Torture and Impunity in US Courts
The decision to throw out Jose Padilla's suit threatens the core freedoms guaranteed to US citizens by the constitution
An important question confronting courts in the United States is whether individuals subjected to torture and other abuse in the "war on terror" can obtain a judicial remedy for their mistreatment. A recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, concludes that they may not.
The verdict will not be the last word on the subject, as it can yet be appealed to the Supreme Court. (Gallo/Getty)
The decision, which throws out the civil suit of former enemy combatant Jose Padilla, is troubling, both in its result and potential sweep. It not only threatens core freedoms protected by the constitution, but also undermines the principle that government officials should be held accountable for their illegal conduct.
Padilla was the victim of one of the most extraordinary uses of military detention power after the 9/11 attacks. In May 2002, Padilla was arrested by the FBI at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport and detained as a material witness in connection with the government's investigation into the attacks. The government suspected that Padilla was involved in a plot to explode a radioactive "dirty bomb" in the United States.
But rather than charge Padilla with a crime under various anti-terrorism statutes, President Bush declared him an "enemy combatant" and transferred Padilla to a navy brig in South Carolina, where he was imprisoned without access to a lawyer, a court, or his family for nearly two years. While at the brig, Padilla was held in total isolation for long periods of time, forced to endure extreme sensory deprivation, subjected to painful stress positions, and threatened with death.
In November 2005, with the Supreme Court poised to decide whether to hear Padilla's legal challenge, the Bush administration ended his military detention, indicting Padilla on criminal charges and subsequently transferring him to a federal prison. The transfer rendered Padilla's challenge to his continued military detention moot, and the Supreme Court declined to hear his case. The question remained, however, whether Padilla could seek reparations for his brutal treatment during his years of military confinement at the brig.
Seeking reparations
Padilla accordingly commenced suit against former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other senior officials responsible for his detention and treatment as an enemy combatant. The complaint, which sought only nominal damages, was not about money, but a principle: In the United States, no person is above the law and even a state of war is not a "blank cheque" when it comes to the rights of US citizens.
In dismissing Padilla's suit at the pleading stage, before the defendants were even required to answer the complaint, the appeals court necessarily assumed the truth of Padilla's allegations. The dismissal instead rested on the more sweeping proposition that Padilla had no right to pursue any claims in federal court, no matter how brutally he was treated.
The dispute in Padilla's case centred mainly on interpretation of a 1971 case, Bivens v Six Unknown Named Agents, in which the Supreme Court had established that individuals could sue federal officials for violations of their constitutional rights. (Bivens itself involved a warrantless search and arrest in violation of the Fourth Amendment.)
"The court's decision effectively creates a national security exception to the general principle that government officials may be held accountable for the torture and prolonged arbitrary detention of US citizens."
There is no question that Padilla's prolonged incommunicado detention and gross mistreatment would have qualified for relief under Bivens, had it occurred as part of a "normal" law enforcement investigation - or had Padilla been a "regular" federal prisoner. The government argued, however, that because Padilla was detained by the military in the name of national security, his suit presented "special factors counselling hesitation" by the courts, thus placing it within an exception to Bivens liability. In this sensitive area, they argued, judges should not allow litigation to proceed - no matter how egregious the constitutional violation - unless Congress expressly provides for a remedy (which Congress has not).
The appeals court accepted the government's argument, concluding that allowing Padilla's suit to proceed would infringe on the prerogatives of the political branches, notwithstanding that Congress had clearly and categorically prohibited torture and other forms of mistreatment. The appeals court also found that judges lacked competence to adjudicate Padilla's claims, concluding that litigation would enmesh them in assessing government decisions about the use of interrogation methods and risk disclosure of classified information and other sensitive intelligence.
Additionally, the court dismissed Padilla's claims under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Padilla, a practicing Muslim, maintained that the government had severely impeded his practice of Islam, including by denying him access to a Quran, to facilitate interrogations and deliberately confusing him about prayer times and the direction of Mecca. While RFRA plainly covered these violations of religious freedom, the court questioned whether that statute's protections applied to enemy combatants in military detention. In any event, the court said, the defendants were immune from suit because RFRA's applicability to enemy combatants was not clearly established at the time.
A national security exception
The court's decision effectively creates a national security exception to the general principle that government officials may be held accountable for the torture and prolonged arbitrary detention of US citizens. That exception is premised on a limited role for courts in enforcing constitutional protections and an aversion to holding officials liable even for the most lawless conduct in matters involving terrorism. The exception, moreover, has no limit: Under the court's reasoning, the result would have been the same if the government had waterboarded Padilla - or cut off the tips of his fingers.
Perhaps, the most cruel irony is that Padilla's military detention was made possible only because the government invoked labels such as "national security" and "enemy combatant" to circumvent established rules - above all, the requirement that individuals arrested in the United States be promptly charged with a crime and not thrown in a military stockade. Extracting an individual from the regular criminal justice system thus became the predicate for immunising government officials for any and all abuse that followed. Padilla's case demonstrates how emergency powers, even if falsely asserted and illegally invoked, can swallow the rule of law.
