destruction

By EDITH M. LEDERER UNITED NATIONS Mar 15, 2006 (AP)— U.N. member states ignored U.S. opposition and overwhelmingly approved a new Human Rights Council on Wednesday, attempting to strengthen the world body's machinery to deal with major human rights offenders. The vote in the 191-member General Assembly was 170 in favor, 4 against, and 3 abstentions. The Bush administration refused to back the new council, saying it was not the radical reform Washington wanted to ensure that countries like Cuba, Sudan, Myanmar and Zimbabwe known as rights abusers are barred from membership. But U.S. officials said Washington nonetheless will give its financial backing and seek a seat on the new council. A year ago, Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed replacing the widely criticized and highly politicized U.N. Human Rights Commission, which has allowed some of the worst-offending countries to use their membership to protect one another from condemnation or to criticize others. Under the resolution adopted Wednesday, the commission will be abolished June 16 and the new council will convene three days later. The resolution was drafted by General Assembly President Jan Eliasson after months of contentious negotiations. He said it did not give any country everything it wanted but would strengthen human rights protections and toughen the criteria for council membership. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1728278 Fucking owned!!

Soldiers in Iraq know they are fighting and dying for a lie March 1, 2006 02:26 AM / The Rant . By DOUG THOMPSON Nearly three-quarters of the American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should withdraw within the next year and 29 percent feel we should get the hell out of the war immediately, a poll of military personnel serving in country reveals. This jives with emails I've been getting from soldiers over the past several months and it confirms that those serving on the ground in the war don't share the rosy optimism painted by the Bush administration about the invasion and occupation of Iraq. "Man, this gig has FUBAR written all over it," says a Marine who has served in Iraq for seven months. "Morale is the pits and nobody in our unit thinks we should be here." The poll, conducted by Zogby International, offers a rare look into the mindset of fighting men and women serving in a war zone. That mindset is, to say the least, reflective of growing American unrest over a war based on false information and outright lies. Among the findings by Zogby: * Only 23 percent agree with the President's position that we should "stay in Iraq as long as needed." * 85 percent of those surveyed felt they were fighting the war "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," although the 9-11 commission in 2004 found "no credible evidence" that Iraq had cooperated with al-Qaida in the attacks. * 68 percent said they believed that the real reason for the war was simply to remove Saddam Hussein from power. * 40 percent say the Iraqi insurgency is mostly homegrown, with very little foreign involvement - a direct contradiction of claims by the Bush administration. * 55 percent flatly oppose using torture and other harsh interrogation methods on prisoners. "Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there," says John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. "Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein." In another direct contradiction of stated White House policy, just 24% said that "establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Zogby interviewed the 944 soldiers at various locations throughout Iraq. Three quarters of the troops had served multiple tours and had a longer exposure to the conflict: 26% were on their first tour of duty, 45% were on their second tour, and 29% were in Iraq for a third time or more. The Pentagon did not cooperate with Zogby in the survey and is trying to downplay the significance of the soldiers' responses but offered conflicting responses. In one released statement, the military brass said the troop comments were not valid because "troops in a combat zone are likely to express negative views of their situation." Then Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Venable tried a different spin. "The poll's findings certainly aren't reflective of the attitudes we see displayed by the majority of troops, who are performing in a remarkable manner in a combat situation far from home," Venable said. I asked Venable's office for any polls the military had conducted on troop attitudes and morale and they admitted they had not done any surveys but added that they based their conclusions on reports from "commanders in the field." Emails received almost daily from soldiers in the field confirm Zogby's findings and say Pentagon claims of success and high morale are, as one National Guardsman said: "Pure unmitigated bullshit." Their emails, and now Zogby's findings, show these men and women who put their lives on the line day in and day out do so for a war they fully know was based on false pretenses and they are fighting and dying for a cause that doesn't exist.

