when the general population shares in some of the subsidy, grows complacent and does not see the “real deal” on how the system works.
However, liquidity and governmental authority will erode if the general population becomes aware of how things really work.
As this happens, they begin to understand the power of innovative technology and re-engineering of government resources to create greater abundance both for themselves and other people.
As this happens, they lose faith in the myth that the current system is fundamentally legitimate.
This jeopardizes the financial markets that depend on fraudulent collateral and practices to continue to work.
It also jeopardizes the wealth and power of the people who are winning with financial fraud.
... As a consequence, extraordinary attention and sums of money are invested in affirming the myth and appearance of legitimacy.
This includes creating popular explanations of why the rich and powerful are lawful and ethical and the venal poor, hostile foreigners, crafty mobsters and incompetent and irresponsible middle class bureaucrats are to blame for the success of narcotics trafficking, financial fraud and other forms of organized crime.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
 
Our efforts at The Hamilton Securities Group to help HUD achieve maximum return on the sale of its defaulted mortgage assets coincided with a widespread process of “privatization” in which assets were, in fact, being transferred out of governments worldwide at significantly below market value in a manner providing extraordinary windfall profits, capital gains and financial equity to private corporations and investors.
US air strike in Baghdad kills 14
At least 14 people killed, nine wounded, in US air strike attack
In addition, government functions were being outsourced at prices way above what should have been market price or government costs — again stripping governmental and community resources in a manner that subsidized private interests.
The financial equity gained by private interests was often the result of financial, human, environmental and living equity stripped and stolen from communities — often without communities being able to understand what had happened or to clearly identify their loss.
This is why I now refer to privatization as “piratization.”
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
 
Over time I was increasingly shocked by the speed and ease with which many intelligent and seemingly competent members of the CFR [ Council on Foreign Relations ] appeared to eagerly justify policies and actions that supported growing corruption.
The regularity with which many CFR members would protect insiders from accountability regarding another appalling fraud surprised even me.
Many of them seemed delighted with the advantages of being an insider while being entirely indifferent to the extraordinary cost to all citizens of having our lives, health and resources drained to increase insider wealth in a manner that violated the most basic principles of fiduciary obligation and respect for the law.
In short, the CFR was operating in a win-lose economic paradigm that centralized economic and political power.
I was trying to find a way for us to shift to a win-win economic paradigm that was — by its nature — decentralizing.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
 
The reader can appreciate why Wall Street would welcome someone as accommodating as Gorelick at Fannie Mae.
This was a period when the profits rolled in from engineering the most spectacular growth in mortgage debt in U.S. history.
As one real estate broker said, “They have turned our homes into ATM machines.”
Fannie Mae has been a leading player in centralizing control of the mortgage markets into Washington D.C. and Wall Street.
And that means as people were rounded up and shipped to prison as part of Operation Safe Home, Fannie was right behind to finance the gentrification of neighborhoods.
And that is before we ask questions about the extent to which the estimated annual financial flows of $500 billion–$1 trillion money laundering through the U.S. financial system or money missing from the US government are reinvested into Fannie Mae securities.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
James Forrestal
James Forrestal’s oil portrait always hung prominently in one of the private Dillon Read dining rooms for the eleven years that I worked at the firm. Forrestal, a highly regarded Dillon partner and President of the firm, had gone to Washington, D.C. in 1940 to lead the Navy during WWII and then played a critical role in creating the National Security Act of 1947.

He then became Secretary of War (later termed Secretary of Defense) in September 1947 and served until March 28, 1949.

Given the central banking-warfare investment model that rules our planet, it was appropriate that Dillon 
partners at various times lead both the Treasury Department and the Defense Department.

Shortly after resigning from government, Forrestal died falling out of a window of the Bethesda Naval Hospital outside of Washington, D.C. on May 22, 1949.

There is some controversy around the official explanation of his death — ruled a suicide.

Some insist he had a nervous breakdown. Some say that he was opposed to the creation of the state of Israel.

Others say that he argued for transparency and accountability in government, and against the provisions instituted at this time to create a secrete “black budget.”

He lost and was pretty upset about it — and the loss was a violent one.

Since the professional killers who operate inside the Washington beltway have numerous techniques to get perfectly sane people to kill themselves, I am not sure it makes a big difference.

Approximately a month later, the CIA Act of 1949 was passed.

The Act created the CIA and endowed it with the statutory authority that became one of the chief components of financing the “black” budget — the power to claw monies from other agencies for the benefit of secretly funding the intelligence communities and their corporate contractors.

This was to turn out to be a devastating development for the forces of transparency, without which there can be no rule of law, free markets or democracy.

Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits

Photo: Wikipedia     

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt appointed Forrestal as an administrative assistant on June 22, 1940, then nominated him as Undersecretary of the Navy six weeks later. In the latter post, Forrestal would prove to be very effective at mobilizing industrial production for the war effort.
He became Secretary of the Navy on May 19, 1944, following the death of his immediate supervisor Frank Knox from a heart attack. Forrestal then led the Navy through the closing year of the war and the demobilization that followed.   What might have been his greatest legacy as Navy Secretary was an attempt that came to nought.   He, along with Secretary of War Henry Stimson and Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew, in the early months of 1945, strongly advocated a softer policy toward Japan that would permit a negotiated face-saving surrender.   His primary concern was "the menace of Russian Communism and its attraction for decimated, destabilized societies in Europe and Asia", and, therefore, keeping the Soviet Union out of the war with Japan.   Had his advice been followed, Japan might well have surrendered before August 1945, precluding the use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.   So strongly did he feel about this matter that he cultivated negotiation attempts that bordered closely on insubordination toward the President.
Forrestal opposed the unification of the services, but even so helped develop the National Security Act of 1947 that created the National Military Establishment (the Department of Defense was not created as such until August 1949), and with the former Secretary of War Robert P. Patterson retiring to private life, Forrestal was the next choice.
His 18 months at Defense came at an exceptionally difficult time for the U.S. military establishment:   Communist governments came to power in Czechoslovakia and China; West Berlin was blockaded, necessitating the Berlin Airlift to keep it going; the war between the Arab states and Israel after the establishment of Israel in Palestine; and negotiations were going on for the formation of NATO.   His reign was also hampered by intense interservice rivalries.
In addition, President Harry Truman constrained military budgets billions of dollars below what the services were requesting, putting Forrestal in the middle of the tug-of-war.   Forrestal was also becoming more and more worried about the Soviet threat.   Internationally, the takeover by the Communists of Eastern Europe, their threats to the governments of Greece, Italy, and France, their impending takeover of China, and the invasion of South Korea by North Korea would demonstrate the legitimacy of his concerns on the international front as well.
Photo and description: Wikipedia
James Forrestal’s oil portrait always hung prominently in one of the private Dillon Read dining rooms for the eleven years that I worked at the firm. Forrestal, a highly regarded Dillon partner and President of the firm, had gone to Washington, D.C. in 1940 to lead the Navy during WWII and then played a critical role in creating the National Security Act of 1947.
He then became Secretary of War (later termed Secretary of Defense) in September 1947 and served until March 28, 1949.
Given the central banking-warfare investment model that rules our planet, it was appropriate that Dillon partners at various times lead both the Treasury Department and the Defense Department.
Shortly after resigning from government, Forrestal died falling out of a window of the Bethesda Naval Hospital outside of Washington, D.C. on May 22, 1949.
There is some controversy around the official explanation of his death — ruled a suicide.
Some insist he had a nervous breakdown. Some say that he was opposed to the creation of the state of Israel.
Others say that he argued for transparency and accountability in government, and against the provisions instituted at this time to create a secrete “black budget.”
He lost and was pretty upset about it — and the loss was a violent one.
Since the professional killers who operate inside the Washington beltway have numerous techniques to get perfectly sane people to kill themselves, I am not sure it makes a big difference.
Approximately a month later, the CIA Act of 1949 was passed.
The Act created the CIA and endowed it with the statutory authority that became one of the chief components of financing the “black” budget — the power to claw monies from other agencies for the benefit of secretly funding the intelligence communities and their corporate contractors.
This was to turn out to be a devastating development for the forces of transparency, without which there can be no rule of law, free markets or democracy.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
What Briody does not mention is allegations regarding Brown & Root's involvement in narcotics trafficking. Former LAPD narcotics investigator Mike Ruppert once described his break up with fiance Teddy — an agent dealing narcotics and weapons for the CIA while working with Brown & Root, as follows:
“Arriving in New Orleans in early July, 1977 I found her living in an apartment across the river in Gretna. Equipped with scrambler phones, night vision devices and working from sealed communiqués delivered by naval and air force personnel from nearby Belle Chasse Naval Air Station, Teddy was involved in something truly ugly.
She was arranging for large quantities of weapons to be loaded onto ships leaving for Iran.
At the same time she was working with Mafia associates of New Orleans Mafia boss Carlos Marcello to coordinate the movement of service boats that were bringing large quantities of heroin into the city.
The boats arrived at Marcello controlled docks, unmolested by even the New Orleans police she introduced me to, along with divers, military men, former Green Berets and CIA personnel.
“The service boats were retrieving the heroin from oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, oil rigs in international waters, oil rigs built and serviced by Brown and Root.
The guns that Teddy monitored, apparently Vietnam era surplus AK 47s and M16s, were being loaded onto ships also owned or leased by Brown and Root.
And more than once during the eight days I spent in New Orleans I met and ate at restaurants with Brown and Root employees who were boarding those ships and leaving for Iran within days.
Once, while leaving a bar and apparently having asked the wrong question, I was shot at in an attempt to scare me off.”
Source: "Halliburton’s Brown and Root is One of the Major Components of the Bush-Cheney Drug Empire" by Michael Ruppert, From the Wilderness
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
The Clinton Administration took the groundwork laid by Nixon, Reagan and Bush and embraced and blossomed the expansion and promotion of federal support for police, enforcement and the War on Drugs with a passion that was hard to understand unless and until you realized that the American financial system was deeply dependent on attracting an estimated $500 billion-$1 trillion of annual money laundering.
Globalizing corporations and deepening deficits and housing bubbles required attracting vast amounts of capital.
Attracting capital also required making the world safe for the reinvestment of the profits of organized crime and the war machine.
Without growing organized crime and military activities through government budgets and contracts, the economy would stop centralizing.
The Clinton Administration was to govern a doubling of the federal prison population.
Catherine Austin Fitts — Dillon Reid and Co. Inc. And the Aristocracy of Stock Profits
 
