Chapter 11
THE LEGAL APPARATUS OF TOTALITARIANISM

11.1 Integration
11.2 UK Mental Health Laws
11.3 Abolition of Juries and Arbitrary Detention
11.4 Expanding the Definition of 'Terrorism'
11.5 Surveillance Legislation
11.6 The Ruling Class Above the Law

'war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal, and, when they are committed by one's own side and not by the enemy, meritorious.'
-George Orwell,

1984, part 2, chapter 9

The War on Terror is the chosen pretext for the global integration of police, intelligence and military functions. Since 9/11, there has been a global attack on civil liberties and a race to set up the international technological infrastructure for a high-tech feudal society. Governments across the world are promoting the idea that society must militarize itself in order to be free from terror, i.e. abandon moral convictions, sweep aside distinctions between foreign and domestic threats, and even the distinction between terrorism and ordinary crime.

When a country is at war, their is no atrocity it will not justify in the name of victory. Once the legal and technological apparatus of totalitarianism is established, there exists the very real prospect of a permanent planetary dictatorship where human existence is micro-managed from cloud cuckoo land by a tiny ruling elite who are themselves above the law.
 

11.1 INTEGRATION

The European globalists seized upon the Madrid train bombing of 11 March 2004 to push forward key areas of E.U. judicial and security integration. Brussels responded with a 'counter-terrorism summit' which drafted 57 proposals on criminal justice, security, and terrorism. Britain had hitherto been reluctant to surrender judicial powers to Brussels, but following the summit, Whitehall signaled that the Government was preparing to drop its veto over important areas of judicial cooperation. (1)

These included many proposals which were already on the table in Brussels:

• The establishment of an E.U. intelligence agency and E.U. security coordinator

• an E.U. database of forensic material; the logging of all telecommunications

• tracking all air travel in and out and within the E.U. (effectively an E.U. version of the U.S.'s controversial PNR, CAPPS II and US-VISIT plans)

• the fingerprinting of nearly everyone in the E.U. by the introduction of biometric passports and ID cards for citizens and the same for resident third country nationals

• the development of the Schengen Information System (SIS) and Visa Information Systems (VIS) to store the new identification and visa data

• simplification of procedures for exchange of information - including personal information such as DNA, fingerprints and visa data - between intelligence and law enforcement agencies.(2)

An analysis by StateWatch of London, concluded that 27 of the 57 proposals had little or nothing to do with tackling terrorism.
 

11.2 MENTAL HEALTH LAWS

The U.K. Government is moving to expand the use of mental health laws to control the wider population. The draft Mental health Bill published in June 2002, included plans to force mentally ill people living in the community to take their medication and proposals to detain dangerous people with severe personality disorders even if they have not committed a crime.(3) 'Serious personality disorder' has no medical diagnosis.

The Joint House of Commons and House of Lords Committee on Human Rights have serious reservations about some aspects of the draft:

1)The compulsory detention of people for the protection of others when the people detained have never been charged with any criminal offence;

2) the breadth of circumstances in which a patient could be subjected to compulsory, non consensual treatment;

3) that part of current laws which prevents detention 'by reason of promiscuity or other immoral conduct, sexual deviancy or dependence on drugs or alcohol' has been omitted from the Bill.

The committee warned that Nazi Germany and the U.S.S.R. were probably not the only countries in which socially or politically unacceptable behaviour was regarded as a manifestation of a 'disorder of the mind'. (4)

In the U.S., Missouri dentist Charles Sell has waited in a federal prison for more than four years for trial on charges of Medicaid fraud. The delay is attributed to the Government's persistent argument that Sell is not mentally competent to stand trial unless he is forcibly drugged. He is, they say, suffering from delusions because he thought there was a Government effort to cover up his personal knowledge of the its culpability in the 1993 deaths at the Branch Davidian land near Waco, Texas. The state has diagnosed Sell as having what it calls a 'delusional disorder'.

As an Army Reservist called up to serve as an expert in forensic dentistry, Dr. Sell was on the scene the day of the tragic fire. Other issues include accusations of Dr. Sell using politically incorrect swear words. The Government wants to make him competent by forcefully giving him powerful medicine. Dr. Sell doesn't want to be medicated since he's had bad reactions to similar drugs in the past. Also, one of the medicines that the Government might want to use on him is an experimental medicine that could kill him.(5)(6)

The twentieth century's most tyrannical regimes pioneered the use of psychiatric 'treatment' against political dissidents. Vladimir Bukovsky spent 12 years in Soviet prisons and psychiatric hospitals due to his outspoken opposition to communism.(7) Wherever manifestations of dissidence couldn't be explained away as a legacy of the past, they were viewed as mental illness. One leading psychiatrist had incarcerated thousands of sane men in lunatic asylums on orders from the KGB. Drugs were administered as punishment for anti-social behavior. These are not only painful but can have lasting side effects.

