Bush has decided and it's nurtz for the detainees. Bill 'freaky' Frist is in complete agreement with Bush on this pesky issue and will bulldog the Senate into giving Our Glorious Leader anything that Bush wants. Frist has also agreed with Bush that America's Constitution is now irrelevant and hardly germane to pressing 'war on terror' needs. After all, America is under seige by those nasty Islamic fascists and if Bush didn't have that new "jointness" thingy working, well, we'd all just be screwed. So grab yourself a pipe and bowl up with some of that freshly arrived Afghanistan opium and party on dudes...America is over. Police state here we come!

Ignore the blather from president cheney and say a prayer for Anthony Kennedy's health.

I wonder if there's an ulterior motive to suddenly marching Bin Laden back to the front of the bogeyman line? Kind if risky parading your most prominent manhunt failure anew isn't it? Unless you have him in detention and are ready to perp walk in time to affect the '06 midterms.....

"Bush Transfers 14 Suspects to Guantanamo
Wednesday, September 6, 2006 (09-06)WASHINGTON, (AP) --
President Bush has transferred 14 key terrorist leaders from secret CIA custody to the U.S. military-run prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be prepared for eventual trials, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

The high-value suspected terrorists include Khalid Sheik Mohammed, believed to be the No. 3 al-Qaida leader before he was captured in Pakistan in 2003; Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be Sept. 11, 2001, hijacker; and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells before he was also captured in Pakistan, in March 2002.

Bush was announcing the move in a speech from the White House, with families of those killed in the 2001 attacks in attendance.

The announcement from Bush is the first time the administration has acknowledged the existence of CIA prisons, which had been reported in the media and the subject of friction between Washington and some allies in Europe. The administration has come under criticism for its treatment of terrorism detainees.

It came as the president also was pressing a hard line with Congress Wednesday on legislation he says is needed to permit the trial of terror suspects through military tribunals. ..."

listening to bush now, i feel speechless myself. the only thing left is this: he's a joke... this government is a joke, at best a facade or mask on real democracy. i'm so saddened by this... and having read zinn's people's history recently...there seems to be nothing new under the sun. keep the people well fed on fear, fear, fear...

Look, heres the deal. Why would this administration feel the need to actually change the written law as it applies to prisoners in our captivity? Have they shown a desire to abide by international or domestic law? As far as prisoners go, in military custody, who here doubts that abuses have ALWAYS gone on, and will continue to go on, no matter the law? What troubles me is the blanket labeling that is melding "enemies of the state" and "enemy combatants". We are rapidly nearing a time, if we allow it, where simple rhetoric, or actual dissent, becomes a crime. As we have discussed here, a common tactic of these fascist fanatics now in power is to IMPLY that dissention against policy is in fact an act of support towards our enemies. If we allow these kinds of IMPLIED ACCUSATIONS to be entered into law through vaque labelings such as "enemy combatant", how far are we from labeling an anti-war protestor, carrying a sign down Wilshire Boulevard, as an "enemy combatant"??? One consistent theme in rthe rhetoric of this administration has always been to claiim that their policies are only focused towards the "terrorists". The catch is it that we have to rely on THEIR DEFINITION of who the terrorists are. And worse, after they have labeled you as such, they are working to pass legislation that removes your ability to legally contest the designation, EVEN IF YOU ARE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. So, merely by pointing their fingers and placing you in some vaquely defined category they can remove your rights to due process and legal representation. It has always seemed to me that this Administration EXPECTS, in the near future, MASSIVE DISSENT, and they have done all in their power to PLAN for that dissent, and lay the legal groundwork for massive detentions and prosecutions that are outside the realm of public scrutiny.

I wonder if there's an ulterior motive to suddenly marching Bin Laden back to the front of the bogeyman line? Kind if risky parading your most prominent manhunt failure anew isn't it? Unless you have him in detention and are ready to perp walk in time to affect the '06 midterms.....

Posted by steve duncan

Pakistan just reached a peace pact with Taliban extremists, and also announced that they will give Bin Laden sanctuary of he surfaces. So much for Bush's "ally" in the war on terror, eh?

These bastards need another "Trifecta", and I have no doubt they intend to give themselves one.

Steve Duncan,
Your idea makes sense; however, the fact that Pakistan has agreed to give Bin Laden a safe haven argues against it.
I think it makes more sense to think that Bush is parading the other top Al Qaeda people precisely because he can't get Bin Laden.
He wants his effectiveness measured by how much he tortures Khalid S.M. rather than by his failure to catch Bin Laden.

