Wexler Waxes Practical Reasons for Impeachment
American Hero: Rep. Robert Wexler calls for Impeachment hearings
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In an region filled with inert sand, in the Southern most State of Florida, there is an oasis. This breath of fresh air moves through the trees in Palm Beach County and in the halls of Congress in Washington, District of Columbia. A man who envisions "a more perfect Union" emanates enthusiasm for the ethical principles that define the democracy he loves. He stands solid in his belief; a nation founded in freedom for all its people cannot let a corrupt authority take these liberties away. This spirited being has a name and a title, Congressman Robert Wexler.
On July 26, 2008, Representative Wexler once again expressed his worry for what has remained "off the table." When asked is impeachment too little, too late, he said, "The crimes of this Administration must be revealed and Bush and Cheney must be held accountable." The Congressman fears a commitment to the Constitution has waned amongst his fellow legislators, and perhaps within the citizenry. Hence, Robert Wexler submitted a call to action. He requests Americans consider the history of censure and what occurs when Executive power is abused.
Many of the people in Wexler's district exclaim with glee as they observe the vigor of this visionary, as do advocates of impeachment throughout the nation. However, an equal number within the electorate express dissent to the opinion, prosecution is essential. Some think we can wait, or as a nation, we have waited too long. Others say a trial will trivialize lawmakers. A petty and partisan focus is futile. Nonetheless, Robert Wexler is not dissuaded. For him, democracy cannot be forsaken.
The Congressman who identifies himself, as a Fire Breathing Liberal learned to survive and thrive in a Conservative State, as well as in the Halls of Congress.
Principles Robert Wexler adopted long ago have helped him to succeed. In his youth, the Congressman realized that many people may prefer to be passive, particularly where censure is considered.
Detractors of an impeachment inquiry by the House judiciary committee into whether President George W. Bush has committed impeachable offenses contend that no questions should be asked until conclusive incriminating evidence is either volunteered up by the suspects themselves or appears before them by spontaneous combustion. In other words, they say, no inquiry should commence until proof of the president's guilt has been unearthed—proof which would, of course, make the inquiry superfluous!
They may think it easier to speak of little of what concerns them. Congressman Wexler cannot sit quietly when he witnesses what he thinks is injustice. He understands and personifies the democratic adage, "every vote and every voice counts." Experience has taught Robert Wexler each person matters. He muses that any of us may not know what will move us; as he inscribed, "The reality is that sometimes issues find" us. Representative Wexler contends when a problem presents itself, people must address it.
Today, the unavoidable need to impeach the two criminals who currently occupy the White House consumes Representative Robert Wexler, and with good reason. Thirty-five Articles of Impeachment scream for consideration.
Wexler has heard the call. He has also listened to those who reject the notion. They say, "Impeachment proceedings would be a partisan effort." It is too late to censure George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. There is not enough evidence. To prove high crimes and misdemeanors. Hearings would be a distraction. Undeterred, Congressman Wexler reminds us.
This is not a partisan issue: Congress is a co-equal branch of government with the Executive, and it cannot allow this attack on our powers to go unanswered. To ignore these actions is tantamount to a willful concession of our rights as legislators. No Democrat, Republican, or Independent should allow Congress' powers to be so undermined.Nor should Congress allow the calendar to determine whether we should ignore abuses of office. No President should be given immunity and free-reign just because there are only a few months left in their term.
Impeachment Hearings can be held very quickly – in a manner of weeks.
Although today we don't have the votes to impeach today – neither did the Judiciary Committee investigating President Nixon until AFTER hearings were held and the truth was revealed. We must put a halt to this historic Administrative power grab.
Congress has not lived up to its promises, and we can no longer credibly claim that impeachment would upset our agenda. Our agenda has not withstood presidential vetoes or senatorial filibusters. If we do nothing, this session will be remembered for our conceding the rightful and constitutional powers of Congress, and little more.
The Congressman from South Florida offers a laudable verity. Robert Wexler, heeds the caution set forth by Conservative Constitutional Scholar Bruce Fein. If we do not impeach President George W. Bush and Dick Cheney then we will have allowed for an awful precedence, one that cannot easily be undone. If we as a nation continue to accept the practices of a President drunk with power, our republic will be perchance permanently crippled. Despite all the hype and hope that finally, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has taken action, the truth is, an arraignment or even an adequate investigation remains stalled. Indeed . . .
"This is not an impeachment hearing," Conyers felt obliged to remind everybody."Maybe," proposed Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), "what we're here for is something called impeachment lite. . . . We're sort of in that Never-Neverland of accusing the president of impeachable offenses but not taking actions to impeach him, which I guess impugns him but does not impeach him, but maybe it has the same effect in the court of public opinion."
There was more truth to that than Democratic leaders could admit in public. . .
"Let's restrain ourselves, please," Chairman Conyers counseled.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) also played to the gallery with his eye-for-an-eye logic: "If lying about consensual sexual activity fits the bill for impeachment, then certainly lying to the American people about the reason for invading Iraq . . . qualifies as an official -- excuse me -- as an impeachable offense." The crowd applauded on cue.
"I am inclined to remind everyone," Conyers intoned again, "please refrain from any actions of support or opposition."
Thus, the official word is that we, the American people and our supposed Representatives, must refrain, abstain, desist, and decline to vote or voice our objection to what has occurred in the Oval Office. Chairman Conyers claims that his colleagues and constituents must forfeit our Constitutional right to censure an Administration that commits countless high crimes and misdemeanors. Collectively, we need to be calm, while the crooks and liars at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue destroy our democracy. Perhaps, it is time to again consider why . . .
Wexler Wants Real Impeachment Hearing NowSubmitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2008-07-26 04:59.
Today, in the Judiciary Committee, we held a full day of hearings that focused entirely on the crimes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and featured testimony by Rep. Dennis Kucinich regarding his Articles of Impeachment against President Bush.
This is a great start – but I am far from satisfied. Following statements by Chairman John Conyers and the Ranking Republicans, I opened with a forceful call for genuine and immediate Impeachment Hearings for President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
The crimes of this Administration must be revealed and Bush and Cheney must be held accountable. Without Impeachment Hearings, we cannot break through the blatant and unprecedented efforts by President Bush to shut down legitimate oversight by this Congress.
As you know, President Bush has inappropriately and repeatedly invoked Executive Privilege to keep Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Josh Bolten, and other White House officials from complying with legal, Congressional Subpoenas.
I believe the only appropriate remedy is to hold Impeachment Hearings.
While Inherent Contempt might dislodge some testimony or at least guarantee the appearance of witnesses, the larger concern is the President's outrageous abuse of Executive Privilege.
We have been down this road before: in 1973, Articles of Impeachment were introduced against President Nixon after he illegally tried to use Executive Privilege to bury evidence of his wrongdoings.
I fully recognize the significance of holding Impeachment Hearings, and I have not come to this position lightly – but when the President of the United States takes actions that amount to high crimes, we are left with no other option than to seek his impeachment and removal from office.
Our government was founded upon a delicate balance of powers – whereby one branch carefully checks the other branches to prevent a dangerous consolidation of power. President Bush's actions have totally destroyed this careful balance. Without these checks and balances, the President could run roughshod over any law and turn us into a nation... ...where wars can be waged based on lies ...and laws can be rewritten without the input of Congress or the American people.
Congress must end this disturbing pattern of behavior, and in these circumstances, the only option left is impeachment . . .
I am unbowed in my determination for Impeachment Hearings and I know you feel the same way.
Encourage your friends to stay updated and demonstrate their support by signing up at www.wexlerwantshearings.comCongressman Robert Wexler
Fire breathing or a breath of fresh air. Representative Wexler asks us to look at our history, and what might prove a perilous future. He asks Americans to consider the consequences if we do not censure an abusive Administration. Robert Wexler pleads, Americans take action. Support those few who wish to restore the Constitution and bring power back to the people. Perhaps, citizens might wish to peruse the thirty-five Articles of Impeachment, just as this Florida forward-thinker has. Robert Wexler requests that citizens, be they :
Democrats, Republicans or Independents, walk forth and breathe deeply. Let us remember why we love a democracy.
Investigation and Impeachment . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 26, 2008 at 05:58 PM in 'Regime Change' , American Patriotism, Bush 43 Administration, Congress, Congress and Bush, Impeach GW Bush | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Audacity to Hope is a Dream From My Father
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It is the day of my father's birth, July 24th. The man who taught me to dream of unity gave me the freedom to aspire. Leon inspired and inspires me today. Since earliest childhood, Daddy ensured I saw no walls and created no barriers. My father, through his actions, helped me to understand the importance of fellowship. He demonstrated the need to build bridges in federations with those we call foreign. Whether Daddy spoke of companions or countries, he emphasized the strength of coalitions. Lee, as others might label him, taught me the value alliances, in every association. With thanks to Daddy, I have the Audacity to Hope. Barack Obama also has the courage of conviction. Illinois Senator, and Presidential hopeful Obama communicated this commitment to a broader community, today, on July 24, 2008, in Berlin, Germany.
Barack Obama spoke of the belief he holds dear, and the one my father shared with me. Perchance, Dreams From My Father, and his, were evident in a speech given this afternoon on distant soil. Citizen Obama expressed a belief in the power of partnerships. He advanced the notion, when we come "together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life, all is finer.
The presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee, and potential President of the United States, declared, as a community, large or small, people connected can strive to achieve for the commonweal. Individually and as a culture, we thrive when we are united. Divided, we worldwide will fall. Whether it be in Berlin, or at an American border, when people build walls, society is weakened.
This sentiment resonated within me. People abroad responded as well.
Possibly, we all have fathers, mothers, sisters, and brothers that help us to acknowledge "the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another." As the assembly in Germany applauded the words "this is the moment when we must" trust, give hope, come together, "summon that spirit [of promise] anew," and "renew our resolve," I choked back tears.
I do not agree with the thought that any of us is, or has an enemy. Nonetheless, I greatly appreciate the broader concept offered; compassion towards all beings is vital. The thought expressed frequently in Barack Obama's address that touched me is, empathy is essential. I too believe that we must join as one. As a whole we need to act on our spoken intention. All individuals say they crave global tranquility. If each of us embraces the "fierce urgency of now" much will be achieved.
The time is upon us. Each of us can choose to act on our hopes and our desires. I have faith that if we recall, as my Dad taught me, no one person is our leader; no one is, or can be the person in charge, then, we can truly prosper. (I thank you Daddy for the lesson. 'All are equal. An egalitarian society is essential if humans are to live in harmony. As you said today Daddy, we each must have an opportunity to shine.)
Today, and every day, the man with a dream is not necessarily a person of any particular gender, race, color, creed, or ethnicity. He is you, me, my Dad, Barack Obama's father, and yours. The person with vision is a woman, a child. He or she is every being. If we are ever to end the nightmare of an era bent on destruction, we must join hands, extend our hearts, empathize, and endeavor to be one.
