Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

President Discusses Creation of Military Commissions to Try Suspected Terrorists

This is straight from the White House, September 6, 2006, 1:45 P.M. EDT.


1:45 P.M. EDT

George Bush THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thanks for the warm welcome. Welcome to the White House. Mr. Vice President, Secretary Rice, Attorney General Gonzales, Ambassador Negroponte, General Hayden, members of the United States Congress, families who lost loved ones in the terrorist attacks on our nation, and my fellow citizens: Thanks for coming.

On the morning of September the 11th, 2001, our nation awoke to a nightmare attack. Nineteen men, armed with box cutters, took control of airplanes and turned them into missiles. They used them to kill nearly 3,000 innocent people. We watched the Twin Towers collapse before our eyes -- and it became instantly clear that we'd entered a new world, and a dangerous new war.

The attacks of September the 11th horrified our nation. And amid the grief came new fears and urgent questions: Who had attacked us? What did they want? And what else were they planning? Americans saw the destruction the terrorists had caused in New York, and Washington, and Pennsylvania, and they wondered if there were other terrorist cells in our midst poised to strike; they wondered if there was a second wave of attacks still to come.

With the Twin Towers and the Pentagon still smoldering, our country on edge, and a stream of intelligence coming in about potential new attacks, my administration faced immediate challenges: We had to respond to the attack on our country. We had to wage an unprecedented war against an enemy unlike any we had fought before. We had to find the terrorists hiding in America and across the world, before they were able to strike our country again. So in the early days and weeks after 9/11, I directed our government's senior national security officials to do everything in their power, within our laws, to prevent another attack.

Nearly five years have passed since these -- those initial days of shock and sadness -- and we are thankful that the terrorists have not succeeded in launching another attack on our soil. This is not for the lack of desire or determination on the part of the enemy. As the recently foiled plot in London shows, the terrorists are still active, and they're still trying to strike America, and they're still trying to kill our people. One reason the terrorists have not succeeded is because of the hard work of thousands of dedicated men and women in our government, who have toiled day and night, along with our allies, to stop the enemy from carrying out their plans. And we are grateful for these hardworking citizens of ours.

Another reason the terrorists have not succeeded is because our government has changed its policies -- and given our military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel the tools they need to fight this enemy and protect our people and preserve our freedoms.

The terrorists who declared war on America represent no nation, they defend no territory, and they wear no uniform. They do not mass armies on borders, or flotillas of warships on the high seas. They operate in the shadows of society; they send small teams of operatives to infiltrate free nations; they live quietly among their victims; they conspire in secret, and then they strike without warning. In this new war, the most important source of information on where the terrorists are hiding and what they are planning is the terrorists, themselves. Captured terrorists have unique knowledge about how terrorist networks operate. They have knowledge of where their operatives are deployed, and knowledge about what plots are underway. This intelligence -- this is intelligence that cannot be found any other place. And our security depends on getting this kind of information. To win the war on terror, we must be able to detain, question, and, when appropriate, prosecute terrorists captured here in America, and on the battlefields around the world.

After the 9/11 attacks, our coalition launched operations across the world to remove terrorist safe havens, and capture or kill terrorist operatives and leaders. Working with our allies, we've captured and detained thousands of terrorists and enemy fighters in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and other fronts of this war on terror. These enemy -- these are enemy combatants, who were waging war on our nation. We have a right under the laws of war, and we have an obligation to the American people, to detain these enemies and stop them from rejoining the battle.

Most of the enemy combatants we capture are held in Afghanistan or in Iraq, where they're questioned by our military personnel. Many are released after questioning, or turned over to local authorities -- if we determine that they do not pose a continuing threat and no longer have significant intelligence value. Others remain in American custody near the battlefield, to ensure that they don't return to the fight.

In some cases, we determine that individuals we have captured pose a significant threat, or may have intelligence that we and our allies need to have to prevent new attacks. Many are al Qaeda operatives or Taliban fighters trying to conceal their identities, and they withhold information that could save American lives. In these cases, it has been necessary to move these individuals to an environment where they can be held secretly [sic], questioned by experts, and -- when appropriate -- prosecuted for terrorist acts.

