"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite." Senator William Jenner, 1954
Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will
Survive WMD Attack! [HINT!!]
Friday, Nov. 21, 2003
Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military
operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he
gave to the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado.
In the magazine’s December edition, the former commander of the military’s
Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass
destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have
catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government.
Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11,
Franks said that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists acquire
and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy
casualties.
If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses
what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a
couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”
Franks then offered “in a practical sense” what he thinks would happen in the
aftermath of such an attack.
“It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist,
massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be
in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our
own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a
repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins
to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”
Franks didn’t speculate about how soon such an event might take place.
Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake
of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil
liberties and sets a dangerous precedent.
But Franks’ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official
to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a
military form of government.
The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in
Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades
in the Army.
Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for
valor. Known as a “soldier’s general,” Franks made his mark as a top commander
during the U.S.’s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in
1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda attacked the
United States on Sept. 11.
Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare
to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden.
Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado,
including:
President Bush: “As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be
judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having
been appraised properly by those who would say he’s not very smart. I find the
contrary. I think he’s very, very bright. And I suspect that he’ll be judged
as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively.
Probably we’ll think of him in years to come as an American hero.”
On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon
brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed
with the president’s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.
“I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein
had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of
America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his
commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last
dozen or so years. So we have intent.
“If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country,
and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime
may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our
actions and orders as leaders in this country?”
The Pentagon’s deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its
most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He
recalled that when his staff identified the most notorious Iraqis the U.S.
wanted to capture, “it just turned out that the number happened to be about
the same as a deck of cards. And so somebody said, ‘Aha, this will be the ace
of spades.’”
Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been
captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner
than Osama bin laden.
“The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I
won’t say that’ll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable.”
Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. “It’s not in the
history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of
man. ... I doubt that we’ll ever have a time when the world will actually be
at peace.”
source: John O. Edwards, NewsMax.com
Watch below video to learn how close you are to living under total government tyranny!
U.S. troops returning from duty in Iraq will be carrying out homeland patrols - Sept 24/08
Cheney and Bush Declare Autonomous Dictatorial Powers - June 25/2007
Exempt themselves from executive branch
Congress passes `doomsday' plan - Boston Herald | January 9, 2005
By Noelle Straub WASHINGTON - With no fanfare, the U.S. House has passed a controversial doomsday provision that would allow a handful of lawmakers to run Congress if a terrorist attack or major disaster killed or incapacitated large numbers of congressmen.
"I think (the new rule) is terrible in a whole host of ways - first, I think it's unconstitutional,'' said Norm Ornstein, a counselor to the independent Continuity of Government Commission, a bipartisan panel created to study the issue. "It's a very foolish thing to do, I believe, and the way in which it was done was more foolish.''
But supporters say the rule provides a stopgap measure to allow the government to continue functioning at a time of national crisis.
GOP House leaders pushed the provision as part of a larger rules package that drew attention instead for its proposed ethics changes, most of which were dropped.
Usually, 218 lawmakers - a majority of the 435 members of Congress - are required to conduct House business, such as passing laws or declaring war.
But under the new rule, a majority of living congressmen no longer will be needed to do business under "catastrophic circumstances.''
Instead, a majority of the congressmen able to show up at the House would be enough to conduct business, conceivably a dozen lawmakers or less.
The House speaker would announce the number after a report by the House Sergeant at Arms. Any lawmaker unable to make it to the chamber would effectively not be counted as a congressman.
The circumstances include "natural disaster, attack, contagion or similar calamity rendering Representatives incapable of attending the proceedings of the House.''
The House could be run by a small number of lawmakers for months, because House vacancies must be filled by special elections. Governors can make temporary appointments to the Senate.
Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.), one of few lawmakers active on the issue, argued the rule change contradicts the U.S. Constitution, which states that "a majority of each (House) shall constitute a quorum to do business.
"Changing what constitutes a quorum in this way would allow less than a dozen lawmakers to declare war on another nation,'' Baird said.
[Original source link to above article]
http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=62564
[Similar article published here by CBS] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/22/politics/main613272.shtml
They've been planning to destroy the constitution for some time... watch below.
FEMA Power Grab - Oliver North and COG plans
Only pro-war groups are allowed freedom of speech in police state Amerika as cops kidnap people who recite the very document they swore an oath to protect and uphold
Peaceful onlookers were arrested by police for reading the Constitution while a pro-war group was allowed full freedom of speech in Washington DC recently in another flagrant example of how American cops are now the enforcers of a tyrannical police state.
