Murder by Numbers

Bump and Update:

Israeli Document: Gaza Blockade Isn't About Security

As Israel ordered a slight easing of its blockade of the Gaza Strip Wednesday, McClatchy obtained an Israeli government document that describes the blockade not as a security measure but as "economic warfare" against the Islamist group Hamas, which rules the Palestinian territory.

Two things; collective punishment is a war crime, and Hamas is the democratically elected government for Palestine, they 'rule' only because they were elected. The Bush regime pushed for the election, but didn't like the results.

So when the Israeli government says they are blockading arms, they are actually blockading aid to Palestinians. (See Palestinians/Palestine.)

Original post below:
Some more thoughts on Israel's latest act of state sponsored terrorism.

First, why is Israel blockading Gaza? Instead of resorting to a bushism of 'the terrists hate us fer arr freedoms' let us look at what Israel has to say:

Details of Gaza blockade revealed in court case

BBC News has seen documents, submitted to an Israeli Court, which give more detail than ever before about how and why Israel maintains its Gaza blockade.

In one document, Israel describes the import curbs as "a central pillar in the armed conflict with Hamas".

It also confirms estimates were made of how many calories Gazans need, but says these were not used for policy-making.
[...]
Israel says the blockade is to pressure Hamas, which does not recognise Israel and backs attacks on its citizens.[Well, that's not quite true, Hamas was the democratically elected gov't of Palestinians and has supported attacks on Israeli citizens, but it also recognizes Israel's right to exist.]
[...]
But Israel has never published a list of banned items, saying it approves requests on a case-by-case basis.
[...]
"Food Consumption in the Gaza Strip - Red Lines" which sets out the minimum calorie intake needed by Gaza's million and a half inhabitants, according to their age and sex.
[...]
Among the large range of goods currently forbidden are jam, chocolate, wood for furniture, fruit juice, textiles, and plastic toys.

Sounds like "collective punishment" to me and recalls certain images from Jewish history.

I guess those damn kids should have stayed off Israel's lawn.

Several years ago, when Ariel Sharon was prime minister, his main advisor, Dov Weisglass “jokingly” said that Israel’s siege was intended to put Gazans on a diet:“It’s like a meeting with a dietitian. We need to make the Palestinians lose weight, but not to starve to death.”

And why this?

Israel rejects international investigation of raid

Israel on Thursday rejected calls from the United Nations and others for an international investigation of its deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla but left the door open to foreign involvement.

Israel says the commandos used force, killing nine people, only after activists attacked them with knives, crowbars and clubs, as well as two pistols grabbed from raiders. Activists who had set sail for Gaza with tons of aid, hoping to break Israel's 3-year-old blockade of Gaza, say Israeli commandos fired first.

Officials have insisted Israel's military already is investigating the raid and the country is capable of conducting a credible review.

Has there ever been an investigation that Israel's military conducted that didn't clear themselves? And to attack someone in international waters in a pre-dawn raid with attack boats and helicopter gunships and then blame the victims because they defended themselves with clubs against guns is ridiculous.

And come on now, the best commandos in the world are whining 'but he had a stick, I was forced to shoot him 4 times in the head' just doesn't wash.

Remember when I mentioned that Israel confiscated laptops and cameras from the civilians on board the flotilla? Well here's why:

Israel's army has been using confiscated videos to justify its deadly raid against a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, and the Foreign Press Association wants it to stop.

The organization, which represents hundreds of journalists in Israel and the Palestinian territories, says the military seized video and equipment from dozens of reporters on board the main ship.

The FPA demanded Thursday that the military stop using the captured material without permission and identify the source of the video already released. The material appeared Wednesday on the army's YouTube site labeled as "captured."

The FPA says the military is now selectively using footage to bolster its claims that commandos opened fire only after being attacked.

What was Israel's intention for what they did? It was definitely an act of war against every country with a flag on one of those ships. If not an act of war, then the soldiers who fired and killed those people need to be rounded up and released to the dead citizen's country for a proper murder trial.

Is this just a huge distraction, and from what? What is Israel doing right now that they'd risk such a backlash so that nobody would notice. I'm just sayin'.

And just as an aside, what do you think would've happened if Iran had done what Israel did? But that's a story for another day.

Compared to all that, this is brain bleach:

Piracy on the high seas

Whether you call it piracy or state-sponsored terrorism, Israel just committed both. They attacked unarmed humanitarian aid ships in International waters and killed 19 people.

