RIA is the only "mainstream" coverage of Roberts comments so far. Foreign mainstream, or in FOX-speak "propaganda", but still, there it is.

Sorry for the repetition, but PCR's statements are the biggest thing out right now... plus, it's more than just us regulars visiting this site who would normally never, ever see that RIA piece.

What ever it will take to wake up the people and save the United States from these mad men.

I DISAGREE with your opinion, does that mean I am now highly suspicious, a "left gatekeeper", "disinformation agent", or an "inifilTraitor"?

The reason I disagree with you is the way the entire government handled the issue of torture. Bush declared it ok to torture, congress did nothing, a prisoner got his day in court, the court struck down Bushs basis for torture. Congress passes legislation legalizing torture. And at the same time passes more legislation preventing prisoners from having their day in court.

So what is the basis for your opinion, and the reason for charging people who disagree of being traitors?

doughnut, you act like this congress has shown backbone or even a small semblence of respect for the constitution before. this is a congress who took impeachment off the table before it even changed hands despite the fact that Cheney/Bush have violated the constitution over and over. the Supreme Court is firmly in the hands of rightwing tools who fully buy into the "war on terror" and most of if not all of the crap that goes with it. and as long as the corrupt media helps to keep congress on that short leash Bush seems to able to get away with most of what he wants. checks and balances ARE there, you're right about that, but that hardly matters when the media and the congress dont make use of them. kind of like asking if a tree falls blah blah blah. if Congress and the media fail to hold the criminals accountable, do the checks and balances really even exist? only on paper.......

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

""When Bush exercises this authority [under the new Executive Order], there's no check to it."

"Doughnut" "That is an absolute out-and-out lie. Period."

Why don't you take the time to read the executive order before calling Craig Paul Roberts a liar. I'll assume you haven't read it, because otherwise it would mean you are just calling people liars without taking the time to read properly.

“’Catastrophic Emergency’ means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions… The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government.” National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, May 9, 2007

“This is nothing more than a power grab that centralizes power and will make the President a dictator in the case of a so called ‘Catastrophic Emergency’. It is insane that this directive claims that its purpose is to define procedures to protect a working constitutional government when the very language in the document destroys what a working constitutional government is supposed to be. A working constitutional government contains a separation of powers between three equally powerful branches and this directive states that the executive branch has the power to coordinate the activities of the other branches. This directive is a clear violation of constitutional separation of powers.” Lee Rogers, May 21, 2007

“This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and obliterating the separation of powers.” Larry Chin, May 21, 2007

Doughnut says: "Bush can say or do anything he wants, or try to, but that doesn't mean that the Congress and the Supreme Court are going to sit back and let him be King George."

“More than 200 years later, we have another King George. In the last six years, George W. Bush has sought to accumulate all governing powers in the same hands -- his. In the Declaration of Independence, the framers charged that the King ‘refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.’ Bush has repeatedly violated the Constitution's command that the President ‘shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,’ by breaking some and refusing to enforce others. The Constitution grants Congress the power to make laws; after both houses pass a bill, the President can only sign it or veto it. Bush, however, takes a different tack. He has vetoed just three bills, then quietly attached ‘signing statements’ to more than 1,000 congressional laws, indicating his intent to follow only those parts with which he agrees.” President of the National Lawyers Guild, Marjorie Cohn, July 16, 2007

“Serious critics of both Mr. Bush and the Democrats ask why the latter do not undertake the impeachment of the former… If one takes the trouble to examine the matter from the perspective of the machinations that dominate all political behavior… though Republicans and Democrats have their personal and minor policy differences, they are in agreement on one basic point: their ‘bipartisan’ support for the preservation and aggrandizement of the power of the state. They understand – as do members of the mainstream media – that their principal obligation is to serve the well-being of the political power structure that long ago laid uncontested claim to the ownership of modern society.” Butler Shaffer, July 17, 2007

"Bush and Cheney would have been impeached long ago if Congress was carrying out the will of We the People, especially since last November. By taking impeachment "off the table", Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic power structure are abetting the formation of dictatorship and the shredding of the Constitution. Why is this happening? The answer can be summed up in two words: "Corporate Personhood". Ever since the late 19th century, clever corporate lawyers have been gaining the rights and privileges of persons for the the fictitious persons that are corporations. Since the only legal job of corporate officers is to make money for stockholders, they have used corporate personhood to influence and buy politicians, especially legislators, so as to get contracts, tax breaks, laws that benefit corporations rather than human beings, and thereby increase profits. This process is now so far advanced that the corporations, especially the military/oil/nuclear/aerospace corporations essentially control the Representatives of We the People. Elections are won by media coverage, by and large, which takes lots of money, which corporations have and We the People do not. Then there are the corporate-controlled voting machines, which have corrupted the democratic process. " Carol Wolman http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_carol_wo_070813_congress_3a_bott...

Doughnut: "anyone who says or thinks differently should be considered HIGHLY suspicious."

Consider me a suspect then. I can find many more who support a position that is "suspicious"--according to you, but the fact that you can call Craig Paul Roberts a liar shows that you really don't know what the heck you are talking about.

If Congress gave a CRAP about stopping bush from being "King George" they would have done it by now. Instead they sit on their asses and pretend that they are "scared" of a terrorist strike. The democrats aren't scared of another terror attack, and they aren't "spineless"--they are remote control, controlled and they are consolidating POWER which they--at least theoretically--could use if they are "elected" (I use this term loosely).

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."