I offer an invitation, an inspirational speech. May you peruse the text, reflect on the transcript, and live as a person with intent. May I present, Barack Obama and his speech delivered in Berlin on the date of my Dad's birth.
Transcript Obama’s Speech in Berlin July 24, 2008The following is the prepared text of Senator Barack Obama in Berlin, Germany, as provided by his presidential campaign.
Senator Barack Obama: Thank you to the citizens of Berlin and to the people of Germany. Let me thank Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Steinmeier for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you Mayor Wowereit, the Berlin Senate, the police, and most of all thank you for this welcome.
I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before. Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.
I know that I don’t look like the Americans who’ve previously spoken in this great city. The journey that led me here is improbable. My mother was born in the heartland of America, but my father grew up herding goats in Kenya. His father – my grandfather – was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.
At the height of the Cold War, my father decided, like so many others in the forgotten corners of the world, that his yearning – his dream – required the freedom and opportunity promised by the West. And so he wrote letter after letter to universities all across America until somebody, somewhere answered his prayer for a better life.
That is why I’m here. And you are here because you too know that yearning. This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.
Ours is a partnership that truly began sixty years ago this summer, on the day when the first American plane touched down at Templehof.
On that day, much of this continent still lay in ruin. The rubble of this city had yet to be built into a wall. The Soviet shadow had swept across Eastern Europe, while in the West, America, Britain, and France took stock of their losses, and pondered how the world might be remade.
This is where the two sides met. And on the twenty-fourth of June, 1948, the Communists chose to blockade the western part of the city. They cut off food and supplies to more than two million Germans in an effort to extinguish the last flame of freedom in Berlin.
The size of our forces was no match for the much larger Soviet Army. And yet retreat would have allowed Communism to march across Europe. Where the last war had ended, another World War could have easily begun. All that stood in the way was Berlin.
And that’s when the airlift began – when the largest and most unlikely rescue in history brought food and hope to the people of this city.
The odds were stacked against success. In the winter, a heavy fog filled the sky above, and many planes were forced to turn back without dropping off the needed supplies. The streets where we stand were filled with hungry families who had no comfort from the cold.
But in the darkest hours, the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning. The people of Berlin refused to give up. And on one fall day, hundreds of thousands of Berliners came here, to the Tiergarten, and heard the city’s mayor implore the world not to give up on freedom. “There is only one possibility,” he said. “For us to stand together united until this battle is won…The people of Berlin have spoken. We have done our duty, and we will keep on doing our duty. People of the world: now do your duty…People of the world, look at Berlin!”
People of the world – look at Berlin!
Look at Berlin, where Germans and Americans learned to work together and trust each other less than three years after facing each other on the field of battle.
Look at Berlin, where the determination of a people met the generosity of the Marshall Plan and created a German miracle; where a victory over tyranny gave rise to NATO, the greatest alliance ever formed to defend our common security.
Look at Berlin, where the bullet holes in the buildings and the somber stones and pillars near the Brandenburg Gate insist that we never forget our common humanity.
People of the world – look at Berlin, where a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.
Sixty years after the airlift, we are called upon again. History has led us to a new crossroad, with new promise and new peril. When you, the German people, tore down that wall – a wall that divided East and West; freedom and tyranny; fear and hope – walls came tumbling down around the world. From Kiev to Cape Town, prison camps were closed, and the doors of democracy were opened. Markets opened too, and the spread of information and technology reduced barriers to opportunity and prosperity. While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history.
The fall of the Berlin Wall brought new hope. But that very closeness has given rise to new dangers – dangers that cannot be contained within the borders of a country or by the distance of an ocean.
The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil.
As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.
Poorly secured nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, or secrets from a scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb that detonates in Paris. The poppies in Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all.
In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone. None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we’re honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny.
In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common. In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe’s role in our security and our future. Both views miss the truth – that Europeans today are bearing new burdens and taking more responsibility in critical parts of the world; and that just as American bases built in the last century still help to defend the security of this continent, so does our country still sacrifice greatly for freedom around the globe.
Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more – not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.
That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another.
The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.
We know they have fallen before. After centuries of strife, the people of Europe have formed a Union of promise and prosperity. Here, at the base of a column built to mark victory in war, we meet in the center of a Europe at peace. Not only have walls come down in Berlin, but they have come down in Belfast, where Protestant and Catholic found a way to live together; in the Balkans, where our Atlantic alliance ended wars and brought savage war criminals to justice; and in South Africa, where the struggle of a courageous people defeated apartheid.
So history reminds us that walls can be torn down. But the task is never easy. True partnership and true progress requires constant work and sustained sacrifice. They require sharing the burdens of development and diplomacy; of progress and peace. They require allies who will listen to each other, learn from each other and, most of all, trust each other.
That is why America cannot turn inward. That is why Europe cannot turn inward. America has no better partner than Europe. Now is the time to build new bridges across the globe as strong as the one that bound us across the Atlantic. Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century. It was this spirit that led airlift planes to appear in the sky above our heads, and people to assemble where we stand today. And this is the moment when our nations – and all nations – must summon that spirit anew.
This is the moment when we must defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it. This threat is real and we cannot shrink from our responsibility to combat it. If we could create NATO to face down the Soviet Union, we can join in a new and global partnership to dismantle the networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York. If we could win a battle of ideas against the communists, we can stand with the vast majority of Muslims who reject the extremism that leads to hate instead of hope.
This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets. No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO’s first mission beyond Europe’s borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now.
This is the moment when we must renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The two superpowers that faced each other across the wall of this city came too close too often to destroying all we have built and all that we love. With that wall gone, we need not stand idly by and watch the further spread of the deadly atom. It is time to secure all loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to reduce the arsenals from another era. This is the moment to begin the work of seeking the peace of a world without nuclear weapons.
This is the moment when every nation in Europe must have the chance to choose its own tomorrow free from the shadows of yesterday. In this century, we need a strong European Union that deepens the security and prosperity of this continent, while extending a hand abroad. In this century – in this city of all cities – we must reject the Cold War mind-set of the past, and resolve to work with Russia when we can, to stand up for our values when we must, and to seek a partnership that extends across this entire continent.
This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably. Trade has been a cornerstone of our growth and global development. But we will not be able to sustain this growth if it favors the few, and not the many. Together, we must forge trade that truly rewards the work that creates wealth, with meaningful protections for our people and our planet. This is the moment for trade that is free and fair for all.
This is the moment we must help answer the call for a new dawn in the Middle East. My country must stand with yours and with Europe in sending a direct message to Iran that it must abandon its nuclear ambitions. We must support the Lebanese who have marched and bled for democracy, and the Israelis and Palestinians who seek a secure and lasting peace. And despite past differences, this is the moment when the world should support the millions of Iraqis who seek to rebuild their lives, even as we pass responsibility to the Iraqi government and finally bring this war to a close.
This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet. Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands. Let us resolve that all nations – including my own – will act with the same seriousness of purpose as has your nation, and reduce the carbon we send into our atmosphere. This is the moment to give our children back their future. This is the moment to stand as one.
And this is the moment when we must give hope to those left behind in a globalized world. We must remember that the Cold War born in this city was not a battle for land or treasure. Sixty years ago, the planes that flew over Berlin did not drop bombs; instead they delivered food, and coal, and candy to grateful children. And in that show of solidarity, those pilots won more than a military victory. They won hearts and minds; love and loyalty and trust – not just from the people in this city, but from all those who heard the story of what they did here.
Now the world will watch and remember what we do here – what we do with this moment. Will we extend our hand to the people in the forgotten corners of this world who yearn for lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and justice? Will we lift the child in Bangladesh from poverty, shelter the refugee in Chad, and banish the scourge of AIDS in our time?
Will we stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe? Will we give meaning to the words “never again” in Darfur?
Will we acknowledge that there is no more powerful example than the one each of our nations projects to the world? Will we reject torture and stand for the rule of law? Will we welcome immigrants from different lands, and shun discrimination against those who don’t look like us or worship like we do, and keep the promise of equality and opportunity for all of our people?
People of Berlin – people of the world – this is our moment. This is our time.
I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.
But I also know how much I love America. I know that for more than two centuries, we have strived – at great cost and great sacrifice – to form a more perfect union; to seek, with other nations, a more hopeful world. Our allegiance has never been to any particular tribe or kingdom – indeed, every language is spoken in our country; every culture has left its imprint on ours; every point of view is expressed in our public squares. What has always united us – what has always driven our people; what drew my father to America’s shores – is a set of ideals that speak to aspirations shared by all people: that we can live free from fear and free from want; that we can speak our minds and assemble with whomever we choose and worship as we please.
These are the aspirations that joined the fates of all nations in this city. These aspirations are bigger than anything that drives us apart. It is because of these aspirations that the airlift began. It is because of these aspirations that all free people – everywhere – became citizens of Berlin. It is in pursuit of these aspirations that a new generation – our generation – must make our mark on the world.
People of Berlin – and people of the world – the scale of our challenge is great. The road ahead will be long. But I come before you to say that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom. We are a people of improbable hope. With an eye toward the future, with resolve in our hearts, let us remember this history, and answer our destiny, and remake the world once again.
Source of Inspiration; The Audacity to Hope . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 24, 2008 at 03:45 PM in 'Regime Change' , Communities, Global Village | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Iraq, Iraqis "Wouldn't Exist Anymore"
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
As Governor of Texas, the Presidential hopeful warned us. If we were to select him as Commander-In-Chief he would not send mixed messages. Americans might have read George W. Bush's lips. Pressure would be applied in abundance. A thousand points of light illuminated the path the then possible Chief Executive proposed. Yet, no one wished to believe a prominent person, the son of a former President of the United States could be so cruel. Certainly, a candidate to the highest office in the land would not suggest that he would be happy to start a war while he worked to win the support of American people. Yet, there it was, in the smirk, in the statement, in the glint seen in the eyes of Governor George W. Bush. The date, January 16, 2000, one year and four days before the ready and willing combatant placed his hand on the Bible and recited the Presidential Oath of Office.
Americans entered a new age; the second millennium had just begun. Yet, the people had learned little from hundreds or thousands of years of history. While tuned into television, citizens did not need to read between the lines. The future President spoke directly of his intent. Journalist Wolf Blitzer heard the words and reiterated. Perchance, the Broadcaster, too shocked by a truth he thought awesome, offered the then candidate a chance to redeem himself. George W. Bush cognizant of how his words might be thought cocky, endeavored to lessen the concern, somewhat; however, he remained stalwart.
The words were ominous, they, the Iraqi's, would not exist any more. They hung in the air. Yet, people wanted to believe, as President, George W. Bush, (or whomever) would protect them. The public chose to suspend disbelief. With blind faith, supporters of the candidate followed their leader. Those who did not endorse the aspirant did not dare to fear the unthinkable. They thought they would or could "trust and verify." Few imagined the impossible would be their unwelcome truth.
