January 31, 2014 - The Constantine Report    
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading
March 5th 2020 12

Are you using the best credit card when ordering food for delivery?

The key to more success is to have a lot of pillows. Always remember in the jungle there’s a lot of they in there, after you will make it to paradise. Egg whites, turkey sausage, wheat toast, water.

Continue reading

Why a CIA Plane Became a Restaurant and Bar in Costa Rica

This is a modified py-6 that occupies the entire horizontal space of its parent.

Gail Harland visits an old cargo plane in Costa Rica, converted into a restaurant, and discovers a Cold War relic involving a tale of political scandal, the CIA, arms trading and the Iran-Contra Affair.

 January 29, 2014

When the C-123 was shot down over Nicaragua in 1986 by the Sandinista guerillas, it left behind an American owned sister plane. This Fairchild C-123 was a part of one of the biggest political scandals in the 1980s. The Reagan Administration set up a network of arms sales to Iran designed to win release of US hostages held in Lebanon and raise money to fund the Nicaraguan, counter-revolutionary guerilla fighters, commonly referred to as the ‘Contras’. By artificially inflating the prices of arms, National Security Council official Oliver North, was able to reap profits that could be diverted to fund the counter-revolutionaries of the Cuban allied Sandinista government.

The sole survior of the C-123, CIA man Eugene Hasenfus, parachuted to safety but was captured by the Sandinista Army and it was his testimony that helped to shed light on what would only later be known as the Iran-Contra Affair. Led out of the jungle at gun point, Hasenfus’s existence set in motion an incredible chain of cover-ups and lies that would mushroom into one of the biggest scandals in American political history known as the Iran-Contra Affair.

The Reagan Administration had set up an arm sales deal with Iran to win the release of some U.S. hostages being held in Lebanon and to raise money to fund the counter-revolutionary Nicaraguan guerrilla fighters. Of the $16 million raised, only $3.8 million actually funded the Contras. With the CIA’s help, they purchased several items, including the two C-123 cargo planes, two C-7 planes, a Maule aircraft, spare parts, and munitions. They also built a secret airstrip on an American-owned, 30,000 acre ranch in northwest Costa Rica.

This surviving C-123 was the second of two purchased by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the 1980s and was, after the successful Sandinista strike, abandoned at the International Airport in San Jose.

Purchased in 2000 by the proprietors of the El Avion Restaurant and Bar for $3,000, the plane was disassembled and shipped in pieces to where it currently stands. Because the fuselage was too wide for the Chiquita Banana railroad bridges that are placed around Costa Rica, it had to be sent on an ocean ferry. After hauling seven sections up the Manuel Antonio hill, the C-123 finally found its current cliff-side resting-place.

El Avion Restaurant and Bar, 22 Manuel Antonio Road, Manuel Antonio, Costa RicaNow the retired sister plane has been converted into a restaurant, bar, and coffee shop and an enduring Cold War relic. It’s a popular place to visit with friendly staff. We are travelling on a very tight budget, so we didn’t stop to eat. We just took a look at the interior and sent these pictures back for you to contemplate how redundant aircrafts could be repurposed in the peak oil future!

El Avion Restaurant and Bar is located on 22 Manuel Antonio Road in Manuel Antonio, Costa Rica.

Article by Permaculture.co.uk


10 January 2014

  • Senate Bill 14 defines ‘crimes against nature’ as knowing ‘any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth’
  • Consenting adults who perform these sex acts in private and aren’t practicing prostitution are excepted from the felony
  • The wording therefore makes it illegal for two consenting teens to have oral sex
  • Senator Thomas Garrett is sponsoring the bill and says he is drafting an amendment to address complaints about the bill’s ‘unintended consequences’

A new bill being considered by Virginia State legislature would make oral sex between teenagers illegal.

The bill is being proposed by ultra-conservative Republican Senator Thomas Garrett, in an attempt to get a previously proposed ‘crimes against nature’ law passed. 

This law, which made it a felony to carnally know ‘any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth’ was shut down by the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit because it violates the 14th Amendment, which guarantees the rights of due process and equal protection. 

Senator Garrett hoped to get around the 14th Amendment this second time around by restricting the law to just minors. 

In the new bill summary, Senator Garrett clarifies that these ‘crimes against nature’ are not illegal if commited between adults, are not in a public place and don’t involve prostitution. 