Padilla, to be sure, is not the most sympathetic plaintiff. Following his transfer to federal court to face charges, he was convicted of providing material support to terrorism and received a lengthy prison term. (Though it bears noting that the conviction was not based on the "dirty bomb" allegations, but on vague assertions of peripheral involvement in "jihad" during the 1990s.)
The Fourth Circuit's decision, however, did not turn on the fact that Padilla had been convicted of a crime. It applies equally to any US citizen placed in military detention, even if that person is never charged with a crime and is innocent of all wrongdoing.
The Fourth Circuit's decision will not be the last word on the subject. Padilla can appeal the decision to the full appeals court or to the Supreme Court, and his separate suit against John Yoo, an architect of Bush-era torture policies, is still pending before a federal appeals court in California. In addition, other suits by US-citizen torture victims are pending in other courts.
The Fourth Circuit's decision, nevertheless, represents a significant setback for the rule of law. It demonstrates, above all, the corrosive effects of torture, which warps legal institutions and values, ultimately co-opting courts themselves, as they become instruments of impunity.
It appears that the issue of treason must be charged against the Presidents, Congressmen, etc. See John Nelson's article (legal researcher) at http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 additionally, BUSH & BLAIR have been documented as War Criminals for the Iraq War....which means current President Obama falls into the same category.....see Kuala Lumpur's info at http://www.presstv.ir/detail/211590.html additionally, Obama was not born in the U.S. and Georgia, U.S. is bringing that up.......Obama's grandmother said he was born in Kenya and the Hawaii Governor Abercrombie has perjured and cannot locate his claimed birth certificate here (see youtube videos also) which means all that he does is NULL and VOID.......treason is the key to undo all the wrongs of changing the Constitution as documented by legal researcher John Nelson...........aloha.
Thanks for the heads up about the latest evisceration of meaningful Bill of Rights' protections, professor Hafetz.
Apparently, an all purpose exception to a Bivens-style civil rights damage action has been created, triggered merely by the plaintiff being tossed into a military prison rather than into an ordinary prison, regardless of innocence or guilt, regardless of how egregious the mistreatment may later become while this hapless US citizen is being confined in a brig run by the Pentagon.
Kindly think for a moment about the significance of this latest Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in the context of what just got enacted into federal law in a fine print section of the NDAA - the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 - which President Obama approved and signed over New Year's.
"Extracting an individual from the regular criminal justice system thus became the predicate for immunizing all government officials from responsibility for any and all abuse that followed. Padilla's case demonstrates how emergency powers, even if falsely invoked, can swallow the rule of law."
Yep. No shit. That's what it demonstrates allright. And the original entitlement of the original Supreme Court ruling was Bivens versus Six Unknown Narcotics Agents for a very good reason.
Bivens was whisked away and held without any semblence of due process by faceless government drug cops whose identities he did not know. The Supreme Court in Bivens declared he had a right to discovery in order to learn his captors' names so they could be sued and eventually held civilly accountable for violating his right to be free from false arrest, to be free from unreasonable seizure, and his right not to be subjected to excessive force or torture.
Well, no longer is that the law of the land - at least if a military brig rather than a local lock up, county jail, or state prison is the destination where you or a loved one gets taken, should (heaven forbid) there ever be an ominous knock on the door some night.
And don't be too surprised either if the the guy in the uniform in charge of the team on your doorstep, like the transporting and intake officers, and the eventual prison staff, all display no ID or have no name tags on them. They might even wear masks. Or keep the arrestee blindfolded for good measure.
One can never take too many precautions, you see, when it is a war on terror that's the reason why.
Bill from Saginaw
Don't forget about the 'son of NDAA':
The Enemy Expatriation Act.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3166/text
H. R. 3166
To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.
A BILL
To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Enemy Expatriation Act’.
SEC. 2. LOSS OF NATIONALITY.
(a) In General- Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in each of paragraphs (1) through (6), by striking ‘or’ at the end;
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘; or’; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘(8) engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘(c) For purposes of this section, the term ‘hostilities’ means any conflict subject to the laws of war.’.
(b) Technical Amendment- Section 351(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1483(a)) is amended by striking ‘(6) and (7)’ and inserting ‘(6), (7), and (8)’.
Jose Padilla's story needs to be told until some kind of reason returns to the u.s. government, if indeed that can ever happen. What I remember is this. Jose appeared on the front pages of u.s newspapers with the "dirty bomber" label attached. But there was no bomb, clean or dirty. from there on it was all alice in wonderland justice: convict first then have a trial. Except in his case they skipped the trial part altogether. It was a bs. story from the beginning, and never got better. the Injustice Department went scrambling around like Keystone Kops trying to put together some kind of charge against a dirty bomber with no bomb. Already Bush said he could pronounce anybody an enemy combatant if he wanted to, and Jose was one of the first to get the title. We had to assume that Ashcroft and cheney had decided we needed another scare to help us remember to stay afraid. That was all we could think of. There was never a real case against Jose. Now they have given us real reasons to be afraid. Of them.
It seems to me to be a case of mass paranoia and if the US government is going to label everybody a terrorist on a whim, then it finds itself against the rest of the world. But will this bother them? I doubt it because the country is run by a load of bigheads who don't know their elbows from their ankles to put it mildly. The whole world is now being informed correctly about the USA, thanks to opportunities to celebrate the power of freedom of information, speech, and the written word, like this forum gives us, and for which I am eternally grateful. It seems you have the ability to wake up the uninformed. Keep up the good work.