Some of these individuals are taken to the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It's important for Americans and others across the world to understand the kind of people held at Guantanamo. These aren't common criminals, or bystanders accidentally swept up on the battlefield -- we have in place a rigorous process to ensure those held at Guantanamo Bay belong at Guantanamo. Those held at Guantanamo include suspected bomb makers, terrorist trainers, recruiters and facilitators, and potential suicide bombers. They are in our custody so they cannot murder our people. One detainee held at Guantanamo told a questioner questioning him -- he said this: "I'll never forget your face. I will kill you, your brothers, your mother, and sisters."

In addition to the terrorists held at Guantanamo, a small number of suspected terrorist leaders and operatives captured during the war have been held and questioned outside the United States, in a separate program operated by the Central Intelligence Agency. This group includes individuals believed to be the key architects of the September the 11th attacks, and attacks on the USS Cole, an operative involved in the bombings of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and individuals involved in other attacks that have taken the lives of innocent civilians across the world. These are dangerous men with unparalleled knowledge about terrorist networks and their plans for new attacks. The security of our nation and the lives of our citizens depend on our ability to learn what these terrorists know.

Many specifics of this program, including where these detainees have been held and the details of their confinement, cannot be divulged. Doing so would provide our enemies with information they could use to take retribution against our allies and harm our country. I can say that questioning the detainees in this program has given us information that has saved innocent lives by helping us stop new attacks -- here in the United States and across the world. Today, I'm going to share with you some of the examples provided by our intelligence community of how this program has saved lives; why it remains vital to the security of the United States, and our friends and allies; and why it deserves the support of the United States Congress and the American people.

Within months of September the 11th, 2001, we captured a man known as Abu Zubaydah. We believe that Zubaydah was a senior terrorist leader and a trusted associate of Osama bin Laden. Our intelligence community believes he had run a terrorist camp in Afghanistan where some of the 9/11 hijackers trained, and that he helped smuggle al Qaeda leaders out of Afghanistan after coalition forces arrived to liberate that country. Zubaydah was severely wounded during the firefight that brought him into custody -- and he survived only because of the medical care arranged by the CIA.

After he recovered, Zubaydah was defiant and evasive. He declared his hatred of America. During questioning, he at first disclosed what he thought was nominal information -- and then stopped all cooperation. Well, in fact, the "nominal" information he gave us turned out to be quite important. For example, Zubaydah disclosed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- or KSM -- was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, and used the alias "Muktar." This was a vital piece of the puzzle that helped our intelligence community pursue KSM. Abu Zubaydah also provided information that helped stop a terrorist attack being planned for inside the United States -- an attack about which we had no previous information. Zubaydah told us that al Qaeda operatives were planning to launch an attack in the U.S., and provided physical descriptions of the operatives and information on their general location. Based on the information he provided, the operatives were detained -- one while traveling to the United States.

We knew that Zubaydah had more information that could save innocent lives, but he stopped talking. As his questioning proceeded, it became clear that he had received training on how to resist interrogation. And so the CIA used an alternative set of procedures. These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution, and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively and determined them to be lawful. I cannot describe the specific methods used -- I think you understand why -- if I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning, and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary.

Zubaydah was questioned using these procedures, and soon he began to provide information on key al Qaeda operatives, including information that helped us find and capture more of those responsible for the attacks on September the 11th. For example, Zubaydah identified one of KSM's accomplices in the 9/11 attacks -- a terrorist named Ramzi bin al Shibh. The information Zubaydah provided helped lead to the capture of bin al Shibh. And together these two terrorists provided information that helped in the planning and execution of the operation that captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Once in our custody, KSM was questioned by the CIA using these procedures, and he soon provided information that helped us stop another planned attack on the United States. During questioning, KSM told us about another al Qaeda operative he knew was in CIA custody -- a terrorist named Majid Khan. KSM revealed that Khan had been told to deliver $50,000 to individuals working for a suspected terrorist leader named Hambali, the leader of al Qaeda's Southeast Asian affiliate known as "J-I". CIA officers confronted Khan with this information. Khan confirmed that the money had been delivered to an operative named Zubair, and provided both a physical description and contact number for this operative.