The phrasing of the new bill suggests that oral sex with and between minors would be a felony. 

In an email to the Huffington Post, Senator Garrett defended his bill by saying its aim was not to prohibit oral sex between teens, but to protect them from child predators. 

He said he was concerned that predators convitcted of ‘crimes against nature’ with children or teens ‘may pursue appeal and quite possibly be released.’ 

If that’s the case, legal experts say Senator Garrett should have drafted a law against predators instead of against certain sexual acts. 

‘If he wants to prosecute people who abuse children, why not write a law that would ban abuse of children,’ UCLS law professor Eugene Volokh told HuffPo. 

Working on it: Senator Garrett says this isn’t the final version of the bill that he will propose to the legislature. Above, the Virginia State Capitol

The proposed bill is also causing controversy in the LGBT community by people who say it’s discriminatory towards people who have non-genital sex. 

Claire Guthrie Gastañaga, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia told Think Progress that her group would oppose the bill because ‘it leaves in place discriminatory treatment and doesn’t address the underlying problem that LGBT people are treated differently than folks that have other kinds of sex.’ 

But Senator Garrett promises that this isn’t the final version of Senate Bill 14. 

‘Our office has been inundated with extremely unsavory telephone calls and emails,’ Senator Garrett said in the email. ‘For the record, I have heard the concerns and have started to draft an amendment to my bill that will deal with the unintended consequences of a bill that is nothing but well-intentioned.’ 

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

“… The biggest lie of the NSS is that we Americans are faced with national security threats that make a totalitarian society essential for our own protection. …”

 January 20, 2014

Predictably, President Obama has done nothing significant to diminish the National Security State. He presided over its expansion. Why should he want to undo it? It’s a big mistake, however, in understanding the National Security State (NSS) and what to do about it to focus on Obama. The issue concerning the NSS is much deeper than one man, one president and a few terms of office. Once we understand the NSS, we will see that it will only disappear in two cases. Either it falls when the American Empire falls, or it falls if Americans fundamentally rethink and change their entire government.

What is the NSS? We are offered this definition from the Oxford Dictionary of the US Military:

“A post-World War II state in which nearly all aspects of political, economic, intellectual, and social life are dominated by considerations of national defense and the drive to maintain a defense establishment capable of protecting the state against all comers.”

What this means is that the state’s organizations across all spheres (economic, political, social) are justified by and geared toward its overriding objective, which is security. The dominating forces will be both government and social institutions and pressures. This in turn means that the country necessarily becomes more and more totalitarian in its quest to achieve its objective. In other words, we arrive at this definition, which is mine:

The National Security State (NSS) is a totalitarian state in which national security (or national defense) is the overriding aim and all aspects of society and government are organized to achieve that aim.

To understand the NSS, one must realize that while persons and personalities create and manage organizations and organizational growth, they do so in order to achieve certain organizational purposes that often pre-exist and outlive them. Furthermore, although an individual may be very important in a creative sense in advancing the organization and its objectives, another person typically could be found who would attend to the same aims of the organization. Thus, an Obama can replace a Bush who can replace a Clinton and so on, and all the while the NSS is intact and advancing. One Secretary of Defense can succeed another without any significant alteration in the thrust, existence or goals of the NSS. The particulars change but the general features of the NSS remain. The general features are an aspect of general ideas and general objectives that the organization and society are following. This is why in some sense the organization lives on through the efforts and common ideology of its ever-changing members. This is how the Catholic Church achieves continuity. It is how Cosa Nostra functioned. It is how the U.S. government functions. It is how America’s NSS functions.

Issues of organization are not well understood by the American public, by intellectuals or by the media. Too often they are ignored. Instead the focus is on persons and personalities. There is not going to be any fundamental change in the NSS until the issues involved are seen as tracing back to organizations that have been constructed and perpetuated as reflections of particular ideologies. And then there will be no change unless people either reject those ideologies or else the organizations fail because the ideologies are false and flawed.

In totalitarian countries, the State is not a single entity. Organizations within the State wield the various powers required to maintain the State’s spying, repression, taxation, imprisonment, propaganda, control of media, and education. Each of the State’s functions requires administration and organization. America has the National Security Agency (NSA) as one of its major spy agencies. It has a complex and increasingly nationally-controlled and influenced apparatus for repression, which includes the FBI, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police forces. It has the IRS for taxation. It has federal and state prison systems. The government dominates the media and has an army of public relations people it pays. The government increasingly influences science and intellectuals through funding.

