That does sound familiar.

There is a technical term for it.

One cannot possibly make this stuff up.

Spanish judge opens investigation into Bush administration over Guantanamo
By DANIEL WOOLLS , Associated Press

Last update: April 29, 2009 – 9:52 AM

http://www.startribune.com/world/43983367.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUl

Excerpt:

Spain’s Judge “Garzon is opening a probe into “possible material authors” of torture, accomplices and those who gave torture orders, although he does not name anyone specifically.”

Kit Bond-(Sen.Missouri) repeated that same nonesense the other day about stopping and attack,but the dates are just not on the side of that argument.

Since you doubled posted your nonsense, I’ll double post my reply from the other thread:

EnhancedInterr…:

Here’s a little analysis of your cut and paste that your web site omitted, and you apparently missed:”

“In a White House press briefing, Bush’s counterterrorism chief, Frances Fragos Townsend, told reporters that the cell leader was arrested in February 2002, and “at that point, the other members of the cell” (later arrested) “believed that the West Coast plot has been canceled, was not going forward” [italics mine]. A subsequent fact sheet released by the Bush White House states, “In 2002, we broke up [italics mine] a plot by KSM to hijack an airplane and fly it into the tallest building on the West Coast.” These two statements make clear that however far the plot to attack the Library Tower ever got—an unnamed senior FBI official would later tell the Los Angeles Times that Bush’s characterization of it as a “disrupted plot” was “ludicrous”—that plot was foiled in 2002. But Sheikh Mohammed wasn’t captured until March 2003.”

Thus, the L.A. attack, if it was ever even intended to be carried out, was averted in 2002 when Americans apprehended the Asian terrorists charged with the task. Official Bush and Intelligence statements even claim that the attack was thwarted back in 2002.

So if Sheikh Mohammed was not arrested until 2003, how on Earth could torturing him have thwarted the plan?”

I guess torture works in the “Through the Looking Glass” world where subsequent events cause preceding events.

I was working within my community and heard some voices. I listened to those voices and thought they were just. So I decided there were enough voices and thought I could organize them. Soon it seemed like I could do this coast to coast and I felt like I was Organizing for America. Then I wondered how can I spread the message, internet of course, you know what they say advertise every where to get a wider audience. Put a donate button everywhere and soon you can be raking in the dough.

sound familiar?

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=3790

and also this from another website:

Here’s what one web site said on Feb. 16, 2006:

“Last week, U.S. President George W. Bush revealed in a public speech that U.S. authorities, working in concert with foreign intelligence and security agencies, had disrupted an al Qaeda plot in
2002 involving an aircraft attack against a skyscraper in Los Angeles. The attack originally had been planned to take place in October 2001, one month after the 9/11 attacks, but was repeatedly delayed for numerous reasons.

“As outlined by the president, the attack would have unfolded along now-familiar lines: Four al Qaeda operatives were supposed to hijack an airliner, seize the controls and ram the aircraft into the tallest building on the West Coast–the U.S. Bank Tower, formerly known as the Library Tower. The weapons used were to have been explosives the operatives concealed in their shoes, which supposedly would have aided them in blowing off the cockpit doors.”

The attack was foiled because of information given by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, under interrogation at Gitmo. Whatever “torture” they applied to him saved thousands of lives.”

This is why America has always been promoted as a land where no man is above the law, including the President.

However, in 1946, certain people hijacked the role of our Grand Jury and the courtroom jury and, henceforth, embarked on a mission of misinformation, distortions, and blatant lies to convince the American people, and the entire legal community, that it is the government that determines what is right and what is wrong in the actions of the government or of any elected government officials, employees, or agents.

In an article in the Creighton Law Review, Volume 33, number 4, 1999-2000, Roger Roots, Juris Doctorate, wrote:

In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution, common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at any time and to investigate public officials without government influence. These fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital function of oversight upon the government. The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past.

Judges and prosecutors and attorneys began using the phrase “runaway grand jury” to create ridicule and scorn upon a jury that chose to think for themselves, which is the Constitutional Right of any jury. Roger Roots continues:

A runaway grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s “runaway” grand jury is in fact, the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model for American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact runaways, according to the definition of modern times. They operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself.

In 1946, The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted. In those procedures, they made a rule to punish runaway grand juries. Rule 6(g): “At any time for cause shown, the court may excuse a juror either temporarily or permanently, and in the latter event the court may impanel another person in place of the juror excused.”

Now judges could throw anyone off a grand jury, or even dis-impanel a grand jury entirely, merely for exercising its own discretion and not doing what the court or prosecutor tells them to do.

All laws in America–whether federal, state, county, or city–must conform to the framework of the United States Constitution. Laws can be illegal, and many laws are illegal. Rules are not even laws and have no authority if attached to a source that is not in line with the U.S. Constitution. Law, rules, orders, methods of the government that do not conform to the U.S. Constitution are considered “Fruit from the poison tree” and if challenged as such, and proven not to be Constitutional in nature, must be unenforceable.

Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure has an added “Note 4″ which directly conflicts with, ignores, and willfully violates the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states clearly: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on the presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.”

Note 4 of Rule 7 states: “Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal courts.” They rewrote the U.S. Constitution to suit their own purposes.

And the guys all willing participated whom are all known now as Doughnuts.

Oops I forgot. Water boarding in not torture, it’s “dunking”.
Sorry!!

the link you posted, I read it and I think the guy is probably right. Without any other explanation for going into Iraq. Although, I think they may have done Iraq so they could engage in a 2 front war with Iran. I still think that was Bush’s ultimate goal, but the Iranians arent stupid, so they got us bogged down in Iraq to prevent that. I would like to think that Bush is a diabolical genius rather than a base prick that followed illegal stupid advise from a bunch of clowns. I think you could at least rationalize the war if clearing out the Mullahs was part of the broader strategy.

My wife thinks he went into Iraq to settle the score with Sadam for trying to off 41 and to upstage daddy. If either one of those is true he should be given a death sentence or at least life in prison.

I am not following, “(I) you hate to say it but I (you) think there is some truth to what that guys says.”

I just need some clarification, Hersch, Rense or Bdaman above?

I read that and I hate to say it but I think there is some truth to what that guy says.

All I can say is WOW.

http://www.rense.com/general35/eax.htm

Only one other one, The ONE thats Hooked on Phonics. I’m a speed reader, I’m a speed reader watchin watchin my lines go by, my, my ,my

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0409/obama_gets_ahead_of_prompter_3813cbcb-1e4a-44c6-b1e7-26017e7b70c2.html

“The first time I met Bush 43,I knew he was different.Two things became clear.One,he didn’t know very much.The other was he had confidence to ask questions that revealed he didn’t know very much.Most people are reluctant to say when they don’t know something,a word or a term they haven’t heard before.not him.

The sad twist is this is something conceived out of Nazi Germany. In that the highest to the ones in sufficient ranks were prosecuted for just following orders. Unless you were in one of the diabolic prisons. Then you were prosecuted just as everyone else.

What I find in amazement is Geo I, put Saddam in power. It is my understanding that we supplied not only Iraq but we supplied Afghanistan with all sorts of lovely weapons. I am sorry, we do not do that sort of thing. It was some rogue operative of the CIA and thye will be punished as soon as we find oout who they were.

Those were the words from the heart of a good man spoken long before the bushie era.

George Bush is as sincere as a parrot about those words.

And so are his followers:

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/goebbel-piece-prize.html