Bush Given Authority To Sexually Torture American Children

[lord_casek]

The "horror of the shrieking boys" gets a rubber stamp from the boot-licking U.S. Congress & Senate as America officially becomes a dictatorship

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | September 29 2006

Slamming the final nail in the coffin of everything America used to stand for, the boot-licking U.S. Senate last night gave President Bush the legal authority to abduct and sexually mutilate American citizens and American children in the name of the war on terror.

There is nothing in the "detainee" legislation that protects American citizens from being kidnapped by their own government and tortured.

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

Similarly, law Professor Marty Lederman explains: "this [subsection (ii) of the definition of 'unlawful enemy combatant'] means that if the Pentagon says you're an unlawful enemy combatant -- using whatever criteria they wish -- then as far as Congress, and U.S. law, is concerned, you are one, whether or not you have had any connection to 'hostilities' at all."

We have established that the bill allows the President to define American citizens as enemy combatants. Now let's take it one step further.

Before this article is dismissed as another extremist hyperbolic rant, please take a few minutes out of your day to check for yourself the claim that Bush now has not only the legal authority but the active blessings of his own advisors to torture American children.

The backdrop of the Bush administration's push to obliterate the Geneva Conventions was encapsulated b y John “torture” Yoo, professor of law at Berkeley, co-author of the PATRIOT Act, author of torture memos and White House advisor.

During a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel, John Yoo gave the green light for the scope of torture to legally include sexual torture of infants.

Cassel: If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?

Yoo: No treaty.

Cassel: Also no law by Congress — that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo…

Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Click here for the audio.

So if the President thinks he needs to order children's penises to be put in vices, there is no law that can stop him and after last night's vote, the Senate and Congress, exemplified by sicko 16-year-old boy groomer Mark Foley (R-FL) , has graciously provided Bush its full support for kids around the world to be molested in the name of stopping terror.

Yoo's comments were made before the passage of the torture legislation last night. Up until that point Bush had merely cited his role as dictator-in-chief as carte-blanche excuse for ordering torture - now his regime have the audacity to openly put it in writing - going one step further than even the Nazis did.

Again, for those who are still deluded into thinking the extent of the "pressure" is loud music and cold water being thrown over Johnny Jihad in Ragheadistan, consider for a moment the fact that your own Congress and President who, according to the Constitution, are mandated to serve you, have just legalized abducting your kids from your home and electric shocking their genitals.

Now that the criminals have declared themselves outside of the law does that mean we'll see Bush barbecuing babies on the White House lawn? Of course not, but the policy of torturing children in front of their parents has already been signed off on by the Pentagon and enacted under the Copper Green program and it happened at Abu Ghraib .

Women who were arrested with their children were forced to watch their boys being sodomized with chemical glow sticks as the cameras rolled. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh says that the U.S. government is still withholding the tapes because of the horror of the "soundtrack of the shrieking boys" and their mothers begging to be killed in favor of seeing their children raped and tortured.

Your government has just lobbied for and Congress has passed legislation to discard the Geneva Conventions and mandate all this.

Pedophiles nationwide should rejoice - they can comfortably take a stroll down to the local swimming pool, grab whoever they like, drag them home, rape and torture them, and then in their defense cite the U.S. government as an example of how one should conduct themselves.

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

Could that possibly be because they are knowingly committing war crimes?

The legislating of torture itself should be a criminal act. All laws that contradict the U.S. Constitution are null and void. It was once a law that black people were slaves.

Only by engaging in civil disobedience and refusing to tolerate or acknowledge the laws of a criminal regime that has greased the skids for sexually torturing kids can we ever have a hope of returning America to its past glory.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoRjbIQMXGQ&eurl=

[Stereotype.003]

Oh you totaly tubular liberals bitch about everything. Why can't you see that Bush just has our best interests in mind? There are terrorists in our mists and they need to be found. It's as simple as that. If you don't like it go smoke another bowl. tHe cOpszeR sTateS dOoOOdZ! theY cOmE fOr mY cHiLdReNz dOoOod! nOt CoOl mAn!

