Liberate Marijuana !

Bill to Tax, Regulate Marijuana Introduced in California | NowPublic News Coverage

[Opinion] Bill to Tax, Regulate Marijuana Introduced in California
Share: Email Story Add to Any Digg Facebook Stumbleupon
by mabone | February 24, 2009 at 09:34 pm
284 views | 10 Recommendations | 4 comments
Videos
WHY I HATE FOX NEWS, GLENN BECK & EVERYONE ELSE THERE!

see larger video

uploaded by lefty_liberated

by Bruce Mirken

Bruce Mirken

California state Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) today announced the introduction of legislation to tax and regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcoholic beverages. The bill, the first of its kind ever introduced in California, would create a regulatory structure similar to that used for beer, wine, and liquor, permitting taxed sales to adults while barring sales to or possession by those under 21.

Estimates based on federal government statistics have shown marijuana to be California’s top cash crop, valued at approximately $14 billion in 2006 — nearly twice the combined value of the state’s number two and three crops, vegetables ($5.7 billion) and grapes ($2.6 billion) — in spite of massive “eradication” efforts that wipe out an average of nearly 36,000 cultivation sites per year without making a dent in this underground industry.

Ammiano introduced the measure at a San Francisco press conference this morning, saying, “With the state in the midst of an historic economic crisis, the move towards regulating and taxing marijuana is simply common sense. This legislation would generate much needed revenue for the state, restrict access to only those over 21, end the environmental damage to our public lands from illicit crops, and improve public safety by redirecting law enforcement efforts to more serious crimes,” said Ammiano. “California has the opportunity to be the first state in the nation to enact a smart, responsible public policy for the control and regulation of marijuana.”

“It is simply nonsensical that California’s largest agricultural industry is completely unregulated and untaxed,” said Marijuana Policy Project California policy director Aaron Smith, who also spoke at the news conference. “With our state in an ongoing fiscal crisis — and no one believes the new budget is the end of California’s financial woes — it’s time to bring this major piece of our economy into the light of day.”

Independent experts from around the world, from President Nixon’s National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse in 1972 to a Canadian Senate special committee in 2002, have long contended that criminalizing marijuana users makes little sense, given that marijuana is less addictive, much less toxic, and far less likely to induce aggression or violence than alcohol. For example, in an article in the December 2008 Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, Australian researcher Stephen Kisely noted that “penalties bear little relation to the actual harm associated with cannabis.”

US kills more civilians in Iraq !!!

 Iraq demands official apology for U.S. raid

Iraq girl cries after mother is killed by US military !


April 29th, 2009 10:42 am
Iraq demands official apology for U.S. raid

By Waleed Ibrahim

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The Iraqi government has asked General Ray Odierno, the U.S. commander in Iraq, for an official apology for a U.S. raid this week that killed two people and kicked off a tide of condemnation, an official said on Tuesday.

"The prime minister sent a letter to the commander of multinational forces in Iraq condemning this act. He asked for an official apology and asked that such acts not be repeated," said Major General Qassim Moussawi, Baghdad security spokesman.

The fallout from the raid early on Sunday in the southern city of Kut, which Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki labeled a "crime," poses the first major test to a U.S.-Iraqi security pact that sets the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by 2012.

Maliki, an increasingly assertive leader as his popularity grows at home and U.S. influence in Iraq diminishes, also said those responsible for the raid should be sent to court -- the first such demand since the pact took effect in January.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the cabinet had discussed on Tuesday the raid that led to the killing of two "innocent citizens."

U.S. officials said the raid, targeting Iranian-backed Shi'ite militants, had Iraqi approval. Six people were arrested in the night-time operation but later released.

They said the man killed was considered a threat because he was carrying a weapon and that the woman moved into the line of fire.

COMMANDERS DETAINED

After the incident, Iraq detained two military commanders for authorizing the raid, the Defense Ministry said.

The cabinet called for "compliance with the points of the pact and for legal proceedings regarding those responsible."

While the rampant violence gripping Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 has subsided, bloodshed has not ended.

Iraqi and U.S. security forces confront a weakened, yet still potent, insurgency while a rash of major recent bombings raises questions about whether Iraq may be sliding backwards into greater sectarian violence.

At the same time, U.S. combat troops are due to pull out of urban bases by July. Under the bilateral pact, U.S. troops can now conduct combat activities only with Iraqi approval.

The pact also sets out conditions under which U.S. soldiers might be tried in Iraqi courts, allowing such trials only for grave, premeditated crimes committed off base and off duty. Otherwise U.S. troops are subject only to U.S. military justice.

The Kut raid did not appear to meet the criteria for a court trial in Iraq.

Moussawi declined to clarify whether the government believes the soldiers should be sent to an Iraqi court or face U.S. military courts. "The conditions set out in the agreement determine what kind of court," he said.

Families of the two people killed in the raid, a man and a woman, have said they are pressing charges.

Young Iraq girl cries after her mother is killed by US military

Welcome to MichaelMoore.com

Young Iraqi girl cries after her mother is killed by U.S. military

Uncomfortable SOFA
After U.S. raid kills two civilians, Iraqi government asks for us to behave as though words of Status of
Forces Agreement have meaning

We Have Good Lawyers
Pact written so only America can
prosecute those responsible

FLASHBACK:
Wiping His Feet on the SOFA
Muntadher al-Zaidi shoe-throwing incident happened during Bush-Maliki press conference about agreement

Members of Congress Call for Special Prosecutor for Bush Officials!

Members of Congress Call for Special Prosecutor for Bush Officials! - Inbox - Yahoo! Mail

June 25: Major Action in DC to Demand Prosecution of Torturers
Plus, Breaking News: Members of Congress Call for Special Prosecutor!

JUNE 25
Please make an urgently needed donation to help us carry out this critical work. We have hundreds of volunteers but we must continue to raise the funds to help this movement continue to grow. Click this link to make a donation. .
Now is the time all of us can make a huge difference.

IndictBushNow and a broad number of organizations are coming together for a major action on June 25, 2009 in front of the Justice Department in Washington DC.

Yesterday, John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and thirteen of his Judiciary colleagues formally appealed to Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor. This dramatic action in Congress is a direct result of the pressure generated by you and millions of other people. The letter to the Attorney General reads: "there can be little doubt that the public interest will be served by appointment of a special counsel. The authorization and use of interrogation techniques that likely amounted to torture has generated tremendous concern and outrage in this country, and has harmed our legal and moral standing in the world."

Please make an urgently needed donation to help us carry out this critical work. We have hundreds of volunteers but we must continue to raise the funds to help this movement continue to grow.

Click this link to make a donation.

More than 400,000 people have signed petitions calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor. A coalition of civil rights and human rights organization presented 250,000 petition signatures to the Attorney General last week. More than 150,000 people have signed the petition at IndictBushNow.

The people of every country must see that We The People of the United States are uniting to demand accountability for those who committed great crimes in our name.

The crimes are too great to let pass. Secret prisons, extraordinary renditions and torture, massive spying on the people of the United States and waging an unprovoked war of aggression on Iraq based on lies and deceit.

People are coming to Washington DC on June 25 from all over the country to say loud and clear: No One Is Above the Law!

Please organize a June 25 IndictBushNow committee in your local area to bring people to Washington DC or, if you are to far away, organize a local June 25th action at the Federal Building or in another central location in your city or town.

Posters, leaflets and logistics information for June 25 will be available in the coming days.

Spread the word. Tell your friends to sign the petition calling for the appointment of a Special Prosecutor by clicking this link.

Donations are urgently needed right now. Show your support by clicking here.

No Torture in Our Name!

-- From all of us at IndictBushNow

Vacate The Siegelman Convictions !!!

Action Page: Vacate The Siegelman Convictions, Help Draft A Real Food Safety Bill, Norm Coleman As Stalker and More - Inbox - Yahoo! Mail

The Stevens Prosecution Was Not Politically Motivated, But The
Siegelman One Was

Former Senator Ted Stevens was allowed to just walk away from the
crimes he has still not been absolved from, because of prosecutorial
abuse. And yet those SAME prosecutors were the ones who cooked up the
framing of Alabama governor Don Siegelman on totally bogus charges,
now affirmed by a partisan all-Republican appellate court, despite a
brief filed by 54 former state attorneys general calling for reversal
of the convictions, and more than that have already written to Holder
calling for him to intervene.

Over the weekend the New York Times called for a "fresh look" at the
Siegelman case. We go further. Holder must immediately reverse the
government's position and ask the Court to vacate the convictions,
and failing all else Obama must pardon Siegelman to stop a gross
miscarriage of justice. Not only that, Congress must finally enforce
the subpoenas that Karl Rove has been thumbing his nose at for over a
year, and he must be compelled to testify about his role in the
politically motivated persecution of Don Siegelman.

Siegelman Action Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/action/pnum979.php

The action page above will send your message to Holder at the DOJ,
and Obama, AND all your members of Congress on the subject "Vacate
The Don Siegelman Convictions, Make Rove Testify Before Congress".
This is a lot of impact from just one click of a mouse, so please
speak out for real justice and do it now.

Or for those of you who would like to speak out thru the new Twitter
channel, here is the form of the reply you can use to submit on this
issue from your own Twitter home page, and you can also add your own
comment to this if you like.