Police are required to swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution but this didn't stop them from kidnapping members of the Code Pink group, who gathered on a nearby sidewalk to calmly express their disagreement with a Neo-Con pro-war event taking place nearby by reading the bill of rights.
The pro-occupation group "Vets for Freedom" held a rally at Upper Senate Park, Washington DC, on Saturday September 22nd. Their guest speakers included Neo-Con criminals John McCain, Johny Isakson and Joe Lieberman.
[...........]
The events echo similar incidents across the pond in Britain, where a woman was questioned by police and entered into the anti-terror database for reading a mainstream newspaper that had an anti-war headline.
In October 2005, another woman was arrested and convicted for reading out names of British soldiers killed in Iraq at central London's Cenotaph. [full report]
CNN: Americans May Need Passport To Have Picnic in a Park - August 16/2007
__________________________________________________________
Government seems to be a magnet for people thirsty for power, and all countries are affected.
Did you know Canada's CSIS was involved in bombing an Air India flight that killed over 300?
Watch below video.... then go to our CSIS page for more shocking revelations.
Click here for: 'Ready for Police State?'
Rule by fear or rule by law? Lewis Seiler, Dan Hamburg, February 4, 2008
"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist." - Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943
Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of "new programs" require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?
Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in response to "a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order."
The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike.
Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.
U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up with a new way to expand the domestic "war on terror." Her Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a commission to "examine and report upon the facts and causes" of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make legislative recommendations on combatting it.
According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping investigative power to combat it.
A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.
What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?
The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.
Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc. Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director.
This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle
__
FBI's Mueller: Al-Qaida Has Intent to Use Nuclear Weapons - June 11/2007
Al-Qaida Plans Nuclear Attacks on 7 U.S. Cities - May 31/07
FBI's Mueller: Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities with Nuclear Weapons - May 15/07
Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.
In an exclusive interview, Mueller also acknowledged that bin Laden is still active, though isolated. The director revealed that the Bureau believes the terrorist leader continues to communicate with al-Qaida cells, some of which remain in the U.S.
Mueller declined to say how often bin Laden communicates or to elaborate on the substance of his communications.
===
US Army Announces Readiness for Total Military Takeover of America
Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that final steps towards a full Military Dictatorship of the United States have been taken with the US Army announcing USARNORTH has now reached ‘full operational capacity’ and is now ready to:
“Execute homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities missions”, and “Conduct the Army-to-Army portion of the theater cooperation mission with Canada and Mexico”.
Click headline for full story..
===
Bush orders contingency plans for attack on U.S.
WASHINGTON — President Bush issued a formal national security directive Wednesday
ordering agencies to prepare contingency plans for a surprise, "decapitating" attack on the
federal government, and assigned responsibility for coordinating such plans to the White House.
The prospect of a nuclear bomb being detonated in Washington without warning, whether
smuggled in by terrorists or a foreign government, has been cited by many security analysts
as a rising concern since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The order makes explicit that the focus of federal worst-case planning involves a covert nuclear
attack against the capital, in contrast with Cold War beliefs that a long-range strike would be
preceded by a notice of minutes or hours as missiles were fueled and launched.
MI5: Iran and Al Qaeda Planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki”
Intelligence report says UK may be target of a huge attack this Summer
Homeland Security: "Many More 9/11s Are Inevitable" June 7/07
Solution provided is to take everyone's fingerprints, email addresses and credit card details
*They need to scare you silly, first [link].....
See Also: False Flag Page and Propaganda Starting
Softdrink ad envisions future Police State
Will Americans Seek Repeal Of Constitution Killing Enabling Act?