Nearly two years later, circumstances afforded Mister Bush an opportunity. The September 11, 2001, attack on the Twin Towers allowed the former Governor, then President, to say, the world changed. However, in truth, while the people's perspective may have been transformed, the views George W. Bush expressed twenty-one months earlier were as they had been. The Chief Executive's sense of reality was static.
Commander-In-Chief Bush is consistent. As documented, at least since January 2000, Mister Bush intended to eliminate what he decided was a threat, Saddam Hussein, and the country known as Iraq. The harangue was heard and George Bush would stay the course.
George W. Bush Opines on His Presidential Candidacy;Blitzer: It's almost exactly nine years since your dad, the president of the United States, accepted a cease-fire with Saddam Hussein in Iraq in exchange for full Iraqi agreement to comply with U.N. weapons inspectors. But for the last year, there have been no weapons inspection teams in Iraq at all. If you were president today, what would you do about it?
Bush: I would continue to keep the pressure on the Iraqi government. I would continue to insist that inspectors be left -- allowed into the country. I would continue to insist that Iraq complied with the cease-fire arrangement.
Blitzer: But they're in violation of the agreement right now.
Bush: Absolutely. Absolutely. And we shouldn't be sending mixed signals. And if any time I found that the Iraqi's were developing weapons of mass destruction, they wouldn't exist any more.
Blitzer: Who wouldn't exist, the weapons?
Bush: The weapons of mass destruction, yes. I'm not going to -- they just need to hear that from a potential president, that if we catch them in violation of the agreement, if we in any way, shape or form find out that they're developing weapons of mass destruction that there will be action taken, and they can just guess what that action might be.
Blitzer: And you're not going to spell it out here today?
Bush: No, sir.
Ah, but he had shared the details. The candidate crafted a message and then, in the midst of the interview thought better of being so blatant. Perhaps, this election season, the American people might ponder the past. Citizens could consider pronouncements are portals. When the public listens to our current crop of Presidential challengers might the people acknowledge that a politician has power to change more than a policy. Lives will be altered with the stroke of a Presidential pen.
This time, will our countrymen contemplate the messages delivered when a Presidential hopeful is away from the persuasive scripts? Might Americans accept commercials do not reveal what is within a heart and soul. Stump speeches do not reveal authentic intentions.
Let us listen when a potential Commander offers his truest calculations. When a candidate speaks of possible combat, have faith. He or she will engage. If the same hopeful honors a citizen's right to bear arms, believe him (or her). Suppose surveillance is the subject. A potential President that promotes a need to spy on those he or she thinks may be terrorists will follow through. Holidays from taxes that build a healthy infrastructure, once proposed, will be part of the ultimate plan. When a presumptive Chief Executive claims he or she will reduce the cost of Health Care Insurance and yet, does not establish a means for better access to affordable medical coverage, realize, he or she will not provide an avenue for those who struggle with what is. What of energy, education, the environment; perchance Americans might acknowledge, no matter the issue, a person, a potential President will reveal him or herself in subtle ways.
Americans might follow the money, the man, and the woman. People, no matter their station know what they need to say and when. A hopeful President indebted to industry will not forget their allegiance, just as George W. Bush never forgot his. Loyalty to family, friends, and financiers leads many a Commander to combat or a multitude of convenient truths.
All actions begin with a thought. Words are windows into a being. Be assured; if an aspirant muses of what he or she "might" do, trust they will. Defensively, details may not be forthcoming before the position is secured. Nonetheless, once the keys to the White House are in hand the world will change to fit the new office holder's reality, when indeed he or she actually has not evolved.
Sources For Statement of War, or Peace. We, the people decide . . .
- Presidential Oath of Office. Inauguration.
- George W. Bush Opines on His Presidential Candidacy. Cable News Network. January 16, 200
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 7, 2008 at 09:44 PM in 'Regime Change' , Bush 43 Administration, Elections, Iraq War, Political Campaigns, Presidential Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Impeachment Off The Table; On Center Stage
Article I: Initiation & Continuation of Illegal War (Part 4)
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
John Conyers put impeachment on the table. Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi said to place such a ‘distraction’ on the table is tantamount to treason. Newly appointed, anointed Pelosi let it be known, there was business to be done and Democrats would do the deeds she deemed necessary. These did not include prosecution of the President or his Vice. Hence, Conyers removed censure from the agenda He had other concerns. His own appointment as Chair to the Judiciary Committee hinged on whether he honored the wishes of the recently selected Speaker.
Thus, Congressman Conyers declared . . .
No Rush to Impeachment
By John Conyers Jr.
Washington Post
Thursday, May 18, 2006; A23As Republicans have become increasingly nervous about whether they will be able to maintain control of the House in the midterm elections, they have resorted to the straw-man strategy of identifying a parade of horrors to come if Democrats gain the majority. Among these is the assertion that I, as the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, would immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush.
I will not do that. I readily admit that I have been quite vigorous, if not relentless, in questioning the administration. The allegations I have raised are grave, serious, well known, and based on reliable media reports and the accounts of former administration officials.
But none of these allegations can be proved or disproved until the administration answers questions. For example, to know whether intelligence was mistaken or manipulated in the run-up to the Iraq war, we need to know what information was made available to -- and actually read by -- decision makers and how views contradicting the case for war were treated.
We need to know the extent to which high-ranking officials approved of the use of torture and other cruel and inhumane treatment inflicted upon detainees. We need to know whether the leaking of the name of a covert CIA operative was deliberate or accidental, as well as the identity of those responsible.
The administration's stonewalling, and the lack of oversight by Congress, have left us to guess whether we are dealing with isolated wrongdoing, or mistakes, or something worse. In my view, the American people deserve answers, not guesses. I have proposed that we obtain these answers in a responsible and bipartisan manner.
John Conyers professed we need answers. He forgets there was no evidence of wrongdoing against Richard Milhous Nixon until an impeachment investigation was underway. Most mused those in opposition to the Vietnam war wanted the President out. However, as Elizabeth Holtzman, a member of the Judiciary Committee during the Nixon proceedings writes much is the same and more differs. Subversion is similar. Evidence is now more abundant. Our own neglect may be our downfall. Perhaps, past disregard for Democratic principles allowed for the eventuality of what we see today. If we forego our responsibility to democracy again, what might occur in the future? Let us assess what we know.
Subverting Our Democracy
A President can commit no more serious crime against our democracy than lying to Congress and the American people to get them to support a military action or war. It is not just that it is cowardly and abhorrent to trick others into giving their lives for a nonexistent threat, or even that making false statements might, in some circumstances, be a crime.It is that the decision to go to war is the gravest decision a nation can make, and in a democracy the people and their elected representatives, when there is no imminent attack on the United States to repel, have the right to make it. Given that the consequences can be death for hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of people--as well as the diversion of vast sums of money to the war effort--the fraud cannot be tolerated. That both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were guilty of misleading the nation into military action and neither was impeached for it makes it more, not less, important to hold Bush accountable.
Once it was clear that no weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq, President Bush tried to blame "bad intelligence" for the decision to go to war, apparently to show that the WMD claim was not a deliberate deception. But bad intelligence had little or nothing to do with the main arguments used to win popular support for the invasion of Iraq.
First, there was no serious intelligence--good or bad--to support the Administration's suggestion that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were in cahoots. Nonetheless, the Administration repeatedly tried to claim the connection to show that the invasion was a justified response to 9/11 (like the declaration of war against Japan for Pearl Harbor). The claim was a sheer fabrication.
Second, there was no reliable intelligence to support the Administration's claim that Saddam was about to acquire nuclear weapons capability. The specter of the "mushroom cloud," which frightened many Americans into believing that the invasion of Iraq was necessary for our self-defense, was made up out of whole cloth. As for the biological and chemical weapons, even if, as reported, the CIA director told the President that these existed in Iraq, the Administration still had plenty of information suggesting the contrary.
The deliberateness of the deception has also been confirmed by a British source: the Downing Street memo, the official record of Prime Minister Tony Blair's July 2002 meeting with his top Cabinet officials. At the meeting the chief of British intelligence, who had just returned from the United States, reported that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.
But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." In other words, the Bush Administration was reported to be in the process of cooking up fake intelligence and facts to justify going to war in Iraq.
During the Nixon impeachment proceedings, I drafted the resolution of impeachment to hold President Nixon accountable for concealing from Congress the bombing of Cambodia he initiated. But the committee did not approve it, probably because it might appear political--in other words, stemming from opposition to the war instead of to the President's abuse of his warmaking powers.
As Commander-In-Chief, President George W. Bush has used his influence and then some. He initiated, investigated, incited, inflicted, and inflated, all in an attempt to do as he desired. Americans sat idly by, as did Congress. Little has changed other than we know more about the manipulations. Today, the table turns, tilts, or is hidden from view, and the Speaker continues to hedge.
Thankfully, The Culture Project and Presidential hopeful, Congressman Dennis Kucinich move forward. The potential President Kucinich works tirelessly to ensure that censure is more than an option ignored. Kucinich brings the issue to the floor of the House in the form of a priveledged Resolution. The Culture Project takes the matter to center stage.
Naomi Wolf, Jackson Browne, Lewis Lapham, Phoebe Snow, Michael Ratner, Bruce Fein, and Sam Shepard are among the many scholars, artists, and activists that ask Americans to authentically consider A Question of Impeachment.
This series is meant to inform and inspire great minds, those that have been fast asleep for too long.
The masses once actively participated in government. Long ago, the media investigated and spoke to sources outside the White House. Now, each hibernates, and the Administration obstructs justice. The Constitution was torn to shreds. Habeas corpus is no more. Executive Powers are infinite; although, apparently, according to the Vice President there is no Executive Branch under Bush.
As Americans sit silently, absorbed in apathy . . .
[The] Culture Project brings crucial and timely concerns to the fore once again with a new, unique series that gathers some of the most brilliant and visionary minds of our time to explore and debate the case for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
You may wish to review the full impeachment schedule, or tune in for just a few discussions. The forum begins and ends in the month of December. Might we, the people work as quickly in support of the Constitution or will we continue to ignore the provisions that ensure no President has, uses, and abuses absolute power?
Sunday, December 2 12:00 p.m. A screening of special cuts of New Home Movies from the Lower 9th Ward, Oscar-winner Jonathan Demme's new documentary drawn from the stories of residents of New Orleans' Lower 9th Ward after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.Monday, December 3 7:00 p.m. Article III: Criminal Negligence and Hurricane Katrina. Participants include attorney Bruce Fein, journalist Lewis Lapham, actor and activist Alec Baldwin, New Orleans public housing organizer Sam Jackson, Judith Browne-Dianis, from the Advancement Project, and Tiffany Gardner from the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative. Performers include Bobby Cannavale, Callie Thorne, Tracie Thoms, Denis O'Hare, Jodie Markell, Bradley White, Nana Mensah, and Chris McKinney.
Sunday, December 9 7:30 p.m. Vanessa, Lynn, Corin, and Jemma Redgrave make a very special appearance to read Poems from Guantanamo: The Detainees Speak, a collection of poems written by detainees held in the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Marc Falkoff, attorney and editor of Poems from Guantanamo, will also be with us.