Israel Attacks Gaza Aid Fleet

Israeli forces have attacked a flotilla of aid-carrying ships aiming to break the country's siege on Gaza.

At least 19 people were killed and dozens injured when troops intercepted the convoy of ships dubbed the Freedom Flotilla early on Monday, Israeli radio reported.

The flotilla was attacked in international waters, 65km off the Gaza coast.

Avital Leibovich, an Israeli military spokeswoman, confirmed that the attack took place in international waters, saying: "This happened in waters outside of Israeli territory, but we have the right to defend ourselves."

You have a right to defend yourselves from food and doctors!? OK, even if I were to acknowledge that, why would you kill them in international waters!?

No, a thousand time NO, you don't get to attack and kill people in international waters just because you think they might attack, when you've established they have no offensive capabilities! These folks were just trying to deliver humanitarian aid to a place that has been devastated by war.

My suggestion? Stop giving Israel our tax money and arms.

Update: The Guardian/UK is putting the death toll at 10:

Israelis Opened Fire Before Boarding Gaza Flotilla, say Released Activists
First eyewitness accounts of raid contradict version put out by Israeli officials

[...]
"I am one of the first passengers to be sent home, just because I have baby. When we arrived at the Israeli port of Ashdod we were met by the Israeli interior and foreign ministry officials and police; there were no soldiers. They asked me only a few questions. But they took everything – cameras, laptops, cellphones, personal belongings including our clothes," she said.
[...]
Michalis Grigoropoulos, who was at the wheel of the Free Mediterranean, said: "We were in international waters. The Israelis acted like pirates, completely out of the normal way that they conduct nautical exercises, and seized our ship. They took us hostage, pointing guns at our heads; they descended from helicopters and fired tear gas and bullets. There was absolutely nothing we could do … Those who tried to resist forming a human ring on the bridge were given electric shocks."

Grigoropoulos, who insisted the ship was full of humanitarian aid bound for Gaza "and nothing more", said that, once detained, the human rights activists were not allowed to contact a lawyer or the Greek embassy in Tel Aviv. "They didn't let us go to the toilet, eat or drink water and throughout they videoed us. They confiscated everything, mobile phones, laptops, cameras and personal effects.

It's especially telling that Israel is confiscating evidence of their assault.

More here with video.

Would I Lie To You?

WikiLeaks has been saying for a few weeks that they have video and testimony of US soldiers deliberately killing Iraqi civilians.

They said they were announcing it in advance because the US Government was targeting them if they exposed it.

Well guess what. They were right. They have produced video, they have produced witnesses, and it's true that the US targeted WikiLeaks specifically to stop their Freedom Of Speech.

Reuters has been trying to get this info thru FOIA requests for years. Our thanks should go out to the brave souls who provided a copy to WikiLeaks, and the brave souls at WikiLeaks.

There is a reason that the military offers video games as a recruitment tool, and there is a reason that the military keeps lowering their standards for recruits to the point of giving waivers to criminals. It's a feature, not a bug, that the WOs involved thought this was a video game. This isn't an aberration, it's how they were recruited and trained.

So the next time you see the military's lies being reported as fact, think of the source.

Mean What You Say, Say What You Mean

Guess who said this?

March 17, 2003
War crimes will be prosecuted. War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, "I was just following orders."

The people who performed the torture, the people who used tortured legal logic to rationalize the torture, the people who approved the torture, to the people who knew about the torture and did nothing to stop it should be tried for war crimes.

This isn't a partisan issue, it's a war crime issue. Whether you're a Dem or a Repub, go to the International Court; do not pass go, do not collect $200, go directly to the court and get a fair trial.

p.s. CIA official: no proof harsh techniques stopped terror attacks
p.p.s. Torture does work! (If by 'work' you mean being tortured until you tell the torturers exactly what Bushco wanted to hear.)

I can't believe there is even a debate about torture in our country. Or even a debate about what constitutes torture. We've had this debate, as has the rest of the world, and we came to specific conclusions about torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Ronald Reagan signed it.

Even if it did work, which it doesn't for purposes of 'actionable intelligence', it's wrong, it's wrong on so many levels!



