Browsed by
Tag: dissent

Executive Order Overrides War Dissent?

Executive Order Overrides War Dissent?

Comments 5 comments

One interpretation of the Executive Order “Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq” is that is actually provides the President with the authority to confiscate the assets of whoever opposes the US-led war.

A presidential Executive Order issued on July 17th, repeals with the stroke of a pen the right to dissent and to oppose the Pentagon’s military agenda in Iraq. …

In substance, under this executive order, opposing the war becomes an illegal act. The Executive Order criminalizes the antiwar movement.

It is intended to “blocking property” of US citizens and organizations actively involved in the peace movement. It targets those “Certain Persons” in America who oppose the Bush Administration’s “peace and stability” program in Iraq, characterized, in plain English, by an illegal occupation and the continued killing of innocent civilians.

The Executive Order also targets those “Certain Persons” who are “undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction”, or who, again in plain English, are opposed to the confiscation and privatization of Iraq’s oil resources, on behalf of the Anglo-American oil giants.

The order is also intended for anybody who opposes Bush’s program of “political reform in Iraq”, in other words, who questions the legitimacy of an Iraqi “government” installed by the occupation forces.

Moreover, those persons or nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), who provide bona fide humanitarian aid to Iraqi civilians, and who are not approved by the US Military or its lackeys in the US sponsored Iraqi puppet government are also liable to have their financial assets confiscated.

The executive order violates the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution. It repeals one of the fundamental tenets of US democracy, which is the right to free expression and dissent. The order has not been the object of discussion in the US Congress.

I would love to hear from anyone who has expertise in law, especially constitutional law. It seems that many of these documents are so vaguely worded that it is simply a matter of if/when the administration decides to interpret it to its own goals.

The thing that bothers me the most about this order is that it is intended to be used against American citizens. On the one hand, it could be a useful tool to stop plans for violence. On the other hand, it looks as though it all depends on who interprets what counts as “undermining reconstruction” and so on.

What greater mockery of the flag?

What greater mockery of the flag?

Comments 1 comment

In the previous post, I made mention of the language of the sacred. If the government decrees that the flag is sacred, does that violate the separation of church and state?

As may be, it’s actually going to come to a vote in the Senate. We may only be able to sit and watch our government amend the First Amendment to restrict political freedom of expression.

So this seems to be the overall plan – get as much power away from the judicial branch as possible by handing it to Congress and the executive branch. Where Congress isn’t pliant enough, then disempower Congress, and focus on executive power.

The US Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that the First Amendment to the Constitution protected Americans’ right to desecrate the flag as a means of free expression. Interesting – the majority opinion was joined by Scalia.

Back in 1997, Dr. Roger Pilon, Ph.D., J.D broke with colleagues at the libertarian/conservative think tank Cato Institute in his testimony before the Subcommittee on the Judiciary of the House. It’s worth a read – here’s my favorite part:

Sir Winston Churchill captured well that essential feature of our system when he observed in 1945 that “the United States is a land of free speech. Nowhere is speech freer–not even [in England], where we sedulously cultivate it even in its most repulsive forms.” In so observing, Churchill was merely echoing thoughts attributed to Voltaire, that he may disapprove of what you say but would defend to the death your right to say it, and the ironic question of Benjamin Franklin: “Abuses of the freedom of speech ought to be repressed; but to whom are we to commit the power of doing it?”

When so many for so long have understood the principles at issue today, how can this Congress so lightly abandon those principles? It is said by some that the flag is a special case, a unique symbol. That claim may be true, but it does not go to the principle of the matter: in a free society, individuals have a right to express themselves, even in offensive ways. Once we bar such expression, however, Franklin’s question will immediately be upon us. What is more, we will soon find that the flag is not unique, that the Bible and much else will next be in line for special protection.

