After attending a Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice, a Bay Area interfaith peace organization. steering committee meeting, where one of the major topics was our endorsement of an anti-torture campaign, I was flipping through the channels when I came across Bill O'Reilly interviewing Rev. Jim Wallis (editor of Sojourners). They were discussing an advertisement run in the New York Times by an organization called the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT) that called for America to put an end to torture. O'Reilly asked Rev. Wallis a simple question, which I was surprised to see Rev. Wallis fumble. Granted, an armchair quarterback always feels better prepared than the person truly in the hot seat, but, Rev. Wallis is acting as a spokesperson for this campaign and I wish he had a more accurate response to O'Reilly's question.

The question from O'Reilly was "What torture?" He wanted to know what examples of torture could be cited to justify a campaign against it, specifically a campaign that accused the United States of torturing people. Instead of citing specific examples, Rev. Wallis gave the impression that the campaign was more philosophical, and that investigations were necessary to show whether the United States was, or was not, conducting or condoning torture.

The Los Angeles Times is reporting that the Pentagon is about to release new guidelines for detainee treatment that specifically omit the Geneva Convention rules on "humiliating and degrading treatment." My warning to every man and woman in uniform, and every single man and woman civilian and/or contractor who has any interaction with any detainee..... treat them badly at YOUR OWN risk.

As a disabled American veteran, I am appalled by the detention camp that is in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It was plainly stated that when they created it there, it was for the purpose of ensuring that these men could not be brought before American Courts.

This is a nation based on laws, and we hold that belief that all men are created equal. Yet, we as a nation condone the President, Vice President and Secretary of Defense. In their position that the men held here are not subject to American law.
The promised military tribunals have not been held, some of these men have been held five years already. When do they get their day in court?

On March 25th, 2006, Scott Ritter, Ray McGovern, Faiza Al-Araji, and Medea Benjamin spoke to a crowd of about 300 people at the First Presbyterian Church of Palo Alto. The title for the evening was Iraq: The Power of Truth in A War Based on Lies. It was an incredible evening, hearing from people with unparalleled experience in the events leading up to this war and the ongoing results. The attendees learned a lot, had many things they already believed to be true affirmed, got some provocative and controversial new perspectives, and heard some of the anger and frustration from the presenters and each other. At times fingers were pointed, tears were shed, hackles were raised, conspiracy theories were floated, objections were shouted, a few laughs were chuckled and some chords of Kum Ba Ya were sang.

In all, it was an amazing evening.

The following morning, during worship at First Presbyterian Church in Palo Alto, I shared a prayer for Scott Ritter. Because of that prayer, several people asked that I write up my reflections on the evening, and what prompted my prayer for Scott, so that others who had been there that evening could understand my interpretation of what happened. Plus, for those who were not there, a lot of important information and ideas warrant discussion.

The following represents my reflections on the Power of Truth In A War Based On Lies, and the people who made that evening come to life.

Major General Geoffrey Miller, the officer sent from Guantanamo Bay to Iraq to teach the MP's and intel teams at Abu Ghraib how to interrogate prisoners Gitmo-Style, has invoked his Article 31 right not to testify in the courts-martial of several dog handlers who are now being prosecuted. Shame shame General!

When you join the service, you do give up quite a few civil rights, but you still have the right to remain silent, not to incriminate yourself. That right is contained in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 31 (very similar to the 5th amendment of the Constitution).

The Bush administration is continuing their sick and pathetic policy of torturing people in Iraq when they think that all the lights and cameras are off. This is the subject of a new report out of Iraq from Amnesty International. The Bush administration would like you to think that the Abu Girhab photos were just a matter of a few frat boys gotten out of control. But this new report shows that the Bush administration's torture plans are far broader than that. In their twisted logic, they thought that as soon as all the lights and cameras were off, they could go right back to doing whatever they wanted to.

Chrs Floyd - Empire Burlesque

When I read the passage below from Moazzam Begg's account of his years in Bush's Terror War prisons, I had a strange feeling of dislocation: it was as if 30 years had suddenly fallen away and I was back in high school, reading Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago in stunned disbelief at the hideous cruelty inflicted on the prisoners -- deliberately, as a carefully calculated instrument of state policy. And all of it done in the name of national security, of course, to protect the nation against "terrorists" and "traitors."

