This is offered to short circuit dismissal of idiotic behavior that passes for acceptance relying upon the consideration of an idiot's superior education. Offering "What have I done?" eleven years after the fact doesn't erase an idiotic act and elevate it instead to a "mistake." And considering the oath of office our long line of chief executive idiots have taken in swearing to uphold the Constitution, this also fails to excuse idiotic and unconstitutional behavior all the more. All that these powerful, dangerous fools had to do was simply follow the job description they swore on a bible to uphold, preserve and protect.
Graduate degrees from prestigious "American" institutions of higher learning notwithstanding, it is one thing to be educated and thus informed, and yet entirely another to analyze situations and when necessary act intelligently to the best of one's ability within the prescribed legal parameters of one's station. Any power-laden fool can really screw up, as Woodrow Wilson came to learn, albeit far too late. And arrogant warmongers, Lincoln and FDR, never came to realize their damage to America's beautiful plan for individual freedom.
At first glance, Harvard Law School would seem to be one of the best, if not the best, law school in the United States. Yet a former Republican Congressman, John LeBoutillier, obviously railing against its "liberalness" at a time when that term meant something, wrote a book entitled, Harvard Hates America. And considering the tortured use of the English language, intellectual "law genius" Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law's most publicly recognized spokesman, recommended, sanctioned and eventually helped "legitimize" the torture of human beings without a warrant, without a statement of charges, without evidence, without a trial by a jury of one's peers, and other egregious expediencies, to provide the state with unlimited powers over anyone that falls prey to its deadly clutches.
And then we have, of course, another outstanding example of a Harvard Law School achiever: former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Viva Gonzales! Viva Harvard Law! By the way, where the hell is Gonzales these days? Shouldn't he be on trial somewhere for selectively firing attorneys that didn't toe the GOP line and selectively execute the unconstitutional "laws" of the Cheney-Bush criminal dictatorship? Oh, that's right - I forgot. This is the America of the Projected New Age Communism!
In spite of Bush's outstanding education, and in spite of the glitter and polish of his Ivy League MBA when compared to my run-of-the-mill MBA, the guy can't eat a pretzel properly and continually falls off his bicycle. He has neither a moral nor constitutional compass, both of which serve admirably to sharpen non-incriminating extemporaneous verbal responses to aggressive journalistic inquiry. He has just about acquired the ability to read a speech!
But aggressive journalistic inquiry in these here United States today is sadly lacking, thanks to the communist gatekeeping of The New York Times. And where real journalism thrives, namely Europe, our "Potemkin President" is heavily shielded and protected by imperial storm troopers of the intergalactic empire, and thereby secure from assaults of intelligent inquiry by true, aggressive journalists.
Neither Bush, nor his boss, Dick Cheney, have the required legal education and training that a graduate of Harvard Law School would have; that's why criminals with law diplomas from this institution of higher legalized subversion are needed. They legalize illegal laws and illegally invalidate legal laws. Did I really write that? This, of course, explains how Cheney-Bush not only disparage the very name of our nation's rule of law, denigrating it to a mere "goddamned piece of paper" that incessantly gets "thrown" into our rulers' faces, but elevates their contempt all the more when neutered by the Harvard rats' nest of lawyers with criminal intent and a penchant for legalistic trickery and word magic.
This burgeoning legal talent at the disposal of "ShrubCo" quickly provides the regime with legal escape windows and ladders. When the Plame outing clearly violated Title 18, Section 784, part (b), a capital offense during time of war, our foreign invasion policy was changed from the "Global War on Terror [GWOT] and renamed the "Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism, or GSAVE. Thus, the illegal Iraqi invasion is no longer considered as a war and Title 18 has not been violated. This also validates violating all international treaties against illegal invasions, dispatches UN considerations and protocol, and saves ShrubCo by deploying instead: G. ShrubCo's Armed Violation of Everystate. GWOT will they think of next?
Ask, and ye shall receive from our glorious emperor! Enjoying fair, accurate and factual news from the European press, specifically the Times of London, a real newspaper and not an establishment propaganda rag like the communist New York Times and its subservient TV cable and broadcast "Potemkin" news shows, American and Jewish patriot Sibel Edmonds stood up to the Cheney-Bush criminal dictatorship, the United States Congress of Criminals and Democrats, the Israel lobby, and yes, even The Establishment's "American" MSM.