Bukovsky said that a few of the doctors called the psychiatric hospital in which he was interned, 'our little Auschwitz.'(8)
 

11.3 ABOLITION OF JURIES AND ARBITRARY DETENTION

 

UK

The 2003 Criminal Justice Act contains three areas of serious concern: 1) Removal of the right to trial by jury in complex fraud cases or where the judge and prosecution believe their is a risk of jury tampering 2) abolishing the double jeopardy makes all acquittals conditional; 3) the admissibility of previous convictions, acquittals and hearsay evidence.(9)(10)This is moving British justice towards a European style inquisitorial system, away from the traditional adversarial system. These measures are designed to harmonize the U.K. with the

E.U. Corpus Juris proposal put forward in April 1997. CJ will set up a European Public Prosecutor on the continental inquisitorial model, who will have over-riding jurisdiction throughout Europe to instruct national judges to issue arrest warrants against suspects and have them held in custody for nine months pending investigation (or transported to other countries in Europe) with no obligation to produce prosecution evidence and no right to a public hearing during this time.

 

The cases are then to be tried by special courts, consisting of professional judges and excluding simple jurors and lay magistrates. The E.U. public prosecutor is responsible for both investigation and prosecution of the crimes. Our rights of habeas corpus established in 1679 and trial by jury established by Magna Carta in 1215 are to be nullified. Furthermore, the European Arrest Warrant removes the need for any formal extradition procedures for 32 crimes, some of which are not even crimes in U.K. law.

 

These include xenophobia and racism which encompass criticism of the E.U.. The Corpus Juris manual itself, (Sous la direction de Mireille Delmas-Marty, ISBN 2-7178-3344-7, p40, para 3), informs us that:

"[Corpus Juris is] designed to ensure, in a largely unified European legal area, a fairer, simpler and more efficient system of repression."(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)

Under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, the Home Secretary could order that a foreign national be detained indefinitely on suspicion that he was either a terrorist or a threat to national security. However, in December 2004, the law lords ruled that these powers contravened the European Convention on Human Rights and ordered the release of twelve foreign nationals who could otherwise have been detained in prison indefinitely.

 

In response, the Government introduced the Prevention of Terrorism Bill, which gives the Home Secretary power to impose 'control orders' on both British and foreign terror suspects. Instead of holding suspects in prison, the control orders could: Impose house arrest or other restrictions on movements, including electronic tagging; restrict association and communication with specified people; restrict use of telephones and the internet. This overturns 800 years of British legal history by taking away both habeus corpus and trial by jury, and giving judicial powers to the Home Secretary! Unsurprisingly it faces a stormy passage through both Houses of Parliament. (16)

On 31 March 2003, Home Secretary David Blunkett, signed an extradition treaty on behalf of the U.K. with his U.S. counterpart, Attorney General John Ashcroft. This ostensibly brings the U.S. into line with procedures between European countries. Parliament was not consulted at all and the text was not available until the end of May. Like the European Arrest Warrant, it removes the requirement on the U.S. to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of people from the U.K., although that requirement remains when the U.K. makes the request of the U.S..(17)
 

USA

Section 412 of the U.S.A. Patriot Act allows for the indefinite detention of non-citizens. The Attorney General has unprecedented new power to order their detention based on a certification that he has reasonable grounds to believe a non-citizen endangers national security. Worse still, if no other country will accept them, they can be detained indefinitely in the U.S. without trial. In January 2003, a decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. on the case of Yaser Esam Hamdi, affirmed the Government's authority to detain indefinitely American citizens captured in foreign battles or those who participate in terrorist attacks against U.S. interests abroad.(18)

 

The court did not address questions about U.S. citizens arrested as enemy combatants in the U.S. Furthermore, in June 2003, a U.S Federal Court ruled that the Government can keep secret the names of the hundreds of foreigners detained since 9/11.(19)The Government has classified as an 'enemy combatant', Jose Padilla of Chicago, who was arrested at O'Hare Airport on suspicion of plotting domestic terrorism after returning from Pakistan. This unconstitutional detention still awaits judicial review (20)

Judicial Review of Padilla's case will be void if Ashcroft's 'Patriot Act II' is passed because it gives him power to designate U.S. citizens 'enemy combatants' for terrorist activity carried out in the U.S.. Section 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists) expands the 'enemy combatant' definition to all American citizens who 'may' have violated any provision of section 802 of the first Patriot Act. Section 101 will also designate individual American terrorists as 'foreign powers' and again strip them of all rights under the 'enemy combatant' designation.

