Call it what it is "The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006". . .

[pat_k]

. . .as you call members of the Senate to lobby them to filibuster, call it what it is:

The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006

As you write letters to the editor (e.g., applaud NY Times for calling for a filibuster), call it what it is:

The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006

As you engage with others in cyberspace and in the Real World, call it what it is:

The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006

Let's inject this label into the noise machine!

Words are powerful. Labels move the game. If the label sticks, it could kill this thing.

[BuyingThyme]

1. kcik

[chill_wind]

2. Absolutely. It is feces.

All the lipstick in the world can't transform this pig.

[pat_k]

3. Hear! Hear!

Perhaps the most abominable, and sweeping, part of their attempt to protect themselves (page 79 of http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/nkk/documents/MilitaryCommissions.pdf">Bush's version):

(b) RIGHTS NOT JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—No person in any habeas action or any other action may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto as a source of rights, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose in any court of the United or its States or territories.

So, now it's:

. . .We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain inalienable, UNENFORCEABLE, Rights.

The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006 has ONE goal -- to protect the War Criminals in the Executive Branch from prosecution for the war crimes they have committed (and continue to commit). This is what we need to focus on to kill this thing. No modification of provisions, no modifying definitions, can touch the contemptible goal.

The War Crimainsl Protection Act CANNOT be "fixed" -- it must be killed. Seeking to "fix" it just promotes the the Bush/Cheney/Rove propaganda that the Executive Branch requires unlimited power to "protect us."

[One Voice]

4. K & R

good idea

[pat_k]

20. filibuster4sanity.com

http://filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

Note: The above should go to:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom

[Anita Garcia]

5. I will - thanks for the label! k and r

[pat_k]

23. Thanks! -- filibuster4sanity.com -- Pass it along!

http://filibuster4sanity.com">filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

http://filibusterforsanity.com">filibusterforsanity.com will work too. Both should be going to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom">A Soapbox Alert on Congress.org

[Senator]

6. Warn Them They'll be "Accessory After the Fact" War Criminals Themselves

And be earning a reserved seat at the Hague, should they vote for this and sanity ever returns to our once-great nation.

The whole world is watching and history can be a cruel judge.

There is no fence to sit on here. No compromise position. No way to finesse it. No political calculations.

And so, no forgiving. No forgetting. No getting over it. No fog of war. No statute of limitations.

NO is the ONLY option for a non-monster.

--

[pat_k]

24. See filibuster4sanity.com (lifted your warning)

http://filibuster4sanity.com">filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

http://filibusterforsanity.com">filibusterforsanity.com will work too. Both should be going to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom">A Soapbox Alert on Congress.org

[sweetheart]

7. Eloquently put

needs an apostrophe to show "Criminals'" is posessive.

[pat_k]

8. Perhaps I haven't had enough coffee yet, but

. . I was thinking of it as akin to the "Data Protection Act" or the "Food Quality Protection Act". . .

But in this case, they are acting to protect War Criminals from being prosecuted "in any court of the United States or its territories."

Page 79 of http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/nkk/documents/MilitaryCommissions.pdf">Bush's version):

(b) RIGHTS NOT JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—No person in any habeas action or any other action may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto as a source of rights, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose in any court of the United or its States or territories.

[chill_wind]

9. Kicking. nt

[pat_k]

10. Thanks! -- Link to "Soapbox Alert"

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom

Pass it along!!

FYI
I am setting up filibuster4sanity.com and filibusterforsanity.com to go to the above, to make it easier to "pass along" but the forwarding may not be active for many hours.

[chill_wind]

12. Thank you pat_k. You are true DU DOer. Keep us posted about

your other links.

[pat_k]

18. filibuster4sanity.com is working -- fingers crossed on the other.

As soon as they are both working, I'll post as a new topic.

http://filibuster4sanity.com

Should be soon. . .
http://filibusterforsanity.com

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. K & R

[pat_k]

25. Thx! -- filibuster4sanity.com -- Pass it along!

Thanks! -- filibuster4sanity.com -- Pass it along!

http://filibuster4sanity.com">filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

http://filibusterforsanity.com">filibusterforsanity.com will work too. Both should be going to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom">A Soapbox Alert on Congress.org

[madokie]

13. says all that needs said

[pat_k]

26. May want to give this a kick. . .

. . .http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2245837&mesg_id=2245837

If there is a "deal" not to filibuster, they still need to hear our full-throated outrage! Nothing is a "done deal" until the deed is done.

Perhaps if we hit them with a big enough Cluestick, they'll wake up and say:

"Sorry boys, but we have to filibuster the <b><i>War Criminals Protection Act of 2006 after all</i></b>. If we don't, our constituents will string us up. And, we hadn't really thought it through. We aren't very keen on becoming "Accessory After the Fact" War Criminals."

The ones who vote to pass the <b><i>War Criminals Protection Act of 2006</i></b> will be "Accessory After the Fact" War Criminals themselves and be earning a reserved seat at The Hague, should sanity ever return to our once-great nation.

Unless they wake up, the "dealmakers" are in the same boat.

[Spazito]

14. It could be interpreted as a bill that protects against war criminals

I think The War Criminals Authorization Act would be less open to interpretation. Just a thought.

[pat_k]

15. "Authorization" doesn't seem to capture their cowardly bid for cover

-- i.e., protection.

I think, in the context, "War Criminals Protection Act" is not likely to misunderstood.

And, if it is misunderstood, it gets a person asking the right questions. Like, what war criminals is it trying to protect against? Who is committing war crimes?

The most important thing is to pick a label, and hammer that label. So far, folks seem to be picking up on this one.

[Spazito]

19. War Criminals Protection Act would not be misunderstood by those

who are informed but to those who simply read the headlines, listen to the 20 sec clip which contains no context and, sadly, that still is the majority of people.

It is all a matter of how one reads it as well as what one knows about the content and intent of the bill. I strongly agree labeling it with something that defines the true intent of the bill is key however and whatever that label might be.

Edited to add: On further thought, any officious title doesn't tend to resonate with the general public, imo, no matter how it is worded. Maybe something as simple as "The Get Out of Prison Free Bill" might catch on better.

[Coexist]

16. fitting title

kick and rec

[pat_k]

22. Thanks! -- filibuster4sanity.com -- Pass it along!

http://filibuster4sanity.com">filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

http://filibusterforsanity.com">filibusterforsanity.com will work too. Both should be going to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom">A Soapbox Alert on Congress.org

[Dinger]

17. K & R!

[pat_k]

21. filibuster4sanity.com

http://filibuster4sanity.com

Pass it along!

Note: The above should go to:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=9060001&content_dir=ua_congressorg&mailid=custom

http://filibusterforsanity.com will be working shortly too.

[Straight Shooter]

27. Yes, that is exactly precise.

I see ambiguous headlines like it's called the detainee act or something benign like that. No way. It is the War Criminals Protection Act. You don't even need to add "of 2006." Repubs can't remember more than 4 words in a row, anyway. Keep it simple for the simple-minded and the morally challenged.

:thumbsup:

[pat_k]

28. . . .just added the 2006 to mirror their "official" euphemistic title. . .

Usually do drop it, as they do, in conversation.

You are spot on on the need to keep it short and sweet.

Since the so-called Democratic "opposition" seems deaf to a case for action grounded in principle and morality, here's my short and sweet way of conveying how politically devastating their demonstrations of weakness are:

How can Americans trust you to stand up to terrorists, if you won't stand up to Bush?

http://voiceoutrage.com">voiceoutrage.com