China hits back at US criticism China has hit back at US criticism of its human rights record by releasing its own document of alleged US abuses. Washington said in its annual rights report that China was one of the world's "most systematic" offenders. In return Beijing urged the US to "look squarely" at its own problems, such as a high murder rate and jail population. While China often rejects US criticism of its rights record, this exchange is especially sensitive due to President Hu Jintao's visit to the US next month. The report issued by China's cabinet, the State Council, on Thursday listed "a multitude of cases to show the serious violations of human rights both in and outside the US," according to state news agency Xinhua. American 'democracy' is always one for the wealthy and a 'game for the rich' Chinese report "As in previous years, the US State Department pointed the finger at human rights situations in more than 190 countries and regions, but kept silent on the violations of human rights in the United States," the report said. It described alleged abuses including secret surveillance, police abuse, racial discrimination and wrongful convictions. "The United States has always boasted itself as the model of democracy, and hawked its mode of democracy to the rest of the world, but in fact, American 'democracy' is always one for the wealthy and a 'game for the rich'," it added. Increased censorship In its own report, issued on Wednesday, Washington was equally scathing about Beijing's human rights record, saying it "remained poor". The report accused the Chinese government of "serious abuses" and noted a trend towards increased "harassment, detention and imprisonment, by government and security authorities, of those perceived as threatening". It also detailed a "significant" increase in protests and public disturbances, saying that "several incidents were violently suppressed", and accused China of increasing censorship of the internet. But the State Department report did mention that there were "notable developments" in Chinese legal reforms, as well as greater personal freedoms and increased protection of some religious activities. At a House of Representatives hearing on Wednesday, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian affairs Christopher Hill that that when President Hu visited Washington in April, he hoped to engage the Chinese leader "on a broad range of human rights and religious freedom topics". The US report also singled out Burma and North Korea for criticism. In Burma, extrajudicial killings, rape, torture and beatings of prisoners and detainees continued, the report said. In North Korea, "extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and arbitrary detention, including many political prisoners" continued, it said Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/4788338.stm Published: 2006/03/09 06:23:37 GMT

retard

Reality scares you, does it? Neoconservatard. Pentagon Admits It Lost 'War on Terror' by URI DOWBENKO Pentagon Admits It Lost 'War on Terror' Brig. Gen. Robert L. Caslen, the Pentagon's deputy director for the phony "war on terrorism," has admitted that the US has lost the war, according to a Washington Times report. "'We are not killing them faster than they are being created,' Gen. Caslen told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson Center," the Times reported. Caslen however did not admit that the Pentagon was responsible for "creating" terrorists by its policy of the indiscrimate murder of innocent civilians in Iraq. The Pentagon calls that "collateral damage". Caslen also admitted that the Pentagon was not even able to define the so-called "enemy" in what has become a defacto 21st century version of a war on Islam as well as the Second Coming of the Crusades. According to Caslen, the Department of Defense now defines the so-called "enemy" in the phony war on terror as "a transnational movement of extremist organizations, networks and individuals that use violence and terrorism as a means to promote their end. http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20060301-113323-8165r.htm Now iggy.... If you cannot identify who your enemy is, how do you win a war? How can you define winning a war when more terrorist organizations are coming to fruition moreso since 9/11? 30 more terrorist organizations have emerged since. Answer that! If you cannot win the hearts and minds of the people of the country you have just invaded, how can a war victory be achieved? When more terrorists are coming out of the woodwork faster than the Coalition are killing them, how can you say we are winning the war on terrorism? Instead of running your mouth off in a childish 9 year old temper tantrum tangent, try being an adult and answer them in a civil manner. Show me you're a real man with real balls. I'm pleased to shit your thread............ And shit on you........... This is going to be interesting.

History won't be kind to them. Nothing phases him.

You ought to be ashamed of yourself!!!

