Urshilikai
Veteran X
I wonder where the protests are. I'm young and hear all these stories of marches and sitins and riots about similar stuff. When did it end and why, where is the motivation?
"Impeachment back on the table" - Pelosi
- Thread starter Automatic Jack
- Start date
bio survival tickets.
Did you know a gram of gold was worth thirty six and a half US Dollars in march?
Millions of peaches, peaches for free
Legality of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There's a bunch of links in there.
The main concern is that the administration of which GWB was (/is) the leader knowingly falsified information to fabricate a justification of self defence for its invasoin of Iraq. Under international law, a country may only attack another if it under imminent threat from it, if it has a mutual defence treaty with another nation which is under a similar imminent threat, or if it is sanctioned by the UN.
The war was not sanctioned by the UN, therefore the US govt had to rely on one of the first two reasons, both of which revolve around Iraq being an Imminent threat, which it plainly knew was untrue.
Subsequent studies have backed this up absolutely.
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html
George W Bush, and no doubt other members of his administration, are war criminals. Plain and simple. The fact that they're the biggest, strongest war criminals on the block means no-one is willing to level that charge at them in any official capacity, though plenty - including the then head of the UN, have 'expressed opinions' that it's an illegal act.
The primary issue here is invading KNOWINGLY based on bogus evidence.
Unless there's a massive witch hunt to document that in detail, that's not the kind of thing that will be post facto proven 100%. It may seem pretty obvious to those reading up on it, listening to insider whistleblowers and stuff... but the White House can always fall back on "we were misinformed."
I support Colin Powell's call for a serious investigation into who knew about the internal analysis which ripped apart all the nuclear claims (aluminum tubes, the african yellow cake, etc). Document who OFFICIALLY knew what and when... then go from there. You then cross-reference with their closed session presentations to Congress in fall 2002 and again with the state of the union... and eventually the act of invasion.
The question then is how legally culpable are they for blatantly lying with statements of 100% certainty about WMDs, even implying we had intelligence about precise locations (when the inspectors couldnt find shit).
PS.
AND I WOULDNT MIND A FUCKIN CONGRESSIONAL REPORT ON HOW WE FUCKED UP AT TORA BORA IN 2001.
Last edited:
Yeah, without massively serious investigation, it's pretty fucking difficult to get that documentary evidence. Politicians (anywhere, we've had a little example locally that's blown out of all proportion) can stonewall and effectively render useless any amount of 'pretty bloody obvious' pointers.
Basically it'd take a signed confession before anything would happen, and even then it'd be a close thing.
Still, they managed to hang Saddam... maybe the Iraq government can request an extradition??
Impeachment works best at long range with a decent scope.
secret service is on their way.
Impeachment oughta be aimed at Cheney, in my opinion, not Bush.
I believe any individual in the government can be impeached... and we should back down from grand-standing about Bush himself, especially since he was probably just duped on most of the serious issues.
Rumsfeld and Rove should have been impeached as well... but they bailed.
Just look at how easily Rove dodged charges of perjury.
1. Rove talked with Time's Cooper in 2003, during what he told White House staff was one of the most important political situations in the post-iraqi invasion period. This was just a couple months after invasion and they were dead serious about undermining anybody critical of their rationale for invasion. They wanted to destroy Joe Wilson because of his article on how the US govt's claims about Iraq's nuclear program were bogus.
2. A short while later, the day after/of the Novak article, a CIA representative informed the White House how absolutely dangerous this leak was and how critical this issue is. The CIA themselves would demand a criminal investigation into the leak and thus an independent special prosecutor was called forth.
3. Rove's secretary allegedly testified that she was told not to log the phone conversation with Cooper.
4. Rove testified but made no mention of the Cooper conversation. However, he would be cocky enough to even publicly say he "didnt know her name" which was a pathetic attempt to suggest knowing her precise maiden name was the issue (valerie plame instead of "mrs wilson"). The Press Secretary recently suggested that Rove lied to him in order to get the White House to formally announce that Rove had no involvement.
5. Rove's lawyer allegedly learns about this Cooper conversation from another Time reporter and realizes there is a huge buzz around the event. He demands to search Rove's email and then immediately finds EVIDENCE of this conversation within Rove's own email. OOOOPS.
6. Rove re-testifies that he forgot the Cooper conversation in spite of evidence of it being in his immediate disposal the entire time (despite the White House making it very clear everybody had a duty to fully SEARCH FOR all related stuff and the Prosecutor's demand to do the same - Rove's position is he didnt even search his email to get his basic facts straight). ANybody who has worked in or with government or in organizations where being FOILED or just fulled investigated is common occurrence... knows you cant legitimately claim lack of knowledge in a CRIMINAL investigation when the fucking shit is right in your fucking email.
7. The above alone is MORE than enough to indict somebody on charges of perjury and perhaps obstruction of justice. An indictment isnt a guilty verdict but simply a Grand Jury saying there is enough reason to have a trial. The decision not to indict him was blatantly political, having little to do with a full assessment of whether he could be found guilty over "intention."
