May be slow to load,items coming from other servers.
Israel calls for shelter rooms to be set up in a bid to prepare the public for yet another war, this time, one of raining missiles. "The next war will see a massive use of ballistic weapons against the whole of Israeli territory," claimed retired general Udi Shani.
read more | digg story
I. Powers and Rights Reserved To We the People, Never Delegated or Violated Without Consent
A. The People are expressly defined as human beings and does not refer to corporations or contractual relationships.
B. No contract, agreement, or promise may ever bind any human to refuse to enforce the law, or prohibit them from speaking on matters of public interest.
C. We the People may believe anything, including the possible belief that this Constitution must be discarded and replaced with a superior document which defends the People and protects their power to enforce this Constitution against the Government.
D. The People are educated to apply the lessons of history to ensure rights are preserved, power asserted, and this Constitution is protected from domestic and foreign enemies.
E. The People have the enforceable right and power to review any public document and access any public official.
F. The People have the enforceable right to engage in any speech, communication, or discussion on issues of war crimes, government incompetence, or allegations of reckless government planning and maladministration.
G. Government officials, agencies, departments may not invoke any power or right they have denied to the People.
H. The People have the right to affordable housing. Where none is available, the government is denied the power to prosecute anyone for not living in a home, or residing in a public park, open forest, or public lands.
I. The People have the enforceable right to freely travel, without questions, and without delay. Any law enforcement officer, agents, or contacted security official who uses any ruse, scheme, or deception to engage in pretextual stops shall be enforced as a violation of this Constitution.
J. The People have the enforceable right to compel govenment officials, contractors, and securty personnel to identify themselves, disclose their policies and procedures, and respond to complaints about violations of this Constitution, the Supreme Law, or laws of war.
K. The People may not be subject to any electronic surveillance except on probable cause and a warrant before a judicial tribunal. The President, Congress and others are expressly denied the power to enact, create, use, or rely on quasi-judicial tribunals to self-certify warrants to conduct surveillance.
L. All denied powers to the US Government in this Constitution are reserved to the People to be used to defend the Constitution.
II. Powers and Rights Reserved to States
A. States shall have authority to enforce any law within their jurisdiction. Failure to enforce the laws of war shall be prosecuted as a war crime.
B. States shall, when the Federal Government refuses to enforce the Constitution or Supreme Law, enforce the national and international law against contractors, legal counsel, state or US government officials.
C. Any state may start impeachment investigations or proceedings against the President, Member of Congress, or US government official on issues of international laws of war, domestic rebellion, or violations of the Supreme Law oath of office, or Geneva Conventions. The States shall, upon receipt of an impeachment investigation or conviction from any other state, shall within 10 days debate that resolution. If convicted by 2/3 of the States, that US government official shall be removed from office. Any effort to thwart State efforts to enforce the US Constitution through impeachment investigations or impeachment proceedings at the State level may be construed as a subsequent violation of this Constitution and laws of war.
D. The States may, without notice, organize themselves to collectively defend this Constitution from the domestic enemies in the United States government. The States Governors have the standing power, right, and authority to use deadly combat force to enforce this Constitution against US government officials.
E. A failure of any State official to enforce the laws of war shall be subject to a war crimes trial within 90 days of discovering that evidence. Where there are credible allegations of war crimes, a failure to investigate shall be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty.
F. States have the power to enforce contract obligations between contractors and the US government which affect the rights of their State citizens. Failure to enforce these contractual obligations against the contractors or US government could be construed as a subsequent violation under the laws of war and US Constitution against legal counsel, state officials, or court officers.
III. Independent Branch
A. All US government, contractor-provided, and legal counsel data shall be retained in an independent branch.
B. The President, Congress, and Judicial branches have no power, right or claim to not fully fund this Independent Branch.
C. The Independent Branch conducts electronic surveillance of the US government, stores that data, and ensures there are independent, safe, retained records of all US government transaction, including conversations and memos between legal counsel and government officials. Once created for the government or connected with any legal or illegal activity, these records are public records.
D. The data may be seen only upon a showing of reasonable belief or suspicion by the United States Congress, Court, or Executive Branch that the information may be useful in enforcing the Constitution, Supreme Law, or Geneva Conventions.
E. Private citizens may view any data, unless the US government provides sufficient, detailed evidence why that request for information should not be met for bonafide, lawful secrets. Any effort to hide evidence behind a claim of "state secrets," where that claim is linked with an effort to bypass the Constitution, oath of office, Supreme Law, or laws of war may be punishable by the death penalty.
F. All government data belongs to the People. Any legal counsel working for the US government shall ensure that the People's right to reliable information is protected. A failure to protect this information could be construed as a war crime.
