|
Michael
Dante Mori, Major, United States Marine Corps Defense Counsel, has been
assigned defence counsel to Australian David Hicks currently held in
Guantanamo Bay.
In Adelaide on 17 March 2004, St Patrick's Day, Dr Fredrick Töben
and Major Michael Mori facing the camera with a smile!
Major Mori is a likeable,
open and approachable fellow whose somewhat ruthless honest remarks
about the unjust process facing David Hicks has astounded many
Australians. It has also brought him admiration, and this he will take
back home with him. All those who made contact with
Major Mori speak admiringly of his willingness to fight a hopeless fight
- to fight the system from within. He even expressed regret if some
would see his actions defending Hicks as validating the system. "He's
a good Aussie, he's just 5ft3, and he's not terrifying", he said.
It is his frankness about the impossible task of
having a just military trial that Major Mori addressed during his time
spent in Adelaide visiting David Hick's 'Umfeld'.
Major Mori points out that his comments are not a
criticism of any persons or policies as such but he is merely
criticising the legal process, the rules and procedures under which he
is expected to mount an effective defence. Local barrister, Stephen
Kenny, is ably assisting in this impossible unjust legal battle.
Major Mori also said that labelling someone a
'terrorist' becomes a powerful propaganda tool, something that
"should not be used if it lowers the standards of justice".
But nothing beats the fact that this trial will not have any appeal
mechanism, nor review, etc.
The precedent on which this trial rests is the
precedent set in the 1942 Commission when German soldiers turned
themselves in in New Jersey. They were labelled 'unlawful combatants -
not POWs - and thus lost all protection that would guarantee a fair
process. Those who turned themselves in were released after the war and
those found were shot.
Hicks did not violate Australian laws and so he
should be brought back, something the Prime Minister and other
politicians refuse to do. Hicks is thus in a bind because were he
returned to Australia he would have his immediate freedom, something the
politicians are not willing to do, thereby doing David Hicks an
injustice.
Major Mori also advised that the photograph shown
in the media is a staged photo of David Hicks with friends posing with a
gun.
He stressed that even the worst person in the world
should be given a fair trial but Hicks never committed any crime. Asked
if David Hicks is again writing poetry, the constraint came in, i.e.
that he cannot say anything personal about David Hicks' life. Asked
whether he would liken the upcoming trial to that of the witch trials,
he responded: "No comment!" To date Hicks has not yet been
charged of any crime.
Asked if he had to date been pressured in any way,
he responded: "No comment."
Major Michael Dante Mori, you are an honourable US
Marine!
Mamdouh Habib, the other Australian held by the USA
at Guantanamo Bay has as yet not been charged, and is thus in total
limbo. Revisionists are reminded what General
Eisenhower did to over a million German soldiers at the end of WWII - as
depicted in James Baque's Other Losses - also declaring them
non-combatants, etc.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 9:41 PM
Subject: ABC - NewsMail
*PM open to indefinite
detention push*
Prime Minister John Howard says he is seriously considering a proposal
to remove the precise time limit on detaining terrorist suspects and
instead say they can be held for a "reasonable" period.
Mr Howard discussed the move with the state and federal police
commissioners at a meeting in Sydney today.
The police chiefs say the current time limits are too restrictive.
They have urged the Federal Government to follow Victoria's lead in
leaving it to the courts to determine what a "reasonable"
detention is.
"I'm sympathetic to what the police commissioners put to me and I
will take that matter up with the Attorney-General and my colleagues
next week," Mr Howard said.
The Civil Liberties Council is concerned about the push to allow
terrorists suspects to be detained for an unspecified period.
Council president Terry O'Gorman is urging the Government to reject the
idea.
"It's hard to see why such a change in the law is needed," he
said. "The ASIO Act - which allows ASIO to detain people including
non-suspects for questioning - was passed only a little over three or
four months ago.
"It has a sunset clause which permits review of the law after a
period of two years. There's just no indication that that particular law
isn't working."
Commissioner
Meanwhile, Mr Howard says Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick
Keelty can "express his views as he sees fit", and says he has
his full confidence.
Mr Howard and other senior ministers criticised Mr Keelty after he
appeared to link the Madrid bombings to Spain's support for the war in
Iraq in a television interview. Mr Keelty later said his comments had
been taken out of context.
Mr Howard and Commissioner Keelty met in the Prime Minister's Sydney
office this morning.
Mr Howard denies that he has politicised the issue of terrorism and has
described the pair's discussions as "good".
"We're both very keen that the very good work that he's been doing
in charge of the federal police continue," he said.
