OP/ED: Impeach Bush Now!

cyberfenix, please do not think that all Americans are with the Pro-Bush crowd. United States citizens who support the President are continuing to let this travesty happen via their attachment to delusion and lies. They mainly listen to their talk show pundits, learning to holler like O'Reilly and proclaiming patriotism to shout down any dissenters. Or better yet, they believe the lies they're told and continue to perpetuate the myth that everything in America is okay.

Be rest assured, that there are a group of us that do not believe the myths and lies. We disdain the talking heads and pundits that have filled this nation with falsities. We know that Mr. Bush deserves to be impeached on many counts. Let me for one, apologize for our leader being an embarassment to the world community. He has literally burnt all the good will extended to us internationally before. Do not think that all Americans are any way reflective of his attitudes or his behavior. A lot of us are not falling for the "Bush Doctrine".

There are just those who refuse to change their mind about the gravity of the situation. They are literally blind, deaf and dumb to the political mess that continues to regurgitate in government. Instead of bringing our country towards a progression, they support a regression.


[edit on 1-5-2006 by ceci2006]

Seekerof,

An act has been commited in your town. EVERYONE points their finger at you. The police pick you up as a person of interest. It is up to YOU and your lawyers to prove YOU DIDNT DO IT.

I live in the same country you do- and i am a paralegal.

If you are innocent, you go on with life.

If you are guilty- Its over for you.

Since 70% of the US population think at the very least, Bush & Co. allowed it to happen, I rest my case.

Lets put the sob on trial.

[edit on 1-5-2006 by dgtempe]

cyberfenix:

I am not an American, however I can say that your current president is slowly bringing a new level of hate towards your country.

I agree with it all except for the "slowly" part.

What is MORE of a danger is that the hatred for Bush is spilling over into hatredfor Americans.

So soon, we can blame him for getting American citizens killed and abused and kidnapped all over the world.

We can blame him next time you say you're American and people instantly start to lay into your President, maybe holding you accountable for what a twerp he is.

George W. Bush is the greatest recruitment tool for international terrorism ever invented.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Since 70% of the US population think at the very least, Bush & Co. allowed it to happen, I rest my case.

I'd love for you to post the link to that stat...I asure you that 70% of the population thinks no such thing. Also, just thinking something with zero evidence is not enough to put someone on trail, let alone convict them.

Lets put the sob on trial.

Petty. So, petty.

-- Boat

[edit on 1-5-2006 by Boatphone]

Originally posted by Jakomo
George W. Bush is the greatest recruitment tool for international terrorism ever invented.

Just for that ...

You have voted Jakomo for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Originally posted by Nerdling
Whoever leads the charge for Impeachment now will win the Democratic nomination in 2008.

I think it's going to be Feingold or Murtha that introduces the bill.
Worst.
President.
Ever.

REPLY: Oh, yeah.. that's all we need is an anti-American president, and you just named two possibilities.... although neither will ever be president.

By the way, I don't know your age, but Johnson, Carter and Clinton were the worst. If you're young enough, you'll see history will rank Bush Jr. right up there with Winston Churchill.

Originally posted by Jakomo
cyberfenix:

I am not an American, however I can say that your current president is slowly bringing a new level of hate towards your country.

I agree with it all except for the "slowly" part.

What is MORE of a danger is that the hatred for Bush is spilling over into hatredfor Americans.

So soon, we can blame him for getting American citizens killed and abused and kidnapped all over the world.

We can blame him next time you say you're American and people instantly start to lay into your President, maybe holding you accountable for what a twerp he is.

George W. Bush is the greatest recruitment tool for international terrorism ever invented.

REPLY: Ummmm international terrorism has been going on for 100's of years, and I believe that was before Bush was in office. Suddan offered Bin Laden to Clinton on a Silver platter, three times, and he refused.
Are most people in this post less than 25 years old??? America has only one true ally, and it's been that way since WW2.

CECI-2006: ".... there are a group of us that do not believe the myths and lies."

REPLY: Could you please list the lies and myths? The WMD's were there, also the nuke program, and the Saddam-Al Queda links. Those are the "Big Three", so what are the other ones? You haven't done much research, have you?