 

Under section 802 of Patriot Act I, the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that,

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

(B) appear to be intended,

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping

(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.(21)

Not only has the Justice Department stated they can infer from conduct that someone is not a

U.S. citizen but also under section 201 of 'Patriot Act II', it is a criminal act for any member of the Government or any citizen to release any information concerning the incarceration or whereabouts of detainees. It also states that law enforcement does not even have to tell the press who they have arrested and they never have to release their names. Therefore section 501 of 'Patriot Act II' means that a U.S. citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen with absolutely no right of appeal! (22)(23)

Section 322 of ' Patriot Act II' removes Congress from the extradition process and allows officers of the Homeland Security complex to extradite American citizens anywhere they wish. It also allows Homeland Security to secretly take individuals out of foreign countries.

A draft of the bill was leaked to Washington D.C. watchdog, The Center For Public Integrity, in January 2003. It caused such a furore that the bill was immediately shelved. However there are three ways the Government might use to get it passed:

1) After the next major terror attack, it will be rushed into law by panicked legislators in the same way Patriot Act I was passed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11

2) the Government will declare martial law and impose the legislation without authority from Congress

3) the bill will be broken down into pieces and tacked onto other legislation

On 12 June 2003 the The Guardian newspaper reported that U.S. military officials are making preparations for the trial and possible execution of captives held in Guantanamo Bay, including the construction of a death chamber. A building at the detention camp in Cuba for suspected Al-Qaida members is being renovated to serve as a courtroom for military tribunals, signaling that the U.S. is moving towards bringing charges against some of the prisoners.(24) According to The Mail on Sunday:

American law professor Jonathan Turley, who has led U.S. civil rights group protests against the military tribunals planned to hear cases at Guantanamo Bay, said:

"It is not surprising the authorities are building a death row because they have said they plan to try capital cases before these tribunals. This camp was created to execute people. The administration has no interest in long-term prison sentences for people it regards as hard-core terrorists."(25)

In June 2004, The Washington Post published on its web site an internal White House memo from 1st August 2002, signed by then Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee, which argued darkly that torturing al-Qaida captives "may be justified" and that international laws against torture may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogations" conducted under President Bush.

 

The memo then continued for 50 pages to make the case for the use of torture. The Bybee memo was clearly the basis for the working-group report on detainee interrogations presented to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld a year later.(26)(27)

The torture techniques being practiced on teenage goat-herders from Afghanistan(28) are a first step towards using torture on U.S. citizens who are deemed 'enemy combatants' i.e. anybody at all. Pictures of prisoners shackled, bound and with bags over their heads, serves to de-sensitize the public, police and military to the most disgusting but necessary instrument of dictatorship. The notion that torture is acceptable is also being heavily promoted in the mainstream American media.
 

11.4 EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF 'TERRORISM'

The purpose of creating crimes of 'domestic terrorism', is to abolish civil rights and to dramatically increase the power of government. This this was foreseen in a report published by the U.S. Army War College in July 1994, entitled Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflicts Short of War:

American leaders popularized a new, more inclusive concept of national security. No distinction--legal or otherwise--was drawn between internal and external threats. In the interdependent 21st century world, such a differentiation was dangerously nostalgic. The new concept of security also included ecological, public health, electronic, psychological, and economic threats.

 

Illegal immigrants carrying resistant strains of disease were considered every bit as dangerous as enemy soldiers. Actions which damaged the global ecology, even if they occurred outside the nominal borders of the United States, were seen as security threats which should be stopped by force if necessary. Computer hackers were enemies.(29)

THE UK DEFINITION:

The U.K. 2000 Terrorism Act expands the definition of terrorism to include serious damage to property or computer systems, designed to intimidate a section of the public, and which is carried out for political, religious or ideological reasons. This could include animal rights activism, tree protesters and even some kinds of industrial action.

 

The Home Secretary is afforded powers to designate and proscribe 'terrorist' organizations. This is a very significant power because of the severe penalties imposed for anyone involved or associated with these groups. Amnesty International have pointed out the potential for repressive foreign governments to press for their political enemies to be so designated. Membership of a proscribed organization carries a ten year prison sentence. Organizing or addressing a meeting which includes members of a proscribed group is an offence under section 12.

 

This even criminalizes independent third parties such as journalists who arrange private meetings which include a member of proscribed group. Section 56 criminalizes any level of activity within a proscribed group even if it has nothing to do with terrorism. It carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Section 57 imposes ten years imprisonment for possessing something which could be construed as being intended for use in terrorist activities.