@cxs #p979

For Twitter newbies, or anyone who wants to know more about how to
configure and use the new Twitter option, here is a step by step
explanation of how to make it work.

Twitter Activism Step-By-Step: http://tcxs.net/step_by_step.php

The Real Issues Of Food Safety

We are well aware that various corporate nitpickers and astroturf
groups have tried to diminish your impact on the food safety issues,
but this is yet another huge win for the people.

Witness this affirmation from Mike Michaud, in RESPONSE to our
participants speaking out against HR 875, and who had the integrity
to listen.

"it lacks specific details for implementation and safeguards to
ensure that local and organic farmers are not hurt by legislation
meant to regulate agribusiness."

Witness this from Chellie Pingree in WITHDRAWING her sponsorship of
the bill

"Although I am an advocate for food safety, these bills that affect
small and organic farmers could have unintended consequences."

We were absolutely on the button loudly protesting the vagueness of
HR 875, NONE of this would have happened if we had not spoken out,
and we STAND BY the warnings in the alerts.

Indeed, one of the things we raised the alarm about, in calling for a
REAL food safety bill, instead of the corporate friendly shams being
pushed through Congress, was that the county sized cesspools that
pass for factory farms were BREEDING GROUNDS for the pandemics of the
future.

And lo and behold, as the corporate media this week goes apoplectic
over the prospect of a worldwide swine flu epidemic, we are hearing
reports that the epicenter of the breakout is a giant, poorly
regulated Smithfield (American company) hog facility in Mexico. Could
we have been any more right on target? A couple weeks ago certain
people were dismissive of internet so-called "alarmists". Today top
biologists all over the world are sweating bullets.

Moreover, we feel more strongly than ever that Congress must
immediately enact REAL food safety legislation, with the most
critical particulars being 1) strict new regulation of factory farms
and outlawing of their practices of breeding animals in horrifically
claustrophobic conditions, and forcing them to be accountable for
their massive quantities of animal excrement overflow, 2) banning all
GMO (Genetically Mutated Organisms) in agriculture until
affirmatively PROVEN safe, and full disclose of any such content,
including the use of rBGH (bovine growth hormone) in food labeling,
and 3) outlawing terminator seed technology.

We could add a great deal to this list, and in fact we call on our
participants to email us, ESPECIALLY if you are a food safety
activist, if you have a group that is already working on this, and
let's get our specific competing proposals on the table in fully
drafted form in front of Congress, so everyone can clearly see what a
REAL food safety bill is supposed to look like.

It is critical that we STAY on these issues in a proactive way, lest
the same bad statutory language from HR 875 be inserted into some
other bill.

By the way, has anyone else noticed that Norm Coleman has become the
political equivalent of a stalker? The guy who on election night
called on Franken to surrender for the good of Minnesota, is such a
drop kick hypocrite that he just won't take "No" for an answer. A
recount in such a close race is a right. That recount is done, and
was fair as any recount could be. And now, a strong majority in
Minnesota find Coleman's scorched earth litigation tactics to be
beyond spiteful, even those foolish enough to have voted for him in
the first place. Hopefully they will never make that tragic mistake
again in any race.

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed
to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.

If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at
http://www.peaceteam.net/in.htm

Or if you want to cease receiving our messages, just use the function
at http://www.peaceteam.net/out.htm

Obama and Habeas Corpus -- Then and Now

The Obama administration fights harder for the power to abduct people and imprison them with no charges.

read more | digg story

Fire Bank of America's CEO

While Bank of America's CEO, Ken Lewis, is calling for business as usual, taxpayers are calling for change. It's time for Bank of America to stop the policies and practices that helped crash our economy and hurts its customers with unfair fees and hidden costs.

read more | digg story

Fire Ken Lewis for the $3 Billion in Merril Lynch Bonuses

Emptywheel » Fire Ken Lewis for the $3 Billion in Merrill Lynch Bonuses

Fire Ken Lewis for the $3 Billion in Merrill Lynch Bonuses
By: emptywheel Wednesday April 1, 2009 4:16 am
19
diggs
digg it

I've been meaning to point to Andy Stern's call to give Ken Lewis, CEO of Bank of America, the same treatment Obama gave Wagoner--the boot.

Both Rick Wagoner and Ken Lewis sunk large public companies -- putting thousands out of work and toppling the American economy -- while accepting billions in taxpayer bailouts. Yet only Wagoner got a pink slip. It's time for Treasury Secretary Geithner to replace Ken Lewis as CEO and let real reform take hold at Bank of America.

And Change to Win's petition calling to fire Lewis.

But this tidbit--courtesy of Howie--will really make you want to oust Ken Lewis.

In its last days as an independent company, Merrill gave performance-based bonuses exclusively to employees earning $300,000 a year or more and holding a rank of vice president or higher, according to their financial statements. $3.62 billion was handed out to these executives - a sum equal to 36.2 percent of the $10 billion in taxpayer funds that were allocated to Merrill as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) before the bonuses were paid.

The company had been failing as a result of misadventures in the now infamous mortgaged-backed securities market which began crumbling with the decline of home values as the bubble burst.

The performance bonuses were determined by Merrill's compensation committee on December 8, 2008, before Merrill revealed that it lost $15 billion in the final three months of 2008, unusual timing according to court documents filed by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in an ongoing suit against Merrill's former CEO.

In prior years, Merrill paid performance bonuses of this type after the end of the year, in January or February of the next year.

[snip]

The questionable timing and the amounts of these bonuses were not revealed to Bank of America shareholders when they voted to acquire Merrill. These facts raise questions about what government officials knew about the bonuses and when they knew it, according to Kucinich's letter.

$3.62 billion would keep all of GM in business for a month or two. But you and I are dumping that on a bunch of Merrill Lynch guys who brought down our finance system.
Share spotlight Spotlight
20 Responses to “Fire Ken Lewis for the $3 Billion in Merrill Lynch Bonuses”
klynn April 1st, 2009 at 4:53 am
1

Like I wrote yesterday, I would prefer to bet my tax dollars on saving the auto industry and the auto industry supply chain over these irresponsible, greedy SOB’s.

By the way EW, those execs, who got those bonuses, have been asked to go three months without pay right now…Wonder if that is PR?

WALL STREET SPENT $5 BILLION FOR POLITICAL INFLUENCE

MichaelMoore.com : Report: Wall Street Spent $5 Billion For Political Influence

March 6th, 2009 8:09 pm
Report: Wall Street Spent $5 Billion For Political Influence

By Brian Montopoli / CBS

A group called Wall Street Watch is out with a report that finds that "Wall Street investment firms, commercial banks, hedge funds, real estate companies and insurance conglomerates made $1.7 billion in political contributions and spent another $3.4 billion on lobbyists" between 1998 and 2008.

The report, "Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America," concludes that the contributions were "aimed at undercutting federal regulation" and ultimately "led directly to the current financial collapse."

The two men behind the report are California lawyer Harvey Rosenfield of the nonprofit Consumer Education Foundation and Robert Weissman of Essential Information, a Washington nonprofit "that seeks to curb excessive corporate power."

The report argues that the lobbying and contributions kept financial derivatives from being regulated, led to the repeal of regulatory barriers between commercial banks and investment banks and kept the government from stepping into halt predatory subprime lending. (The authors list "12 Key Policy Decisions Led to Cataclysm" here.)

"Depression-era programs that would have prevented the financial meltdown that began last year were dismantled, and the warnings of those who foresaw disaster were drowned in an ocean of political money," Rosenfield said in a release.

The authors don't blame either political party, noting that roughly 55 percent of the donations went to Republicans and 45 percent to Democrats. In the 2008 election cycle, they note, Democrats received slightly more than half of the financial sector's contributions.

They also say that 142 of the lobbyists employed by 20 "leading financial firms" during this period "were previously high-ranking officials or employees in the Executive Branch or Congress."

The report can be found here.

Stanford and UC Berkeley employs war criminals !

Bushit

Stanford University employs war criminal Condi Rice and UC Berkeley employs war criminal John Yoo. That is amazing how this two distinctive universities do not pay attention to the crimes commited by Condi Rice and John Yoo on the torture of prisoners and other civilians at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and other undisclosed locations.




As national security adviser to former President George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice verbally approved the CIA's request to subject alleged al-Qaida terrorist Abu Zubaydah to waterboarding in July 2002, the earliest known decision by a Bush administration official to OK use of the simulated drowning technique.

Rice's role was detailed in a narrative released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee. It provides the most detailed timeline yet for how the CIA's harsh interrogation program was conceived and approved at the highest levels in the Bush White House.

The new timeline shows that Rice played a greater role than she admitted last fall in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The narrative also shows that dissenting legal views about the severe interrogation methods were brushed aside repeatedly.

People should read the blog FireJohnYoo.org

I think both Condi Rice and John Yoo should be fired from their jobs at Stanford University and UC Berkeley.

Karl Rove guilty in Don Siegelman case

Don Siegelman Home Page features the most current news and media concerning this case.

3/9/09
Ousted governor blames Rove
Interveiw with Rick Sanchez for CNN

Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman says Karl Rove pressed a
corruption case on a federal level for political reasons.

