from: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner

The President of the US swears to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution (article VI, paragraph 2) states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” One of the most important treaties is that governing when a nation may go to war. After 20th century wars that killed over 100 million human beings, the UN was formed to eliminate war as a foreign policy option The UN Charter is registered in the US State Department as a Treaty in Force.

Therefore, one of the most important Constitutional duties of any US President is to follow the law to not unleash the world’s most powerful destructive force and to defend innocent civilians from such onslaught and misery.

from: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner

“The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know.” – Harry Truman, as quoted in Plain Speaking : An Oral Biography of Harry S Truman (1974) by Merle Miller, p. 26.

Senator Lieberman, Secretary of State Clinton, and former UN Ambassador John Bolton have resumed rhetoric of a United States attack upon Iran. As my other articles have demonstrated, that rhetoric is false and intentional propaganda attempting to justify another US War of Aggression. We should understand that the rhetoric for war with Iraq was also known to be false at the time it was told. The following is from my brief, “War with Iraq and Afghanistan, rhetoric for war with Iran": http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/41708

Please use this information in any way helpful to build a brighter future.

August 12, 2009
by Jeremy R. Hammond
Shahid R. Siddiqi contributed to this report

In an exclusive interview with Foreign Policy Journal, retired Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul responds to charges that he supports terrorism, discusses 9/11 and ulterior motives for the war on Afghanistan, claims that the U.S., Israel, and India are behind efforts to destabilize Pakistan, and charges the U.S. and its allies with responsibility for the lucrative Afghan drug trade.

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."
- Voltaire, Questions sur les miracles (1765)

Senator Lieberman, Secretary of State Clinton, and former UN Ambassador John Bolton have resumed rhetoric of a United States attack upon Iran. This article will define “War of Aggression” and explain when a war is justifiable under US and international law. Laws are meant to be understood and obeyed. Among the most important for governments and citizens to understand is when war is authorized, and when responses other than war are required. If we wish to call ourselves civilized, we MUST understand the rule of law before we threaten a nation for destruction, death, and cruel physical, emotional and mental agony.
It is edited from my brief, “War with Afghanistan and Iraq, rhetoric for war with Iran”; found here: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/41708.

(Updated with further developments from Democracy Now. Essentially, the Obama administration is threatening the security of British citizens to prevent disclosure of torture crimes; a less roundabout way to describe it would be that the White House is "threatening with increased risk of mass murder by ending intelligence sharing" -- SnowCrash)

British Lawmaker David Davis Challenges US Threats to Suppress Evidence of CIA Torture

Democracy Now, August 5, 2009

A British court heard evidence last week that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to prevent the disclosure of details regarding the CIA’s role in the alleged torture of former Guantanamo Bay prisoner Binyam Mohamed. We hear from conservative British parliamentarian David Davis about the Obama administration’s attempts to suppress evidence in this case.

Calvin Sloan expands on his message at his new blog, The Pursuit of Injustice;

"...The Casus Belli for the Iraq war has been revealed, even by the corporate mainstream media, as a falsification designed for imperial gain. With Alan Greenspan's confession in 2007 that the ''Iraq war is largely about oil,'' whatever disillusions remained in political circles over the motives behind the U.S. occupation of Iraq were squelched...

...Before justifying the U.S. occupation to the Arab world in his speech in Cairo, President Obama reminded us that the United States was originally the victim for it had been "al Qaeda [who] killed nearly 3,000 people on that day [9/11]." And thus, the U.S. will rightfully remain stationed in the crossroads of Central and South Asia until the "violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan" who are "determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can" are terminated. The Afghan myth is inexorably dependent on the 9/11 myth.

The official narrative of 9/11 and its severe implications still stand as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy 8 years after the event. The disturbing truth however, that factions of the U.S. government had a hand in nurturing the plot, cannot be denied. The documented failure of the administration to detain the conspirators and stop the attacks goes beyond incompetence and into the realm of intentional negligence and interference. Further investigation reveals even more deception and distortions.***

The 'War on Terror,' with its focal point, the war in Afghanistan, is thus a facade constructed to mislead the public into supporting despotic, imperialist policies..."

Full post:
http://pursuitofinjustice.blogspot.com/2009/07/afghan-myth.html

The Big Lie of Afghanistan

By Malalai Joya

July 26, 2009 "The Guardian" -- July 25, 2009 -- In 2005, I was the youngest person elected to the new Afghan parliament. Women like me, running for office, were held up as an example of how the war in Afghanistan had liberated women. But this democracy was a facade, and the so-called liberation a big lie.

On behalf of the long-suffering people of my country, I offer my heartfelt condolences to all in the UK who have lost their loved ones on the soil of Afghanistan. We share the grief of the mothers, fathers, wives, sons and daughters of the fallen. It is my view that these British casualties, like the many thousands of Afghan civilian dead, are victims of the unjust policies that the Nato countries have pursued under the leadership of the US government.

Almost eight years after the Taliban regime was toppled, our hopes for a truly democratic and independent Afghanistan have been betrayed by the continued domination of fundamentalists and by a brutal occupation that ultimately serves only American strategic interests in the region.