[lord_casek]

i'm not a liberal. i wonder how many times i have had to say that?

 

and no, he doesn't have "our" best interest at mind. no more habeas

corpus means big trouble. have you even read the bill? they can strip away

our citizenship and torture us. even if aquitted in the star chamber (military tribunal

courts), they can hold anyone indefinitely.

 

 

you cease to surprise me with your insane comments. why don't you go join the cfr so you can be with your own kind?

[lord_casek]

Many Rights in U.S. Legal System Absent in New Bill

 

Washington Post | September 29, 2006

By R. Jeffrey Smith

 

The military trials bill approved by Congress lends legislative support for the first time to broad rules for the detention, interrogation, prosecution and trials of terrorism suspects far different from those in the familiar American criminal justice system.

 

President Bush's argument that the government requires extraordinary power to respond to the unusual threat of terrorism helped him win final support for a system of military trials with highly truncated defendant's rights. The United States used similar trials on just four occasions: during the country's revolution, the Mexican-American War, the Civil War and World War II.

 

Included in the bill , passed by Republican majorities in the Senate yesterday and the House on Wednesday, are unique rules that bar terrorism suspects from challenging their detention or treatment through traditional habeas corpus petitions. They allow prosecutors, under certain conditions, to use evidence collected through hearsay or coercion to seek criminal convictions.

 

The bill rejects the right to a speedy trial and limits the traditional right to self-representation by requiring that defendants accept military defense attorneys. Panels of military officers need not reach unanimous agreement to win convictions, except in death penalty cases, and appeals must go through a second military panel before reaching a federal civilian court.

 

By writing into law for the first time the definition of an "unlawful enemy combatant," the bill empowers the executive branch to detain indefinitely anyone it determines to have "purposefully and materially" supported anti-U.S. hostilities. Only foreign nationals among those detainees can be tried by the military commissions, as they are known, and sentenced to decades in jail or put to death.

 

At the same time, the bill immunizes U.S. officials from prosecution for cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of detainees who the military and the CIA captured before the end of last year. It gives the president a dominant but not exclusive role in setting the rules for future interrogations of terrorism suspects.

 

Written largely, but not completely, on the administration's terms, with passages that give executive branch officials discretion to set details or divert from its protections, the bill is meant to provide what Bush said yesterday are "the tools" needed to handle terrorism suspects U.S. officials hope to capture.

 

For more than 57 months after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush maintained that he did not need congressional authorization of such tools. But the Supreme Court decided otherwise in June, declaring the administration's detainee treatment and trial procedures illegal, and ruling that Bush must first seek Congress's approval.

 

Now Bush has received much of the authority he desired from party loyalists and a handful of Democrats on Capitol Hill. "The American people need to know we're working together," Bush told senators before yesterday's vote.

 

But Tom Malinowski, the Washington office director for Human Rights Watch, said Bush's motivation is partly to protect his reputation by gaining congressional endorsement of controversial actions already taken. "He's been accused of authorizing criminal torture in a way that has hurt America and could come back to haunt our troops. One of his purposes is to have Congress stand with him in the dock," Malinowski said.

 

The bill contains some protections unavailable to the eight Nazi saboteurs who came ashore in the United States in 1942 and were captured two weeks later. Six were executed that year after a closed military trial on the fifth floor of Justice Department headquarters. That proceeding was upheld by the Supreme Court in a decision it explained two months after the electrocutions.

 

Under the new procedures, trials are supposed to be open, but can be closed to protect the security of individuals or information expected to harm national security. Defendants have a right to be present, unless they are disruptive, and a right to examine and respond to the evidence against them. Proof of guilt must exceed a reasonable doubt.

 

Many constitutional experts say, however, that the bill pushes at the edges of so much settled U.S. law that its passage will not be the last word on America's detainee policies. They predict it will shift the public debate to the federal courts, a forum where the administration has had less success getting its way on counterterrorism policies.

 

"This is a full-employment act for lawyers," said Deborah Perlstein, who directs the U.S. Law and Security Program at the New York-based nonprofit group Human Rights First.

