The Impeachment Hearing Room

To enforce a Fascist Military/Police State!

Martial Law In The United States Is Now Just One Bush Decree Away.

Every Effort Has Been made In This Post to Provide The Most Comprehensive Linkages Available to Examine the Totality of the Problem and Possibilities. Anyone having Further Input Is Invited to Leave a Message and/or Additional Search Links.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

Thousands of Troops Are Deployed on U.S. Streets Ready to Carry Out "Crowd Control"

(1) By Naomi Wolf, AlterNet. Posted October 8, 2008.

((2) WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States military's Northern Command, formed in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, is dedicating a combat infantry team to deal with catastrophes in the U.S., including terrorist attacks and natural disasters.

The 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, which was first into Baghdad, Iraq, in 2003, started its controversial assignment Wednesday.

The First Raiders will spend 2009 as the first active-duty military unit attached to the U.S. Northern Command since it was created. They will be based in Fort Stewart, Georgia, and focus primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel, the Army says.))

Members of Congress were told they could face martial law if they didn't pass the bailout bill. This will not be the last time.

Background: the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1. Their stated mission is the form of crowd control they practiced in Iraq, subduing "unruly individuals," and the management of a national emergency. I am in Seattle and heard from the brother of one of the soldiers that they are engaged in exercises now. Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.

George Bush struck down Posse Comitatus, thus making it legal for military to patrol the U.S. He has also legally established that in the "War on Terror," the U.S. is at war around the globe and thus the whole world is a battlefield. Thus the U.S. is also a battlefield.

He also led change to the 1807 Insurrection Act to give him far broader powers in the event of a loosely defined "insurrection" or many other "conditions" he has the power to identify. The Constitution allows the suspension of habeas corpus -- habeas corpus prevents us from being seized by the state and held without trial -- in the event of an "insurrection." With his own army force now, his power to call a group of protesters or angry voters "insurgents" staging an "insurrection" is strengthened.

U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman of California said to Congress, captured on C-Span and viewable on YouTube, that individual members of the House were threatened with martial law within a week if they did not pass the bailout bill:

"The only way they can pass this bill is by creating and sustaining a panic atmosphere. … Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day and a couple of thousand on the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no."

If this is true and Rep. Sherman is not delusional, I ask you to consider that if they are willing to threaten martial law now, it is foolish to assume they will never use that threat again. It is also foolish to trust in an orderly election process to resolve this threat. And why deploy the First Brigade? One thing the deployment accomplishes is to put teeth into such a threat.

I interviewed Vietnam veteran, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel and patriot David Antoon for clarification:

"If the President directed the First Brigade to arrest Congress, what could stop him?"

"Nothing. Their only recourse is to cut off funding. The Congress would be at the mercy of military leaders to go to them and ask them not to obey illegal orders."

"But these orders are now legal?'"

"Correct."

"If the President directs the First Brigade to arrest a bunch of voters, what would stop him?"

"Nothing. It would end up in courts but the action would have been taken."

"If the President directs the First Brigade to kill civilians, what would stop him?"

"Nothing."

"What would prevent him from sending the First Brigade to arrest the editor of the Washington Post?"

"Nothing. He could do what he did in Iraq -- send a tank down a street in Washington and fire a shell into the Washington Post as they did into Al Jazeera, and claim they were firing at something else."

"What happens to members of the First Brigade who refuse to take up arms against U.S. citizens?"

"They'd probably be treated as deserters as in Iraq: arrested, detained and facing five years in prison. In Iraq a study by Ann Wright shows that deserters -- reservists who refused to go back to Iraq -- got longer sentences than war criminals."

"Does Congress have any military of their own?"

"No. Congress has no direct control of any military units. The Governors have the National Guard but they report to the President in an emergency that he declares."

"Who can arrest the President?"

"The Attorney General can arrest the President after he leaves or after impeachment."

[Note: Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi has asserted it is possible for District Attorneys around the country to charge President Bush with murder if they represent districts where one or more military members who have been killed in Iraq formerly resided.]

"Given the danger do you advocate impeachment?"

