Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Special Prosecutor Must Investigate the 9/11 Sacred Myth as Iran-contra Styled Special Counsel

The paradox of exposing the real facts about 9/11 is that these facts may lead to revolution: a precise reason to do 9/11 as a false-flag attack in the first place.

According to the Ford doctrine, if prosecuting Richard Nixon would be "too traumatic" for the American people, this becomes a reason for future Presidents to do even worse crimes and believe they will get away with it.

The Robert Jackson Steering Committee was formed at a September 2008 conference in Andover, Mass. Watch video.

Was 9/11 the extreme dark side of American exceptionalism? Were generations of Americans deeply brainwashed by television to believe their "parental" government and media could not do an Operations Northwoods false-flag attack? Even as such a false-flag attack almost occurred in 1962? Thus empowering this government as the Machiavellian manipulator? Such a diabolical PsyOps would indeed be "too disturbing" and "too sophisticated" for the average American to handle, making it an ideal scheme for the true Machiavellian. But what about the Court? The 9/11 Truth movement confronts the powerful emotions generated by this covert PsyOps operation. Will 9/11 mark the new Age of Mind Control and the death of the Age of Reason? If full revelation of the Operation is "too disturbing" for the American people, will this not become a reason to repeat such false-flag attacks or much worse? In one of its most important interpretations of the doctrine of separation of powers, the Supreme Court upheld the Federal law that provides for independent prosecutors to investigate suspected crimes by high-ranking officials.

To retain our Constitution's rational framework, we must push for an Independent Prosecutor with full authority and full independence to get the facts to the most powerful Mind Control event in human history. 9/11's "sacred myth" must be fully exposed as a powerful instrument of military PsyOps. Americans are unaware of the power of the executive branch to create the sacred myth through covert terror and the extent to which they have been brainwashed.

Indeed, the sole mission of military PsyOps "shock and awe" is to employ your own belief system against you in a profound and traumatic fashion. Thus making it nearly impossible to prosecute false-flag "terror" attacks in a real Court.

The most disturbing fact about this PsyOps will be the revelation that the American people are being brainwashed, beginning at childhood. Will you have the courage to stand up for children?

Hitler's Big Lie Method of Mass Mind Control.

The Court's 7-to-1 ruling was a stunning rebuff to the Reagan Administration, which had been awash in investigations of its officials and former officials. The law provides for judges to appoint special prosecutors in such cases, insulated from Presidential control. The Administration argued that this was an unconstitutional encroachment on the power of the President.

The decision was one of nine rulings the Court handed down on an unusually busy day, the last full opinions of its 1987-1988 term. The special prosecutor decision upholds a measure of Congressional power to curb what many political conservatives believe to be the absolute constitutional authority of the executive branch to appoint, control and remove Federal prosecutors.

The Court showed no sympathy for the sweeping view of the President's inherent constitutional powers that was urged upon it by political conservatives, who have pressed for judicial invalidation of the special prosecutor law and of an array of other Congressional restraints on the executive branch.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who wrote the opinion for the Court, rejected the various arguments for invalidating the law, concluding that the law does not violate any specific constitutional provision and ''does not violate the separation-of-powers principle by impermissibly interfering with the functions of the executive branch.'' The special prosecutor law had been denounced by many conservative legal thinkers, and supported by many liberals. Nevertheless, Chief Justice Rehnquist, perhaps the best known conservative legal theorist in the recent history of the Court, who confounded expectations that he would support the Administration on the issue.

Justice Antonin Scalia, in a passionate 38-page dissent, said the Court had subverted the Constitution's separation of powers in what he called ''one of the most important opinions the Court has issued in many years.'' Scalia Dissents From Bench

Summarizing his dissent aloud from the bench, which is rarely done, he said in a nine-minute statement that ''what is at issue in this case is purely executive power, quintessentially executive power to prosecute,'' and that the law had an ''intimidating effect'' on Presidential advisers in disputes with Congress.

The decision takes away a key argument from defense lawyers representing several former Administration officials who were being investigated for Iran-contra or had been prosecuted by independent counsels, as the special prosecutors are formally called. Among them were two former close Reagan aides, Michael K. Deaver and Lyn Nofziger, who are appealing criminal convictions obtained by special prosecutors.

The decision also removed a potential impediment to Lawrence E. Walsh, the special prosecutor investigating the Iran-contra affair, who has obtained indictments of Oliver L. North; John M. Poindexter, a former National Security Adviser, and three others.

Mr. Walsh said that the law ''provides a workable solution to a difficult problem,'' adding, ''we are gratified'' by the decision. The decision was also praised by many members of Congress and by the American Bar Association, which had filed a brief supporting the law.

President Reagan would not comment today, saying, ''I can't comment on individual cases.'' Marlin Fitzwater, the White House spokesman, said that despite Mr. Reagan's doubts about the law, the decision ''will have no practical effect on the Administration's implementation of the Independent Counsel Act or the ongoing investigations.'' Special Prosecutor Law Upheld

The decision overturned a 2-to-1 ruling by the Federal appeals court here, which had held the special prosecutor law to be an unconstitutional transfer of executive authority to the courts by Congress, and had assailed the law as unfair to officials covered by it.

Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinion was joined by Justices William J. Brennan Jr., Byron R. White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry A. Blackmun, John Paul Stevens and Sandra Day O'Connor. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy had disqualified himself in the case, without stating his reasons.

The President elevated Mr. Rehnquist from Associate Justice to Chief Justice in 1986. He also appointed Justice O'Connor, Justice Scalia and Justice Kennedy.

The Watergate-inspired special prosecutor law was first passed in 1978, as part of the Ethics in Government Act, to insulate investigations and prosecutions of high-level executive branch officials from Presidential control. It was re-enacted with minor amendments in 1982, with the name being changed to ''independent counsel,'' and again last year. How the Law Operates

The law requires the Attorney General first to conduct a preliminary investigation of allegations that any of certain enumerated high-ranking executive branch officials may have committed a crime, and then to ask a special three-judge Federal appellate court here to appoint an independent counsel to complete the investigation and conduct any prosecutions unless the allegations prove insubstantial.

The law provides that the Attorney General may remove a special prosecutor from office ''only for good cause,'' and subject to judicial review.

The decision upheld an appeal from the appellate ruling by Alexia Morrison, one of several special prosecutors who are currently operating.

It means she can resume her investigation of Theodore B. Olson, a former Justice Department official, and two other former officials to determine whether they misled Congress in 1983 in a dispute over alleged political manipulation of the toxic waste cleanup program by Administration officials.

Ms. Morrison said she was ''delighted not just by the opinion but by the near-unanimity.''

The power balance between the executive and legislative branches has figured in several major Supreme Court decisions in recent years. In 1983, the Court supported executive authority by ruling that Congress may not overrule executive regulations through a ''legislative veto'' mechanism, although it may do so by passing new legislation. In 1986, the Court held that Congress could not set up a mechanism for automatic budget cuts that gave final authority to an official who was removable by Congress itself.

Today, while it did not make broad pronouncements about the separation of powers, Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinion clarified the limits of those earlier rulings.

''The clear message of these decisions taken together is that the Court is willing to allow Congress some leeway in putting limitations on executive power but that it is wholly unwilling to permit Congress to participate in administering the laws itself or through its agents,'' said Alan B. Morrison, a Washington lawyer who filed a brief as a friend of the Court supporting the special prosecutor law. He was also on the winning side in the 1983 and 1986 decisions.

In particular, Chief Justice Rehnquist's reasoning seemed to rule out any adoption by the Court of suggestions by Attorney General Edwin Meese 3d and some other conservatives that it is unconstitutional for Congress to insulate regulatory agencies like the Federal Trade Commission from Presidential control.

In the case decided today, Chief Justice Rehnquist rejected the challenges to the special prosecutor law by the Administration and others point by point.