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | October 3 2006 The end of the U.S. Constitution and the impending passage of George W. Bush's own Enabling Act are of little importance to a U.S. media fixated with the lurid e mails of a pervert politician. Will Americans focus on what really matters and seek a repeal of HR 6166?We have the legal precedent and the unmitigated necessity to lobby and protest for repeal legislation of this draconian power grab to be introduced in the U.S. Senate. It was only through public pressure that legislation to repeal drug companies' immunity to lawsuits caused by gross negligence and vaccine damage (The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act) was introduced and is still under the consideration of the Senate.Will Democrats, the majority of whom voted to hand Bush a mandate that puts him above the law, ever back up their rhetoric and challenge this horrific attack on the Bill of Rights? Will Americans push for a similar repeal of Bush's Military Commissions Act? A legal mandate for absolute power that greases the skids for American citizens to be labeled enemy combatants, disappeared and tortured?Left-leaning commentators and blogs are aghast that the bill would pave the way for immigrants to be deported or detained in a similar vein to the world war two Japanese internment program - a sentiment that only emboldens Neo-Con cheerleaders to further praise the legislation. The crux of the issue that left-gatekeepers have played their part in overshadowing is that the bill allows U.S. citizens to be targeted as terrorists, kidnapped and stripped of all legal rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. Top legal scholars have expressed their shock at the scope of the so-called "compromise" legislation.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."As we reported on Friday, the bill also contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal. It also preemptively criminalizes any challenge to the legislation's legality by the Supreme Court or any United States court and allows the use of torture that is, "incidental to lawful sanctions."Detainment facilities on American soil have already been set up to handle an influx of prisoners in anticipation of a major nuclear or biological terror attack or widespread race riots. At the start of the year Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root were awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency. The fact that freedom in America was officially buried last Thursday was swiftly knocked off the top of the news cycle by more school shootings, more mindless celebrity gossip, and a morbid fascination with the perverted ramblings of Republican Congressman Mark Foley.The White House is deliberately fanning the flames of this faux controversy by having Press Secretary Tony Snow downplay Foley's actions as "naughty e mails." This arrogant dismissal causes a new wave of righteous outrage to wash over the blogosphere and give the story legs for the rest of the week - just enough time for the Military Commissions Act to safely reach Bush's desk. There is no question that Foley needs to be investigated and have a restraining order slapped on him for life but press saturation of the story has diverted attention from the most egregious affront to liberty since the PATRIOT Act - as Bush prepares to put the final signature on the American Police State._______________________ Software Being Developed to Monitor Opinions of U.S. - ERIC LIPTON / NY Times | October 5 2006 |
Tommy Franks Defends Dubai Ports Deal
Former CENTCOM commanding general Tommy Franks said Wednesday that the Bush administration was right to approve a deal for a United Arab Emirates-based company to run six major U.S. ports.
"We have more U.S. Navy ships using the port in Dubai, Jebel Ali, than any other port outside the United States," Franks told Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes."
The former Iraq war commander explained U.S. reliance on the Dubai port facility by saying, "We know the difference between an enemy and a friend."
"The Emirates is a friend," Franks aid. "That is the best run port that I've ever seen."
Gen. Franks said the Dubai company had three essential qualities that commend it for the task of running U.S. ports: The capacity to handle the job, the inclination to do it right and security, which he noted "will remain, in any case, in the hands of the United States Coast Guard."
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006/230206Franks.htm
Documents Reveal White House Deal on Ports - Associate Press story. Feb. 23/06
----------------------------------------------------------
Law Suite Filed Against Franks, et al.
General Tommy Franks calls for Repeal of US Constitution
www.globalresearch.ca 23 November 2003 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/EDW311A.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commentary on General Franks' Statement
The Criminalization of the State by Michel Chossudovsky, 23 November 2003
In the wake of the Iraq war, 18 Iraqis and 2 Jordanians introduced a class action law suit in a Brussels Court against General Franks, Commander of the US Armed Forces in Iraq.
Based on the law of “universal jurisdiction”, characteristic of Belgian law concerning genocide and war crimes, General Franks was identified:
"for ordering war crimes and for not preventing others from committing them or for providing protection to the perpetrators."
The law suit does not solely implicate General Franks, who was obeying orders from higher up: Under the war agenda, high ranking officials of the Bush administration, members of the military, the US Congress and the Judiciary have been granted the authority not only to commit criminal acts, but also to designate those opposed to these criminal acts as "enemies of the State."
In other words, the "Criminalization of the State", is when war criminals legitimately occupy positions of authority, which enable them to decide "who are the criminals", when in fact they are criminals.
Franks' statement no doubt reflects a consensus within the Military as to how events ought to unfold. It is clear in his mind that the "war on terrorism" provides a justification for repealing the Rule of Law, ultimately with a view to preserving civil liberties.