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act allows police limited power to stop and search people for articles 'of a kind which could be used in connection with terrorism'. The important issues are that the police do not have to demonstrate any grounds for reasonable suspicion whereas The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) allows a constable stop and search authority if they are acting on reasonable grounds.

 

Secondly if the constable does find the items in question, and if there is reasonable suspicion that they will be used for terrorist purposes, they may be seized and retained.(30) Section 44 notices have been used by police to stop and search protesters at RAF Fairford during the Iraq war and more recently against protesters at an international arms fair in London.(31)
 

THE EU DEFINITION

Article 1 of the Framework Decision on Combating Terrorism December 2001 reads:

[offences] which are intentionally committed by an individual or a group against one or more countries, their institutions or people with the aim of intimidating them and seriously altering or destroying the political, economic or social structures of those countries will be punishable as terrorist offences.

Article 4 extends the definition to include 'instigating, aiding, abetting or attempting to commit a terrorist offence' and Article 5m., 'Promoting of, supporting of or participation in a terrorist group.' Explanatory notes state that Article 3., defining terrorist offences 'could include, for instance, urban violence'.

 

The inclusion in Article 3f. of the 'unlawful seizure of or damage to state or government facilities, means of public transport, infrastructure facilities, places of public use, and property' (property covers public and private) could embrace a wide range of demonstration and protests, ranging from the non-violent Greenham Common protests against a U.S. cruise missile base in the U.K., to the anti-globalization protests in Genoa. The phrase in Article 3h.,'endangering people, property, animals or the environment', could refer, for example, to animal right protests.(32)

Under Article 5. the prison sentences imposed are long: 5l., Directing a terrorist group 15 years; and 5m., promoting of, supporting of or participation in a terrorist group, 7 years. Terrorists will also lose their right to vote.

The E.U. anti-terrorism laws are being directed against protesters at E.U. summits and other international conferences. Following the arrest and shooting of protesters at the E.U. summit in Gothenberg 14-16 June 2001, a Police Cooperation Working Party met in Brussels on 4 July. This was quickly followed by a series of meetings by the E.U. Council's Justice and Home Affairs committee who requested that member states participate in,

i) surveillance of protest groups

ii) the plan to create a new database on the Schengen Information System (SIS) on protestors;

iii) the plan agreed to bring together para-military police units (eg: carabinieri, CRS, Tactical Support Groups for EU Summits and international meetings.(33)

THE AMERICAN DEFINITION

Under section 802. of the Patriot Act , the term 'domestic terrorism' means activities that, `(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; `(B) appear to be intended, `(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; `(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or `(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and '(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'

Also under section 802, the U.S. Government can bankrupt political organizations it asserts are involved in domestic terrorism. The government can seize and/or freeze the assets on the mere assertion that there is probable cause to believe that the assets were involved in domestic terrorism. The assets are seized before a person is given a hearing, and often without notice. In order to permanently forfeit the assets, the Government must go before a court, but at a civil hearing, and it is only required to prove that the assets were involved in terrorism by a preponderance of the evidence. Section 806 is so broadly defined that it could include anyone who supported a terrorist group in any way.(34)

Section 301-306 of 'Patriot Act II' (Terrorist Identification Database) authorizes a national database of suspected terrorists and radically expands the database to include anyone associated with suspected terrorist groups and anyone involved in crimes or having supported any group designated as terrorist.

 

These sections also set up a national DNA database for anyone on probation or who has been on probation for any crime, and orders State governments to collect the DNA for the Federal government.(28) Section 402 is titled "Providing Material Support to Terrorism." The section reads that there is no requirement to show that the individual even had the intent to aid terrorists.

 

Section 411 expands crimes that are punishable by death. Again, they point to Section 802 of the first Patriot Act and state that any terrorist act or support of terrorist act can result in the death penalty. Section 421 increases penalties for terrorist financing. This section states that any type of financial activity connected to terrorism will result to time in prison and $10-50,000 fines per violation.(35)(36)

A flyer created by the Phoenix FBI suggests that police officers contact the Joint Terrorism Task Force if they encounter any of the following persons (a partial list):

• Right Wing Extremists: Defenders of U.S. Constitution against federal government and the U.N. (Super Patriots),

• Left Wing Terrorism: Political motivation is usually Marxist/Leninist philosophy

• Common Law Movement Proponents: make numerous references to the U.S. constitution, attempt to police the police.

