Why so many US citizens conveniently pretend to be ignorant about Bush?

[Guest guest]

Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:29:29 -0800 (PST)

S

Why so many US citizens conveniently pretend to be ignorant

about Bush?

 

 

 

 

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=47722

 

Published: Sunday, January 22, 2006

Bylined to: Arthur Shaw

 

Why so many US citizens conveniently pretend to be ignorant about Bush?

 

VHeadline.com commentarist Arthur Shaw writes: In an historic address

titled " US Constitution in Grave Danger " delivered on January 16 in

Washington, to countless standing and thunderous ovations, former Vice

President Al Gore Jr. exposed the savage hostility and habitual

contempt of the Bush regime for the democratic principles of

accountability and of the rule of law. Gore described in detail the

illicit concentration of power by the executive branch of the US

government. Gore gave a comprehensive account of the anti-democratic

policies and practices of Bush dictatorship, although US capitalist

media portrayed Gore's speech as a " wiretapping speech. "

 

Gore started off with the wiretapping story: " The Executive Branch of

our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of

American citizens and has brazenly declared that it has the unilateral

right to continue without regard to the established law enacted by

Congress to prevent such abuses. It is imperative that respect for the

rule of law be restored. "

 

The unconstitutional invasion by the state into the privacy of US

citizens is not only a crime, but the arrogant insistence by the GOP

regime that it possesses the " right to continue without regard to the

established law " is more than just a crime ... it is the overthrow of

the law that defines crime.

 

" During the period when this eavesdropping was still secret, the

President went out of his way to reassure the American people on more

than one occasion that, of course, judicial permission is required for

any government spying on American citizens and that, of course, these

constitutional safeguards were still in place. "

 

Bush " reassures " the American people by telling them same lies again

and again or hiding what he's doing. Like any common dictator, Bush

spied without judicial permission on citizens chiefly (but not

exclusively) because he wanted to identify and distinguish GOP

opponents and supporters. It's the old Nixon " enemies list " again.

Bush and his GOPs will deny that this is motive.

 

But Bush, at least, is a confirmed liar, so his word is worthless.

 

What is particularly bizarre in this instance is that with US

judiciary so hopelessly infested with weak GOP judges who view

servility to the executive branch of the government as their supreme

imperative, " judicial permission " could have been easily and quickly

obtained.

 

" What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels

the conclusion that the President of the United States has been

breaking the law repeatedly and persistently. "

 

What's more, this so-called " president " is not going to stop breaking

the law because he believes he is the law and the law has the right to

break the law.

 

" The law is king. " Gore quotes Thomas Paine .

 

Not any more.

 

" We now know that the decision by Congress to authorize the Iraq War

… was also based on false information. America would have been

better off knowing the truth and avoiding both of these colossal

mistakes in our history. "

 

Yeah, that's right ... Bush lied the United States into war against

the people of Iraq. But the GOPs in the legislative and judicial

branches of the US government didn't really care because the US bombs

and missiles would drop on Iraqi people, not the US people. So, the

blase GOPs believed that only the Iraqis … you know, Arabs … would

suffer the consequences of Bush lies which were in themselves a fraud

and another breach of the rule of law. And, since the US aggression

against Iraq was …and is … a violation of international law which the

USA has ratified, the aggression constituted still another a

repudiation of the rule of law with ramifications for US citizens.

 

Gore knows the danger of selective observance of the rule of law:

" Once violated, the rule of law is in danger. Unless stopped,

lawlessness grows. The greater the power of the executive grows, the

more difficult it becomes for the other branches to perform their

constitutional roles. As the executive acts outside its

constitutionally prescribed role and is able to control access to

information that would expose its actions, it becomes increasingly

difficult for the other branches to police it. Once that ability is

lost, democracy itself is threatened and we become a government of men

and not laws. "

 

The implication of what Gore says here is that Bush and his GOPs are

already too strong to be stopped. Bush has overpowered the legislative

and judicial branches and reduced them to adjuncts and

instrumentalities of the executive power. Gore hits the nail on the

head when he says an unconstitutional government must " control access

to information that would expose its actions. "

 

Whistle-blowing, once a right of law-respecting US citizens, is now a

crime.

