Dems Rally Around War Criminal Clinton

[align=left]presidents are just revolving door puppets, each laying the groundwork for the next...

Dems Rally Around War Criminal Clinton
Kurt Nimmo | September 11 2006
Democrats are in a tizzy over a poorly produced and executed ABC television miniseries, the Path to 9/11, designed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the event and unabashedly capitalize on the success of Oliver Stoneâ??s film, World Trade Center. [/align]

Former president Bill Clinton is angry over the release of the â??docudrama,â?� and Democrats allege â??fabricated scenesâ?� that that do not â??accurately portray history,â?� according to the Age.

Clinton factotums went so far as to write at least two letters to Robert Iger, president and chief executive of the Walt Disney Company, ABCâ??s parent, demanding the show not be aired, in other words they want it censored. â??Critics say the film blames Clinton, former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, and other senior aides for not adequately pursuing bin Laden, leaving him free to plan the 2001 attacks in which nearly 3000 people died,â?� the Age explains.

Democrat stalwarts such as William Rivers Pitt have come out of the woodwork to defend â??measuresâ?� taken by the Clinton administration to â??thwart international terrorism and bin Ladenâ??s network.â?� Pitt cites the Constitution-busting Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) as a â??historicâ?� and â??unprecedentedâ?� effort to fight â??terrorism,â?� that is to say false flag covert operations created by a variety of intelligence organizations. â??The adoption of the Antiterrorism Act of 1996 showed how little had been learned from the abuses of the past and how alluring remained the concept of unrestrained intelligence investigations focused on political ideology,â?� write David Cole and James X. Dempsey.

The Actâ??s explicit criminalization of support for peaceful activity effectively authorized FBI surveillance and infiltration of political, religious and ethnic groups engaged in peaceful humanitarian and political work. Its repeal of a prohibition against using First Amendment activities as the sole basis for an investigation further encouraged politically motivated investigations. Its reintroduction of guilt by association into the immigration laws allowed the exclusion and deportation of immigrants and foreign visitors not for what they have done but for the causes and groups with which they have associated. And the endorsement of secret evidence in immigration proceedings against alleged â??terroristsâ?� denied the most fundamental of rightsâ??the right to defend oneself by confronting oneâ??s accusers.

AEDPA targeted the writ of habeas corpus, known down through history as the â??great bulwark against tyranny,â?� a natural right with origins going back to the Magna Carta. Edmund Burke called habeas corpus and English common law the â??sole securities either for liberty or justice,â?� and with this in mind the Judiciary Act of 1789 created a statutory right of habeas corpus review for federal prisoners in the United States. AEDPA essentially trashed this right, especially in regard to prisoners sentenced to death, prisoners having nothing to do with terrorism.

Democrats really have no problem destroying the Constitution and killing people in faraway lands, so long as a Democrat president does the killing and trashing. In fact, when it comes to war crimes, Bill Clinton leaves George Bush in the dust. Clinton, writes Edward S. Herman, â??has gone beyond the Bush [Senior] record of criminality, and has brought to the commission of war crimes a new eclectic reach and postmodern styleâ?¦. Clintonâ??s crimes range from ad hoc bombings to boycotts and sanctions designed to starve into submission, to support of ethnic cleansing in brutal counterinsurgency warfare, and to aggression and devastation by bombing designed to return rogues to the stone age and keep them there.â?�

On June 26, 1993, Clinton bombed Baghdad in retaliation for an alleged but unproven Iraq plot to assassinate Bush Senior, killing Iraqi civilians, including the distinguished Iraqi artist Layla al-Attar. â??This kind of unilateral action in response to an unproven charge is a violation of international law,â?� notes Herman. A few years later, in 1998, Clinton attacked Afghanistan and the Sudan, destroying a crucial pharmaceutical factory in the latter nation.

On a roll, Clinton also attacked Yugoslavia, targeting civilian infrastructure and civilian facilities (houses, hospitals, schools, trains, factories, power stations, churches, historical sites). Clintonâ??s crimes, according to lawyers from several countries that submitted a formal complaint with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in 1999, include â??willful killing, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, extensive destruction of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly, employment of poisonous weapons or other weapons to cause unnecessary suffering, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity, attack, or bombardment, by whatever means, of undefended towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings, destruction or willful damage done to institutions dedicated to religion, charity and education, the arts and sciences, historic monuments and works of art and science,â?� an â??open violationâ?� of the United Nations Charter, the NATO treaty, the Geneva Conventions and the Principles of International Law Recognized by the Nuremberg Tribunal.

All of this, however, pales in comparison to Clintonâ??s enforcement of a brutal and genocidal sanctions regime imposed on Iraq. In 1996, the Lancet, the journal of the British Medical Society, claimed sanctions were responsible for the deaths of 567,000 Iraqi children (UNICEF rounded the number off to 500,000), through preventable disease and malnourishment, a claim that prompted Clintonâ??s Secretary of State, at the time UN ambassador, Madeleine Albright, to declare on CBSâ?? 60 Minutes that the medieval siege of Iraq and the murder of hundreds of thousands of children was a price worth paying. Denis Halliday, United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad, resigned after a 34 year career with the UN, declaring, â??I donâ??t want to administer a program that satisfies the definition of genocide.â?� Hallidayâ??s successor, Hans von Sponeck, also resigned in disgust, as did Jutta Burghardt, head of the World Food Program in Iraq. All told, 1.5 million Iraqis died as a direct result of the sanctions.

