The Fourth Reich is here

[andrewwatson]

Bush has assumed the powers of a dictator. Anyone who opposes him can be termed an ''illegal enemy combatant'' and can also be detained indefinitely without trial and subjected to whatever a military decides appropriate, i.e. incarceration for life, torture or even execution.

Why is this not being covered in the world's press? In my view the neo-cons are a bigger threat to world peace than Hitler's thugs, but at least in 1939 the British press was united in opposition to the Nazis.

This silence is truly terrifyng.

Amnesty International says:

USA: Congress rubber stamps torture and other abuses
By passing the Military Commissions Act, the United States Congress has, in effect, given its stamp of approval to human rights violations committed by the USA in the “war on terror”. This legislation leaves the USA squarely on the wrong side of international law, and has turned bad executive policy into bad domestic law. Amnesty International will campaign for repeal of this act and fully expects the constitutionality of this legislation to be challenged in the courts.

In the “war on terror”, the US administration has resorted to secret detention, enforced disappearance, prolonged incommunicado detention, indefinite detention without charge, arbitrary detention, and torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Thousands of detainees remain in indefinite military detention in US custody in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay. Congress has failed these detainees and their families. President Bush has defended the CIA’s use of secret detention and in the debates over the Military Commissions Act, members of Congress have done the same. This policy clearly violates international law.


The New York Times says:

Published: September 28, 2006

Here’s what happens when this irresponsible Congress railroads a profoundly important bill to serve the mindless politics of a midterm election: The Bush administration uses Republicans’ fear of losing their majority to push through ghastly ideas about antiterrorism that will make American troops less safe and do lasting damage to our 217-year-old nation of laws — while actually doing nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Democrats betray their principles to avoid last-minute attack ads. Our democracy is the big loser.

Republicans say Congress must act right now to create procedures for charging and trying terrorists — because the men accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks are available for trial. That’s pure propaganda. Those men could have been tried and convicted long ago, but President Bush chose not to. He held them in illegal detention, had them questioned in ways that will make real trials very hard, and invented a transparently illegal system of kangaroo courts to convict them.

It was only after the Supreme Court issued the inevitable ruling striking down Mr. Bush’s shadow penal system that he adopted his tone of urgency. It serves a cynical goal: Republican strategists think they can win this fall, not by passing a good law but by forcing Democrats to vote against a bad one so they could be made to look soft on terrorism.

Last week, the White House and three Republican senators announced a terrible deal on this legislation that gave Mr. Bush most of what he wanted, including a blanket waiver for crimes Americans may have committed in the service of his antiterrorism policies. Then Vice President Dick Cheney and his willing lawmakers rewrote the rest of the measure so that it would give Mr. Bush the power to jail pretty much anyone he wants for as long as he wants without charging them, to unilaterally reinterpret the Geneva Conventions, to authorize what normal people consider torture, and to deny justice to hundreds of men captured in error.

These are some of the bill’s biggest flaws:

Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.

The Geneva Conventions: The bill would repudiate a half-century of international precedent by allowing Mr. Bush to decide on his own what abusive interrogation methods he considered permissible. And his decision could stay secret — there’s no requirement that this list be published.

Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.

Judicial Review: The courts would have no power to review any aspect of this new system, except verdicts by military tribunals. The bill would limit appeals and bar legal actions based on the Geneva Conventions, directly or indirectly. All Mr. Bush would have to do to lock anyone up forever is to declare him an illegal combatant and not have a trial.

Coerced Evidence: Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses.

Secret Evidence: American standards of justice prohibit evidence and testimony that is kept secret from the defendant, whether the accused is a corporate executive or a mass murderer. But the bill as redrafted by Mr. Cheney seems to weaken protections against such evidence.

Offenses: The definition of torture is unacceptably narrow, a virtual reprise of the deeply cynical memos the administration produced after 9/11. Rape and sexual assault are defined in a retrograde way that covers only forced or coerced activity, and not other forms of nonconsensual sex. The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.

•There is not enough time to fix these bills, especially since the few Republicans who call themselves moderates have been whipped into line, and the Democratic leadership in the Senate seems to have misplaced its spine. If there was ever a moment for a filibuster, this was it.