 

The Bush regime is expert at lying by concealment of the truth. But

even Gore speaks gingerly when he says " democracy itself is

threatened. " In these circumstances, democracy is not only threatened,

it is destroyed.

 

Here's a real eye-opener in Gore's speech: " First, another admission

by the Attorney General: he concedes that the Administration knew that

the NSA project was prohibited by existing law and that they consulted

with some members of Congress about changing the statute. Gonzalez

says that they were told this probably would not be possible. So how

can they now argue that the Authorization for the Use of Military

Force somehow implicitly authorized it all along? Second, when the

Authorization was being debated, the Administration did in fact seek

to have language inserted in it that would have authorized them to use

military force domestically - and the Congress did not agree. Senator

Ted Stevens and Representative Jim McGovern, among others, made

statements during the Authorization debate clearly restating that that

Authorization did not operate domestically. "

 

The Bush wanted authority from the legislature to " use military force

domestically? "

 

What did the GOP in the White House have in mind?

 

What ground did the ruling GOPs (not just Bush) have to support

their belief that US law enforcement authorities are unable to handle

domestic disturbances?

 

The fact of the matter is that the president already has authority to

use military force domestically, but the authority is limited and

regulated by law. So, what Bush sought from Congress was the removal

of the legal restrictions on his use of military force within the

United States, against the US people, and against the law.

 

The habit of denial of political unpleasantness and the pretence of

innocence will no doubt prevent many US citizens from conceding or

even understanding this point which is of the utmost gravity for them.

But US citizens should drop the innocence act because most of what

Gore spoke about has been transparent to foreigners, including the

closest US allies, for years.

 

Gore goes even further: " When Bush failed to convince Congress to give

him all the power he wanted ... he secretly assumed that power anyway,

as if congressional authorization was a useless bother. "

 

So, this so-called " president " is prepared to use military force ...

domestically ... against the United States. What else can this quote

from Gore mean? This so-called " president " not only breaks the law and

brags about it, he also steals power that the legislature denies him.

 

Yes … I know, I know … denial, incredulity and, above all, s,

self-serving US innocence have set in and prevent Gore's charges

against the GOPs for being seriously considered or understood..

 

Gore then gets ginger again: " It is this same disrespect for America's

Constitution which has now brought our republic to the brink of a

dangerous breach in the fabric of the Constitution. And the disrespect

embodied in these apparent mass violations of the law is part of a

larger pattern of seeming indifference to the Constitution that is

deeply troubling to millions of Americans in both political parties. "

 

" To the brink? "

 

What does it take to go over the brink?

 

More " mass violations? "

 

Gore may be too generous or wishful when he says that the lawlessness

of the Bush regime is troubling to " both political parties. " On the

contrary, the mass of the GOPs are delighted that Bush has discarded

constitutional and other legal " prejudices " and they are standing

beside him, encouraging him to break the law, especially those laws

that he has not yet broken.

 

Gore tells us about the sweeping powers this so-called " president "

claims and exercises over the hear-nothing and the see-nothing

citizens of the United States: " For example, the President has also

declared that he has a heretofore unrecognized inherent power to seize

and imprison any American citizen that he alone determines to be a

threat to our nation, and that, notwithstanding his American

citizenship, the person imprisoned has no right to talk with a lawyer

- even to argue that the President or his appointees have made a

mistake and imprisoned the wrong person. "

 

Do you understand why so many US citizens conveniently pretend to be

ignorant about Bush?

 

In other words, Bush believes he has the power to " disappear " any US

citizen. And not just US citizens. Bush has actually disappeared

thousands of people around the globe to US concentration camps in

Poland, Romania, occupied Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Iraq, and some of the

former Soviet republics where they are imprisoned, tortured and

murdered. A 50-page legal memorandum prepared by Office of Legal

Counsel of the US Department of Justice argues that Bush , as

commander in chief, has the authority to torture and murder anybody wants.