 

Former White House associate counsel Bradford A. Berenson, a supporter of the bill and one of the authors of the rules struck down by the Supreme Court, agreed. "Some of the most creative legal minds are going to be devoted to poking holes in this," he said.

 

Anticipating court challenges, the administration attempted to make the bill bulletproof by including provisions that would sharply restrict judicial review and limit the application of international treaties -- signed by Washington -- that govern the rights of wartime detainees.

 

The bill also contains blunt assertions that it complies with U.S. treaty obligations.

 

University of Texas constitutional law professor Sanford V. Levinson described the bill in an Internet posting as the mark of a "banana republic." Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh said that "the image of Congress rushing to strip jurisdiction from the courts in response to a politically created emergency is really quite shocking, and it's not clear that most of the members understand what they've done."

 

In contrast, Douglas W. Kmiec, a professor of constitutional law at Pepperdine University, said Congress "did reasonably well in terms of fashioning a fair" set of procedures. But Kmiec and many others say they cannot predict how the Supreme Court will respond to the provision barring habeas corpus rights, which he said will leave "a large body of detainees with no conceivable basis to challenge their detentions."

 

There are other likely flashpoints. In the Supreme Court's June decision overturning previous administration policies, four members of the court who joined the majority opinion said conspiracy is not a war crime. The new bill says it is.

 

Georgetown University law professor Neal Katyal said the bill's creation of two systems of justice -- military commissions for foreign nationals and regular criminal trials for U.S. citizens -- may violate the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which requires equal protection of the laws to anyone under U.S. jurisdiction.

 

"If you're an American citizen, you get the Cadillac system of justice. If you're a foreigner or a green-card holder, you get this beat-up-Chevy version," he said.

[El Mamerro]

That was a bullshit troll account, not the real Stereotype. Banned.

[lord_casek]

oh damn. what'd stereotype do?

[El Mamerro]

It's pretty obvious whoever created that account (v.003) is just trying to mock the real Stereotype (v.0002) by being 10x more obnoxious and painting him out to be a Bush lover. So, for that reason, banned.

[lord_casek]

It's pretty obvious whoever created that account (v.003) is just trying to mock the real Stereotype (v.0002) by being 10x more obnoxious and painting him out to be a Bush lover. So, for that reason, banned.

 

didn't even realize that v.003

[lord_casek]

Americans may be held as 'enemy combatants,' appeals court rules

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/08/enemy.combatants/

[--->]

I guess this is the part where they come kicking in our doors for what we say on the internet to drag us and our families off never to be seen again. I'm sure people on here will still find new clever ways to argue that this isn't a police state though.

[Larry Pubes]

yea, or some will find really stupid ass ways to argue it's already full blown.

[lord_casek]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:2:./temp/~c1098By76F::

 

here's the bill ^

[lord_casek]

yea, or some will find really stupid ass ways to argue it's already full blown.

 

it is most certainly full blown. america is no more.

[Anthony from Brooklyn]

wtf. Somebody tell me this shit isn't as bad as the article makes it seem.

 

Am I getting this shit right, if the government thinks I'm connected to terrorism they can torture my children?! That seems unimaginable. I mean that's some shit the Japanese did during the Nanking Massacre. That's the fucking Nanking Massacre. Some the most vile shit ever done in human history. And the US is planning to use these methods on their own citizens?

 

As bad as it is, I can conceive sleep deprevation, months of solitary, beatings abuse, sexual humiliation. I can comprehend my government doing something like that, but sexually torturing children? I can't belive that. it can't be that bad.

[HardyHarHar]

Kudos on banning that Stereotype.411 asshole. I'm really pissed that this got passed. Scratch that. I'm really pissed that something like nine Democratic senators voted for this to be passed. Fuck that. This law is like the acid test of whether you are a neo-con/neo-nazi, or whether you believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (and justice).

[--->]

yea, or some will find really stupid ass ways to argue it's already full blown.

 

 

You don't even live here. You live on a tropical island with El Mamero and "Stereotype".:lol:

[HardyHarHar]

And sexual torture is in the play-book, believe you-me, just look at the photos of naked detainees stacked up, and Whatever-her-face England pointing at that masked detainee's dick. Sexual torture for gods sake, Fuck that. Impeach Congress!