"Yes. President Bush struck down Posse Comitatus -- which has prevented, with a penalty of two years in prison, U.S. leaders since after the Civil War from sending military forces into our streets -- with a 'signing statement.' He should be impeached immediately in a bipartisan process to prevent the use of military forces and mercenary forces against U.S. citizens"

"Should Americans call on senior leaders in the Military to break publicly with this action and call on their own men and women to disobey these orders?"

"Every senior military officer's loyalty should ultimately be to the Constitution. Every officer should publicly break with any illegal order, even from the President."

"But if these are now legal. If they say, 'Don't obey the Commander in Chief,' what happens to the military?"

"Perhaps they would be arrested and prosecuted as those who refuse to participate in the current illegal war. That's what would be considered a coup."

"But it's a coup already."

"Yes."

A draft document published by the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks entitled, “Donald Rumsfeld: US Army regulation 500-3 Continuity of Operations Program,” dated 19 January
2001, spells out changes in Army doctrine. [Download this document HERE.]

Leahy Concerned about NorthCom’s New Army Unit (More)

http://www.progressive.org/radio/7oct08.html

http://66.170.18.164/playlists/7oct08.mp3

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/7/us_army_denies_unit_will_be

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/24/army/index.html

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Establishing_martial_law_in_the_United_States

http://uweb.txstate.edu/~lf14/conspire/execu.html

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Establishing_martial_law_in_the_United_States#Executive_Order_12919:_.22National_Emergency.22

http://courtofimpeachmentandwarcrimes.blogspot.com/2008/02/impeach-bush-and-cheney-1st-black-water.html

http://www.infragard.net/index.php

http://theimpeachmenthearingroom.blogspot.com/2008/10/will-anyone-even-remember-all-efforts.html

http://theimpeachmenthearingroom.blogspot.com/2008/10/black-quill-letters-index-links-on.html

http://theimpeachmenthearingroom.blogspot.com/2008/10/black-quill-letter-4-america-is-living.html

http://theimpeachmenthearingroom.blogspot.com/2008/09/when-one-thinks-about-great-depression.html

http://www.impeachthem.com/?q=node/2107

http://www.impeachthem.com/?q=node/2134

http://www.impeachthem.com/?q=node/2083

http://www.impeachthem.com/?q=node/2118

http://www.infowars.com/?p=5129

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4803

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10473

http://www.oilempire.us/redalert.html

http://badamerican.wordpress.com/2008/02/07/martial-law-usa-your-corporate-bosses-have-shoot-to-kill-authority-granted-by-fbi/

http://www.infowars.net/articles/february2008/210208Camps.htm

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/10/07/18543328.php

http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2006/04/military_coup_i.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Jux68F_AQ

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=martial+law%2Bbailout&search_type=&aq=f

The Threat

MARTIAL LAW OCT. 1 , 2008 - what will you do ??

BAILOUT RIOTS EXPECTED AND MARTIAL LAW CONCENTRATION CAMPS!!

Police State Martial Law, Rex 84, FEMA Camps

Economic Collapse and Rise of the Police State

FEMA: Concentration Camps in the USA

WORLD WAR 3 US ECONOMOC COLLAPSE ISRAEL IRAN ARMAGEDDON 2008

http://www.afj.org/check-the-facts/resources-and-publications/judicial-selection-during-the-bush-administration-2008.html

Yesterday President Bush appeared before Federalist Society members to tout a judicial selection record that has undermined our constitutional values. Though he claimed during the event that his selection policy "does not impose litmus tests," we know better. This administration has cemented a transformation of our federal judiciary begun by Ronald Reagan, which has resulted in less freedom, less privacy and fewer constitutional protections.

The facts speak for themselves; you can check them out for yourself in Alliance for Justice's new report, Judicial Selection During the Bush Administration. This comprehensive report details the legacy of President Bush’s appointments to the federal courts, closely examining how the administration's courtpacking agenda has dramatically changed the landscape of the federal bench.

It is no surprise that President Bush is speaking about judges at this moment. The judges issue has long been a tool to rally the ultraconservative base, but the rhetoric they use rarely matches reality. In the weeks ahead, Americans must decide whether the federal bench will continue to be a place where judges put politics before the law, or if it will once again reflect our core constitutional values of liberty, justice, and equality for all.

