Source:
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/290906torturebill.htm

(more links to mainstream news articles on main link above within this
article)

Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism
Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth of the
dictatorship

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | September 29 2006

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the
Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a
definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American
citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions
of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and
conviction in front of a military tribunal.

Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by
military commissions - includes the following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or
duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of
the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be
punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

For an individual to hold an allegiance or duty to the United States
they need to be a citizen of the United States. Why would a foreign
terrorist have any allegiance to the United States to breach in the
first place?

This is another telltale facet that proves the bill applies to U.S.
citizens and includes them under the "enemy combatant" designation. We
previously cited the comments of Yale law Professor Bruce Ackerman, who
wrote in the L.A. Times, "The compromise legislation....authorizes the
president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they
have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison,
they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal
protections of the Bill of Rights."

The New York Times stated that the legislation introduced, "A
dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill
could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign
citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite
detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to
apply this label to anyone he wanted."

Calling the bill "our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition
Acts," the Times goes on to highlight the rubber stamping of torture.

"Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable
— already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined
in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005
Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses."

Since with this bill, in the aggregate, Bush has declared himself to be
above the Constitution and the laws of the United States, the allegiance
of American citizens is no longer to the flag or the freedoms for which
it stands, but to Bush himself, the self-appointed dictator, and any
diversion from that allegiance will mandate arrest, torture and
conviction in a military tribunal under the terms of this bill.

Similar to the UK's Glorification of Terrorism law, which top lawyers
have slammed as vague, open to interpretation and a potential weapon for
the government to kidnap supposed subversives, the nebulous context of
"wrongfully aiding the enemy," could easily be defined to include
publicly absolving an accused terrorist of involvement in a terrorist
attack.

That renders the entire 9/11 truth movement an aid to terrorist suspects
and subject to military tribunal and torture. In addition, Bush's
recently cited National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which is
available on the White House website, labels conspiracy theorists as
terrorist recruiters.

This should leave us with no doubt as to which parties are the target of
the government's torture and intimidation campaign.

Could protesting a war approved by the government and their bootlickers
in Congress and the Senate be considered breaching an allegiance to the
United States? Could campaigning against the bombing of a target country
be considered wrongfully aiding the enemy?

When the USA PATRIOT act was rushed through at the height of an anthrax
scare without any members of Congress even having time to read it, we
were assured that it was to fight terrorists and would not be used
against the American people.

Since then a plethora of cases whereby the USA PATRIOT act was used
against U.S. citizens emerged, including the internment without trial
for over three years of Jose Padilla, an American citizen who was
finally released after no evidence of terrorism was uncovered.

The so-called "compromise" before the bill was passed and the media
acclaim of John McCain as some kind of human rights champion is one of
the biggest con jobs ever inflicted upon the American people.

Shortly after the bill was finalized it was spun by Bush security
advisor Stephen Hadley as "good news and a good day for the American
people." McCain said that it safeguarded "the integrity and letter and
spirit of the Geneva Conventions."

In truth the legislation does the exact opposite, giving Bush carte
blanche to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva
Conventions."

In addition, under the bill, "No person may invoke the Geneva
Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas corpus or other civil
action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former
officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the
United States is a party as a source of rights in any court of the
United States or its States or territories."

The bill also allows hearsay evidence (obtained via phony confessions
after torture) to be considered by the military tribunal and bars the
suspect from even having knowledge of the charges against him - making a
case for defense impossible. This is guaranteed to produce 100%
conviction rates as you would expect in the dictatorships of Uzbekistan
or Zimbabwe and other torture protagonists who are in many cases allied
with the Bush administration and provide phony confessions obtained from
torture that allow the U.S. government to scare its people with the
threat of imaginary Al-Qaeda terror cells waiting to kill them.

Following the Supreme Court's ruling to previously strike down Bush's
shadow penal system, Alberto Gonzales is already out threatening federal
judges to shut up and get behind the dictator or face the consequences.

Gonzales has the sheer gall to attack judges for even considering to
"overturn long-standing traditions or policies without proper support in
text or precedent," which is exactly what Gonzales, Bush and the rest of
the White House criminals are doing themselves by de facto abolishing
the Bill of Rights!

This is a dark day for the United States, the day America died and the
bastard birth of a literal dictatorship.

I think that the portion of that bill that refers to citizens of the
United States, Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes
triable by
military commissions - includes the following definition.

"Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or
duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of
the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be
punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

is refering to people like the US born citizen that sided with Bin Laden
and actually went over there and trained and supported the terrorist
acts committed against our country. I would have hoped that you had not
forgotten that part of it.

This is a very good topic that I really don't want to go too deep
into,
but, suffice it to say that our country, the way that it was ment to be,
died a long time ago.

that's true Net..but Bush has taken a big first step on the road to a
fascist police state..so much for liberty and justice for ALL... I do
agree..if they capture a KNOWN terrorist, then too bad for that fucker,
the hell with legalities and prison.. smear some pork in his face then
stuff it in the fuckers mouth and blow him away. BUT, a SUSPECTED
terrorist should have the same rights as any other criminal suspect.
Oddly enough, this is how Hitler started out, the curtailing of and even
the outright rescinding of certain civil liberties, and the fact that an
oath had to be sworn, not to Germany or it's ppl, but to Hitler.

I pledge allegiance to the chimp
the Vietnam dodger, that little wimp
I will not speak out about his war mongering behavior
Running around like the world's personal savior
I will not complain about his domestic policies
Even tho he's bringing this country to its knees
And when his back door deals are done
Watch out cuz there'll be liberty and justice for none

i agree with you animal and the thing is, we aren't stopping there. this
stuff is going to keep going downhill, this is just the beginning. now
that the damage is done i hope they don't try to take away our guns.

ok..this is ONE problem I have with the US is it's prediliction for
guns..now DON'T tell me cuz it's in the constitution, cuz anybody who
says that has obviously never read that part carefully..when that was
written in...the threat of a British invasion was still very real, heck
the Brits WERE planning on doing just that and the idea was to have an
effective militia to defend the newly formed nation. BUT you now have
the most technologically advanced military on the planet to defend you
and guess what?..the Brits have decided to put those invasion plans off
indefinitely lol. Now, the only ppl those guns are killing are other
Americans...Oh sure, I've heard ppl say, " I only use my M-16 for
hunting." Well ya know what? if ya need a fully automatic weapon to
hunt, stay the fuck home cuz yer obviously either a menace or a lousy
shot or both...Secondly, and this point I find sadly amusing. Remember
lawn darts? You know you why you don't see it in stores anymore? In 1985
three ppl in North America were accidentally killed by errant lawn
darts, so the game was banned. Now c'mon..pick any major US city and
I'll guarantee at least that many ppl are killed or wounded by handguns
on a weekly if not daily basis. To put in perspective, in 1985 3 ppl in
Great Britain were killed with handguns, 7 ppl in Canada were killed
with handguns, in the US..it was thousands(btw, handguns are illegal in
Canada unless yer a licenced collector). and I don't wanna hear about
how the criminals have 'em either. They wouldn't have so many of them if
the US quit making them for the public in general..did you know that the
US produces more handguns then EVERY other country on the planet
combined?? and handguns only have 2 purposes, to be easily concealed and
to kill ppl. And if you wanna argue with me, then I'll just shoot ya
lolol