Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Beware the leader: Pentagon violates Geneva Convention, but blames the bloggers for reporting the facts

اللغة العربية Hamilton said the outrage wasn't the publication, but the government scandal that deserved rebuke.

So too is publishing photographs only part of the problem.

Hamilton said:
"The Question before the Court and you, Gentlemen of the Jury, is not of small nor private Concern, it is not the Cause of a poor Printer, nor of New York alone, which you are now trying: No!

It may in its Consequence affect every Freeman that lives under a British Government on the Main of America. It is the best Cause.

It is the Cause of Liberty; and I make no Doubt but your Upright Conduct this Day will not only entitle you to the Love and Esteem of your Fellow-Citizens; but every Man who prefers Freedom to a Life of Slavery will bless and honor You, as Men who have baffled the Attempt of Tyranny; and by an impartial and uncorrupt Verdict, have laid a noble Foundation for securing to ourselves, our Posterity and our Neighbors, That, to which Nature and the Laws of our Country have given us a Right -- the Liberty -- both of exposing and opposing arbitrary Power (in these parts of the World, at least) by speaking and writing Truth."
The actual problem is that DoD took photographs of him in the first place.

It is irrelevant what Saddam may have done in the past. The US entered Iraq to allegedly bring order and stability. That means meeting that standard, not creating exceptions.

Americans are not barbarians. Yet, their leaders laugh when others are subjected to humiliation.

Supposedly the war is over, the Americans have won. So why is there the need to continue humiliating prisoners contrary to law. Where is the indictment against the prisoner?

Justice means doing justice. Not violating the laws. We see many videos of people shaking hands with the Prisoner. Yet, where is the video of Rumsfeld embracing the prisoner?

How can the humiliation be explained away as "he is an evil man," yet then hide the images of Rumsfeld embracing this prisoner? Either he is evil and Rumsfeld associated with an evil man; or he is a prisoner and is not to be humiliated, yet the Americans want to ignore the images showing their leader embracing a prisoner.

Which is it?

The laws of war are there as guides, not to be explained away or debated out of convenience. The United States says it does not need to be brought before the Hague; that it will discipline its own troops.

Yet, despite the US promise to discipline its troops, the misconduct continues. Who is the United States to lecture anyone about what body can appropriately impose justice when the United States "leaders" laugh at the site of war crimes?

Here's the relevant text from the Geneva Conventions:
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Why is the Pentagon outraged at the newspaper? Not because the newspaper has a problem; but now the world knows that the Pentagon continues to ignore the Geneva Conventions.


A. The United States is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions.

B. Pentagon personnel are violating those Conventions by torturing and humiliating prisoners.

C. There is photograhic evidence of this mistreatment.

D. The United States is blaming the media . . .


Think of the legal consequences of this misconduct. The only catalyst for sanctions is if Saddam Hussein takes the American to court.

Indeed, the courts have already ruled that Guantanamo Prisoners do have standing to bring a cause of action against the United States and the individual prison guards.

If the US continues to mistreat prisoners, the appropriate sanctions on the United States could very well be to dismiss the charges against the prisoners.

At that point, what reason would there have been to invade Iraq? No WMD, no evidence, just allegations. The war is self-evidently unjust -- Americans have not brought freedom, but chaos; have not brought liberty, but humiliation.

Indeed, the war has only emboldened those who might otherwise have done nothing. Now, they have the popular support to do what the US least desires: Revenge.

What excuse will we hear this time to justify these war crimes; or find a scapegoat for the likely failure in prosecuting Saddam for committing crimes against human?

It is absurd for the Americans to sit in judgment, while at the same time violating the standards they choose to impose on others.

It was the alleged violation of these standards which was the pretext to invade. Look in the mirror! The US continues to violate these standards.

Is it not reasonable to assume that other parties, relying on the US's argument, would not similarly take the same actions as the US has done in Iraq, but do so CONUS?

It is both reasonable to assume this; and foreseeable. Before the decision to invade occurred. Yet, we have no plan for this eventuality.

The future has arrived, and the leaders have no plan. Why do we refer to them as leaders?

Call them what they are: Unconstitutional. Lawless. Threats to the Republic. Tryants. Unworthy to call themselves Americans.

The Pentagon's ridiculous response: Blame the bloggers for talking about the Pentagon war crimes.

The right to speak of truth is not one contingent upon government's assent. But it is a fruit of nature. To which all are entitled to eat regardless their standing, whether they be a prisoner at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib or on the CIA Rendition express; or one who freely chooses to type in a blog.

Bloggers are not prisoners nor slaves. We are born free. And only government or forces of intimidation can take that freedom away.

But when facing an enemy that will kill its own citizens, lie in open court, and doctor evidence: Who needs any justification to fight, to prevail, and simply be free?

We have already fought this battle. These words already inscribed in the constitution. To fight tyranny at home is not simply protected, it is a right and arguably fully protected under 42 USC 1983, the US Constitution, and US Declaration of Independence.

Simply re-read Hamilton's words: To fight tyranny is a right. There is nothing unlawful with opposing that which is morally devoid of legal foundation.