Yesterday, the first Monday in October, was a busy day on the judges front. In addition to the president's speech, the U.S. Supreme Court opened its 2008-2009 term. This term, the nation's highest court will address questions that have a fundamental impact on both the American legal system and our daily lives. Consumer safety and corporate liability are major themes. In addition, the extent of unilateral executive power may once again be at stake.

The Court will hear arguments about whether tobacco and drug companies can shield themselves from liability, whether employers can retaliate against workers who report or participate in investigations related to sex-based discrimination and is expected to take up the question of whether the executive branch can detain an individual indefinitely without criminal charge or trail. Read our Supreme Court 2008-2009 Preview to learn more about what's at stake this year.

And Don’t Believe The Human Mind Can’t Endure Such Thoughts…Just Look At Iraq!

http://www.campaigntobantorture.org/

Revealed: "Secret" Executions Being Carried Out in Saddam's Old Intelligence Headquarters

By Robert Fisk, Independent UK. Posted October 8, 2008.

Hundreds of "insurgents" have been executed since 2003, victims of the same summary justice they mete out to their own captives.

Like all wars, the dark, untold stories of the Iraqi conflict drain from its shattered landscape like the filthy waters of the Tigris. And still the revelations come.

The Independent has learned that secret executions are being carried out in the prisons run by Nouri al-Maliki's "democratic" government.

The hangings are carried out regularly -- from a wooden gallows in a small, cramped cell -- in Saddam Hussein's old intelligence headquarters at Kazimiyah. There is no public record of these killings in what is now called Baghdad's "high-security detention facility" but most of the victims -- there have been hundreds since America introduced "democracy" to Iraq -- are said to be insurgents, given the same summary justice they mete out to their own captives.

The secrets of Iraq's death chambers lie mostly hidden from foreign eyes but a few brave Western souls have come forward to tell of this prison horror. The accounts provide only a glimpse into the Iraqi story, at times tantalizingly cut short, at others gloomily predictable. Those who tell it are as depressed as they are filled with hopelessness.

"Most of the executions are of supposed insurgents of one kind or another," a Westerner who has seen the execution chamber at Kazimiyah told me. "But hanging isn't easy." As always, the devil is in the detail.

"There's a cell with a bar below the ceiling with a rope over it and a bench on which the victim stands with his hands tied," a former British official, told me last week. "I've been in the cell, though it was always empty. But not long before I visited, they'd taken this guy there to hang him. They made him stand on the bench, put the rope round his neck and pushed him off. But he jumped on to the floor. He could stand up. So they shortened the length of the rope and got him back on the bench and pushed him off again. It didn't work."

There's nothing new in savage executions in the Middle East -- in the Lebanese city of Sidon 10 years ago, a policeman had to hang on to the legs of a condemned man to throttle him after he failed to die on the noose -- but in Baghdad, cruel death seems a specialty.

"They started digging into the floor beneath the bench so that the guy would drop far enough to snap his neck," the official said. "They dug up the tiles and the cement underneath. But that didn't work. He could still stand up when they pushed him off the bench. So they just took him to a corner of the cell and shot him in the head."

The condemned prisoners in Kazimiyah, a Shia district of Baghdad, are said to include rapists and murderers as well as insurgents. One prisoner, a Chechen, managed to escape from the jail with another man after a gun was smuggled to them. They shot two guards dead. The authorities had to call in the Americans to help them recapture the two. The Americans killed one and shot the Chechen in the leg. He refused medical assistance so his wound went gangrenous. In the end, the Iraqis had to operate and took all the bones out of his leg. By the time he met one Western visitor to the prison, "he was walking around on crutches with his boneless right leg slung over his shoulder."

In many cases, it seems, the Iraqis neither keep nor release any record of the true names of their captives or of the hanged prisoners. For years the Americans -- in charge of the notorious Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad -- did not know the identity of their prisoners. Here, for example, is new testimony given to The Independent by a former Western official to the Anglo-U.S. Iraq Survey Group, which searched for the infamous but mythical weapons of mass destruction: "We would go to the interrogation rooms at Abu Ghraib and ask for a particular prisoner. After about 40 minutes, the Americans brought in this hooded guy, shuffling along, shackled hands and feet.