IV. Prosecutorial Branch
A. All prosecutorial options are denied of the President.
B. The Prosecutorial branch has the power to raise independent combat power, support them, and may lawfully use that deadly combat force to confront Members of Congress, the Judicial Branch Officers, or the Presidents upon showing of probable cause for war crimes.
C. The prosecutorial power is the exclusive power of the prosecution branch. However, anyone may make a claim of illegal activity, and enforce the laws of the United States and States respectively. Any effort to block anyone from unilaterally attempting to enforce the laws of war through discovery, investigation, and open discussion of those alleged war crimes shall be construed as a possible subsequent offense under the laws of war.
D. Legal counsel are subject to public review, audit, and can be required, with fair notice, of a requirement to demonstrate before any court their compliance with the laws of war.
E. Legal counsel may be denied authority to conduct discovery during any investigation when that discovery is linked with efforts that would thwart war crimes investigation, enforcement of the Supreme law or Geneva Conventions.
V. Judicial Branch
A. The Judicial Branch is above the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch only in order of precedence. The Judicial Branch is a co-equal branch, and closest to the People and Constitution. It is least responsive, and most slow to the People's daily interests to enforce the Constitution and Supreme Law or Geneva Conventions.
B. Where the Judicial Branch does not timely enforce the Constitution, Supreme Law, or laws of war, the States and People retain the power and right to investigate and prosecute allegations of US government illegal activity, war crimes, or violations of the Supreme law.
C. All precedents under the laws of war are binding on the Judicial Branch, US government, and the People through enforcement actions.
D. Any decision by any judicial officer not to fully enforce the laws of war, Supreme Law, or this Constitution may be construed as a war crime, subject to the death penalty.
VI. Legislative Branch
A. The Legislative Branch is listed after the Judicial Branch because it is less responsive to the People.
B. The Members of Congress may be stopped between sessions and held to account for their failure to enforce the laws of war.
C. Refusing to investigate or impeach the President, Judicial Officers, or any current or former US government official for alleged war crimes, maladministration, illegal warfare, or other crimes against the People, States, or US Government shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to not fully assert ones oath of office, and punishable by the death penalty under the laws of war.
D. There are three chambers to the Congress. The Senate and House have a legal duty to fully enforce the laws. Any decision to not timely review evidence of impeachable offenses, or not investigate war crimes or maladministration could be construed as subsequent offenses under the laws of war.
E. The Superior Chamber shall decide, before any debate, whether the proposed bill is or is not Constitutional. This determination is subject to approval, challenge, and rejection by the People, States, and Judicial Branch.
F. The Congress is denied the exclusive power to make rules. Any rule which prohibits any investigation into alleged malfeasance in re the laws of war, Supreme Law, or oath of office is illegal, and may be construed as a subsequent offense under the laws of war.
G. The Congress shall comply with public audits, and timely provide within 45 days of an audit report a statement of remedy, and outline a plan within 90 days to fully comply with all legal obligations under the Statute, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.
H. The Congress may raise and support an army, and independently order that army only against the President when the President refuses to enforce the laws of war, or comply with his legal obligations under this Constitution.
VII. Executive Branch
A. The Executive Branch is led by three Presidents, co-equal with non-overlapping jurisdictions. The Executive Branch has one power: Executive Power. All actions taken under that one power are lesser authorities not powers. The Executive Branch has no power to create new powers or assign itself broader power.
B. The Executive Branch is listed last because it is the least responsive to the People, and the greatest threat of tyranny to this Constitution. The President is a clerk, not a King or Emperor. The President only manages programs. The President has no power to ignore, rewrite, or refuse to enforce the law. Each of the three Presidents shall have an ongoing requirement to demonstrate to the People and States and Congress and Courts compliance with the Constitution, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.
C. The Domestic Affairs President is responsive to the States and US Government on internal affairs.
D. The Foreign Affairs President shall have exclusive power to interact with foreign powers. The Foreign Affairs President is denied any power to violate the laws of war, or use covert activity against American citizens.
E. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs President are denied the power to thwart any lawful State action to organize with foreign powers and agents to defend the US Constitution, enforce the laws of war, or protect the rights and powers of the People and States against domestic encroachments by the US government, legal counsel, or other US government officials.
F. The Commander in Chief shall only have power to lead combat operations during war time. Congress shall conduct ongoing, public reviews whether the Commander in Chief is or is not competent in managing combat operations. The Presidents and Commander in Chief are denied the power to prohibit Congress from using electronic surveillance or use separately raised and supported armies to conduct this oversight during wartime and peacetime.