First, he said, appointment of special prosecutors by the courts was valid under the Constitution's provision that ''the Congress may vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper'' in courts of law. He rejected arguments that special prosecutors' powers were so broad that they were not ''inferior officers'' and that the appointments clause was not intended to allow judges to appoint prosecutors.

Second, Chief Justice Rehnquist said the limited powers given by the law to the special three-judge court to choose a special prosecutor when requested by the Attorney General, and to exercise limited supervision, did not involve judges in matters inconsistent with their duties under Article III of the Constitution.

Third, he said the law's limitation of the Attorney General's power to remove special prosecutors, and other provisions, did not violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

The law did not amount to ''Congressional usurpation of executive branch functions,'' Chief Justice Rehnquist said, because it gave Congress no control over special prosecutors.

He added that while special prosecutors are independent to some degree, the law ''gives the executive branch sufficient control over the independent counsel to insure that the President is able to perform his constitutionally assigned duties.''

Acts of Torture, a Mask for CIA Mind Control Operations

Lawrence Velvel is chairman of the Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference On Planning For The Prosecution of High Level American War Criminals, or the Robert Jackson Steering Committee for short.

Other members:

Ben Davis, a law Professor at the University of Toledo College of Law, where he teaches Public International Law and International Business Transactions. He is the author of numerous articles on international and related domestic law.

Marjorie Cohn, a law Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, Calif., and President of the National Lawyers Guild.

Chris Pyle, a Professor at Mount Holyoke College, where he teaches Constitutional law, Civil Liberties, Rights of Privacy, American Politics and American Political Thought, and is the author of many books and articles.

Elaine Scarry, the Walter M. Cabot Professor of Aesthetics and the General Theory of Value at Harvard University, and winner of the Truman Capote Award for Literary Criticism.

Peter Weiss, vice president of the Center For Constitutional Rights, of New York City, which was recently involved with war crimes complaints filed in Germany and Japan against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others.

David Swanson, author, activist and founder of AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, of Charlottesville, Va.

Kristina Borjesson, an award-winning print and broadcast journalist for more than twenty years and editor of two recent books on the media.

Colleen Costello, Staff Attorney of Human Rights, USA, of Washington, D.C., and coordinator of its efforts involving torture by the American government.

Valeria Gheorghiu, attorney for Workers’ Rights Law Center.

Andy Worthington, a British historian and journalist and author of books dealing with human rights violations.


Joint Statement Released February 2009: Here.


Propelling prisoners' heads into concrete walls by means of towels wrapped around their necks, savage beatings with fists and rifles that left prisoners crippled, hanging prisoners by the arms with their arms strung up behind them, depriving prisoners of sleep for weeks on end, which has been thought the worst torture possible for 500 years, causing prisoners to freeze -- sometimes to death, and waterboarding are but a partial list of the torture methods ordered by America's highest officials. In the "Preliminary Memorandum of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference on Federal Prosecutions of War Criminals," law school Dean Lawrence Velvel, the founder of the Jackson Conference, details the full spectrum of tortures performed in wholesale combinations -- not one torture by itself -- on detainees around the world. His Preliminary Memorandum is a precursor to a formal legal complaint to be filed with the Justice Department this spring.

The Preliminary Memorandum identifies 31 culprits and details the war crimes they committed, the laws they broke, and the many fulsome warnings they received regarding their actions from numerous governmental lawyers and officials high and low, including the Judge Advocate Generals of all the armed services. The culprits who should be prosecuted include Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Addington, Tenet, Bybee, Yoo, Haynes, Chertoff and others.

The Preliminary Memorandum calls the Bush administration's illegal acts "an attempted constitutional revolution that succeeded for years." It began six days after 9/11, when Bush secretly gave the CIA permission to "murder . . . people all over the world." It continued in a series of secret, wholly specious legal memos authorizing torture, electronic eavesdropping, wholesale violations of law, and Presidential usurpation of the role of Congress.

Public pressure eventually forced the administration to declassify a few of the memos. These purported to authorize war crimes outlawed by the Geneva Conventions and U.S. anti-torture laws. Among them was John Yoo's infamous "torture memo" defining torture as "requiring the pain associated with organ failure or death," saying torture supposedly couldn't exist if the torturer wanted information, and urging that the President could do anything he wanted, including paying no attention whatever to Congressional laws. Meanwhile, Bush administration officials and lawyers ignored extensive warnings given them by government officials that they were engaging in criminal acts; the warnings were given both orally and in extensive memos.




An extensive complaint seeking federal prosecution of American officials who ordered, authorized, approved or committed war crimes is currently being prepared. While the complaint is in preparation, the Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference is issuing this preliminary memorandum setting forth several of the points to be presented more extensively in the complaint itself. Such points include the acts of torture and abuse which constitute war crimes, the high level individuals of the American Government who ordered, authorized, or approved these acts plus some of the lower level officials who committed them, and the warnings of illegality and immorality given to the culpable American officials -- as news of their secret actions slowly began to percolate within the Executive branch -- by persons ranging from FBI officials on the ground, to other executive investigative personnel on the ground, to military Judge Advocates General, to general counsels of the armed services. These warnings of illegality and immorality given by knowledgeable and experienced persons were ignored by the small group of high Executive officers who were determined that America would torture and abuse its prisoners and who had the decisionmaking power to secretly require this to be done.

We note that the information in this preliminary memorandum on criminal acts, officials who authorized them or carried them out, and warnings of criminality and illegality which were ignored, has become available in the last four years in a host of investigatory books, investigatory articles, initially secret government memoranda which have now been publicly released, internal governmental investigations, statements of present and former governmental officials and generals (e.g., Dick Cheney and Antonio Taguba), investigatory television programs, legal complaints and other legal documents, transcripts of interviews, congressional hearings and congressional reports (such as the recent report of the Senate Armed services’ Committees).

Among the books which extensively detail the matters written of here are Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side, Philippe Sands’ The Torture Team, Jack Goldsmith’s The Terror Presidency (Goldsmith is a former head of the Office of Legal Counsel), and Steven Wax’s Kafka Comes To America.


There are a large number of “standard” acts of torture and abuse that were committed on the order or authorization of this country’s highest officials. What the public generally does not realize is that these acts were not committed in isolation, one from the other. Instead they were committed in combination, with up to ten or fifteen being perpetrated on a single detainee.

Nor were the acts isolated from each other in time. Rather, many detainees were subjected to combinations of tortures for weeks and months in a row. One detainee was tortured by combinations for 54 straight days without let up. Others were tortured by combinations for several weeks in a row. The torture of sensory deprivation by isolating a detainee in a single small room, sometimes with black-out goggles over his eyes and sound-stopping plugs for his ears, and sometimes with the prisoner being kept in a tiny slot the size of a coffin, was carried on for years with regard to some prisoners, with the prisoners also being subjected to other tortures during this period.

Though torture is illegal whether the victim is innocent or guilty, many of the prisoners upon whom torture was practiced proved to be innocent -- estimates of the innocent run up to 50 percent and higher.

The acts of torture and abuse that were regularly practiced on order or authorization of this country’s highest officials included:

· Savage Beatings. Prisoners were severely and regularly beaten with clubs, rifles and fists. They were beaten to the point that bones were broken, ribs were fractured, and prisoners sometimes were killed.

It is already known that at least two prisoners, one now known to be falsely accused, were beaten to death at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, that a third savagely beaten prisoner, Manadel al-Jamadi, died, within one hour of entering Abu Ghraib, because of beatings that fractured six ribs and then being hung by the arms, with his arms secured behind him (not over his head) in the so-called “Palestinian hanging” position. It is Jamadi’s corpse, packed in ice, with a grinning female American soldier named Sabrina Harman giving the thumbs up sign, that is in the infamous photograph from Abu Ghraib.