These powerful organizations frequently start small or innocuously and later grow in power.

In Nazi Germany, the Schutzstaffel (meaning Protection Squadron or defense corps) was the infamous SS. It began as a small paramilitary unit that guarded the halls where the Nazis met. Later, it became one of the largest and most powerful organizations in the Third Reich.

Joseph Goebbels began in Hitler’s first administration with no office, but in time he was in the Cabinet overseeing a ministry of propaganda.

The NKVD was a powerful law enforcement agency of the Communist Party, which itself was already the most powerful organization within the State. It began as a people’s police in 1917 but very soon a secret police (the Cheka) separated out.

In ancient Italy, the Praetorian Guards were originally bodyguards who protected generals and important personages during the Republic. They eventually became a very powerful organization within the Roman Empire, making and breaking emperors.

The United States has the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and now the powerful National Security Agency (NSA). The origin of the National Security Agency (NSA) traces back to 1917. It officially began in 1952. It too started innocuously and then grew.

The NSA has turned America into a police state, but this could not have been done without the laws passed by the Congress, signed by the Executive and upheld by the Judiciary. The power of the NSA and the other organizations of the NSS derives from the State that passes laws to sustain them. If the people do not or can not halt the growth of these powers, the organizations grow in power. America’s NSS has been and continues to be a work-in-progress.

To get rid of America’s NSS, one must get rid of the NSA. We cannot expect any U.S. government leader to dismantle the NSA, when it is a key building block of both the American police state and the American Empire.

All of the American organizations mentioned are dangerous in the sense of threatening the freedom, security and well-being of the average American. However, many Americans think the opposite. They think that the NSS is enhancing their freedom, security and well-being. Many support the police state. Their support in fact is a critical factor in sustaining it. Other Americans do not recognize the threat. They think that somehow America differs from Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the Roman Empire. Many activists naively think that government can be controlled, tamed, or put to noble purposes, namely, their own. They too fail to understand the dangers inherent in these organizations.

In 1987, the U.S. formed the Special Operations Command (SOCOM). This controls the U.S. Special Operations Forces in 134 different countries. These are military forces. This enormous global breadth and its functions as one of the Executive’s private forces, available and unaccountable for any number of uses, make it yet another dangerous organization. It has shown rapid growth.

The chief of SOCOM is proud that his organization has penetrated 38 other agencies in Washington:

“I have folks in every agency here in Washington, D.C. — from the CIA, to the FBI, to the National Security Agency, to the National Geospatial Agency, to the Defense Intelligence Agency.”

How can we Americans know that the organizations of the NSS are in fact threats to us, not benefits? One way is that we cannot control them. We cannot change them. They are like forces of nature to us. How can the people be conceived of as owning or operating the government under such a condition? They are also uncontrolled by Congress. They control key members of Congress, not the other way around.

Next, the accountability of the organizations of the NSS to both other agencies of government and to the people is nil. They stonewall Congress, lie or provide the least possible information, and even then it’s obtuse. Their operations are cloaked. They are kept secret. It has always been extremely difficult to know what the CIA, the NSA and SOCOM are doing.

Third, these organizations are impenetrable. They present a barrier to us as formidable as steel mesh. We cannot contend against them or fight them. Most Americans cannot keep up with the tax regulations of the IRS, much less know when SOCOM is leading them into another war. It’s one thing to write a letter to one’s Congressman or to pen an article, it’s quite another to get inside these organizations and expose them.

Fourth, we are told to take them on trust. We are told to trust authority for our own good. Why? Why should we trust a government that has behaved as irresponsibly as the U.S. government? Why should we trust a government that has lied so many times to us? Why should we trust a government that is so dominated by moneyed interests? Why trust a government that supplies narratives at variance with the facts, or alters its narratives contradictorily from one year to the next? Why should we trust an imperial Presidency?

These NSS organizations increasingly intrude on us, our privacy, and treat us all as suspects. It will take very little to transform them into a very nasty set of masters.