Franks' interview suggests that an Al Qaeda sponsored terrorist attack will be used as a "trigger mechanism" for a military coup d'état in America. Franks is alluding to a so-called "Pearl Harbor type event" which would be used as a justification for declaring a State of emergency, leading to the establishment of a military government.
In many regards, the militarisation of civilian State institutions is already functional under the facade of a bogus democracy.
General Franks has nonetheless identified with cynical accuracy the precise scenario whereby military rule will be established:
"a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event [will occur] somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event."
This statement from an individual who was actively involved in military and intelligence planning at the highest levels, suggests that the "militarisation of our country" is an ongoing operational assumption. It is part of the broader "Washington consensus". It identifies the Bush administration's "roadmap" of war and Homeland Defense. Needless to say, it is also an integral part of the neoliberal agenda.
The "terrorist massive casualty-producing event" is presented by General Franks as a crucial political turning point. The resulting crisis and social turmoil are intended to facilitate a major shift in US political, social and institutional structures.
In the words of David Rockefeller:
"We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
A similar statement was made by Zbigniew Brzezinski in the Grand Chessboard:
"As America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
The NeoCons' Project for the New American Century (PNAC), published in September 2000, barely two months before the presidential elections, called for:
"some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor." (See http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAC304A.html )
What is terrifying in General Franks' statement is that it accurately reflects official US foreign policy. It comes from a man who obeys orders emanating from the military command structure.
In other words, his statement accurately reveals the Pentagon's frame of mind. Moreover, it comes from a military man who speaks with a profound sense of conviction, who firmly believes in the righteousness of war as a means to safeguarding democratic values. [Or as we now know - Military Police states, and suspension of the Constitution he allegedly took oath to protect]
In other words, the military actors and politicians are totally blinded by the "war on terrorism" dogma. Truth is falsehood and falsehood is truth. Realities are turned upside down. Acts of war are heralded as "humanitarian interventions" geared towards upholding democracy. Military occupation and the killing of civilians are presented as "peace-keeping operations." The repeal of democracy is portrayed by General Franks as a means to providing "domestic security" and upholding civil liberties.
Needless to say: any attempt by antiwar critics to reveal these "inconsistencies" or "unanswered questions" would --under General Frank's scenario-- be defined as a "criminal act". In other words, those who are investigating "the war on terrorism" and the military, political and economic actors behind the New World Order, with a view to establishing the truth, are categorized as "enemies of the State", and consequently as criminals:
"The 'war on terrorism' is the cover for the war on dissent."
("Homeland Defense" and the Militarisation of America by Frank Morales, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR309A.html , September 2003)
=========================================================
For further details on the war crimes law suit against General Franks, see:
Court case against General Franks in Brussels: No impunity for war crimes committed by U.S. troops in Iraq:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/COU305A.html
The Genocide and War Crimes Case against General Tommy Franks in Brussels:
US Lawyers Sue Rumsfeld in Karlsruhe
A renowned US human right organization submits charge on today's Tuesday in Karlsruhe against US Secretaries of Defense Rumsfeld and nine further US-official. She accuses war crimes and offences against international law in Iraq to them.
Frankfurt A. M. · 29. November · The announcement at the Federal Prosecutor's Office in Karlsruhe, whose text of the Frankfurt round rundschau is present, is directed against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the former secret service boss George Tenet, against general Ricardo Sanchez as well as sieved further functionaries of military and US government.
The center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) accuses to them in connection with the scandal around the US prison Abu Ghraib in Iraq war crime committed as well as against international law and UN Folterkonvention to have offended. The center represents also the interests of prisoners on the US base Guantánamo.
"the US authorities do not make recognizable institutes to pull the responsible persons for tortures in Abu Ghraib the account", justified US lawyer and CCR president Michael Ratner the resolution to refund in Germany announcement.
Despite "convincing reports" that tortures were abgesegnet directly or indirectly "by highest functionaries of the US government", are limited the military to treat the offences as act of individual Sadisten. International law is at one point, which the most powerful state of the world tries to lodge a complaint for itself special rights said Ratner of the FR . If these obvious offences against international law should not be punished, threaten "a relapse in the Middle Ages".
The US lawyers support themselves by the German people penal code, according to which war crimes, crimes can be pursued against the humanity and genocide, if no Germans are involved and the passing took place not here.