238347

I don't care what he mouthpiece says any longer I am too busy watching what the rest of the world is doing in reaction to Isrmerica. That is where the action is going to be because everyone has had enough of us already.

Russia has said NO to the US Iran plan at the UN
Every country (3) that had an embassy in the Israeli section of Jerusalem has moved them out in protest.
The UK and the Aussies have both resumed flights into Lebanon in violation of Israel's "blockade", effectively teling Isr to shoot them down or go piss up a rope.
Three European countries have forbidden US flights carrying weapons for Isr to land for refueling at their airports.
Pakistan has adopted a don't ask, don't tell policy for AQ and OBL.
Pandora's box has gone full circle and a jewish guy got kicked off a Canadian airliner for praying in Hebrew and making passengers nervous.

Whatever Bush said I am sure there is more of the above,large and small, to come for USA/Isr,LTD.

Marky, there are reports Pakistani officials dispute Bin Laden will be given a pass. We give them billions a year in arms, cash and training. They'd probably be in line for a lucrative increase for coughing up Binny. Sure, there'd be local repercussions but I figure they'd go with the tradeoff in goodies. Bush detests having his shortcomings and failures highlighted. For him to do it on his own is implausible without something akin to the explanation I've offered.

I found it a bit odd that the President received a standing ovation when he announced the names of detainees that had been transferred to Guantanamo for prosecution. Isn't he the same person that has been preventing this type of prosecution? It seems to me that saying "It's about time" would be the more appropriate response to this announcement. The only thing we've gained from the delay of this outcome is the ire of much of the world and a loss of the moral authority that 9/11 most certainly provided.

more here:

www.thoughttheater.com

Steve D.
The government of Pakistan would probably deny an agreement with Bin Laden even if one existed.
It seems to me that if troops are withdrawn from Waziristan, that will mean Bin Laden is safe.

Bush wants congress to ex post facto a law that prevents the civilians who tortured folks in Afganistan and Iraq etc. to be let off the hook. There has been one conviction of a civilian so far.
If Bushco had the evidence against the detainees, why haven't any of them been prosecuted?
Under the current laws, evidence that is obtained under torture is not allowed.
Also, Bush doesn't want the detainees to see the evidence against them and doesn't want them to attend their own trials.
This is the guy who lied about Iraq.
He also wants congress to nulify the Judge Taylor decision about the NSA wiretap program.
If the detainees that are being moved out of the secret prisons to Cuba are planners of 9/11, where is the proof and why hasn't the gov't put them on public trial?
Maude

"Defending the program, the president said the questioning of these detainees has provided critical intelligence information about terrorist activities that have enabled officials to prevent attacks not only in the United States, but Europe and other countries."

Hummm...which preventions would those be?...the gang of homeless guys in Miami?...or the "liquid' bombers routed by the UK?...tell us about all these attacks you have "prevented' that somehow you didn't crow about in the press....that you learned about from guys arrested 3 to 4 years ago...how are these captured terrorist communicating with AQ on their terrier plans, thru mental telepathy?

someone convince me that obl is still alive. something other than unidentified government sources or "the cia confirms that the recorded message is the voice of obl". we're all being played like a fiddle.

from archived late nite comics:

"a couple of things we now know about Osama bin Laden. . .he's 6'5" and has 23 children. . . 6'5" and 23 kids. . .in the NBA you would call him a rookie. . ."

"now I know why bin Laden wears that white cloth on his head. . .he's bumped his head so many times on those low cave ceilings. . .he comes from a very rich family. . .so rich he can afford to spend his winters in a south cave. . ."

THE REAL QUESTION IS, "DOES BUSH REALLY WANT TO CAPTURE HIM or DOES ALLOWING BIN LADEN TO REMAIN FREE ALLOW BUSH TO CHASE THE ELUSIVE -- AND UNKNOWN-- TERRORISTS IN HIS NEVER-ENDING WAR ON TERROR?"

I think the Democrats should be clamoring to have OBL added to the docket. After all, Osama is the one who is responsible for 9/11. "Why isn't the most guilty party on trial?" they can wail.
This has two advantages. First of all, a trial in absentia of OBL would have to be public, right?
There's no point for having a secret trial if the perp won't be punished. Once you agree that Osama's trial must be public, why not KSM's trial, etc?
I got this idea from reading Digby, who suggests that the Dems point out that the Nuremberg trials should be the gold standard for this sort of affair.
The second advantage in demanding that Osama be added to the docket is that it focuses attention on Bush's manifest failure in capturing Osama.