Source: www.rawstory.com

BY STEPHEN C. WEBSTER
6/27/2009

Since the United States invaded Afghanistan, the country’s number one cash crop, opium, has repeatedly broken production records for the country. By some estimates, the occupied territory now supplies by some 90 percent of the world’s poppies.

So far, eradication efforts have merely fueled the Taliban’s coffers and driven civilian farmers further outside of U.S. influence. Because of this, the United States has formed a new strategy in the fight against the crop: They are giving up.

“The Western policies against the opium crop, the poppy crop, have been a failure,” said Richard Holbrooke, America’s envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, speaking to a G8 conference on Afghanistan.

“They did not result in any damage to the Taliban, but they put farmers out of work. We are not going to support crop eradication. We’re going to phase it out,” he told Reuters.

SHIP OF STATE OR SHIP OF FOOLS

The Money Party at Work

We keep doing the same things over and over again and expect different results.

Michael Collins

May 19, 2009
Ex-U.S. Envoy Considers Key Role in Afghan Government
By HELENE COOPER

WASHINGTON — Zalmay Khalilzad, who was President George W. Bush’s ambassador to Afghanistan, could assume a powerful, unelected position inside the Afghan government under a plan he is discussing with Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, according to senior American and Afghan officials.

Mr. Khalilzad, an American citizen who was born in Afghanistan, had considered challenging Mr. Karzai for the presidency in elections scheduled for this summer.

But Mr. Khalilzad missed the May 8 filing deadline, and the American and Afghan officials say that he has been talking with Mr. Karzai for several weeks about taking on a job that the two have described as the chief executive officer of Afghanistan.

Such an alliance would benefit Mr. Karzai by co-opting a potential rival. For its part, the White House has made no secret of its growing disenchantment with Mr. Karzai, and some Afghanistan experts said that enlisting Mr. Khalilzad would have the virtue of bringing a strong, competent leader into an increasingly dysfunctional Afghan government.

Passing out DVDs and spreading the truth about the events of September 11, 2001 at City Hall in downtown Kitchener on April 11, 2009.

Meet the MAN who tried to arrest George W. Bush on March 17th, 2009 in Calgary, and learn why he did this.

Direct Link:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4237471280373245988

In this interview Splitting the Sky (aka John Boncore) explains his actions in Calgary, Canada's laws pertaining to war crimes. and attempts to have Bush barred or arrested. He makes connections to 9/11, references his personal history with that day, discusses his investigations into put option stocks, then ties this to AIG, Hank Greenburg, Soros, Obama, Brezizinski, Kissinger, et al and the current financial meltdown (controlled economic collapse).

A Grand Slam!

This video is from "Face to Face" with guest host Chris Cook, to be aired soon in Victoria, BC, southern Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands, potentially reaching 400,000 viewers.

Weekly Address: The Challenges of Our Time

"The President discusses the breadth and depth of the global challenges we face, as well as our potential to address them through renewed international alliances. This week's address was filmed aboard Air Force 1 amidst vital diplomatic stops at the G-20 Summit, a NATO summit, and bilateral meetings" - From White House YouTube Channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCjZRCPniSk

Source: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikileaks_obtains_10_years_of_messages,_interviews_from_Osama_bin_Laden_translated_by_CIA

September 15, 2008

Ten years of messages and interviews with al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden have been leaked. Translated by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the documents were posted on a blog Friday.

Posted to Secrecy News blog on September 12, and copied to similar sites including Wikileaks.org, the ten years of messages span from 1994-2004. The packet, issued in 2004, is nearly 300 pages, and labeled "official use only". It was translated by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), a division of the CIA, and includes interviews with bin Laden from various news agencies and also includes messages he sent directly to the United States.

One message includes bin Laden's denial of having anything to do with the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York City, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania.

news.ReOpen911.info by Spotless Mind
Translated by DJDaveMark
December 1st, 2008

The administrators at Change.org have deleted the idea for a new investigation into 9/11.

They declared that a new investigation into the attacks – which gave the Bush Administration the power to spy on it's own citizens, to torture, to launch two preventative wars based on lies and more generally to trample all over the Constitution – was "outside the scope" of the site's stated mission and therefore didn't meet their criteria for "specific policy solutions". It doesn't matter how many people want to know the Truth about 9/11, they refuse to have the idea promoted and discussed on their site.

Because of this censorship, the Change.org site has shown that it isn't a "social platform" but, rather, just another gatekeeper of 9/11 Truth.

When the idea was pulled, it was by far the most popular, comfortably occupying the top spot, totaling at least 660 votes (twice the amount of the next best rated idea) only 48 hours after being submitted. On a side note, the other proposed ideas had a 3 week head start, and the 9/11 Truth idea was only just warming up.

Why (pretend to) ask the citizens for ideas then simply delete the most popular? It seems like all of this is more of a joke than a wishful expression for democracy…

Here is the e-mail received by everyone who voted (and to whom we thank for voting):