G. The Executive Branch is denied the power to block anyone from getting access to illegal activity related to the laws of war.
H. During Peacetime, the Commander in Chief shall periodically cooperate with ongoing Oversight of US combat forces to ensure they are combat ready, fully trained on the laws of war, and prepared to lawfully be used to defend the Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies.
I. The Executive Branch and Presidents and officers, agents, contractors, and personnel are denied the power, right, or authority to order anyone to ignore any statute, law, legal requirement, or obligation under the Constitution.
J. The Executive Branch has no power or authority to directly contact the Legislative Branch by name. The President may only request, not order other branches of government. All Communications between the Executive and Legislative Branch shall pass through the Prosecutorial Branch, and retained in the National Archives. Those records are available for public inspection at any time. The People have the enforceable right to compel the Executive Branch, Legislature, and Judicial Branch to produce documents.
K. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judicial Branch, and Prosecutorial Branch, and States are denied the power to wage warfare, information warfare, or harass American civilians through his agents, combat troops, or third parties in the United states or from overseas. Any funds used for this illegal purpose belong to the People and States. Contracts used to enforce, compel, or organize this illegal activity are not enforceable, and contrary to public policy.
L. The Presidents are denied a presumption of competence until proven. The President shall always have the burden of proof, and is expressly denied a presumption of good faith until demonstrated with overwhelming evidence in public. An election result is not proof of competence nor does it satisfy a presumption of good faith, only of mastery to win an election through legal or illegal methods and deception.
M. The Executive Branch and Presidents and subordinate agency head, contractor, and employees are expressly denied any assurance any conversation he has related to illegal activity, war crimes, unlawful acts, or other threats to the US Constitution shall remain secret behind any shield, scheme, agreement, or technology. Any order a President or anyone gives to anyone to hide, destroy,not provide, or conceal evidence of illegal activity may be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty. This restriction against following illegal orders may not be bypassed by claiming the order was from a non-person, electronic device, or other non-Constitutionally recognized entity, database, policy, guide, or other document.
N. The Presidents are denied the power to use any combat force, technology, or other military weapon or plan against American civilians, except in cases of internal rebellion which only the Congress shall approve in writing. When the Congress fails to act, or abuses its authority, the State Governors may lawfully use deadly combat force to detain and enforce the laws of war prohibiting illegal use of force against American civilians.
O. The Presidents are denied the power to induce any civilian to take any action that might deny them on any Geneva protections as a civilian. Any order, ruse, scheme, propaganda, or unreliable information to induce anyone to wage war, information warfare, or any action to harass civilians is punishable by the death penalty, and may be enforced as a violation of the laws of war.
P. The President, when delegating any power to any agency head, agrees that that agency shall be organized as if it were a separate, lesser, and not coequal branch. Those agencies shall fully cooperate with the other branches of government to ensure power within the branch or department is divided. There is no single agency, division, or office in the Executive Branch that is beyond ongoing oversight by the other four branches.
Q. The President shall have no power to block the Congress, States, Judiciary, Prosecutorial, and Independent Branch from a having co-equal status to oversee, manage, and organize that lesser branch. If the President refuses to substantially comply with that requirement, Congress may not lawfully provide funding for that agency, and the funds return to the States and People.
1 comment:
[for public comment: Do not attribute to "anonymous", just post it, and see who is looking at it. You'll see some law firms swooping in. Check their names of their firms as the appear on your register.]
[public comment:]
There's a crack in the President's efforts to thwart a war crimes investigation. Former and currently assigned legal counsel have a major problem. Evidence developed supports the allegations the NSA did rely on illegally captured information to violate FISA, target Americans, and render innocents in violation of the laws of war.
The CIA and NSA appear to have worked with the OVP to destroy the link between Geneva violations, unlawful FISA violations, prisoner abuse, and warrantless interrogations of US citizens, in breach of domestic and international law.
There is no statute of limitations for war crimes. The alleged evidence destruction appears well connected from concerns the JAGs well raised in re Geneva. The penalty of war crimes evidence destruction could include the death penalty.
The WH e-mail destruction is not linked with a sole event, but the broader effort to hide the use of unreliable information to justify bypassing the Congress and Courts. The basis for the state secrets claims have less to do with national security, and more to do with hiding evidence of war crimes, impeachable offenses, and violations of the Supreme Law including the Bill of Rights.
The President, Congress, and US Courts have been complicit with illegal US government activity to hide from public view evidence of the US government official's illegal conduct. They've been turning a blind eye to illegality to avoid paying attention to their complicity with the illegalities.