<script src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/js/2.0/video/evp/module.js?loc=dom&vid=/video/politics/2009/03/09/nr.intv.siegelman.rove.cnn" type="text/javascript"></script><noscript>Embedded video from <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video">CNN Video</a></noscript>

Condi Rice, Cheney Approved Waterboarding !!!

Rice, Cheney Approved Waterboarding

Your request is being processed...
Rice, Cheney Approved Waterboarding
digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Rice, Cheney Approved Waterboarding stumble reddit del.ico.us ShareThis RSS

04/23/09 08:15 PM
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Read More: Bush Administration, Condoleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, Torture, Torture Memos, Waterboarding, Politics News
Show your support.
Digg this article.
Condoleezza Rice
Get Breaking News Alerts
never spam

*
Share
*
Print
*
Comments

The Associated Press reports that the highest Bush administration officials signed off on waterboarding:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice verbally OK'd the CIA's request to subject alleged al-Qaida terrorist Abu Zubaydah to waterboarding in July 2002, a decision memorialized a few days later in a secret memo that the Obama administration declassified last week.

Rice's role was detailed in a narrative released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee. It provides the most detailed timeline yet for how the CIA's harsh interrogation program was conceived and approved at the highest levels in the Bush White House.

The new timeline shows that Rice played a greater role than she admitted last fall in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The narrative also shows that dissenting legal views about the severe interrogation methods were brushed aside repeatedly.

But even the new timeline has yet to resolve the central question of who inside the Bush administration first broached the idea of using waterboarding and other brutal tactics against terror detainees in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

The Intelligence Committee's timeline comes a day after the Senate Armed Services Committee released an exhaustive report detailing direct links between the CIA's harsh interrogation program and abuses of prisoners at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in Afghanistan and at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

Both revelations follow President Barack Obama's release of internal Bush administration legal memos that justified the use of severe methods by the CIA, a move that kicked up a firestorm from opposing sides of the ideological spectrum.
Story continues below

According to the new narrative, which compiles legal advice provided by the Bush administration to the CIA, Rice personally conveyed the administration's approval for waterboarding of Zubaydah, a so-called high-value detainee, to then-CIA Director George Tenet in July 2002...

As McClatchy notes, Cheney attended a meeting in 2003 to discuss the continuation of the interrogation program:

The Director of Central Intelligence in the spring of 2003 sought a reaffirmation of the legality of the interrogation methods. Cheney, Rice, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales were among those at a meeting where it was decided that the policies would continue. Rumsfeld and Powell weren't.

The Washington Post reports that the timeline suggests Rumsfeld and Powell were not briefed on the program until September 2003.


The AP continues to discuss the timeline of how the harsh-interrogation methods were approved:

Last fall, Rice acknowledged to the Senate Armed Services Committee only that she had attended meetings where the CIA interrogation request was discussed. She said she did not recall details. Rice omitted her direct role in approving the program in her written statement to the committee.

A spokesman for Rice declined comment when reached Wednesday.

Days after Rice gave Tenet the nod, the Justice Department approved the use of waterboarding in a top secret Aug. 1 memo. Zubaydah underwent waterboarding at least 83 times in August 2002.

In the years that followed, according to the narrative issued Wednesday, there were numerous internal legal reviews of the program, suggesting government attorneys raised concerns that the harsh methods, particularly waterboarding, might violate federal laws against torture and the U.S. Constitution.

But Bush administration lawyers continued to validate the program. The CIA voluntarily dropped the use of waterboarding, which has a long history as a torture tactic, from its arsenal of techniques after 2005.

According to the two Senate reports, CIA lawyers first presented the plan to waterboard Zubaydah to White House lawyers in April 2002, a few weeks after his capture in Pakistan.

In May 2002, Rice, along with then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales met at the White House with the CIA to discuss the use of waterboarding.

The Armed Services Committee report says that six months earlier, in December 2001, the Pentagon's legal office already had made inquiries about the use of mock interrogation and detention tactics to a U.S. military training unit that schools armed forces personnel in how to endure harsh treatment.

In July 2002, responding to a follow-up from the Pentagon general counsel's office, officials at the training unit, the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, detailed their methods for the Pentagon. The list included waterboarding.

But the training unit warned that harsh physical techniques could backfire by making prisoners more resistant. They also cautioned about the reliability of information gleaned from the severe methods and warned that the public and political backlash could be "intolerable."

"A subject in extreme pain may provide an answer, any answer or many answers in order to get the pain to stop," the training officials said in their memo.

Less than a week later, the Justice Department issued two legal opinions that sanctioned the CIA's harsh interrogation program. The memos appeared to draw deeply on the survival school data provided to the Pentagon to show that the CIA's methods would not cross the line into torture.

The opinion concluded that the harsh interrogation methods would be acceptable for use on terror detainees because the same techniques did not cause severe physical or mental pain to U.S. military students who were tested in the government's carefully controlled training program.

Several people from the survival program objected to the use of their mock interrogations in battlefield settings. In an October 2002 e-mail, a senior Army psychologist told personnel at Guantanamo Bay that the methods were inherently dangerous and students were sometimes injured, even in a controlled setting.

"The risk with real detainees is increased exponentially," he said.

Nevertheless, for the next two years, the CIA and military officials received interrogation training and direct interrogation support from JPRA trainers.

Last week, the Obama administration's top intelligence official, Dennis Blair, privately told intelligence employees that "high value information" was obtained through the harsh interrogation techniques. However, on Tuesday, in a written statement, Blair said, "The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means."

European Nations May Investigate Bush Officials Over Prisoner Treatment

MichaelMoore.com : European Nations May Investigate Bush Officials Over Prisoner Treatment

April 23rd, 2009 12:31 pm
European Nations May Investigate Bush Officials Over Prisoner Treatment

By Craig Whitlock / Washington Post

BERLIN, April 21 -- European prosecutors are likely to investigate CIA and Bush administration officials on suspicion of violating an international ban on torture if they are not held legally accountable at home, according to U.N. officials and human rights lawyers.

Many European officials and civil liberties groups said they were disappointed by President Obama's opposition to trials of CIA interrogators who subjected terrorism suspects to waterboarding and other harsh tactics. They said the release last week of secret U.S. Justice Department memos authorizing the techniques will make it easier for foreign prosecutors to open probes if U.S. officials do not.

Some European countries, under a legal principle known as universal jurisdiction, have adopted laws giving themselves the authority to investigate torture, genocide and other human rights crimes anywhere in the world, even if their citizens are not involved. Although it is rare for prosecutors to win such cases, those targeted can face arrest if they travel abroad.

Martin Scheinin, the U.N. special investigator for human rights and counterterrorism, said the interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration clearly violated international law. He said the lawyers who wrote the Justice Department memos, as well as senior figures such as former vice president Richard B. Cheney, will probably face legal trouble overseas if they avoid prosecution in the United States.

"Torture is an international crime irrespective of the place where it is committed. Other countries have an obligation to investigate," Scheinin said in a telephone interview from Cairo. "This may be something that will be haunting CIA officials, or Justice Department officials, or the vice president, for the rest of their lives."

Manfred Nowak, another senior U.N. official who investigates torture accusations, said the Obama administration is violating terms of the U.N. Convention Against Torture by effectively granting amnesty to CIA interrogators. He said the United States, as a signatory to the treaty, is legally obligated to investigate suspected cases of torture. He also said Washington must provide compensation to torture victims, including al-Qaeda leaders who were waterboarded.

"One cannot buy the argument anymore that this does not amount to torture," he said. "These memos are nothing but an attempt to circumvent the absolute prohibition on torture."

Nowak, an Austrian law professor based in Vienna, acknowledged that there is no mechanism in the anti-torture treaty to punish governments that ignore its provisions. From a political standpoint, he said, it is more important for the White House or Congress to authorize an independent commission to conduct a public examination of how terrorism suspects were treated after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

"I still have full trust in the Obama administration to do the right thing," he said in a telephone interview from Bangkok. "It is more important for the United States to overcome a dark chapter in its history."

On Tuesday, Obama for the first time raised the possibility of creating a bipartisan commission to examine the Bush administration's handling of terrorism suspects. He also said he would leave it up to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to determine whether to prosecute senior officials who approved waterboarding and other tactics.

Several CIA and Bush administration officials have been targeted for prosecution in Europe, though the cases have generally not progressed very far.

In Spain, a human rights group is pushing prosecutors to investigative six senior Bush administration officials for allegedly sanctioning the torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Last week, Spanish prosecutors recommended dropping the case after Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido called it a politicized attempt to turn Spanish courts "into a plaything." A Spanish judge will make the final decision.

In Germany, human rights groups have tried to bring charges against former U.S. defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib facility. Germany's federal prosecutor has twice rejected the case, but supporters have appealed in court.

Wolfgang Kaleck, a Berlin lawyer who helped file the complaint against Rumsfeld, said that such cases have failed largely because European courts have ruled that they should be handled in U.S. courts instead. That could change, he said.

"Everybody prefers that prosecutions take place in the U.S.," he said. "But if nothing happens there, then that's the end of the legal argument to dismiss these cases in Europe."