Monday, December 10 7:00 p.m. Article IV: Warrantless Surveillance. Participants include former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, attorney Joshua Dratel, attorney Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Aziz Huq of NYU's Brennan Center for Justice, and journalist Richard Valeriani. Performers include Kristen Johnston, Michael Mastro, Nana Mensah, Gerry Bamman, Chris McKinney, and Sarah-Doe Osborne.
Sunday, December 16 CLOSING DAY 2:00 p.m. Article V: Expansion of Executive Power. Participants include Harper's contributor and human rights attorney Scott Horton, author David Lindorff, and attorney Marjorie Cohn. Performers include Josh Hamilton, Tracie Thoms, Ned Eisenberg, Grace Zandarski, and Tom Bower.
7:30 p.m. Closing celebration includes performance and commentary from John Nichols, author of The Genius of Impeachment, Jackson Browne, Jorie Graham, Naomi Wolf, Duncan Sheik and Steven Sater, Peter Matthiessen, Kathleen Chalfant, Aasif Mandvi, and others.
Perchance, after each performance you, dear reader will reflect and realize, the time is now. You may be encouraged to dream what some think absurd. I invite you to explore. Before you venture out on Election Day certain January 2009 is your last hope. Please consider there are possibilities more profound and perhaps, if we are to preserve the Constitution, necessary.
Sources and Censure . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on November 28, 2007 at 09:00 AM in 'Regime Change' , Bush 43 Administration, Congress and Bush, Impeach GW Bush, Lawbreakers, Lies, United States Constitution | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
A Climate of Fear Permeates; Morton High School Students Protest
Climate of Fear
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It was a quiet day in America; yet, the feeling of fear was palpable. Oceans away, in Baghdad, the air was filled with the smell of napalm. Frightened, as the young contemplated their future, seventy some courageous and committed students filed into the Morton West High School cafeteria in Berwyn, Illinois. Trepidation for their lives, and the lives of friends, family, and those innocent Iraqi citizens they never met prompted these pupils to take action. The young and eligible enlistees protested the war in Iraq.
Years earlier, dissent against this unjust battle was unthinkable. The Twin Towers fell. The Pentagon was hit. Other buildings were threatened and the nation panicked. America could not comprehend there might be blood shed on the tranquil shores of their homeland. Citizens were willing to do anything to ensure no more lives would be lost in the land of their birth. If it meant countrymen must sacrifice their freedoms, so be it. Immediately, Congress was called into session. Bills were passed and liberties lost. America was attacked; and thus, we were at war.
Theories were bantered about. Osama Bin Laden, the enemy behind the assault, was in Afghanistan. Terrorists were within our country. Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction. The thousands killed on September 11, 2001 were just the beginning. Certainly, we must know as a continent, North America is no longer safe. Air travel has opened all borders. Trains, boats, and planes were no longer means of transport. These are potential missiles.
Acquiescent, the American public believed they were not safe. Yet, fearful as the people were they knew this country must come together and show its strength. At ground zero a crowd stood and chanted, "USA, USA!" The Commander-In-Chief took the bull by the horn or the bullhorn and calmed the throng. He said . . .
"I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon,"
It was then that the former friendly fellow, the man that had failed in most all of his business ventures, the son of a President whose success was said to be tied to his name, appeared decisive. The President, placed into the Oval Office by the Supreme Court, not by the people, became the protector. From the moment Bush stood on the mound of rumble and raised his voice, Americans followed his lead.
George W. Bush led his Secretary of State astray. Colin Powell addressed the United Nations with what Bush and Vice President Cheney knew was not "solid" intelligence. The Commander prompted his Cabinet to lie to Congress. The President's pal and Attorney General told a nation the Rules of the Geneva Convention are quaint. Our leader authorized torture. He trolled telephones. President Bush took us to the airport and asked us to take our shoes off. He read our library records and convinced us there was reason to forfeit our rights. The President of the United States played on our fears and we accepted his truths. Americans became apathetic and perhaps pathetic.
However, just as in years past, when an unpopular war was sold to the American public, when a threat [then communism, now terrorism] loomed large in the minds of those told to fear the youth responded, Morton High School's young scholars decided they must speak out. They entered the dining hall, a nook in the cranny of a huge building, a place where pupils often feel, or felt able to break from bureaucracy. For students, the canteen is considered a safety zone. Every high school has one, a place where pupils can relax, chat, gather, and forget the fears that flank them in the halls, and stalls of academia.
Yet, on this day, November first, All Saints Day, and a national day of peace, the lunchroom furnished no refuge. Apprehensive Administrators swooped down on the young scholars as they exercised their democratic right to free speech. Frightened school officials did just as a petrified President had done. Under the guise of informed authority, the Superintendent and Principal imposed retaliatory measures.
As is often true in a climate of fear, the terrified meet the terrified, and the trouble begins. When filled with fear a person in a powerful position does not wish to show his or her weakness. Thus, they adopt a punitive posture to appear in control; George W. Bush, Superintendent Ben Nowakowski , you decide.
The Berwyn School District bureaucrats selectively singled two-dozen students for expulsion. [Might these individuals be as those sent to Guantanamo Bay Prison, or off to Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other countries with poor human rights records, for interrogation.] Morton West, Morton High School District 201 Superintendent Nowakowski told parents, pupils involved in the protest that are seventeen years or older would also face police charges. [Ah, those of a certain age may be as the persons of Middle Eastern descent. People in power think it just to profile agitators.] High achievers, athletes, and those whose parent are well connected were exempt from the more severe penalties. [Frequent fliers, white businessmen, and little old ladies . . .perhaps these persons are above reproach.] Indeed, school officials telephoned many prominent Moms and Dads and warned them. Take your child home. Be sure your son or daughter returns to class. Cease or dismiss.
The injustice was obvious; even mothers and fathers were distressed. Parents questioned School Board members and Administrators. They asked, what have we as a people become when we suppress speech, suspend dialogue, and arrest those that assemble, and petition the government for a redress of grievances. Perhaps, after all these years of war and Weapons of Mass Destruction that never were, the adults realize they too must question authority.
Parents and students say that penalties were too harsh -- and unfairly dispensed -- for some of those involved in the protest. More than a dozen parents at the meeting in the Morton East auditorium told the board that students who play varsity athletics or have a high grade point average were given less stringent penalties.Maniotis said her daughter Barbara, a junior at the high school, participated in the protest but was given a 5-day suspension and does not face expulsion because she is an honor student with a 4.5 GPA. Other students received 10-day suspensions with the possibility of expulsion.
"She did the same thing they did," Maniotis said. "This entire incident is outrageous. The school missed out on a wonderful teachable moment. Instead, they cracked down on them right away and turned it into a punitive situation."
Parents have said they want their children reinstated and the penalties removed from their records.
However, the Board and the Superintendent chose to exert its power. The community gathered thousands of signatures in support of the students. Parents, neighbors, concerned citizens met with authorities and stated, the punishment for protestors is too harsh. Those in power argued the point. School authorities might have said, "We do not torture." Waterboarding, while repugnant, is just in "real life" situations.
School officials also sent a letter to the parents of all the school’s students calling the protest “gross disobedience” and reminding parents that any disruption to the educational process could lead to expulsion.
Disobedience and dissention must be deterred. There can be no distractions. Our mission is clear. If we are to accomplish our goal, all threats must be eliminated. Presidents and Principals, Secretary's of State and Defense and Superintendents remind us, we have reasons to fear. This is the "age of terror."
Americans know by now, as we accept our telephones are tapped, any time we question authority we are in insubordination. Countrymen chuckle on reflection as they ponder, I almost got sent to Guantanamo. We are anxious regardless of what is real, for in truth, reality is perception. As long as we perceive a threat, there is one, and those in power will act in accordance. Innocents will be sent to [Guantanamo Bay] prison without due process.
Morton High school Principal, Mister Lucas was fretful despite of what occurred or did not. The protesters, pupils were extremely peaceful. They did as they were told to do. Law enforcement officers observed all went well. Nevertheless, fear flourished amongst Administrators.
[S]everal students said the protesters, whose numbers had dwindled to about 25, obeyed the administration’s request to move from a high-traffic area in the cafeteria to a less-crowded hall near the principal’s office. There, they intertwined arms, sang along to an acoustic guitar and talked about how the war was affecting the world, said Matt Heffernan, a junior who took part.“We agreed to move to another side of the building,” Matt said. “We also made a deal that if we moved there, there would be no disciplinary action taken upon us.”
Matt said the group had been told that the most severe punishment would be a Saturday detention for cutting class that day.
Police officers were on the scene, and Berwyn’s police chief, William Kushner, said no arrests were made. “It was all very peaceful and orderly,” he said.
But at the end of the school day, Matt said, Dr. Nowakowski gave the remaining protesters disciplinary notices stating that they had engaged in mob action, that they were suspended for 10 days and that they faced expulsion.
The sense of being actively involved in the community and in the civic process is weighty and can be woeful. As a Morton High School student stated; upon reflection he had "feelings of confidence — of a job well done." However, faced with expulsion he also embraced anxiety "and fright, because my whole educational future is at risk.”
Education for American students is at risk whether they protest the war or not. As the battles in the Middle East intensify, our youngest citizens watch expectantly. Currently, they are not forced to take up arms; yet, the cost of an advanced degree, the expense of living on your own, salaries, or more accurately, practically speaking, minimum wages threaten the security of a young mind. Military recruiters know this, as does the Administration, local and Federal. Armed Forces representatives maximize on the fear and the White House blesses such actions.
The practice began just after America surrendered itself to permanent apprehension. The Twin Towers fell and so too did the Bill of Rights. The Constitution was set aside in favor of the Patriot Act. The Commander-In-Chief of the United States, George W. Bush proposed we leave no child behind. In the spirit of bipartisanship, Mister Bush garnered support for a initiative that would change the lives of young Americans forever. The "Education" President signed the measure and a new military force was born.
Sharon Shea-Keneally, principal of Mount Anthony Union High School in Bennington, Vermont, was shocked when she received a letter in May from military recruiters demanding a list of all her students, including names, addresses, and phone numbers. The school invites recruiters to participate in career days and job fairs, but like most school districts, it keeps student information strictly confidential. "We don't give out a list of names of our kids to anybody," says Shea-Keneally, "not to colleges, churches, employers -- nobody."But when Shea-Keneally insisted on an explanation, she was in for an even bigger surprise: The recruiters cited the No Child Left Behind Act, President Bush's sweeping new education law passed earlier this year. There, buried deep within the law's 670 pages, is a provision requiring public secondary schools to provide military recruiters not only with access to facilities, but also with contact information for every student -- or face a cutoff of all federal aid.
"I was very surprised the requirement was attached to an education law," says Shea-Keneally. "I did not see the link."