· Peroneal Strikes. Peroneal strikes are a specific form of savage beating, consisting of blows to the soft tissue and nerves just above the knee. The falsely accused prisoner beaten to death at Bagram had been given so many peroneal strikes that a coroner testified that his leg tissue had ‘“basically been pulpified.’”

· Sleep Deprivation. Though the matter is not widely understood by the public, the effects of sleep deprivation are extremely serious. In addition to becoming weary, a person’s electrolyte balance changes, a mental haze forms, balance evaporates and the prisoner wants only one thing in the world: to be allowed to sleep. The person becomes delusional, and it has been known since the Middle Ages that sleep deprivation produces false confessions because the prisoner will say anything to be allowed to sleep. An American Bar Association Report has said that ‘“It has been known since 1500 at least that deprivation of sleep is the most effective torture and certain to produce any confession desired.’” (Emphasis added.)

There reportedly were prisoners who were deprived of sleep for a dozen days, and other prisoners deprived of sleep for 96 hours in a row. Still other prisoners were intermittently deprived of sleep for three months. One prisoner, while being subjected to numerous other tortures as well, was allowed to sleep no more than a total of four hours a day for 54 straight days.

· Waterboarding. The water torture, now called waterboarding, has been a torture since the Spanish Inquisition. It was used by the Americans to torture Filipinos after the Spanish American War; it was used by the Nazi Gestapo; Japanese officers committed it upon Americans and were executed for their acts after World War II; it was used by the French in Algiers, by Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge, and by Latin American dictatorships such as Chile and Argentina. It has been used on prisoners held by the Americans, sometimes at the apparently express command of George Bush. Some of the Americans’ prisoners have been waterboarded many times.

Waterboarding is not simulated drowning. It is actual slow drowning. It usually produces panic and hysteria. A number of Americans, including Americans who did waterboarding of prisoners, underwent waterboardings themselves to see what it was like: some lasted as few as five second before they broke and none lasted more than ten or fifteen seconds. When waterboarding prisoners, American torturers would sometimes deliberately bring them to the brink of death.

Waterboarding is so awful that, to avoid this unlawful act being seen, the CIA lied to the 9/11 Commission and to federal Judge Brinkema by falsely telling them it had no videotapes of the waterboarding of prisoners. The CIA then further obstructed justice by destroying the tapes rather than allowing them to be seen even by officials in the three branches of the federal government.

· Hanging By The Arms. A highly excruciating “stress position” torture used on many prisoners, sometimes every day for two to three months, is hanging them by their arms, often or usually on tiptoe, for up to eight hours at a stretch. The prisoners’ wrists and arms are shackled while they hang. Excruciating pain arises because ankles double in size, blisters erupt, skin “tenses,” and shackles cut through the skin of the ankles and wrists.

In the version of hanging by the arms known as “Palestinian hangings,” the arms are not stretched directly above the head, but are instead stretched behind the body.

· Slamming A Prisoner’s Head Into Concrete Walls. In this torture a towel is wrapped around a prisoner’s neck and is then used to propel the prisoner head first into a concrete wall. Subsequently, instead of using a towel, the CIA used a plastic strip around the neck like a dog collar, with the strip being attached to a lead so that the torturer could have better leverage in propelling the prisoner head first into a concrete wall.

This torture was so fraught with risk of serious injury to or death of a prisoner that the CIA kept a doctor on hand at all times to guard against death or crippling injury. The physician was, of course, violating medical ethics by assisting in the perpetration of torture.

· Additional “Stress Positions” And Electric Shocks. Hanging prisoners by their arms with only their toes touching the ground, and “Palestinian hangings,” were only two of the “stress positions” used as tortures. Prisoners were also chained to walls in a way that forced them to maintain a painful crouch. They were chained to the floor in the same way or in a fetal position with hands and feet chained, and were kept naked and forced to defecate and urinate on themselves. They were hung by the arms with their feet on a drum through which electric shocks were applied to their feet; the shocks would cause the feet to “dance” so that the prisoners’ full weight was on their arms, excruciatingly. They were hung by their arms with their feet and legs in water.

· Extremes Of Hot And Cold. Prisoners were subjected to extremes of hot and cold. Cells would be kept at over 100 degrees, and then switched to freezing temperatures with air conditioners going full blast. Cold water would repeatedly be thrown on prisoners who were being kept in frigid temperatures for up to a month. At least one prisoner is known to have frozen to death after he was left in a freezing cell, wet and naked. (There has been no accounting of the number of prisoners who were killed by American torture, though estimates run to several dozen. Nor has the prisoner who froze to death ever been identified. He just “‘disappeared from the face of the earth,’” and the CIA supervisor of his torture was reportedly promoted.)

· Tiny Cages, Hoods And Duct Tape, Lack Of Medical Care And Food, Torture By Continuous Strobe Lights And Continuous Noise, And Other Tortures. Prisoners were kept in tiny slot-like cells and in small boxes that were like coffins. They were kept hooded and with duct tape over their mouths. Their wounds were left untreated, and they were denied medical care and pain killers. They were denied food. They were threatened by vicious dogs. They were threatened with death, with being buried alive, and their families were threatened. Their cells were flooded with continuous, never ending light, including strobe lights, and they were subjected to never-ceasing loud music. At other times they were kept in pitch dark.

· Ghost Detainees. Prisoners known as “ghost detainees” were kept “off the books,” so that nobody, including their families, would know they were in custody, to avoid any oversight by Congress, the courts, and the International Red Cross, and to avoid any knowledge on the part of the media or public. Keeping prisoners “off the books” in this way is in itself a war crime, and was done to facilitate torture of prisoners.

· Renditions For Torture. Infamously, prisoners were “rendered” to other countries for torture. Men were kidnapped off the street, hooded, shackled, sedated by anal suppositories or syringe injections, dressed in jump suits, and flown by private Gulfstream jets (registered to dummy corporations) to countries such as Egypt, Syria and Uzbekistan to be tortured at the behest of the CIA. These persons were “disappeared,” as had occurred in Chile under Pinochet. Torture practiced by one of the countries they were given to, Egypt, was long known to include beatings with metal rods and whips, being suspended from ceilings or door frames, electric shocks, and dousing with cold water. The CIA was able to give questions to Egyptian torturers in the morning and get answers by the evening. In Syria, it was known, torture included electric shocks, “pulling out fingernails, freezing cells, forcing objects into the rectum” and “hyper-extending the spine” to fracture or near fracture. Uzbekistan has long engaged in boiling people -- they are placed in water which is raised to boiling temperature.

It is not yet known how many people were kidnapped and rendered to other countries for torture, but confirmed cases range from a low of 117 to at least 150. Every rendition to torture was approved by the CIA’s General Counsel, and rendition for torture excited and was personally encouraged by George W. Bush, who wanted to brag about it publicly but was unable to because some of the participating governments were fearful that their own populations might learn what they were doing.

Though the Executive has made every effort to keep renditions secret, information has leaked out. Thus it is already known, for example, that at least seven of the persons who were rendered and tortured were innocent. (Sometimes mistaken identity was involved, as when an innocent “rendee” had the same Arab name as a possible culprit (much like two Americans might both be named George Thomas.) Federal judges such as David Trager and T.S. Ellis, III refused to allow cases brought by innocent but tortured persons to proceed against the federal government, lest the government be forced to disclose information it desires to keep secret. Such torture-promoting decisions may constitute war crimes in themselves under principles applied against Nazi judges and lawyers at Nuremberg in the Alstotter case.

* * * * * *

The foregoing acts, singly and in combination, violate numerous international treaties and domestic statutes. In particular they violate Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the federal War Crimes Act, and the federal Antitorture Statute. These laws outlaw torture, other war crimes, breaches of Common Article 3, cruelty, infliction of serious physical or mental pain, degrading or inhumane treatment, death threats against the prisoner or his relatives, violence against prisoners or abuse of prisoners, other similar conduct, or grave breaches of Geneva Conventions rules that bar such acts.