"...peripheral involvement in "jihad" during the 1990s."
So what? I could make that ridiculous case against just about anybody who was alive during the 1990's. And, even if his involvement with jihad was "peripheral," one could hardly blame him given the conduct of the US over the last 200 years.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/211590.html War Crimes Tribunal Said BUSH & BLAIR found guilty of War Crimes due to the Iraq War......doesn't that mean OBAMA is too?
http://obamacrimes.com/ read below and more at this site
Hubert Poetschke of www.hubertpoetschke.mycambridgewebsite.com shared his writing with us. Mr. Poetschke did a wonderful job with his writing. Please honor his wishes and pass his message along to others. Thank you Mr. Poetschke for taking the time to write this terrific article and allowing us to post it on our website for others to read and share!
Hi Friends!
Please read this essay and pass to all people on your mailing list, as well as politicians.
The election in 2012 is not far away and each of us have to get informed and share our information’s with others because We the People can NOT allow Obama Hussein Barack to win the election in 2012 – this will be the end of our country as we know and cherish and Socialism/Communism will triumph and we all will be endlessly and equally poor.
This will be the most important election of this Century – We the People MUST WIN.
In God We Trust
The importance of the 2012 election, the most consequential election of the 21st Century for the President, the Senate and the House – to the survival of our Constitutional Republic.
It have to be stressed that our form of government is a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy because in fact a Democracy is a rule of mob or simple majority and the rest of the society must obey the rules of the majority. It is also true that Democracy is a transitional form of government, which usually leads to Anarchy, which is only a short transition to the Totalitarian Dictatorship, to be either Socialist, Communist, Fascist or Nazism.
They are all, similar Totalitarian political, economic and social systems with absolute tyranny governing everybody and everything with a very limited or no individual liberty and rights. All rights are vested in the ruling Party to be either Socialist, Communist, Fascist or Nazis. Moreover, in this respect the Islamic despotic theocracy is also similar totalitarian, ideological, political and social system whose goal is the world dominance of Islam as was former Communist Soviet Union.
The foundation of our Republic was and is our Constitution for over 235 years as the Law of the Land and it is our Constitution which was the base of our phenomenal successes as a Nation in all areas of human achievements. The Founding Fathers of our Republic left US the greatest document – the Constitution which established three independent branches of government: 1. Executive branch, 2.Congress, and 3. Supreme Court as a condition to check and balance the power of the Federal Government, to prevent any of the branches to become dominant and dictatorial.
Moreover, to make sure that Government will not ever become a new Tyrant as in many other countries was and is and treat the people as their subjects.
Our Constitution guaranty the individual liberty, economic liberty, individual responsibility, property rights, freedom of travels and communications, commerce, right to keep and bear arms as the ultimate guaranty of all our rights and the free speech among other rights in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The Rights of the States are clearly defined by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and they never should be infringed or violated by the Federal Government.
The Capitalistic free market economy is inherent to our Constitution and becomes the integral part in the formation of our nation as the most industrious, dynamic and solution oriented people including entrepreneurs.
It was our free market economy – the driving engine who propelled our country’s phenomenal economic growth, which increased the standard of living of the American people more than any other country in the World, during the first 150 years of our Republic.
Notwithstanding, the horrible losses in human resources during the Civil War, the economic growth slowed only temporarily, than resumed huge progress.
It is important to note, that for the most of these 150 years, our country did not have the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913 and for the first 15 years did not have any impact on our economy or the American people.
However, the actions taken by the Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression, which lasted from 1929 till 1941, for 12 long years because of the policies and actions taken by FDR, elected in 1932, who took Office in March 1933, namely his Communistic New Deal which was a rotten deal for the American people.
The Communistic New Deal was a war against the economic recovery which started in the summer of 1933 but the New Deal killed the recovery and the American people had to endure the unprecedented misery for another eight years, thanks to FDR’s obsession with the Communistic ideas to manage the economy and the lives of the American people.
Indeed, FDR’s closest advisers were already professing the death of Capitalism and the dawn of the Collectivism/Communism in America nevertheless, they were ahead of time by about eight decades.
FDR was the worst President ever in the history of our country, who committed multiple treason’s against our country and the American people.
I wrote about this period of time and much more in my book: “Memoirs from the Turbulent Years and Beyond” – it is a factual story of the years from the end of WWI till year 2008 including predictions about Obama, the Radical Marxist/Communist ideologue and eloquent demagogue,which helped Obama to win the election in 2008.
Over the last decades the power of the Federal Reserve grew constantly to the detriment of our economy because of the interventionist policies of the Fed’s into the economy. Hence, the Fed’s adhere to the Keynesian theory of government fiscal programs and deficit spending to increase employment and stimulate the business activity, which is contrary to the free market economy and will not work, it is a fallacy for which many countries are paying heavy price, notably Europe and now our country.
Nevertheless, this theory never works, maybe for a very short period of time, nonetheless it is not any solution to the underlying economic problems.
Any interventions to the free market economy have adverse economic effects and will create recession or depression depending on the magnitude of the interventions and this is the phase, where we are now in our country.
