You could have knocked me over with a feather that the major media was talking about the Bradley Manning trial at all, after years of being confined to the progressive Internet, but although it is important for Manning's treatment in virtual isolation be a focus, the real story is being ignored. Bradley Manning is where he is in the first place because he was reporting a war crime.
No matter what Manning's treatment, many Americans, not always the most big-hearted people, will believe Manning deserved every bit of it unless context is provided. The CNN reports on the trial which have run so far delve no deeper than his complaints about being forced to stand naked, not being allowed to sleep, and being harassed under a bogus "suicide watch" by being asked every five minutes "are you okay?"
Manning wrote to his then friend Adrian Lamo of the Wikileaks video which has since made the news:
"At first glance it was just a bunch of guys getting shot up by a helicopter...No big deal ... about two dozen more where that came from, right? But something struck me as odd with the van thing, and also the fact it was being stored in a JAG officer’s directory. So I looked into it."
Manning was talking about the now-famous video in which an American Apache helicopter crew is seen firing upon a group of Iraqi men in "New Baghdad" in 2007. Most of the public debate has since centered around the first of two attacks in the video, in which a Reuters journalist is killed.
Manning's eyes were elsewhere, and in perhaps a sad commentary on the rules of engagement at the time, accepted the first attack as "just a bunch of guys getting shot up." It was the second attack, the "van thing," which caught Manning's attention. Manning knew a war crime when he saw one.
In the second attack, unarmed men are attempting to evacuate a wounded man, an act which since the Geneva Convention of 1864 is protected. Article 12 of the Geneva Convention of 1864 states that,
"...Members of the armed forces and other persons (...) who are wounded or sick, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances. They shall be treated humanely and cared for by the Party to the conflict...Any attempts upon their lives, or violence to their persons, shall be strictly prohibited; in particular, they shall not be murdered or exterminated...".
In the second attack a man is seen crawling upon the ground after the first attack, when a van pulls up with men who attempt to evacuate him. The Apache gunner in his bloodlust requests and receives permission to open fire, muttering the words "just pick up a weapon," even though no weapons are anywhere visible near the crawling man. It is in this attack that two children in the van are wounded, whereupon the gunner remarks "that's what they get for bringing their kids to the battle."
These are the children saved by Spc. Ethan McCord, who brings them to a Bradley vehicle after another soldier, upon discovering them, runs away vomiting. A documentary has been made about the shooting featuring McCord which has won the award for Best Documentary Short at the Tribeca Film Festival, "Incident in New Baghdad."
A perusal of soldier's and veterans blogs shows surprising unanimity even among the battle-hardened. Remarks go roughly: First shooting, tough sh*t. Second shooting, war crime.
If it came out that Manning had been hung upside down and beaten on the soles of his feet, many Americans would conclude it was deserved given the incomplete reporting which merely mentions that Manning is accused of leaking classified documents. This may be part of it, but the fact also remains that Bradley Manning was reporting a clear war crime.
Bradley Manning's "van thing" can be seen starting at about 9 minutes.
Please note: most of my comments in defense of my diary (and others) have been deleted. Note original comment count is 46.
Before trial and absent a confession, the media has labeled the nanny who allegedly slashed her own throat with enough force that she "fractured a vertebra in her neck" as the "Killer Nanny." Yoselyn Ortega allegedly killed two children of the Senior VP for CNBC Digital, which manages CNBC online content. The murders took place the day after CNBC Online posted a story that Spire Law Group had announced a $43 trillion "bankster" lawsuit which named US Attorney General Eric Holder, former US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geitner, and other officials of the present and former administrations. The same day of the murders, CNBC took down the post, but it was then re-posted by the Wall Street Journal, where it remains.
The headline words 'Stabbed Children to Death After Massive Fight With Their Mother' are put in quotation marks as if uttered by the nanny herself.
The article seeks to paint a picture of "friction" between the nanny and the family of the murdered children, using what often are anonymous sources. Editorializing by adding the word "ominously" the article reads:
Ortega waived her right to have a lawyer present during questioning when she ominously told the detective, 'Marina knows what happened', a source told the New York Times.
The New York Times initially reported that the mother, Marina, found the nanny unconscious on the floor with her throat cut, near the murdered children. The next day, the police changed the story to the mother entering the bathroom and seeing the nanny stabbing herself in the neck. The police now say that she stabbed herself with "such force that she fractured a vertebra in her neck."
The first reporting on the murder in the NY Times begins:
A mother returned home to her luxury Upper West Side apartment on Thursday evening to find two of her children, a 2-year-old boy and a 6-year-old girl, fatally stabbed in a bathtub by the family’s nanny, the authorities said. The nanny herself lay on the floor, near a bloody knife, with an apparently self-inflicted slash to her own throat.
New York (CNN) -- The New York nanny suspected in the killings of two children in her care began knifing herself when their mother entered the bathroom and saw the bodies in the bathtub, police said Friday.
"We believe now that the nanny began to stab herself as the woman entered the room," Police Commissioner Ray Kelly told reporters in a revised account of Thursday's events.
"We initially thought that had already been done but now information is coming out that she did it as the mother entered the bathroom."
However, Capital Bay does not report the initial conflicting account and instead reports as a finding of fact that:
Marina Krim returned to her New York home on October 25 with her youngest daughter to find her children Lucia, six, and Leo, two, dead in a pool of blood before walking in on nanny Yoselyn Ortega stabbing herself in the throat.
The Capital Bay article quotes second and third-hand sources such as "RadarOnline" now "revealing" friction between the nanny and her employer, thus prejudicing any jury pool as to the nanny's guilt or innocence:
Ortega revealed from her hospital bed that she resented her employers because they kept telling her what to do and asked her to do the housework....
RadarOnline reported yesterday that Ortega 'told NYPD detectives that she was involved in an epic argument with Marina Krim the day before the children were tragically murdered.'
'Yoselyn also said that when she left at the end of the day before the murders, Marina ignored her when she said good-bye and this made her very, very angry,' Radar's source continued.
The children are survived by a younger sibling.
American jurisprudence has long relied on the firm presumption of innocence before a finding of guilt by a jury. Courts have found that media coverage which greatly taints the mindset of the public from which jurors will be drawn must be considered, in legal jargon, "poisoning the well," or "poisoning the jury pool."
Film-maker and activist Harry Fear has been in Gaza since the first bombs fell. He says Israel has the capability to avoid collateral damage - but has instead chosen to attack indiscriminately.
In his video report "Martyred in Gaza" one of Fear's interview subjects relates that an Israeli missile which killed and wounded a number of people was followed up by a second missile into the crowd of people attempting to help those injured in the first strike.
Fear's report follows a widely-reported incident in which the child of a BBC journalist was killed by an Israeli missile strike, in his own home with fighting nowhere in the residential neighborhood. The father is captured mourning his child in a AP photo.
The front page photo on Thursday’s Washington Post tells, in a single frame, a very personal story from Wednesday’s Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza Strip. Jihad Misharawi, a B.B.C. Arabic journalist who lives in Gaza, carries the body of his 11-month old son, Omar, through al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City.
An Israeli round hit Misharawi’s four-room home in Gaza Wednesday, killing his son, according to B.B.C. Middle East bureau chief Paul Danahar, who arrived in Gaza earlier Thursday.
Misharawi’s sister-in-law was also killed, and his brother wounded. Misharawi told Danahar that, when the round landed, there was no fighting in his residential neighborhood...
Omar Misharawi, 11-months-old:
B.B.C. journalist Jihad Masharawi carries his son’s body at a Gaza hospital. (Photo: AP)
Something not right here. Everyone knows how I feel about Obama, NDAA and all that. But I must say I'm disturbed by the one-sided pummeling Democrats are taking from the right-wing talking-nuts, and they are hitting hard and shamelessly. Today both Rush Limbaugh and that real psycho, Jeff Kuner, were challenging the Republican Party to sue over, of all things, vote fraud in Ohio.
Excuse me? You mean where Karl Rove and Kenneth Blackwell stole the election from John Kerry in 2004? Across the state but especially in the very county Limbaugh is talking about? Cuyohonga County? This is really too much. Do Democrats have a pulse? Are they really setting themselves up to fail just like cynics say they are?
If you want to pass your agenda, you want most of the American people, if not with you, at least not against you. And just because they are nuts don't think these right-wing talking heads don't have influence, or don't need to be answered. This will subtly poison the body politic against Obama by invoking a felony and impeachable charge. The kicker is, it is so the pot calling the kettle black it is breathtaking. Yes, I have no words. And this rubbish is now entering the mainstream blogosphere.