The punishments provided for violation of the federal laws range up to life imprisonment, and execution if the tortured prisoner was killed. These are serious penalties for serious acts, showing the seriousness with which this country has regarded torture and abuse of prisoners prior to the Bush administration. Nor can there be any legitimate dispute that laws against torture and abuse have been violated -- wholesale.


The persons already known to be responsible for ordering, authorizing or carrying out the torture and abuse which constitute war crimes include government officials and politicians who ordered these actions, CIA officials who committed the actions, and lawyers (who sometimes were also officials and/or politicians) who carried out the bidding of the politicians and CIA by creating false, professionally incompetent memoranda claiming that acts of torture were legal. The lawyers acted in the “tradition” of the lawyers and judges who were convicted at Nuremberg because they aided the commission of war crimes, or, as has been said, in the “tradition” of mob lawyers who invent justifications for the unlawful actions of the mob.

The government officials and politicians who are guilty of war crimes, and violations of both international law and domestic statutes, include George Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, Tim Flanigan, Lewis Libby, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith, Stephen Cambone, John Ashcroft, Michael Chertoff, Michael Dunlavey, Geoffrey Miller, and to a lesser extent, because he sometimes tried to stop the torture in which he was complicit, Colin Powell. Gonzales, Addington, Flanigan, Feith, Dunlavey, Libby, Ashcroft and Chertoff are lawyers as well as officials and/or politicians. The CIA officials who are guilty of war crimes include George Tenet, Cofer Black, James Pavitt, Scott Muller and John Rizzo (who are lawyers), David Becker, and a woman whose name is classified and who is therefore publicly identified only as a spiky-haired, red-headed person who, as head of the CIA’s Al Qaeda unit, insisted on and for no apparent reason flew abroad to see the waterboarding of a prisoner. (She also was a CIA briefer of George Bush). The lawyers who are guilty of war crimes, as well as those named above, include Jay Bybee, John Yoo, Jim Haynes, Robert Delahunty, Patrick Philbin, Steven Bradbury, Diane Beaver, Mary Walker and to a somewhat lesser extent, because he at least withdrew the professionally incompetent memo of August 1, 2002 authorizing war crimes, Jack Goldsmith. (Goldsmith did not withdraw the torture memo because he was in disagreement with the kind of actions it approved, but because he was appalled by its professional incompetence. He did not disagree with the recommended actions, and did not withdraw the second memo of August 1, 2002, which listed specifically authorized techniques of torture. Rationalizing his action regarding the second memo, he claimed, among other things, that he did not know if the techniques -- which included waterboarding -- were torture. Also, he authored a memo unlawfully authorizing prisoners to be removed from Iraq for interrogation in other countries, where they were tortured, and he participated extensively in authorizing illegal wiretapping.)


The ordering of torture and abuse of prisoners was part of a larger view of Executive prerogative held by several leading actors, especially Dick Cheney and David Addington. Both of them propounded their view since at least the 1980s. And, when Executive officials showed compunctions about continuing to carry out those views during the administration of G.W. Bush, the very powerful Cheney would vigorously oppose such “backsliding,” while the large, physically imposing Addington, who was known to speak as the voice of the powerful Cheney (his boss), would aggressively browbeat those who had qualms about what was being done.

The view of Executive authority imposed by Cheney and Addington, carried out by a group of powerful acolytes who were officials and/or lawyers, and approved by George W. Bush, was that the Executive was all powerful. The Executive could break the laws of the United States, as with the FISA law and laws against torture. The Executive could secretly and bindingly opine, through the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) of the Department of Justice, that Congress and the laws of the United States could not stop the Executive from doing whatever it wished, as was exemplified in secret OLC memos, including memos falsely authorizing torture and abuse of prisoners. The Executive could even announce that parts of U.S. laws would be ignored, as with scores or hundreds of signing statements. The Executive could refuse to tell Congress what it was doing and could, indeed, even hide its actions from the leaders of Congressional committees with jurisdiction over those actions. The Executive was, in short, all powerful and Congress was merely a cipher.

As now widely recognized, this Cheney/Addington view -- signed onto by their acolytes, by George Bush, and at least partly endorsed publicly by some individuals whom George Bush has appointed to the Supreme Court -- was an attempted constitutional revolution. It was, moreover, an attempted constitutional revolution which succeeded for several years (at least partly because the so-called mass media went along with it).

With regard to torture and abuse, the unlawful ordering and authorization of war crimes proceeded on two parallel but intimately related tracks. One was the civilian track involving the Department of Justice, the CIA and the White House. The other was the Department of Defense track. John Yoo of the OLC was a major point of commonality for both tracks, because his memoranda authorizing torture formed the basis of the false, incompetent and identical legal positions of both tracks.

At all times the false legal memoranda by civilian lawyers such as Yoo and Steven Bradbury, and by military lawyers such as Diane Beaver, and Mary Walker, were kept as secret as possible. So too the actions of torture and abuse carried out both before and after the false memos were issued. The memos and actions were hidden not just from the public, but also from Congress and, startlingly, from many, perhaps even most, lawyers in the Executive branch who ordinarily would be expected to vet and opine on the memos and actions. (Thus, DOD kept only a single copy of a memo from John Yoo providing it with the same unlawful advice he previously gave the CIA -- advice DOD then parroted in its own memo -- and that single copy was kept locked in the safe of the General Counsel of the Air Force, Mary Walker.)

The memos and actions were kept as secret as possible because the Executive Branch actors knew that if word of their authorizing memos and their actions ever became public, there would be a vast outcry among the public, in Congress and in the media, and at least part if not all of the attempted constitutional revolution would be jeopardized. Such an outcry is, indeed, precisely what happened, with increasing vigor, after the secrecy began to fail and unlawful memoranda and actions began to become public.

To this day, however, it remains true that an unknown (perhaps large) number of the memos remain secret. (For instance, on a related subject, memos authorizing the NSA to violate the FISA laws enacted by Congress remain secret.) They were kept such a “close hold” (in the culprits’ own terminology) that Addington would not even allow the NSA’s own lawyers to see them when they asked to do so -- that is to say, the lawyers for the agency being told to violate the law were not allowed to see -- and comment on -- the memos authorizing the illegality. But public pressure has caused some of the unlawful memoranda to be declassified and thereby become public, or has resulted in a significant amount becoming known about memos which remain classified. So a fair amount is now known about false, professionally incompetent memos by which the Executive Branch actors sought to secretly work a constitutional revolution. (There are persons who consider their efforts to have been treason. The Jackson Committee presently takes no position one way or the other on this claim.)

The attempted constitutional revolution seems to have begun with a secret decision, shortly after 9/11, that was sought by the CIA. This decision, also sought by George Bush and signed by him on September 17, 2001, secretly gave the CIA power -- contrary to Congressional prohibition -- to murder or seize people all over the world.

Subsequently, in January 2002, Dick Cheney’s office wrote a memorandum saying that the Geneva Conventions are “quaint” and are inapplicable to the war. This memo implemented views propounded by Douglas Feith, views Feith had been vigorously arguing since the 1980s. The January 2002 memo was signed by Alberto Gonzales, then the White House Counsel, but was actually written by Cheney’s attorney, David Addington. On February 7, 2002 George Bush then stated that the United States was not bound by the Geneva Conventions.

At a point contemporaneous or near in time to these events, a so-called “War Council” of lawyers came into existence. This “War Council” consisted of David Addington, John Yoo, Jim Haynes, Alberto Gonzales, and Tim Flanigan. These five lawyers met in secret, with their views and resulting memos, written by Yoo, being kept from other lawyers and numerous officials in the Executive Branch.