The idea of government spending in any form of stimulus’s is an absolute insanity, a derange notion of ideological Leftist maniacs. However, if you are a fanatical, Radical Marxist/Communist as Obama is, you will use as many as possible stimulus’s to create more debt, more regulations and constrictions to overwhelm the free market, to create endless crisis to achieve instability and finally, the economic collapse, or economic implosion of the Capitalistic free market economy.
Moreover, the implosion of our economic system will be the dawn of the Socialistic/Communistic totalitarian tyranny, the dream of Obama, Soros and all these Radical Leftists, all these Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, Progressive lunatics with barbaric and murderous mentality.
The Democratic/Socialist Party for decades was tinkering and “improving” the free market economy by establishing new government sponsored entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac doing the mortgage business, during the L. B. Johnson Great Society’s boondoggle experiment which cost Billions of dollars and devastated the black families. Moreover, what an insane and devastating idea to get government in the mortgage business. However, very clever way to entangle government in another humongous program for which ultimately the taxpayers are responsible and must pay the bill in Billions of dollars and here lays most of the problems of the sub-prime loans, including the very destructive Community Reinvestment Act – the product of the Democratic/Socialist Party Congress inspired by President J. Carter a very mediocre man with Socialistic baggage – a very bad combination and results, which culminated in 2008 disaster, what an unnecessary tragedy. Please remember, whenever the Socialists, Communists, Progressives, Liberals or similar lunatics or intellectually retarded people get to even limited power, they will work hard to destroy our Republic because all these kind of people hate America, hate our Capitalistic economic system and destruction of this system is their ultimate goal, as is now Obama’s goal.
You might ask why? Because destruction of our economy which parallels the pauperization of the middle class is absolutely necessary to “fundamentally transform” America into the Socialistic/Communistic totalitarian tyranny – a modern slavery and a dream come true for Obama and his Radical Leftists advisers, czars, Union leaders, sycophants in Main Stream Media and delusional elitists.
As you can see, our economic problems created continuously by the members of the Democratic/Socialist Party started long ago, practically since FDR’s Presidency with some short setbacks, notably during President Ronald Reagan, the greatest President of the 20th Century because Reagan stopped the former Communist Soviet Union march to Conquest the World and Communist domination everywhere.
All these so called “leaders” in Congress like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and other leaders of the Democratic/Socialist Party were already proclaiming that free market do not work anymore and government have to play major role in solving economic problems like different Stimulus’s to reinvigorate the economy. However, have to be stated unequivocally that the real jobs, the productive jobs create only the private sector and not the Government.
Government create only bureaucratic, nonproductive jobs which have to be paid by taxpayers, therefore taxes must go up, because the taxpayers must pay the bureaucrats wages and benefits, than the economy slows down – Socialism on full display.
All these claims, were and are just pure fabricated lies to cover up the truth, that all leaders of the Democratic/Socialist Party were for years passing laws, regulations and different constrictions against the free market economy, which eventually start jamming the free market system and the results was a very serious economic and financial contraction and recession.
This should never happened, but happened because Congress actions over the years, often with Presidents acceptances were very frequently totally illogical, absurd, corrupt, showing very little understanding of the basic economics and the Fundamental doctrine of the Capitalistic free market economy which says: the wages should be allow to fall and rise as the market dictates and the adjustment of prices, supply and demand to their natural level as the market desire. If we, as a Nation and our Representatives in Congress as well as our President will adhere to this fundamental doctrine of the free market economy, our country will enter again the era of unprecedented progress, re-industrialization and growth in all areas of different industries, education, science, agriculture, energy, etc. because there will be no limits to our achievements.
Moreover, if We the People demand that our Congress and President implement the Fair Tax and the National Right to Work, than our unemployment will fall to about 3% in first two years and our GDP will surge to about 6-8% in first two years.
The American people can do this, if we release the full force of the free market, abolish at least 75% -85% of all regulations, curtail dramatically the government bureaucratic machine by about 75% and fight corruption without mercy, because we must start rapidly our economic recovery with energy industry leading the way.
Considering that our national debt is over 15 TRILLION dollars already and Obama in less than three years accumulated about 4.5 (four and half) TRILLION dollars in debt or 42% of all the debt accumulated since the beginning of our country – about 231 Years, than it is obvious that Obama MUST go – Obama is a mortal danger to the American people and our Republic.
Moreover, our country MUST make bold changes, we cannot continue on present course leading US to economic, financial, social, moral and military collapse.
The present rate of deficit spending is unsustainable, suicidal, intellectually bankrupt and MUST stop now and Congress MUST do their job – balance the budget now – hopefully Congress know simple mathematics – any Congressperson who will vote against balance budget MUST be fired by the voters.
I know it is not easy, but remember we have to big government, to many Departments, Agencies and to many government employees, to much corruption and thievery and we MUST cut all areas.
The Federal government budget can NOT EXCCED 16% of the GDP than our country will become the economic engine of the world and will flourish and be example to the other countries how to resolve the economic problems – especially Europe.
The election in 2012 will decide, if our Republic will survive or will perish – If American people will vote for the Republican candidate, whoever it is, our Constitutional Republic will survive and become again economically vibrant with steady growth of our GDP at the rate of about 6-8% per year and fast decreasing unemployment.