Based on that information, Zubair was captured in June of 2003, and he soon provided information that helped lead to the capture of Hambali. After Hambali's arrest, KSM was questioned again. He identified Hambali's brother as the leader of a "J-I" cell, and Hambali's conduit for communications with al Qaeda. Hambali's brother was soon captured in Pakistan, and, in turn, led us to a cell of 17 Southeast Asian "J-I" operatives. When confronted with the news that his terror cell had been broken up, Hambali admitted that the operatives were being groomed at KSM's request for attacks inside the United States -- probably [sic] using airplanes.

During questioning, KSM also provided many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans. For example, he described the design of planned attacks on buildings inside the United States, and how operatives were directed to carry them out. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent the people trapped above from escaping out the windows.

KSM also provided vital information on al Qaeda's efforts to obtain biological weapons. During questioning, KSM admitted that he had met three individuals involved in al Qaeda's efforts to produce anthrax, a deadly biological agent -- and he identified one of the individuals as a terrorist named Yazid. KSM apparently believed we already had this information, because Yazid had been captured and taken into foreign custody before KSM's arrest. In fact, we did not know about Yazid's role in al Qaeda's anthrax program. Information from Yazid then helped lead to the capture of his two principal assistants in the anthrax program. Without the information provided by KSM and Yazid, we might not have uncovered this al Qaeda biological weapons program, or stopped this al Qaeda cell from developing anthrax for attacks against the United States.

These are some of the plots that have been stopped because of the information of this vital program. Terrorists held in CIA custody have also provided information that helped stop a planned strike on U.S. Marines at Camp Lemonier in Djibouti -- they were going to use an explosive laden water tanker. They helped stop a planned attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi using car bombs and motorcycle bombs, and they helped stop a plot to hijack passenger planes and fly them into Heathrow or the Canary Wharf in London.

We're getting vital information necessary to do our jobs, and that's to protect the American people and our allies.

Information from the terrorists in this program has helped us to identify individuals that al Qaeda deemed suitable for Western operations, many of whom we had never heard about before. They include terrorists who were set to case targets inside the United States, including financial buildings in major cities on the East Coast. Information from terrorists in CIA custody has played a role in the capture or questioning of nearly every senior al Qaeda member or associate detained by the U.S. and its allies since this program began. By providing everything from initial leads to photo identifications, to precise locations of where terrorists were hiding, this program has helped us to take potential mass murderers off the streets before they were able to kill.

This program has also played a critical role in helping us understand the enemy we face in this war. Terrorists in this program have painted a picture of al Qaeda's structure and financing, and communications and logistics. They identified al Qaeda's travel routes and safe havens, and explained how al Qaeda's senior leadership communicates with its operatives in places like Iraq. They provided information that allows us -- that has allowed us to make sense of documents and computer records that we have seized in terrorist raids. They've identified voices in recordings of intercepted calls, and helped us understand the meaning of potentially critical terrorist communications.

The information we get from these detainees is corroborated by intelligence, and we've received -- that we've received from other sources -- and together this intelligence has helped us connect the dots and stop attacks before they occur. Information from the terrorists questioned in this program helped unravel plots and terrorist cells in Europe and in other places. It's helped our allies protect their people from deadly enemies. This program has been, and remains, one of the most vital tools in our war against the terrorists. It is invaluable to America and to our allies. Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al Qaeda and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland. By giving us information about terrorist plans we could not get anywhere else, this program has saved innocent lives.

This program has been subject to multiple legal reviews by the Department of Justice and CIA lawyers; they've determined it complied with our laws. This program has received strict oversight by the CIA's Inspector General. A small number of key leaders from both political parties on Capitol Hill were briefed about this program. All those involved in the questioning of the terrorists are carefully chosen and they're screened from a pool of experienced CIA officers. Those selected to conduct the most sensitive questioning had to complete more than 250 additional hours of specialized training before they are allowed to have contact with a captured terrorist.

I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it -- and I will not authorize it. Last year, my administration worked with Senator John McCain, and I signed into law the Detainee Treatment Act, which established the legal standard for treatment of detainees wherever they are held. I support this act. And as we implement this law, our government will continue to use every lawful method to obtain intelligence that can protect innocent people, and stop another attack like the one we experienced on September the 11th, 2001.