I'm surprised igloo hasn't launched another insult fest after posting this but it's good people are realizing how much of a moron Bush really is.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/soldiers_in_iraq_know_they_are.html Soldiers in Iraq know they are fighting and dying for a lie Posted at March 1, 2006 02:26 AM in The Rant . By DOUG THOMPSON Nearly three-quarters of the American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should withdraw within the next year and 29 percent feel we should get the hell out of the war immediately, a poll of military personnel serving in country reveals. This jives with emails I've been getting from soldiers over the past several months and it confirms that those serving on the ground in the war don't share the rosy optimism painted by the Bush administration about the invasion and occupation of Iraq. "Man, this gig has FUBAR written all over it," says a Marine who has served in Iraq for seven months. "Morale is the pits and nobody in our unit thinks we should be here." The poll, conducted by Zogby International, offers a rare look into the mindset of fighting men and women serving in a war zone. That mindset is, to say the least, reflective of growing American unrest over a war based on false information and outright lies. Among the findings by Zogby: * Only 23 percent agree with the President's position that we should "stay in Iraq as long as needed." * 85 percent of those surveyed felt they were fighting the war "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks," although the 9-11 commission in 2004 found "no credible evidence" that Iraq had cooperated with al-Qaida in the attacks. * 68 percent said they believed that the real reason for the war was simply to remove Saddam Hussein from power. * 40 percent say the Iraqi insurgency is mostly homegrown, with very little foreign involvement - a direct contradiction of claims by the Bush administration. * 55 percent flatly oppose using torture and other harsh interrogation methods on prisoners. "Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there," says John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. "Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein." In another direct contradiction of stated White House policy, just 24% said that "establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Zogby interviewed the 944 soldiers at various locations throughout Iraq. Three quarters of the troops had served multiple tours and had a longer exposure to the conflict: 26% were on their first tour of duty, 45% were on their second tour, and 29% were in Iraq for a third time or more. The Pentagon did not cooperate with Zogby in the survey and is trying to downplay the significance of the soldiers' responses but offered conflicting responses. In one released statement, the military brass said the troop comments were not valid because "troops in a combat zone are likely to express negative views of their situation." Then Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Venable tried a different spin. "The poll's findings certainly aren't reflective of the attitudes we see displayed by the majority of troops, who are performing in a remarkable manner in a combat situation far from home," Venable said. I asked Venable's office for any polls the military had conducted on troop attitudes and morale and they admitted they had not done any surveys but added that they based their conclusions on reports from "commanders in the field." Emails received almost daily from soldiers in the field confirm Zogby's findings and say Pentagon claims of success and high morale are, as one National Guardsman said: "Pure unmitigated bullshit." Their emails, and now Zogby's findings, show these men and women who put their lives on the line day in and day out do so for a war they fully know was based on false pretenses and they are fighting and dying for a cause that doesn't exist.

http://freeinternetpress.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5799 American Veterans To Be Forbidden To Fly When the government turns on it's military, you know it's a sad state of affairs. We were informed confidentially by a high ranking individual in the Veterans Administration that the TSA is looking to the office of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Defense, and various American veterans groups, asking for the records on all “mental defectives”. I was thrown by the term "mental defectives”, but I was informed that this means anyone who shows any mental abnormalities. Unfortunately, this includes and seems to be targeted at veterans who suffer from PTSD. PTSD is "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder". An estimated 30% of troops who saw active duty in war zones suffer from PTSD. It is characterized by trouble dealing with public situations; sometimes irrational fears of paranoia; sleepless nights due to bad dreams steming from real events from years ago; sevree anxiety, severe depression; and mood swings sometimes set off by seemingly insignificant events. Due to these problems, the sufferer can turn to drug and/or alcohol abuse; high incidence of relationship problems; legal problems due to lack of control or above referenced problems; and problems maintaining daily life such as holding down a job. In World War I it was known as "Shell Shock". In World War II it was known as "Battle Fatigue". PTSD can affect anyone who has suffered a traumatic experience. This can include the death of someone close, or other life changing events even if only perceived so in the victim's mind. You probably know several people who have undiagnosed PTSD. Some hide it very well; some have occasional outbursts; and a very few are the stereotypical tv or movie Vietnam Vet. Traumatic experiences such as witnessing the events of 9/11 or natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina can cause PTSD. You probably know several victims of PTSD. Many people are undiagnosed, or in the case of war veterans, told they are not victims so the VA and US military can absolve themselves from responsibility of their actions. With this new TSA action, they are effectively blacklisting hundreds of thousands of citizens of the United States of America, who have never comitted any crime nor ever expressed any intention to do so. It may also block active military from doing normal things such as flying home to see their family on leave. We need to draw the line somewhere. Suspecting 20% of our military war veterans is not progressive towards stopping the 'terror' threat that hasn't been seen in this country in over 4 years. Lets not forget that these veterans are our hero's, who served their country, risking their lives (and many dying). Now we dishonor them by treating them like this. The following links contain other authors talking about this issue. Word has been leaking out on this all over the country. TSA Wants Access to Veterans’ Files to Add ‘Mental Defectives’ to Watch List - Congressional Quarterly Serve your country -- get grounded - Happening-Here TSA Looks to VA and DoD for “Mental Defectives” - OpEd News WTF: TSA wants the names of veterans with PTSD Daily KOS (Daily Chaos) The other side Ginmar's LiveJournal (Blog) The Pentagon Breaks the Law - Washington Post "Mental defectives" to be kept from air travel - InfoWars TSA Wants Access to Veterans’ Files to Add ‘Mental Defectives’ to Watch List - Veterans for Common Sense TSA WANTS DATA FROM VA ON 'MENTAL DEFECTIVES' - The Progressive Review TSA Looks to VA and DoD for "Mental Defectives" - U.S Labor Against War TSA Wants Access To Veterans’ Files To Add ‘Mental Defectives’ To Watch List - Veterans Against the Iraq War (VAIW) Now We Vets May Be ‘Mental Defectives’ TSA Wants Access to Veterans' Files to Add 'Mental Defectives' to Watch List Riba Rambles (Blog) Editor: It's somewhat understandable that the government can identify ex-military as being a more dangerous threat, being that they are trained killers, it is completely disrespectful to assume that a large percentage of them could commit a terrorist act on citizens of the country they swore to defend with their lives.