 

And Bush wants.

 

Legal mumbo-jumbo in the August 1, 2002, memorandum goes something

like this. The commander-in-chief can cause other people extreme pain

or take their lives without justification. Such acts however are not

torture or murder because torture and murder are crimes created by law

and the commander is above the law, therefore he can't torture or

murder, no matter what he does.

 

I suggest that any US citizen who wants to shed the customary pretense

of innocence and ignorance about the evil of the Bush regime to read

the regime's legal memorandum approving torture and murder.

 

" Over 100 of these captives have reportedly died while being tortured

by Executive Branch interrogators and many more have been broken and

humiliated. In the notorious Abu Ghraib prison, investigators who

documented the pattern of torture estimated that more than 90 percent

of the victims were innocent of any charges. "

 

The " over 100 " figure is only the reported murders. Naturally, the

Bush regime under-reports its murders. A few weeks ago, Gore relates,

Bush signed a watered-down law that purports to regulate the use of

torture by the US troops. [uS mercenaries (or the co-called " private

security contractors " ) can still torture.] When he signed the

" anti-torture " law, Bush also signed a presidential statement that

accompanies the law which states he has the right to ignore law.

 

Gore says " Some of our traditional allies have been shocked by these

new practices on the part of our nation. " It's a good thing that Gore

stuck that " some " in there because the UK regime is one of the most

traditional of US allies and its hands are as bloody as those of the USA.

 

Gore then asks a very important question.

 

" Can it be true that any president really has such powers under our

Constitution? If the answer is " yes " then under the theory by which

these acts are committed, are there any acts that can on their face be

prohibited? If the President has the inherent authority to eavesdrop,

imprison citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then

what can't he do? "

 

Well, try to think of something. Bush welcomes new ideas.

 

" The Dean of Yale Law School, Harold Koh, said after analyzing the

Executive Branch's claims of these previously unrecognized powers: '

If the President has commander-in-chief power to commit torture, he

has the power to commit genocide, to sanction slavery, to promote

apartheid, to license summary execution.' "

 

All of which he has done in a number of places, including Iraq and Haiti.

 

This " commander-in chief " thing is deceptive ... Bush says he has

these previously unrecognized powers because he is the high and mighty

commander-in-chief. This suggests that these powers are only available

in times of war. That's a popular GOP or " goppish " lie. The president

of the United States is the commander-in-chief in times of war and in

times of peace. So, Bush claims these dictatorial powers all the time.

 

Gore recognizes this point when he says: " A second reason to believe

we may be experiencing something new is that we are told by the

Administration that the war footing upon which he has tried to place

the country is going to 'last for the rest of our lives.' So we are

told that the conditions of national threat that have been used by

other Presidents to justify arrogations of power will persist in near

perpetuity. "

 

The existing dictatorship over the United States is not just a Bush

dictatorship, it is a GOP dictatorship. So, even if Bush graciously

leaves the White House in 2009, the GOPs intend to stay in power

through election fraud which the GOPs have developed into a fine art

or precise science. When the GOPs declare prophetically that " the war

footing " and the previously unrecognized powers associated with the

war footing are going to " last for the rest of our lives, " they are

promising that the current GOP dictatorship is going to " last for the

rest of our lives. " Make no mistake, they are serious.

 

So, either do something or get use to it.

 

But the mass of the US citizens are so meek and timid that they

pretend not to notice the monster which sits in the room with them.

 

Although he still shows a delicate touch, Gore comes real close to

calling a horse a horse when he says " The stakes for America's

representative democracy are far higher than has been generally

recognized. " He is likely talking about the common tendency to deny

the politically unpleasant, to wave pretentious innocence in each

others faces and to claim a fraudulent ignorance about " Un-American "

things going on in high places. Many US citizens believe that faking

blindness about the demon in the White House is the very definition of

USA patriotism.