After the Times of London and their Times Online.com broke and expanded the story of Cheney-Bush's illegal and continuing Title 18 violations in selling nuclear secrets to "our friends" in Turkey, who in turn brokered these to Pakistan and "our ally" Israel, Cheney-Bush's pool of lawyers went quickly to work on this new legal challenge. And when does a nation need enemies when we have friends such as Turkey and Israel? What are friends and allies for if not to steal from one another and knife one another in the back? And Uncle Sap has a real broad back!
It can be suggested that the "highest levels" of American government were unaware of this treason involving BOTH the State Department and the Pentagon. Need proof that this isn't the case? Just observe the behavior of G. Bush IMMEDIATELY after the fact, motivated into immediate action by the heroism of just one, single, solitary Jewish patriot that had the courage to come to her country's aid and try her best to save Americans by exposing the treason and criminality of the Cheney-Bush national crime machine.
Focusing the accusations of Sibel Edmonds upon one Marc Grossman, and airing the nuclear secrets espionage, who was it that immediately responded to this brave citizen's charges and complaint? As I had written earlier, their actions after the fact are very telling in terms of their direct complicity.
As was the case with ShrubCo changing the name of its imperial invasions after the fact from GWOT to GSAVE, and as was the case in "declassifying" Valerie Plame as a covert operative after her criminal exposure by Cheney, G. Bush is now backpedaling once again to make legal that which was formerly illegal. Neither Bush nor Cheney have the legal brains to do this, so one needs to consider the emergency after-the-fact huddle and damage control conference that was necessary to responsd to the accusations made by Sibel Edmonds and published by the Times of London.
The Times of London broke the nuclear secrets espionage story on Sunday, January 6, 2008. The report related how nuclear secrets were transferred to the Turkish government through diplomats and exchange scientists cleared by Marc Grossman. The exposé heavily implicated the government of Turkey. Clearly, this was an egregious violation of Title 18 during a time of war.
On Wednesday, January 23, 2008, G. Bush issued a "Message to the Congress of the United States," a message that was very, very low key, and very, very subtle, and therefore, almost secret. And jumping immediately to the aid of the president and helping to cover up the treason, was the ever-obedient, subversive, despicable American mass media. Never mind that the message was released through the office of the Press Secretary; the MSM and the communist New York Times summarily ignored it! Talk about a "smoking gun" proving guilt!
The five-paragraph memo was obviously a brief, one-page memo written by the Cheney-Bush rats' nest of traitors with law diplomas to slide under the radar screen obliterated by the MSM. If you cannot interpret this as proof of Bush's direct knowledge and full participation, then you need to enlighten me as to what I'm missing!
The memo to Congress opens: " I transmit to the Congress, pursuant to sections 123 b. and 123 d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2153(b),(d))(the 'Act'), the text of the proposed Agreement for Cooperation between the United States of America and the Republic of Turkey Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy (the 'Agreement') together with a copy of the unclassified Nuclear Proliferation Assessment Statement (NPAS) and of my approval of the proposed Agreement and determination that the proposed Agreement will promote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to, the common defense and security. The Secretary of State will submit the classified NPAS and accompanying annexes separately in appropriate secure channels."
Now if you and I experience difficulties interpreting this legal mumbo-jumbo, just think of how confusing it is to our "Decider"! Let's take a shot at it: Clearly, an international policy statement and law was issued via due process in 1954. This followed almost immediately after the execution for treason of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg for passing secrets of the atomic bomb to Soviet Russia. ShrubCo is requesting an amended change to that legal policy, specifically focusing on ONLY Turkey. ShrubCo's suggestion that this is for peaceful purposes does not avoid the Times' report initiated by Edmonds that MILITARY secrets were what was specifically asked for, pursued and alledgedly provided to the Turks by Grossman. But concluding the paragraph by offering a routine examination initiated by the State Department serves to distance the White House procedurally, as well as offering evidence of, the need for a technical review not within the competency or purview of the State Department.
As regards the latter point referencing the military and nuclear technology security review requirement, let us now please remember that such technical review capability had been originally the responsibility and mission of such agencies as the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, and others, and that Bush II's predecessor, Bill Clinton, jockeyed and manipulated to create a deliberate bureaucratic oversight blur to allow hundreds of millions of dollars into his pockets and the coffers of the Democratic National Committee from the People's Republic of China.