â??U.S. Ieaders commit war crimes as a matter of institutional necessity, as their imperial role calls for keeping subordinate peoples in their proper place and assuring a â??favorable climate of investmentâ?? everywhere,â?� explains Edward S. Herman. â??They do this by using their economic power, but also (by means of â??bombs bursting in the airâ?? and) by supporting Diem, Mobutu, Pinochet, Suharto, Savimbi, Marcos, Fujimori, Salinas, and scores of similar leaders. War crimes also come easily because U.S. Ieaders consider themselves to be the vehicles of a higher morality and truth and can operate in violation of law without cost. It is also immensely helpful that their mainstream media agree that their country is above the law and will support and rationalize each and every venture and the commission of war crimes.â?�

Democrat partisans such as William Rivers Pitt, so consumed with rage against the Republican Bush, are oblivious to all of this, and are thus unable to comprehend there is not a dimeâ??s worth of difference between Bush, Clinton, or any other establishment politico. In the process, they become apologists for mass murder and, in regard to the flapdoodle over ABCâ??s â??mini-series,â?� torch carriers for the official Brothers Grimm version of 9/11 events and, as well, subscribers to the fraudulent â??war against terrorism,â?� more accurately described as a war of terrorism against millions of people in Iraq, Afghanistan, and, soon enough, Iran.

[align=left]Bush the Pitiful
Paul Craig Roberts | September 11 2006
People are beginning to feel sorry for President George W. Bush. And with good reason. [/align]
A new poll by Harris Interactive published in the Financial Times reveals that our traditional European allies regard the United States as a much greater threat to world stability than Iran, Iraq, and North Korea.
In European opinion, the axis-of-evil is Bushâ??s America.
Almost twice as many British, whose Prime Minister Tony Blair is complicit in Bushâ??s war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, see the US as the greatest threat to world stability than see Iran as the danger. In Spain three times more people regard the US as the threat than see Iran as the threat. Only in Italy does Iran edge out the US as the greatest perceived threat, a result no doubt due to the propaganda that spews from the media empire of Silvio Berlusconi, the Rupert Murdoch of Italy.
Another reason to feel sorry for Bush is because he is regarded by his own political party and his own Attorney General as a war criminal. Republicans recognize that Bush has committed felonies by violating the US War Crimes Act of 1996 (legislation aimed at the likes of Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic). Bushâ??s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, and the Republican Congress have produced draft legislation that aims to protect Bush retroactively by gutting the 1996 War Crimes Act. Republicans hope to quietly pass this unconstitutional legislation before they are defeated in the November elections.
The fact that retroactive law is prohibited by the US Constitution adds to Bushâ??s shame.
Bush is also pitied because a large majority of Americans no longer believe in the single over-riding cause of Bushâ??s presidency â?? the "war on terror." A recent Ipsos-Public Affairs poll released by the Associated Press shows that 60 percent of Americans believe that Bushâ??s invasion of Iraq has created more terrorism and that Americans are less safe as a result of invading Iraq.
Talking heads on television now discuss whether Bush is an idiot. The frequency of such discussions is likely to increase as Bush makes such declarations as "the battle for Iraq is now central to the ideological struggle of the 21st century."
Bush evokes more pity, because he has lost the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Iraq, the Kurds in the north have replaced the Iraqi flag with the Kurdish flag. The rest of Iraq is governed by Sunni insurgents or Shiite militias. The US puppet government is powerless and dares not leave its US protected fortified bunker.
On September 5, the dominant Shiite political alliance prepared legislation that would divide Iraq into Kurd, Sunni, and Shiite autonomous regions.
So much for "democracy in Iraq."
Apparently, no one has told Bush that he is spending American lives and money on a cause that the Iraqis themselves have abandoned.
Bush still crows about his defeat of the Taliban. Those of us who have served in the government at high levels wonder every day about Bushâ??s daily briefing. Does he get one? Who gives it to him? I think Bushâ??s briefing must come from Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, and William Kristol. Where else could he get such bogus information?
Perhaps Bushâ??s wife or one of his daughters could smuggle him a copy of the recent report on Afghanistan by the Senlis Council, a security and development policy group that closely monitors the situation in Afghanistan.
According to this report, "Afghanistan is spiraling into uncontrollable violence." The Taliban have regained control over half of the country:
"Despite the international communityâ??s concerted five-year focus on military operations, the security situation in Afghanistan is worse than in 2001. The Taliban now have a strong grip on the southern half of the country. Afghans perceive that the US and NATO troops in southern and eastern Afghanistan are being defeated by the Taliban. The legitimacy of the international communityâ??s presence in Afghanistan is undermined by its incapacity to protect the Afghan population.â?�
Bush was betrayed by the neoconservatives he appointed, protected, and promoted. Public opinion polls in the Arab and Muslim world show that Bushâ??s invasions, aggressive stance toward Syria and Iran, and unconditional support for Israeli aggression have created a powerful Islamic political movement that experts say will sweep away the corrupt governments allied with the United States.
The ignorant actions of Bush the Pitiful have marginalized moderate Arabs and destroyed Americaâ??s standing both in Muslim lands and the wider world.
Bush has defeated no one, but he has destroyed Americanâ??s reputation and his own.

Hey pissy i see you didnt pay your respect to the 9-11 victims.


Just sit here and bitch................

You.............have no CLass.

PH, is this your way of saying Alex Jones for President :D