Originally posted by ceci2006
Be rest assured, that there are a group of us that do not believe the myths and lies.

Yes, what lies are you talking about??

-- Boat

Originally posted by rich23

A love fest of socialist, Bush -hating posters. Your dem commrades have no new ideas, do not develop any new ideas to help the country and are simple mindedly focused on tearing down this admin. Silly. What have you/they to offer besides yellow cake and and a non-operative-operative cia gal?

NURSE! He's out of bed again... and I thought I told you not to let him watch Fox News, it messes with his mind!

Just a reminder: The yellowcake thing was a FORGERY. It was never actually real. Now I dare say your grasp on reality is much like a baby's on a buttered anvil, but do try to keep up.

Here's the second part: Valerie Plame's cover was blown by Karl Rove, and all the signs are that Bush and Cheney knew about it. And indeed were behind it. Personally, I'm always glad when a CIA operative is unmasked, as it limits the amount of mischief they can make... but it IS illegal to do that in your country. Even if you're the prez or the veep.

REPLY: It is YOU who's off the medication. Why are you so scared of one, single TV news show? You shoot the messenger for the message, because it sometimes brings facts that go against your beliefs?

REPLY: In Wilson's spoken report to the CIA (something that is unusual in and of itself), he said that Saddam did, indeed, begin negotiations for yellowcake, yet he tells the Times just the opposite. Remember the 100 tons of yellowcake in the U.N. sealed
containers??? Did he get it from Iowa?

REPLY: Plames cover could not be broken, because A: she was not undercover for over six years (and a woman who helped write the law said no law was broken); B: She broke her own cover, and that of the (undercover) company she worked for when she voted for Ozone Algore using her real name; C: Russia broke her cover in the early 1980's and D: Her own husband outed her a few times at parties, introducing her as his "CIA wife."

Ah, yes ..... knock those people (CIA) who risk their life to protect yours.

I am very disappointed by your chosen name. FZ would have disagreed with you and challenged your view of American history. To insist, in the face of so much evidence to the contrary, that WMDs were there, and the Al-qaeda links...

I'm not scared by Fox News. But I do recognise them as an arm of the propaganda machine.

If you're going to make these ludicrous assertions in future, please post some sources so we can check it out.

Here too, I am going to cut to the chase and just give a couple of sources about impeachable offenses that should be investigated and charged. Read them and make up your mind.

Elizabeth Holtzman wrote an interesting piece for The Nation upon why Mr. Bush deserves to be impeached. Aptly titled, The Impeachment of George W. Bush, she goes through several detailed reasons why.

John W. Dean, former counsel to Mr. Nixon, wrote yet another piece about the WMD's and whether the POTUS had misued information. He weighs the information in Is lying about the reason for a war an impeachable offense? It is an interesting read that intricately goes through the details of whether there was wrongdoing or not.

And what about those presidential rankings? Here's a whole bunch of them on wikipedia.org and Arthur M. Schlesinger's ranking of the POTUS by virtue of Frontline.




[edit on 3-5-2006 by ceci2006]

Zappafan:

Ummmm international terrorism has been going on for 100's of years, and I believe that was before Bush was in office. Suddan offered Bin Laden to Clinton on a Silver platter, three times, and he refused.

Aha, your point being what? Does the fact that in 1100A.D. some guys set fire to a grain shipment in Rome somehow make President Bush less of a lying sack of poo? The thread is to do with impeachment, and Clinton has nothing to do with the lies that Bush tells.

Could you please list the lies and myths? The WMD's were there, also the nuke program, and the Saddam-Al Queda links. Those are the "Big Three", so what are the other ones? You haven't done much research, have you?

WMDs cover a bunch of lies, not just one. They said Saddam had nukes, which was a lie. They said he had chemical weapons, that was a lie. They said he had MOBILE chemical weapons labs, that was a lie. They said he had outfitted unmanned drones, that is a lie. They said he had the will to sell WMDs to terrorists (a double lie, since he didn’t have any, and since he mostly likely wouldn’t).

There’s 5. For the Saddam-al Qaeda links, NONE exist. That’s number 6. And I’m not even warmed up.

