The above (leaked) photo and the ones which follow provide a few examples of why Obama wants torture evidence suppressed. Now that Obama has replaced George W. Bush as Chief Puppet of the American War-for-Profit Industry, he does not want the American people to see what has been done in their name. It would be bad for business-as-usual. You remember Obama- the Neo-Con in disguise whom many of us supported and voted for. Too bad for us. Too bad for our nation.

( photos were published in www.washingtonblog.com/2009/05/)

Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

May 19, 2009

Dear General Holder:
There is more than ample probable cause to believe that war crimes of torture were committed on a widespread basis by military and civilian personnel of the United States government during the administration of former President George W. Bush.

I am sure that you are aware that The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1984 and entered into force in June of 1987.The United States ratified the Convention in October of 1994 and the Convention entered into force in this country on November 20, 1994. Every act constituting torture under the Convention constitutes a criminal offense under the law of the United States and no exceptional circumstances may be invoked as a justification for torture.

The current equivocations which one hears in the media regarding the meaning of torture can be described as nothing more than politically motivated distractions because the meaning of torture is clear in the law: Torture is defined as any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted on a person for the purpose of obtaining information or for punishment or intimidation. Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment are included in the definition of the crime of torture.

That being the case, I find it inexplicable that the Justice Department has not moved forward with all due speed in investigating and in initiating appropriate prosecutions in this area. I received an email from Congressman Robert Wexler the other day advising that he was in the process of petitioning your office to appoint a Special Prosecutor for war crimes. It troubled me that a petitioning process would be necessary in an area as grave as this. One would think that the Justice Department would have already initiated the necessary investigative and prosecutorial processes on its own without the necessity for outside pressure of any kind. Given the extreme gravity of the situation I presume that your office fully realizes that full-scale criminal investigation is absolutely essential and that the good-standing of the United States in the world community is at stake here.

I fully understand that there have been enormous political tensions surrounding the issue of the criminal prosecution of war crimes; but I also know that you are a man of integrity and unquestionably devoted to the rule of law. I also know from your public statements that you will not under any circumstances tolerate the politicization of the Justice Department. Therefore I am confident that you would not hesitate to resign as Attorney General if you were in any way prevented by political forces from investigating and prosecuting criminal violations as serious and as detrimental to our national persona as those alleged. I am certain that you are aware that crimes of this tremendous magnitude simply cannot be swept under the rug to serve the needs of anyone's political agenda.

Can you advise when you expect that a Special Prosecutor will be appointed in this matter and when we can expect that the criminal investigations will be in process? My own opinion is the sooner the better. The TV debates are becoming more and more tedious and immaterial; and delays in fully engaging these issues will result in irreparable harm to the very foundations of our national sense of justice.

Very truly yours,

Alfred E. McGuire, JD, Ph.D.

( Letter sent electronically to AG Holder on 5/19/09 and published in Diary Section of oped news.com on the same date)

There have been many risings and settings of the sun since I practiced law; but I think I still remember enough to provide you with a few words of advice: Stay off the talk shows and keep your mouth shut really tight because you and your ex-boss Mr. Bush may well be on the way to the slammer. Your legacy is the last thing you have to worry about. That's set in bronze forever and history will record both you and Mr. Bush as the two who invented and pursued a phony war by which you sent hundreds of thousands of human beings to their deaths for no reason other than your egomania, power-madness, greed, paranoia and stupidity. History will also record you and Mr. Bush as colossal sociopaths who for year after year failed and refused to put an end to the needless slaughter, mayhem and destruction even though you knew full well that there had been no reason whatsoever to begin the war in the first place. But don't worry. You will have company on the bronze plaque. Among them will be the name of Barack Obama who failed to put a prompt end to it all.

And as to the torture- Oh, I'm sorry- "enhanced interrogation"- you and Mr. Bush initiated and authorized, well, what will happen in that regard will depend upon the decisions of the aforementioned Mr. Obama and the reaction of the American people to those decisions. Thus far you can breathe a little easy; but as I've said, keep your mouth shut because the tables may turn and everything you say may be held against you. And if the tables do turn it can get really hairy because you'll not only have the torture charges to worry about but also any deaths that might have resulted from the torture. In that case you'll have murder charges to fret over as well. But, as I say, breathe a little easier for the time being. Mr. Obama doesn't believe that heinous international crimes should be prosecuted and he's got the complicit corporate media and a host of obeisant politicians to support him. And, look, if you do finally get indicted Mr.Obama may well start a legal fund to help with your defense.

War is profitable to your masters. Who are you to complain? Submit with no further delay to the Governors of The Brave New World.



I am happy to note that the occasions have been infrequent; but one has to notice that a bit too often negative comments pertaining to the policies of Corporate-War -Industry Spokesman Barack H. Obama have been in evidence.

CWIS Obama has important objectives to accomplish and one would hope that further instances of recalcitrant annoyance will be promptly curtailed so that full accomplishment of his agenda may not be impeded even to a miniscule degree

Ask yourself the direct question: What does the U.S.A. have left? Yes, ask it. The steel industry is gone. The automobile industry is gone. Myriad technological manufacturing industries have been usurped by the Chinese and Japanese. The U.S.A. must import, import and import so much of all these items. And what does it export? Yes, my poor naive little crap heads, scrap paper and rags and other recyclables. And what else? Think, think, little babes in Toyland! Yes! War! It exports war. Why, my little schmutzies? Because war is very profitable. At last count the Almighty One Percent made over $1.6 trillion pursuing this noble enterprise. How else would they have amassed such a sum- stringing rosary beads? Even the metal coffins provide them with some extra cigar money. I mean get with the program. Corporate-War-Industry Spokesman Barack H. Obama did- well before his election. Why do you think his first order of business was to establish a state of permanent warfare?

And are you grateful to CWIS Obama? No, what do you do? Nag, nag, nag. I know there are only a few of you. But think what a distraction that can be to the CWIS. All this fanfare about enhanced interrogation and calling it "torture" and all that. And so much of it directed at the founders of our noble war enterprise, CWIS's Bush and Cheney. Is that loyalty? Is that respect? Would you have directed such barbs at George Washington or Benjamin Franklin? How do you think this makes CWIS Obama feel? To have to experience these impertinences while he is working so hard to implement these changes we can believe in.

We appreciate that the constitutional right of free speech still remains on the books. But after all, as CWIS Bush remarked so aptly, the Constitution is just a piece of paper. And yes, the Corporate Media are doing their best to offset these nagging impertinences. But if the CM should begin to find it difficult to neutralize the interferences, it may become necessary for the purpose of national security to initiate enhanced modification of the pertinent constitutional provision. Certainly the end would justify the means in this matter and one would not wish to be overly judgmental of any necessary and appropriate measures which would have to be put in place in order to facilitate our moving forward.