Which brings us to our current dilemma. George W. Bush has trampled on our Constitution, has been found to have authorized illegal surveillance of Americans in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and tortured those protected under U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions. Senators of Bush's own party now realize that Bush and his cronies may have committed war crimes and they are not eager for Bush to have the U.S. back out of its Geneva Convention treaty commitments. And then there is Iran. From all indications, Bush and his neocon war council are determined to go to war with Iran sooner rather than later. Current and retired senior military officers have reached their breaking points with the Bush administration over torture and another bloody war. They are also well aware that Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority war criminal Jerry Bremer presided over a cabal of Republican loyalists who enriched themselves and their families with lucrative salaries and contracts -- at the cost of the lives of hundreds of American servicemen and women and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis.madsen has a tendency to get worked up prior to elections, justifiably IMHO. I'm not sure that a military overthrow is the only solution - but I've been 'advocating' (if that's the right word) that it is our best chance for 3 years now.[ . . . ]
The response by loyal Americans to either a Bush war with Iran or another rigged election, or both, is clear. Every U.S. military officer swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, including enemies occupying the Oval Office. And it may take temporarily suspending a very small part of the Constitution in order to save our Constitutional Republic from neocon tyranny and dictatorship.
The Thai military decided to suspend the entire Thai Constitution in an interim measure before a return to democratic rule. The U.S. military, in response to Bush's numerous violations of the U.S. Constitution and orders to engage in a potentially disastrous war with Iran, could merely step in and suspend Article I, Section 9; Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution to pave the way for a return to democratic rule. That Clause is the Bill of Attainder clause, which states, "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed." A Bill (or Writ) of Attainder is when a legislature (or another governing tribunal such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff) declares a person or group of persons guilty of a crime or crimes, and nullifies their constitutional rights, without benefit of a trial." In this case, the U.S. military could, under international law (and pursuant to a suspension of the Bill of Attainder clause in the U.S. Constitution), declare that Bush, Cheney, and other high level administration perpetrators have violated the Geneva Conventions and other U.S. treaties having the effect of law, and, without the benefit of a U.S. trial, hand them over to the International Criminal Court in The Hague to face justice. In other words, the Joint Chiefs of Staff could issue a Writ of Attainder against the guilty parties in the Bush administration. Afterwards, the Writ of Attainder clause of the U.S. Constitution could be restored to force. Extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures -- and the founders of the United States wanted it that way. We owe it to them and their great sacrifices to carry on the revolutionary spirit they bequeathed to us.
There was some talk a while back via sy hersh that folks in the military are ready to revolt if ordered to attack Iran. I think Hersh was talking about mass resignations - but I'm not sure that will have the desired effect. Let's hope some of them at least have contingency plans in case - and if they are going to do it, that it happens when they get told to attack iran, or steal another election. whichever comes first.