I just called all my reps and told them NO stimulus package. In that package is a pardon for Bush and other officials so that they cannot be charged with any war crimes. In that package is a provision to make spying on the American people permanent. This is why they are trying to rush this through, not their deep concern for the people!! Hope you will call and object to this bill.
Kill the stimulus package
- Thread starter Mayflower
- Start date
HOLLYWOOD
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 22,314
CNN Situation Room with Wolf Biltzer.. Jack Cafferty reveals sneaky GOVERMENT Corrupt
It's also posted under BAD MEDIA thread...
While watching Wolf Blitzer’s The Situation Room on CNN on Wednesday, off-hand comments during a conversation with Jack Cafferty took me by surprise:
Buried deep inside this legislation is a provision that will pardon President Bush and all the members of his administration of any possible crimes connected with the torture and mistreatment of detainees dated all the way back to September 11, 2001.
At least President Nixon had Gerald Ford to do his dirty work. President Bush is trying to pardon himself.
... Under the War Crimes Act, violations of the Geneva Conventions are felonies. In some cases, punishable by death. When the Supreme Court ruled the Geneva Conventions applied to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees, President Bush and his boys were suddenly in big trouble. They had been working these prisoners over pretty good.
In an effort to avoid possible prosecution, they're trying to cram this bill through Congress before the end of the week when Congress adjourns. The reason there's such a rush to do this, if the Democrats get control of the House in November, well, this kind of legislation probably wouldn't pass.
... The question is this: Should Congress pass a bill giving retroactive immunity to President Bush for possible war crimes?
For me, this raises several red flags immediately and raises the questions:
1. Why does President Bush so urgently need pardon/blanket immunity for crimes dating back to September 11th 2001 that no one has proven that he’s committed yet?
2. Why wasn’t/hasn't the presidential pardon section mentioned out in the open and above board?
While it’s understandable that protections would be put in place to provide immunity to CIA interrogators that are only following orders from the President, it is not reasonable to pardon the issuer of those dubious orders as well. So determined and so urgent is President Bush’s need, apparently, that Republican Congress members have begun vigorously attacking anyone who opposes the legislature as un-American and soft on terrorism.
As written, the bill also changes the definition of an enemy combatant to mean just about anything President Bush wants it to mean. This includes such vague terms as someone knowingly supporting terrorist groups with arms, money and other activities, but does not spell out how those definitions are determined or who is to make the distinctions. The legislation retains the illegality of such methods as induced hypothermia, biological experiments, and sleep deprivation, however Bush would still be free to create other methods of questioning as he sees fit whether they conflict with the Geneva Conventions or not.
It is my opinion that President Bush and the Republican led Congress should be made to answer for this obvious misleading of the American voting public as to the actual motives of this legislation. An explanation of their urgency to get it passed before Congress recesses for the November elections might help too.
We have NAZIs and NEOCONs RUNNING THE COUNTRY and BAFFOONS AND APES ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE OF CONGRESS!
It's also posted under BAD MEDIA thread...
While watching Wolf Blitzer’s The Situation Room on CNN on Wednesday, off-hand comments during a conversation with Jack Cafferty took me by surprise:
Buried deep inside this legislation is a provision that will pardon President Bush and all the members of his administration of any possible crimes connected with the torture and mistreatment of detainees dated all the way back to September 11, 2001.
At least President Nixon had Gerald Ford to do his dirty work. President Bush is trying to pardon himself.
... Under the War Crimes Act, violations of the Geneva Conventions are felonies. In some cases, punishable by death. When the Supreme Court ruled the Geneva Conventions applied to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees, President Bush and his boys were suddenly in big trouble. They had been working these prisoners over pretty good.
In an effort to avoid possible prosecution, they're trying to cram this bill through Congress before the end of the week when Congress adjourns. The reason there's such a rush to do this, if the Democrats get control of the House in November, well, this kind of legislation probably wouldn't pass.
... The question is this: Should Congress pass a bill giving retroactive immunity to President Bush for possible war crimes?
For me, this raises several red flags immediately and raises the questions:
1. Why does President Bush so urgently need pardon/blanket immunity for crimes dating back to September 11th 2001 that no one has proven that he’s committed yet?
2. Why wasn’t/hasn't the presidential pardon section mentioned out in the open and above board?
While it’s understandable that protections would be put in place to provide immunity to CIA interrogators that are only following orders from the President, it is not reasonable to pardon the issuer of those dubious orders as well. So determined and so urgent is President Bush’s need, apparently, that Republican Congress members have begun vigorously attacking anyone who opposes the legislature as un-American and soft on terrorism.
As written, the bill also changes the definition of an enemy combatant to mean just about anything President Bush wants it to mean. This includes such vague terms as someone knowingly supporting terrorist groups with arms, money and other activities, but does not spell out how those definitions are determined or who is to make the distinctions. The legislation retains the illegality of such methods as induced hypothermia, biological experiments, and sleep deprivation, however Bush would still be free to create other methods of questioning as he sees fit whether they conflict with the Geneva Conventions or not.
It is my opinion that President Bush and the Republican led Congress should be made to answer for this obvious misleading of the American voting public as to the actual motives of this legislation. An explanation of their urgency to get it passed before Congress recesses for the November elections might help too.
We have NAZIs and NEOCONs RUNNING THE COUNTRY and BAFFOONS AND APES ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE OF CONGRESS!
P
PeacePlan
Guest
Ron Paul should speak up about what is in this bill...
HOLLYWOOD
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 22,314
Here's the original thread... plenty in there. Gesus watching C-SPAN, those NEOCONS are freaks with their "so-called" justifications to violate the, LAWS & CONSTITUTION
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=98917
VoteForRonPaul
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,052
If that is true he would not try to pass this hidden legislation. The gang is in deep fear!
This topic should be in the grassroots and it needs to be bumped all the time for more people to be aware of what is going on.
Citizen Warrior
Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2008
- Messages
- 6
It's called "cover your butt with paperwork". Government employees are Masters of the technique!
On the other hand, there is the distinct possibility that Bush, suspecting that Hillary just MIGHT be the next Prez, feels the need to CYA. Hillary is just vindictive enough to try to get some payback for the GOP trying to impeach her "hubby", back when.
CW
On the other hand, there is the distinct possibility that Bush, suspecting that Hillary just MIGHT be the next Prez, feels the need to CYA. Hillary is just vindictive enough to try to get some payback for the GOP trying to impeach her "hubby", back when.
CW
Similar threads