Solzhenitsyn's books -- not just the factual Gulag but also the deep-delving fiction of his middle years, the powerful First Circle and Cancer Ward -- were enormous influences on my own understanding of politics, power and morality. Years later, I was in Moscow when he returned to Russia from his long exile, having outlasted the system of state terror that had consumed so many of his compatriots. However much I had come to disagree with some of his political positions on certain issues, it was a still a moment of triumph for the deeper truths and moral courage that he continued -- and continues -- to represent.

On December 31, 2003, a German national with Lebanese lineage by the name of Khaled el-Masri was allegedly kidnapped by CIA agents and shipped off to a prison in Afghanistan where he has was held for five months, tortured, then released without charges being brought against him because this was a case of mistaken identity.

If his story sounds familiar, it's because the usage of torture flights has been practiced repeatedly in George Bush's Global War on Terror™.

continued below the fold...

As soon as I think the Bush administration can go no lower, it does it again. The Bush administration is taking so-called terror suspects from Eastern Europe to Morocco where the Moroccans are cutting their penises. This is a new low for an administration which has already been guilty of firing White Phosphorus into Fallujah and melting ths skin off of people.

Temara itself already has a fearsome reputation among former inmates. Binyam Mohammed, an Ethiopian-born Briton later sent to Guantanamo Bay, told Amnesty International that interrogators there cut his chest and penis when he refused to answer questions.

Mohammed said he was held at Temara for 18 months before being flown to another "black prison" in Afghanistan in January 2004, and then on to Guantanamo Bay.

Now, the Bush administration is building a new facility in addition to Temara. Details are below.

So not only was McCain's legislation watered-down into a pale, bland version of itself, but Little King George won't even deign to drink it because he's already intoxicated by delusions of imperial power:

After approving the bill last Friday, Bush issued a "signing statement" -- an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law -- declaring that he will view the interrogation limits in the context of his broader powers to protect national security. This means Bush believes he can waive the restrictions, the White House and legal specialists said.

Dana Priest has done it again. The covert action is code named GST and Bush has spared no illegality in authorizing it.

Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor Anti-Terror Effort Continues to Grow

The headline seems understated compared to the story.

How does she do this?

The Bush Junta, trying to cover its ass, made an announcement yesterday, the kind that insults the intelligence of anyone exposed to it:

I have always had strong political opinions. Throughout my life I have written letters and editorials, posted on blogs, passed out materials and worked on elections. In November of 2000 I went into shock. I didn't come out of it until Dean woke me up to `take back our country'. We all know what happened next.

Perhaps we have gotten the government that we deserve. There is no doubt that "Freedom isn't free." However it's not just some anonymous member of the military that needs to pay the price. It is you. And me. No exceptions and no exemptions.

The FISA wiretap warrants had a 72-hour retroactive availability.

This has been mentioned on many other blogs and websites, but I feel it's much too important to ignore, especially since every conservative pundit and every right-wing blogger has neglected to mention this. I don't know if this is due to ignorance or dishonesty, but either way, it really needs to be corrected.

Here's why this is important. The government basically gets three full days to eavesdrop on a subject before they have to file for a warrant. And when they finally get around to filing said warrant, it has (if past history is to be believed) around a 99.99% chance of going through. Ponder that for a moment. How hard is it to work within these guidelines? 72 hours of free wiretap authority and a court that's practically a rubber stamp? You'd have to try to break the law under these circumstances.

And yet, people are defending this. Why? That's not a rhetorical question. I really wish someone would tell me.

On August 28th, John McCain committed a howler on Face the Nation when he said, "I'm not knowledgeable" when asked how many more troops were needed in Iraq, given the fact that he had repeatedly called for them:

The howler came when he called for the escalation of the Iraq War in the face of increasing violence. When asked how many more troops were necessary by Bob Schieffer, he said, "About 20,000 more; I'm not that knowledgeable." Then, if John McCain is not that knowledgeable about what must be done in the Iraq Conflict, then what the heck is he doing considering a run for President in 2008? And what the heck is he doing going on all the talk shows shilling for the administration?

This howler led me to wonder what else John McCain is not knowledgeable about. Now, I think I have an answer: John McCain is not knowledgeable about how Bush operates or acts. This was most evident on the torture deal where Bush supposedly caved in on the torture ban.