America goes Nazi: tortured and murdered prisoners labeled "DETAINEES"... in name of Homeland Security and the Reich, of course.

We suppose it was inevitable. The Right-WIng NARRATIVE, unopposed by any REAL 'OPPOSITION' party or vocal, confrontational 'major media,' has prevailed.

Under the post-9/11 "PATRIOT" laws, and now the new "KGB/Gestapo TORTURE" law, American military and secret police officials are now free to operate as... the KGB and Gestapo once did, with blanket, total state immunity for all torture and murders resulting from torture or, whoops! premeditated executions.

We do have the small consolation that none of this would have been possible without the cooperation of the "AIPAC media" and the AIPAC "Democrats" - institutions like the Sulzberger owned New York Times, and people like Joe Lieberman and Harvard University Professor ALAN DERSHOWITZ, who once made a name for himself as a Human Rights advocate and defense counsel, but, blinded by the temptation of a "Greater Israel" or however the neo-cons define their goals, now subscribes to a human rights agenda that is just about indistinguishable from that once advocated by the KGB or Gestapo. IF that is a little too dramatic a comparison, how about the Russians operating during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan?

Remember, we Americans were ON THE SIDE of the "MUJAHADEEN FREEDOM FIGHTERS" back then.

And make no mistake about it: for "MUJAHADEEN FREEDOM FIGHTERS" to go up against Red Army firepower was very often a suicidal proposition, just as suicide bombers are today.

"Detainees killed under interrogation" is the new American euphamism for the old Nazi standby, "Jewish terrorists shot while trying to escape."

And, of course, the much LARGER portion of that propaganda picture was (is) those tortured/murdered WHO DON'T EVEN MAKE the 'NEWS'.

We have no illusions as to the cruelty of men in combat, including American soldiers in 'modern' wars. The WWII testimonial book, "Another Battle, Another Town" documents that in close, brutal infantry combat, neither side (Americans nor Germans) was predisposed to take prisoners after seeing their own comrades brutally killed in close combat. A similar theme was portrayed in the movies "Saving Private Ryan" and "Band of Brothers," with surrendering soldiers often shot before they are taken in. And make no mistake, TORTURE was a huge part of the Vietnam war, as documented in countless books, articles, and movie dramas. TORTURE can be administered as easily as placing a gun barrel close to a prisoners head, and allowing the muzzle blast to rupture the prisoner's eardrums. Literally, even a child could administer this type of torture (especially with a modern low-recoil weapon like the M-16) without significant effort, without leaving a mark.

BUT WILL BESTOWING BLANKET KGB/GESTAPO TORTURE POWERS on American servicemen and CIA agents IMPROVE their "intel" gathering ability? We doubt it. People in an occupied land tend to understand who is funding and commissioning TORTURE and imprisonment, and tend to resent or despise those distant taskmasters. And with the increasing ability of fundamentalist sects to to create distinct, isolated CELLS, no individual terrorist will know much that good, basic detective-work Intel couldn't gather. And finally, a government and regime (the US administration) that LUSTS after TORTURE powers, has demonstrated that it has hardly any committment to enhancing our foreign language translation capacity.

And don't forget, the brutal regime (Bush White House) that sneers at those who oppose the "KGB TORTURE BILL," is also the regime that has been TOTALLY INCOMPETENT at bringing THE ANTHRAX TERRORIST to justice. And some editorial commentators have said IT WAS THE FEAR of the ANTHRAX ATTACKS, on top of the 9-11 attacks, that drove Congress over the edge to passing the "PATRIOT" unlimited arrest- and detention-powers bill.

Well, CHATTLE SLAVERY in the United States was quite impossible without PROXY WARS (the slave raids necessary to capture slaves), TORTURE (the terrorization and punishment of slaves), and the wholesale denial of any legal rights to an entire category of people, so Mr. Bush and his apologists (including, as we have just said, so many former "liberals" and "human rights advocates") aren't really breaking new ground on their precious "DETAINEES" bill, they have simply managed to take America's 150 years back to the era of state-sanctioned TORTURE; just as Osama bin Laden and the Islamist radicals seek to take the entire world back to over a millennium ago.

[note the typical New York Times template: the article is NOT about "AMERICA AUTHORIZES TORTURE" but is instead about a "he said, she said" political horserace. Joseph Goebbels might be jealous, but he would grudginly approve.]


=======================================

Detainee Bill Closer to Passage After House Vote

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 27, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/washington/wire-detain.html

WASHINGTON (AP) _ The House approved legislation Wednesday giving the administration authority to INTERROGATE and prosecute terrorism detainees, moving President Bush to the edge of a pre-election victory with a key piece of his anti-terror plan.

The 253-168 vote in the House came shortly after senators agreed to limit debate on their own nearly identical bill, all but assuring its passage on Thursday.

Republican leaders are hoping to work out differences and send Bush a final version before leaving town this weekend to campaign for the Nov. 7 congressional elections.

For nearly two weeks the GOP have been embarrassed as the White House and rebellious Republican senators have fought publicly over whether Bush's plan would give him too much authority. But they struck a compromise last Thursday, and Republicans are hoping approval will bolster their effort to cast themselves as strong on national security, a marquee issue this election year.

House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, all but dared Democrats to vote against the legislation.

''Will my Democrat friends work with Republicans to give the president the tools he needs to continue to stop terrorist attacks before they happen, or will they vote to force him to fight the terrorists with one arm tied behind his back?'' he asked just before members cast their ballots.

Democrats opposed the bill by about a five-to-one margin, with many wanting to tone down the powers it would give to Bush and the limits it would impose on terror-war suspects' abilities to defend themselves during trials.

Said Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio: ''This bill is everything we don't believe in.''

The legislation would establish a military court system to prosecute terror suspects, a response to the Supreme Court ruling last June that Congress' blessing was necessary. While the bill would grant defendants more legal rights than they had under the administration's old system, it nevertheless would eliminate rights usually granted in civilian and military courts.

The measure also provides extensive definitions of war crimes such as torture, rape and biological experiments _ but gives Bush broad authority to decide which other techniques U.S. interrogators can legally use. The provisions are intended to protect CIA interrogators from being prosecuted for war crimes.

With elections just weeks away, the debate over the legal handling of terrorists was often partisan with some Democrats contending the bill would approve torture.

''All Americans want to hold terrorists accountable, but if we try to redefine the nature of torture, whisk people into secret detention facilities and use secret evidence to convict them in special courts, our actions do in fact embolden our enemies,'' said Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va.

Others vehemently opposed language that would give the president wide latitude to interpret international standards of prisoner treatment and bar detainees from going to federal court to protest their treatment and detention under the right of habeas corpus. Supporters of the bill have said eliminating habeas corpus was intended to keep detainees from flooding federal courts with appeals.

The bill also gives the president the ability to interpret international standards for prisoner treatment when an act does not fall under the definition of a war crime, such as rape and torture.

''It gives too much leeway to the president,'' said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa. ''And I think when you tamper with the Geneva Conventions ... you hurt our ability to protect the troops.''

Republicans defended the measure as sound.

''Is it perfect? No,'' said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla. ''Do we have an obligation to pass it? Yes.''

Republicans said time was critical so that terrorists could be brought to justice.

Lawmakers shrugged off multiple disruptions from citizens watching the floor debate from inside the Capitol.