An early problem arose because members of the CIA were very worried about actions they were taking against prisoners. From low levels to high, from on-the ground CIA perpetrators of torture to high CIA officials in Washington, there was knowledge that what the CIA was doing -- the torture and abuse of prisoners -- constituted war crimes for which CIA personnel could be prosecuted. CIA personnel wanted a “golden shield,” a “get out of jail free card,” that would protect them against prosecutions. It was hoped that an authorizing legal opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice would serve this purpose because the OLC opines on legal matters for the Executive Branch. Thus John Yoo of the War Council and the OLC wrote two opinions on August 1, 2002.

One of the opinions became known as “the torture memo.” It was a long document purporting to legally justify torture. The other was a memo listing approved techniques of torture, such as the techniques listed above. The second memo remains classified to this day, but much about what it approved has become publicly known, including that it authorized waterboarding.

Yoo’s work had input from and was signed by the head of OLC, Jay Bybee. For his actions as head of OLC, Bybee was rewarded with a federal appellate judgeship. He was nominated and confirmed before any information relating to torture became public.

The first memo -- the “torture memo” -- has become infamous, for three reasons in particular. One is its definition of torture as requiring the pain associated with organ failure or death, a definition that was preposterous and one that was taken, remarkably, from the entirely different context of a public health statute defining when a person must be treated.

The second particular reason for the torture memo’s infamy was that Yoo falsely said there was no torture if the torturer’s intent was to obtain information rather than inflict pain. Since torturers who seek to obtain intelligence always want to gather information, and the torture is only a means to that end rather than an end in itself, no torturer could ever be guilty of torture under Yoo’s “principle” because every torturer’s primary goal is to obtain information. Presto: John Yoo, as if by magic, converted the worst tortures, e.g., waterboarding, into nontorture.

The final particular reason, and the one which fully carried out the attempted constitutional putsch, was that Yoo’s torture memo said the President, as Commander-in-Chief, could do anything at all he wants with regard to so-called national security, and Congress can do absolutely nothing to stop him. All power is his (and, one day, hers). No power is Congress’. If the President wants to torture, murder, or start wars, as Commander-in-Chief he can do it, and Congress has no say about anything.

The barbaric view of torture, and the Executive hegemony, implemented in Yoo’s memo were stated dramatically a few years later when Yoo said publicly that if the president wanted to try to force a prisoner to talk by crushing the testicles of the prisoner’s child, no treaty could stop this and, depending on why the president wanted to do it, neither could any congressional law stop the president from crushing the child’s testicles.

Yoo’s memo was secret for years, and the administration, from the president on down to soldiers and CIA officers who tortured people at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram and in CIA “black holes” around the world, acted in accordance with Yoo’s secret revolutionary principles. When the memo became public years after Yoo issued it, it became reviled by some of the nation’s leading lawyers as professionally inept, even as the single most incompetent piece of legal analysis some had ever seen. It had, as a reporter said, the veneer of legal scholarship: long, densely written paragraphs, a plethora of citations. But the veneer was a fraud. It ignored the cases and points contrary to -- devastating to -- its revolutionary principles, including the leading case in the field, Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (the famous Steel Seizure Case), and could provide no true authority for its secretly adopted positions.

So professionally inept was Yoo’s torture memo that it was later withdrawn by Bybee’s replacement as head of OLC, Jack Goldsmith (even though Goldsmith hated to do this because, among other reasons, he was a good friend of Yoo’s). But the second memo of August 1, 2001, the memo which listed the approved techniques of torture, was never withdrawn. That OLC memo remains on the books, remains operative, remains secret even though much of what it approved (including waterboarding) has nonetheless become known, and continues to unlawfully seek to justify war crimes.

One of the reasons it remains on the books is that Cheney, Addington, Gonzales and CIA officials have been very worried that their exposure to war crime prosecutions would increase if it were withdrawn by OLC, and extensive pressure was exerted to compel it not to be withdrawn. This is the same reason, we note, that Cheney and Addington have conspired with others to exert overwhelming pressure to compel Congressional enactment of laws putatively granting immunity to war criminals in American courts. Such laws are the self-protective product of a conspiracy to manipulate the law so as to try to immunize from federal prosecution those who organized and ran a conspiracy to commit war crimes.

While the civilian torture track was taking place, a parallel torture track likewise was proceeding in the Department of Defense.

In February of 2002, Army Reserve Major General Michael Dunlavey, an intelligence specialist who was a judge in civilian life, was appointed to be the first head of interrogation at Guantanamo, where torture and abuse were in progress. Thereafter Dunlavey flew to Washington every week to brief Rumsfeld personally on intelligence being obtained at Guantanamo, and said in a sworn statement that ‘“I got my marching orders directly from the President of the United States.”’

Dunlavey’s comment about where he got his marching orders cannot be considered surprising. Although George Bush deliberately lied to the American people and media by claiming in public that the U.S. does not engage in torture, it has long been plain that he knew what was being done. The torture and abuse were discussed at meetings of the so-called Principals Committee, where George Tenet presented graphic details of interrogations to a Committee which included some of Bush’s highest associates, including Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft, and Dick Cheney. (At times John Yoo was also at Principals Committee meetings to brief members.) Bush knew of and approved these meetings, at which Tenet would brief the members of the Principals Committee on the specific details of the torture and abuse that were taking place. And in September 2006, after years of (then still continuing) torture, Bush publicly admitted that for years the US had been holding secret (off the books) prisoners at so-called “black sites” (in countries like Poland, Romania and Thailand), and had subjected these secret prisoners to “‘an alternative set of procedures,’” that is, to torture and abuse.

There can thus be no doubt that George Bush knew what was occurring all the while nor can there be surprise that Dunlavey swore his marching orders, at Guantanamo, where torture was regularly practiced, came directly from Bush.

Lieutenant Colonel Diane Beaver, a lawyer, was also at Guantanamo. She was commissioned to write a memorandum justifying the torture techniques being practiced there, she willingly complied, and she later was promoted to the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel. (The techniques she approved at Guantanamo were part of a list drawn up there by Lt. Col. Jerald Phifer.) Beaver placed no limits on the use of techniques, and did not address the legality of using them in combination and over time, as was the actual practice. Her views were used as a legal basis for torturing and abusing prisoners, specifically including a prisoner who was tortured and abused for 54 straight days.

Beaver also discussed torture with several lawyers/executive officials who visited Guantanamo and personally observed tortured prisoners on September 26, 2002. Those lawyers/executive officials included several of the most culpable of the executive culprits; they included Addington, Haynes, Gonzales, Chertoff, Philbin, Rizzo, and Goldsmith, as well as a Chertoff aide named Alice Fisher. The lawyers knew about the prisoner who was undergoing 54 straight days of torture, and wanted to know what the military was doing with regard to “‘managing’” him.

While Beaver was doing her work at Guantanamo, John Yoo wrote another torture memo, this one for DOD. The final version was dated March 14, 2003, but DOD had a draft at least as early as late January 2003. Yoo’s memo for DOD largely parroted his torture memo of August 1, 2002. It rendered Guantanamo a law-free torture zone for military interrogators, and suggested that even acts such as gouging out a prisoner’s eyes or “‘dousing him with scalding water [or] corrosive acid’” could be lawful. Yoo’s memo served as the template for a memo on permissible torture being drafted by a Pentagon working group chaired by Air Force General Counsel Mary Walker. As noted earlier, the Pentagon kept only one copy of Yoo’s memo seeking to justify horrendous violations of law; the copy was kept locked in Walker’s safe.

Subsequent to Yoo’s memos for the CIA and the DOD, torture and abuse of prisoners continued, with tortures being used in combinations and for extended periods of time on individual prisoners. People in the CIA who were perpetrating or authorizing the tortures remained worried despite the “golden shield,” “get out of jail free cards” that had been issued by Yoo, however. They remained worried particularly because of the effects of the use of tortures in combination, which Yoo had not covered. They demanded new, broader attempted “golden shields,” golden shields that would cover combinations of tortures.