I would say the main argument the Kool-Aid drinkers will put forth is that these trials are a means towards the end of punishing the perps of 9/11.
This is a trap they are sure to fall into, IMO.
Once they insist that the guilty parties must be punished, you have to ask about Osama again.
Many of these people are on record saying that Osama is not important now. How can they not care about bringing that monster to justice? How can they? I can't fathom how the Republicans can be so callous towards the feelings of the victims of 9/1l.

I believe Bush's gambit is a superb opportunity for the Democrats to take the ball and run it into the endzone this November.

You can email President Bush, VP Cheney, Congressional Leaders & Rush Limbaugh from my homepage. Check it out here...
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/8889

So if Bush doesn't try OBL in absentia for the 9/11 attacks, does that mean he doesn't think he's guilty?
Can't complain about the "law-enforcement approach to terrorism" if your'e holding trials. He's got to answer that one.

Or turn it around again: Suppose Bush captures OBL. Do you suppose that for one minute the public would be satisfied with a secret trial of OBL? Hell no! So why doesn't the public get to see KSM found guilty? It doesn't make sense.

Is this another case of Karl Rove trying to trick everyone (or at least the editors of the Note) into believing that this is a brilliant Machiavellian ploy when he is really just trying to cover his butt in a rather hapless fashion?

Perhaps the reality has set in that they have left folks terribly exposed with their hairbrained schemes...so now they need to try and change some laws before they lose control of the house and senate.

Porco,
There's a coordinated strategy that involves a LOT of money and has been planned for some time.
The ABC fake documentary, Bush's announcement of trials, etc. are designed to make the "war on terror" the focus of the election without discussing Iraq.
Nevertheless, I think that this salvo does not have to be so effective. There really is no good reason to believe that KSM has any secrets that can't be revealed now. He certainly won't know anything about Al Qaeda operations.
People should naturally want a public trial---AND they should want to see Bin Laden tried as well. As I wrote above, this is the real weak point of the Rove fall offensive.

By the way, when did the comments page margins get fixed?

Do all of you realize that Bin Laden IS NOT on the FBI ten most wanted list? Why isn't he?

BTW, if Osama isn't dead, my bet is that the neocons have had him on ice for time now.

(Washington, DC) -- Larry Cox, Amnesty International USA's Executive Director, made the following statement in response to news reports regarding President Bush's new detainee policy, the new directives and the revised Army Field Manual issued by the U.S. Department of Defense:

"Amnesty International welcomes many key provisions of the new Army Field Manual and Department of Defense Directive 2310.01E. By announcing adherence to Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions for all detainees the Pentagon has reaffirmed important protections found in international law. We are also pleased to see a direct repudiation of tactics previously approved for use against detainees such as hooding, the use of dogs, and temperature manipulation, as well as a repudiation of extreme techniques such as waterboarding.

However, Amnesty International remains concerned that these documents continue to put forth a broad definition of what constitutes an 'unlawful enemy combatant' in an effort to extend the law of war framework globally. By applying this framework to people detained far from any armed conflict, the administration is turning the law of war on its head and using it to swallow the applicable human rights framework.

Amnesty International welcomes the announcement that the administration intends to transfer people out of secret prisons into acknowledged DOD facilities. Bringing one or more of these so-called 'high value detainees' to trial for alleged war crimes or crimes against humanity is an important step in achieving accountability. However, any trial must preserve fundamental fair trial protections including the right to be present at one's trial and the exclusion of evidence obtained through torture or other ill treatment or coercion.

The transfer of detainees out of secret detention is not enough -- the President should rescind any directive that gives the CIA 'extraordinary powers' to continue to detain people secretly outside of the law."

My sentiments exactly, POA. Psyop operations are actually quite amazing and not that farfetched.
http://www.specialoperations.com/Army/PSYOP/default.html
Too bad the mainstream intellectual blogs didn't drill down further on the DARPA-Poindexter exposure a few years ago. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1949.htm . Just the tip of the iceberg.

AI is right..there will be no "lawful" detainees.
Everyone will be considered a terrorist enemy combatant.
None of this matters, they will continue to do just as they have.

Carroll, Howdy -- you got that right, girl.