"the German right is world-wide prominent here", said Peter Weiss, Vize-Praesident of the CCR. because the US law with the clearing-up Abu Ghraibs fails and the international criminal court by Washington is not recognized, has one decided to use national criminal law."we are not a group of cranks", stressed the citizen of Berlin human right lawyer Wolfgang Kaleck. In the summer the highest Court of Justice of the USA decided upon the request of the CCR that the interned ones would have the right to complain against their detention before US courts. "I hope, the Federal Prosecutor's Office take our affair seriously and leave myself on an examination of circumstances", said Kaleck.
Need another motive? Meet the Carlyle Group - the Bush family contractors.
911's Older Sister: Operation Northwoods
Dr. Eric R. Pianka gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science last month in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus. Pianka's chilling comments, and their enthusiastic reception again underscore the elite's agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.Standing in front of a slide of human skulls, Pianka gleefully advocated airborne ebola as his preferred method of exterminating the necessary 90% of humans, choosing it over AIDS because of its faster kill period.
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | April 4 2006 [< link]
"Any UK citizen who refuses to be marked as cattle of the state and carry a national ID card must leave the country before 2008 or face fines and prison sentences as the government cracks down on refusniks."
Fox News Says
Hezbollah 'Certain' To Nuke Major City
Channel is terror group's biggest cheerleader as
Americans
hit with the sum of all fearmongering
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | July 27 2006
Following the ceaseless bombing of Lebanon, Fox News has gone thermonuclear in its mission to drive fear into the hearts of Americans by insisting that Hezbollah's use of a nuclear device in a major US or Israeli city is inevitable and that only increased surveillance of Americans can stop it.Couched in a bizarre Hannity and Colmes demonstration, where a Geiger counter (soon to be a common household object apparently) was used to measure radiation of packets placed in the two presenter's pockets, guest Cham Dallas, director for the Center for Mass Destruction Defense, was determined to get his message across.
Dallas: Sometime in the future there's going to be a nuclear weapon used in the United States - certainly a radiological device is going to be used and a lot of radioactivity is going to fall on American citizens.Colmes: You say that like it's a certainty, like there's no question it's going to happen.
Dallas: There's no doubt in my mind that at some point in the future we will have a radiological device probably soon and a nuclear device at some point five or ten years after.[Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLZS_h-Y_i4&eurl= ]
Dallas fingered Pakistan and North Korea as the likely suppliers of nuclear weapons without informing the viewers that the receipts for this technology are in the hands of the US government - Rumsfeld fast-tracking nuclear capability to North Korea and the Bush family protecting A.Q. Khan's network.Not content with saying it twice, Dallas snapped up the chance provided by Hannity to repeat his doomsday creed a third time.
Hannity (referring to Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda): Do you doubt that these terror groups could get a weapon - if they did there's no doubt they would use it against Israel is there?Dallas: There's no doubt in mind that if I should say when one of these terror groups gets a weapon like Hezbollah - within the next decade - they will use it within a time of their choosing, but they would use it.
And a fourth time!
Dallas: I'm certain of it.
And a fifth time!Hannity: You're certain of it - you have no doubt?
Dallas: There's no doubt in my mind about it.Five times in the space of two minutes - nuke - major city - inevitable - rinse, wash, repeat.
Nuke - major city - inevitable - sell your rights down the river for a geiger counter.
As if this overdose of 'duck and cover' type fearmongering wasn't enough to stomach, the next day Fox's 'Big Story' show hosted by John Gibson picked up the 'you're all gonna die' baton and ran with it with glee.
Gibson's guest was CEO of Investigative Management Group Robert Strang, who makes a mint from building up security companies and selling them on for tidy profits - hyping imaginary terror threats puts bread on his table.Set to accompanying booms and explosions on one side of the screen, Gibson and Strang eulogized about Hezbollah's ties to Al-Qaeda and how their deadly cells were ready for activation within the US.
Saying a massive terror attack on US or Israeli soil was all but certain, Strang pleaded with fellow guest Judge Andrew Napolitano to increase surveillance of phone calls and e mails - intoning that only Big Brother could save us from the inevitability of mushroom clouds over America.
Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism
Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth
of the dictatorship
Click here for: 'Ready for Police State?'
See Also: False Flag Page or Propaganda Starting or Secret Societies
Please help us spread the truth, and help preserve your rights and heritage
with a donation of your choosing... Click 'make a donation' button
below. We depend on donations to maintain this website.
Thank You!!!
.