• Single Issue Terrorist: Animal Rights, Eco-terrorism, Lone individuals, Cyber penetration, violent anti-abortion extremism

• Hate Groups: Black separatists, Christian Identity.(37)

This is not an isolated incident. Alex Jones' film 911:The Road To Tyranny, shows Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) teaching a class of police officers that terrorists include the Founding Fathers of America, gun owners, Christians and home schoolers.(38)

 

The New York Times announced on 17 September 2003 that there is to be a database of 100,000 suspected terrorists. It will be run jointly by the CIA, FBI, State Dept. and Dept. Homeland Security. Justice Dept. officials said they expected the centre to be operating by December. It will track not only suspected foreign terrorists but also Americans tied to domestic events like violence at abortion clinics.(39)
 

11.5 SURVEILLANCE LAWS

 

UK

The 2001 Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act enables the police and security services to go through personal information held by 'public authorities',

e.g. medical records, bank statements, school records, Inland Revenue files, even though no crime (let alone terrorist offence) has been committed or even suspected. No judicial oversight is required and indeed the information can be volunteered by the public bodies on a spontaneous basis.(40) 'Public authority ' is defined by the 1998 Human Rights Act (6)(3) as (a) a court or tribunal, and (b) any person whose functions are of a public nature. (41)

 

Section 19 of the 2000 Terrorism Act makes it a criminal offence punishable by up to five years in prison, not to disclose to the police information that creates suspicion of terrorist activity when discovered in the course of one's ' trade, profession, business or employment'.(42)

On 24 November 2004, the Government introduced the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill, which sets up a an FBI-style Serious Organized Crimes Agency (SOCA). This Bill is still being debated, but the Fourth Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights raises serious concerns over surveillance powers granted to the Agency.

 

It confers broad powers to SOCA to gather, store and analyse information relating to crime generally not just serious crime. It also confers broad powers over the kinds of information SOCA gathers, and the disclosure of that information both to the Agency, and by the Agency to other Government departments.

These laws reflects a shift in philosophy towards the E.U. Corpus Juris model, in which one is presumed guilty until proven innocent and therefore deserving of continuous surveillance.(43)
 

USA

Section 358 of the Patriot Act requires that, in addition to law enforcement, intelligence agencies such as the CIA also receive suspicious activity reports from financial institutions. These reports are usually about wholly domestic transactions of people in the United States, and do not relate to foreign intelligence information. In addition, Section 358 allows law enforcement and intelligence agencies to get easy access to individual credit reports in secret. There is to be no judicial review and no notice to the person to whom the records relate.(44)

Section 215 allows the FBI to force anyone at all - including doctors, libraries, bookstores, universities, and internet service providers - to turn over records on their clients or customers. The FBI does not even have to show a reasonable suspicion to a judge that the records are related to criminal activity, much less the requirement for 'probable cause' that is listed in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Judicial oversight of these new powers is essentially non-existent.

 

All the Government needs to do is make the broad assertion that the request is related to an ongoing terrorism or foreign intelligence investigation. A person or organization forced to turn over records is prohibited from disclosing the search to anyone. As a result of this gag order, the subjects of surveillance never even find out that their personal records have been examined by the government. Section 213 expands the Government's ability to search private property with a warrant but without notice to the owner.

 

This means that law enforcement agents can enter a house, apartment or office with a search warrant when the occupants are away, search through their property, take photographs, download files off their computer and in some cases even seize property and not tell them until later. The Patriot Act also changes the law to allow wiretaps and searches without showing probable cause when 'a significant purpose' is intelligence gathering for regular domestic criminal cases. It also expands the use of warrantless wiretaps to include lists of websites visited and email headers.(45)

Section 106 of 'Patriot Act II' states that Government agents must be given immunity for carrying out warrantless searches of private property. This section throws out the entire Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. Section 123 restates that the Government no longer needs warrants and that the investigations can be a giant dragnet-style sweep.

 

Section 126 grants the Government the right to mine the entire spectrum of public and private sector information from bank records to educational and medical records. This is the enacting law to allow computers to break down all walls of privacy. The Government states that they must look at everything to 'determine' if individuals or groups might have a connection to terrorist groups. From cradle to grave, all Americans will be guilty and never proven innocent. Section 301-306 sets up national databases of suspected terrorists complete with DNA samples.

 

The database will also be used to 'stop other unlawful activities'. It will share the information with state, local and foreign agencies for the same purposes. Section 313 provides liability protection for businesses, especially big businesses that spy on their customers for Homeland Security, violating their privacy agreements.(46)

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 became Public Law No: 108-177 on 13 December 2003.(47) It achieved one of the objectives of 'Patriot Act II' by removing the need of the FBI to obtain a warrant before conducting searches of third party information. Congressman Ron Paul made a speech against the bill in November:

I am referring to the stealth addition of language drastically expanding FBI powers to secretly and without court order snoop into the business and financial transactions of American citizens. These expanded internal police powers will enable the FBI to demand transaction records from businesses, including auto dealers, travel agents, pawnbrokers and more, without the approval or knowledge of a judge or grand jury.