The military complained this year that up to 15 percent of the nation's high schools are "problem schools" for recruiters. In 1999, the Pentagon says, recruiters were denied access to schools on 19,228 occasions. Rep. David Vitter, a Republican from Louisiana who sponsored the new recruitment requirement, says such schools "demonstrated an anti-military attitude that I thought was offensive."
Slights or the restricted right of entry seemed odious to pro-war Congressman Vitter, a man too young to have fought in a foreign battle. Attitudes such as his may helped build a system of recruitment that expanded our military defense. Prior to the initiative that allowed military representatives to sell their schpeel to High School students interest and investment in America's youth was not equally distributed. Nor is it now. The difference is, under current law, military recruiters can more easily find men and women willing to enlist. With thanks to No Child Left Behind the armed forces can focus on those most in need. That is best. After all, the affluent have opportunities that ensure economic and academic success. The rich are less likely to enlist.
[I]t appears that the affluent are not encouraging their children and peers to join the war effort on the battlefield.The writer of the Post-Gazette article, Jack Kelly, explored this question in his story that ran on Aug. 11. Kelly wrote of a Marine recruiter, Staff Sgt. Jason Rivera, who went to an affluent suburb outside of Pittsburgh to follow up with a young man who had expressed interest in enlisting. He pulled up to a house with American flags displayed in the yard. The mother came to the door in an American flag T-shirt and openly declared her support for the troops.
But she made it clear that her support only went so far.
"Military service isn't for our son," she told Rivera. "It isn't for our kind of people."
The kinds of people that are targeted are poor or lower Middle Class. Plebeian families will sacrifice their progeny disproportionately. Morton West High School in Berwyn, is nestled in a working-class suburb just west of Chicago. Soldiers dressed in uniform, don sparkly metals, and wear shined shoes as they stroll the halls of this blue-collar neighborhood school campus. They smile and sweet-talk eager teens. Recruiters befriend students and promise them a bright future if they enlist. In part, this helped to provide perspective for the pupils and prompted the protest.
Disabled Gulf War veteran Cesar Ruvalcaba, dressed in his military uniform, chose to lash out at military recruiters allowed to roam the halls of the school."Shame on the administrators who think receiving military money from recruiters is more important than the education of their students," he told the board. "I am 100 percent disabled, and I learned the hard way that education, not carrying a machine gun, is the key to success. It's those people who are pro-war who would never drop everything and go fight for the red, white, and blue. These kids should receive extra credit for speaking up, not expulsion."
Morton High School students are not alone. After years of subjection, some schools are fighting back. Administrators have decisively stood up for their students. Principals refuse to be part of the Bush regime or relegate academics to expulsion. Principals ask whether funds from No Child Left Behind provisions are worth the cost, the lost of freedom.
Rift over recruiting at public high schools
A Seattle high school bars military solicitation, touching off debate over Iraq war and free speech.
By Dean Paton
The Christian Science Monitor
May 18, 2005Seattle - While most Parent Teacher Student Association meetings might center on finding funding for better math books or the best way to chaperon a school dance, a recent meeting here at Garfield High School grappled with something much larger - the war in Iraq.
The school is perhaps one of the first in the nation to debate and vote against military recruiting on high school campuses - a topic already simmering at the college level . . .
High schools are struggling with a similar issue as the No Child Left Behind Act requires that schools receiving federal funding must release the names of its students to recruiters. Some feel that's an invasion of privacy prompted by a war effort that has largely divided the American public. Others say barring recruiters is an infringement of free speech - and a snub to the military, particularly in a time of war.
Garfield High School took a decisive step last week with a vote of 25 to 5 to adopt a resolution that says "public schools are not a place for military recruiters."
All this comes as recruiters struggle to meet enlistment goals.
Perchance, Americans no longer wish to live a life in fear. Our countrymen finally decided to vote for change. However, it did not come. Now the children take up the cause. Perhaps they will be more successful. With the support of their parents, the impossible may be probable. Indeed, it is, slightly.
Last evening, the Superintendent of Berwyn Schools released a statement. [On the same day some troops are slated to return home to American shores, not because the President heard the people say exit Iraq, but because, physically, they could no longer remain in battle] suspended students could and would return to class. School records will not reflect, peaceful rebellions as a dishonorable reason for discharge. Although Administrative faces are saved, it is important to consider that this is a step. We may move closer to educational experiences and further from a culture of fear. One can hope.
I offer the link for your perusal. Please read the Superintendent's proclamation. Please share your thoughts, quietly. Remember class is in session. Recruiters may still be listening and the Bush regime remains in office.
As you, dear reader, breathe deeply and ponder the protestors' plight, might I submit, alls is not well; nor did this situation truly end well. Granted, the students will be reinstated. Those that wish to pursue a military career will, and those that do not, will not. However, there is more to this story. Power plays; those that instill fear, fear not. Even when we think the Authorities care; they are concerned, and will no longer abuse, use or manipulate, we discover they continue to do as they have done.
Eight million veterans got their education thanks to the World War II GI Bill, which covered tuition, fees, and books, and gave veterans a living stipend while they were in school. A 1988 Congressional study proved that every dollar spent on educational benefits under the original GI Bill added seven dollars to the national economy in terms of productivity, consumer spending and tax revenue.Unfortunately, the current educational benefits offered to veterans are far lower than the original GI Bill. In fact, they cover only 60-70% of the average cost of four years at a public college or university, or less than two years at a typical private college. Our veterans deserve better.
A new GI [Government Issue] Bill is being crafted in Congress. However, Americans have reason to think this too shall not pass. If we the voters learn from the Morton High School students and state what we think, perhaps, veterans will have the chance they were promised . . . that is if they live to return home.
Let s fear no more. Americans cannot sit silent. If you wish to communicate to your Congress Person, please do. The time is now.
Help Veterans Continue their Education.
Sources of Fear; Culture of Care. . .
Thursday, January 6, 2005; Page A01
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on November 15, 2007 at 01:00 PM in 'Regime Change' , Activism, Adult Influence on Children, Afghanistan, American Patriotism, Americana, Bush 43 Administration, CIA Prisons, Civil Disobedience, Civil Rights, Congress and Bush, Current Affairs, Domestic Security, Education or War, Emotional Decisions, Exit Iraq Now, Fear, Inequality in America, International Security, Iraq War, Lies, Military Missions, National Security, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Peace Movement, Politics, Question Everything, Saddam Hussein, Teach The Children, The Patriot Act , War and Peace, War is in the Wind, Wars Bush Commanded, “When is Enough, Enough?” | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Vigorous Vermont Senator Leahy Falls Victim To Dynamic Bush/Cheney Duo
Patrick Leahy on the Wiretapping Subpoena Deadline
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
I wish I could applaud. I long to feel hopeful. As Congress continues to succumb to the current Administration, I watch all the antics, listen to the rhetoric and cringe again.
Wave the flag, walk all over the Constitution, no matter the position, nothing changes. Journalist Dana Milbank was able to find humor in what for me is too painful to ponder. This creative columnist wrote of the recent Patrick Leahy address and I smiled.
The Caped Crusader From VermontHowever, the comedy turn to tragedy, as inevitably those that that care knew it would.. When the Senator from Vermont was asked about attempts to move forward, formulas that would impose consequences on officials that care not for the Constitution, the reply was prosaic, the passion void.
By Dana MilbankWashington Post.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007; A02"Sen. Patrick Leahy has a part in the next Batman movie." -- Associated Press, Aug. 19.
"Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) holds a media availability on the deadline for subpoenas for documents relating to the ... Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program." -- Reuters, Aug. 20.
Somewhere in Gotham, the Batphone rings. Loyal butler Alfred (played by Robert Byrd) summons Bruce Wayne ( Leahy). It's Commissioner Gordon on the line, and the news is grim: A villainous alliance has been formed by the Riddler (Karl Rove), the Penguin (Dick Cheney), the Joker (Alberto Gonzales) and Catwoman (Harriet Miers).
The fearsome foursome has brainwashed the previously incorruptible White House counsel (Fred Fielding), and the villains are trying to take over the American government through wanton and reckless claims of executive privilege. The latest sign of doom: Fielding has missed yet another deadline to respond to Senate subpoenas probing a secret eavesdropping program.
Enter the caped crusader, who has flown in from Vermont wearing a Batman-gray business suit and Batman-black loafers. He strikes back at Gotham's criminal masterminds with his signature weapon: the news conference. Meeting reporters in the Judiciary Committee hearing room, the Dark Knight encounters so many Batmicrophones on his Batlectern that he has to hold his Batspeech in his hands.
"The administration has produced no documents!" Leahy growled.
POW!
"No adequate basis for noncompliance!"
BANG!
"No privilege claims!"
BOP!
"No complete privilege log!"
BING!
The forlorn female then posed another supposition.
Aspiring superhero Leahy came up short when asked at a news conference yesterday what specific weapon he might use to force the White House to comply. But he left little doubt that, if the ne'er-do-wells continue to defy him, he may give the White House another good scolding when Congress returns from recess. And -- who knows? -- he may bring Robin the Boy Wonder (played by Chuck Schumer). . . .The first questioner riddled Batman with this.
"The full Judiciary Committee will have to sit down and determine whether to seek contempt from the full Senate," said the noncommittal action hero.
Does that mean he would seek a contempt-of-Congress citation? "What I want to do is get the response to these things," Leahy demurred.
Rebecca Carr of Cox News tried again to pin him down, but Leahy continued to escape. "What we have to find out is what happened here," he answered.
How about withholding money from the administration? "Let's take it step by step," he [Leahy] proposed.Perhaps there is no reason to turn in next week at the same time. The audience can predict as Journalist Milbank states.
Holy incrementalism, Batman!Someone please, hand me the remote. I want to change the channel. Patrick Leahy and his supporting cast of characters have lived in the Batcave for too long. There is no light in sight. There is no end to this tunnel. The diabolic duo live on and live strong in the Oval Office. The Bushman and the Quail Hunter remain strong. Their position solid.
With or without a Turd Blossom to be their "Brain," these two are ready, willing, and able to battle Batman Leahy and his band of Benign Boy and Girl Wonders. The Joker of an Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales does justice in his role. Crafty Catwoman Miers continues to mesmerize those that cannot see her appearance. The adventure continues; however, the outcome seems a foregone conclusion. Few expect Congress, the country, or the citizens will ever be free from this folly. Might I have missed an episode, the one in which the Constitution was burned.
The Source . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on August 21, 2007 at 03:39 PM in 'Regime Change' , Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General , Congress and Bush, Impeach GW Bush | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Impeachment; Bush and Cheney Convict of Constitutional Crimes
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The question is often posed. Each day a few Progressives ponder the possibility and offer their plea. Conservatives on the "Right" and "Left' languish when they discuss what may be apt. They state there is no time. Some posit, impeachment will distract a nation at war. Ah, how the White House welcomes that theory. Many dismiss the notion. They question the feasibility. Others are ready, willing, and waiting to start the impeachment proceedings. Rants, rage, reasons fill the air; they flood the airwaves. Cyberspace is clogged with conversations. Congress declares the topic is "off the table." Yet, here it is. Few have stated the rational so concisely. I present the position for impeachment as detailed by the Voice of the Environment. I invite a discussion.