And all that just to COVER UP a discussion with a reporter which outed a covert CIA analysis in charge of a middle east WMD program. To punish a guy who blew the whistle on bogus US claims about the threat of Saddam.
The fucker blatantly dodged the truth and should have at least been INDICTED, requiring more serious investigation. Sure, it's hard to prove intention but give me a fucking break. There's enough there to have cause to press charges.
National Security leaks causing serious harm and we all shrug it off.
Meanwhile, you have Condi Rice being confronted on national television for having 2 fucking memos on her desk which explained internal analysis of the nuclear claims showed the claims to be bullshit. She claimed she hadn't read the memos and that nobody in her circle was familiar with concerns about these claims. She then says they "forgot" the head of the CIA explicitly told them to remove mention of these nuclear claims from a presidential speech...
These people are fucking lying and we need to document what they knew and when...
I believe any individual in the government can be impeached... and we should back down from grand-standing about Bush himself, especially since he was probably just duped on most of the serious issues.
Rumsfeld and Rove should have been impeached as well... but they bailed.
Yeah, without massively serious investigation, it's pretty fucking difficult to get that documentary evidence. Politicians (anywhere, we've had a little example locally that's blown out of all proportion) can stonewall and effectively render useless any amount of 'pretty bloody obvious' pointers.
Basically it'd take a signed confession before anything would happen, and even then it'd be a close thing.
Still, they managed to hang Saddam... maybe the Iraq government can request an extradition??
Just look at how easily Rove dodged charges of perjury.
1. Rove talked with Time's Cooper in 2003, during what he told White House staff was one of the most important political situations in the post-iraqi invasion period. This was just a couple months after invasion and they were dead serious about undermining anybody critical of their rationale for invasion. They wanted to destroy Joe Wilson because of his article on how the US govt's claims about Iraq's nuclear program were bogus.
2. A short while later, the day after/of the Novak article, a CIA representative informed the White House how absolutely dangerous this leak was and how critical this issue is. The CIA themselves would demand a criminal investigation into the leak and thus an independent special prosecutor was called forth.
3. Rove's secretary allegedly testified that she was told not to log the phone conversation with Cooper.
4. Rove testified but made no mention of the Cooper conversation. However, he would be cocky enough to even publicly say he "didnt know her name" which was a pathetic attempt to suggest knowing her precise maiden name was the issue (valerie plame instead of "mrs wilson"). The Press Secretary recently suggested that Rove lied to him in order to get the White House to formally announce that Rove had no involvement.
5. Rove's lawyer allegedly learns about this Cooper conversation from another Time reporter and realizes there is a huge buzz around the event. He demands to search Rove's email and then immediately finds EVIDENCE of this conversation within Rove's own email. OOOOPS.
6. Rove re-testifies that he forgot the Cooper conversation in spite of evidence of it being in his immediate disposal the entire time (despite the White House making it very clear everybody had a duty to fully SEARCH FOR all related stuff and the Prosecutor's demand to do the same - Rove's position is he didnt even search his email to get his basic facts straight). ANybody who has worked in or with government or in organizations where being FOILED or just fulled investigated is common occurrence... knows you cant legitimately claim lack of knowledge in a CRIMINAL investigation when the fucking shit is right in your fucking email.
7. The above alone is MORE than enough to indict somebody on charges of perjury and perhaps obstruction of justice. An indictment isnt a guilty verdict but simply a Grand Jury saying there is enough reason to have a trial. The decision not to indict him was blatantly political, having little to do with a full assessment of whether he could be found guilty over "intention."
And all that just to COVER UP a discussion with a reporter which outed a covert CIA analysis in charge of a middle east WMD program. To punish a guy who blew the whistle on bogus US claims about the threat of Saddam.
The fucker blatantly dodged the truth and should have at least been INDICTED, requiring more serious investigation. Sure, it's hard to prove intention but give me a fucking break. There's enough there to have cause to press charges.
National Security leaks causing serious harm and we all shrug it off.
Meanwhile, you have Condi Rice being confronted on national television for having 2 fucking memos on her desk which explained internal analysis of the nuclear claims showed the claims to be bullshit. She claimed she hadn't read the memos and that nobody in her circle was familiar with concerns about these claims. She then says they "forgot" the head of the CIA explicitly told them to remove mention of these nuclear claims from a presidential speech...
These people are fucking lying and we need to document what they knew and when...
Last edited:
I think Kucinich threatened to take away their lucky charms if they did not listen to him.
Seriously this is a complete joke. If the Dems really wanted to do something they would have done it 2 years ago when it might have mattered. Now the guy is months away from leaving. People in Washington need a fucking clue already they are all just plain worthless.
Seriously this is a complete joke. If the Dems really wanted to do something they would have done it 2 years ago when it might have mattered. Now the guy is months away from leaving. People in Washington need a fucking clue already they are all just plain worthless.
Error|550 must have a lot of google stock or something.