 

" This effort to rework America's carefully balanced constitutional

design into a lopsided structure dominated by an all powerful

Executive Branch with a subservient Congress and judiciary is --

ironically -- accompanied by an effort by the same administration to

rework America's foreign policy from one that is based primarily on

U.S. moral authority into one that is based on a misguided and

self-defeating effort to establish dominance in the world. The common

denominator seems to be based on an instinct to intimidate and control. "

 

" To establish dominance in the world? " Well, guess what the United

States is a part of? Gore must have a lot of guts or he truly loves

the United States or both to say things like that about the ruling

GOPs, a bunch of liars, kidnappers, torturers, and murderers. Knowing

that he is a lying criminal, Bush understands that he can't rely on

moral authority. We hope Bush's efforts are " self-defeating " as Gore

alleges. But to end this dictatorship over the USA may require more

than hoping. Bush's efforts are definitely designed " to intimidate and

control " most US citizens.

 

To a considerable extent, he has succeeded. Now that almost all US

citizens know that they are being closely watched by the dictatorship,

they may become more circumspect in their utterances and activities.

 

* All the while, pretending to be ignorant of any political reason

why they should be more circumspect.

 

Gore looks at Bush's packing of the judiciary with judges who view the

role of the courts with contempt and who worship an exaggerated role

of the executive power:

 

" The President's judicial appointments are clearly designed to ensure

that the courts will not serve as an effective check on executive

power. As we have all learned, Judge Alito is a longtime supporter of

a powerful executive - a supporter of the so-called unitary executive,

which is more properly called the unilateral executive. Whether you

support his confirmation or not -- and I do not -- we must all agree

that he will not vote as an effective check on the expansion of

executive power. Likewise, Chief Justice Roberts has made plain his

deference to the expansion of executive power through his support of

judicial deference to executive agency rulemaking. "

 

Oh! So, Bush is one those " unitary executive " or, better still, one of

those " unilateral executive? " We must use the correct nomenclature

when we talk about our dictator.

 

Whether Bush is unitary or unilateral, he has systematically and

successfully undermined the separation of powers. The judges whom Bush

appoints to the bench have less respect for the rule of law than he

does. And Bush doesn't have any respect for it. The mass of US judges

consists despicable traitors if the United States means the US people

under the Constitution. To this judicial mass in robes, the United

States means boundless servility to the executive power.

 

Gore has a few choice words left for the US legislature: " But the most

serious damage has been done to the legislative branch. The sharp

decline of congressional power and autonomy in recent years has been

almost as shocking as the efforts by the Executive Branch to attain a

massive expansion of its power. I was elected to Congress in 1976 and

served eight years in the house, 8 years in the Senate and presided

over the Senate for 8 years as Vice President. As a young man, I saw

the Congress first hand as the son of a Senator. My father was elected

to Congress in 1938, 10 years before I was born, and left the Senate

in 1971. The Congress we have today is unrecognizable compared to the

one in which my father served. There are many distinguished Senators

and Congressmen serving today. I am honored that some of them are here

in this hall. But the legislative branch of government under its

current leadership now operates as if it is entirely subservient to

the Executive Branch. "

 

Bravo!

 

The GOP majorities in the US Congress are the most corrupt and rotten

bunch of scoundrels ever assembled in a deliberative body. Like the

judicial and executive powers, the GOP-controlled legislature has no

respect for the rule of law. Indeed, they despise it. They care only

about their bribes and their vile competition of show who in Congress

is the most obsequious toward head GOP, the tyrannical occupant in the

Oval Office.

 

Gore exposes this " goppish " bunch of legislative sycophants: " The role

of authorization committees has declined into insignificance. The 13

annual appropriation bills are hardly ever actually passed anymore.