Voice of the Environment's August 9, 2007 advertisement appeared in the San Francisco Bay Guardian, Santa Monica Mirror and New York Times.
Let’s put Bush & Cheney where they belong . . .
|
Step One: Impeachment
We the people have the legal right and the moral obligation to enforce the Constitution and the rule of law. If we allow George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to subvert and break the law, we ourselves become complicit in the illegality.
The Case for Impeachment Step Two: Indictment Once Bush and Cheney are impeached (or termed out of office), both are liable in criminal proceedings. Justice can and should be done through an indictment brought by a federal grand jury for treason in conspiring to defraud and deceive the American people into an illegal war. World opinion of the United States is at an all-time low. Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid, and the House Judiciary Committee must address this crisis by taking the Constitutional steps necessary to bring about impeachment proceedings in the House and a trial in the Senate. To delay or avoid such remedy is to place our democratic republic and the separation of powers in grave danger now and for the foreseeable future.
|
 Ultimately, we the people are responsible for the actions of our government. We are responsible for the thousands of American soldiers killed and maimed and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis – including civilians, women and children – killed, maimed and displaced. We are ashamed at what is being done in our names! After six years of imperial adventurism, Bush and Cheney have set the stage to attack Iran. Such an attack could mark the beginning of World War III, an unthinkable conflict pitting the west against much of the Muslim world. In 1933, as Hitler rose to power, the German people still had a chance to rise up and change history. They failed to act and tens of millions paid with their lives. Today, the American people face a similar challenge. If we don’t change history, we may be doomed to repeat it. If you agree with the ideas expressed in this ad, support Voice of the Environment with a tax-deductible contribution. Please mail your check to: |
Voice of the Environment’s mission is to . . .
educate the public regarding the illegal seizure of our natural resources
and the unconstitutional usurpation of our inalienable right by a corporate-driven government.
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on August 19, 2007 at 09:27 PM in 'Regime Change' , Bush 43 Administration, Impeach GW Bush, Richard [Dick] Cheney, Vice President | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Death Touches US All, United States Citizens and Iraqi Civilians
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It was a lovely Saturday evening. We had no idea that within minutes, the telephone would ring and we would hear the news. A young woman, a beloved wife, the sister of eight siblings, and an associate of ours, had passed. Prior to the call, we did as Americans frequently do. Four of us piled into a late model automobile and drove down quiet streets. It was after dusk, early in the evening, when we arrived at the elegant restaurant. The lights were low. The ambiance was tranquil.
The hostess directed us to our table. She gave us a window seat. A stream surrounded the building. Ducks, geese, and swans, gently swam in the water. Birds quietly passed overhead. The server bought each of us a cool glass of iced water. Then he asked if we would like coffee, tea, a carbonated beverage, or perhaps an alcohol based brew. We had many choices. Food was placed in front of us. The supply of fodder seemed endless. Music played. There were no bullets or bombs blasting. Conditions and circumstances were unlike those in Iraq.
However, for a moment, we felt as the mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, and extended family members of the more than 655,000 plus Iraqi civilians who have died must feel; 'How could this happen?' One so young and vibrant is alive and well in one instant and then, she or he is gone forever.
Teairra Washington-Thomas, twenty-four years young, lost her life when a drunk driver smashed into her vehicle. The automobile Washington-Thomas drove flipped over and over again. The long and graceful neck of this youthful woman snapped. As we heard the scant details, we observed the beauty of nature just outside the window. Our heads bowed. We verbalized; Iraqi citizens must mourn their loses each day. How devastating. How painful, how purely paralyzing life must be for those that struggle to survive in Iraq.
According to a July 2007 briefing paper published by Oxfam and the NGO Coordination Committee in Iraq, civilians in that country are confronted with catastrophes each and every day. For those that reside in a war-torn nation circumstances are never calm. The innocent do not anticipate a quiet night with friends and family. Entertainment is rarely elegant. Entrées are not well prepared and abundant. Water is not served; nor is it wasted. Good health, education, and employment are sadly but a dream.
Iraqis are suffering from a growing lack of food, shelter, water and sanitation, health care, education, and employment. Of the four million Iraqis who are dependent on food assistance, only 60 per cent currently have access to rations through the government-run Public Distribution System (PDS), down from 96 per cent in 2004.
While some might muse life for Iraqis is far better since the fall of the Baath Party, arguably, many would say that is not so. Granted poverty was prevalent under the autocratic rule of Saddam Hussein; however, in 2002, before the brutal American assault, life for Iraqi citizens was improving. Iraq was beginning to adjust after years of sanctions imposed by the United States. The embargoes impacted this Middle Eastern nation, as much as the once American sponsored dictator himself did. Prior to the unilateral invocation of war, the Seattle Post Intelligencer reported;
On a recent evening tour of Baghdad car dealers and shopping districts, it was easy to see that conditions, despite 12 years of sanctions in the wake of the Gulf War, are improving, even if only slightly.Streets and storefronts are bathed in light, thanks to electrical plants that now provide 24-hour power. Food, clothing and electronic equipment is everywhere. Kinetic crowds of young men and women crowd the sidewalks. Restaurants and pizza parlors are packed. Theaters show movies from Italy, France, and even the United States, although most of them, judging from the billboards outside the theater, appear to be B-grade or worse.
For the more intellectual crowd, there is the Orfali Art Gallery, which has offered exhibits, movies, and musical events since 1963. On this night, a CD movie of an opera, "The Tales of Hoffman," was playing on an outdoor screen, while, inside, an Iraqi musician was playing her own compositions on the piano.
Decidedly, life was not good for the then "mind-numbing" ninety-percent living in poverty prior to the fall of Saddam Hussein; however, it was better than it is now. As bad as dearth is, the possibility and stench of death is worse. The difference between scarcity and running scared is sizeable. A person can be poor, and still feel secure.
The truer, deeper crisis began when Americans physically set foot on Iraqi soil. When nothing seems certain, when soldiers can be seen on every corner, and each wields a weapon, when neighborhoods are battlefields, no amount of money ensues tranquility.
The war on Iraq is not novel; the form of destruction is. When we look back on the history of Iraq, we must acknowledge America's influence. Long before the first bullets whizzed past the heads of innocent Iraqi civilians the United States worked to undermine the government it put in place with full knowledge that blameless people were being hurt. Sanctions against Iraq secured an uncertain future for innocent civilians. Survival was threatened. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people perished. Among these half a million children.
Comprehensive Economic Sanctions: A Badly-Flawed PolicyHowever, even when we attempt to shine a light on such criminal actions, those that impose "diplomatic" warfare defend their right to do so. You, dear reader may recall, former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, was asked of how Americans could justify such cruelty. Journalist, Lesley Stahl delicately broached the subject, during an interview aired on 60 Minutes.When the Security Council first imposed sanctions on Iraq in 1990, many diplomats, scholars, and citizens believed that comprehensive economic, sanctions were innovative, benign, and non-violent. Some believed that sanctions offered an ethical foreign policy tool to combat threats to peace and security without causing unintended suffering.
It is now clear that comprehensive economic sanctions in Iraq have hurt large numbers of innocent civilians not only by limiting the availability of food and medicines, but also by disrupting the whole economy, impoverishing Iraqi citizens and depriving them of essential income, and reducing the national capacity of water treatment, electrical systems and other infrastructure critical for health and life. People in Iraq have died in large numbers. The extent of death, suffering, and hardship may have been greater than during the armed hostilities, especially for civilians, as we shall see in more detail below. Comprehensive sanctions in Iraq, then, are not benign, non-violent, or ethical.
The 1977 Protocols to the Geneva Conventions on the laws of war include a prohibition of economic sieges against civilians as a method of warfare. Ironically, legal consensus does not yet define economic sanctions as subject to these laws, which apply in warfare and which legally require belligerents to target military rather than civilian objectives. Sanctions operate in a hazy legal status between war and peace. Unlike the dramatic, visible toll of military action, sanctions take their effect gradually, indirectly and with low visibility.
Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?As I reflect on the bereavement in my own life, and ponder the end of a young life, I cannot help but wonder how we prevaricate and posture, "We Think the Price Is Worth It." I can only assume that those that advocated for restrictions and chose not to work directly with Iraqi leaders think an amicable agreement is not possible. For these Ambassadors, war, militarily or otherwise is the only option.Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.
-- 60 Minutes (5/12/96)
Then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's quote, calmly asserting that U.S. policy objectives were worth the sacrifice of half a million Arab children, has been much quoted in the Arabic press. It's also been cited in the United States in alternative commentary on the September 11 attacks (e.g., Alexander Cockburn, New York Press, 9/26/01).
But a Dow Jones search of mainstream news sources since September 11 turns up only one reference to the quote--in an op-ed in the Orange Country Register (9/16/01). This omission is striking, given the major role that Iraq sanctions play in the ideology of archenemy Osama bin Laden; his recruitment video features pictures of Iraqi babies wasting away from malnutrition and lack of medicine (New York Daily News, 9/28/01). The inference that Albright and the terrorists may have shared a common rationale--a belief that the deaths of thousands of innocents are a price worth paying to achieve one's political ends--does not seem to be one that can be made in U.S. mass media.
It's worth noting that on 60 Minutes, Albright made no attempt to deny the figure given by Stahl--a rough rendering of the preliminary estimate in a 1995 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report that 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of five had died as a result of the sanctions. In general, the response from government officials about the sanctions’ toll has been rather different: a barrage of equivocations, denigration of U.N. sources and implications that questioners have some ideological axe to grind (Extra!, 3-4/00).
It seems we forget how precious live is, unless or until death is delivered at our doorstep. Many Americans look at the recent findings and think nothing of the numbers. Nonetheless, I present the figures. My hope is that your heart will be full. Tiaerra Washington-Thomas may serve as a reminder. Every life is dear.
Nearly a third of Iraqis need immediate emergency help as conflict masks humanitarian crisis, say Oxfam and [The NGO Coordination Committee in Iraq] NCCIThe violence in Iraq is overshadowing a humanitarian crisis, with eight million Iraqis – nearly one in three - in need of emergency aid, says a report released today by international agency Oxfam and NCCI, a network of aid organizations working in Iraq.
The agencies' report "Rising to the Humanitarian Challenge in Iraq" says although the appalling security situation is the biggest problem facing most ordinary Iraqis, the government of Iraq and other influential governments should do more to meet basic needs for water, sanitation, food and shelter. According to the report:
Four million Iraqis – 15% - regularly cannot buy enough to eat.
70% are without adequate water supplies, compared to 50% in 2003.
28% of children are malnourished, compared to 19% before the 2003 invasion.
92% of Iraqi children suffer learning problems, mostly due to the climate of fear.
More than two million people – mostly women and children - have been displaced inside Iraq.
A further two million Iraqis have become refugees, mainly in Syria and Jordan.