The CIA program has detained only a limited number of terrorists at any given time -- and once we've determined that the terrorists held by the CIA have little or no additional intelligence value, many of them have been returned to their home countries for prosecution or detention by their governments. Others have been accused of terrible crimes against the American people, and we have a duty to bring those responsible for these crimes to justice. So we intend to prosecute these men, as appropriate, for their crimes.

Soon after the war on terror began, I authorized a system of military commissions to try foreign terrorists accused of war crimes. Military commissions have been used by Presidents from George Washington to Franklin Roosevelt to prosecute war criminals, because the rules for trying enemy combatants in a time of conflict must be different from those for trying common criminals or members of our own military. One of the first suspected terrorists to be put on trial by military commission was one of Osama bin Laden's bodyguards -- a man named Hamdan. His lawyers challenged the legality of the military commission system. It took more than two years for this case to make its way through the courts. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the military commissions we had designed, but this past June, the Supreme Court overturned that decision. The Supreme Court determined that military commissions are an appropriate venue for trying terrorists, but ruled that military commissions needed to be explicitly authorized by the United States Congress.

So today, I'm sending Congress legislation to specifically authorize the creation of military commissions to try terrorists for war crimes. My administration has been working with members of both parties in the House and Senate on this legislation. We put forward a bill that ensures these commissions are established in a way that protects our national security, and ensures a full and fair trial for those accused. The procedures in the bill I am sending to Congress today reflect the reality that we are a nation at war, and that it's essential for us to use all reliable evidence to bring these people to justice.

We're now approaching the five-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks -- and the families of those murdered that day have waited patiently for justice. Some of the families are with us today -- they should have to wait no longer. So I'm announcing today that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, and 11 other terrorists in CIA custody have been transferred to the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay. (Applause.) They are being held in the custody of the Department of Defense. As soon as Congress acts to authorize the military commissions I have proposed, the men our intelligence officials believe orchestrated the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans on September the 11th, 2001, can face justice. (Applause.)

We'll also seek to prosecute those believed to be responsible for the attack on the USS Cole, and an operative believed to be involved in the bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. With these prosecutions, we will send a clear message to those who kill Americans: No longer -- how long it takes, we will find you and we will bring you to justice. (Applause.)

These men will be held in a high-security facility at Guantanamo. The International Committee of the Red Cross is being advised of their detention, and will have the opportunity to meet with them. Those charged with crimes will be given access to attorneys who will help them prepare their defense -- and they will be presumed innocent. While at Guantanamo, they will have access to the same food, clothing, medical care, and opportunities for worship as other detainees. They will be questioned subject to the new U.S. Army Field Manual, which the Department of Defense is issuing today. And they will continue to be treated with the humanity that they denied others.

As we move forward with the prosecutions, we will continue to urge nations across the world to take back their nationals at Guantanamo who will not be prosecuted by our military commissions. America has no interest in being the world's jailer. But one of the reasons we have not been able to close Guantanamo is that many countries have refused to take back their nationals held at the facility. Other countries have not provided adequate assurances that their nationals will not be mistreated -- or they will not return to the battlefield, as more than a dozen people released from Guantanamo already have. We will continue working to transfer individuals held at Guantanamo, and ask other countries to work with us in this process. And we will move toward the day when we can eventually close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

I know Americans have heard conflicting information about Guantanamo. Let me give you some facts. Of the thousands of terrorists captured across the world, only about 770 have ever been sent to Guantanamo. Of these, about 315 have been returned to other countries so far -- and about 455 remain in our custody. They are provided the same quality of medical care as the American service members who guard them. The International Committee of the Red Cross has the opportunity to meet privately with all who are held there. The facility has been visited by government officials from more than 30 countries, and delegations from international organizations, as well. After the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe came to visit, one of its delegation members called Guantanamo "a model prison" where people are treated better than in prisons in his own country. Our troops can take great pride in the work they do at Guantanamo Bay -- and so can the American people.

As we prosecute suspected terrorist leaders and operatives who have now been transferred to Guantanamo, we'll continue searching for those who have stepped forward to take their places. This nation is going to stay on the offense to protect the American people. We will continue to bring the world's most dangerous terrorists to justice -- and we will continue working to collect the vital intelligence we need to protect our country. The current transfers mean that there are now no terrorists in the CIA program. But as more high-ranking terrorists are captured, the need to obtain intelligence from them will remain critical -- and having a CIA program for questioning terrorists will continue to be crucial to getting life-saving information.