"They sat him on a chair in front of us and took off his hood. He had a big beard. We asked where he received his education. He repeatedly said 'Mosul.' Then he said he'd left school at 14 -- remember, this guy is supposed to be a missile scientist. We said: 'We know you've got a PhD and went to the Sorbonne -- we'd like you to help us with information about Saddam's missile project.' But I said to myself: 'This guy doesn't know anything 'bout fucking missiles.'

Then it turned out he had a different name from the man we'd asked for, he'd been picked up on the road by the Americans four months earlier, he didn't know why. So we said to the Americans: 'Wrong gentleman!' So they put the shackles on him and took him back to his cell and after 20 or 30 minutes, they'd bring someone else. We'd ask him where he went to school and he told us he had never been to school.

"Wrong person again. It was a complete farce. The incompetence of the U.S. military was astounding, criminal. Eventually, of course, they found the right guy and brought him in and took his hood off. He was breathing heavily, overweight, pudgy, disoriented, a little bit scared."

On this occasion, the Americans had found the right man. The British and American investigators asked the guards to remove the man's shackles, which they did -- but then they tied one of the man's legs to the floor. Yes, he had a PhD.

Again, the official's testimony: "We went through his history, what he'd worked on -- he was obviously just a minor functionary in one of Saddam's missile programs. Iraqi scientists didn't have the knowledge how to make nuclear missiles nor did they have the financial support necessary. It just remained in the dreams of Saddam."

The scientist-prisoner in Abu Ghraib miserably told his captors that he'd been arrested by the Americans after they'd knocked on his front door in Baghdad and found two Kalashnikov rifles a woman's hijab, verses from the Koran and, obviously of interest to his captors, "physics and missile textbooks on his bookshelves." But this supposedly valuable prisoner was never charged or previously interviewed even though he admitted he was a rocket scientist.

"I don't know what happened to him," the former official told me. "I tried to tell the UK and the U.S. military that we've arrested this man but that he's got a wife, children, a family. I said that by locking up this one innocent person, you've got 50 men radicalized overnight. No, I don't know what happened to him."

For many of the investigators working for the Anglo-American authorities in Baghdad, the trial for the crime for which the Iraqi dictator was himself subsequently hanged was a fearful experience that ultimately ended in disgust. Through captured documents, they could see the dark, inner workings of Saddam's secret police. The idea of the Saddam trial was less to bring members of the former regime to justice than to show Iraqis how justice and the rule of law should operate.

"It was exhilarating to see Saddam being cross-examined," one of the court investigators said. "The low point was when he was executed. What drove me on was seeing how Saddam dealt with his victims -- I was looking at a microcosm of all the deaths that had taken place in Iraq. But when he was executed, it was done in such a savage way."

Saddam Hussein was hanged in the same "secure" unit at Kazimiyah where al-Maliki's people, in an echo of Saddamite Baathist terror, now hang their victims.

Iraq's death penalty

* The death penalty in Iraq was suspended after Saddam Hussein was deposed in 2003. It was reinstated by the interim government in August 2004.

* The United Nations, the European Union and international human rights organizations all spoke out against the reintroduction.

* At the time, the government claimed the death penalty was a necessary measure until the country had stabilized. Amnesty International claims that "the extent of violence in Iraq has increased rather than diminished, clearly indicating that the death penalty has not proved to be an effective deterrent."

* Saddam, left, his half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and Iraq's former chief judge Awad Hamed al-Bandar were hanged at the end of 2006 for their part in the killings of 148 people in the mainly Shia town of Dujail in 1982. Illicit videos of all three executions later became public. Saddam's body could be seen on a hospital trolley, his head twisted at 90 degrees. Barzan -- Iraq's former intelligence chief -- was decapitated by the noose. Officials said it was an accident.

* According to Amnesty, there were at least 33 executions reported in Iraq last year. About 200 people were estimated to have been sentenced to death.