John B. Bellinger III, who was legal adviser to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said European governments will face a worsening legal and political dilemma if human rights groups redouble their efforts to pursue criminal investigations of U.S. officials.

"They realize this will put them in a very difficult position," said Bellinger, now a partner at the law firm Arnold & Porter in Washington. "They will be under pressure from civil liberties groups and some European parliamentarians not to oppose these cases. But if they allow them to go forward, they know it could strain their relationship with the Obama administration, which says it wants to look forward, not back."

Additionally, European governments are unlikely to favor the prosecution of U.S. officials under universal-jurisdiction statutes for practical reasons, he said. For instance, U.S. officials facing charges or indictment could no longer travel to Europe without facing the risk of arrest, a situation that could spiral out of control diplomatically.

"It just sets a bad precedent," he said. "Current and former government officials have to be able to travel. Once you allow one or two of these cases, it could really open the floodgates to actions against officials of many countries."

Condi Rice OK'd CIA waterboard request as Bush advisor !!!

Rice OK'd CIA waterboard request as Bush adviser

Rice OK'd CIA waterboard request as Bush adviser
AP

*
Buzz Up
* Send
o Email
o IM
* Share
o Delicious
o Digg
o Facebook
o Fark
o Newsvine
o Reddit
o StumbleUpon
o Technorati
o Yahoo! Bookmarks
* Print

Featured Topics:

* Barack Obama
* Presidential Transition

Jake Tapper on Torture Memos Play Video ABC News – Jake Tapper on Torture Memos

* Clinton disses Cheney on torture memos Play Video Video:Clinton disses Cheney on torture memos AP
* Obama To Meet With Credit Card Industry Leaders Play Video Barack Obama Video:Obama To Meet With Credit Card Industry Leaders CBS 2 New York
* First Lady: We 'Sneak Out' In Our Free Time Play Video Barack Obama Video:First Lady: We 'Sneak Out' In Our Free Time ABC News

FILE -- In this June 6, 2001 file photo, then National Security Adviser AP – FILE -- In this June 6, 2001 file photo, then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, talks with …
By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer Pamela Hess, Associated Press Writer – Thu Apr 23, 1:35 am ET

WASHINGTON – As national security adviser to former President George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice verbally approved the CIA's request to subject alleged al-Qaida terrorist Abu Zubaydah to waterboarding in July 2002, the earliest known decision by a Bush administration official to OK use of the simulated drowning technique.

Rice's role was detailed in a narrative released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee. It provides the most detailed timeline yet for how the CIA's harsh interrogation program was conceived and approved at the highest levels in the Bush White House.

The new timeline shows that Rice played a greater role than she admitted last fall in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The narrative also shows that dissenting legal views about the severe interrogation methods were brushed aside repeatedly.

The Intelligence Committee's timeline comes a day after the Senate Armed Services Committee released an exhaustive report detailing direct links between the CIA's harsh interrogation program and abuses of prisoners at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in Afghanistan and at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

Both revelations follow President Barack Obama's release of internal Bush administration legal memos that justified the use of severe methods by the CIA, a move that kicked up a firestorm from opposing sides of the ideological spectrum.

According to the new narrative, which compiles legal advice provided by the Bush administration to the CIA, Rice personally conveyed the administration's approval for waterboarding of Zubaydah, a so-called high-value detainee, to then-CIA Director George Tenet in July 2002.

Last fall, Rice acknowledged to the Senate Armed Services Committee only that she had attended meetings where the CIA interrogation request was discussed and asked for the attorney general to conduct a legal review. She said she did not recall details. Rice omitted her direct role in approving the program in her written statement to the committee.

A spokesman for Rice declined comment when reached Wednesday.

Days after Rice gave Tenet the nod, the Justice Department approved the use of waterboarding in a top secret Aug. 1 memo. Zubaydah underwent waterboarding at least 83 times in August 2002.

In the years that followed, according to the narrative issued Wednesday, there were numerous internal legal reviews of the program, suggesting government attorneys raised concerns that the harsh methods, particularly waterboarding, might violate federal laws against torture and the U.S. Constitution.

But Bush administration lawyers continued to validate the program. The CIA voluntarily dropped the use of waterboarding, which has a long history as a torture tactic, from its arsenal of techniques after 2005.

According to the two Senate reports, CIA lawyers first presented the plan to waterboard Zubaydah to White House lawyers in April 2002, a few weeks after his capture in Pakistan. Tenet wrote in his memoir that CIA officers themselves originated the idea.

In May 2002, Rice, along with then-Attorney General John Ashcroft and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales met at the White House with the CIA to discuss the use of waterboarding.

The Armed Services Committee report says that six months earlier, in December 2001, the Pentagon's legal office already had made inquiries about the use of mock interrogation and detention tactics to a U.S. military training unit that schools armed forces personnel in how to endure harsh treatment. A former intelligence official said Wednesday the CIA officers also based their proposed harsh interrogations on the mock interrogation methods used by the unit. He declined to be identified because the CIA had not authorized the disclosure of the information.

In July 2002, responding to a follow-up from the Pentagon general counsel's office, officials at the training unit, the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency, detailed their methods for the Pentagon. The list included waterboarding.

But the training unit warned that harsh physical techniques could backfire by making prisoners more resistant. They also cautioned about the reliability of information gleaned from the severe methods and warned that the public and political backlash could be "intolerable."

"A subject in extreme pain may provide an answer, any answer or many answers in order to get the pain to stop," the training officials said in their memo.

Less than a week later, the Justice Department issued two legal opinions that sanctioned the CIA's harsh interrogation program. The memos appeared to draw deeply on the survival school data provided to the Pentagon to show that the CIA's methods would not cross the line into torture.

The opinion concluded that the harsh interrogation methods would be acceptable for use on terror detainees because the same techniques did not cause severe physical or mental pain to U.S. military students who were tested in the government's carefully controlled training program.

Several people from the survival program objected to the use of their mock interrogations in battlefield settings. In an October 2002 e-mail, a senior Army psychologist told personnel at Guantanamo Bay that the methods were inherently dangerous and students were sometimes injured, even in a controlled setting.

"The risk with real detainees is increased exponentially," he said.

Nevertheless, for the next two years, the CIA and military officials received interrogation training and direct interrogation support from JPRA trainers.

Last week, the Obama administration's top intelligence official, Dennis Blair, privately told intelligence employees that "high value information" was obtained through the harsh interrogation techniques. However, on Tuesday, in a written statement, Blair said, "The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means."

Afghan Women March, America Turns Away !!!

Op-Ed Contributors - Afghan Women March, America Turns Away - NYTimes.com

Advertise on NYTimes.com
Op-Ed Contributors
Afghan Women March, America Turns Away

* Sign In to E-Mail
* Print
* Single Page
* ShareClose
o Linkedin
o Digg
o Facebook
o Mixx
o MySpace
o Yahoo! Buzz
o Permalink
o

Article Tools Sponsored By
By NADER NADERY and HASEEB HUMAYOON
Published: April 19, 2009

LAST November, extremists on motorbikes opposed to education for women sprayed acid on a group of students from the Mirwais School for Girls in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Several young women were severely burned. Yet it did not take more than a few weeks for even the most cruelly disfigured girls to return to school. Like the crowds of women in Kabul this week who protested a new law that restricts their rights, the Mirwais students demonstrate unbending courage and resolve for progress. They don’t fear much — except that the world might abandon them.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Loren Capelli

That is why President Obama’s Afghanistan-Pakistan policy speech last month and his administration’s related white paper are worrisome: both avoided any reference to democracy in Afghanistan, while pointedly pushing democratic reforms in Pakistan. The new policy represents critical shifts — such as a new emphasis on civilian work, and recognizing the regional nature of the problem and the inadequacy and abuse of resources. But a faltering commitment to the democratization of Afghanistan and ambiguous statements from Washington on an exit strategy have left us Afghans scratching our heads.

The Obama administration’s bold declaration of what is to be defeated (Al Qaeda) and absence of equal zest for what is to be built (democracy) inspires a sense of déjà vu. The last time the United States was seriously involved in Afghanistan, its goal was the defeat of the Soviet Union. But after that “success,” extremist militias greedy for power brought our society to its knees. In the absence of the rule of law and legitimate and democratic institutions, the militias’ atrocities allowed the Taliban to rise to power and harbor those behind the 9/11 attacks.

To defeat the forces of oppression, Washington must promote and protect the ideals of democracy and human rights. It is true that Afghanistan has miles to go before it will be a real democracy. But why won’t the new administration state a commitment to helping us get there?

First, with the economic crisis and other domestic priorities, there is a sense in Washington that helping Afghanistan democratize is either a luxury American taxpayers cannot afford or a charitable cause they can delay. This shows a misunderstanding of both what is needed to help Afghans build a real democracy and the lasting interest of the United States.

Second, there is a temptation among some in Washington to believe that if the zeal for democratic reform or women’s and minority rights in Afghanistan were relaxed, Taliban insurgents would find “reconciliation” more attractive and the war would end more quickly.