Hell i bet I can google that.
If a man can face an impeachment trial for a blow job (yes i understand it was the perjury around that situation that ultimately got him in trouble, but he should have never been put in the position to lie in the first place) then bush should be on the receiving end of a thorough investigation. There are more than enough whistle blowers out there saying something isn't right to warrant an official investigation.
Plus bush is a tool box and I'm sure we will get some quite humorous headlines out of the whole thing.
Edit: I agree with lock up that its too little to late.
Hell i bet I can google that.
If a man can face an impeachment trial for a blow job (yes i understand it was the perjury around that situation that ultimately got him in trouble, but he should have never been put in the position to lie in the first place) then bush should be on the receiving end of a thorough investigation. There are more than enough whistle blowers out there saying something isn't right to warrant an official investigation.
Plus bush is a tool box and I'm sure we will get some quite humorous headlines out of the whole thing.
Edit: I agree with lock up that its too little to late.
Politically, it would make more sense for them to go strong after Cheney.
Impeachment hearings and the whole thing, based on both Iraqi war claims, unconstitutional legal policies, ties to lobbyists (energy, haliburton, abramoff, etc) and involvement with the Justice Department stuff.
Even if they didn't impeach, the process would stir up a lot of attention. And by focusing on Darth Cheney, they wouldn't anger all the people who KNOW the bush admin is full of shit but just dont like seeing the office of the Presidency trashed.
Reading Tse Tse's post really got me thinking....
I'm wondering if Bush will eventually put out a book that explains how he built his administration around a bunch of people who were supose to be best and the brightest when it comes to running the country. Those same people, tricked him into a war that would eventually turn him into probably one of the most hated presidents in history...
I almost feel bad for him, as I'm starting to think that Bush really thought he was doing the right thing - because the people around him played him into it, knowing damn well he would be the scapegoat for it, and what the outcome would be...
I mean has the hatred in america shifted from Bush to the people around Bush? Or do most americans who are against our current gov't still focus on Bush alone... The way I see it Bush isn't savy/smart enough to pull this off.... but the people around him definatly are (and they're fucking evil too).
I'm wondering if Bush will eventually put out a book that explains how he built his administration around a bunch of people who were supose to be best and the brightest when it comes to running the country. Those same people, tricked him into a war that would eventually turn him into probably one of the most hated presidents in history...
I almost feel bad for him, as I'm starting to think that Bush really thought he was doing the right thing - because the people around him played him into it, knowing damn well he would be the scapegoat for it, and what the outcome would be...
I mean has the hatred in america shifted from Bush to the people around Bush? Or do most americans who are against our current gov't still focus on Bush alone... The way I see it Bush isn't savy/smart enough to pull this off.... but the people around him definatly are (and they're fucking evil too).
emperor not emporer.
Indeed.
I think Bush was basically the failed son who got thrown into politics and had a lot to prove. He failed at everything in life and knew he wasn't worthy, but turned to GOD. He truly is a moral man who wanted to believe God had a destiny for him. Then 9/11 hit. He didn't know shit about management or the world, so he was easily manipulated.
Colin Powell... in the months before invasion of iraq... COULDNT GET A ONE ON ONE MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT. He had to leverage Condi Rice (who barely got him the meeting) to do it for him, and when Powell finally got to talk privately with Bush... there was Cheney in the room, sitting next to the President.
Can you imagine how fucked up that is? The Secretary of State... ffs.
(and the only guy in the admin with military experience, mind you)
Bush has said he's going to write a book (lawl), but i dont think he'll be pointing fingers internally. He places too much on loyalty and i think he's truly delusional at this point about having made right decisions. It will be drivel about faith, leadership and only mild reflection... trying to retro-actively lower the bar on the rationalizations for iraqi war (i.e. saddam was a bad guy, iraq will be a better place some day because of the invasion, etc).
I think the hatred in the USA is a mixed bag.
Many have seen Bush as a pawn of Cheney from day one. That's the mainstream joke, yet i dont think it removes Bush from criticism. It just shows that folks take him to be a weak minded leader outside his cowboy posturing. I thikn Bush's memoir will try to solidify that he was the real decision maker. Yawn.
Folks hate the BUSH ADMINISTRATION in general. Rightly so.
I wonder if all those people are going to try and get pardon's from him as he exists office. I definatly think he's snapped out of his 'yes man' state - and probably has started to realize how manipulated he was. If you've seen the way he acts when he speaks now, he's definatly changed somehow - to me it apears that he's started to realize what he's done, how he was manipulated, and how he will be remembered. He definatly does not look like he wants/enjoys his job anymore, and he looks like the last thing he wants to do is be infront of a camera anymore.
I hope he doesn't pardon anyone in the administration, and does write a book pointing fingers, and testifies against the people. Thats the only way he can try to correct the history books, and public opinion.
Of course, i guess he has to care about public opinion to want to do this... This shit kinda reminds me of the movie JFK... and how they manipulated johnson.