It is said also that the flag is special because men have fought and died for it. Let me suggest in response that men have fought and died not for the flag but for the principles it represents. People give their lives for principles, not for symbols. When we dishonor those principles, to protect their symbol, we dishonor the men who died to preserve them. That is not a business this Congress should be about. We owe it to those men, men who have made the ultimate sacrifice, to resist the pressures of the moment so that we may preserve the principles of the ages.

After all, free expression and the right to dissent are among the core principles that the American flag is meant to represent. What greater defacement of the flag can there be than to shift its meaning into something that makes a mockery of American values and rights? Freedom of expression is one of the the truest tests of our dedication to the principles that our flag is supposed to represent.

Flag Issue History – Resources

Three countries ban flag-burning – Quick! Who are they?

Iran | China | Cuba

Main Page – WikiThePresidency

Main Page – WikiThePresidency

People For the American Way believes that “a healthy democracy is an informed democracy,” so they have created WikiThePresidency.org to establish a single place for the public to both acquire and share information about Executive Branch wrongdoings.

It’s a Wiki, so anyone can edit the site, but there are rules. You must post factual claims (no op-eds), with links to credible supporting material. No spouting off.

Take a look. It’s interesting reading.

Main Page – WikiThePresidency

US Concentration Camps?

US Concentration Camps?

Comments 2 comments

KBR, the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton Co. was awarded a $385 million 1-year contract (with 4 1-year options) from the Department of Homeland Security to establish “temporary detention and processing capabilities to expand existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs.”

“We are especially gratified to be awarded this contract,” an executive vice president, Bruce Stanski, said in a statement, “because it builds on our extremely strong track record in the arena of emergency management support.”

It’s amazing someone can stand up and say something like that, given the historical facts. Sigh.

So, the question is, why do we need concentration camps in the US, and who’s really gonna sit in them??

Terrorists? Immigrants to be deported? Victims of natural (or unnatural) events? Poor people? Old people? Whoever doesn’t sign up for the drug benefit written by the insurance industry? (the last a lame attempt at humor, sorry)

American citizens culled for one of the rapidly-developing “new programs”?

What kind of programs require major expansion of detention centers, each capable of holding 5,000 people?

Let’s ask the Bush administration exactly what it means by the “rapid development of new programs,” which might require the construction of a new network of detention / labor / concentration camps across the United States!

“Almost certainly this is preparation for a roundup after the next 9/11 for Mid-Easterners, Muslims and possibly dissenters,” says Daniel Ellsberg, a former military analyst who in 1971 released the Pentagon Papers, the U.S. military’s account of its activities in Vietnam. “They’ve already done this on a smaller scale, with the ‘special registration’ detentions of immigrant men from Muslim countries, and with Guantanamo.”

Peter Dale Scott, author of Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina, suggests that it could be a preparation for conditions of martial law, and notes that a multimillion program for detention facilities “will greatly increase NORTHCOM’s ability to respond to any domestic disorders.”

…in April 2002, Defense Dept. officials implemented a plan for domestic U.S. military operations by creating a new U.S. Northern Command (CINC-NORTHCOM) for the continental United States. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called this “the most sweeping set of changes since the unified command system was set up in 1946.”

The NORTHCOM commander, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced, is responsible for “homeland defense and also serves as head of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)…. He will command U.S. forces that operate within the United States in support of civil authorities. The command will provide civil support not only in response to attacks, but for natural disasters.”

John Brinkerhoff later commented on PBS that, “The United States itself is now for the first time since the War of 1812 a theater of war. That means that we should apply, in my view, the same kind of command structure in the United States that we apply in other theaters of war.”

…NORTHCOM conducted its highly classified Granite Shadow exercise in Washington. As William Arkin reported in the Washington Post, “Granite Shadow is yet another new Top Secret and compartmented operation related to the military’s extra-legal powers regarding weapons of mass destruction. It allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control.”

For an excellent, but chilling overview of some of the possibilities here (including labor camps, dissident and “Fifth Columnist” roundups, and so on), take a look at “Bush’s Mysterious ‘New Programs'” by Nat Parry, Consortium News, posted February 23, 2006. at AlterNet.