Let me ask you something. Do you actually still believe these lies even when they have been disproven? If not, then is it not an impeachable offense for a President to LIE to the country in order to get it into a war that massacres over 100,000 civilians and 2400+ soldiers?

The President never lied...you are being sucked into groupthink!

The Clinton administration talked about firm evidence linking Saddam Hussein's regime to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network years before President Bush made the same statements.


In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda.

Washington Times -- Link...

There is a great deal of evidence to support the Presidents war plan.

The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, met with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More disturbing, according to an administration official familiar with briefings the CIA has given President Bush, the Agency has "irrefutable evidence" that the Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in 1998, around the time his Islamic Jihad was merging with al Qaeda.

Weekly Standard -- Link...

Get informed.

-- Boat

Boatphone: Haha.

From your first link:

In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.

An Al-Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of that pharmaceutical plant in Sudan? Um, what? LOL! He "cited" a link, huh? Where?

The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

And yet no links were ever found. No evidence, no nothing. Nice try but you're being gullible. Read further:

To justify the Sudanese plant as a target, Clinton aides said it was involved in the production of deadly VX nerve gas. Officials further determined that bin Laden owned a stake in the operation and that its manager had traveled to Baghdad to learn bomb-making techniques from Saddam's weapons scientists.

It was NOT a nerve gas factory, but despite that fact you still believe that the intel they received in addition to it was accurate? Bin laden owned a stake in the aspirin factory? Wha? The manager had travelled to Iraq to learn bomb-making strategies from Saddam's weapon scientists? AAHAHAHAHAHA I think I busted a gut.

As for your next "proof". from the Weekly Standard: another LOL. Its current editors are founder William Kristol, chairman of the Project for the New American Century, and Fred Barnes. It's a well known pro-Bush rag.

also, check the DATE on the article.

09/01/2003

I mean, hey, nice try, but kind of laughable at the same time...

Out of the whole entire internet, you will find very few sites that say Bush DIDN'T lie. Because he did. That you still believe it after all the irrefutable evidence says something about your level of logical analysis.

How many hours a day do you watch Fox?

Originally posted by zappafan1

REPLY: Oh, yeah.. that's all we need is an anti-American president, and you just named two possibilities.... although neither will ever be president.

By the way, I don't know your age, but Johnson, Carter and Clinton were the worst. If you're young enough, you'll see history will rank Bush Jr. right up there with Winston Churchill.

lyndon johnson? im from a semi poor area, and i have alot of pretty poor friends. he started the war on poverty did he not? just because vietnam hes the worst president ever? i dont think so.

Ok carter was pretty bad, but not for the same reasons bush is. Carter was a peace loving hippie who really didnt know how to work things. Of course nothing would get done and he would look stupid. At least it wasnt as bad as now.

Clinton wasnt as bad as your trying to make him out to be. he shouldnt have lied under oath, and im sure he should have gone after osama. he probably wasnt that great of a president, but i would hardly qualify him as the worst, since i can look at the way our economy went while he was in office. He may not have been the best morally, but overall how can you argue a surplus?

Originally posted by Jakomo
And yet no links were ever found. No evidence, no nothing. Nice try but you're being gullible. Read further:

Ha, keep dreaming...sorry the facts are getting in your way.

The Sunday Times March 19, 2006

NEWLY released documents seized in Iraq immediately after the American invasion in 2003 point to the presence of Al-Qaeda members in the country before the war and moves to hide traces of “chemical or biological materials” from United Nations weapons inspectors.

www.timesonline.co.uk...

There is mounting evidence that Saddam not only had connections with terrorists, but that he was active in hiding his WMD program that we already know existed.

Again, get informed.


-- Boat


[edit on 3-5-2006 by Boatphone]

[edit on 3-5-2006 by Boatphone]

more unwelcomed news for bush...

MSNBC: Plame was working on Iran

www.alternet.org...

dawnstar, thanks for that link! It's HUGE news which will obviously be ignored by the coporatists controlling the press. Thank God for the WEB. I only hope we can hang onto it.

Originally posted by Jakomo

George W. Bush is the greatest recruitment tool for international terrorism ever invented.

Just to clarify: he IS a tool and he was invented. Despite apparent evidence to the contrary, the guy isn't human. He's a media collage with signing authority.

.