However, if American people will vote for Obama Hussein Barack, the Radical Marxist/Communist demagogue who is determined to finish Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America into Socialist/Communist totalitarian tyranny, than our Constitutional Republic will perish and American people will become slaves of the Socialist/Communist Oligarchy and stripped from individual liberty and all rights, because Constitution and Bill of Rights will be nullified by Obama and his minions and criminals.
Hubert Poetschke, www.hubertpoetschke.mycambridgewebsite.com
December 10, 2011
9
2011
IMPEACHMENT ???
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/08/politics/congress-fast-and-furious/index.html
Holder to GOP critic: ‘Have you no shame?’
Washington (CNN) — GOP critics cranked up the political heat Thursday on Attorney General Eric Holder, threatening impeachment and accusing him of withholding information from Congress about Operation Fast and Furious, a severely flawed and discredited federal gun-sting program.
At the end of a long, combative day of testimony before the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee, California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa compared Holder to disgraced Nixon-era Attorney General John Mitchell.
Holder shot back by comparing Issa to Sen. Joe McCarthy, the infamous Wisconsin Republican censured by the Senate in 1954 for leading what critics called a Communist witch hunt.
“As they said in the McCarthy hearings, have you no shame?” asked Holder, referencing a famous retort to McCarthy.
Holder acknowledged mistakes were made, but said he would not resign over the controversy. The attorney general, accusing the GOP of playing political games, said he also didn’t think any of his top aides should step down.
Operation Fast and Furious, which started in 2009, allowed illegally purchased firearms to be taken from gun stores in Arizona across the Mexican border to drug cartels. The intent of the operation was to monitor the flow of weapons to their ultimate destination.
However, hundreds of weapons were lost or unaccounted for, and a storm of outrage erupted when two of the missing weapons were found at a site where Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was killed in December 2010.
Democrats and Republicans have since been at odds over who knew what about the operation and when.
Wisconsin GOP Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner told Holder Thursday that “heads should roll” over the matter.
“There is really no responsibility within the Justice Department,” Sensenbrenner said. “The thing is, if we don’t get to the bottom of this — and that requires your assistance on that — there is only one alternative that Congress has and it is called impeachment.”
Sensenbrenner did not make clear whether he was referring to the possible impeachment of Holder or other top Justice Department officials.
Blame for the botched operation “must go to your desk,” Issa, the GOP’s point man on investigating Fast and Furious, told Holder. Congress has been “systematically lied to” by department officials, he alleged.
Issa opens investigation of DEA
Pressure on Holder: Fast and Furious guns
Holder: Fast and Furious unacceptableFor his part, Holder told committee members the operation relied on “unacceptable tactics” and was “inexcusable.” But he insisted that Justice Department officials have cooperated with congressional investigators, and he said that any previous misleading information provided on the matter was not part of an intentional deception.
“It all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that can be considered perjury or (a) lie,” Holder said.
The attorney general tried to turn the tables on his GOP critics, accusing them of engaging in “inflammatory and inappropriate rhetoric … in an effort to score political points.”
It’s time to end “politically motivated ‘gotcha’ games,” he said.
While Holder and his critics vehemently disagreed over the extent of executive-legislative cooperation in the Fast and Furious investigation, they agreed that the deadly fallout from the operation is not over.
Fast and Furious is “going to continue to have tragic consequences,” Holder said at one point in Thursday’s hearing.
“More people are going to die, probably,” said Rep. Ted Poe, a Texas Republican.
“Unfortunately, I think that’s probably true,” Holder replied.
Last month, Holder testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the controversial operation “should never have happened, and … must never happen again,” hitting hard at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives practice that has now tarnished his tenure at the Justice Department.
Despite Holder’s insistence that Congress has never been intentionally misled in the matter, a number of Republicans have called for him to step down. Last month, Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar said the attorney general’s “refusal to take responsibility for the actions of his department is inexcusable.”
Earlier this week, Issa, head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he is broadening his investigation to also include recent allegations of U.S. agents laundering money for Mexican cartels — accusations that have infuriated officials on both sides of the border.
“These allegations, if true, raise further unsettling questions about a Department of Justice component engaging in a high-risk strategy with scant evidence of success,” Issa said in a letter to Holder.
“The existence of such a program again calls your leadership into question,” Issa added.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said Wednesday that Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer should also resign because he misled Congress about his awareness of a February 4 letter that denied any gunrunning operation existed.
The Justice Department recently withdrew the letter due to inaccurate information, and Grassley said that e-mails turned over to congressional investigators showed Breuer saw various versions of the letter — including the final one submitted to Congress — before it was sent in February.
In addition, Grassley said Breuer knew in 2010 of a previous gunrunning operation by the ATF in the Bush administration, but he failed to notify superiors or Congress about it.
“Mr. Breuer’s failure to be candid and forthcoming before this body irreparably harms his credibility,” Grassley said, later adding: “Mr. Breuer has lost my confidence in his ability to effectively serve the Justice Department. If you can’t be straight with the Congress you don’t need to be running the Criminal Division. It is time to stop spinning and start taking responsibility.”