Some may ask: Why are you acknowledging this program now? There are two reasons why I'm making these limited disclosures today. First, we have largely completed our questioning of the men -- and to start the process for bringing them to trial, we must bring them into the open. Second, the Supreme Court's recent decision has impaired our ability to prosecute terrorists through military commissions, and has put in question the future of the CIA program. In its ruling on military commissions, the Court determined that a provision of the Geneva Conventions known as "Common Article Three" applies to our war with al Qaeda. This article includes provisions that prohibit "outrages upon personal dignity" and "humiliating and degrading treatment." The problem is that these and other provisions of Common Article Three are vague and undefined, and each could be interpreted in different ways by American or foreign judges. And some believe our military and intelligence personnel involved in capturing and questioning terrorists could now be at risk of prosecution under the War Crimes Act -- simply for doing their jobs in a thorough and professional way.

This is unacceptable. Our military and intelligence personnel go face to face with the world's most dangerous men every day. They have risked their lives to capture some of the most brutal terrorists on Earth. And they have worked day and night to find out what the terrorists know so we can stop new attacks. America owes our brave men and women some things in return. We owe them their thanks for saving lives and keeping America safe. And we owe them clear rules, so they can continue to do their jobs and protect our people.

So today, I'm asking Congress to pass legislation that will clarify the rules for our personnel fighting the war on terror. First, I'm asking Congress to list the specific, recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes under the War Crimes Act -- so our personnel can know clearly what is prohibited in the handling of terrorist enemies. Second, I'm asking that Congress make explicit that by following the standards of the Detainee Treatment Act our personnel are fulfilling America's obligations under Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions. Third, I'm asking that Congress make it clear that captured terrorists cannot use the Geneva Conventions as a basis to sue our personnel in courts -- in U.S. courts. The men and women who protect us should not have to fear lawsuits filed by terrorists because they're doing their jobs.

The need for this legislation is urgent. We need to ensure that those questioning terrorists can continue to do everything within the limits of the law to get information that can save American lives. My administration will continue to work with the Congress to get this legislation enacted -- but time is of the essence. Congress is in session just for a few more weeks, and passing this legislation ought to be the top priority. (Applause.)

As we work with Congress to pass a good bill, we will also consult with congressional leaders on how to ensure that the CIA program goes forward in a way that follows the law, that meets the national security needs of our country, and protects the brave men and women we ask to obtain information that will save innocent lives. For the sake of our security, Congress needs to act, and update our laws to meet the threats of this new era. And I know they will.

We're engaged in a global struggle -- and the entire civilized world has a stake in its outcome. America is a nation of law. And as I work with Congress to strengthen and clarify our laws here at home, I will continue to work with members of the international community who have been our partners in this struggle. I've spoken with leaders of foreign governments, and worked with them to address their concerns about Guantanamo and our detention policies. I'll continue to work with the international community to construct a common foundation to defend our nations and protect our freedoms.

Free nations have faced new enemies and adjusted to new threats before -- and we have prevailed. Like the struggles of the last century, today's war on terror is, above all, a struggle for freedom and liberty. The adversaries are different, but the stakes in this war are the same: We're fighting for our way of life, and our ability to live in freedom. We're fighting for the cause of humanity, against those who seek to impose the darkness of tyranny and terror upon the entire world. And we're fighting for a peaceful future for our children and our grandchildren.

May God bless you all. (Applause.)

END 2:22 P.M. EDT

left
right
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Bush Used S11 to invade Iraq- U.S. Senate Report

 If nobody's buying Dubya's spiel, even within his own borders, then why is he being allowed to proceed?

[Voice Of America extract]

According to the 400 page document, an assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 2005 stated that before U.S. and allied forces invaded, the Saddam Hussein regime did not, in the words of the report, have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates.

President Bush and other administration officials have acknowledged that no evidence has emerged to show a direct link between Saddam and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

However, the president, along with Vice President Dick Cheney and other key officials have maintained that Zarqawi's presence in Iraq before the war constituted proof of an al-Qaida connection. 

At a news conference Friday, Senate Democrats asserted the report proves that the Bush administration sought to exploit the fears Americans had in the wake of the 2001 al-Qaida attacks in New York and Washington to justify military action in Iraq.