Cross posted at VidiotSpeak

It's not me, it's Yoo

Post-9/11 Memos Show More Bush-Era Legal Errors

The number of major legal errors committed by Bush administration lawyers during the formulation of its early counterterrorism policies was far greater than previously known, according to internal Bush administration documents released for the first time by the Justice Department yesterday.
[...]
In one of the newly disclosed opinions, Justice Department appointee John Yoo argued that constitutional provisions ensuring free speech and barring warrantless searches could be disregarded by the president in wartime, allowing troops to storm a building if they suspected terrorists might be inside. In another, the department asserted that detainees could be transferred to countries known to commit human rights abuses so long as U.S. officials did not intentionally seek their torture.
[...]
Yoo's previously secret 37-page memo asserting that the president could authorize a broad use of military force to combat terrorist activities inside the United States was completed six weeks after the terrorist attacks. In it, Yoo said any terrorists in the United States could be treated like an invading army, justifying warrantless searches and the subordination of free speech and press rights if needed to "wage war successfully."

"Post-9/11 Memos Show More Bush-Era Legal Errors", errors!? ERRORS!? These aren't 'errors', they're direct assaults on the US Constitution and constitute war crimes!

John Yoo is unrepentant. Yoo shouldn't be allowed to teach law, practice law, or remain free. He should get a fair trial here, with all the safeguards the Constitution affords, and then tried internationally with all the protections the ICC affords.

You can read the memos for yourself:

Office of Legal Counsel Memoranda

* Memorandum Regarding Status of Certain OLC Opinions Issued in the Aftermath of the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (01-15-2009)
* Memorandum Regarding Constitutionality of Amending Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to Change the "Purpose" Standard for Searches (09-25-2001)
* Memorandum Regarding Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities within the United States (10-23-2001)
* Memorandum Regarding Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Provisions of the ABM Treaty (11-15-2001)
* Memorandum Regarding the President's Power as Commander in Chief to Transfer Captured Terrorists to the Control and Custody of Foreign Nations (03-13-2002)
* Memorandum Regarding Swift Justice Authorization Act (04-08-2002)
* Memorandum Regarding Determination of Enemy Belligerency and Military Detention (06-08-2002)
* Memorandum Regarding Applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 4001(a) to Military Detention of United States Citizens (06-27-2002)
* Memorandum Regarding October 23, 2001 OLC Opinion Addressing the Domestic Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities (10-06-2008)

What is listed above is a blueprint for a dictatorship. And all of the Constitution, everything we fought for to establish our shining beacon, was eliminated by a 2nd rate lawyer, acting on behalf of a 3rd deciderer, by secret memos that 2/3rds of our government of 'checks and balances' had no input on. (Kids' version here.)

I'll close with President Obama's AG's statement:

Attorney General Eric Holder "There is no reason we cannot wage an effective fight against those who have sworn to harm us while we respect our most honored constitutional traditions. We can never put the welfare of the American people at risk but we can also never choose actions that we know will weaken the legal and moral fiber of our nation."

Yep, what he said.



Cross posted at VidiotSpeak

(graphic by Dancin' Dave)

How can people be so heartless, How can people be so cruel?

Does this sound reasonable to you?

Israel Defends Gazan Deaths
Military says shelling that killed 3 daughters and niece of Palestinian doctor was `reasonable'

The Israeli military has defended the actions of its troops in an incident last month that resulted in the deaths of three daughters of a Palestinian doctor in Gaza.

A niece of Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish was also killed.

The tragedy unfolded on Israeli television Jan. 16 as the doctor was being interviewed via cellphone by an Israeli reporter. The 55-year-old physician related the deaths of the children moments after his house was bombed.

Abu al-Aish's story deeply touched the Israeli audience: even Prime Minister Ehud Olmert acknowledged crying as he heard the doctor speak.
[...]
The Israeli military said its personnel contacted the doctor by phone "several times" in the days before the incident, urging him to evacuate his home because of fighting in the area, as many of his neighbours had done. But Abu al-Aish insisted on remaining.
[...]
"I am telling you 100 per cent no," said Abu al-Aish. "There is no need for them to falsify."

He said the Israeli military action was unprovoked.

The Israeli military said its forces in the area on Jan. 16 came under mortar and sniper fire from Hamas gunmen located in a building "adjacent" to the one occupied by the Abu al-Aish family.

"During the counter-fire opened by the IDF forces, suspicious figures were identified in the upper level of (Abu al-Aish's) house and were thought to be spotters who directed the Hamas sniper and mortar fire," the Israeli military said.

The military said its field commander assessed the situation under the pressure of combat and gave the order to open fire on the suspicious figures. Shortly afterward, two tank shells slammed into a bedroom occupied by four of the physician's daughters and a niece.