Media Treadmill Blackout On Key Issues Of Port Story Sweetheart deals and government links swept under the rug Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | February 28 2006 The mainstream media treadmill has re-employed its familiar tactic of moving attention away from the cornerstone smoking guns that make the port story important and those that would implicate former administration officials and the White House itself in criminal activities. We are now learning that it is not 6, 12, 18 or 21, it is more than 21 port complexes that in American and 10 to 15 in Canada that are going to be handed over to Dubai Ports World. The majority of the major port systems in the United States and North America will be sold off. Segments of the controlled left have tried to make the debate about racism. It doesn't matter which country is handed the ports, as the British already owned the ports to begin with. The supposed terrorism threat being used to try and block the deal is a red herring. We should oppose the port deal simply because selling off key infrastructure is a threat to the sovereignty of the United States. We should also oppose the deal because former Treasury Secretary Snow and the Bush administration have made millions of dollars personally and billions of dollars for their respective companies in these sales. The individual named by the White House to run security for all major US ports under Maritime Administration, David Sanborn (pictured above), is the current number two man at Dubai Ports World and head of their European and Latin American operations. So when Neo-Cons defend Bush by saying that UAE won't be running security at the ports involved in the deal, they are deliberately ignoring the fact that DP World's number two is already in charge of all major US ports by appointment of Bush. The New York Daily News pointed out Snow's (pictured below) connection to the sweetheart deal in pointing out that Snow headed, "the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan's cruise ship terminal and Newark's container port. "Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet." The deal has already violated federal law in its failure to undergo a 45 day review procedure. That alone should bring criminal charges of espionage for those involved who profited from breaking federal law. These issues take precedence over national security issues. The UAE is a willing stooge in the manufactured war on terror. The media has once again artificially framed the debate and shifted attention away from the key factors in this story. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006/280206mediablackout.htm

Media Treadmill Blackout On Key Issues Of Port Story Sweetheart deals and government links swept under the rug Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | February 28 2006 The mainstream media treadmill has re-employed its familiar tactic of moving attention away from the cornerstone smoking guns that make the port story important and those that would implicate former administration officials and the White House itself in criminal activities. We are now learning that it is not 6, 12, 18 or 21, it is more than 21 port complexes that in American and 10 to 15 in Canada that are going to be handed over to Dubai Ports World. The majority of the major port systems in the United States and North America will be sold off. Segments of the controlled left have tried to make the debate about racism. It doesn't matter which country is handed the ports, as the British already owned the ports to begin with. The supposed terrorism threat being used to try and block the deal is a red herring. We should oppose the port deal simply because selling off key infrastructure is a threat to the sovereignty of the United States. We should also oppose the deal because former Treasury Secretary Snow and the Bush administration have made millions of dollars personally and billions of dollars for their respective companies in these sales. The individual named by the White House to run security for all major US ports under Maritime Administration, David Sanborn (pictured above), is the current number two man at Dubai Ports World and head of their European and Latin American operations. So when Neo-Cons defend Bush by saying that UAE won't be running security at the ports involved in the deal, they are deliberately ignoring the fact that DP World's number two is already in charge of all major US ports by appointment of Bush. The New York Daily News pointed out Snow's (pictured below) connection to the sweetheart deal in pointing out that Snow headed, "the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan's cruise ship terminal and Newark's container port. "Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet." The deal has already violated federal law in its failure to undergo a 45 day review procedure. That alone should bring criminal charges of espionage for those involved who profited from breaking federal law. These issues take precedence over national security issues. The UAE is a willing stooge in the manufactured war on terror. The media has once again artificially framed the debate and shifted attention away from the key factors in this story. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006/280206mediablackout.htm