Protesting Iraq – Anti-War Photos

Protesting Iraq – Anti-War Photos

Comments 0 Comment

indymedia.us :: International Day of Protest on the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq

Some photos from all over the USA, and all over the World.

From signs:

Support the troops – bring them home
Dissent Protects Democracy
Who Would Jesus Bomb?
War is Terror
Drop Bush Not Bombs
It’s about Lives for Oil and Nothing about Freedom
Students Not Soliders
No To Imperialism Militarism and Bush
Iraq War is Anti-Christian
Making a Killing with Your Money
No War but Class War
Who Dies for Bush Lies?
Warning – You are Buying War, Poverty, Greed, and Fear
Third World Within (on a map of a bleeding USA)
9/11 Unanswered Questions: Why did FBI HQ block investigations in NY, Minneapolis, and Phoenix?
Iraquis aren’t Cheerleaders (with a photo from Abu Ghraib)
Jail Time for War Crimes
Destroy the War Machine
College Not Combat
War Loves to Prey on the Young
When Christ Disarmed Peter, he Disarmed Every Soldier
Dumbo – “Bring Them On”
Violence Breeds Violence
Books Not Bombs
Stop the Poverty Draft
Stop the War Junkies
Where are the WMDs?
Not Our President
Not in Our Name
War is Not the Answer
80% Unemployment in Harlem
Every Day a Soldier Dies for Cheney’s Oil and Bush’s Lies
Anything War can Do, Peace Can Do Better
Give Peace a Chance
Death is Forever
US Troops Out of the Middle East
Another Woman for Peace
Osama Toppled 2 Buildings, Bush Toppled Peace, Freedom and Democracy
21st Cent. terrorist murders -Bin Laden 3,000, Bush 15,000
Lee Harvey, where are you?
Bush Quit Your Vile War, Deal with WHY They Hate Us
Viva La Paz
End Occupation Corporate Exploitation Iraq to Haiti
Stop Imperialism
Why Aren’t You Outraged?
Uncle Sam Iraq will be your Vietnam
Anti-Bush – Pro-Schools
No War for Oil
US Out of the Middle East
History Will Condemn Us
Vietnam Mistake Iraq Bigger Mistake
A US Occupation is Still an Occupation
Use Law Not War
Liars
Military Families Say Bring Them Home Now
Bring Them Home
Money for Jobs and Education Not War
Don’t Send Our Troops to Commit Your War Crimes
Stop the Back Door Draft
Fight Corporate End Racist War
Separation Corporations and State
Silence is Acceptance
No War Between Nations, No Peace Between Classes
No More
Stop the War

And from Protests Outside the US:

Only Democracies May Commit Mass Murder According to the American Empire
One Million Children
Another World is Possible
End the Occupation of Iraq and Palestine
No More War
Is This Your Peace Fu…ng Capitalists?
Global No
Troops Out Now
No to American Terrorism, No to Islamic Terrorism
Violence Leads to Violence
Bush (with a swastika for the S)
Latin Amerika Rebelde y Anti-Kapitali$ta
Bush the Tiny Tyrant
Put Bush, the war criminal, on trial
Support the Right to Resistance in Iraq and Palestine
No More Bush Wars
Bliar Bliar Iraq’s on Fire
No Nukes
Bush terrorist number one of the world
No to War Profiteering
“2-4-6-8, F..k The Police State
Oil War
All Out Iraq Now
Occupation is Not Freedom

“War is everywhere: a global war against humanity in which our bodies, the air we breathe, the water that we drink, what we are taught, the stories we tell and are told … become commodities bought and sold in an open market. Whether in the Iraqi killing fields or a prepaid drought in Phiri, Soweto, the logic is the same: the rule of money and the market over all of life – the logic of neoliberalism.” –South Africa IndyMedia