It seems to me that Israeli troops deliberately targeted the bedroom of the doctors house, and I suspect their targeting optics could identify exactly who the 'suspicious figures' were. This was pure and simple retaliation on the doctor's family. Approved by Israel's government and carried out by their military.

If you think I'm engaging in paranoia or hyperbole, read the following:

Not guilty. The Israeli captain who emptied his rifle into a Palestinain schoolgirl

An Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old was acquitted on all charges by a military court yesterday.

The soldier, who has only been identified as "Captain R", was charged with relatively minor offences for the killing of Iman al-Hams who was shot 17 times as she ventured near an Israeli army post near Rafah refugee camp in Gaza a year ago.
[...]
The military court cleared the soldier of illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and perverting the course of justice by asking soldiers under his command to alter their accounts of the incident.
[...]
A recording of radio exchanges between Capt R and his troops obtained by Israeli television revealed that from the beginning soldiers identified Iman as a child.

In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.
[...]
On the tape, Capt R then "clarifies" to the soldiers under his command why he killed Iman: "This is commander. Anything that's mobile, that moves in the [security] zone, even if it's a three-year-old, needs to be killed."
[...]
Capt R claimed that he had not fired the shots at the girl but near her. However, Dr Mohammed al-Hams, who inspected the child's body at Rafah hospital, counted numerous wounds. "She has at least 17 bullets in several parts of the body, all along the chest, hands, arms, legs," he told the Guardian shortly afterwards. "The bullets were large and shot from a close distance.

When I read this today it made me sick. I mean that literally, I scan the news on my lunch hour and after I read that I left the lab and walked around outside trying not to vomit. When I came back in, pale with frozen tears on my face, my boss asked me if I needed to go home for the day. She thought I had the flu until I showed her the article.



Cross posted at VidiotSpeak

War Pigs

Did you know that "From 2001 until December, 2008, there have been over 4048 rockets and 4040 mortars fired at Israeli targets"? (Those stats were provided by the Israel Minister of Foreign Affairs, and they wouldn't lie ... would they?)

Did you also know that in those 8 years and 8,088 attacks only 13 Israelis were killed?

Yes, I said 'only' because just in the last month "Some 1,300 Palestinians, including at least 700 civilians, were killed." And it's impossible to calculate how many civilians have died because the Gaza infrastructure, (AKA food, water, sewage, hospitals, medicine), is in ruins and Israel refuses to let humanitarian aid or reporters in and even defy their own courts. There are 1.5 MILLION people living in that tiny strip of land.

Let's get this straight right off the bat, I have nothing against Jews or Judaism, but this has nothing to do with that, it has to do with war crimes. And before you go off on me please look at the following analogies and the articles I quote below.
1) If you kill my brother and I kill your whole family and everyone in your neighborhood, that's wrong.[/obvious]
2) The comparative size & technology of the 2 parties involved is like the Nez Perce fighting the USA.

Onto the articles:

Israel Finally Admits Using White Phosphorous in Attacks on Gaza

January 5 The Times reports that telltale smoke has appeared from areas of shelling. Israel denies using phosphorus

January 8 The Times reports photographic evidence showing stockpiles of white phosphorus (WP) shells. Israel Defence Forces spokesman says: "This is what we call a quiet shell - it has no explosives and no white phosphorus"

January 12 The Times reports that more than 50 phosphorus burns victims are taken into Nasser Hospital. An Israeli military spokesman "categorically" denies the use of white phosphorus

January 15 Remnants of white phosphorus shells are found in western Gaza. The IDF refuses to comment on specific weaponry but insists ammunition is "within the scope of international law"

January 16 The United Nations Relief and Works Agency headquarters are hit with phosphorus munitions. The Israeli military continues to deny its use

January 21 Avital Leibovich, Israel's military spokeswoman, admits white phosphorus munitions were employed in a manner "according to international law"

January 23 Israel says it is launching an investigation into white phosphorus munitions, which hit a UN school on January 17. "Some practices could be illegal but we are going into that. The IDF is holding an investigation concerning one specific unit and one incident"

Israel Vows Legal Protection for Troops Over Gaza War

[...]
Last week, the military censor ordered local and foreign media in Israel not to publish names of army commanders in the Gaza war and to blur their faces in photos and video for fear they could be identified and arrested while travelling abroad.