Everything is lumped into a single giant measure that is not even

available for Members of Congress to read before they vote on it. "

 

If that is not the funeral of US democracy, then what is? That gives

new meaning to the phrase " contempt of Congress. " The so-called

" lawmakers " are not allowed by Bush to read the key appropriation

bills that they vote into law. And only one of the " lawmakers, "

Senator Robert C. Byrd (D --WV) by comparing in May 2005 Bush to

Hitler, has spoken up and denounced the dictatorship of the executive

over the legislative branch.

 

Gore quotes Thomas Jefferson who said " An informed citizenry is the

only true repository of the public will. " What did Jefferson think

about an intimidated and controlled citizenry like the mass of US

citizens today? It's hard for the US citizenry to be informed when it

relies on the lying US capitalist press which is thoroughly

infiltrated and infested with GOP hacks. A good example of the lying

of the US capitalist press is its distorted and perverse coverage of

Gore's speech. I recommend that you read the speech and then check out

" coverage " of the speech in the US capitalist press. You'll think that

you're dealing with two entirely different stories.

 

What does Gore think should be done about this mess?

 

" A special counsel should immediately be appointed by the Attorney

General to remedy the obvious conflict of interest that prevents him

from investigating what many believe are serious violations of law by

the President. We have had a fresh demonstration of how an independent

investigation by a special counsel with integrity can rebuild

confidence in our system of justice. Patrick Fitzgerald has, by all

accounts, shown neither fear nor favor in pursuing allegations that

the Executive Branch has violated other laws. "

 

OK. I'll go for that. If neither the judges nor lawmakers will do

their job, then give the special counsel a chance to do their job for

these cowards. So, the Republic rests in the hands of special counsel.

But the cringing legislature and judiciary are unlikely to demand the

appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute " serious

violations " of the law. The Attorney General Albert Gonzales has the

authority to appoint a special counsel. But Gonzales is the architect

of the pro-torture policy of the Bush regime, so it is unlikely that

he will see anything wrong with " serious violations " of the law.

 

It will take a powerful mass movement to push Gonzales to make the

appointment. But will the I-don't-care-about-politics citizenry rise

up against this vicious and dangerous regime in Washington?

 

The US people and the people of the whole world owe Albert Gore Jr. a

lot. He brilliantly and boldly defended US democracy and US honor that

been horribly violated by the Bush and his GOPs, both domestically and

internationally. We can hope that other leaders of the Republic will

find the guts to join Gore. Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, a

leading authority of the US Constitution, arrived at Gore's

conclusions sometime in 2003. It's lamentable that the " physical

therapist " and glamorous senator from New York who frequents the White

House so much is too gutless to take a stand for democratic principles.

 

The gist of Gore's historic speech is that Bush does not respect the

rule of law and Bush is unaccountable to the US people because he

keeps the people uninformed with a current of lies or by hiding

information about what he's doing. And Bush is also unaccountable,

Gore argues, under the doctrine of the separation of powers and of

checks and balances because he dominates the GOP weaklings and hacks

at the top of judicial and legislative branches of the government.

 

If the four fundamental principles of democracy are sovereignty, the

electoral principle, accountability, and the rule of law, then the

Bush breaches all of them. In other words, democracy seems to be a

form of state in which supreme power resides in the body of citizens

entitled to vote, citizens elect their representatives who exercise

power, these representatives are accountable to the citizens, and the

representative exercise power in accordance with the rule of law.

 

Again, Gore concentrates mainly on Bush's violations with regard to

accountability and the rule of law.

 

But Gore knows … better than anybody else in the world … that Bush has

violated the electoral principle of democracy. Gore deliberately

remained silent about Bush's 2000 and 2004 infringements of the

electoral principle.

 

* Perhaps he believes that if he included the electoral violations

of democracy, people would think his speech was the crying by poor

" loser. "

 

Clearly, Gore sees that the unconstitutional surveillance of the US

people by the GOP dictatorship over the United States is an attack on

the sovereignty principle, that is, supreme power resides in the body

of citizens entitled to vote.

 

Arthur Shaw

belial4444

 

http://www.vheadline.com/shaw