Homelessness, helplessness, horrific circumstances unimaginable to the average American pass for normal in the life of Iraqis. Citizens of the United States of America caused great damage before they launched the first bomb. Today, we, the benevolent people in a civilized society claim to care. However, as we jaunt about in our jalopies and cozy up to our computers lest we forget “Their blood is on our hands.” In other nations, friends or foes, are dying a slow and awful death. In my mind, there is no excuse for man's inhumanity to man. Can we ever truly justify homicide, slaughter, murder, or a massacre? I think not.
As we go about our work and improve our life style, let us consider more than the cost of gas, or the quality of our neighborhood. Please ponder, "No man is an island." I ask each of us to bear in mind if my brother suffers, so too will I. The death of one affects us all. Please let us embrace life; work for peace, prosperity, and equality. May our mourning extend to those we have yet to meet. Teairra Washington-Thomas, may you rest in peace. May your passing help guide us all.
Be Kind.
For everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle.
~ Plato
Sources, Resources, References for Life . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on August 7, 2007 at 11:27 PM in 'Regime Change' , Global Village, Iraq War, War and Peace, War is in the Wind, War Kills [Mind, Body, Spirit] | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Impeach. Support Increases for Censure of Cheney and Bush
Dennis Kucinich Move To Impeach V.P. Cheney Gains Support.
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The quiet little man from Ohio is making gains. His mission is not yet accomplished; nor is his objective vengeful. Honesty and integrity are his vision. Congressman Dennis Kucinich does not think the President of the United States governs the people, or presides over the public as a ruler might. Presidential Candidate Kucinich believes in a higher moral standard. He has faith the person that holds the office of President has the power to bring peace to this planet. The former Mayor also holds that the Vice President must act with honor. He asserts neither in our current Administration does. The Congressman claims as do others that are joining him in expressing their concerns, we must work to impeach this George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
John Conyers proposed the impeachment of the President many months ago. While the Congressman had support for the measure, House Resolution 635, [636 and 637] that movement languished under the weight of the idea we must wait, or not pursue that path for reasons that trouble the calm and peace seeking Congressman Kucinich.
Dennis Kucinich observes that the current White House focuses on defense, destruction, and a deliverance from “evil.” This concentration does not benefit or befit a President and his or her Cabinet. Yet, the Bush - Cheney clan contends they must lie, cheat, and steal to secure our shores. The Congressman thinks not and has said so for quite some time.
After months of appeals to an apathetic public, an extremely cautious Congress, or people that just feel powerless, there is a little bit of movement. Today, in my own life two persons expressed a belief that the “electability” factor they clung to may not serve us [citizens of the United States and the globe] well.
Earlier eight of those in Congress that once stated President Bush and his pals had not committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” or at least they had not done so in a manner that might make a case for censure are now re-thinking their stance. In April of this year, after delaying too long in the minds of many people, Dennis Kucinich called for impeachment. This plan would not only introduce articles of impeachment against the President, this directive would address the transgressions of the man second-in command, Vice President Dick Cheney.
Kucinich introduced three articles of impeachment against Cheney: The first accusing the vice president of deceiving the country by "fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify" an invasion of Iraq; the second accusing him of "purposefully" manipulating intelligence to Congress and the American public about a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda "despite all evidence to the contrary;" and the third for "threaten[ing] aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States."The progress is slow. For Progressives it usually is. However, we are patient people, at times too serene for our own good.In a synopsis, Kucinich wrote, "In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office."
BREAKING: Five US Reps Support Cheney ImpeachmentSadly, few do participate as they might. Many see the government as separate from themselves. Americans forget the Constitution defines the authority within a democracy as of, by, and for the people. We, the citizens of this country must make our directives and desires known. America, we have work to do. Let us be active and aware and play a part in our lives. If we wish to bring peace, we must deplore destruction. We need to disengage from those that bring harm to humans anywhere in the world.
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, Atlanta Progressive News
June 06, 2007(APN) ATLANTA – US Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) has become the fifth total co-sponsor of US Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s (D-OH) bill to impeach Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney, Atlanta Progressive News has learned. In addition to Kucinich, the additional three Members of Congress who have signed on to H. Res 333 are US Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D-IL), William Lacy Clay (D-MO), and Albert Wynn (D-MD).
"This Administration has continued to erode the trust of the American people and enough is simply enough," stated US Rep. Clarke in a press release issued first to Atlanta Progressive News.
"H.Res. 333 was introduced to the House of Representatives by Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio on April 24, 2007, and asserts that the vice president manipulated intelligence to make the case for going to war with Iraq, falsified a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and has threatened aggression against Iran," US Rep. Clarke says.
"When the American people voted on November 7th, they asked for a change in direction by electing the Democratic party in the House and Senate. I have heard the loud cries of my constituents, and they want accountability. My support of HRes 333 reflects the voices of the residents of central Brooklyn."
Congresswoman Clarke replaced US Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), who retired at the end of the 109th Session. US Rep. Owens had been one of the early supporters of Conyers’ bill, H Res 635, which would have created a Select Committee to look into the possible grounds for impeaching President Bush.
Congresswoman Clarke is her own woman and "does not follow the crowd," her spokesperson said, adding that constituents had regularly lobbied her to co-sponsor this bill.
"Vice President Dick Cheney is the architect of the Administration's deception about the war. Cheney persistently and deliberately deceived the Congress and the American people about the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the alleged link between Saddam Hussein and the attack on September 11th. There should be a serious dialogue about the conduct of this Administration. Cheney should be held accountable for purposely misleading the American people. Despite the obvious lack of success on the ground, Vice President Cheney continued a barrage of propaganda claiming that we were winning the war and successfully rebuilding Iraq which is patently false. His statements and representations about the situation in Iraq amount to malfeasance for which he should be taken to task," said Wynn in a press release prepared for Atlanta Progressive News.
Impeachment activist Tracie Stern of Atlanta World Can't Wait said the new co-sponsorships are exciting, but at the same time, the case for impeachment is so clear that these Members of Congress are actually just doing their duty.
Those Members who do not co-sponsor H Res 333 are enabling the Bush Administration, Stern said, adding "People need to step on to the stage of history."
Do not forget when we assess the strife this country, this planet endures we cannot separate the parts from the whole. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney are undeniably one. Each has fostered global destruction, torture, and a lack of transparency. If we impeach one we must indict the other. We must remember.
House Resolution 635.Out of respect for House Leader Nancy Pelosi and a desire to be appointed to the Judiciary Committee this Resolution was taken off the table by its author Representative John Conyers. Nevertheless, there were brave souls that supported this measure.
Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration’s intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.
The 39 total co-sponsors of H Res. 635 were . . .Let us not abandon hope or lose sight of our vision. If we are to bring peace, prosperity, and form a more perfect union than we must work towards what we believe in. Let us unite in our cause. May our will be as strong as that of the Administration. May we never forget, in a democracy the government is of, by, and for the people. Without us, there is nothing but this awful mess.US Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), Rep. Jackson, Jr., (D-IL), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Rep. John Olver (D-MA), Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN), Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA), Rep. Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA), Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Dianne Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Rep. David Wu (D-OR).
There is reason to believe we can bring about change. Only months, ago Dennis Kucinich was a whisper, a voice in the wind. This presentation illustrates what was our truth. We shall overcome. We shall overcome . . .
We can use nonviolent measures to bring about peace. Let us lead the world in a manner that is consistent with our rhetoric. “All we are saying, is give peach a chance.” Support nonviolent actions. Impeach the aggressors.
Dennis Kucinich Introduce H Res 333 to Impeach VP Cheney
I thank you for all that you do to help make America strong, the best, a truly tranquil superpower that promotes peace worldwide.
Support Our Troops and Truth, Justice, and the American Way . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on June 26, 2007 at 11:00 AM in 'Regime Change' , Congress, Current Affairs, Impeach GW Bush, Lawbreakers, Politics, Presidential Politics, Richard [Dick] Cheney, Vice President | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Freedom Shall Prevail. Big Brother in Afghanistan and Iraq
Apple – 1984 YouTube
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
This week I had reason to reflect on passion. While what I feel cannot compare to what those in the Middle East experience, I think the analogy is subtly apt. I have long theorized that wars are never won. Death and destruction do not give rise to winners, only losers. Nonetheless, if combat could produce a champion, passionate persons always prevail. Since childhood, I thought this theory true. From the Revolutionary War to Vietnam, America has been given opportunities to assess. History teaches us that those that fight for personal freedom will triumph.
Nevertheless, the United States repeatedly refuses to learn from history and continues to pursue paths that cannot and will not be productive. I offer an obscure parallel in hopes that you might relate.
The “machine” of my dreams was breathing its last breathe through no fault of its own. I had virtually killed my beloved. I was deeply distressed and fighting to revive the cherished computer, the Old Soul. While engaged, I was reminded of how even an assertive pacifist such as I will fight for what I love and what I believe in. I recall the old Tareyton cigarette advertisements; "I rather fight than switch." For decades, a member of my family was a Tareyton smoker. She often expressed this sentiment. As I pondered, I thought of the civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. I contemplated the reasons for a failed surge. I trusted as I always have love with passion is forever stronger than fear and loathing.
We love our family, our friends, and our freedom to choose. An outside force cannot diminish our fondness for whom or what we treasure. Others do not have the power to lessen our passion. Many might try to deny us our free will to choose who or what is special to us. However, only we can change our heart. Occasionally, conversion seems possible. George W. Bush tells us they are a reality as he points to the purple fingers during the Iraqi elections.
In truth, the illusion of an easily altered awareness is temporary and fleeting. Sooner and sadly, often too late we realize that transformation comes from within.
Nonetheless, those that want us to believe in their cause tell us reform can be accomplished quickly. Indeed we can 'change a regime' with little difficulty. Time is not needed to transform a nation. You may recall the words of former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.
"Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that," he said. "It won't be a World War III."He said as the Commander might have or has, 'Good will conquer evil.' However, what we love and think the best is not necessarily better than what another honors.
Again, may I offer the Macintosh analogy albeit a stretch for some to comprehend. Those that love a supposed intangible as I do the Old Soul will understand the depth of a desire to be truly free, to choose a life, and a style that is solely your own.
The “machine” of my dreams was presented to the public in 1984. I must state this instrument, the Macintosh computer, was never a mechanical object to me. It was and is today a loved one. As fond as I am of the Old Soul that sits sweetly on my desk, I inadvertently hurt the heart of my beloved. The hard drive that gives the Sweetness life was deeply distressed by my error.
As I struggled to recreate a life of calm and comfort, to revive my beloved the words of those that believe themselves wiser than I rang in my head. Choose ‘social equality.’ Purchase what is politically correct. Do as others in this republic do and as those throughout the world would certainly endorse; 'Buy Big Blue.' These words were echoes from the past. In 1984, the majority of the populace considered IBM personal computers the be-all-end-all, much as American born democracy is today.