 

 Following the extract that Hamish used as an introduction to the piece, the next most poignant quote, to me, from Bush is " We're now approaching the five-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks -- and the families of those murdered that day have waited patiently for justice."

Is this to be regarded as a permit for whatever murder the Administration carries out?

ABC-News has just broadcast the White House's whitewash of the report, with spokesman Tony Snow (-Job?) saying that while everyone will be going back and forth "figuring out who said what" for a while, that "It's all well and good, but the most important thing is, figure out what you're doing today and tomorrow" 

No worries, Tony, let's just forget everything that's happened over the last five years and get on with some fresh carnage.  Let's pretend it's still the day after 11/9/2001 and do as we're told.

Ramzi the fake terrorist in the CIA hands,smoking gun alert

"Ramzi bin al-Shibh"; the smoking gun.

Here is his name in the President's address. According to the speech Ramzi is in CIA custody in Gitmo Bay.

According to the NYT it is Ramzi's vioce that is speaking on the newly released "not seen before" video from AlJazeera Satellite media.

This video uses the Osama Bin Laden fake that has already been debunked from the fake confession video rebuked by the real man in a person to person interview after 911. Interestingly the real OBL gives the credit for the most successful attack upon the USA to "A government within a government" of the US in that interview.

So the newly released video has the fake OBL and the Ramzi man . Hence the Ramzi man is involved in making fake OBL videos, unless he did not know OBL was fake....unlikely. Hence Ramzi is an agent of those making the false video and audios usually rapidly debunked, but part of scaring America and justifying the defensive actions and promoting the spin that the islamists want to change the world and impose Islam-an unnegotiable stand for everyone-rather than what OBL has really said, to condemn the corrupt and violent regimes and fight against them via their financial and military backers....not a nice thought either, makes us want to be more responsible for what our government does if it may come back and bite, eh?

Ramzi is part of the deception. Ramzi is allegedly in Gitmo Bay. So......either the CIA are part of the deception, or they should announce whether Ramzi in the video is the same as the Ramzi they have and why...ask him who made the video, eh? Then we know who had videos ready before 911. Who had videos made showing support for Al Zarkawi - originally not supported by the living OBL - by the fake OBL voice. (memo to Bush, OBL is dead by all logical analysis, save your money, he is already silenced in Toro Bora in 2001. Ask the Pakis, they said it)

Fake fear, fake terrorists, fake terrorism? Now why would someone do that?

Blah Blah...

Thanks to Michael de Angelos, J McPherson, Angela Ryan and Richard Tonkin for your clear statements and apologies for my rambling on...

I’ve been hunting through my books for an old, crazy science fiction book, mostly set in Scotland and in essence, it’s an after the event story of global war. It contained elements of the Star Wars Program and the constant threat from within and without and lots of blah blah blah….sort of Bush blah blah.

What’s going on, in this crazy snakes and ladders game, would be the makings of a wonderful farce if the outcomes were not so serious. What amazes me is the way people take this drivel hook, line and sinker and I’m including our own wonderful and comfortable citizens who will underwrite Bush’s stance. The dishonesty of the whole game is breath taking, as the players are operating on several levels, the most important being the hip pocket nerves of power and money and they, like the so called terrorists, have no borders or morality.

I don’t underestimate Bush’s input, but doesn’t he have a bloody good speech writer. The soliloquy from the start, was entirely emotive and meant to sound as though he was bearing his soul. Similar to the likes of used car and real estate sales types, lawyers and the like,…the list goes on… they all essentially say, TRUST ME. It’s just a bit worrying when a crazy like Bush with the support of our home grown crazy and UK’s pretend Labour leader, can totally change the dynamics of world politics for the worse. Policies which their own people don’t want and policies that destroy peace and understanding and for what? Demonising who ever becomes the next scape goat and for what? I respect Orwell all the more for his grasp of what, those in power will do to retain power and 1984 is coming alive at last.

To quote from a great movie, “you’ve just got to choose which level of bullshit you want to live on”. And on that note, I think the world is stuck together with bullshit!