In 2005 Stephen Bradbury was appointed head of OLC on a probationary basis. That is, he was made interim head, with promotion to the prestigious position of permanent head, a position he coveted, being dependent on performance that satisfied his political masters, Gonzales, Cheney and Addington. Bradbury thereupon wrote legal memoranda justifying and seeking to legalize torture, including tortures undertaken in wholesale combinations. His desire for appointment as permanent head of OLC was then realized.


It is claimed by apologists that war criminal culprits should not be prosecuted because they thought what they were doing was lawful. That claim simply cannot be sustained. No person, at least no person of sufficient intelligence to have risen to a responsible level of American government, can reasonably fail to know that the imposition of torture is unlawful and that the imposition of horrible pain and fear by beatings, waterboarding, stringing people up by the arms for hours and days on end, etc., are torture.

Indeed, it was precisely the culprits’ knowledge that what they were doing was illegal torture which caused CIA officers to demand “golden shields” in order to try to escape future prosecutions by pointing to memos authorizing them to commit crimes and giving the President unfettered power to authorize crimes.

Beyond this, with the existence of unlawful torture being obvious to any sensate person, the false legal memos cannot enable the culprits to escape prosecution. The Nuremberg principles set their face against any argument that one can be excused on the ground that he or she was merely following transparently illegal orders, as here.

There is also the important fact that, when they ultimately found out what was going on, a host of persons in the Executive Branch, including both knowledgeable and experienced lawyers as well as laymen, told the culpable actors that what they were writing or doing was illegal, could lead to prosecutions, and must stop. But wishing to continue the torture and abuse, the culpable Executive actors deliberately ignored these warnings, and even threatened and verbally abused those who issued them, in order to try to prevent the warnings from continuing.

It is often publicly pretended by the Executive culprits and their apologists, that all the advice they received was in favor of torture. To the contrary. We have here a situation in which they received extensive advice -- which they deliberately chose to ignore -- that what they were doing was illegal and could lead to prosecutions. Such advice came from knowledgeable and experienced persons including FBI agents, agents and officials of other investigative bodies, general counsels of the military services, the Judge Advocates General of the armed services, and State Department officials and lawyers.

The following were among the verbal or written warnings, and facts constituting warnings, given to the Executive culprits:

· In an extensive 40-page memo of January 11, 2002, the Legal Adviser to the State Department, William Howard Taft IV, warned that the Geneva Conventions certainly did apply to the war and that Bush’s claim that the enemy was not covered by the Conventions could subject him to prosecution for war crimes.

· Another State Department lawyer, David Bowker, warned that “‘there is no such thing’” as a person who is not covered by the Geneva Conventions.

· FBI agents were interrogating a prisoner named Abu Zubayda in early 2002, were using traditional methods of questioning, not torture, and were getting excellent information. But because George Bush wanted the “tough guy CIA” to take the lead, the FBI agents were replaced by a CIA team headed by a CIA contract officer named James Mitchell. The CIA team engaged in torture, the FBI unsuccessfully tried to persuade the CIA not to do so, and Zubayda stopped talking.

Appalled by what they were seeing, and fearful that they would be implicated, the FBI agents left Guantanamo. FBI Director Mueller then barred FBI agents from participating in coercive CIA interrogations, a warning-fact well known to many in the Executive.

· The Counterterrorist Center (CTC) of the CIA was headed by Cofer Black and was the terrorist-fighting operation of the CIA. R. Scott Shumate was its chief operational psychologist from 2001-2003. He reported directly to Black. He spoke out against the CIA’s use of torture and abuse, and left the CIA because of this disagreement with the use of torture.

· Reserve Air Force Colonel Steve Kleinman, who had had years of experience with interrogations, was posted to Iraq in the fall of 2003 to help advise on interrogations there. He objected to the torture and cruelty he saw there, and pointed out that interrogators were obliged to follow the Geneva Conventions. His views were rejected by the commanding officer of his special unit and by other officers. Torture was instead specifically approved, Kleinman was shunned, and he was physically threatened.

· In approximately October/November 2002 an FBI agent named Jim Clemente (who had a law degree and had been a prosecutor), and other FBI agents, observed horrendous torture and abuse of a prisoner at Guantanamo. One of the agents accused the military of criminal behavior. Clemente and colleagues urged Lt. Col. Phifer to stop the torture, but Phifer (who had created the Guantanamo list of torture techniques) was “‘enraged’” by this advice and told the FBI personnel to “‘Lead, follow, or get the fuck out of the way.’”

Clemente then contacted the head of the FBI’s national security law section in Washington, Marion Bowman, warning that actions in violation of antitorture law were being taken and could lead to prosecutions and convictions. Bowman in turn called lawyers in Jim Haynes’ office in DOD and expressed concern. He never heard back from the DOD lawyers or from their boss, Haynes.

· In the late summer of 2002, the CIA sent a senior intelligence analyst to Guantanamo to observe and report on what was going on. (Now retired, he “declined to be identified.”) In a top secret, detailed report, he estimated that one-third of the detainees had no connection to terrorism and said the United States was committing war crimes at Guantanamo.

His report, “written by a tough and highly experienced CIA analyst whose career had been spent fighting terrorists,” alarmed Condoleezza Rice’s lawyer, John Bellinger, and retired four star General John Gordon, a terrorism expert on the National Security Council who was also a former Deputy Director of the CIA. But their concern, stoked by the experienced CIA analyst’s report, was flatly rejected and ignored by Addington, Flanigan and Gonzales. Nor was there subsequently an interest in their concern in Rumsfeld’s office, which likewise ignored the concern and the report underlying it.

· The Criminal Investigative Task Force (CITF) of DOD, headed by Col. Brittain Mallow, investigated what was going on at Guantanamo, and became alarmed in approximately the summer of 2002. It raised questions about potentially criminal mistreatment of prisoners. In a meeting, Mallow told Haynes that interrogation tactics being used at Guantanamo could be illegal. Haynes and DOD ignored CITF’s concerns, telling CITF that it (CITF) had no say in the matter. Haynes’ willingness to ignore CITF was stoked by statements of John Yoo and Michael Chertoff.

· David Brant was the head of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS). He learned from NCIS personnel on the ground at Guantanamo, especially an NCIS psychologist named Michael Gelles, and from Brittain Mallow, that torture and abuse were taking place at Guantanamo. Brant knew such actions were unlawful regardless of contrary legal advice from Jim Haynes’ Office of General Counsel in the Pentagon, and he would not permit NCIS personnel to participate in the torture and abuse. His bottom line was “‘it just ain’t right.’” “‘It was pretty basic, black and white to me,’” he said. “‘I didn’t know or care what the rules were that had been set by the Department of Defense at that point. We were going to do what was morally, ethically and legally permissible.’”

Brant conveyed his concern to Army leaders, who had command authority over the military interrogators at Guantanamo, but they did not care. He also conveyed his concern to the Air Force. But it too did not care. He found nobody who cared until he spoke to the General Counsel of the Navy, Alberto Mora, on December 17, 2002 and told him what had been going on. (Mora was deeply upset by what he was told. His subsequent actions are discussed below.)

· Steven Morello, the General Counsel of the Army, was long aware of and deeply concerned about what had been going on. He had in his office a DOD collection of pertinent documents, including, among other items in the DOD paper trail, Diane Beaver’s memo, a document by which Rumsfeld, upon Haynes’ recommendation, gave the green light to torture and abuse, and a memo from Jim Clemente of the FBI warning that the renditions could be considered a criminal conspiracy in violation of American law. When Mora came to him after learning what was taking place from Brant, Morello informed Mora that “‘We tried to stop it,’” but couldn’t. His concerns had been ignored. He had been “told to shut up.”

