Page 1

Handful of Congress Members Move to Rein In Surveillance State Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com June 23, 2013

It’s no mistake the Limiting Internet and Blanket Electronic Review of Telecommunications and Email Act (LIBERT-E Act) received zero coverage by the establishment media. The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), Chairman of the House Liberty Caucus, and Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), the Ranking Member on the House Judiciary Committee, will be allowed to die a quiet and unobtrusive death. NSA's Criminal Activity VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UfUi5C7WdrA

The bill strikes at the heart of the PATRIOT Act, the unconstitutional monstrosity passed by Congress and signed into law by George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. LIBERT-E Act would also restrict the government’s ability to conduct surveillance not connected to an ongoing investigation. It calls for the illegal and unconstitutional FISA Court to make its secret opinions available to Congress and the American people. The LIBERT-E Act, however, falls far short of correcting the problem. The PATRIOT Act should be repealed immediately and the FISA Court dismantled. Unfortunately, neither of these things will happen due to more than a decade of propaganda to brainwash the American people into falsely believing they face a terrorist threat and therefore must surrender their birthright enshrined in the


Constitution and the Bill of Rights. LIBERT-E is a noble if halfhearted effort sponsored by 32 members of Congress. They released the following statement on the legislation: “The recent NSA leaks indicate that the federal government collects phone records and intercepts electronic communications on a scale previously unknown to most Americans. “The LIBERT-E Act imposes reasonable limits on the federal government’s surveillance. The bill puts some teeth into the FISA court’s determination of whether records the government wants are actually relevant to an investigation. It also makes sure that innocent Americans’ information isn’t needlessly swept up into a government database. LIBERT-E prohibits the type of government dragnet that the leaked Verizon order revealed. “We accept that free countries must engage in secret operations from time to time to protect their citizens. Free countries must not, however, operate under secret laws. Secret court opinions obscure the law. They prevent public debate on critical policy issues and they stop Congress from fulfilling its duty to enact sound laws and fix broken ones. “LIBERT-E lets every congressman have access to FISA court opinions so that Congress can have a more informed debate about security and privacy. And the bill requires that unclassified summaries of the opinions be available to the public so that Americans can judge for themselves the merit of their government’s actions. “We are proud to lead a broad, bipartisan coalition that’s working to protect privacy. It shouldn’t matter whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican. Defending the Constitution and protecting Americans’ rights should be an effort we all can support.” Putting “reasonable limits on the federal government’s surveillance” will permit the government to continue its surveillance. Instead of half measures, Congress needs to call for the dismantlement of the NSA – and the CIA and FBI – and all legislation that violates the Fourth Amendment needs to be immediately repealed. Finally, all the criminals who have conspired against the Constitution need to be arrested immediately – including standing and ex-presidents – and put on trial for treason. Anything short of a strenuous effort will result in failure. Half measures and statements released by a handful of Congress members will be ignored as the fascist juggernaut rolls forward. The ruling elite are now a hair’s breadth away from finishing the installation of their high-tech surveillance and police state. If they successfully fend off attempts to preserve the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, in the not too distant future all opposition to their fascist rule will be impossible.


Irish Politician Tells Parliament: Obama is a War Criminal Infowars.com June 22, 2013

An Irish socialist politician called Obama out as a war criminal following the conclusion of the G8 in her country earlier this week. Clare Daly told the Irish Parliament Obama is a “war criminal” and “hypocrite of the century” for his remarks concerning the Northern Ireland peace process while supporting al-Qaeda in Syria and conducting a drone program responsible for killing thousands, including innocent women and children. “Is this person going for the hypocrite of the century award?” Daly asked. “Because we have to call things by their right names, and the reality is that by any serious examination, this man is a war criminal.” The Irish Taoiseach, or prime minister, Enda Kenny, responded forcefully to Daly’s criticism of Obama and his visit to the country. Kenny said the comments were a “disgrace” because Obama “wants to support [the Irish peace process] visibly, personally and with assistance from the US where 35 million Irish-Americans want this peace process to continue.” The Obama Deception The Truth About Barry Soetoro AKA Barack Obama VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw WOW MUST SEE Obama destroyed & called a war criminal in Irish Parliament WOW MUST SEE VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CnJCvKA-oEU Fall of the Republic Obama's Final Destruction Of America VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU


U.S. Engaged in Torture After 9/11, Review Concludes Obama Bush Clinton And More Indicted For War Crimes By SCOTT SHANE nytimes.com April 16, 2013 A nonpartisan, independent review of interrogation and detention programs in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that the nation’s highest officials bore ultimate responsibility for it. The sweeping, 600-page report says that while brutality has occurred in every American war, there never before had been “the kind of considered and detailed discussions that occurred after 9/11 directly involving a president and his top advisers on the wisdom, propriety and legality of inflicting pain and torment on some detainees in our custody.” The study, by an 11-member panel convened by the Constitution Project, a legal research and advocacy group, is to be released on Tuesday morning. Debate over the coercive interrogation methods used by the administration of President George W. Bush has often broken down on largely partisan lines. The Constitution Project’s task force on detainee treatment, led by two former members of Congress with experience in the executive branch — a Republican, Asa Hutchinson, and a Democrat, James R. Jones — seeks to produce a stronger national consensus on the torture question. While the task force did not have access to classified records, it is the most ambitious independent attempt to date to assess the detention and interrogation programs. A separate 6,000-page report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s record by the Senate Intelligence Committee, based exclusively on agency records, rather than interviews, remains classified. “As long as the debate continues, so too does the possibility that the United States could again engage in torture,” the report says. The use of torture, the report concludes, has “no justification” and “damaged the standing of our nation, reduced our capacity to convey moral censure when necessary and potentially increased the danger to U.S. military personnel taken captive.” The task force found “no firm or persuasive evidence” that these interrogation methods produced valuable information that could not have been obtained by other