Not Goebbels again

Yet another production from the Joseph Goebbels school of oratory. Repeat lies often enough with a straight face and people will believe them. Though in fact the tissue of lies is ripping in more and more places.This speech is part of a series ostensibly designed to shore up support for the Republicans in the upcoming Congressional elections. However, it has another more sinister purpose, putting pressure on Congress to overturn the recent decision by the Supreme Court  that  ruled illegal the military tribunals and inferred that Bush and his people were liable for the war crimes they have committed.

Reading the speech one wonders whether even someone as fatuous as our foreign minister would actually believe this rubbish, though no doubt he will dutifully endorse it. Note the backwards justification of Iraq as part of the war on terror and of course the eliding of the fact that one of the CIA torture sites is Camp Echo, which is part of the Guantanamo complex. The continual use of the word in legal is also a give away since what Bush justifies as legal are actions he authorised but that the Supreme Court recently found illegal, including torturing people to death. In 1984 style the word legal as Bush uses it means the opposite of what the word really means.

Bush wants Congress to overturn the Supreme Court decision through legislation: legislation  that will make his Kangeroo courts legal, and more importantly, protect hiimself and his administration from being prosecuted for the war crimes they have clearly committed under the Geneva conventions. His "end justifies the means" reasoning for why this should be allowed is textbook Soviet or Nazi logic.

In terms of terrorism and "justifications" for it a dispassionate observer could be forgiven for thinking the only real difference between Bush and Bin Laden is that the former monster has killed many more innocent people. From an Australian point of view the fact that Australian troops are fighting alongside American troops who have Bush as their Commander in Chief is a disgrace. It puts Australian soldiers clearly in the position of collaborators.

Some pertinent links backgrounding this whole get out of jail, justifiy human rights abuse fraud Bush is spinning:

 

Washington Post “Detainee Abuse Charges Feared; Shield Sought From '96 War Crimes Act  July 28, 2006

Los Angeles Times Aug 18 2006 The CIA Torture Loophole

BBC News February 21, 2006   Report probes US Custody Deaths

Newsweek May 19, 2004 Memos Reveal War Crimes Warning

New York Review of Books Aug 10 2006 Why the Court Said No

Downer responds to Bush

Yesterday in Parliament our Foreign Minister proclaimed support of the George Bushes' (don't forget Daddy) CIA program by invoking the anniversaries of the more local atrocities.  Here's the introduction to his speech.

[transcript extract from today's Australian:]

We are - I think it is next Monday - five years on from 9-11, in which 10 Australians were killed. It is nearly four years since 88 Australians were killed in Bali. We are two days from the second anniversary of the bombing of the Australian embassy in Jakarta and we are pretty close to the first anniversary of the so-called second Bali bombing.

Downer follows Bush's JI lead in linking the situation in the two countries but neglects to mention that, according to Bush, South East Asians were to be used to attack L.A. as they don't look like Arabs.

So far the only direct likelihood of an attack on Australia we've seen was that video threat that was on the telly on September 11 last year (my blog on the day) warning that Melbourne was a target (hmm.. didn't hear Howard mentioning that one today)  We also had , on the same day, the story of the arrest of that violent anti-Halliburton activist Scott Parkin.  Yep.. remember the Pentagon's Peanut Butter Files?  Oh well, at least the arrest was good  PR for the Sunday papers.

The head of the FBI, Robert Muller, said just now on ABC's The World Today that there is no intelligence of an anniversary attack within the United States.  The last part may be a signifigant qualifier.

Oh by the way.. are Murdoch papers going up in price in any other city than Adelaide?  We're paying an extra ten cents from Monday.



Doctor Who and 666 and 6/6/06

Check out Saturday night's episode.. it's the second of a two-parter centring on the Awakening of the Beast that was originally broadcast in the UK on the weekends surrounding 6/6/06.  My point is that if the BBC can pull off co-ordinating months of production and broadcast scheduling to achieve such timing, then so can Bush and the CIA.

War on Saudi Arabia ?

I know it's not fashionable to refer to Michael Moore these days. It must be noted, however, that he was earlier than most in publicising that the majority of the 9/11 highjackers were Saudi Arabians, and in suggesting that the War On Terror should be conducted in that country. There's a snowball\s chance in hell of that one.