In response, Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said Breuer “has acknowledged his mistake in not making — and therefore not alerting department leadership to — a connection between the allegations made about Operation Fast and Furious and the unacceptable tactics used years earlier.”
But Holder “continues to have confidence” in Breuer’s ability to lead the department’s Criminal Division, Schmaler said.
Breuer and Holder previously apologized to a Senate committee and to Grassley in particular about the false information in the February letter. Both have insisted they did not know the assertions were wrong when the department sent the letter.
However, Grassley said Wednesday that the additional documents recently provided to congressional investigators show that Breuer should have been aware that the letter contained false assertions, due to his knowledge of a similar previous program called Operation Wide Receiver.
In Mexico, the case has drawn nationwide attention and sharp criticism from top officials, who have long stressed that U.S. weapons are fueling the country’s drug war.
The Mexican attorney general’s office demanded a quick U.S. investigation of the matter in March and said authorities must hold accountable anyone who was responsible for the operation.
CNN’s Alan Silverleib, Tom Cohen, Terry Frieden and Jim Barnett contributed to this report.
7
2011
Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent Social Security Number. “xxx-xx-4425” is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number.
For Immediate Release: – 12/07/2011
For Further Information Contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
Obama is NOT using a Stolen or Fraudulent
Social Security Number “xxx-xx-4425”
is Obama’s Legal Social Security Number
Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States Due to His Lack of U.S. Natural Born Status
(Lafayette Hill, PA – 12/07/11) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama on August 21, 2008 challenging Obama’s lack of “Constitutionally Eligibility” to serve as President of the United States stated that Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not using a fraudulent or stolen Social Security Number. Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro was legally assigned Social Security Number xxx-xx-4425. Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not Constitutionally Eligible to serve as President of the United States due to his lack of being a “Natural Born” United States Citizens as a result of him being born in Kenya and his mother not being old enough to confer Natural Born citizenship status upon him and his Adoption / Acknowledgment by Lolo Soetoro in the Country of Indonesia, making Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro an Indonesian Citizen.
Mr. Berg stated, “I am pursuing the eligibility questions regarding Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro. My goal is to pursue the issue in each and every state in the United States.”
Mr. Berg continues, “I am repeatedly contacted about Obama’s use of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 and the word on the Internet that the number in use by Obama was originally assigned to Jean Paul Ludwig born in 1890 in France, who is now deceased. All over the Internet there are articles and posts that Obama stole Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number and Obama is using Mr. Ludwig’s Social Security number fraudulently. There are also posts all over the Internet that Obama is using a deceased person’s Social Security number. This is NOT true. Mr. Berg continues, “when false information is put out on the Internet and filed in our Court’s, it takes away from the factual issue that Obama is not Constitutionally Eligible to be President of the United States. False information regarding the eligibility of Obama makes the question into the lack of Constitutional eligibility of Obama serving as our President a laughing stock.”
The Social Security death index is located on the Web at http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi. The Social Security death index has the death records, along with Social Security number, of every person in the United States ever assigned a Social Security number who has died.
A simple search of the name “Jean Paul Ludwig” born in 1890 returns no results. See the print-screen attached hereto. A simple search of Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 returns no results for a death of any individual using that number. A simple search for “Jean Ludwig” returns several deaths, but only one in that name born in 1890, and as can be seen, the Social Security number of this particular Jean Ludwig does not match, nor is it similar to Obama’s Social Security number xxx-xx-4425. See the copy attached hereto:
Berg continued, “Simple searches show that the information pertaining to Obama’s Social Security number being previously assigned and that Obama is using a fraudulent Social Security number is false information and does nothing more than discredit the true questions into Barack Obama a/k/a Barry Soetoro’s Constitutional Eligibility to serve as our President of the United States.”
Questions have also been raised regarding the fact Obama’s Social Security number was issued out of Connecticut instead of Hawaii and that Obama never resided in Connecticut. The state and/or office that issued a Social Security number and/or card is not always the same as where the person the number being assigned to resides.
A brief look at the history of Social Security numbers available through Social Security at http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/firstcard.html shows that the State who issues a Social Security number does not have to be and may not be the state in which the person resides.
The “First” Social Security Number (SSN)
Issued Through Local Post Offices
Since the Social Security Board did not have a network of field offices in late 1936, it contracted with the U.S. Postal Service to distribute and assign the first batch of Social Security numbers through its 45,000 local post offices around the country. Of these 45,000 post offices, 1,074 were also designated as “typing centers” where the cards themselves were prepared. The procedure for issuing the first SSNs were that the SS-4 application forms were to be distributed by the post offices to employers beginning Monday, November 16, 1936. These forms asked the employers to indicate how many employees they had at their place of business. Using the data from the SS-4 forms, the post offices then supplied an SS-5 form for each employee and these forms (on which the assignment of an SSN was based) were to be distributed by the post offices beginning Tuesday, November 24, 1936. The completed SS-5 forms were returned to the post office where an SSN would be assigned and a card typed with the name and SSN. This step could happen on one of several ways. The person could return the card in person and wait while the “typing center” prepared their card, or they could hand the form to their local letter carrier, or they could put it in the mail. Once the SSN was assigned and the card typed, the local letter carrier then returned the card to the place of business as a piece of regular mail. The record of the SSN assignment was sent to Social Security headquarters in Baltimore, Maryland, where the master file of SSNs would be kept.