This belief is encouraged by the radically conservative forces that have increased their influence since 2005 over the Kabul government, which has been backtracking on its commitment to rights like freedom of the press and equality under the law. This was exemplified by two events last month: the upholding of a 20-year jail sentence given to a young journalist for printing a controversial article from the Internet that was critical of the role traditionally assigned to women in Islam; and President Hamid Karzai’s signing of a law affecting the country’s Shiite minority that places restrictions on when a woman can leave her house and states the circumstances in which she is obliged to have sex with her husband. That law prompted the protests this week in Kabul.

It would seem that the escalating violence the country has suffered since 2005 would be a pretty convincing demonstration that giving up ground on democracy and human rights is not helping end this war. Rather, the Taliban has interpreted it as a sign of the weakness of the Afghan government and its international allies. The Afghan public, even as it faces an unpopular and brutal insurgency, is no longer sure if a government that is reluctant to stand up for human rights deserves support. Afghans are also aware that if their government does not honestly commit to judicial and legislative reforms, it will lose American and European public support.

* 1
* 2

Next Page »

Nader Nadery is a member of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. Haseeb Humayoon, a student at Middlebury College, has worked as a consultant to nongovernmental groups in Afghanistan.

Ask your Representative to allow travel between the US and Cuba

Just Foreign Policy

Ask your Representative to allow travel between the U.S. and Cuba
Action Alert
AddThis
Ask your Representative to allow travel between the U.S. and Cuba
Take the next step in improving relations
Change address
Address
City
State
ZIP
ZIP+4

Take Action Now!
Confirm Your Zip Code:
94303-3535
Read about this bill
President Obama has made historic steps to improve U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba and Venezuela. Ask your Representative to add their voice, by supporting the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act, using the form below. 70% of Americans say that all Americans should be allowed to travel to Cuba.

[Note: if you don't want to write your Representative, but would be willing to write one of your Senators, use this link for the Senate:

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/travel.html ]
Read about this bill
Take Action Now! Confirm Your
Zip Code: 94303-3535
Change address
Address
City
State
ZIP
ZIP+4

Tell-A-Friend

Rethink Afghanistan

Rethink Afghanistan,

The cost could easily top 1 trillion !!!

Rethink Afghanistan !




Wiil the War in Afghanistan Help Me get a Job?

Gmail - Will the War in Afghanistan Help Me Get a Job? - jbcj10@gmail.com

Dear Friends, Colleagues and Supporters,
Watch the video
1. Watch this trailer
2. Share this trailer
3. Ask Congress


We bring you Cost of War, part three of our Rethink Afghanistan documentary, which delves into the financial costs of this broadening war.

As we pay our tax bills, it seems an appropriate time to urge everyone to Rethink Afghanistan, a war that currently costs over $2 billion a month but hasn't made us any safer. Everyone has a friend or relative who just lost a job. Do we really want to spend over $1 trillion on another war? Everyone knows someone who has lost their home. Do we really want spend our tax dollars on a war that could last a decade or more? The Obama administration has taken some smart steps to counter this economic crisis with its budget request. Do we really want to see that effort wasted by expanding military demands?

Watch Pulitzer Prize-winning authors and journalists, military and foreign policy experts, leading economists, and many more explain just how much the war in Afghanistan will cost us over how many years. View both the trailer and full segment of Cost of War, part three of the Rethink Afghanistan documentary.

Last week, we delivered a petition to Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Howard Berman, demanding oversight hearings. These hearings could raise the critical questions about costs and many other issues. Now, we want to know what questions you would ask in such hearings. Would you want to know how exactly the war is weakening the U.S. economy? What about whether more troops can solve Afghanistan's problems or the escalating instability in Pakistan, subjects explored in parts one and two of this documentary?

1. Record your questions on your webcam and send them to us! Simple instructions for doing this can be found here. It's easy!
2. Post your video to our Facebook page! Go to our Facebook page, click in the "Write something" box, and then click the video link.
3. Vote on the written questions you think are the most critical for oversight hearings and submit your own.

We must urge Congress to raise key questions about this war at once. As FireDogLake blogger Siun recently wrote, "Once again we are planning a surge with no exit plan and a continued lack of concern for the most basic protection of the civilians in the land we claim to liberate."

Yours,
Robert Greenwald
and the Brave New Foundation team

Protesters around the US fed up with banks

MichaelMoore.com : Protesters around the U.S. fed up with banks

April 12th, 2009 8:41 am
Protesters around the U.S. fed up with banks

By Amanda Vergel de Dios / Golden Gate X-Press

In front of the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank, a group of protesters gathered Saturday to voice anger towards the banks, believing their rampant greed destroyed the economy.

San Francisco and 46 other cities in the United States and Canada took part in mass protests to break up the power of the banks that caused the current financial crisis. The mass protests were organized by a group called A New Way Forward.

About a hundred people came to the Federal Reserve Bank to protest the collapse of the economy.

"The same people who got us into this mess are also in charge of getting us out," said Bob Niederman, protester outside the bank. "It's going to lead us into a depression. They should let the banks go bankrupt and start all over."

The campaign is focused on demanding structural change to the financial industry, advocating for a "nationalize-reorganize-decentralize" economic exit strategy and a call to "break up the banks," according to the press release by A New Way Forward group.

The economic exit strategy calls for no more taxpayer handouts, the removal of current CEO's and board members and the need for current banks to break up and new banks to be managed by new people.

"I'm fed up with taxes going to CEO bonuses instead of health care and education and help for people becoming homeless," said one organizer, Phoebe Sorgen. "What deregulation has meant is a nation of desperation," she said.

Students from SF State and City College of San Francisco also came to support opposition towards the banks.

"We see a connection between the crisis in our education and the national economic crisis," said Lacei Amodei, a history major at SF State. "We're angry at the way Sacramento and D.C. has chosen how to handle it."

Amodei believes the two capitals are handling the situation in a very undemocratic way.

"They are just taking money directly out of the hands of working people and students and giving it to the banks," said the 22-year-old.

Karzai Decries Civilian Deaths

Karzai Decries Civilian Deaths - washingtonpost.com

Karzai Decries Civilian Deaths
Recent NATO, U.S. Operations Called 'Careless'

TOOLBOX
Resize
Print
E-mail
Save/Share +
Digg
Newsvine
del.icio.us
Stumble It!
Reddit
Facebook
myspace
NewsTrust
COMMENT
washingtonpost.com readers have posted 20 comments about this item.
View All Comments »

Comments are closed for this item.
Discussion Policy
Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem.
Discussion Policy
CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging
» Links to this article
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, June 24, 2007; Page A16

KABUL, June 23 -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai chastised U.S. and NATO-led troops Saturday for their "careless operations" and accused them of killing more than 90 civilians in the past 10 days, as fresh reports emerged of more noncombatant deaths.

Using some of his strongest language yet against the foreign forces that occupy his country, Karzai asserted that "Afghan life is not cheap and it should not be treated as such."

"We do not want any more military operations without coordinating them with the Afghan government," a visibly angry Karzai said at a news conference in Kabul, the capital. "From now onwards, they have to work the way we ask them to work in here."
ad_icon

It was unclear late Saturday whether Karzai's statement indicated that he plans to formally restrict the operations of the 32,000 NATO-led troops and 21,000 U.S.-led troops who patrol Afghanistan.

Karzai has the power to place limits on what foreign forces can do here, although any attempt to exert that control would probably produce a strong backlash from the United States and other countries that contribute troops to Afghanistan. Military officials from those nations have said they need to act aggressively to quell a stubborn Taliban insurgency, and they say militants are deliberately provoking civilian deaths by hiding in residential areas.

Spokesmen for the NATO and U.S.-led forces declined to comment on Karzai's statements.

Karzai, a pro-Western leader who has generally welcomed the presence of international troops over the past 5 1/2 years, spoke after a series of incidents in recent days in which dozens of civilians have allegedly been killed in U.S. and NATO-led airstrikes.

Accusations of another such incident came Saturday, when the Pakistani military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, said international troops fired rockets across the border overnight Friday and killed 10 civilians, including children. Arshad said that three or four houses were destroyed in the attack and that 14 people were injured.

"We have protested about what happened," Arshad said. "They were innocent people."

A NATO forces spokesman, Maj. John Thomas, acknowledged the Pakistani report and said the civilian death toll could be higher than 10.

Thomas said that NATO and U.S. forces were fighting about 50 Taliban insurgents along the Afghan-Pakistani border -- the largest contingent observed there in the past six months -- and that some of their firing was directed into Pakistan.

"It was a fluid situation," he said. "At some point, the activities did cross the border."

Thomas said the insurgents were killed. The fighting took place in the Afghan province of Paktika and the Pakistani tribal land of North Waziristan, areas where militant activity is heavy and the border is porous.

International troops operating in Afghanistan are not supposed to attack in Pakistan, although it has happened on numerous occasions. This month, residents of a Pakistani border village reported seeing an aerial drone fire missiles in an attack that killed more than 30 people.

In other incidents disclosed Saturday, a coalition soldier was killed in fighting in Afghanistan's Helmand province and at least 20 suspected insurgents were killed in neighboring Kandahar, according to U.S.-led forces.

Violence has spiked in Afghanistan in recent weeks, with the Taliban carrying out suicide attacks and engaging troops in firefights. At least 230 civilians have been killed this year in attacks by U.S. and NATO-led troops, according to estimates based on official tallies.