But the biggest lie of the NSS is that we Americans are faced with national security threats that make a totalitarian society essential for our own protection. This was never true in the 20th century, even in the presence of the Kaiser’s Germany, Hitler’s Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union. There is a governmental Parkinson’s Law at work: The government manufactures threats so as to justify the expansion of its own organizations and resources. A fortiori, it is even less true in the 21st century that the country faces major threats.

And even if there were major national security threats to Americans, it is absurd to conclude that the country’s response should be to become totalitarian. What does that accomplish but directly undermining the domestic welfare and tranquility and creating domestic threats that may result in bloody civil disturbances and rebellions? How can America preserve its values of freedom and consent of the governed by destroying them?

Let me indulge in a generalization, which is of course not true of everyone.

Americans are in a position analogous to a Mafia hit man or Mafia soldier. The soldier swears allegiance to his family, his boss and Cosa Nostra. He obeys every order given him. In return for his loyalty and obedience, he feels secure in the family. His own family will be taken care of if he is jailed or killed. A lawyer will be gotten him if he is accused or arrested. The Mafia soldier gives up freedom of action in return for a secure place in the family.

Americans are like the Mafia soldier. They pledge allegiance and obediently follow the government’s orders. In return, they feel more secure and protected. They hardly ever question what they are told to do or made to do, not in any serious or effective way. Laws are to be obeyed, like the orders handed down by the mob boss. And if you do not obey, you’re in for a lot of trouble in both cases. The organization has a way of enveloping its members.

But, and this is the fly in the ointment, what happens when the head of the family for whatever reason decides that the soldier must be eliminated or die? The boss has the power to do this and when it’s in his interest to do it, he will. He’ll cover it up so as not to disturb the other loyal soldiers, but he’ll eliminate someone if he is ordered to or decides himself to do it. What happens when the U.S. government decides for whatever reason that certain American should be jailed or that all Americans should be searched at airports or that certain Americans should be ordered into combat? What happens if the government decides to seize your assets or raise your taxes prohibitively? At that point, where is the security?

You cannot obtain security by giving yourself over to a superior power. You give up your freedom for certain and the security you obtain is at best at the pleasure of that superior power. Congress is the Cosa Nostra boss of America. Its bills when passed are law. It’s as simple as that. And because of that, Congress owns America and Americans.

Of all the institutions of the NSS, Congress is the most dangerous in terms of making laws and funding the NSS. The Presidency (Executive) of the United States is the most dangerous in terms of creating and running the institutions of the NSS.

Michael S. Rozeff [send him mail] is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York. He is the author of the free e-book Essays on American Empire.


Washington, D.C. 25 January (Asiantribune.com):

When the United States was forced to withdraw the draft resolution against Sri Lanka in September 2011 as a result of the strategic diplomatic maneuvers of the members of the Sri Lanka team at UNHRC in Geneva, the US Ambassador for Human Rights in Geneva threatened the then team leader Tamara Kunanayakam “We’ll get you next time!”.

Well, Sri Lanka is facing the U.S. diplomatic assault in March this year while the United States itself has refused to investigate and account for its own human rights violations and war crimes during its ‘War on Global Terror’ completely ignoring the slogans ‘accountability’, ‘transparency’ it is using to bring Sri Lanka to the ‘Geneva Dock’ fulfilling one of the ‘agenda items’ of the separatist-pro Eelam elements within the Global Tamil Diaspora.

The Amnesty International in its 2008 report on America’s culpability to war crimes noted “There is not a single fix that will bring the USA’s actions on counterterrorism into compliance with international law. The violations in the “war on terror” have been many and varied, and the government has exploited a long-standing reluctance of the USA to commit itself fully to international law, including in relation to recognizing the full range of its international obligations with respect to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The question of accountability and remedy for violations in the “war on terror” must therefore be part of a new commitment by the USA to international law.”

The London Guardian gave a startling revelation on January 23 when it said “America’s professional association of psychologists has quietly declined to rebuke one of its members, a retired US army reserve officer, for his role in one of the most brutal interrogations known to have taken place at Guantánamo Bay.”

The decision not to pursue any disciplinary measure against John Leso, a former army reserve major, is the latest case in which someone involved in the post-9/11 torture of detainees has faced no legal or even professional consequences.

In a 31 December letter obtained by the Guardian, the American Psychological Association said it had “determined that we cannot proceed with formal charges in this matter. Consequently the complaint against Dr Leso has been closed.”