"He does, as he always has, enjoy my full support and my full
confidence. He will be allowed to express his views as he sees
fit."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Pilger,
Indymedia branded "Anti-Semitic"
Imre Salusinszky: We should nix Hicks flick
The
Australian, Sydney, March 18, 2004
CURTIS Levy, the director of The President v David Hicks, which will
screen on
SBS tonight, has never tried to conceal the point of his documentary.
...
Levy's film leaves us in far less doubt than we were before that
Australian
Taliban fighter David Hicks is a vicious fundamentalist who trained with
al-Qa'ida. ...
But what is most disturbing, and raises most unanswered questions, is
just
where this film stands on Hicks's virulent anti-Semitism.
In his letters to his family, Hicks tells them his training in Pakistan
and
Afghanistan is designed to ensure "the Western-Jewish domination is
finished,
so we live under Muslim law again". He denounces the plots of the
Jews to
divide Muslims and make them think poorly of Osama bin Laden.
After reading aloud a letter from his son warning him to ignore
"the Jews'
propaganda war machine", Terry Hicks smiles affectionately and
says: "I think
David's told me off in his way there."
Given that this film is unashamedly advocating for David Hicks, and that
in
promoting it Levy has said it exists to counter the "demonisation"
of Hicks,
shouldn't the film-maker have given us a hint about what he thinks of
these
racist comments, or pressed Terry Hicks to do so? Once upon a time, we
would
not have wondered where those on the Left stood on such a question.
But in an era when virulent anti-Semitism erupts daily on such
"progressive"
websites as sydney.indymedia.org, or when John Pilger can claim without
embarrassment that the "Jewish establishment" will never allow
the true causes
of September 11 to be known, all bets, and all assumptions, are off. ...
Imre Salusinszky, a Wry Side columnist and editorial writer with The
Australian, is co-editor of Blaming Ourselves: September 11 and
the Agony of
the Left (Duffy & Snellgrove, 2002).
________________________________________ John
Pilger speaks of " the Jewish establishment ", says
Islamic peoples its victims
John Pilger :13 Sep 2001
http://pilger.carlton.com/print/77937
If the attacks on America have their source in the Islamic world, who
can be
surprised? ...
Far from being the terrorists of the world, the Islamic peoples have
been its
victims - that is, the victims of American fundamentalism, whose power,
in all
its forms, military, strategic and economic, is the greatest source of
terrorism on earth. This fact is largely censored from the western
media. ...
I was writing about Palestine and censorship when the attacks in America
took
place. A friend, a distinguished American photojournalist, told me how
he had
stood up at a debate on media censorship in New York the other day and
asked
why Israel's oppression of an Arab nation, a construct of American
power, was
not recognised in American political life and the media. He was called
an
anti-Semite. It is not quite as bad in this country. The
censorship is more
subtle: the collaborative silence of the Jewish establishment, together
with
the BBC's promotion of moral equivalence between oppressor and oppressed
while
adhering essentially to Israel's and CNN's news agenda. The Times, says
its
former Middle East correspondent Sam Kiley, routinely censored his
reports in
Israel's favour.
It is left to a courageous few to tell the truth. Among them are two
Israeli
dissidents: the poet and novelist Yitzhak Laor and the journalist Amira
Hass.
With the recent death of the indomitable peace campaigner Israel Shahak,
they
represent an endangered species in their own country. In the current
issue of
New Left Review, Laor exposes the liberal Zionists "whose
voices are heard
over and over again". ...
____________________________________
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 4:22 AM
Subject: RESOLUTION 3077 COVERTLY VOTED BY CONGRESS TURNING
WASHINGTON AND AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES INTO ISRAELI OCCUPIED
TERRITORIES!Laura Dawn Lewis - ORWELLIAN!
|
COMPELLING
AND OMINOUS INDICTMENT OF ZIONIST GRIP ON
CONGRESS AND RELENTLESS ATTACKS ON
FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF AMERICAN
CITIZENS INCLUDING THE FIRST
AMENDMENT!!OUTRAGEOUS!
burning
books before they are printed
House
Resolution 3077 Passed the House…Will the
Senate Save our First Amendment, or will
debate in our Universities become the Occupied
Territory of a foreign government?
By Laura Dawn Lewis
PRINT
|
|
Consider
the ramifications of a foreign country
dictating what you are permitted to learn
about that country, what your children can
learn and even what you can write and debate
about that country in the United States.