This misconduct and malfeasance spans all three branches, including legal counsel, court officers, and legislators. The alleged malfeasance relates to failures to enforce the laws of war, investigate, and enforce the law as required by oath.
[end public comments]
[NOTE: private comment: ]
- What role does DOJ AG have in thwarting a real investigation given his relative with Verizon could be implicated in alleged war crimes?
AG is asserting silence on waterboarding because: Verizon was connected with the fiber optics interceptions, and the transfer of that data for subsequent use during abuse of POWs, in violation of Geneva.
You may assume the AG is tainted; and has a personal interest in protecting his relative from an alleged war crimes indictment. Evidence could be destroyed; and lines of inquiry not followed, as they should.
[I'm still mulling this over: This isn't ready for publication. Maybe put this up as a draft . . .not yet. Save this for future reference. Something is new here. ]
[Feel free to use the "gist" of the comments, but do not quote directly. Feel free to rewrite for your own purposes/publication, but do not post any of this word-for-word publicly.]
Subj: CIA IG ombudsman, TPM posting problems
Something occurred to me in response to:" The results suggest CIA officers were concerned there was a presumption of guilt and they were not treated fairly by Helgerson's team of investigators" from
The "presumption of guilt"-assertion is jut that, an assertion. Perhaps the CIA agents _were_ guilty; and were sensitive to the probing questions.
Conversely, now the CIA knows about the "problems with presumption of guilt"-approach, and may have a sense of how the US public feels after 9-11: We're treated as if guilty until proven innocent.
Now, consider this, current at top on Kos, with only 5 comments: here. Notice Clarke is saying, in effect, the President got it all backwards.
Clarke is essentially saying, "We've destroyed our rule of law, and we're worse off. Rather than go after the enemy, this President treats the US public, rule of law, and facts as if they were the enemy."
Going back to the CIA ombudsman issue: We still don't know for sure whether the CIA IG really did anything wrong. Rather, based on the Hayden promises, it appears he's offering CIA agents things they already had: Access to legal counsel.
The only thing we're seeing is that investigations will be "faster": That's curious: What if it does take time to get through the CIA agents' stonewalling. "Oh, we can't go on, we have a time limit." Maybe the investigation was long because the CIA agents were delaying; and the CIA IG was going after the right things. We don't know.
Let's consider what little we've been told: We haven't been told about the scope of the CIA IG review, although it appears it involves Guantanamo; but it may have included Eastern Europe detention/abuse.
The 9-11 Commission reports that the footnotes relied on information gleaned from torture: from. 9-11 commission has been discredited when they say, "We had no idea about torture": The answers to their questions allegedly relied on torture for them to complete their report.
Did you catch that: "Torture" as an unreliable source of info was the means by which the 9-11 COmmission told te public "what happened":
9-11 was about FISA failures; NSA failures.
We don't know for certain what happened on 9-11, because the conclusions are based on data relying on abuse, dubious information, and NSA targeting that used that illegally captured information to then request more data. Cycle is this: US government before 9-11 messes up; action occurs; US government uses unreliable information to conclude what happened; then uses unreliable information to expand illegal warfare.
Key point: Appearance of CIA use of illegally captured information, as suspected. If the 9-11 Commission was using this data/abuse to gt information, seems logical NSA was also doing the same when bybassing the FISA court and going after US citizens' data: On absurd accusation alone, relying on worthless information.
That may be the key: Was torture/abuse of POW used to get informatoin that the NSA used to "justify" ignoring the FISA court, and directly target US citizens? Appears to be supported as a conclusion, line of inquiry.
[for public comment:]
Information developed suggests the NSA did rely on illegally captured information to violate FISA, target Americans, and render innocents in violation of the laws of war.
[end public comments]
[re-start/begin private comment:]
It remains unclear how much of the prextextual stops/warrantless interrogations are linked with dubious information gleaned from POW abuse.
- Were Americans told to put up with Consttutional violatins because of dubious information gleaned from prisoner abuse?
- How quickly was Congress told to act on the basis of unreliable information?
We've seen the results of "unrelaiable information" in re Iraq WMD. That was externally. But what about inernally: Against US citizens. Recall, CIA has a larger domestic role.
- How much of the CIA's powers -- abused during watergate, and constrained with laws -- were expanded to justify abusing US citizens on the pretext of dubious information gleaned from illegal abuse? A police state relies on non-sense to justify abuse, avoid oversight, and shift attention elsewhere -- overseas, other people, and to scapegoats with lies, misleading statements, and false "reasons" to violate rights:
- Bogus emergencies
- Shifting stories
- Inconsistent assertions
- Conduct that is not consistent with the asserted reasons for action
- Dubious claims
- Unreliable assertions
- abuse of those who question the dubious assertions (insults, accusations)
- Then using the "lack of a reaction to unfounded taunting" as evidence of "mental problems"; or using taunting to provoke a reaction to jutsify more intrusions . . .