Today, they, those that do not love the Macintosh as I do plead, “Purchase Panasonic, Dell, or Sony.” Yet, none of these please me. What I think awful brings many pleasure. . Thus, what others consider "good," I would experience as "evil." I, as do all beings, want to choose for myself. I believe Americans, Iraqis, and Afghanis do too. No one wants an outside force to tell him or her what to think, say, do, feel, or be. A philosophy or a political policy cannot be imposed on another. No one can define for us what is fine or finer. However, attempts are made and attacks abound.
Justifications, persuasive propaganda, and distortions of authentic universal principles are denied. Divisions are exploited. Earlier in the week as I focused on fighting to restore the apparatus I prefer, I heard George W. Bush speak of a similar situation. Our Commander-In-Chief reflected on the rebels, the insurgents, terms often used to define those that favor a Macintosh system. He said . . .
We live in a world in which there are ideologically driven people who murder the innocent in order to achieve their strategic objectives.I trust he was speaking of the persons he calls "terrorists," persons unwilling to relent. Might Mister Bush be a PC [personal computer or politically correct] advocate, offering ruminations on those he believes to be rebellious Mac users.
Perhaps, he was addressing what he considers the "evil empire" and their endeavors. Could the Commander-In-chief be thinking as I am. Americans are acting as zealots, as Big Brother had or would. United States service men and women are slaughtering civilians in the Middle East. The intent is presented as a will to "spread democracy." This deliberate goal, our mission in the words of George W. Bush, must be accomplished. We attacked two nations determined to change a regime. The United States and its allies have slaughtered tens of thousands of innocents.
Sigh. The words of W. sound all too familiar. I recall the ideologues in the 1980s. Those that told me to buy Big Blue. These fervent followers of what was then a technological wonder had blood in their eyes as they tried to persuade me to practice as they did. Thankfully, they were not armed or dressed in military garb.
Today, Americans, with their closely organized system of beliefs, values, and ideas have formed a basis for a social, economic, and political philosophy that they think best. Under the auspices of the Bush Administration, those residing in this republic work to impose their ethics on others. Unlike the backers of Big Blue, these supporters of democracy carry weapons. Apparently, they believe people will be convinced at the point of a gun to accept their gentle gesture.
The United States Armed Services equipped with bayonets, bombs, and bullets inflicts their reality on others. It seems our countrymen are challenged to accept; freedom cannot be forced. Imposing a philosophy on another will not reap rewards. “Might” does not make right, even if you wear the label “American” and tact the flag of your superior “superpower” country on your lapel. In fact, the pretense of physical strength often does not equate to power. Bravado does not endure; passion does.
Again, I am reminded of the formidable Big Blue [IBM.] In the 1980s, this blue chip company was influential. They were strong, stable, and dominant. Yet, the corporation was lumbering, languid, and slowly losing sales. Those that used the dinosaurs manufactured by IBM were not deeply devoted to the electronic devices that graced their desks. They merely thought that using these relics was right. PC people wanted all others to be as they were, suffering in silence. Persons working on conventional desktop personal computers were unlike loyal Macintosh consumers. They were not in love with their labors or their tools; they were simply satisfied.
Bill Gates, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Microsoft Corporation observed this phenomena and learned a lesson George W. Bush might benefit from. When people are fervent about a person, place, or philosophy, they will fiercely defend whatever it might be they are fond of. Individuals and groups will forever protect their right to choose what is best for them. The supremacy of a system cannot control people or their choices. Passionate feelings will prevail.
Legend has it that years ago, Bill Gates and his engineers realized that persons laboring at a personal computer terminal spoke of their need to work when using this piece of equipment. People creating on a Macintosh gleefully stated, I am going to play with my computer. Researched at Microsoft studied this phenomena and realized Graphic User interface increased learning by fifty percent and productivity by forty percent. User actually relished their endeavors and achieved ample amounts of work. Recognizing this Windows™ was invented.
Americans were given a choice. Armaments were not held to their heads. The public was not told which terminal to use, how, or when. “Democracy,” social equality was not forced upon them; nor would that have been possible. The free and equal right of every individual to participate at will cannot be dictated. The idea that one corporation, or a country, can spread social equality brutally is ludicrous.
Few of us feel compelled to change our regime or routine when others demand that we do so. Consider the Iraqi innocents or the Afghanis who were once going through life above suspicion. Suddenly these persons were attacked, told they were evil, an empire that needed to be destroyed. How ludicrous that America would expect those in the Persian Gulf to take pleasure in a doctrine to devastate.
Macintosh users remained faithful even when their numbers were small, and the company that produced their systems was not powerful. IBM clients were willing to change to other means of output. They found a sense of love and grew more passionate when given an emulation of Graphic User Interface. Granted, some PC users still feel the stress of work when laboring on a computer and that is their choice. They can and will feel as they do regardless of prodding and poking from others.
I might muse, 'Imagine how they might feel were they to embrace the genuine GUI operating system.' However, that is not for me to decide. Just as with the construct of "spreading democracy," I cannot and will not attempt to choose what is "right" for another. PC users just as the people residing in the Persian Gulf feel their passions to their core.
For Iraqis and Afghanis, the situation is far more dire than my little computer event could ever be! They are fighting for their lives, their freedom to be, not merely for the privilege of using a Macintosh. The magnitude of their emotions is far greater than mine. Yet, perhaps, in the abstract, we in our comfy little American homes can relate through the trivial.
Citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan will change when they are presented with a pleasurable means for pursuing their lives peacefully. Americans offer no serenity to those struggling to survive in the Middle East. The United States government and its puppet politicos present no means for true choice. There is no calm when siding with Westerners. No hope of happiness exists. Iraqis and Afghanis are passionate. They will prevail as will their idea of peace in their nation.
Life forms crave tranquility. Those that cause them harm and not endeared. No one wishes to be the prey or the object of occupation. People will fight for their freedom, not for what others define as independence. Passion is powerful.
This is evident as we assess the latest Bush Administration agenda, the surge. The Iraq people fervently wish to pursue what they believe brings them peace, not what America, and its allies, think is reasonable, "right," or fair. Americans may bring bigger or more battalions. They might import more machinery. The United States can spend trillions or even zillions; still, the situation will not change.
Just as I have no desire to share my little life with a computer that is less than satisfying to me, no matter the reasons others deem these "better," Iraqis and Afghanis have no interest in associating with those that profess "democracy" while acting as an aristocracy might. My minor disputes pale in comparison to what an Iraqi experiences daily. Yet, I feel passionate about my right to choose for myself. What might an Afghani or Iraqi feel?
When the Persian people experience reactive, self-righteousness behavior and hear these labeled the acts of 'freedom fighters,' they can only conclude autonomy is a foe.
When those bearing arms and brutally murdering their families en masse say they are the "good guys," there is reason to question. It is self-evident, soldiers on the streets, in homes, and out in the field offer no sanctuary. For Iraqis and Afghanis, more military is not the merrier.
The latest U.S.-Iraq security plan, based on occupying neighborhood bases and having close contact with the community, is nowhere more intense and focused than here in west Baghdad, where Iraqi forces battle daily with homegrown Sunni Muslim insurgents and foreign Islamist fighters.I think it wise that as we evaluate this war or the next and we realize that fear prompts much of human behavior. Frequently, people choose to fight or take flight. In my own moment of alarm, as the screen filled with gibberish, and the word "panic" was displayed on a black background, I might have mourned my loss and declared conventional personal workstations the victor. I might have trashed the crashed computer. I could have called Apple, ranted, raged, and realized no reward; thus, I could have given in to those that claim to know what is best for me. I did none of these.Five U.S. soldiers have died this month in Amiriya, victims of improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, and snipers. Since the arrival of additional troops in February, the square-mile area patrolled by 1st Lt. Schuyler Williamson's platoon and others from the 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry, has been the site of 300 IEDs buried in or alongside the road. An Army intelligence map uses small red blast symbols to mark bomb sites. The symbols obscure entire thoroughfares.
Soldiers here now openly declare pessimism for the mission's chances, unofficially referring to their splinter of heavily fortified land as "the Alamo."
"Sometimes," said Brendan Gallagher, the captain who oversees Williamson, "we like to comfort ourselves when we are taking a lot of IEDs and casualties by saying that the enemy is desperate, they are doing this because they are scared. But how many times can they actually be desperate? I sometimes worry that this period will end up going down here as their surge, not ours.”
My heart was with my beloved. I did all that I could to restore the health of the Sweetness, the name my Macintosh was given at birth. I did not doubt my fondness for the freedom my Apple apparatus provides. The love of liberty is not a passing fancy for me. Nor do I believe it is for any living being. Struggles do not deter my desire for independence. Indeed, I believe that the more we have at stake, the harder we fight.
I only had what for some was a small sacrifice to make. My very existence was not in danger. Death or imprisonment would not befall me. In truth, my concern was minuscule. In comparison, there is none. I trust the men, women, and children in Afghanistan and Iraq feel infinitely more passionate than I did or do. The intensity of what they grapple with cannot be measured.
I know from my diminutive perspective, no matter how many persons told me or tell me personal computers using Windows™ are best, more prevalent, less expensive, or there is more software made for this product, I did not wish to be bound to a clumsy piece of hardware or software is not for me. If only the decision the Iraqis’ and Afghanis’ was so small. It is not.
Although extremely more serious, the circumstances of those in the Middle East is similar. They feel deeply when told democracy will benefit them. They trust this is not so. Citizens of these Middle Eastern countries see, since being adorned and identified with democratic republics there is crime on every street. Bombs are blazing. Bullets graze even the youngest soul. Unemployment is incomprehensibly high. Electricity is scarce. Elections are just for show.
I suspect, Iraqis and Afghanis, more than I, wish to be unfettered, free to choose for themselves. They long for an opportunity to be creative and productive; only they can define for themselves what that looks like for them. They feel passionate. Iraqis and Afghanis love their homeland and fight for its freedom, for theirs. I understand this.
For me, following my bliss and finding freedom are possible when I embrace a Macintosh computer. At least I have that opportunity. I cannot fully comprehend what the people in the Persian Gulf want or the way in which they want it. Nor would I pretend to have the right to hypothesize. I trust they crave the prospect of choosing for themselves. I have faith they only they know what is "right" and correct for them. Only they can "win" this war. It is not ours to loose or choose.
If we truly wish to spread democracy, we must allow it to flow freely. Again, freedom cannot be forced. Liberty is lost when guns serve to govern. Decidedly, it may take time and there is much for the residents of the Persian Gulf to settle. They are passionately engaged in doing as is necessary for them. Please, let them resolve their differences and make well their countrymen, women, and children as they see fit. We cannot win. Success is not an option we can select. We have done needless damage. Let us do no more harm. Bring our boys and girls home. Let us tend to our own wounds. Only we, as individuals or a nation, can heal thyself.
Freedom and Justice Revisited through these resources . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on June 7, 2007 at 01:43 PM in 'Regime Change' , Aggression, Bush 43 Administration, Iraq War, Military Missions, Terrorism, War and Peace, War Kills [Mind, Body, Spirit], Wars Bush Commanded | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