Air Strikes, bombs kill Afghan civilians

MichaelMoore.com : Air strikes, bombs kill Afghan civilians

April 13th, 2009 12:38 pm
Air strikes, bombs kill Afghan civilians

ASADABAD, Afghanistan (AFP) — Afghan officials and victims blamed NATO air strikes Monday for killing six civilians and wounding 14 in Afghanistan, but the military said up to eight "enemy fighters" were killed.

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said in a statement that "four to eight enemy fighters were killed" during an operation in Kunar province.

It said multiple intelligence sources provided positive identification of insurgents assembled in a known enemy area, in northeast Afghanistan.

"Intelligence intercepts indicated the hostile intent of the enemy to attack ISAF posts. Due to the remote location, ISAF called in close-air support and eliminated the enemy threat," the statement said.

But Watapour district governor, Zalmai Yousufzai, and district police chief Mirza Mohammad insisted that civilian homes were struck about 15 kilometres (nine miles) northwest of provincial capital Asadabad.

"Among the six dead were two children, a woman and three men," Yousufzai said. Seven children, a woman and six men were wounded, all of them civilians, the district governor added. The district police chief gave the same details.

Mounting civilian deaths during military operations targeting Taliban and other Islamist insurgents is one of the main sources of tension between Afghan authorities and US and NATO-led forces in Afghanistan.

An AFP reporter saw a wounded 25-year-old woman, a 14-year-old boy and two men in hospital in Asadabad.

"We were asleep and all of a sudden the roof collapsed," said 14-year-old Zakirullah, who gave only one name.

"I don't remember anything. I got to know here that my father, my mother, my brother and my younger sister have all been killed and I am wounded."

The woman, named Shahida, said: "We were asleep and heard a strange noise and then the roof and walls collapsed.

"The people took me out of the rubble and there are many still there. I was told nine people from my family were killed and wounded. I don't know who is dead, who is wounded and who is alive in my family."

The alliance said it was investigating the possibility that non-combatants may have been injured.

"We deeply regret any possible civilian injuries caused by our operations against the enemy," said Captain Mark Durkin, ISAF spokesman.

"We will thoroughly investigate the allegations of civilian injuries and, if found true, provide assistance to support the law-abiding people affected."

Monday's reports of civilian casualties come four days after the US military admitted that troops under its command killed four civilians during a raid in the eastern province of Khost last week.

Security forces say they do all they can to prevent such casualties and accuse militants of living among civilians and endangering their lives.

In Watapour in July 2007, local authorities said 27 civilians were killed in ISAF air strikes, along with 37 militants. The force said some ordinary villagers were killed but did not give a number.

Elsewhere in Afghanistan, two roadside bombs killed six civilians on Monday.

One bomb ripped through a civilian truck in the Adraskan district of Herat province killing four civilians on board and wounding another three, the Afghan interior ministry said.

Another roadside bomb blast killed two private construction workers in the Bak district of eastern Khost province, the ministry said in a statement.

In addition the Afghan army said it killed nine insurgents and wounded another 14 during an eight-hour battle in southern Uruzgan province on Sunday, and four "terrorists" on the same day in neighbouring Helmand province.

Karl Rove is a criminal bushie bastard above the law and must go to jail !!!!

This Week: Karl Rove Stammers Through Siegelman Defense | Crooks and Liars

This Week: Karl Rove Stammers Through Siegelman Defense
By Nicole Belle Saturday May 24, 2008 2:00pm

[media=5363] [media=5364] (h/t Heather)

I will never understand why Karl Rove is considered a political genius. A "dirty tricks master"? Absolutely. An amoral partisan hack? Indubitably. But genius? Nuh uh. He managed to pull out all the stops to illegitimately place his candidate in office and then consistently played the American public for sheep by repeating talking points over and over until they became conventional wisdom, but that's no more than what P.T. Barnum did, just on a national scale. Mercifully, I think we're collectively wising up on Rove's antics and they're coming back to haunt him. On This Week, host George Stephanopoulos asks him about the subpoenas hanging over his head and he can only stammer the same talking point over and over: he heard about the prosecution in the paper. I LOVE it when he tries to claim that no one remembers the phone call that initiated the plan to railroad Don Siegelman and Stephanopoulos says that the phone record has been produced. Pwned!

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here's what the House report said. It said, "In May 2007, a Republican attorney for northern Alabama named Jill Simpson wrote an affidavit stating that in November 2002, she heard a prominent Alabama Republican operative named Bill Canary say that Karl Rove had contacted the Justice Department about bringing a prosecution of Don Siegelman. The question for Mr. Rove is whether he directly or indirectly discussed the possibility of prosecuting Don Siegelman with either the Justice Department or Alabama Republicans." Did you?

ROVE: Let me say three things. First of all, I think it's interesting -- everybody who was supposedly on that telephone call that Ms. Simpson talks about says that the call never took place. I'd say...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Although she produced a cell phone record, according to the committee.

ROVE: Well, I would say three things. First of all, I have -- I learned about Don Siegelman's prosecution by reading about it in the newspaper. Second of all, this is really about a constitutional question of separation of powers. Congress, the House Judiciary Committee, wants to be able to call presidential aides on its whim up to testify, violating the separation of powers. Executive privilege has been asserted by the White House in a similar instance in the Senate. It will probably be asserted very quickly in this -- in the House. Third, the White House has agreed -- I'm not asserting any personal privilege. The White House has offered, and my lawyers offered, several different ways in which if the House wants to find out information about this, they can find out information about this. And they've refused to avail themselves of those opportunities.

Uh no, Karl. Your "availability" was predicated on you not swearing an oath, behind closed doors with no transcripts and/or by doing it by letter only. And the "Executive Privilege" assertion only works if you are admitting that you discussed this with the President and that's something you deny--but keep repeating that, the sheep won't realize that you're incorrectly applying the privilege. Finally, the whole "Separation of Powers" argument is as inside out as any other assertion Rove makes. This IS one of the powers guaranteed to Congress as checks and balances against an Executive branch run amok.

Face it, Karl, I don't think repeating that talking point over and over is working any longer. Karma's a bitch, baby.

STEPHANOPOULOS: We're just about out of time. This is -- as you know, and our viewers probably know, you were subpoenaed this week by the House Judiciary Committee to give testimony on any involvement you may have had with the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. He's claiming there was selective prosecution. He's out on bail now, even though he was convicted. He says your fingerprints were all over it.

Here's what the House report said. It said, "In May 2007, a Republican attorney for northern Alabama named Jill Simpson wrote an affidavit stating that in November 2002, she heard a prominent Alabama Republican operative named Bill Canary say that Karl Rove had contacted the Justice Department about bringing a prosecution of Don Siegelman. The question for Mr. Rove is whether he directly or indirectly discussed the possibility of prosecuting Don Siegelman with either the Justice Department or Alabama Republicans." Did you?

ROVE: Let me say three things. First of all, I think it's interesting -- everybody who was supposedly on that telephone call that Ms. Simpson talks about says that the call never took place. I'd say...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Although she produced a cell phone record, according to the committee.

ROVE: Well, I would say three things. First of all, I have -- I learned about Don Siegelman's prosecution by reading about it in the newspaper. Second of all, this is really about a constitutional question of separation of powers. Congress, the House Judiciary Committee, wants to be able to call presidential aides on its whim up to testify, violating the separation of powers. Executive privilege has been asserted by the White House in a similar instance in the Senate. It will probably be asserted very quickly in this -- in the House. Third, the White House has agreed -- I'm not asserting any personal privilege. The White House has offered, and my lawyers offered, several different ways in which if the House wants to find out information about this, they can find out information about this. And they've refused to avail themselves of those opportunities.

We didn't say, close off any option to do anything else that you want to do in the future. We said if you want to hear about this, let's sit down and talk about this, and then you're entitled to do what you want to do in the future. This is now tied up in court. It's going to be tied up in court and settled in court. And frankly, the House last week doing this, you know, is duplicating what the Senate has already done and it's already found its way into the courts.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But to be clear, you did not contact the Justice Department about this case?

ROVE: I read about -- I'm going to simply say what I've said before, which is I found out about Don Siegelman's investigation and indictment by reading about it in the newspaper.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that's not a denial.

ROVE: I've -- you know, I read -- I heard about it, read about it, learned about it for the first time by reading about it in the newspaper.

Karl Rove should be arrested and go to jail !!!

Don Siegelman: Urge Congress to Vote Contempt for Karl Rove

Urge Congress to Vote Contempt for Karl Rove
digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us ShareThis RSS
Read More: Alberto Gonzales, Congress, Department Of Justice, Doj, Don Siegelman, John Conyers, Judiciary, Judiciary Committee, Justice Department, Karl Rove, Nancy Pelosi, Politicization, Politics News

Be the First to Submit
This Story to DiggBuzz up!
Get Breaking News Alerts
never spam

*
Share
*
Print
*
Comments

I'm writing today to urgently enlist your help in my effort to hold Karl Rove accountable for politicizing the Department of Justice -- including the malicious, politically-motivated prosecution that targeted me and sent me to prison -- because our time may well be running out.