So the first card was issued, sometime in mid-November, 1936, somewhere in one of 1,074 post offices to someone whose identity and SSN are unknown. In theory, the first card should have been issued on November 24th, but there have been reports of cards showing earlier dates. It is not clear whether the cards with earlier dates were actually issued on that day or whether some post offices predated some of their cards. If the 45,000 local post offices followed their procedures, no cards could have been issued before November 16th, and none should have been issued before November 24th. But here again, there is always the possibility that some local post offices failed to follow their instructions. The best we can say with certainty is that the first SSN was issued sometime in mid-November 1936. In any case, on whatever day the first card was issued, hundreds of thousands of SSNs were probably issued on that same day, so many people had Social Security cards issued on the very first day they became available.
The First Official SSN
Once the SSN records were received in Baltimore they were grouped in blocks of 1,000 and the master records were created. On December 1, 1936 the first block of 1,000 records were assembled and were ready to start their way through the nine-step process that would result in the creation of a permanent master record and the establishment of an earnings record for the individual. When this first stack was ready, Joe Fay, head of the Division of Accounting Operations in the Candler Building, walked over to the stack, pulled off the top record, and declared it to be the official first Social Security record. (This was the first point in the process where there was enough control to designate an official first card–it would have been impossible to try and identify the first card typed in one of the 1,074 typing centers around the country.) This particular record, (055-09-0001) belonged to John D. Sweeney, Jr., age 23, of New Rochelle, New York. The next day, newspapers around the country announced that Sweeney had been issued the first SSN. It would be more accurate to say that the first Social Security record was established for John David Sweeney, but since master records were invisible to the public and the Social Security card was a very visible token of the program, the newspapers overlooked the nuance. And so John David Sweeney, Jr. is the closest thing we have to the first person to have received a Social Security card–although his status is more symbolic than actual.
So now that I have given a bit of history, how in the world could someone be issued a SSN in 1890, when the first batch of social security numbers were NOT issued until 1936?
According to the Social Security death index, the majority of the SSN’s issued for Hawaii residence were in fact issued out of CT, see below, there are thousands of records and were issued during the same time period as Obama’s was issued to him, which was in or about 1972-1978.
(V)=(Verified) Report verified with a family member or someone acting on behalf of a family member. (P)=(Proof) Death Certificate Observed.
You can now order the SS-5 Form for deceased individuals directly from the Social Security Administration online at https://secure.ssa.gov/apps9/eFOIA-FEWeb/internet/main.jsp.
Information from http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/ssn/geocard.html
The Social Security number is a nine-digit number in the format “AAA-GG-SSSS”. The number is divided into three parts. The Area Number, the first three digits, is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1973, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the office code in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1973, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant’s mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, neither prior to 1973, nor since.
Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving south and westward, so that people on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality are exhausted, new areas from the pool are assigned, so some states have noncontiguous groups of numbers.\
Complete list of area number groups from the Social Security Administration
The middle two digits are the group number. The group numbers range from 01 to 99. However, they are not assigned in consecutive order. For administrative reasons, group numbers are issued in the following order:
- ODD numbers from 01 through 09
- EVEN numbers from 10 through 98
- EVEN numbers from 02 through 08
- ODD numbers from 11 through 99
As an example, group number 98 will be issued before 11.
- The last four digits are serial numbers. They represent a straight numerical sequence of digits from 0001-9999 within the group.
Berg continued, “Soetoro/Obama’s social security number was NOT stolen from an individual born in 1890 who is now dead. Attached is a screen shot from the social security death index, running Soetoro/Obama’s social security number. If in fact, Obama was using a stolen number from a man born in 1890, who died, it would be showing in the Social Security Death Index. As you can see from the attached picture, no death’s are returned using Obama’s number. Anyone can check the Social Security Death Index (SSDI) by going to http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/.
Berg continued, “The Social Security office in the state of Maryland issues Social Security numbers and cards for people residing all over the United States. Just like in the 70′s, local Social Security offices were and continue to be back-logged, thus Maryland issues the numbers and cards as do other less busy Social Security offices. The state that issued the SSN number and card is not always and does not mean the person had to reside in that state.
Berg continued, “The Birth Certificate issued by Obama on national Television, is believed to be a forgery – it is NOT a long form Birth Certificate. Even if Obama could produce a long form Birth Certificate, which is highly doubted, it fails to answer the questions into Obama’s adoption and/or birth acknowledgment in Indonesia.”
Berg said, “I have received many calls claiming Obama could not have lost his U.S. citizenship by his mother’s acts of expatriation. In part this is true, however, the Nationality Act of 1940, revised 1952, Section 318(a) states, “A former citizen of the United States expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents and who has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents may be naturalized upon filing a petition for naturalization before reaching age of Twenty-Five [25] years and upon compliance with all requirements of the naturalization laws with the following exceptions: (b) No former citizen of the United States, expatriated through the expatriation of such person’s parent or parents shall be obliged to comply with the requirements of the immigration laws, if he has not acquired the nationality of another country by any affirmative act other than the expatriation of his parent or parents, and if he has come or shall come to the United States before reaching the age of Twenty-Five [25] years. (c) After his naturalization such person shall have the same citizenship status as if he had not been expatriated.”