Here's an article by Murray Waas from Salon.com dating back to 1998: "The flow of high-technology exports from the U.S. to China in recent years has been significant. Between 1990 and 1993 -- during both the [first] Bush and Clinton presidencies -- the Commerce and State Departments approved a total of 67 dual-use technology export licenses, worth more than $530 million, to China, according to an April 1994 report by the General Accounting Office, the congressional watchdog agency. More recent figures have not yet been made public by the Clinton administration." Where was the technological bureaucratic focal point for export and military implication reviews for these under Clinton?
More evidence of deliberate bureaucratic manipulation and enfeeblement by the White House was engendered by the Cox Report that lambasted the Clinton regime in 1999, and elicited the regime's response:
"Domestic and International Export Policies
The Administration agrees with the Committee that the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of COCOM in 1994 has complicated efforts to control transfers of militarily important dual-use goods and technology. In this regard, the Administration agrees with the Committee on the desirability of strengthening the Wassenaar Arrangement to improve international coordination and reporting on the export of militarily useful goods and technology, and to prevent transfers of arms and sensitive dual-use items for military end-uses if the situation in a region, or the behavior of a state is or becomes a cause of serious concern to the participating states. All Wassenaar members currently maintain national policies to prevent such transfers to Iran, Iraq, Libya and North Korea. We are making a concerted effort this year to strengthen and enhance existing transparency mechanisms and to expand restraint measures.
We do not believe that other countries are prepared to accept a legally binding international regime like COCOM directed against China and we are not seeking such a regime. We note that a COCOM-style veto could act against U.S. interests by letting other countries block U.S. sales to our own security partners. The Administration agrees with the Committee on the need to enact a new Export Administration Act with new penalties. We have operated too long without updated legislation in this very important area. The Administration will work with the appropriate Committees in Congress and U.S. industry to obtain a new Export Administration Act. The Administration believes that the existing dual-use export licensing system allows adequate time for careful review of license applications and provides effective procedures to take account of national security considerations in licensing decisions."
More evidence of the Clinton regime's treasonous technology and military secrets transfers was articulated by none other than former GOP 2008 presidential candidate Duncan Hunter, while acting in his capacity of Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee: "The President has said he acted aggressively in the case of nuclear espionage by China at the Los Alamos laboratory. The record of the Administration's actions says something else. It shows the President's men keeping Wen Ho Lee employed in a sensitive position for some three years after he became the prime espionage suspect and 15 months after the FBI told the Department of Energy that there was no longer any investigative reason to allow the suspect to remain in his position. Once again there is a clear case of what the President said being at odds with the truth." History does repeat itself! And speaking of Clinton, here's the second paragraph in Bush's brief message: "The Agreement was signed on July 26, 2000, and President Clinton approved and authorized execution and made the determinations required by section 123 b. of the Act (Presidential Determination 2000 26, 65 FR 44403 (July 18, 2000)). However, immediately after signature, U.S. agencies received information that called into question the conclusions that had been drawn in the required NPAS and the original classified annex, specifically, information implicating Turkish private entities in certain activities directly relating to nuclear proliferation. Consequently, the Agreement was not submitted to the Congress and the executive branch undertook a review of the NPAS evaluation." Seems as what is being said is that due to some unfortunate, unforseeable mere oversight, and bureaucratic differences of opinion, Turkey was somehow unjustly targeted as being out of compliance with US foreign policy regarding technology transfers formerly considered secret. And somehow, Turkey was the only nation wrongly targeted; hence, the immediate need to remedy this situation a little over two weeks after the Edmonds revelation.
The final paragraph lights the 90-day fuse. It gives Congress 90 days to object or request clarification, and then it automatically becomes "law." Pretty neat stuff, no? Stroke of the pen, law of the land! But it serves in reality to violate the Constitution's ban against precisely such laws. Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 3 states: "No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." But then again, Article I is confined to the powers of Congress, thereby exempting such prohibitions in the case of an executive dictatorship. Just as ShrubCo backpedaled on Plame, and GWOT, and making public that which formerly was secret and in the national interest, Cheney-Bush will now make legal retroactively that which is illegal today. Thus they can, once again, proclaim after-the-fact, that they did nothing wrong. And if Bush wasn't directly involved, just as Clinton was directly involved, why would he have acted so swiftly and so secretly?
© THEODORE E. LANG 2007 All rights reserved
Ted Lang is a political analyst and a freelance writer.