Nor may the government credibly argue that it can "change a contract" to require free people to do that which is unlawful. Those agreements are not enforceable as they are designed to achieve an unlawful purpose.

A contract, for it to be enforceable, must be for a lawful purpose. The contracts which bind us to these unlawful acts can be broken without fear of consequences.

Indeed, there may be a battle. There may be bloodshed just as we saw in Uzbekistan. But in the end, there is no legal foundation for that which is tyrannical and unwilling to submit to the rule of law.

Arguably, this leadership long ago embarked on that path. The moment they chose to invade without foundation; when they agreed to torture without regard to treaties; and when they chose to silence those who they are there to serve.

We are not your puppets. Nor are we here as your fodder for you to hide behind.

It is time you show yourselves, stop hiding behind your silly arguments, and come before the American people to explain yourself without the support of an ear-piece, without the crutch of talking papers, and answer for what you continue to do.

If the Pentagon chooses to silence those who speak the truth, then let us all be clear with what is going on: The Pentagon has declared war on freedom, nature, and all bloggers.

The Pentagon shall lose this battle.

Feel free to retract your statements, or give up your unlawful grab on power. Your position shall crumble, either from within or without.

Freedom never left. Rather, the Pentagon will be left knocking on freedom's door.

You will never be invited back.

Choose wisely. There are over 300 Million of us. Do you plan to enslave us all and threaten all of us with silence?

You deserve to be mocked more!

America is already distracted in Iraq. And there are forces threatening to attack once again.

How will the Pentagon possibly defend both America and a legal "position" that has no foundation, yet hope to possibly stop the world from discussing the truth?

US military forces at odds with public momentum

The United States military has three diverging problems:

  • 1. All combat-ready ground forces are gone, already assigned overseas in Iraq [not located CONUS, nor available to cover a second state-side front]; there are no ready reserves available;

  • 2. Credible threats of CONUS attacks [away from troops in Iraq]; the possibility for an attack is real, yet American leaders have no credible plan to quickly move combat forces from Iraq back to the United States; and

  • 3. Crumbling moral-foundations/popular support, or elan.

    The civilian population is getting blamed for the government's self-evident failures. Despite these failures, it would please me if you would explain:

  • Do you plan to call into service even less qualified civilians to commit abuse on their peers?

  • Do you plan to have a 24-hour curfew to keep you safe from someone saying "boo" -- you don't even bother calling "the leader" when there's an unknown threat circling the Mayonnaise Jar!

    What is most absurd is this war was a choice. A choice to ignore the 52 FAA warnings; a choice to invade without evidence; and a choice to intimidate CIA analysts to keep quiet about what is actually going on.

    These choices continue without regard to the rule of law.

    It was your choice

    With 'leaders' like this, who needs enemies? They cannot plan, their forces are outnumbered, and now they proudly alienate last source of support: It's greatest national resource -- free citizens.

    Yet, these "leaders" hey want to be isolated as pretext to lash out. That is not leadership. That is playing, "I'm a victim because the press spoke the truth. . . "

    Are we to believe that criminals like drug dealers and war criminals deserve to make a living committing crimes as they have no other livelihood?

    It is self-evident the "leaders" should be locked away, to protect free citizens from this absurdity and power grab.

    The rules are they as guides, not as hurdles to be explained away. The law is a body of wisdom to guide conduct, it is not an excuse to engage in abuse or mistreat civilians, employees, or foes.

    Even when the battle is over, victory declared, these "leaders" choose to continue to impose their arbitrary power on the vulnerable.

    That is not leadership. That is recklessness.

    Leaders cannot lead people who no longer have lawful reasons to follow. A leader can either resign, or he can be removed from power through the law.

    Yet if the Congress will not remove him, and he will not resign, the third alternative is to simply refuse to interact. Free citizens do not have to bid on government contracts; free citizens do not have to show up to work; nor do free people have to follow unlawful, reckless directions.

    A leader without followers is powerless. There is no reason to listen to these people. They are leader in name only, but they are not reliable. They squander the national wealth. They engage in unlawful conduct.

    Yet, their only solution is to blame the vulnerable, blame those who know the facts. That is not leadership. That is arrogance, denial, and foolishness.

    Yet, what of the staffers in Washington, DC--how can anyone who works for these "leaders' possibly continue their work? Each day the staffers must arrive at work, turn off their brain, and mindless go through the motions of leadership.

    All the while they simply engage in more what fuels a reckless machine.

    Have you ignored history? The Nazis didn't appear out of the blue. Millions had to give up their minds, blindly obey, and freely choose to embrace the foolishness.

    And this is where America finds itself. Free citizens blamed for the reckless government leadership. And the staffers continue to support the outlaws.

    For shame! You are no example to your children, your peers, or those who see what is self-evident.

    With so many arguments, we see the Pentagon's true nature.

    Absurdity! Your leadership deserve to mocked louder. Your admirals and generals cannot stop freedom.

    You will lose. And you have yet to successfully defeat either the bloggers or the greater American population.

    You self-evident fools! Go home!

    Hoc Voluerunt!