But the APA did not deny Leso took part in the brutal interrogation of the suspected 20th 9/11 hijacker, Mohammed al-Qahtani, whose treatment the Pentagon official overseeing his military commission ultimately called “torture”.

Leso was identified as “MAJ L” in a leaked log, published by Time magazine in 2005, of Qahtani’s marathon interrogation in November 2002. With Leso recorded as present for at least some of the session, Qahtani was forcibly hydrated through intravenous drips and prevented from using the bathroom until he urinated on himself, subjected to loud music, and repeatedly kept awake while being “told he can go to sleep when he tells the truth”.

Documents that emerged from a (US) Senate armed services committee torture inquiry detailed Leso’s involvement in an early “Behavioral Science Consultation Team” at Guantánamo, which was instrumental in crafting torture techniques out of measures taught to US troops to withstand brutal treatment.

Then we have several other US violations of international humanitarian law not brought before the UNHRC in Geneva. And no ‘truth commission’ within the US system to probe such dastardly crimes.

Gul Rahman died in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002, after being shackled to a cold concrete wall in a secret CIA prison in northern Kabul, Afghanistan, known as the Salt Pit. He was suspected of links to the terrorist group al-Qaida. Rahman is the only detainee known to have died in a CIA-run prison.

Al-Jamadi, another enemy combatant under interrogation in the hands of Americans, died in 2003 at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. A military autopsy declared al-Jamadi’s death a homicide.

At Abu Ghraib prison, instead of turning al-Jamadi over to the Army, CIA officers took him to a shower stall. They put a sandbag over his head, cuffed his hands behind his back and chained his arms to a barred window.

When he leaned forward, his arms stretched painfully behind and above his back.

The Obama administration’s Attorney General Eric Holder on August 30 last year officially announced that no one would be prosecuted for the deaths of these prisoners, one in Afghanistan in 2002 and another in Iraq in 2003, eliminating the last possibility that any criminal charges will be brought as a result of the brutal interrogations carried out by the C.I.A.

In its refusal to investigate the Bush-era torture practices, President Obama himself declaring that he prefers to look forward, not backward, the Obama administration announced June 30 (2011) that it would shut down 99 investigations into deaths of prisoners in US custody during the “war on terror,” leaving only two investigations with the potential to develop into criminal prosecutions.

What Eric Holder announced on August 30 last year was the dismissal of the last two remaining torture-death investigations under the watch of the CIA.

Mr. Holder had previously ruled out any charges related to the use of waterboarding and other methods that most human rights experts consider to be torture. His announcement closes a contentious three-year investigation by the Justice Department.

“Based on the fully developed factual record concerning the two deaths, the department has declined prosecution because the admissible evidence would not be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt,” Holder statement said. It said the investigation “was not intended to, and does not resolve, broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct.”

“It is hugely disappointing that with ample evidence of torture, and documented cases of some people actually being tortured to death, that the Justice Department has not been able to mount a successful prosecution and hold people responsible for these crimes,” said Elisa Massimino, president of Human Rights First. “The American people need to know what was done in their name.”

She said her group’s own investigation of the deaths of prisoners showed that initial inquiries were bungled by military and intelligence officers in charge of prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rendition of enemy combatants meaning sending terrorist suspects who are in the custody of the United States to their home countries which are notorious for their torture chambers was an established practiced in the Bush-Cheney administration. The Bush administration itself developed ‘enhanced interrogation’ regimen that was widely accepted as torture.

Simulated drowning technique called waterboarding, an established torture method, Dick Chaney even now supports.

Then comes transparency and accountability under the Obama administration.

The United States which stands for transparency and accountability in other nations monitoring those nations’ domestic battles has shown absolute minimal preparedness when it comes to its own transparency and accountability.

Shunning accountability and transparency since the advent of the Obama administration as an attempt to suppress the brutality of enhanced interrogation which is widely known as torture, prisoner rendition, and other violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL) has now become an official policy.

US call for Accountability in Sri Lanka

At a press conference in the premises of the American Embassy in Colombo, Sri Lanka on May 4 (2011) winding up his three-day visit, the assistant secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs of the State Department Robert Blake said

“The United States has continually expressed to the Government of Sri Lanka the importance of implementing a credible and independent process to ensure accountability. Domestic authorities have responsibility to ensure that those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law are held accountable. International mechanisms can become appropriate in cases where states are either unable or unwilling to meet their obligations.”