When Mora went to speak to Morello about what he had learned from Brant, Morello showed Mora the DOD paper trail that was in his possession. But he was so nervous that he made Mora promise not to tell where he had seen the documents. The documents had, of course, been “closely held,” with numerous DOD personnel and lawyers being kept out of the process lest they learn about and object to what was being done. Such close holding and efforts to limit paper trails were a modus operandi of Haynes.

· Mora was horrified by what he read in the paper trail in Morello’s office. He took his concerns to Gordon England, then Secretary of the Navy and later Deputy Secretary of Defense. Then, with England’s approval, he met with Haynes on December 20th, three days after Brant had come to him.

Mora warned Haynes that the DOD paper trail permitted torture. In the next three weeks, Mora’s warnings against torture and abuse were also put before several of the Pentagon’s top officials, including Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz, Jane Dalton, who was the legal advisor to the Joint Chiefs, and Secretary Rumsfeld. Mora’s warnings were unheeded, and torture and abuse continued at Guantanamo.

Three weeks after first meeting with Haynes on December 20, 2002, Mora met with him again on January 9, 2003, to once again warn against the torture and abuse, which were continuing. Mora warned Haynes that criminal charges could be filed against administration officials. Haynes rejected Mora’s views. When he later mentioned Mora’s views to Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld too rejected them.

Mora warned Haynes yet again on January 15, 2003. Acting contrary to Haynes’ aversion to paper trails, on January 15th Mora gave him an unsigned draft memorandum saying that what was occurring at Guantanamo was “‘at a minimum cruel and unusual treatment, and, at worst, torture.’” Mora said he would sign the memo that afternoon -- thereby making it an official document for and permanently available in the DOD’s historical files -- unless the unlawful interrogation techniques were suspended.

Haynes called Mora by the end of the day on January 15, 2003 to tell him that the illegal techniques had been suspended. One week later, however, Mora was shown a draft of an 81-page memo from John Yoo, which was subsequently finalized in March 2003. Mora was shown the draft by Mary Walker, head of the Pentagon working group that was drafting a DOD memo, based on Yoo’s work, that authorized torture. Appalled by the barbarism and professional incompetence of Yoo’s draft, a few days after reading the draft Mora sent an email to Mary Walker warning that Yoo’s memo was erroneous and dangerous.

Walker wrote back that she disagreed with Mora’s warning and she believed Haynes did too. Subsequently, Mora again confronted Haynes, telling him that the draft report being prepared by Walker’s working group was “‘deeply flawed’” and should be locked up and “‘never let out to see the light of day again.’”

Mora’s warnings were all ignored. The torture and abuse continued.

· The Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are the country’s top uniformed legal officers. They were appointed to be part of Mary Walker’s working group. All four of them were appalled at what they were seeing, and each wrote a memo of dissent to torture and abuse. Their memos warned not just that what was being approved was contrary to the legal and moral training American servicemen have always received, and not just that there would be international criticism, but also that interrogators and the chain of command were being put at risk of criminal prosecutions abroad.

The views and warnings of America’s top uniformed legal officers were ignored.

In sum, far from American officials and lawyers authorizing or engaging in torture because it was lawful, they authorized and engaged in it because they wanted to, they kept their actions secret from interested officials for as long as they could lest there be strong opposition to the torture and abuse they were perpetrating, they deliberately ignored repeated warnings that the torture and abuse were illegal and could lead to prosecutions, and they ignored these warnings even when they came from high level civilian and military officers.

The Mind Control programming which produces the suicidal, killer terrorist is the highest definition of religion: it is the establishment of a religion that controls the entire belief system and therefore, this establishment of religion must be utterly rooted out of our federal government root, stock and limb.

A careful study of the 911 Mind Control events will prove this ancient power system's true goal is to destroy traditional religion and replace it with its own. Bin Laden is a carefully crafted Jungian religious archetype for a very good reason: he is meant to demonize all traditional religions in our collective unconscious. This is a profoundly important study of the true goals, operations and strategy of the New World Order elite. This unconstitutional elite governs by absolute secrecy and absolute deceit, seeking absolute power and they nearly have it! Our Constitution today is sustained by the narrowest thread as the vast majority of Americans go about their lives as if their freedom is assured. Nothing is further from the truth! Therefore, your first instinct will be to shoot the messenger, not question your own secret government! The messenger is not unlike the guy at a David Copperfield event pointing out the tricks of the trade. You will naturally want this guy removed from the audience! But if we do not question our secret government's slave-making operations regarding young children, we will never get to the heart of the matter and do not deserve to call ourselves patriots. Full exposure of the child-slave will expose the true evil of this secret government and it's true intent. Ignoring this critical issue is the power of Mind Control and this profound power is not in your best interest to ignore.

As our secret federal government advances "get tough" measures against "pedophiles" and "child abuse," it simultaneously hires real pedophiles to write manuals and determine the fate of millions of children. This fascist government commits horrific child abuse on a massive scale which serves the Pentagon's many mind-slave operations and becomes invisible to the outside world. These CIA-abused children come out and testify to these horrors and they are ignored. The public has been fully programmed to ignore them. This logic is totally consistent with sound psychology which our government is trying to stamp out. Our federal government produces massive child abuse by advancing sexual repression on a massive scale, because it now requires the abused and the "programmable" child for New World Order slavery operations. It deliberately spreads emotional contagion just like the Nazis, because this builds a more militant society, creates slave-products and serves eugenics.

Mind Control variables require covert extremists and are not the products of moderate democratic institutions. By establishing the sun god paradigm, you are conditioned by television and most other media to trust wrongful authority: authority which as been programmed by top-down elitists. The secret government then can function in the realm of the inexplicable, perfected by Psychological warfare manipulation variables. Even when these extremists are exposed as agents of the U.S., British or Israeli governments, you are conditioned to ignore this critical exposure. Like the molten lava of steel flowing at ground zero, the realm of the inexplicable must be fully investigated by the true patriot because it will not be investigated by your own government! Even mass murder is not investigated by your own government, but you will not question the sun god authority. This authority has been programmed by Tavistock and not by our Constitution. Those who were first to question these obvious inconsistencies of the Nazi Mind Control machine in Nazi Germany were the first to be placed in the concentration camps. America, today, is no different. To effectively challenge this elitist power system requires the exceptional patriot.

The extra-constitutional elite running our federal government, our media and our perceptions of "reality" have operated highly sophisticated Mind Control agendas for generations. Therefore, all of these unconstitutional control methods are now totally normalized. FBI, CIA and KGB experts have come out to tell you this, but you will still not believe it. They tell you that for decades the bulk of their spending has been for programming and not for spying. This programming targets your entire belief system with billions of dollars of attitude propaganda. Therefore, the most powerful control mechanisms of Mind Control have been made invisible to the conscious mind. How can this be? It is very simple. Those who advanced the truth that would protect Americans from these mechanisms have been thoroughly discredited, absorbed into the establishment or simply killed. Those who played along with the agenda of the mind controller were empowered and advanced. This wrongful manipulation has occurred over generations.

Mind Control deliberately functions in the areas where your brain will not go. It deliberately operates parallel to your belief system so as to affect change through the inexplicable. This is the domain of the magician's craft or Gamma-level Mind Control. Terrorism advanced by our own government through mind-slaves is made inexplicable by the full repression of slave-making knowledge. If you attempt to protect your children with this knowledge, they may now be taken away from you. Police and social workers destroying countless families and children by Freudian taboos because they have been programmed as marionettes for the elite is equally inexplicable. This process of enforcing sexual repression serves the elite, but it does so by the witchcraft of manipulating your own belief system from cradle to grave. We must begin to address this false religion in terms which are accurate. This realm of the inexplicable is largely a conditioned state of mind for which children can be protected. For example, the Sun King mythos establishes blind "trust" for government and media. This blind trust then allows government to commit horrific, inexplicable crimes invisibly. Effective child rearing will build the awareness that good citizens question government, understand the mechanisms of deception and demand accountability, constitutional clarity.