Except for attacking Iran, it doesn't matter what Bush does now. You can be assured that all of his choices will not be in the public interest, and will pander to the basest fears.
You can also be sure that he will bend the rules and get help from his corporate backers.

The ONLY thing that matters now, besides Iran, is the election in November. If the Democrats take back the House and Senate, everything will unravel for Bush. I wouldn't be surprised to see suicides as the truth of the last 5 years comes out.
That said, the most important thing for the Democrats right now is to call out the lies coming from Disney, and to ridicule Bush's plan for military trials. Bush is a sitting duck right now. His proposal for military trials now, years after these rogues have been caught, makes no sense. It's the most blatantly political move ever. As a matter of fact, it is ONLY being discussed in terms of its possibility to damage Democrats in the fall. That's the way the media is covering it---they're not even pretending anymore.
His proposal makes no sense at all, AND he's leaving out Bin Laden.
This is Bush's weakest moment, and the Democrats HAVE to pounce. They have to destroy him now, before the election. With the right push, the whole edifice can be toppled.
Lastly, it doesn't matter in the least if they produce Bin Laden (I doubt they can).

Didn't this blog use to be the place to go for information on John Bolton? Why nothing on his upcoming confirmation hearings this time?

"...the most important thing for the Democrats right now is to call out the lies coming from Disney..." etc

"...This is Bush's weakest moment, and the Democrats HAVE to pounce..." etc

Posted by marky
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

High fives, marky: Pouncers-R-Us!

Paging all pouncers. Will all pouncers kindly report to the protest desk immediately!

I sent my letter to ABC/Disney to cancel their erroneous and biased 9-11 program. I'm re-posting that link here, for those who are interested in participating in a timely, important and clear-cut letter campaign. It'll take just a few seconds, so let ABC have it up the wazoo:

http://tinyurl.com/eo64b

On a meta-comment: could the off-topic cut-and-pasters Get Their Own Damn Blogs, instead of clogging up the comments here? This thread, thankfully, is pretty unclogged, but others? Eeesh.

On-topic: Bush is double-daring the Democrats to vote against writing his crimes into law. They should take that dare and stand up in defense of the American criminal justice system as it stands today, in the open.

Ahem, you are exactly right. This is what Bush is doing. But think about this. Abu Zubayda is not a top al Qaeda agent and this is a known fact. His 'evidence', extracted by refusing to give him pain medication after shooting him three times, is, to say the least, a bit fevered. He is supposedly the source for the accusations against Jose Padilla and we all know how well that effort is going. By the president's and the CIA's own admission, there are about 100 of these secret detainees. Fourteen are supposedly being moved to Guantanamo. Are the remainder of even less importance than crazy Abu, he of three personalities, none of them knowing anything worth torturing him for?

Bush desperately needs these 'tribunals' to be secret affairs.

Then he will be able to spend millions on them, just as he did the Zacarias Moussaoui trial. But this time around, he can assure a spectacular ending that will bring 'justice' and 'closure'.

There is no war on terror. There is just chaotic flailing about, tricked out in outrageous self-righteous rhetoric.

As I read it, the speech contained a remarkable menu of euphemisms for torture, and no assurance that it will stop:

http://unspeak.net/questioned-by-experts/

Or am I merely being paranoid?

My question - will the Washington Post now publish which nations were the hosts of the CIA prisons? Certainly they have the info.

http://armchairgeneralist.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/09/bush_comes_clea.html

Hear you, ahem. I, for one, will try to bracket my off-topic remarks, but concerns do overlap and interaction happens.

Off-topic: Hate speech. Will Steve and others *please* check out:

August 24, 2006
America Plays Poker While Iran Plays Chess
Comment 106

Let's also note here that Bush is basically trying to present Guantanamo as if it's indisputably part of the American criminal justice system -- when that's certainly not the case.

It's presented as 'bringing terrorists in' from the shadows of the Bush Gulag: the CIA secret prisons in eastern Europe and who knows where else. In truth, they're being brought to the unhidden bit of the Bush Gulag, which exists in a geographical and legal anomaly. The closest allies of the United States have called for Guantanamo's swift closure, and condemn its use as a legal get-out. Bush wants it turned into the legal equivalent of Saipan: sweatshop justice with a 'Made In The USA' label.

These bastards are rewriting history, and brainwashing our kids to do it. How long before the majority wakes up to the sheer evil this Administration embodies?