Your university's funding, its curriculum and
even its ability to debate issues currently
effecting our national policy, our tax dollars
and our foreign policy gagged, banned and
prevented from discussion.
|
|
|
H.R.3077
|
1 . International
Studies in Higher Education Act of 2003
(Introduced in House)
[H.R.3077.IH]
2 . International Studies in Higher
Education Act of 2003 (Reported in House)
[H.R.3077.RH]
3 . International Studies in Higher
Education Act of 2003 (Referred to Senate
Committee after being Received from House)
[H.R.3077.RFS]
|
|
|
|
As
an American citizen or college student attending school in the
United States, your needs are irrelevant;
this foreign power determines which issues are truth, their
pertinence or relevancy. Its truth, not the truth, this is the
evil of censorship.
This scenario
finds its origin in fact, not fiction. Republican
Representative Peter Hoeksta of Michigan, the sponsor of HR
3077 serves our higher education system on a platter to the
interests of a foreign country financing and lobbying this
resolution. In effect, our education system becomes
occupied territory and our professors the puppets of a foreign
regime prevented financially from exercising free speech,
effectively censoring the classroom, community and
press.
On September
17, 2003 the House Subcommittee on Select Education
unanimously approved H.R. 3077, the International Studies
in Higher Education Act. Known as "Title
6," after the article in the Higher Education Act
empowering the government to fund selected international
studies and foreign language centers at universities. Its
grants, up to $500,000 are used to train experts for national
security, government service and educate the public on
international affairs. This act advocates a seven-member
advisory board, similar to a Warren Commission with the power
to recommend cutting federal funding for colleges and
universities that are viewed as harboring academic critics of
the foreign power lobbying this resolution. Simply put, if
this foreign power finds the professor to be teaching anything
failing to fit the agenda or cultivated image that country
wants, the professor may be censored and the school eligible
for fines through the removal of federal funds. TOP
Our House
Representatives agreed through their passing of HR 3077, on
October 21, 2003 the truth constitutes an acceptable casualty
in favor of this foreign power's vanity. In passing this
resolution, congress blessed a foreign country with the right
to ignore the first amendment rights of Americans and
determine what we teach, speak and write in the United States.
1st
Amendment
(Freedom
of Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly & Petition)
Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances. (1791)
And they did this
semi-secretly by not registering who voted for it and who
voted against, protecting the McCarthyites from their
constituencies. Intrinsic to this resolution, now heading for
the Senate are three very serious issues aside from simple
curtailment of speech: Dual Loyalties, Treason and the
influence of Special Interests on our Educational System. TOP
1.
Dual-loyalties: The House of Representatives
is willing to strip Americans of their Constitutional Rights,
transferring those to a foreign power with the ability to mold
our opinions.
This is not a grassroots
resolution brought about by US citizens concerned over
curriculum. Its supporters and underwriters are lobbing
groups for a single foreign country. Our professors of
political science, history and international law are bound by
our own laws not to lie, defame or purposely mislead. We
have laws that prosecute persons for this. The professors
angering this foreign government speak and teach the truth
based upon international law, documentation, footage and
current events. It is a truth this foreign government does not
like. Knowledge of this truth exposes the multiple war crimes
and crimes against humanity, policies once realized and
understood result in Americans hacking the financial umbilical
cord for good. Americans have a history of opposing
morally abhorrent behavior. TOP
Like most attempts at
control, this is about money, keeping it flowing to foreign
coffers and back into the campaign funds of those in our
government unquestioning in their support. Our House prefers
to relinquish American rights for foreign favor, an objective
residing in anarchy: stifle public debate and discussion about
its policies at the root. The professors and educators
responsible for teaching America's leaders critical thinking,
factual information and a sound understanding of all affairs,
foreign and domestic provide this information, insight and
varying opinions. Place them on mute and the questions
stop.
When a country invades
another, its leaders, educators and clergy find themselves
endangered species. Educators, academia assist the
masses in understanding their areas of expertise. Kill them or
their message and the population becomes easily manipulated to
the message of those orchestrating the information.
With this censorship through HR 3077, much more is at
stake than appears.
The
question to our congress:
Mr. Congressman, how does this resolution, which keeps
information from the public, censors public debate and
requires a foreign government approve our curriculum and
opinions strengthen the United States and our people?
We
see how it strengthens this foreign country by letting them
continue to hide the truth, but how does it help the American
people if our future leaders in national security and
government service are only allowed to learn what a
foreign country wants them to learn?
2.
Treason: Congress, the Senate and The
President of the United States have one job and one job only: support
and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic. TOP
US
Federal Oath of Office:
I
do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign
and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any
mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well
and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I
am about to enter: So help me God.
Every
Congressman, Senators and the President of the United States
swears this oath of office, drafted in the 1860's. Its
principles as set forth in the US Constitution drafted by
Civil War-era members of Congress are worded specifically with
the intent of ensnaring traitors within our government.