VidiotSpeak

Congress passed a law, I tell you! It's not my fault!

Watch how Bush immediately goes into a semantics game to explain Abu Ghraib. Apparently asking this question means you are slandering America....

GEORGE W. BUSH: This was a law passed, Adam. We passed a law. Bypassing the Constitution means that we did something outside the bounds of the Constitution. We went to the Congress and got a piece of legislation passed.

REPORTER: Which is now being struck down, I think.

GEORGE W. BUSH: It is, and I accept what the Supreme Court did, and I necessarily don't have to agree with it. My only point to you is, is that yes, I mean, we certainly wish Abu Ghraib hadn't happened, but that should not reflect America. This was the actions of some soldiers.

The question unanswered is this, Georgie. WHY did you get Congress to pass a law bypassing the Constitution? WHY was there this odd need to torture? WHY?



Shorter Bush: We wanted to torture so we changed the meaning of the word so it wasn't called torture so we didn't torture so we could watch the tapes of ... uh ... it was the soldiers that did it!

crossposted at Rants from the Rookery

Oh, Sweet Bird of Hitler Youth

School Military Recruiting Could Violate International Protocol

[...]
The 46-page report, “Soldiers of Misfortune“, which was prepared by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for submission to the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, also found that the U.S. military disproportionately targets poor and minority public school students.
[...]
While the United States is one of only two countries — the other being Somalia — to have never ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the U.S. Senate ratified the Protocol in 2002, making it binding under U.S., as well as international, law.
[...]
The army’s own Recruiting Programme Handbook, for example, instructs its more than 10,600 recruiters to approach high school students as early as possible, and explicitly before their senior year, which, for most students, starts at age 17. “Remember, first to contact, first to contract…that doesn’t just mean seniors or grads…,” according to an excerpt quoted in the report. “If you wait until they’re seniors, it’s probably too late.”

Once recruiters are inside their assigned high schools, the Army’s Recruiting Command instructs them to “effectively penetrate the school market” and “(b)e so helpful and so much a part of the school scene that you are in constant demand”, with the goal of “school ownership that can only lead to a greater number of Army enlistments.” That includes volunteering to serve as coaches for high school sports teams, involvement with the local Boy Scouts, attending as many all school functions and assemblies, and even “eating lunch in the school cafeteria several times each month”.

The report documents a number of specific cases, mostly in New York and California — the two most populous states with the largest number of minority high school students — in which recruiters clearly followed these instructions. In a survey of nearly 1,000 children, aged 14 to 17, enrolled in New York City high schools, the ACLU New York affiliate found that more than one five respondents — equally distributed among the different grades — reported the use of class time by military recruiters, and 35 percent said military recruiters had access to multiple locations in their schools where they could meet students.

The report also noted that the Pentagon’s central recruitment database systematically collected information on 16-year-olds and, in some cases even 15-year-olds, including their name, home address and telephones, email addresses, grade point averages, height and weight information, and racial and ethnic data obtained from a variety of public and private sources. The explicit purpose of the database is to assist the military in its “direct marketing recruiting efforts”. As the result of a 2006 ACLU lawsuit, the Pentagon agreed to stop collecting data about students younger than 16.

But recruitment efforts even dip below 15-year-olds, according to the report, which found that the Pentagon’s Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC), which operate at more than 3,000 junior high schools, middle schools, and high schools across the country, target children as young as 14 for recruitment. The report cited recent studies that found that enrollment in some JROTC programmes was involuntary.

JROTC “cadets”, of whom there were nearly 300,000 in 2005, receive military uniforms and conduct military drills and marches, handle real and wooden rifles, and learn military history, according to the report, which noted that the programme is explicitly designed to “enhance recruiting efforts”. African American and Latin students make up 54 percent of JROTC programmes.

JROTC also oversees the Middle School Cadet Corps (MSCC), in which children ages 11 to 14 can participate, according to the report. Florida, Texas, and Chicago schools offer military-run after-school MSCC programmes in which children take part in drills with wooden rifles and military chants, learn first-aid, civics, military history and, in some cases, wear uniforms to school for inspection once a week.

The Army also uses an online video game, called “America’s Army”, to attract potential recruits as young as 13, train them to use weapons, and engage in virtual combat and other military missions. Launched in 2002, the video game had attracted 7.5 million registered users by September 2006.

This was what Bush meant when he said 'No Child Left Behind.'