If Congress adjourns at the end of September without holding Karl Rove in contempt, our chances at restoring democracy may very well be kaput. We must pull out all the stops and turn up the heat.

Now that a U.S. District Judge has ruled that White House aides like Rove can't claim immunity in order to refuse testifying before Congress, there's no room for Karl Rove to hide any longer. It is time for Rove to come clean and tell the truth about what he has done, before the House Judiciary Committee, for all America to see.

That's why I'm asking you to email your Member of Congress, right now, and urge the full House to vote to hold Karl Rove in contempt! If you speak out, and Congress votes contempt for Rove, he'll have to speak out too -- and for the first time, under oath!

There is sworn testimony by a Republican lawyer that Karl Rove targeted me when I was Governor of Alabama through a malicious, unfounded, politically-motivated prosecution by the wife of Rove's best friend in Alabama. I was shackled, handcuffed, taken to a maximum security prison, and put into solitary confinement. I served 9 months in federal prison before the appeals court released me. We cannot let Karl Rove refuse to testify before Congress about his role in this nefarious scheme!

Karl Rove has thumbed his nose in the face of Congress, refusing to answer questions about his abuse of power in launching politically motivated prosecutions and politicizing the Department of Justice.

Now a federal judge has stripped Rove of his immunity claim. We don't have any time to lose. With only two more weeks left before Congress adjourns for the year, we need the House to act -- and act swiftly -- to force Karl Rove to show up and testify.

If Rove really has nothing to hide, then he should prove it to Congress and the country. He shouldn't be ducking the Congressional subpoena.

So please join me in speaking out: Forward an email to your Member of Congress right now, before the House adjourns at the end of September -- and demand that they vote to hold Karl Rove in contempt!

Thank you so much for your help.

-- Don Siegelman
Governor of Alabama
1999-2003

Ousted governor blames Rove

Karl Rove has to go to jail for a lot of reasons, one of them being responsible for ousting the democrat governor of Alabama:

Karl Rove has to go to jail:

Bush's Vacation Get Away in Paraguay !!!!

Bush's Vacation Get Away in Paraguay

Bush’s Vacation Get-Away in Paraguay?
By Deanna Spingola
6 December 2006
Join Email List to receive notification of new Spingola articles
Every country must surrender their sovereignty in order to establish the One World Order. This is facilitated by the globalists and their American minions, abetted by the obedience-trained U.S. Congress. Economic destabilization, with or without military blitzkriegs (a.k.a. major acts of terrorism) is an effective method for taking over a vulnerable country. The play-for-pay political puppets are installed or replaced according to their compliance to the globalist handlers. The elite affluent men behind the curtain remain the same: big banks and multi-national businesses. The privatization of so many government functions has stripped Congress, with their compromised consent, of congressional approval and oversight which is mandated by congressional law.


Graphic courtesy of The People's Voice

The privatization of warfare, rendition flights, torture, and economic destabilization has produced numerous enemies and vehement animosity. Most Americans, who get their daily dose of government-friendly 1984 Orwellian-style propaganda, have no idea why foreigners hate us.

Countries with huge populations of indigenous, brown-skinned “enemies” seem particularly vulnerable to resource pilfering, together with the atrocities and massacres that accompany such activities. After all, they are “uncivilized” and standing in the way of our “national interests,” without appreciation or vision for what their resources could produce in our insatiable, more sophisticated society. Incredulous Americans, comfy at home, don’t like hearing about the bloody, gory details. However, there are astute foreign leaders, though U.S. media-demonized, who won’t readily acquiesce to economic assailants or conform to globalist demands. In addition to the Middle East, the resource-rich countries of South America have been especially targeted.

Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Ecuador and Bolivia are fighting against United States control and hegemony, preferring, instead, to control their own country and resources. Their duly-elected, populist, egalitarian leaders, compassionately concerned about their own people, though deserving of admiration, would never receive respect from the greedy globalists. Rather they will be summarily accused of inciting unrest or supporting terrorists so that when our government announces that a regime change is essential, by military force or by Washington-directed election-riggers, obedient U.S. citizens will readily assent. For decades, America has attempted to influence politics in South America for our own national and business interests through such projects as Operation Condor.

The U.S., under the pretext of fighting terrorism, has conducted military exercises in Paraguay since July 2005 after threatening to withhold millions of dollars in aid if Paraguay failed to allow hundreds of our military, along with our planes, weapons and ammunition, into their country. [i] Ex-Secretary of Defense (War) Donald Rumsfeld, ironically the current owner of Mount Misery, visited Paraguay in August 2005. He said that Cuba and Venezuela were somehow instrumental in creating tensions in Bolivia. Although he claims keen perception into the internal problems of foreign countries, he apparently was deliberately inept with his own responsibilities. An audit revealed on September 10, 2001, that $2.6 trillion was missing in some pentagon accounts. This was conveniently forgotten with the horrifically distracting events of 9/11. [ii] That sum, plus another $1 trillion, disappeared under Dov Zakheim’s watch, the Pentagon Comptroller appointed by Bush in May 2001. Zakheim, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), like so many others, has left “through the traditional revolving door for government-corporate insiders” [iii] and gone on to greener pastures.

The proposed U.S. military objective is to train our Paraguayan counterparts. Why we had to financially finagle them into accepting our help isn’t clear – obviously it was in our “national interests” rather than accommodation of their needs. Unless renewed, our contract ends December 31, 2006. Justifiably, local residents immediately protested our invasive military presence. “Some activists, military analysts and politicians in the region believe the operations could be part of a plan to overthrow the left-leaning government of Evo Morales in neighboring Bolivia and take control of the area's vast gas and water reserves.” [iv] The water reserves constitute the Guaraní Aquifer, an underground water reservoir shared by four nations. Morales signed a decree on May 1, 2006 which nationalized all of Bolivia’s gas reserves, an outrageous objective – certainly not conducive to U.S. interests. Imagine a national leader who puts his country’s needs first – rather than the needs of the American government!

“A major focus of the unrest in Bolivia is who controls its vast natural gas deposits, the second largest in the Western Hemisphere. Under pressure from the United States and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Bolivia sold off its oil and gas to Enron and Shell in 1995 for $263.5 million, less than 1% of what the deposits are worth.” [v]

“Would the United States try to destabilize Bolivia's economy while training people how to use military force to insure Enron, Shell, British Gas, Total, Repsol, and the United States continues to get Bolivian gas for pennies on the dollar? Quite likely.” [vi]

“And would the White House like to use such a coup as a way to send a message to other countries? You bet. President Bush may be clueless on geography, but he is not bad at overthrowing governments and killing people.” [vii]

The United States alleges that they have no plans for establishing military bases in Paraguay. Of course, they said they had no plans to establish military bases in Iraq. Not only are the locals concerned about the military taking up residence, there are substantial rumors that the Bush family has purchased land in Paraguay. News of George W. Bush purchasing 98,840 acres of land in the Chaco area of Paraguay was reported in Prensa Latino, the Latin American News Agency on October 18, 2006. That story is no longer available at their site but is available as a PDF file.

Jenna Bush paid a 10-day visit to Paraguay in October 2006. She met with the Paraguayan president and America’s ambassador to Paraguay, James Cason, who was appointed in July 2005, the same time our troops arrived. Ambassadors function as damage control and are charged with representing U.S. interests. Jenna Bush was visiting under the auspices of the UNICEF but it was apparently also a private visit. She did not grant any interviews nor did she do any fundraising. It appears to have been a convenient pretext to visit in as much as the UNICEF function was occurring at the same time. [viii]

Despite claims in international newspapers (Argentina, Brazil), official U.S. sources maintain that neither George H. W. nor George W. Bush have purchased thousands of acres of land in northern Paraguay. The White House claims that this is merely a conspiracy theory. [ix] Now we know that government officials never lie, right? Any story that remotely questions the covert activities of the government is considered a conspiracy theory. The greatest conspiracy in this country is the one the government is perpetrating against the citizens. Despite his egregious actions, revelatory books, numerous impeachment web sites, Bush will likely never be impeached. Our compromised congress, both parties, lacks the courage to facilitate the process regardless of what the citizens want.

The Chaco area of Paraguay, the area in question, contains vast natural gas reserves. Most of the Chaco region belongs to private companies. Conveniently, the property that Bush claims not to own is close to the U.S. Mariscal Estigarribia Air Base and also near another large block of land controlled by the ultra right-wing Christian fundamentalist cult of Sun Myung Moon, a Bush contributor and supporter. So Bush and Moon, both alleged Christians, will be neighbors. The Reverend Sun Myung Moon owns almost 1.5 million acres. The local residents are not happy about Moon’s intrusion and control. Of course, if Bush should ever need to claim political asylum, Paraguay has a history of giving asylum.

In addition to easy access to Bolivia, Monsanto has designs on Paraguay, considered by the U.S. to be a failed state. Our military presence provides support/intimidation for Monsanto. It is the fourth-largest producer of soy in the world. Paraguay is a country of 157,047 sq. miles, which is about the size of California (158,402 sq. miles).