Resolution 3077 patently violates this oath and shows the
interests of those in our government pushing it through
egregiously failing in the only job they have: Protect and
Defend the US Constitution. Foregoing American interests
in favor of a foreign agenda is treason. Our House of
Representative sacrificed our rights in favor of the needs and
desires of a foreign country.
Keeping
information from the American public never helps us. We
have the right to decide what is good information and what is
bad information. No foreign government, special interest
or lobby, under our Constitution is allowed to circumvent this
fundamental right. Any government official who sells our
rights to others, neglects his office and places us as a
nation in peril is committing treason. Allowing another
country or its proxy to mold our thoughts and what we learn is
placing us as a nation at risk. Nobody has the right to tell
an American how to think! Nobody
has the right to tell us what or how we learn.
TOP
The
question to our congress:
How does passing a resolution abridging the freedom of
speech and our right as citizens to openly debate issues
support and defend the First Amendment of the United States
which states: Congress shall make no law prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech?
According
to your oath of office, Mr. Congressman, failing to protect
this right from enemies domestic and in this case foreign,
constitutes treason. Please explain to the American
people why you are sacrificing us by allowing a foreign
government to nullify the US Constitution.
3.
Undue influence of Special Interest
on our Education System: Freedom of education
represents a fundamental American value, the cornerstone and
bedrock of a republic.
The strength of a people
directly relates to the level of education, whether formal or
acquired, and its awareness of all aspects surrounding
decisions. Information represents the single most valuable
asset for any country, company or individual. Stifling
education and debate is oral book burning, destroying the book
before it can be written. It is mind control in the most
basic sense. The ability to learn and exchange ideas in
a free society is a right, not a privilege. This country
was not built on gag orders and intimidation. It was
built on ideas and ideas need freedom to flourish. TOP
The fact that this
resolution exists illustrates how seriously warped our
government's values have become. We the People no
longer exist and if we do, we are an after-thought, a piggy
bank or the building materials of our representative's power
and wealth, the means to their hedonistic ends. The fact that
the interests of a foreign government supercede American
rights is astonishing! The fact that a foreign power holds
enough clout over our representatives for them to consider HR
3077 a good idea, willingly violate their oath of office and
commit treason to satisfy this single lobby is terrifying.
Does
it surprise anyone to discover this foreign country does not
want us discussing this power in any terms other than those it
agrees with?
Will it now require that
political sciences, law and international studies in
Universities be funded by outside sources, simply so Americans
can decide what we learn without being influenced by the
agendas of those out to destroy our Constitutional rights?
The
question to our congress:
Why Mr. Congressman are you allowing a foreign
government to dictate what we teach in our schools?
Why
does this single country have the power to ignore the US
Constitution and enough influence to persuade you into
breaking your oath to us?
HR 3077 isn't the first
resolution to destroy our rights. Capps
II and the Trusted Traveler violate our 4th and 5th
Amendment rights and many others precede these. Their
passage as well, according to the oath of office is treason.
Our rights, the foundations of democracy fall by the wayside,
more every day. In January 2004, the United States
achieved a new milestone. We now fulfill all fourteen
points of Fascism. This resolution, HR 3077
Orwellian in nature fortifies these points through the
limitation of information and extraction of meaningful debate.
TOP
Now
HR 3077 heads to the Senate and this foreign government
continues to lobby hard and ruthlessly for its passage.
They usually get their way. The last time they didn't
involved the sale of jets to Saudi Arabia in the early 1980's.
The question is, will our senate support
and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic by destroying this attack on our
First Amendment? Or will our Senate remain the pawn, the
mouthpiece and Occupied Territory of this foreign insurgent so
many already accuse and believe it to be.
|
The
groups & individuals behind HR 3077 are:
The
Country: Israel
It's
Lobbies in the US on this Resolution
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of
B’nai B’rith,
The American Jewish Congress
American Jewish Committee
Martin
Kramer, a professor of Arab studies Tel Aviv University
Stanley Kurtz, a contributor: (anti-) Arab National Review
Online
Daniel Pipes: Campus Watch, (This group conducts witch hunts
against professors. See our article: Killing
the First Amendment for a graphic example of its
purpose and what they want to censor)
The
Congressmen who drafted and Championed the Resolution: Rep.
Peter Hoekstra (MI), Rep. John A. Boehner (Ohio), Rep. John R.
Carter (Texas), Rep. Tom Cole (Oklahoma), Rep. James Greenwood
(Penn.), Rep. Howard (Buck) McKeon (Calif.), Rep. Patrick J.
Tiberi (Ohio), Rep. Joe Wilson (South Carolina)
|
|