 

This was written into the bill at the 11th hour over the objections of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would normally have jurisdiction over the FBI. The Judiciary Committee was frozen out of the process. It appears we are witnessing a stealth enactment of the enormously unpopular "Patriot II" legislation that was first leaked several months ago. Perhaps the national outcry when a draft of the Patriot II act was leaked has led its supporters to enact it one piece at a time in secret.

 

Whatever the case, this is outrageous and unacceptable.(48)
 

11.6 THE RULING CLASS ABOVE THE LAW
 

USA

Section 312 of 'Patriot Act II' gives immunity to law enforcement engaging in spying operations against the American people and would place substantial restrictions on court injunctions against Federal violations of civil rights across the board. Section 205 allows top Federal officials to keep all their financial dealings secret, and anyone investigating them can be considered a terrorist.(49)

Section 304 of The Homeland Security Act removes liability from anyone involved in administering the smallpox vaccine and other bioterrorist countermeasures: Manufacturers and distributors of countermeasures, hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare entities under whose auspices the countermeasures are administered, and licensed health care professionals or other individuals authorized to administer the countermeasures under state law ("qualified persons").(50)

A study by the Defense Dept.'s Inspector General found that the Pentagon couldn't properly account for more than a trillion dollars in monies spent in year 2000.(51)
 

EU

Article 1, chapter 1 of Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the E.U. states that '...premises and buildings of the Communities shall be exempt from search, requisition, confiscation or expropriation, and their archives shall be inviolable'. Article 12 of Chapter 5 states, 'In the territory of each member state and whatever their nationality, officials and other servants of the Communities shall.... be immune from legal proceedings in respect of acts performed by them in their official capacity, including their words (spoken or written).

 

They shall continue to enjoy this immunity after they have ceased to hold office'. Thus no buildings or offices, filing cabinets, archives or bottom drawers belonging to the E.U., wherever they are located, can be snooped, searched or inspected EVER. These two exemptions alone place the staff and premises of the E.U., in their official capacities, completely above the law.(52)

The European police force, Europol, is included in this legal exemption. Their officials are immune from prosecution and its files cannot be subpoenaed by any court. It is based in the old fortified Gestapo building in The Hague. Article 8 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, signed into law via British Statutory Instrument 2973:1997, concerning Europol officers, declares that, 'such persons shall enjoy immunity from suit and legal process in respect of acts, including words written or spoken, done by them in the exercise of their official functions…' (53)(54)

The proof of these incredible statements came in 1999, when the entire E.U. Commission resigned, having been exposed for fraud, yet nobody was prosecuted. The E.U. has been unable to sign off its accounts for the last ten years and an estimated 5-8% of its £63 billion budget disappears in fraud and mismanagement every year.(55)(56) Over 90% of the budget cannot be properly accounted for.(57)

British MEP Theresa Villiers reports that the problem with the Commission's accounts was highlighted by the decision in 2002 by its Chief Accountant, Marta Andreasen, to go public about the total absence of genuine accounting procedures. The Commission was not even using the most basic double entry bookkeeping - in widespread use in Europe since the Renaissance - and used by virtually every company from British Petroleum to the local sweetshop. Andreasen uncovered these facts within weeks of arriving at her post at the European Commission.

 

She quickly approached her bosses, pointing out the very serious problems which she had found and asked for change. She was told that it was her job to sign off on the accounts and if she did not do so, she would be sacked. When she refused to be silenced, the European Commission suspended her and subjected her to a petty campaign of persecution. And who was the man leading this campaign ?

 

None other than former British Labour Party leader, Neil Kinnock, a member of the disgraced Santer Commission which was forced to resign in 1999, and who was subsequently re-appointed as Commissioner in charge of tackling E.U. fraud.(58)(59)
 

UK

In February 2005, Amnesty International put out a press release concerning the pending enquiry into the murder of human rights lawyer, Patrick Finucane, in which the British Government is alleged to have collaborated as part of its anti-terrorism strategy in Northern Ireland :

The UK government has reneged on its promise to act on the recommendation of Justice Cory, a former Canadian Supreme Court judge, that a public inquiry be held in the case of Patrick Finucane. Instead it has stated that Patrick Finucane's case would be the subject of an inquiry under the new Inquiries Bill now going through parliament. The government has also stated that the Bill aims to take account of "the requirements of national security"

 

...Under the Inquiries Bill:

• the inquiry and its terms of reference would be decided by the executive; no independent parliamentary scrutiny of these decisions would be allowed

• the chair of the inquiry would be appointed by the executive and the executive would have the discretion to sack any member of the inquiry

• the decision on whether the inquiry, or any individual hearings, would be held in public or private would be taken by the executive

• the decision to issue restrictive notices to block disclosure of evidence would be taken by the executive

• the final report of the inquiry would be published at the executive's discretion and crucial evidence could be omitted at the executive's discretion, "in the public interest". (60)

Chapter 11 End Notes

1. Richard Norton-Taylor, EU set to agree sweeping counter-terror policies, The Guardian,25 March 2004.See http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,1177349,00.html?=rss

2. StateWatch, Scoreboard on post-Madrid counter-terrorism plans, 23 March 2004. See http://www.statewatch.org/news/2004/mar/swscoreboard.pdf

3. Milburn promises Mental Health Bill, BBC, London, 14 Nov. 2002. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/milburn_promises_mental_health_bill

4. Mental health rights fears, BBC, London, 11 Nov. 2002. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/mental_health_rights_fears

5. Robert B. Bluey, Forced Drugging Case Headed to Supreme Court, CNSNews.com, 29Nov. 2002. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/forced_drugging_case_headed_to_supreme_court

6. Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D. and Robert J. Cihak M.D., American Conscience: The Saga of Dr. Charles Sell, Newsmax, 26 March 2003. See http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/25/192512.shtml

7. Edmund Conway, Don't pay TV licence fee, campaigners urge viewers, The Daily Telegraph, London, 08 Nov. 2002. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/11/08/nfee08.xml 

8. Vladimir Bukovsky, To Build A Castle: My life as a Dissenter, 1978, p.196. See http://www.roca.org/OA/5/5e.htm

9. Criminal Justice: Battle Against the Bill, Liberty. See http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/ criminal-justice-battle-against-the-bill.shtml

10. Criminal Justice Act, 2003, Part 7. See http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/30044--h.htm#43

11. Phillip Day, Are You Furious and Paddling Yet? The Campaign For Truth in Europe. See http://www.campaignfortruth.com/Eclub/250303/CTEleadarticle.htm

12. Commentary, Corpus Juris (a euro-sceptic website), 01 Jan. 1999 See http://www.euroscep.dircon.co.uk/corpus3.htm#Top

13. Philip Johnston, Britons face extradition for 'thought crime' on net, The Daily Telegraph, 18 Feb. 2003. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/02/18/nxeno18.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/02/18/ixnewstop.html 

14. Philip Johnston, Blair accused of treason over Europe, The Daily Telegraph, London, 21 Sept. 2000. See http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2000%2F09%2F21%2Fnblur221.xml&secureRefresh=true&_requested=56786

15. Petrina Holdsworth, Bye Bye British legal System, UK Independence Party website. See http://www.independence.org.uk/html/body_comment_info_0.html

16. Restrictions that UK suspects may face, BBC News online, 27 Feb 2005. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4212431.stm

17. New UK-US Extradition Treaty, Statewatch website, analysis no 18. 2003. See http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jul/25ukus.htm

18. U.S. Can Hold Citizens as Combatants, Fox News website, 08 Jan. 2003. See http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_010803_combatants.html

19. US terror arrests to remain secret, BBC, London, 17 June 2003. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/us_terror_arrests_to_remain_secret

20. Charles Lane, In Terror War, 2nd Track for Suspects Those Designated 'Combatants' Lose Legal Protections, Washington Post, 1 Dec. 2002. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/in_terror_war_2nd_track_for_suspects

21. How the USA PATRIOT Act redefines "Domestic Terrorism" American Civil Liberties Union website, 6 Dec 2002 http://www.aclu.org/NationalSecurity/NationalSecurity.cfm?ID=11437&c=111

22. Alex Jones, A Brief Analysis of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act 2003, Also Known as Patriot Act II, 10 Feb 2003. See http://www.infowars.com/alexjones.html

23. Patriot Act II, draft version leaked to the Center for Public Integrity on 9 Jan. 2003. Available to download in full at: http://www.publicintegrity.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=502&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0&L5=0

24. David Teather, US plans for executions at Guantanamo, The Guardian, London, 12 June 2003, http://www.prisonplanet.com/us_plans_for_executions_at_guantanamo.htm

25. US plans death camp, news.com.au, 26 May 03. See http://www.prisonplanet.com/us_plans_death_camp.htm

26. Robert Scheer, Conservatives put Bush above law, polkonline.com, 17 June 2004 http://www.polkonline.com/stories/061704/opi_law.shtml

27. Mark Sherman, White House Won't Release Gonzales Papers, The Guardian, 6 January 2005 http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4715334,00.html

28. Duncan Campbell, Afghan prisoners beaten to death at US military interrogation base The Guardian, London, 7 March 2003. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,909164,00.html

29. Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War . p12, July 1994, U.S. Army War College. See http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi/pdffiles/00233.pdf

30. Anti-Terrorism Legislation in The United Kingdom, Liberty, 2003. See http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/resources/publications/pdf-documents/anti-terrornew.pdf 

31. Police questioned over terror act use, BBC, London, 10 Sept. 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3097150.stm

32. EU to adopt new laws on terrorism, Statewatch, 2003. See http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/sep/14eulaws.htm

33. Conclusions adopted by the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) and the representatives of the member states on 13 July 2001 on security at meetings of the European Council and other comparable events, doc no 10916/01,16.7.01; also Draft Conclusions on security at meetings of the European Council and other comparable events, doc no 10731/01 and Rev 1, 10 & 11.7.01. See Statewatch article: The "enemy within": EU plans the surveillance of protestors and the criminalization of protests http://www.statewatch.org/news/2001/aug/protest.pdf  Also: Initiative by the Kingdom of Spain for the adoption of a Council Recommendation on the introduction of a standard form for exchanging information on terrorists, Brussels, 29 May 2002 5712/6/02 REV 6. See http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/apr/spainterr.pdf

34. ACLU, op cit. see http://www.aclu.org/NationalSecurity/NationalSecurity.cfm?ID=11437&c=111

35. Charles Lewis and Adam Mayle, Special Report, Justice Dept. Drafts Sweeping Expansion of Anti-Terrorism Act Center Publishes Secret Draft of `Patriot II' Legislation, The Center for Public Integrity, January 2003. See http://www.publicintegrity.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=502&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0&L5=0

36. Alex Jones, op cit.

37. This FBI Flyer is available to view at: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Back.jpg http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-front.jpg

38. 911: The Road To Tyranny, a documentary film by Alex Jones. See http://www.infowars.com/tyranny.htm

39. Eric Lichtblau, Administration Creates Center for Master Terror 'Watch List', New York Times, 16 Sept 2003. See http://www.propagandamatrix.com/administration_creates_center_for_master_terror_watchlist 

40. Liberty, op cit.

41. U.K. Human Rights Act 1998, Chapter 42. See at http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/80042--a.htm

42. Liberty op cit., p.13

43. Fourth Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill, 12 January 2005. See http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200405/jtselect/jtrights/26/2604.htm

44. How the Anti-Terrorism Bill Puts Financial Privacy at Risk, ACLU website
    23 October 2001. See http://www.aclu.org/NationalSecurity/NationalSecurity.cfm?ID=9147&c=111

45. Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act, ACLU website. See http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12263&c=206

46. Alex Jones, op cit.

47. Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, H.R.2417, 108th Congress. See http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.2417

48. Ron Paul, Congressman for Texas, speech in the House of Representatives, 20 Nov. 2003. See http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/h112203.html

49. Alex Jones, op cit.

50. Guidance for the Healthcare Community Concerning Section 304 of the Homeland Security Act, CDC website. See http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/vaccination/healthcare-304-guidance.asp

51. Tom Abate, Military Waste Under Fire, $1 Trillion Missing - Bush targets Pentagon Accounting, San Francisco Chronicle, 18 May 2003. See http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL

52. Philip Day, op cit.

53. Ibid.

54. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, EU police force could be a repressive monster, says report, The Daily Telegraph, 31 Jan. 2001. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2001%2F01%2F31%2Fweup01.xml

55. Theresa Villiers MEP, Tackling Fraud And Mismanagement In The EU, 28 April 2003. See http://villiers.politicos.ws/record.jsp?type=news&ID=138 Also, Top financial watchdog slams EU accounts system, The EU Observer.com. See http://www.independence.org.uk/html/eu_news.html

56. EU Accounts - A decade of failure, theconservatives.com, 15 November 2004 http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=117282

57. EU accounts fail to pass muster, BBC News on-line, 18 November 2003. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3279675.stm

58. Theresa Villiers MEP, Cleaning Up The Commission. See http://www.theresa-villiers.com/record.jsp?type=issue&ID=8

59. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Tory MEPs urge Kinnock to resign, The Daily Telegraph, London,15 March 2003. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F03%2F15%2Fwfile15.xml

60. Amnesty International Press Release, AI Index: EUR 45/003/2005 (Public), News Service No: 034,11 February 2005 http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engEUR450032005?open&of=eng-gbr 

Back to Contents