Ninety thousand (90,000) poor families have been displaced from their soybean producing land for rejecting Monsanto’s genetically manipulated soybeans. “On June 24, 2005, in Tekojoja, Paraguay, hired policemen and soy producers kicked 270 people off their land, burned down fifty-four homes, arrested 130 people and killed two.” [x] “As a result of the rapid expansion of genetically modified soybeans into the area, peasants and indigenous people in Eastern Paraguay have become the targets of land evictions, pesticide poisoning and assassinations.” [xi] Perhaps some of the local officials benefit as the result of allowing Monsanto and their problematic big profit products into the country.

As recently as 2004, genetically modified soybeans were illegal in Paraguay and for excellent reasons and should be illegal in other places, like Iraq. Individuals should avoid genetically modified soybeans (as well as other GM foods) for the following reasons: (information comes from What About Soy?)

· two-thirds of the U.S. soybean crop today is genetically engineered;

· they are genetically altered to withstand Monsanto’s Roundup, a weed killer

· Roundup residue levels in harvested crops exceed the allowable legal limit

· the FDA tripled the allowable amount of Roundup residues that can remain on the crop (the FDA seems to be Monsanto’s Washington branch office)

· permitting increased residues helps Monsanto’s bottom line

· corporate interests are given higher priority than public safety

· Monsanto’s own research had raised many questions about the safety of their Roundup Ready soybeans. Solution: stop the tests, market the product

· genetically modified soy is contained in a wide array of processed foods

· tens of millions of people are unknowingly eating experimental foods daily

· Roundup Ready soybeans contain 29 percent less of the brain nutrient choline, and 27 percent more trypsin inhibitor, the potential allergen that interferes with protein digestion, than normal soybeans

· genetically altered soybeans have lower levels of phenylalanine, an essential amino acid that affects levels of phytoestrogens

· levels of lectins, which are most likely the culprit in soy allergies, are nearly double in the transgenic variety

These foods should definitely be avoided if one considers his/her health. Monsanto collects royalties from countries that use its seed and they exercise control and influence in our country via their lobbyists and our accommodating congress. Monsanto believes that everyone who benefits from proprietary technology should have an obligation to pay for it. The global market for soybean oil is growing. Soybean oil, together with palm oil, accounts for over half of all oil consumed in the world. For alleged health reasons, consumers are switching to soybean oil as studies suggest that soy may lower cholesterol. “Compared to regular soybeans, the genetically engineered beans have more of the very things that are problematic, and less of the very things that are beneficial.” [xii] “The international market for soybeans is being artificially inflated, not least by the new craze to exploit globalized sources of biofuels.” [xiii]

Since January 1, 2006, the FDA, our selectively health conscience government agency, has required the Trans fat content on all foods and dietary supplements that it regulates. [xiv] Some communities are banning Trans fats in restaurants – possibly a disaster for smaller businesses. Depleted uranium munitions, though not under the FDA, have no such labels. I suppose a study about Trans fat, cholesterol, cancer, diabetes, etc. can prove anything you want it to – meanwhile our general health diminishes. No doubt, Monsanto financed the studies! The Rockefeller Foundation also promoted and financed many of the GM studies. [xv] Elected officials, often former corporate leaders, assist the firms that contribute to their campaigns. Citizens have no such influence – money talks. Monsanto is world-wide – they are not discriminatory about which nations they inflict their products on.



Oppression and violence in Paraguay are the worst in the areas occupied by the U.S. military. [xvi] Their very presence creates tension which is then used to justify their presence. Similar situations are true in other parts of the world. Yet, in an attempt to further justify their presence, they have tried to link the campesino organizations to terrorist cells whose existence has never been proven – it is propaganda to justify prolonged U.S. presence – comparable to our Iraqi occupation (2 minute video clip) except Paraguay is under the U.S. media radar. Supposedly, they are providing humanitarian service to some of Paraguay's most disadvantaged citizens. I am uncertain how removing the poor from their farms is humanitarian – more Orwellian doublespeak!

Apparently the military establishes a relationship with various farmers in order to garner information. Then they “establish the plans and actions to control the farmer movement and advise the Paraguayan military and police on how to proceed.” The military conducts classes for the Paraguayan troops under the auspices of the Southern Command, the branch of the U.S. military for South America. [xvii]

“The Mariscal Estigarribia air base is within 124 miles of Bolivia and Argentina, and 200 miles from Brazil, near the Triple Frontier where Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina meet. Bolivia’s natural gas reserves are the second largest in South America, while the Triple Frontier region is home to the Guaraní Aquifer, one of the world’s largest fresh water sources.” [xviii] The air base is capable of housing 16,000 troops, includes a fancy radar system, large hangars and has an air traffic control tower.

By agreement, our military is exempt from trial in the International Criminal Court (ICC). Paraguay is terminating the immunity stipulation to comply with the MercoSur trade block, which includes Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Venezuela. On October 3, 2006 George Bush signed a waver pledging military aid to countries that reject the immunity stipulation. However, the CIA, the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will continue to enjoy immunity. [xix]

“Kremlin sources are reporting today that the International Committee of the Red Cross, based in Switzerland, has opened a War Crimes Portfolio charging the United States President, Vice President, Defense Secretary, United States Military Commanders and the majority of United States Senators and Congressmen with ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ over what the United Nations has declared as an ‘illegal’ war in the Middle Eastern Country of Iraq, and where the innocent civilian death toll is nearing 30,000.” [xx] It is actually drastically higher. American leaders have committed and sanctioned war crimes as well as torture.

When criminals go against all legal conventions and wage savage, brutal war against civilians as well as unwarranted, disproportionate military attacks, destruction of vital, non military infrastructure then they are culpable to a military tribunal. Rather, some attempt to alter the law and avoid responsibility. The Nuremburg Trials failed to execute justice against many who escaped to South American countries like Argentina and Paraguay. Even though reprehensible and illegal, the most vile Nazi "scientists" escaped punishment and came to America with the help of the U.S. Military through Project Paperclip.

“This is reported to be only the second time in the International Committee of the Red Cross’s history where a War Crimes Portfolio has been opened against the Civilian and Military Leadership of a sovereign country, with the first being opened in 1943 against the Nazi German Empire and its Chancellor, Adolph Hitler, and various other civilian and military leaders of that country.”

“The specific ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ that these Americans are being charged with are violations of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, specifically Articles 3 and 4.” [xxi] War crimes and their punishment are also covered under the War Crimes Act of 1996.

The Nazi war criminal, Joseph Mengele, Auschwitz’s notorious “Angel of Death” managed to finance his way out of Germany by 1949 and headed for Buenos Aires, Argentina, a country stricken with serious economic problems but sympathetic and relatively safe for Nazis. The country was divided between the poverty-stricken and the affluent with an active black market.
After ascertaining that people might be looking for him in Argentina and because of enhanced financial opportunities, Mengele fled to Paraguay, a haven for Nazi war criminals. The government had been overthrown by Alfredo Stroessner in 1954.[xxii] Mengele was approved for Paraguayan citizenship on November 27, 1959 under his own name. [xxiii] Unlike Argentina, Paraguay and West Germany had no formal extradition agreement between them. Mengele, like many other war criminals, was never brought to justice. [xxiv] Paraguay and the United States entered into an extradition agreement in 1998. (PDF File) Enforcement is another matter!


[i] The US Military Descends on Paraguay
[ii] Testimony before the House Appropriations Committee: Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Budget Request
[iii] Pentagon Fraud Chief Dov Zakheim Goes to BoozAllen by Uri Dowbenko
[iv] The US Military Descends on Paraguay
[v] Dark Armies, Secret Bases, and Rummy, Oh My!
[vi] Ibid
[vii] Ibid
[viii] What are the Busheviks up to now?
[ix] United States Has No Plans for Military Base in Paraguay, Misunderstandings arose from agreement on military exercises
[x] The US Military Descends on Paraguay
[xi] Monsanto Teams Up with the U.S. Military to Force Genetically Engineered Soybeans on Paraguay
[xii] What About Soy? by John Robbins
[xiii] Monsanto Teams Up with the U.S. Military to Force Genetically Engineered Soybeans on Paraguay
[xiv] Continued Losses Put Pressure On Monsanto Product Launch, Anastasia L Thatcher, November, 2004
[xv] Seeds of Destruction: The Geopolitics of GM Food, William Engdahl, Current Concerns (Zurich), 6 Mar 2005
[xvi] Marines Blamed for Deaths
[xvii] The US Military Descends on Paraguay
[xviii] Project Censored: US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region
[xix] Paraguay Revokes U.S. Military Immunity
[xx] ‘War Crimes’ Portfolio against United States President, Vice President and Defense Secretary Opened By International Committee of the Red Cross Charging ‘Crimes Against Humanity’
[xxi] Ibid
[xxii] Alfredo Stroessner; Paraguayan Dictator
[xxiii] How Nazi war criminal Josef Mengele cheated justice for 34 years
[xxiv] Josef Mengele


Comments: deannaATspingola.com
To avoid attracting spam email robots, email addresses on this site are written with AT in place of the usual symbol. Replace AT with the correct symbol to get a valid address.

Back To Political Points

© Deanna Spingola 2006 - All rights reserved

Deanna Spingola's articles are copyrighted but may be republished, reposted, or emailed. However, the person or organization must not charge for subscriptions or advertising. The article must be copied intact and full credit given. Deanna's web site address must also be included.

Hit Counter