Bush is still using the New York tragedy to vindicate his activities. Al Jazeerah has responded by showing vision of Osama with alleged hijackers. Do you wonder where the footage came from? Whether from terrorists/insurgents or from the CIA (or it's subcontractors such as the Rendon Group) the fact that the video has surfaced now concerned me.

A day before the Heathrow scare I emailed a friend flying around the US and warned her that a September 11 anniversary attack was imminent. Let's just say I'll be happier when the date has passed.

Bush's speech has done little to elevate my mood. That it follows his statement that the WOT is the "idealogical battle of the century" doesn't help either.

So what happens next? Will the US pull off a miraculous result in the next few days to support Bush's rhetoric, or will another "terror attack" do the job?

John Howard's timing in rebuffing the hypothesis that Melbourne is the most likely target in Australia doesn't sit well in my mind, either, given that Howard and Downer generally use ASIO chief Paul O'Sullivan for that sort of thing. I hope he's not being held in reserve for a bigger story.

Aussi lament for our destiny

Spot on as usual Michael. Why can some see it so clearly and others choose not to? I really fear for what is to happen, considering the ruthless lengths people have gone to and the planning (WMD plants - Italians and Yellowcake and Michael Ledeen et al, and PR companies so carefully primed long before Iraq... years, imagine the planning there!) for Iraq and Iran now  being the already predestined target. What is in store to justify the necessary heavy hit against a fully armed nation?

October 10/17 would be just their sense of humour.

Simplified for other Mikes:

Iran Iran Iran, oy oy oy,
let's bomb 'em blast 'em blame 'em
cos that's the game, our ploy.
Worked with Iraq cos no-one cares
what happens so far away...
But chickens come home to roost they say,
and the mills of G-d grind slowly...
A cloudless day can turn to storm,
and masters mired sink lowly.

Aussi lament. To your favourite Rap.

Your turn, all can do better. ;)

Cheers.

oh come on

Ah come on Michael, you've gotta give the angry monkey points for staying on target in that tower of hypocrisy speech. He managed to say 'terrorist' 67 times by my count.

I particularly liked the implied threat that the perps of 9/11 could not be charged if the military commissions were not authorised. I'd a'thunk America would have some other way of charging people responsible for the death of 3000 people.

And apparently it's the fault of 'other countries' that Guantanamo exists, 'cause we won't take back our own homegrown 'terrorists'. Nothing to do with keeping 'em off American soil so that they don't have to apply American laws to their treatment.

Oh come on

Does anyone really believe all this mumbo jumbo? He ranges from calling people "terrorists" and then they're suddenly enemy war combatants. Notice he completely glosses over the incovenient fact he illegally invaded two countries, Afghanistan and Iraq. I wonder whether he's prepared to front up to his own criminal war crimes tribunals for those acts in which thousands of innocent civilians have died - certainly far more than Americans died on 9/11 and who never harmed the USA. If this is really a "war" then the enemy deserves all the rights of enemy combatants no matter what this dimwitted disgrace of a fool president thinks.

Sadly we'll probably have a few more dramatic scares pop up with the house elections coming in the US with the London so-called plane bombings that are looking like a real fizzer - a group of so-called bombers with no airline tickets etc but a willing media only too willing to do Bush and Blair's bidding.

I really don't think any of these guys are connected to reality. The current US Ambassador to Australia defended the continued incarceration of David Hicks at GITMO recently because he was an "enemy combatant". Uhhh? What enemy combatant? Hicks is an Australian and no matter what anyone thinks of his acts Australia hadn't declared war on Afghanistan. What we are getting is a slow softening up of the next phase - an attack on Iran. Watch all talk of Iraq slowly fade into the background as the rhetoric on Iran steps up. The only hope is that the British Labor Party does the right thing and boots out Bush's partner in murder, Blair, which may restrain Bush but anything's possible. John Howard must be thanking his lucky stars that stingray took the heat of his recent blunders for a while.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.
Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Recent Comments

David Roffey: {whimper} in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 1 day ago
Jenny Hume: So long mate in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 2 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Reds (under beds?) in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 3 days ago
Justin Obodie: Why not, with a bang? in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 3 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Dear Albatross in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 3 days ago
Michael Talbot-Wilson: Good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 4 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Goodnight and good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 5 days ago
Margo Kingston: bye, babe in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago