The court accepted that nine men had been tortured and that the tortures were of a “horrifying” nature BUT the responsible party who issued the commands and sanctions avoids accepting responsibility for his actions!

As part of the maturation process most of us learn to accept responsibility for our actions; it should be cause for concern when we learn that the world's most powerful military nation is led by pathologically stunted, infantile personalities who refuse to accept any responsibility for actions that have resulted in death and destruction. The leaders of the coalition have all avoided the responsibility for the most heinous crime committed this century – the death of over half-a-million civilians in Iraq. Notwithstanding the multitude of other offences these sick individuals have committed with impunity.

Eliminating an independent judiciary and introducing new laws designed to protect ruling elites is common practice for criminal governments. The dictator of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, effectively silenced opposition by implementing draconian new ‘defamation’ laws. So-called anti-terror laws have been introduced by coalition leaders to suppress opposition and silence their opponents; we all remember the popular media chant of “new sweeping terrorists laws” designed to rob local populations of their rights. But most recently is the Nazi style sacking of eight U.S. attorneys who didn’t support the current Bush regime. No one should be surprised by the exoneration of a known war criminal (Rumsfeld) who held a high position in a criminal regime. However, EVERYONE should be deeply OFFENDED!

Fortunately for the free and civilised world the people have recourse when the legal system fails. Removing protective barriers that prevent the prosecution of known war criminals is as easy as mandating a new government with the appropriate power, for example, electing representatives whose platform includes the apprehension of known war criminals, regardless of any position they may hold, including the highest office in the land! Electing representatives whose platform includes a particular action is the surest means of swift and legal justice. Known war criminals such as Howard, Bush and Blair would be liable to IMMEDIATE incarceration if mandated by the people. The slower and more prone to risk approach is via legislation, however, that approach may not reflect the will of the people as powerful interests are capable of corrupting members once a new government has been formed. Nevertheless, a government would find it extremely difficult to reverse or overturn mandates critical to its tenability.

Today the choice is easy, all major parties are corrupt; choice therefore reduces to a narrow field of independents who openly and unreservedly represent the will of the majority as opposed to powerful minority interests. Integrity is extremely easy to identify these days as it contrasts dramatically with the lying sociopaths who currently lead us. It has been decades since government truly represented the will of the people.

The world today is an open book, no one is able to hide their crimes; nefarious forces rely instead on support from huge corporate and financial interests. Maintaining crippling debt levels and reducing accessibility to quality social services (education etc) keep populations ill-informed and manageable.

People with integrity have never been easier to identify; the solution for the immediate future is clear. Values expressed by corrupt governments today are the values of Corporate and Financial interests NOT the values of the vast majority of people.

I leave you with the power to alter the course of the nation. Choose wisely those who would lead you.

I rarely conclude with a reiteration but the circumstances warrant it: “No one should be surprised by the exoneration of a known war criminal (Rumsfeld) who held a high position in a criminal regime. However, EVERYONE should be deeply OFFENDED!”

Peace.


Story from BBC NEWS:

Rumsfeld torture suit dismissed

27 March, 2007 -- A US court has dismissed a lawsuit against former US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld over claims prisoners were tortured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The court accepted that the nine men who sued had been tortured - and detailed the torture in its ruling.

But Judge Thomas Hogan ruled the five Iraqis and four Afghans did not have US constitutional rights, and also that Mr Rumsfeld was immune from such suits.

Two human rights groups brought the suit against him and three officers.

Judge Hogan threw out the claims against retired Lt Gen Ricardo Sanchez, the former commander of US military forces in Iraq, Col Thomas Pappas and former Brig Gen Janis Karpinski, both former commanders at Abu Ghraib prison.

In a ruling stretching to nearly 60 pages, the chief judge of the US district court for the District of Columbia said the allegations of torture were "horrifying".

Details of abuse

The nine men suffered abuse including being:

* hung upside-down and slapped until they lost consciousness
* stabbed with knives
* subjected to electric shocks
* deprived of sleep by loud noises and bright lights
* grabbed by aggressive dogs

They also were subjected to sexual humiliation.

None was ever charged with a crime.

All were released after detentions of one month to one year. Some were detained multiple times.

The complaint alleged that the three officers knew torture and abuse were occurring and were present when officers under their command were committing torture and abuse.

The complaint against Mr Rumsfeld - brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First - focused on an order he signed in December 2002 authorising new methods for interrogating prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Both groups say he later ignored overwhelming evidence that the policies resulted in prisoner abuse.

Mr Rumsfeld has apologised for the abuse scandals.

He was removed as defence secretary following the defeat of President Bush's Republican party in elections last year.


© BBC MMVII

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6501499.stm