Wed, Sep 6, 2006 6:25pm EST

ABC and Scholastic release skewed Path to 9/11 "Discussion Guide" for high school teachers to assign to students

Summary: In conjunction with ABC miniseries The Path to 9/11, Scholastic and ABC have released a "Discussion Guide for the Classroom" aimed at high school teachers nationwide to "[e]ncourage your students and their families to watch The Path to 9/11 and use the accompanying" discussion guide as part of their lesson plan. A Media Matters for America review of the material finds it to be rife with conservative misinformation.
In conjunction with the September 10 premiere of ABC miniseries The Path to 9/11 -- a six-hour "docudrama" reportedly based on the findings of the 9-11 Commission Report -- ABC has teamed up with Scholastic to create a "Discussion Guide for the Classroom" to urge high school teachers nationwide to "[e]ncourage your students and their families to watch The Path to 9/11 and use the accompanying" discussion guide as part of their lesson plan. ABC and Scholastic have reportedly sent out letters to 100,000 high school teachers informing them of the miniseries and accompanying discussion guide. A Media Matters for America review of The Path to 9/11 "resource sheets" and "discussion guide[s]" provided to teachers has found that the material omits critical information regarding the Bush administration's pre-Iraq war weapons of mass destruction claims; falsely suggests a tie between Iraq and the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; gives upbeat accounts of reportedly dire conditions on the ground in both Iraq and Afghanistan; suggests that military responses to Osama bin Laden by the Clinton administration could have "hinder[ed] the U.S. stance on the war on terror"; and asks students to debate whether the media "hinder our national security."

As Media Matters has previously noted, ABC describes The Path to 9/11 as "a dramatization of the events detailed in The 9/11 Commission Report and other sources" and will air over the course of two nights -- September 10 and 11. In recent days, members of the right-wing media have begun promoting The Path to 9/11 as a film that "really zeros in on the shortcomings of the Clinton administration" and "honestly and fairly depict[s] how Clinton-era inaction ... allowed the 9/11 conspiracy to metastasize."

However, a Media Matters review of ABC and Scholastic's discussion guide has found it to be rife with conservative misinformation.

Iraq

The ABC/Scholastic "Student Resource Sheet 1" omits key information, resulting in a distorted account of pre-Iraq war WMD capabilities; misleadingly suggests a tie between Iraq and 9-11; and minimizes the current role of coalition troops in the country.

While providing background information to assist viewers in "becom[ing] familiar with the people, places, and organizations that played a role in the events of 9/11 and those that led up to that tragic day," the resource sheet asserts that prior to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, "[t]he U.S. government believed that [Saddam] Hussein had been developing weapons of mass destruction that he planned to use against American and other targets." But the material omits any mention of the fact that, as we now know, Iraq did not have WMDs. Nor is there any mention of the voluminous and growing body of evidence that indicates that the Bush administration knew, prior to the 2003 invasion, that its claims about WMDs were unsupported.

As Media Matters has repeatedly noted, at least three different U.S. or U.K. government-sanctioned reports have found that, before the invasion, Saddam was not in possession of illegal WMDs and did not have an active chemical, biological, or nuclear WMD program. Further, as Media Matters has documented (here, here, and here), over the past year and a half, substantial evidence has emerged that the Bush administration dismissed clear-cut evidence undermining President Bush's central case for war -- that Saddam possessed WMDs -- evidence that the media have largely ignored.

The material also appears to suggest a link between Iraq and 9-11, by both apparently including Iraq as a "place[] ... that played a role in the events of 9/11," and by later tying Iraq to the "War on Terror." The resource sheet stated:

As part of the "War on Terror," President Bush has led the United States into Afghanistan and Iraq and reorganized the national government in an attempt to combat terrorist activity.

continues at.....

http://mediamatters.org/items/200609060008?src=buzzflash

POA, Got it, that issue is hot. And here's a follow-up on voter fraud:

Ohio judge ordered ballots preserved.

The ballots and voting records can now be used in a major civil rights case against Blackwell. He's accused of "inequitably distributing voting resources, suppressing votes, and spoiling ballots" in the 2004 election.

http://tinyurl.com/ffaf4

Some reports indicate that those ballots may also serve as major evidence in impeachment hearings against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) blocks some of the fat that you eat from being absorbed by your body. Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) is used in the management of obesity including weight loss and weight maintenance when used with a reduced-calorie diet. Xenical (Generic Xenical, Orlistat) may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.

http://www.rxwanted.net/generic-xenical.html