Former CIA Analyst: Western Intelligence May Be Behind Mosque Bombing Ray Mcgovern says US in most danger ever, from its own government Prison Planet | February 26 2006 Former CIA analyst a and presidential advisor Ray McGovern does not rule out Western involvement in this week's Askariya mosque bombing in light of previous false flag operations that have advanced hidden agendas of the ruling elite. During the mid-eighties, McGovern was one of the senior analysts conducting early morning briefings of the PDB one-on-one with the Vice President, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. He joined Alex Jones to discuss many topics from martial law to government false flag terrorism and provocation tactics. McGovern firstly suggested that Posse Comitatus, the law that forbids the military to take on a policing role within the US, is being systematically overthrown. "Not only have the top ranks of the intelligence community been politicized and corrupted, so has the army. The military establishment is goose stepping around, saluting the President and saying whatever the President wants them to." A former officer himself, McGovern declared that the unprecedented movement towards a martial law mentality within government and military is a deeply unsettling one and that the US is hurtling toward a dictatorship. "As I look at the top Pentagon brass, I have to conclude that unlike my days as a US army officer, those folks have been so politicized that if the US President told them to go ahead and exercise police functions in this country they would go ahead and salute and they would do it, and that's really scary." Moving on to the "war on terror", 27 year veteran McGovern concurred that staged terror has long been used by our governments in order to forward their own agendas at home and elsewhere: "There's lots of evidence that the government in the past has used these things for its own purposes, for overthrowing governments, as it did in Iran in 1953, and in Guatemala in 1954, the Gulf of Tonkin was a little different...LBJ did deceive Congress and the war went on for seven years." Concerning 9/11 McGovern declared that although he is still in two minds, he is deeply suspicious of the official version of events and "there is certainly a cover up." The amount of unanswered questions and blatant lies told by Cheney and the NeoCons makes it very easy for him to believe the government was involved. Moving on to the recent Askariya mosque bombing in Samarra, Iraq McGovern commented; "The main question is Qui Bono? Who benefits from this kind of thing? You don't have to be very conspiratorial or even paranoid to suggest that there are a whole bunch of likely suspects out there and not only the Sunnis. You know, the British officers were arrested, dressed up in Arab garb, riding around in a car, so this stuff goes on." Ray McGovern is part of a collective of former Intelligence officers who call themselves Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Their writing can be found on www.truthout.com http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006/260206mosquebombing.htm

drlogic's childhood video has been found. http://ebaumsworld.com/2006/02/racistkid.html A reminder: Friends don't let friends allow their parents to let their children watch fox news or their children wind up like drlogic.

drlogic is your basic green toothed, trailer trash, high-school drop out stuck making 6 bucks an hr at the local 7/11. He's pissed off because he can't get welfare. Just ignore the tool.

I see nothing wrong with what was said Igloser. If that was Bush or Cheney or another one of their cronies, you would not be putting your thongs in a bind. You need to brush up on reading comprehension.

whacked.

Igloo must fulfill his patriotic duty by exercising his freedom of speech to shut the fuck up!

That's COMMIE. Not COMMI. LEARN TO READ! White inbred trailer park trash. Only pussies threaten people with guns.

I'm not intimidated with your childish death threats. I'm sure the MPD would like to know about you. And obby, your faggot induced music mix is lame at best.

Die bitch!

Nasrallah tells Bush and Rice to 'shut up' about Muslims The leader of Hizbullah, heading a march by hundreds of thousands of Shi'ite Muslims on Thursday, said US President George W. Bush and his secretary of state should "shut up" after they accused Syria and Iran of fueling protests over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said that if the controversy touched on Jews or Israel the West would have reacted differently and quickly. "Is the Islamic world less important than a bunch of Zionists? We cannot acquiesce to this." Nasrallah urged Muslims worldwide to continue demonstrations until there is an apology over the drawings and Europe passes laws forbidding insults to the prophet. The head of the guerrilla group, which is backed by Iran and Syria, spoke before a mass procession of Shi'ites marking Ashura, an annual remembrance of the 680 A.D. battle in which Hussein, their saint and grandson of Muhammad, was killed by rivals, cementing the split in Islam between Shi'ites and Sunnis. Whipping up the crowds on the most solemn day for Shi'ites worldwide, Nasrallah declared: "Defending the prophet should continue all over the world. Let Condoleezza Rice and Bush and all the tyrants shut up. We are an Islamic nation that cannot tolerate, be silent or be lax when they insult our prophet and sanctities." "We will uphold the messenger of God not only by our voices but also by our blood," he told the crowds, estimated by organizers at about 700,000. Police officers had no final estimates but put the figure at even higher. Speaking about the controversy for the first time Wednesday, Bush condemned the deadly rioting sparked by the cartoons and urged foreign leaders to halt the spreading violence and to protect diplomats in besieged embassies. Rice, the US secretary of state, said Iran and Syria "have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the world ought to call them on it." "There can be no settlement before an apology and there can be no settlement before laws are legislated by the European Parliament and the parliaments of European countries," Nasrallah said. Islamic nations should demand "a law committing the press and the media in the West that proscribes insulting our prophet. If this matter cannot be achieved that means [the West] insists on continuing this," he added. This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1139395375738&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

International Commission Delivers Verdicts on Bush Administration Revolution #034, February 12, 2006, posted at revcom.us It was a historic moment at the National Press Club in Washington, only blocks from the White House. On February 2, the preliminary findings of the International Commission on Crimes Against Humanity were read out by Ajamu Sankofa, executive director of the Physicians for Social Responsibility-NY and former national secretary of Blacks for Reparations in America. Listening to the verdicts, Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst and founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, exclaimed: "This is what our German forbearers in the 1930s did NOT do. They sat around, blamed their rulers, said 'maybe everything's going to be alright.'... That is something we cannot do. Because I don't want my grandchildren asking me years from now, 'why didn't you do something to stop all this?'" The findings were based on five days of public testimony in New York in October and January. The work of the Commission brought together a unique combination of former government officials, experts in international law, human rights monitors in the relevant areas, and victims of the crimes under investigation. It was a Commission of great legal, ethical, and moral credibility based on its integrity, its rigor in the presentation of evidence, and the stature of its participants. On the first charge of committing wars of aggression, the Commission found: "The evidence is overwhelming that the Bush Administration authorized and is conducting a war of aggression against Iraq in violation of international law, including The Nuremberg Principles, Geneva Conventions of 1949, the United Nations Charter, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In doing so, the Bush Administration has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity." Former United Nations weapons inspector Scott Ritter was a compelling witness before the Commission on this issue. Ritter led the investigation into the defection of Sadam Hussein's son-in-law, Hussein Kamel: "Dick Cheney said because of Hussein Kamel's defection the United Nations, indeed the United States, received evidence that Iraq was actively reconstituting its nuclear weapons program... Dick Cheney was lying. Dick Cheney knew that he was lying.... But it is evidence that the Bush administration willfully exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq's WMDs, thereby negating any case they might make about the existence of a clear and present threat that warranted pre-emptive attack." The actual conduct of the war was also a major issue investigated by the Commission, especially the destruction of the city of Fallujah using white phosphorous and hyperbaric bombs. The Commission saw film of the bombing of civilians in Fallujah that was truly damning. Shown was the pilot's camera trained on the ground where people were running in the street. The pilot asks his controller, "shall I take them out?" And the controller says, "Yes." The pilot kept a laser focused on the crowd until a guided bomb exploded in the middle of the running crowd. The destruction of Fallujah, a city of over 300,000 people, in retaliation for the death of four U.S. mercenaries, was a vivid reenactment of a historic war crime — the destruction of the Czechoslovakian village of Lidice in 1942 by the Nazis in retaliation for the assassination of a high Nazi official. On the indictment for illegal detention and torture, the Commission found: "There was substantial evidence submitted through testimony and documents that the Bush Administration committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in conducting its 'War Against Terror.' It did this by developing and implementing policies and practices that violated international law and international human rights to force information from detainees and to punish those whom it believes may be 'enemy combatants.'" Barbara Olshansky, from the Center for Constitutional Rights, told the Commission of an August 2002 memo written for Alberto Gonzales, now Attorney General: "It talks about what the traditional definitions of torture are... and it says that a very good case can be made for redefining torture. And the definition that is recommended in that memo is that torture really is only when someone is at the risk of complete organ failure or death. And that is a new definition of torture in the United States according to this administration. Then the memo proceeds to...examine all the ways that the government could avoid liability, even if its actions meet that definition of torture. It is a staggering document..." The results of such "legal theories" by the U.S. government at the very top were described by Brig. General Janis Karpinski (U.S. Army ret.), the former commandant of the infamous Abu-Ghraib prison in Iraq. After photographs of the torture of prisoners there were revealed, Gen. Karpinski entered the cell block where this happened and found a memo attached to the wall calling for harsher interrogation techniques and signed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. In the margin was handwritten: "Make sure this happens!!" Karpinski went on to testify that a high-ranking general demanded that Iraqi prisoners be "treated like dogs." Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, provided particularly chilling testimony on the horrible forms of torture used by the U.S.'s 'Coalition of Willing' and declared, in a very moving moment, "I'd rather die than have someone tortured to save my life." On the indictment for destruction of the global environment: "The testimony of scientists and the scientific reports and other documents submitted during the inquiry support a conclusion that the Bush Administration has committed crimes against humanity by its environmental policies and practices." Daphne Wysham, from the Institute for Policy Studies and the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network gave a searing example: "On June 8, 2005, the New York Times, through whistle-blower Rick Pilz, exposed [White House official Philip] Cooney as the primary censor of climate change policy documents at the highest levels of government. Two days later, Cooney resigned... Cooney and his staff's edits were pervasive with 100 to 450 changes per report, and shameless. Among the topics the government doesn't want you to know about are the national and regional impacts from climate changes, consequences like glacial melting and floods." On the indictment for the destruction of New Orleans: "The evidence of the Bush Administration's conscious and deliberate failings in preventing the foreseeable devastation, including death toll, caused by Hurricane Katrina, particularly in New Orleans, and its failure to respond efficiently and appropriately after the Hurricane was overwhelming. Its failures constitute crimes against humanity." The Commission heard stunning testimony that the government knew full well that New Orleans would be inundated in a major hurricane, and the President himself knew two days in advance that Katrina would hit New Orleans. But no efforts were made to evacuate the predominantly poor and Black masses of the city. As a result, over 1,300 people died on the Gulf Coast with over 3,000 still missing. Annette Addison, a Katrina survivor, told her personal story to the Commission: "So many Army trucks just was driving past us. We even waved for the Army trucks to help us because we were so desperate. We was dehydrated. They did not give us any assistance. We even asked the police for water, and where we could get gas to get out of the city. The police just looked at us like we was nobody, as though we were nothing. Many were going into the stores, and they said they were looters. But to be honest, they was going into stores to survive. It was people helping people.It was not the Army, it was not the police. It was not the ones that were in authority to help us. It was just the community helping each other to survive." At the February 2 press conference to release the Commission's preliminary findings, three of the five Commission judges were present, along with Commission Convener C. Clark Kissinger. In presenting the preliminary findings (more findings will be presented later), the judges were emphatic about the criminality of the Bush administration. Judge Ann Wright, 29-year Army reserve colonel with 16 years in the State Department as former deputy ambassador in Afghanistan, Mongolia, Sierra Leone, and Micronesia: "I believe the Commission is incredibly important for the future of the United States and really the world, because it's the people of America who are speaking to these very serious indictments. It's the people who are coming forward with evidence, their personal testimony in many cases of things that have happened to them, or cases of their lawyers, cases they have worked, the human face of what torture is all about, what detention is about, what war is all about — a war that's conducted the invasion and occupation of a country that did nothing to the United States of America." Judge Abdeen Jabara, board member of the Center for Constitutional Rights and past president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee: "People who launch a war of aggression are in violation of international law, have committed crimes against humanity, and that is the kind of discourse we need to introduce into the United States... the use of torture in the press often reported as "abuse" rather than torture. Of course, there is no international convention for the prevention of abuse, but there is an international convention for the prevention of torture. So we need to change the way in which these items are talked about in order to get people to face up to the fact of what this government is doing." Judge Jabara closed by pointing to the profound significance of what Craig Murray, the British ambassador to Uzbekistan, had said. Murray testified that his government and the American government were OK with receiving intelligence reports that had been obtained by torture in Uzbekistan. His superiors in the British foreign service said to him that, "we don't mind as long as we didn't ask them to do that. We can still receive this information." Murray then added, "After I heard that, I understood how some clerk could sign off on these cattle cars that were going to Auschwitz." That's really what is at stake, Jabara pointed out. "The use of this torture, the beginning of all these black sites — all of these things are the road to Auschwitz." Send us your comments.

YES!!! Bush Gets an Earful at Coretta King's Funeral By Peter Wallsten and Richard Fausset LITHONIA, Ga. -- A day of eulogizing Coretta Scott King turned into a rare, in-person rebuke of President Bush, with a succession of civil rights and political leaders assailing White House policies as evidence that the dream of social and racial equality pursued by King and her slain husband is far from reality. Bush and his wife, Laura, sat on stage as worshippers cheered the suggestions from several speakers that the civil rights movement -- led in the 1960s by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and fostered since his assassination by the widowed Coretta -- remains alive, its goals not fully realized. Tuesday's service, lasting six hours, much of it carried live nationally on cable television, marked an unusual combination of political pageantry and civil rights history. The spectacle included humor, interpretive dance, gospel and classical music, shouting and testifying, and a list of dignitaries that made room for three former presidents, poet Maya Angelou and crooner Michael Bolton. But it also included pointed political commentary, much of it aimed at Bush. The president and his wife watched as the sanctuary at New Birth Missionary Baptist Church near Atlanta filled with raucous cheers for their White House predecessors, Bill and Hillary Clinton -- a reminder that five years into his term, Bush and the Republican Party he leads have not found the acceptance across black America that GOP strategists had hoped. "This commemorative ceremony this morning and this afternoon is not only to acknowledge the great contributions of Coretta and Martin, but to remind us that the struggle for equal rights is not over," said former President Carter, a Democrat and former Georgia governor, to rising applause. "We only have to recall the color of the faces of those in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, those who were most devastated by Katrina, to know that there are not yet equal opportunities for all Americans." Carter, who has had a strained relationship with Bush, drew cheers when he used the Kings' struggle as a reminder of the recent debate over whether Bush violated civil liberties protections when he ordered warrantless surveillance of some domestic phone calls and e-mails. Noting that the Kings' work was "not appreciated even at the highest level of the government," Carter said: "It was difficult for them personally -- with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated as they became the target of secret government wiretapping, other surveillance, and as you know, harassment from the FBI." Bush has said his own program of warrantless wiretapping is aimed at stopping terrorists. The most overtly partisan remarks came from the Rev. Joseph Lowery, a King protege and longtime Bush critic, who noted Coretta King's opposition to the war in Iraq and criticized Bush's commitment to boosting the poor. "She deplored the terror inflicted by our smart bombs on missions way afar," he said. "We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there. But Coretta knew and we knew that there are weapons of misdirection right down here. Millions without health insurance. Poverty abounds. For war, billions more, but no more for the poor." As the barbs flew, Bush seemed to take the heat in stride, smiling at times, giving Lowery a standing ovation and even pulling the civil rights leader in for a bear hug. The president himself received polite applause before and after his seven-minute eulogy, in which he said he attended the service "to offer the sympathy of our entire nation at the passing of a woman who worked to make our nation whole." "As a great movement of history took shape, her dignity was a daily rebuke to the pettiness and cruelty of segregation," the president said. Sitting with Bush on the stage by King's flower-draped casket were three ex-presidents: Clinton, Carter and the president's father, George H.W. Bush, along with one potential future presidential candidate, Sen. Clinton, a Democrat from New York. The appearance by Bush, who decided over the weekend to rearrange his schedule and attend the service, came as his approval rating among blacks has slipped to the low single digits in some surveys -- a direct response, some strategists believe, to the government's failed response in the wake of Katrina. Civil rights leaders and Democrats have also criticized Bush's proposed new budget plan announced this week, which would increase defense spending while maintaining tax cuts for wealthier Americans and reducing aid to the poor. For Bush, the service offered a rare face-to-face encounter with some of the traditional, liberal civil rights leaders, such as Lowery, that he has avoided since taking office. While Bush has never addressed an NAACP convention as president, he has instead sought to build black support by reaching to more conservative pastors and business leaders sympathetic to his entrepreneurial vision of government. New Birth and its pastor, Bishop Eddie Long, have been at the center of those outreach efforts, with Long and other leaders of black "megachurches" meeting on several occasions with Bush at the White House to discuss directing money to faith-based charities, combating AIDS in Africa, poverty and other topics. But as the speeches continued Tuesday, the scene reflected the uphill struggle that Republicans have faced in courting blacks, even before Hurricane Katrina focused attention on black poverty. But for all of the bare partisanship, the service offered light moments and conviviality. Former President Bush poked fun at Lowery, joking that he used to keep a score card in his Oval Office desk of their interactions. It was Lowery 21, Bush 3, he said, adding: "It wasn't a fair fight." The elder Bush, who as a candidate for the U.S. Senate in 1964 campaigned against the Civil Rights Act pursued by the Kings, acknowledged that the service was an unusual experience. "I come from a rather conservative Episcopal parish," Bush said. "And I haven't seen anything like this in my life." For the assembled politicians, the applause was most thunderous for Bill Clinton. Sen. Clinton stood at his side at the podium as he spoke, and her brief comments later focused on how Coretta King had taken up the mission of her husband. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-coretta8feb08,0,7796896.story?coll=la-home-headlines