Berg continues, “Renewing an Indonesian Passport after the age of 18 is an affirmative act, as you are swearing allegiance to another Country. Soetoro/Obama renewed his Indonesian Passport when he traveled to Pakistan, which is why he had to stop in Indonesia first. Remember, in 1981, Dunham was divorcing Soetoro in Hawaii and was not in Indonesia. Obama/Soetoro admits to traveling to Indonesia first and then onto Pakistan. Soetoro/Obama claims in his book “Dreams From My Father” that he stopped in Indonesia to visit his mother. But again, his mother was not in Indonesia, she was in Hawaii with Maya, divorcing Lolo Soetoro. In addition, the State Department has stated in response to a FOIA [Freedom of Information] request that they do not have a U.S. Passport application on file for Barack H. Obama.”
Berg said, “Despite the above however, Indonesia required Obama/Soetoro to do a bit more upon his 18th birthday. In fact the Indonesian law gives until the age of Twenty-One [21]. Soetoro/Obama would have had to sign an Affidavit relinquishing his Indonesian citizenship and said Affidavit had to be sent to the Indonesian Government before reclaiming any U.S. citizenship he may have once held.
When it comes to the citizenship of individuals in other countries, we are prevented from interfering, Hague Convention 1930. During the late 60′s all the way up until 2006 Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship. In 2006, Indonesia changed their laws to permit dual citizenship; however, Indonesia has had its battles with enforcing their new law permitting dual citizenship.
From the legal research we have done, it appears that Barry Soetoro [a/k/a Barack Obama] became an Indonesian citizen. When Soetoro/Obama was approximately four [4] years old his parents divorced and thereafter, Soetoro/Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia. Evidence points to the fact that Lolo Soetoro either signed a government form legally ‘acknowledging’ Soetoro/Obama as his son or ‘adopted’ Soetoro, either of which changed any citizenship status Soetoro/Obama had to a “natural” citizen of Indonesia.
At the time Barry Soetoro was in Indonesia, all Indonesian students were required to carry government identity cards or Karty Tanda Pendudaks, as well as family card identification called a Kartu Keluarga. The Kartu Keluarga is a family card which bears the legal names and citizenship status of all family members.
Soetoro/Obama was registered in a public school as an Indonesian citizen by the name of Barry Soetoro and his father was listed as Lolo Soetoro, M.A according to the Indonesian school records. Indonesia did not allow foreign students to attend their public schools in the late 1960’s or 1970’s, and any time a child was registered for a public school, the child’s name and citizenship status were verified through the Indonesian Government. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Chapter 13, Law No. 62 of 1958 (all citizens of Indonesia have a right to education). There was no way for Soetoro/Obama to have attended school in Jakarta, Indonesia legally unless he was an Indonesian citizen, as Indonesia was under tight rule and was a Police State. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Law No. 62 of 1958. These facts indicate that Obama/Soetoro is an Indonesian citizen, and therefore he is not eligible to be President of the United States.
Under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son, it deems the son, in this case Soetoro/Obama, an Indonesian State citizen. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 62 of 1958 concerning Immigration Affairs and Indonesian Civil Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata) (KUHPer) (Burgerlijk Wetboek voor Indonesie).
Furthermore, under the Indonesian Adoption Law, once an Indonesian citizen adopts a child, the adoption severs the child’s relationship to the birth parents, and the adopted child is given the same status as a natural child and the child takes the name of his step-father, in this case, Soetoro. See Indonesian Constitution, Article 2.
The Indonesian citizenship law was designed to prevent apatride (stateless) or bipatride (dual) citizenship. Indonesian regulations recognized neither apatride nor bipatride (stateless or dual) citizenship. Since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship; neither did the United States (since the United States only permitted dual citizenship when ‘both’ countries agree); and since Obama/Soetoro was a “natural” citizen of Indonesia, the United States would not step in or interfere with the laws of Indonesia. Hague Convention of 1930.”
As a result of Soetoro/Obama’s Indonesian ‘natural’ citizenship status, Soetoro/Obama could never regain U.S. ‘natural born’ status, if he in fact he ever held such, which we doubt. Soetoro/Obama could have only become ‘naturalized’ if the proper paperwork were filed with the U.S. State Department, after going through U.S. Immigration upon his return to the United States; in which case, Soetoro/Obama would have received a Certification of Citizenship indicating ‘naturalized’.
Berg continued, “Regardless, we have been unable to locate any records indicating that Soetoro/Obama attempted to and/or actually did take the proper steps through the State Department in order to be here in our Country legally”.
Further, there is no evidence that Soetoro/Obama ever ‘legally’ changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama – therefore his legal name is still ‘Barry Soetoro’.
Donations are needed ASAP and very appreciated
to help cover our expenses to continue to Defend “our” Constitution
I am requesting everyone to please contribute $2.12, $20.12, $201.20, $2,012.00 or $20,120.00
so we can expose Soetoro/Obama in 2012 for the fraud he is in each and every State !
You may donate on our web site: obamacrimes.com
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
obamacrimes.com
****************************************************************
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-r3ZQjIlNI
aloha.
10 Comments so far
Hide All