The Republicans, as always, are making the issue to be voter identification, naturally, because it disenfranchises old and poor people who can't afford a state ID card. This is especially brassy because they know full well that how you steal elections is by flipping code in computer programs.
What can be gained that is positive out of this is a national initiative to institute an honest vote, as honest as it can be made, anyway, by returning to all paper ballot voting. Computers are good for many things, but voting is not one of them. If we want to save paper this is not where you do it.
A paper ballot that can be seen, held, and examined, the numbers of which can be known and counted before they enter a polling station, is the best system yet devised for guarding against fraud. It requires a bit more doing to walk boxes in and out the back door than to press a few keys on a computer keyboard.
Maybe OWS can lead it. The Democratic Party can actually do something which will be wildly popular across the board. Why not?
Addendum to comments:
Come on everyone remembers the long lines outside the polling stations in black precincts in Ohio being reported on election day of 2004. I was in Copley Square, Boston, the Kerry HQ street party, at 11pm when people were still celebrating until the numbers started to change. Through all the noise you couldn't hear the news, but you knew something was wrong because the crowd was getting quieter. We were there, remember?
There was the lawsuit and now a Diebold programmer testifying under oath that he did it. What is the rebuttal to all this. Can you provide a link? I'd sure like to see that and I will read it carefully.
Clinton Eugene Curtis testified under oath, before the Ohio State legislature, that he wrote a program to rig elections. This program would flip the total vote from the real winner to the candidate who had been pre-selected to win by the electronic vote counting machines....
A new filing in the King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell case includes a copy of the Ohio Secretary of State election production system configuration that was in use in Ohio's 2004 presidential election when there was a sudden and unexpected shift in votes for George W. Bush.
The filing also includes the revealing deposition of the late Michael Connell. Connell served as the IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove. Connell ran the private IT firm GovTech that created the controversial system that transferred Ohio's vote count late on election night 2004 to a partisan Republican server site in Chattanooga, Tennessee owned by SmarTech. That is when the vote shift happened, not predicted by the exit polls, that led to Bush's unexpected victory. Connell died a month and a half after giving this deposition in a suspicious small plane crash.
Additionally, the filing contains the contract signed between then-Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell and Connell's company, GovTech Solutions. Also included that contract a graphic architectural map of the Secretary of State's election night server layout system....
Michael Louis Connell (November 30, 1963 – December 19, 2008) was a high-level Republican consultant who was subpoenaed in a case regarding alleged tampering with the 2004 U.S. Presidential election and a case involving thousands of missing emails pertaining to the political firing of U.S. Attorneys. Connell was killed when the plane he was flying crashed on December 19, 2008.
Request for protection
In July 2008, the lead attorney in the King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell case, Cliff Arnebeck, sent a letter  to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey seeking protection for Connell as a witness in the case, saying he had been threatened. Arnebeck wrote, “We have been confidentially informed by a source we believe to be credible that Karl Rove has threatened Michael Connell, a principal witness we have identified in our King Lincoln case in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, that if he does not agree to 'take the fall' for election fraud in Ohio, his wife Heather will be prosecuted for supposed lobby law violations."  Arnebeck claims that months later, his source called back and warned that Connell's life was in danger.
He was served with a subpoena in Ohio on September 22, 2008, in a case alleging that vote-tampering during the 2004 presidential election resulted in civil rights violations. Connell, president of GovTech Solutions and New Media Communications, was a website designer and IT professional and created a website for Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell that presented the results of the 2004 election in real time as they were tabulated. At the time, Blackwell was also chairman of the Bush-Cheney 2004 reelection effort in Ohio. Connell refused to testify or to produce documents relating to the system used in the 2004 and 2006 elections, lawyers said.
At about 6 p.m. on December 19, 2008, Connell was killed, at the age of 45, in the crash of a single-engine 1997 Piper Saratoga private airplane, which he was flying, which occurred in Lake Township, between 2.5 and 3 miles short of the runway at the Akron-Canton Airport near Akron, Ohio.
On December 31, 2008 it was reported that air traffic controllers had noted prior to the crash that Connell was off course, that they had been in communication with him regarding this, and that he had been trying to get back on course at the time of the crash. There were reported to have been no signs of mechanical problems with the plane.
The National Transportation Safety Board published its final report into the accident that killed Connell on January 28, 2010. The board concluded that Connell had lost control of the aircraft as a result of disorientation while turning in cloud. During a pre-flight briefing Connell had commented that he wanted to return to Akron before the weather "went from bad to worse". Several other pilots in the vicinity had reported severe icing at the time of the crash; Connell's aircraft was not equipped or approved to fly in icing conditions.
A January 2010 article in Maxim Magazine speculated that because Connell possessed knowledge which, if revealed, would be damaging to high-level Republicans, his death may have been the result of sabotage of his aircraft, particularly as his cell-phone was never recovered. Project Censored, a small non-profit organization, has called for a Federal criminal investigation; and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has called the case "more serious than Watergate."
Israel boarded without permission and commandeered another Gaza-bound vessel carrying humanitarian supplies in international waters today, which was making another attempt to break the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip.
"The Estelle is now under attack - I have just had a message from them by phone," Victoria Strand, a Stockholm-based spokeswoman for the Ship to Gaza Sweden campaign told the AFP news agency on Saturday....
"Five or six military vessels surrounded the Estelle. Soldiers wearing masks are now trying to board the ship. The attack took place on international water: N31 26 E33 45," Feiler said.
The Israeli military confirmed that the ship was boarded, after first denying that they had attacked or boarded it.
Bearing witness to the cargo and purely humanitarian nature of the mission were five European Parliamentarians from various nations. Confirmed aboard are:
Former Member of Parliament Manly James, Canada
Member of Parliament Hagen Aksel, Norway
Member of Parliament Britton Sven, Sweden
Member of Parliament Kodelas Dimitios, Greece
Member of Parliament Sixto Ricardo, Spain
Member of Parliament Diamantopoulos Evangelos, Greece
Ahead of the ship's arrival in Ashdod, a group of 20 Israeli peace activists gathered on a nearby beach, holding up signs in English and Hebrew reading: "End the siege of Gaza" and "Blockade = war crime," an AFP correspondent said.
"We oppose Israeli policy, which seeks to maintain its control through siege and closure, strangulating the Palestinian people," said a coalition of Israeli rights groups, including the Coalition of Women for Peace, Yesh Gvul and the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel.
Activists organised a major attempt to break the Israeli blockade in May 2010, when six ships led by the Mavi Marmara tried to reach Gaza.
Israeli troops stormed the Marmara, killing nine Turkish activists and sparking a diplomatic crisis with Ankara.
After the killings of the Marmara activists in 2010, former Reagan Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Dr. Paul Craig RobertS went on RT to charge that US failure to strongly condemn Israel over such acts is a result of the US Congress being a "puppet" of Israel. Roberts ascribes this in turn to the undue influence of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, over the US elections process. Earlier this year an "Occupy AIPAC" spin-off of the Occupy Wall Street movement protested the organization's stated agenda of "enshrin[ing] in law that it is U.S. policy to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."
The protest sparked a melee in which the protesters were attacked by AIPAC members and one older activist choked with his necktie (video below.)
Amy Goodman's Democracy Now captures a surreal scene. Stein contention is that there should be a return to League of Women Voters criteria that "anyone who does the work to be on the ballot in enough states to win electoral vote" should be allowed to debate. As the arrest is taking place, the arresting officer can be heard professing concern for the flag Dr. Stein and her VP Cheryl Honkala are holding, and that no one step on it by accident.
This video clearly shows that Jill Stein is one gutsy and classy lady.
After a years-long media black-out and a grueling battle to get the film shown in the US, The Prosecution of an American President, the brainchild of the Los Angeles County prosecutor who prosecuted Charles Manson, opens at theaters this week. In its long trek to the American big screen, the movie was originally scheduled to be run on HBO before the channel dropped it at the last minute. Bugliosi then had to go outside the country to find a producer, Windsor Ontario NAFTC Studios.
The Prosecution of an American President, which will world premiere on October 3rd at the Hollywood ArcLight theatre, documents the efforts of Vincent Bugliosi , one of our nation's foremost prosecutors, as he presents his case that former president George W. Bush should be prosecuted for the deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers who died in Iraq . Based on Bugliosi's controversial New York Times bestseller, the movie discloses hidden details of how key Bush officials and President Bush himself systematically lied to Congress and the American people, deliberately taking our nation to war under false pretenses.
Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice were arguing vigorously that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat to the United States and that he might strike the US "in as little as 45 minutes." But the paragraphs which were deleted and thus hidden from Congress maintained that Saddam would likely only strike the US in self defense, if attacked, or if threatened with annihilation.
"Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger cause for making war.
Iraq probably would attempt clandestine attacks against the US Homeland if Baghdad feared an attack that threatened the survival of the regime were imminent or unavoidable, or possibly for revenge."
This wording seems to indicate that Saddam feared that if any terrorist attack, or any weapon used in one, were ever traced back to him, it would amount to national suicide.
Bugliosi appeared before the House Judiciary Committee in 2008 to state that, as a result of the deceptions, and as a professional prosecutor, he considered George W. Bush guilty for the murder of over 4,000 US service members in Iraq. Bugliosi gained fame with his successful prosecution of Charles Manson. Bugliosi pioneered an area of law in which culpability could be assigned to someone who had never actually pulled a trigger, but who had directly incited others.
During the course of the film, Bugliosi never allows us to forget that the loss suffered by families of fallen soldiers is still marked by unimaginable grief and pain, and that the void left in a family is one which can never be filled.
The theaters are in which The Prosecution of an American President is opening this weekend are in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. It will be opening at:
Oct. 3, Hollywood ArcLight Theatre (Los Angeles)
October 5, AMC Empire 25 (New York City)
October 5, 2012, AMC River East 21 (Chicago)
A portion of the film's proceeds will be donated to the Lost Soldier Foundation, a charity established to help support Iraq war Veterans, their families, and those who lost loved ones. The film is directed by Dave Hagen and David J. Burke,
Let's get one thing straight. I am currently disgusted with both major parties and candidates and will not be voting for either of them. The choice of Mr. NDAA Indefinite Military Detention and/or Assassination of US Citizens or Mr. Send Your Jobs to China is one I refuse to make (Romney also favors the fascist NDAA.) But this is offensive, and I am duty-bound to report what I am hearing on a show which no doubt most people here never touch with a ten foot pole, so there is no way you would know about it.
This is the sound cut Rush Limbaugh plays over and over in his "Obama equals welfare people" campaign, which never fails to give the racists on the show a good shit laugh at how "those people" (yes, Limbaugh actually uses the words "those people") talk and think. Why isn't he being slammed?
They play it over and over, yuk yuk and pass me a chaw of tobacky, won't ya?
No doubt Limbuagh would say "it isn't racist, it's a real tape of a real person, those libs see racism everywhere!" To this I say, this kind of racism is like porn. If you are sitting with your young kids and the TV suddenly flashes it, an embarrassed silence overtakes the room. If I am in my home with company including my black friends (I'm not politically correct, I still just say "black" and so do they,) I would feel my face turn red at this coming on in the context in which Limbaugh repeatedly uses it.
Like porn, you know it when you see it.
This is after Limbaugh, on the occasion of the recent passing of singer Andy Williams, played a version of "Born Free" which included the sound of jungle animal noises and gunfire in the background. After the song Limbaugh stage whispered: "Oh by the way that's Detroit in the background."
So as long as I may be one of the few people here who monitors Rush Limbaugh, what is frightening is his orders seem to be to mainstream the idea that an economic collapse is coming, of course with special instructions on the tag to set up Obama for the blame. This is nonsense of course. Obama as part of the two-party duopoly bears his share of the blame, but the real blame will reside with the banksters and the Federal Reserve which control both parties, Obama included. It has been discovered as a result of Bernie Sanders.' and Ron Paul's legislation last year that the Fed has issued another $16 trillion in bail-outs to banks, some of them not even American.
That's my report. I've checked out of the two major parties, but I haven't checked out of opposing bigotry and racism when I see it. As far as I'm concerned this is all part of divide and conquer. In the meantime the banksters get away.
New film on the prosecution of Bush to be released
All ancient history, unless you are one of thousands of soldiers living with missing limbs, burn disfigurations, or one of 5,000 families with an empty dinner table seat like a hole in your heart. A new documentary project by famed Los Angeles County prosecutor Vince Bugliosi, "The Prosecution of an America President," is scheduled for release next month.
In the summary section called "Key Judgements" of the classified report which Bush was given, US intelligence said that Saddam Hussein would likely only support terrorist attacks on the US in self-defense, if he felt threatened. The classified National Intelligence Estimate 2002 (NEI 2002) read on page 8:
"Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger cause for making war. Iraq probably would attempt clandestine attacks against the US Homeland if Baghdad feared an attack that threatened the survival of the regime were imminent or unavoidable, or possibly for revenge."
In other words, the classified, full version of the report that Bush had was saying that Saddam knew that if any part or role in a terrorist attack was ever traced back to him, it would be national suicide. In the declassified version given to Congress and the public these words were deleted.
This consensus opinion of US intelligence was contrary to statements by Bush, Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that Saddam presented a direct, immediate threat to the United States, and that he was ready to attack the United States "in as little as 45 minutes."
The Italian Supreme Court has just upheld the convictions of the former CIA Milan station Chief, Robert Seldon Lady, and 22 other CIA agents in an extraordinary rendition and torture case. An extradition request is expected. The precedent has been set that American war criminals can escape American courts, but perhaps not foreign ones....FULL ARTICLE
Version of intelligence Congress was looking at, note goes from "ballistic missile" section to "Discussion"
Version of intelligence Bush was looking at, section in bold at bottom was deleted before report was given to Congress and the public.
Vincent Bugliosi on Intelligence Deleted by Bush, That Saddam Would not Attack, 2008 Impeachment Hearings
2008 TV Ad for State Attorney General Campaign Promising to Prosecute Bush
Imagine that in 2008, instead of bailing out bankers who made criminally risky investments with investors' and depositors' money, we arrested them, bailed out the victims, and let better bankers take over. That is what Iceland did, meeting with a remarkably hushed silence in the American media.
You mean you can arrest a banker? Make them feel steel around their wrists just like anyone else? As Sarah Palin would say, you betcha.
Now it comes out, after Bernie Sanders' and Ron Pauls' recent partial audit of the Federal Reserve, that the Fed has issued another $16 trillion in bail-outs to banks, some of them not even American. Forbes:
The Fed's $16 Trillion Bailouts Under-reported
Tracey Greenstein, Contributor
The media’s inscrutable brush-off of the Government Accounting Office’s recently released audit of the Federal Reserve has raised many questions about the Fed’s goings-on since the financial crisis began in 2008.
The audit of the Fed’s emergency lending programs was scarcely reported by mainstream media – albeit the results are undoubtedly newsworthy. It is the first audit of the Fed in United States history since its beginnings in 1913. The findings verify that over $16 trillion was allocated to corporations and banks internationally, purportedly for “financial assistance” during and after the 2008 fiscal crisis.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) amended the Wall Street Reform law to audit the Fed, pushing the GAO to step in and take a look around. Upon hearing the announcement that the first-ever audit would take place in July, the media was bowled over and nearly every broadcast network and newspaper covered the story. However, the audit’s findings were almost completely overlooked, even with a number as high as $16 trillion staring all of us in the face.
Sanders press release, dated July 21st, stated:
“No agency of the United States government should be allowed to bailout a foreign bank or corporation without the direct approval of Congress and the president.”
Now before anyone starts spinning that what Iceland did reeks of socialism, let's remember that here in the good old US we only socialize the losses, while keeping the profits private. It is the height of hypocrisy to say that arresting banksters is socialism.
Watch Cenk in his usual inimitable way explain how we can learn a lot from Iceland, in the video below.
Bankers jailed, sued as Iceland seeks culprits for crisis
By Haukur Holm (AFP) – May 12, 2010
REYKJAVIK — More than a year and a half after Iceland's major banks failed, all but sinking the country's economy, police have begun rounding up a number of top bankers while other former executives and owners face a two-billion-dollar lawsuit.
Iceland’s special prosecutor into the banking crisis has confirmed that raids have taken place today and that arrests have been made. The Central Bank of Iceland is among the institutions under investigation.
Special Prosecutor, Olafur Thor Hauksson told Visir.is that house searches are taking place in at least three places today as part of investigations into the central bank, MP Bank and Straumur Bank...
2012: Cenk on what we can learn from Iceland
At Crooks and Liars, photographs of the former Icelandic bankers who left their country after the financial crash were stuck on the urinals. (AFP: Olivier Morin, file photo)
Not much to say here. Obama apologists will find a way to excuse it. Romney feels NDAA does not go far enough. Write-in Dennis Kucinich for president?
The new ruling in favor of Obama's right to detain Americans in military custody comes a week after a federal judge struck it down, and ruled it unconstitutional. The administration appealed the decision and won.
The US government filed an "emergency stay" with the US Second District Court on Monday, in a bid to maintain its ability to indefinitely detain any person without charge or trial.
US President Barack Obama speaks before signing the National Defense Authorization Act (Photo: Agence France-Presse/Getty Images) The move comes as a desperate attempt to lift last week's federal court ruling in which Judge Katherine Forrest ruled against a provision of the US National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which allows the military to apprehend anyone, including US citizens, who may be assumed to be a terrorist, or affiliated with terrorists, and in turn detain them indefinitely.
The law, signed by Obama, lead to a lawsuit, which was filed by a large group of journalists and activists, spearheaded by journalist Chris Hedges, who argued that the law was unconstitutional and a threat to free speech.
A single federal appeals court judge put a temporary hold Monday night on a district court judge's ruling blocking enforcement of indefinite detention provisions in a defense bill passed by Congress and signed into law last year by President Barack Obama.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier issued a one-page order staying the district court judge's injunction until a three-judge appeals court panel can take up the issue on September 28.
Lohier offered no explanation or rationale for the temporary stay. However, the Justice Department has asked the appeals court to block the injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Katherine Forrest last Wednesday.
So much for the canard "it doesn't apply to American citizens," so carefully nourished and spread among unwitting believers in hope and change. We can thank law professor Jonathan Turley for putting that to rest, not in the American media of course. He had to go on BBC.
So now we are left with the shreds of a constitutional republic, and nowhere to turn. Earlier in the month Obama punted when Ben Swann asked why his administration was fighting for this power, saying the power to detain US citizens without charge or trial by the US military is not something a president should have, but still not explaining why his administration is fighting for it. What the interview does is cut off at the knees those who would say "Obama is not aware of everything going on in his administration. IT'S NOT HIS FAULT!" Obama was asked point blank. He knows about it.
More and better Democrats. Please see details at YeaRight.com
Daniel Ellsberg does not issue many public appeals or statements, so when he does, we should listen. The former Pentagon analyst and Department of Defense whiz kid's refusal to stay silent helped end the Vietnam War. He makes the talk shows when they are brave enough to have him, since one ever knows what Daniel Ellsberg is going to say.
Now he tells us in truly alarming tones that we must continue to express our opposition to an attack on Iran to the Obama administration, no matter what we are hearing in the media.
President Barack Obama's explicit warning that he will not accept a unilateral Israeli attack against Iran may force Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to step back from his ostensible threat of war.
But in his RootsAction call for petition signatures, also unusual for Ellsberg, he says:
"The danger of a U.S. or Israeli attack on Iran -- either before the election or later -- is real and horrifying. It is crucial that we voice our opposition before it is too late.
"I urge you to add your name to my own and to ask your friends to do the same.
"We've been helping to prevent this attack for years, and we must not give up now."
It can be taken for granted that an attack on Iran will involve the pouring of millions of rounds of depleted uranium ammunition into the country, the effects of which are now seen in Iraq in the form a rate of birth deformities which are 11 times the world average in some parts of the country . The effects are suspected to be due to the radioactive dust which stays in the air and the soil long afterwards.
Typical for American media, what is always missing from the discussion is any broad historical context of US-Iranian relations, a shameful and sorry blot on the US. The average American might think that all dealings with Iran started with the 1979 hostage crisis.
But the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis was triggered when the US allowed the brutal, just-deposed Iranian dictator, the Shah of Iran, to get medical treatment in the US rather than hand him over to the Iranians for justice. Installed by the CIA in 1953, the Shah was by all accounts one of the most sadistic dictators in recent history. The torture methods of his SAVAK secret police included "inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum" (Federation of American Scientists.) The Iranians had every right to want the Shah for trial for crimes against them.
Ellsberg is a strong supporter of Bradley Manning, and often says that what Manning has done took even more courage than what he did, when a true opposition in Congress was willing to stand for whistleblowers. Senator Mike Gravel at that time submitted the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record.
The Pentagon Papers were the classified documents which Ellsberg had seen, which essentially confirmed that the military generals running the Vietnam War believed it could not be won, yet continued to send American boys to their deaths. Ellsberg knew that when he blew the whistle, and leaked the documents to the New York Times, that he would be prosecuted by the Nixon administration.
History often overlooks the fact that Ellsberg knew he could have spent life in prison for his act, and very nearly did.