Bush official admits "We tortured…"

A senior Bush official has come forward saying that the US Military has tortured a Saudi man being held at Guantanamo Bay. Since they went ahead and tortured the guy, he apparently cannot be referred for prosecution. Whew…He sure lucked out of that one.

The top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial has concluded that the U.S. military tortured a Saudi national who allegedly planned to participate in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, interrogating him with techniques that included sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a “life-threatening condition.”

“We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani,” said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. “His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that’s why I did not refer the case” for prosecution.

via BoingBoing

And the Sign shall be a Mark shall be a Word shall be a Whisper

This story telling me is foReign,
hidden on the stones of our fur-fathers cast to tell our fortune -
only to have the shattered words thrown back

Exploratory emotions push through my skin, root hairs digging deep into the yet-to-be-known with the nourishment being probability of success.

Plant your seeds, log^men,
plan your seeds

agapE, the devourer moves upwards – a twirling star particles surrounding flays maw from spirit and i am weightless
bliss

gravity well performing ultimate justice as this form rotates around its new-found binary forming the system
10
0
0
0

ethereal vapors pulling all to oNe and a tumultuous joy embraces
This wind I ride upon…it has a secret name that was whispered in my years ago, so softly the clay godsesses spoke this talisMan’s true sign to me
the æons have taken more than our perception, but also This Name That Shall Not Be Spoken

the naming has begun again
only this star’s path shall mark the sign

and a sign will be wonder

1

forever is an illusion

DNC Detention Camps Spark Outcry

With the 2008 Democratic Nation Convention convening on the 25th, there have already been a few voices raised about security and the right to protest. Protesting that the National Conventions seems to be a historical outlet for the nation’s grievances. But it seems that the city of Denver, which is hosting the event, had already decided how and where to deal with all the protesters.

In large fenced area in a warehouse that once housed voting machines.

The police and the city were very hush-hush about the entire issue, and were not forthcoming when the even broke into the public eye. The fact that they have built the detainment centers before the event begins means that they anticipate confrontations with the protesters. Perhaps, rather than preparing for violence that hasn’t happened yet, tax dollars would be better spent on listening to the issues of the tax-payers voicing their problems.

The single best quote I’ve heard about this issue so far is was by Glenn Spagnuolo at a press conference about the detention camps:

This facility has a long history,” he told a small gathering of reporters. “The city pulled its voting machines from here because the building gets too hot. Yet now, they’ll put people in there who use those machines to vote.

“There are no toilets there. There’s no water, no fire suppression. The city should be ashamed. It needs to stop criminalizing protests.” [emphasis added]

Hopefully one day both sides will decide to meet together and discuss this rather than viewing protests of this nature as warzones to compete in. The escalation of violence in situations like this do not bode well for the future of our supposed democracy.

Full Story: City defends “secret jail” built for DNC

Pentagon ordering inventory on all US nuclear weapons

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has released an order to inventory all of the United State’s nuclear weapons in light of the recent accidental shipment of weapons parts to Taiwan and the older – more important - “accidental” flight of 6 (maybe 5) nuclear warheads across the country.

Pentagon officials said at a news conference Tuesday that Gates would call for the review in addition to a full investigation into how the shipment to Taiwan from a Defense Logistics Agency warehouse happened 18 months ago.

The inventory review, which will involve thousands of items, is due to Gates in 60 days. Pentagon officials said the request was ordered, in part, because this latest incident comes after the August 2007 accidental flight of six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles on a B-52 bomber across the country.

Hmmm…I wonder if any will be found missing?

Bush Ignores Congressional Restrictions…Again

Just recently H.R. 4986 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 was signed into law. This is basically a big bill designating funds for specific functions of the military, defense, and intelligence sections of the government. However, it seems that President Bush is ignoring the parts that he wants to – telling congress to basically shove it.

Provisions of the Act, including sections 841, 846, 1079, and 1222, purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the President’s ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as Commander in Chief. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.

Now, the best section out of that bill is 1222 – The Limitation on Availability of Funds for Certain Purposes Relating to Iraq – which states:

No funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of appropriations in this Act may be obligated or expended for a purpose as follows:(1) To establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq.

(2) To exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq

So, basically, Bush is saying that he can’t even abide by the simple rules of “No Permanant Iraq Bases” and “No Controlling the Oil”. Hmmmm…I wonder why that is? It seems that by simply looking at what he won’t listen to, we can see the plans for the future. This is a very dangerous situation – the fact that he can just openly and publicly give the metaphorical finger to the American people. Why doesn’t this news bother more people? I’ve only been able to find a few different articles about it around the net, and no mention in mainstream sources.

I’m bothed even more by the other sections. The first two (841, 846) seem to deal with contractors abroad. The first, deals with recieving permission from Senate committees for actions pertaining to government contractors (a la Blackwater), and the second with protecting employees from those companies (or Department of Defense employees) from prosecution if they come forward with “information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a Department of Defense contract or grant, a gross waste of Department of Defense funds, a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or a violation of law related to a Department of Defense contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant”.

So, Bush doesn’t want anyone to be able to tattle on the disgusting things going on up top, and he wants to continue to station mercenaries anywhere he chooses on the taxpayer’s dime. What a waste, what a waste. Hopefully Kucinich changes his mind again about impeachment hearings.

(via SOTT)

Update: GNN just covered this subject.

History Channel Fingers Defense Department Over Anthrax Attacks

Interesting – the History Channel did a report about the 2001 anthrax attacks. In it, they have a couple of guests that directly blame the DoD for the attacks. I do think that this is one dirty secret that refuses to go away. Why wasn’t the investigation completed? What happened to the virologists involved?