means. While “a person subjected to torture might well divulge useful information,” much of the information obtained by force was not reliable, the report says. Interrogation and abuse at the C.I.A.’s so-called black sites, the Guantánamo Bay prison in Cuba and war-zone detention centers, have been described in considerable detail by the news media and in declassified documents, though the Constitution Project report adds many new details. It confirms a report by Human Rights Watch that one or more Libyan militants were waterboarded by the C.I.A., challenging the agency’s longtime assertion that only three Al Qaeda prisoners were subjected to the near-drowning technique. It includes a detailed account by Albert J. Shimkus Jr., then a Navy captain who ran a hospital for detainees at the Guantánamo Bay prison, of his own disillusionment when he discovered what he considered to be the unethical mistreatment of prisoners. But the report’s main significance may be its attempt to assess what the United States government did in the years after 2001 and how it should be judged. The C.I.A. not only waterboarded prisoners, but slammed them into walls, chained them in uncomfortable positions for hours, stripped them of clothing and kept them awake for days on end. The question of whether those methods amounted to torture is a historically and legally momentous issue that has been debated for more than a decade inside and outside the government. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel wrote a series of legal opinions from 2002 to 2005 concluding that the methods were not torture if used under strict rules; all the memos were later withdrawn. News organizations have wrestled with whether to label the brutal methods unequivocally as torture in the face of some government officials’ claims that they were not. In addition, the United States is a signatory to the international Convention Against Torture, which requires the prompt investigation of allegations of torture and the compensation of its victims. Like the still-secret Senate interrogation report, the Constitution Project study was initiated after President Obama decided in 2009 not to support a national commission to investigate the post-9/11 counterterrorism programs, as proposed by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and others. Mr. Obama said then that he wanted to “look forward, not backward.” Aides have said he feared that his own policy agenda might get sidetracked in a battle over his predecessor’s programs. The panel studied the treatment of prisoners at Guantánamo


Bay, in Afghanistan and Iraq, and at the C.I.A’s secret prisons. Staff members, including the executive director, Neil A. Lewis, a former reporter for The New York Times, traveled to multiple detention sites and interviewed dozens of former American and foreign officials, as well as former detainees. Mr. Hutchinson, who served in the Bush administration as chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration and under secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, said he “took convincing” on the torture issue. But after the panel’s nearly two years of research, he said he had no doubts about what the United States did. “This has not been an easy inquiry for me, because I know many of the players,” Mr. Hutchinson said in an interview. He said he thought everyone involved in decisions, from Mr. Bush down, had acted in good faith, in a desperate effort to try to prevent more attacks. “But I just think we learn from history,” Mr. Hutchinson said. “It’s incredibly important to have an accurate account not just of what happened but of how decisions were made.” He added, “The United States has a historic and unique character, and part of that character is that we do not torture.” The panel found that the United States violated its international legal obligations by engineering “enforced disappearances” and secret detentions. It questions recidivism figures published by the Defense Intelligence Agency for Guantánamo detainees who have been released, saying they conflict with independent reviews. It describes in detail the ethical compromise of government lawyers who offered “acrobatic” advice to justify brutal interrogations and medical professionals who helped direct and monitor them. And it reveals an internal debate at the International Committee of the Red Cross over whether the organization should speak publicly about American abuses; advocates of going public lost the fight, delaying public exposure for months, the report finds. Mr. Jones, a former ambassador to Mexico, noted that his panel called for the release of a declassified version of the Senate report and said he believed that the two reports, one based on documents and the other largely on interviews, would complement each other in documenting what he called a grave series of policy errors. “I had not recognized the depths of torture in some cases,” Mr. Jones said. “We lost our compass.” While the Constitution Project report covers mainly the Bush years, it is critical of some Obama administration policies, especially what it calls excessive secrecy. It says that keeping the details of rendition and torture from the public “cannot continue to be justified on the basis of national security” and urges the administration to stop citing state secrets to block lawsuits by former detainees. The report calls for the revision of the Army Field Manual on interrogation to eliminate Appendix M, which it says would permit an interrogation for 40 consecutive hours, and to restore an explicit ban on stress positions and sleep manipulation. The core of the report, however, may be an appendix: a detailed 22-page legal and historical analysis that explains why the task force concluded that what the United States did was torture. It offers dozens of legal cases in which similar treatment was prosecuted in the United States or denounced as torture by American officials when used by other countries. The report compares the torture of detainees to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. “What was once generally taken to be understandable and justifiable behavior,” the report says, “can later become a case of historical regret.”

www.infowars.com

Handful of Congress Members Move to Rein In Surveillance State  

It’s no mistake the Limiting Internet and Blanket Electronic Review of Telecommunications and Email Act (LIBERT-E Act) received zero coverag...

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you