Cross posted at VidiotSpeak

It's torture, it's torture, it's torture

US judge steps in to torture row

[...]
In the interview with the Law in Action programme on BBC Radio 4, [Justice Scalia] said it was "extraordinary" to assume that the ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" - the US Constitution's Eighth Amendment - also applied to "so-called" torture.

"To begin with the constitution... is referring to punishment for crime. And, for example, incarcerating someone indefinitely would certainly be cruel and unusual punishment for a crime."

Justice Scalia argued that courts could take stronger measures when a witness refused to answer questions.

"I suppose it's the same thing about so-called torture. Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to determine where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited in the constitution?" he asked.

"It would be absurd to say you couldn't do that. And once you acknowledge that, we're into a different game.

"How close does the threat have to be? And how severe can the infliction of pain be?"

Jeebus, I'm so sick of these morons and their fantasies about Jack Bauer. It is "extraordinary" for a justus of the US Supreme Court to try to justus-ify torture. We've signed treaties, we've passed laws, and regardless of what scaliawag sez, waterboarding is water torture.

"To begin with the constitution... is referring to punishment for crime." Actually the 8th amendment says: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

INAL, but I don't see anything in the 8th that says only punishment for the guilty falls within its guidelines. It seems to me to also incorporate people just charged with a crime, (that 'excessive bail' terminology is the key.)

Besides the fact that when the CIA tortured suspects there was no ticking bomb! And they didn't torture them to find out about the future but about their past. And guess what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to after they water tortured him:

* The February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City
* A failed "shoe bomber" operation
* The October 2002 attack in Kuwait
* The nightclub bombing in Bali, Indonesia
* A plan for a "second wave" of attacks on major U.S. landmarks to be set in the spring or summer of 2002 after the 9/11 attacks, which includes more hijackings of commercial airlines and having them flown into various buildings in the U.S. including the Library Tower in Los Angeles , the Sears Tower in Chicago, the Plaza Bank building in Seattle and the Empire State Building in New York
* Plots to attack oil tankers and U.S. naval ships in the Straits of Hormuz, the Straits of Gibraltar and in Singapore
* A plan to blow up the Panama Canal
* Plans to assassinate Jimmy Carter
* A plot to blow up suspension bridges in New York City
* A plan to destroy the Sears Tower in Chicago with burning fuel trucks
* Plans to "destroy" Heathrow Airport, Canary Wharf and Big Ben in London
* A planned attack on "many" nightclubs in Thailand
* A plot targeting the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. financial targets
* A plan to destroy buildings in Eilat, Israel
* Plans to destroy U.S. embassies in Indonesia, Australia and Japan in 2002.
* Plots to destroy Israeli embassies in India, Azerbaijan, the Philippines and Australia
* Surveying and financing an attack on an Israeli El-Al flight from Bangkok
* Sending several "mujahideen" into Israel to survey "strategic targets" with the intention of attacking them
* The November 2002 suicide bombing of a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya
* The failed attempt to shoot down an Israeli passenger jet leaving Mombasa airport in Kenya
* Plans to attack U.S. targets in South Korea
* Providing financial support for a plan to attack U.S., British and Jewish targets in Turkey
* Surveillance of U.S. nuclear power plants in order to attack them
* A plot to attack NATO's headquarters in Europe
* Planning and surveillance in a 1995 plan (the "Bojinka Operation") to bomb 12 American passenger jets
* The planned assassination attempt against then-U.S. President Bill Clinton during a mid-1990s trip to the Philippines.
* "Shared responsibility" for a plot to kill Pope John Paul II
* Plans to assassinate Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf
* An attempt to attack a U.S. oil company in Sumatra, Indonesia, "owned by the Jewish former [U.S.] Secretary of State Henry Kissinger"
* The beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl

BTW, he also shot Lincoln and both Kennedys. Confessions obtained thru torture are not trustworthy. It is impossible that KSM was involved in all those events.

"incarcerating someone indefinitely would certainly be cruel and unusual punishment for a crime" How interesting. The Gitmo detainees are incarcerated indefinitely. Without charges, without trials, except for these 6 detainees they're 'prosecuting' ... just in time for the election.

"courts could take stronger measures when a witness refused to answer questions" Uhh no! Not if it would incriminate them, and I tend to think telling where you planted a bomb would be self-incriminating.


"how severe can the infliction of pain be?" Pain = torture. That's simple enough. There can be no infliction of pain.

Any questions?




Cross posted at VidiotSpeak