We don’t blame the Democrats for being frightened. The Republicans have made it clear that they’ll use any opportunity to brand anyone who votes against this bill as a terrorist enabler. But Americans of the future won’t remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration.

They’ll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/290906torturebill.h tm

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/290906sexuallytortu re.htm
__________________

[Mark Gobell]

A powerful reply and some history from Keith Olbermann:

'Beginning of the end of America'

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15360.htm

If you can't watch the video, here's the transcript.

http://mparent7777.livejournal.com/13638973.html

[Leiff]

The 14 Characteristics of Fascism
by Lawrence Britt
Free Inquiry Magazine, Spring 2003
www.globalresearch.ca 7 November 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BRI411A.html

Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20).

Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.


The 14 characteristics are:


Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.


Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.


Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


Supremacy of the Military

Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


Rampant Sexism

The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


Controlled Mass Media

Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


Obsession with National Security

Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


Religion and Government are Intertwined

Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.


Corporate Power is Protected

The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


Labor Power is Suppressed

Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


Obsession with Crime and Punishment

Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


Fraudulent Elections

Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

[Mark Gobell]

US Anti-Terror Law Concerns Red Cross

The Associated Press

Thursday 19 October 2006

Geneva - The international Red Cross said Thursday it has "concerns and questions" over whether a new U.S. anti-terror law signed by President Bush complies with the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war.

The legislation, signed into law Tuesday, authorizes military trials of terrorism suspects, eliminating some of the rights defendants usually are guaranteed under U.S. law while allowing continued harsh interrogations of terror suspects, a provision Bush has said was vital.

The Geneva-based International Committee of the Red Cross said it was studying the law, which it said was very complex and entailed both positive and negative elements. But it said it had some immediate reservations.

"Our preliminary reading of the new legislation raises certain concerns and questions," said Jakob Kellenberger, president of the Red Cross.

"The very broad definition of who is an 'unlawful enemy combatant' and the fact that there is not an explicit prohibition on the admission of evidence attained by coercion are examples," he said.

Kellenberger said the Red Cross would discuss its concerns with the Bush administration, such as how the law "omits certain violations from the list of acts that are war crimes under U.S. domestic law."

"These include the prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, and the prohibition of the denial of the right to a fair trial, which is a basic protection provided for in international law," Kellenberger said.

Opponents of the legislation say it eliminates defendants' rights considered fundamental to American values, such as the use of coerced testimony as evidence.

For example, the military commissions which will try terror suspects are allowed to consider hearsay evidence so long as a judge determines it is reliable - a provision barred in civilian courts.

Kellenberger said the Geneva Conventions guarantee prisoners "the presumption of innocence, the right to be tried by an impartial and independent court, the right to qualified legal counsel and the exclusion of any evidence obtained as a result of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment."

Bush pushed for the legislation because the Supreme Court in June said the administration's plan for trying detainees in military tribunals violated U.S. and international law.

The act, which sets the rules for court proceedings, applies to those selected by the military for prosecution and leaves mostly unaffected the majority of the 14,000 prisoners in U.S. custody, mostly in Iraq.

It says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, which was intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.

In Washington, John Bellinger III, the State Department's legal adviser, told reporters Thursday the Bush administration has not decided whether it will give the Red Cross access to any future CIA terrorism detainees or identify them.

"We think there's no requirement to do it" under the Geneva Conventions, he said.

Before President Bush announced last month that the CIA had turned over its terrorism detainees to the U.S. military, the administration did not acknowledge the program existed and provided no information or access to the Red Cross.

Bellinger recently returned from Berlin and The Hague, where he discussed the new law with officials there. Bellinger acknowledged that defending U.S. detention practices to the nation's allies has been a tough job, but said he thinks progress has been made in recent months.

"This is clearly an uphill battle to try to explain policies that people are uncomfortable with," he said. "On the other hand, we have not done a very good job at engaging in dialogue about these issues over the previous number of years. And as a result a lot of inaccurate perceptions have grown up."

Kellenberger, of the Red Cross, said it was "noteworthy" the act spelled out what the U.S. regards as "grave breaches" of the Geneva Conventions that go even farther than the 1949 accord. These included specifying the prohibition on rape, sexual assault, biological experiments and intentionally causing serious bodily injury, he said.

[Reflecter]

The following short goes with Leiff's post from the same people.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/14.html