[lord_casek]

Oh by the way, most analysts agree that this will be challenged and taken to the supreme court who will more than likely kick it back to congress. Even though it should never exist in the first place.

 

 

Gonzales Cautions Judges on Interfering

 

 

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/09/29/national/w084539D78.DTL

[lord_casek]

Kudos on banning that Stereotype.411 asshole. I'm really pissed that this got passed. Scratch that. I'm really pissed that something like nine Democratic senators voted for this to be passed. Fuck that. This law is like the acid test of whether you are a neo-con/neo-nazi, or whether you believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (and justice).

 

not a single vote against this. think about that. not one single vote.

 

there is no distinguishable line between democrat and republican at this moment in time.

 

 

 

p.s.: to the guy with kids up top on the thread, i don't want you to be scared. it's not my intent.

i want you to be angry and ready to fight for your loved ones, your countrymen. if we don't participate

in this, if we fight with everything we have, their system will break.

[--->]

wtf. Somebody tell me this shit isn't as bad as the article makes it seem.

 

Am I getting this shit right, if the government thinks I'm connected to terrorism they can torture my children?!

 

 

It's actually worse than that. "Enemy combatant" is just a blanket term that most people associate with "terrorist". That's what they want people to think... "terrorist". What it really means is anybody that's against the government in any way. It includes activists, protestors, journalists, other politicians, and people like you and me speaking out on the internet.

People REALY need to get ready for some shit. What would our forefathers have done? What would our grandfathers WHO FAUGHT THE NAZI'S have done if this shit went down in their time???

[--->]

Fuck that. Impeach Congress!

 

 

Impeach DC!!!

[--->]

....

[lord_casek]

Impeach DC!!!

 

we need to get the pitchforks and torches ready.

[--->]

p.s.: to the guy with kids up top on the thread, i don't want you to be scared. it's not my intent.

i want you to be angry and ready to fight for your loved ones, your countrymen. if we don't participate

in this, if we fight with everything we have, their system will break.

 

 

 

THANK YOU!!!!!

[lord_casek]

ps.: if you don't like the sf gate for your news (speaking of the gonzalez article i posted above)

why not try usa today?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-29-gonzales_x.htm?csp=34

[lord_casek]

THANK YOU!!!!!

 

you're welcome.

 

i'd just expect that of all of you.

you guys know what to do. don't roll

over and be sheep to these assholes.

they are ruining our country.

 

when it comes time, i want you guys to remind your

local cops and military friends and aquaintances

that they did take an oath to uphold the constitution.

[Anthony from Brooklyn]

not a single vote against this. think about that. not one single vote.

 

there is no distinguishable line between democrat and republican at this moment in time.

 

 

 

p.s.: to the guy with kids up top on the thread, i don't want you to be scared. it's not my intent.

i want you to be angry and ready to fight for your loved ones, your countrymen. if we don't participate

in this, if we fight with everything we have, their system will break.

 

Ohh no, I don't have kids, I was just saying hypothetically. I'm from a big family though, so there's kids everywhere, and I care for them very much.

 

I was aware of the sexual torture, but sexually torturing innocent kids? That is so beyond evil, it's mind boggling.

 

Ohh and I think most Americans are far too complacent (and will remain that way) for the system to break.

[lord_casek]

well, it seems that way (that americans are complacent)

but more are waking from the slumber we were all under

for so long.

 

america is a great country. we were, at one time, the greatest on the planet.

respected everywhere.

 

people will remember. i have faith in them. some won't.

some will try and goose step with the neo-cons thinking that

they can go along for the ride, too.

[--->]

 

Ohh and I think most Americans are far too complacent (and will remain that way) for the system to break.

 

 

This is why EVERY ONE OF YOU has to become the annoying asshole (like me... annoying asshole) and do what you can to snap everybody you know back into reality.... It's never too late.

[lord_casek]

i can't wait to see what theo huxtable has to say about this.

theo aka mamerro? j/k