Know them by their fruit
Bush — continuing to support increasing genocide of Palestinians
Mass killings of innocents in Afghanistan
Mass killings of innocents in Iraq
Development of more nuclear weapon horror
Complete abrogations of Nuclear Arms Treaty
Ratzinger — now Benedict XVI — issued letter designed to prevent sex abuse from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police
Coverup continued for years until overwhelmed by amount of abuse

New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth:
No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth:

No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon
Thu Jun 21, 3:01 AM ET
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon.
Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude.
The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor.
This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.
Madison, WI (PRWEB) June 21, 2007 - A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.
"We have had four lines of proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building," said James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.
"This new study by Pilots drives another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission":
The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77.
A Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process.
The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.
According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth (
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ ), there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:
a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.
b. All Altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.
c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.
d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.
e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.
As Robert Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, observes:
"The information in the NSTB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001."
The study was signed by fifteen professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience.
They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4648624627192508186
According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth ( http://911scholars.org ), this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day.
"We have developed four lines of argument that prove — conclusively, in my judgment — that no Boeing 757 hit the building.
The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building.
If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."
Fetzer, who retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, expressed pleasure over the Pilot's results, which, he said, has neatly resolved the most pressing issue that remained about the Pentagon.
He added,
"We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building."
(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail!
Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.
(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor".
At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible.
There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.
(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory — flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level — physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.
(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows.
The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.
Members of Scholars have contributed to a new book that analyses the government's official account, according to which 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four commercial airliners, outfoxed the most sophisticated air-defense system in the world, and committed these atrocities under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan.
Entitled, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), it includes photographs of the hit point before and after the upper floors collapsed, the crucial frame from the released videos, and views of the clear, smooth, and unblemished lawn.
"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said.
"In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them."
The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence.
James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995.
"It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact."
Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site,
http://911scholars.org .
"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11," Fetzer said.
"Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired.
Unless," he added, "they want to mislead the American people.   The evidence is beyond clear and compelling.   It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.   No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! Inc.
If you never see another movie, better watch this: the old original version still allowed on Google video
For Google video version — click here — it will state this version is old!
This version is not censored — it is infinitely better then the newer censored version
To download this version and keep
http://keepvid.com
copy and paste
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331
P.S. The new Zeitgeist movie is loaded with political rhetoric
It cannot be more opposite of the sense of Zeitgeist — a German word meaning 'Of the time'
AND don't forget this:
Pandora's Black Box Chapter Two — click here
Firefighters for 9-11 truth

Image: firefightersfor911truth.org/Click logo for Firefighters for 9-11 truth
Click logo for architects & engineers for 9/11 truthArchitects & Engineers for 9/11 truth

Image: www.ae911truth.org/
Do not be deceived by evil
Think of Opus Dei — both present and former Pope married
Think of US Supreme Court — many also have married Opus Dei
Think how Bush was appointed
 
Think about your government.
If you are a U.S. taxpayer you have been paying the people who bombed the USS Liberty
Paying to the tune of 15 million dollars a day.
If the government can cover up the attack on the USS Liberty, what else WILL it do.
9/11?
A nuclear attack wiping out some city?
Martial Law — complete absorption of control by the elite through the tool of police, state and local, military, multiple government security agencies too numerous to place here.
Complete absorption of control!
We are there now!
When the shit hits the fan, those on the right who have guns will resist.
Those of the right who truly believe in freedom — many of them — will resist.
Will the left do what it usually does.
Stand unarmed, helpless, and watch!
Part I
Part III