That is exactly the intention of the United States, well supported by the separatist-Eelamist elements within the Global Tamil Diaspora, to go beyond the UNHRC in Geneva toward an ‘international mechanism’.

Previously on March 14 (2011) Mr. Blake addressing the Asia Society in New York that discussed the developments in Sri Lanka warned “Accountability is an essential part of any reconciliation process. Without it an enduring peace will remain elusive as unhealed wounds fester. Primary responsibility for implementing a credible and independent process through which individuals who may have violated human rights and international humanitarian law are held accountable for their actions lies with Sri Lanka itself. Our strong preference is that the Sri Lankan government establish its own transparent process that meets international standards. However, in the absence of such a mechanism, there will be mounting pressure for an international mechanism.”

Bringing pressure and forcing Sri Lanka to undertake accountability for what occurred during the final stages (Jan-May 2009) of the battle between the Tiger cadres and Sri Lankan military has been the corner stone policy of the US State Department since the demise of the LTTE which has helped pro-separatist/Tamil Tiger lobbies in Washington and in other European Capitals to help build a global voice to isolate Sri Lanka to achieve to bifurcate the nation that the LTTE failed for twenty six years. This State Department ‘accountability and transparency’ call led Sri Lanka to face scrutiny in Geneva before UN Human Rights Commission in previous years, and now this March..

Truth, Accountability in US

“Truth, accountability, reform, and reconciliation are milestones in the road to security. And they are milestones that must be reached in that order. For truth is the foundation of all else. Without it, accountability is abusive, reform is blind, and reconciliation is hollow. And accountability and reform are preconditions for reconciliation as well. For, without them, the victims have no reason to believe that the crimes will not be revisited, upon them or upon others, in the future. Consequently, they will continue to be on guard. Worse yet, they may feel that the period of abuse has not really ended, and they will not be delivered from the temptation to retaliate.”

The above paragraph was taken from a study done by the Center for the Study of Human Rights in the Americas at the University of California at Davis. The study was “Truth, Accountability, Reform and Reconciliation: The Road to Security and the Restoration of American Values.”

The Davis study highlights the violation of International Humanitarian Laws and universally-accepted human rights practices by the United States since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in Washington and New York.

The University of California, Davis study undertaken by academics and professionals in their final report outlines the violation of IHL and universally-accepted human rights as:

“According to credible information, the practices and policies enacted since 9/11 have involved international alliances with criminal armed groups; human trafficking; civilian arrests without warrants; denial of the writ of habeas corpus; secret detention; life-threatening, open-air, holding pens; medical neglect; interference of interrogation on medical treatment; fatal, disabling, and disfiguring beatings; hanging by the wrists; threats of death or bodily harm; mauling by military dogs; torture by proxy (extraordinary rendition); controlled drowning (waterboarding); sensory deprivation; sensory assault; forced nudity; temperature and dietary manipulation; sleep deprivation; disorientation in space and time; positional torture (stress positions and prolonged standing); binding torture (tight shackling or cuffing); solitary confinement; indefinite detention; severe humiliation; sexual assaults; assaults with excreta; forced feeding; interference with religious practices; verbal abuse, and the exploitation of cultural idiosyncrasies and personal phobias.”

The study declares: “These policies and practices are outrages upon human dignity, and are subject to criminal prosecution under both national and international law.”

This exactly what the Thursday announcement of US Attorney General Eric Holder dismissed – the dismissal of accountability, transparency and truth the United States always urge other nations to adhere to.

The Center for the Study of Human Rights in the Americas of the University of California at Davis report says:

“What are the prospects that these recommendations will be heeded? At present, they are next to nil. Invoking pragmatism, President Obama has called on us to look forwards rather than back, thus failing to realize that we cannot look forwards without looking back. Restoring our values, repairing our image, and curbing terrorism are goals that we must achieve in the future. Yet, none of these goals may be reached if we do not face the past first and objectively assess what has been done in the name of the American people. As far as we can see, this can best be done through an independent, nonpartisan, transparent, and thorough investigation into the facts, circumstances, and policies employed in response to the September 11 attacks.”