This protection of children, however, requires that our secret federal government provide us with the real truth about Mind Control and the slave-making process. We must begin to employ the correct terms to address this power system. The Monarch Mind Control processes used against soldiers and countless other federal operatives is a slave-making process which has become "normalized" throughout society. Those who advance draconian "investigations" against parents in many cases turn out to be pedophiles. Pedophiles are now found throughout government actively advancing a massive child-trafficking network. Pedophiles will be attracted to these positions in government just like in Nazi Germany. This demand for the slave-product is now built into our child services organizations and our schools. But millions of Americans must be made aware that these attitudes function on the unconscious mind largely through massive wrongful programming. This programming then manifests itself as demoralization of the individual, even as it has been advanced by the elite. This is the signature of a Nazi power system, not a constitutional power system.

By manipulating the science of psychology, the CIA has advanced bizarre double-standards around the world. The Germans broadly practice naturalistic parenting and comprehensive sex education largely due to American CIA efforts. Yet, non-elite American parents are demonized for this same education. We now are a society fully programmed to make mind-slave children for the Pentagon and we can't bring ourselves to make this critical connection. This slavery comes from an ancient power system of master and slave, elite and non-elite. This wrongful power system requires the magician's craft in order to invert our legal system. Today, many of these mind slaves are the true "terrorists" and they have been programmed for suicide and societal self-destruction by government and not by traditional religion. Yet we are now programmed to blame traditional religion. Bin Laden has been shaped as the perfect unconscious Biblical archetype for traditional religion. As our secret government advances its own religion of slavery and the sun god authority, it will demonize traditional religion. This conspiracy can be easily exposed by aggressive subpoena powers by the Congress and our courts. You must demand the truth!

Today this terrorism is directed against the American people and the world as a post-Orwellian circus of the absurd. Your government is committing terror attacks in order to drive you like cattle. The "elite" who willingly advance this horror are true Nazi extremists who advance broad slave-making operations covertly, as these operations are now fully encoded to appear "altruistic" or "necessary." Nothing is further from the truth! Decades of wrongful programming must now be fully exposed.

Primitive superstition lies just below the surface of even the most tough minded individuals. Sexual repression builds these primitive superstitions and is extremely harmful to children and families. This destruction of non-elite families is simultaneously advantageous to the Pentagon and active eugenics movements. Eugenics is the modern "science" of the elite advanced in death cults and used as a unifying force for the elite. An honest government would seek to raise children in a manner that negates harmful superstitions, as our government has actively done in post-war Germany. Our current government does the precise opposite in the U.S. in order to build a militant society and produce mind-slaves. It sustains children in harmful ignorance so that they can be secretly trafficked toward the Pentagon and programmed as mind-slaves.

This process is advanced by Orwellian inquisitions and not real courts. The press has been fully stroked by massive P.R. to advance these duplicitous agendas of false trust. We now routinely destroy the parental authority using witchcraft devices. This ignorance in children is advanced as "altruistic" or "necessary" by the CIA's full manipulation of our entire psychological institutional complex over many decades. But this lie becomes very obvious at the level of the elite. There is a marked disparity between the elite and the non-elite child, a decisive double-standard. This non-elite programming has become highly specific for Pentagon needs and is therefore encoded in many "psychological" assessments of non-elite children for which the Pentagon programmer will have full access.

This produces an actual black market for programmable children and for abused children. Highly sophisticated Mind Control can produce both. The Pentagon receives a statistical increase in sexually abused children in direct proportion to the advancement of sexual repression through the wrongful programming of state and local officials and the media. If you doubt this, simply read the many CIA-advanced "sex investigation" manuals that are secretly encoded to build sexual hysteria in non-elite society, producing sexual abuse. These manuals advance a draconian approach to parents as "predators" and they can only be recognized as coming from pedophiles themselves. The basic and historical parental duty of sex education and the normalization of sexuality with children is utterly repressed for purely political reasons. This advancement of sexual hysteria actually creates abused children on a massive scale, since normal positive childhood education is replaced with fear and terror programming. Good psychology proves this! Sexually abused children are then trafficked through the "system" to become mind-slaves. Such an outrageous black market is now fully documented and ongoing. As these children come out to testify, you are programmed by Freudian taboos to laugh at them or totally ignore them. These mind-slave requirements are so utterly unconstitutional that the entire field of slave-making will be fully repressed from the public consciousness. But the horrific truths to the ubiquitous nature of slave-making in our society can be advanced in a real court of law with an intelligent and open-minded jury of true patriots.

These are "dark" taboo areas where we find experts in psychology, constitutional law, history and the arts simply disappearing or thoroughly discredited. This knowledge has been made taboo by decades of Alpha-level political programming which shapes our attitudes about such knowledge. The critical works concerning the truth about the slave-making process, such as the truth about sexual repression, have been taken out of circulation, banned, labeled as "occult" and otherwise destroyed or utterly diminished. Nazis cannot tolerate the truth in these areas of knowledge. The overwhelming majority of Americans will be conditioned, from cradle to grave, to deny the very existence of this wrongful authority and they will be made utterly blind to the true mechanisms of Nazi Mind Control. They will ignore this fact at their great peril! In order to build constitutional clarity and deprogram yourself from wrongful government Mind Control, you should begin by studying the 911 programmed events to understand the ubiquitous nature of our own secret government's Mind Control matrix. Learn the truth and expand your rational mind!

911: The Real Matrix of totalitarian Mind Control

MKULTRA Mind Control now used against Americans

We now have top experts to explain how and why these massive buildings were "pulled" for full Mind Control effect on 911

Listen to Rep. Dennis Kucinich July 8 phone call regarding whistle-blowers and Impeachment

View Improbable Collapse: the demolition of our Republic

What Americans can't possibly believe is true is the true realm of Mind Control. Psy-Ops deliberately manipulates the belief systems so as to fully operate in the realm of the inexplicable. For the elite running your government, this is now the realm of Pentagon statistics and not right or wrong.

Instead of confronting the lies about how they were raised, most Americans are content to be blind to the obvious. Your government had a profound impact on how you were raised, what you would believe as "absolute truth." This blindness is now grounds for profoundly important law suits. Since 1947, our federal government has dismissed an active coup over our Constitution advanced incrementally through powerful Mind Control programming. This wrongful authority through secret, unconstitutional government, advancing multiple secret wars, is now so powerful, that it can literally make or break any presidential candidate, sustaining this extra-constitutional power indefinitely. We now petition our Supreme Court to open a fully public trial for advancing the truth about this coup, the truth about 911 and the truth about our secret federal government. This abuse of power is absolute, therefore extraordinary measures must be advanced. Powerful Disinformation Campaigns will be advanced against the truth! Obvious crimes against our Constitution will require Articles of Treason against all conspirators domestic and foreign. Therefore, our Supreme Court must take all necessary powers vested in it by our Constitution to secure a thorough, accurate and complete investigation based upon the rule of law, not an elite-cult conspiring to destroy the Constitution. Ask yourself one question: Are you on the wrong side of history? Will you take a few minutes to find out?

Investigate the Reversal of our Constitution by an active Mind Control Conspiracy

The End of America: Movie
9/11 Visibility Website
The Exceptional Patriot: Dr. David Ray Griffin
The Exceptional Patriot: Naomi Wolf
The Exceptional Patriot: Charlie Sheen
The Exceptional Patriot: Ed Asner
The Exceptional Patriot: Jesse Ventura
Primitive Evil Resurrected in Bedford, Pennsylvania

The Brainwashing of Children in America

Zeitgeist: Addendum---The true source of Terrorism and Slavery

Top Lists

No comments:

Post a Comment