That's what Geneva is about: A system like the US that is relying on non-sense, and ignoring the laws/rules of logic, is going to make other logic errors when conducting planning for warrants, combat, and nation building.
The entire 9-11/Iraq/Afghanistan story is about incompetent people violating the law/using imprudent methods to "respond" to the mess they created. This is why Rome collapsed: Rome wasn't bringing order -- it created a disaster that "it's governance failed, in the long run, to manage."
Let's take a look at the specifics with the CIA internal probe, and show how this imprudence continues:
1. Geneva
"Helgerson has also been highly critical in a classified report of how the CIA has treated its detainees." They've disclosed contents of a classified report; but are going after the NYT reporter. Seriously, where's the US Atty in going after Haydeon on this leak?
2. Assertions
"The CIA has declined to specify why the IG review was undertaken. The results suggest CIA officers were concerned there was a presumption of guilt and they were not treated fairly by Helgerson's team of investigators.
Notice: The CIA investigatyors are not give a chance to rebut this assertion.
3. Ombudsman
"Hayden said Helgerson has appointed an ombudsman to represent the interests of CIA officers under IG investigation.
INterests of the officers may not be the truth, or intersts of justice or oversight.
4. Justice
"He agreed to make a "greater effort" to include the views of those officers in his final reports, and to allow officers to review draft reports. What if the overwhelming evidence is against the CIA agent; are they going to forever have "the last word"? Appears so, in contravention to administrative law precedents: Provide your defense, and then turn it over for judgement.
When someone has a "minority" view, this is the same as giving the defendant, that lost a case, the last word.
5. Legal Counsel
He also agreed to help officers find attorneys with security clearances to represent them if they choose. They've always had this right. This isn't new. The question is whether the CIA agent can access classified information for their defense. Bush says, "Can't litigate that," and throws the case out. So much for oversight.
The trick of defense legal counsel is to attach the defense theory to a known state secret so the defendant cannot defend themselves; and this will get the charges dropped on what are otherwise war crimes hidden behind a veil of "state secrecy".
6. Speed
Officers will be told when interviews are being recorded, and investigations will be conducted more swiftly. Oh, so the assertion that they "weren't told there were recordings" is an issue? CIA looks like it is upset that they said things and couldn't back away from those false statements. Note, the CIA doesn't like recordings, but they destroy the tapes of their abuse.
Also, if the CIA delays long enough, they'll close the investigation. That rewards non-cooperation using arbitrary deadlines.
7. Ombudsman: Minority Voice
"Finally, Helgerson agreed to an internal watchdog of his own, a "quality-control manager" who will ensure that all exculpatory and mitigating information about the subjects of IG investigations is included in final reports.
Again, this asks that we give the minority-losing position another voice after the IG made a conclusion about laws. If the overwhelming evidence, despite the "mitigations", is a conclusion that there was misconduct, that's the conclusion. Period.
This asks that the CIA agent, despite losing a battle with The CIA IG, will get another, and another, and another chance to rebut what might be overwhelming evidence of war crimes, misconduct, or evidence destruction. "But, but. . ."
POINTS
The point is that the US public isn't given this kind of respect: We're told, and not given a chance to input our "minority" views: It's decided, without a debate, and they have no impeachment, investigation, or charge of war crimes.
CIA agents allegedly involved with war crimes are given more rights that US citizens! JTTF and law enforcement lie all the time, and that's removed from the record because there is "no evidence" and the courts give a deferential attitude toward the officers DESPITE THEIR LYING. They lie to justify pretextual stops; then they go on expansive fishing trips. When they cant' find anything, they'll grind a US citizen down with insults, abuse, and arrogant conduct. They're out of control. And the CIA/copes want to have "their input"?!? Where's our input?!?
Rather than lead and protect Americans from external threats, the US government is targeting US citizens: They're targets of convenience, not real threats. The government is using the public's opposition to the US tyranny as a pretext to expand illegal activity against US citizens.
It's feeding off itself. Congress is part of the problem, narrowly focusing on small issues, but not seeing the larger picture: It's a criminal enterprise that is out of control. That's tyranny.
CIA IG appears to have found some things the CIA agents assumed they could get away with doing, but improperly believed given the Geneva restraints. An "ombudsman" appears to be a Russian-komisar-like person to regulate the CIA IG fact finding, and insulate the CIA offers from needed confrontation Geneva violations.
Post a Comment