THE FOLLOWING TEXT IS FROM A USER GENERATED CONVERSATION AT THE FRESNO BEE'S WEBSITE. I POSTED MY RESPONSE IN THE CORRECT ORDER THAT IT WOULD HAVE APPEARED ON THE BEE'S WEBSITE. DUE TO THE NUMBER OF LINKS ON MY RESPONSE, THEIR SERVER WOULD NOT ALLOW IT TO BE POSTED:
Misrepresenting the Al qaeda-Iraq Connection From New American by Thomas R. Eddlem 2-9-04
Colin Powell's recent admission that the Bush administration had no "concrete evidence" tying Saddam Hussein's regime to al-Qaeda was a full reversal of his statement to the United Nations Security Council on February 5, 2003. In that speech, Powell stated: "Iraq officials deny accusations of ties with al Qaeda. These denials are simply not credible." More importantly, the specifics cited by Bush and Powell were--at best--deceptive. For example, when Mr. Bush stated in his February 8, 2003 radio address that a "terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner ... runs a poison and explosive training camp in northeast Iraq," he failed to mention that the area in question was in Kurdish-held territory, outside Saddam Hussein's control.
Bush on 9-27-02: “The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations, and there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq,” Bush said Thursday after a meeting with House members to promote a congressional resolution authorizing the president to use force against Iraq.
"In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent," the Committee chairman, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, said on releasing the 172-page report. "As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed."
Council on Foreign Relations March/April 2006 The greatest discrepancy between the administration's public statements and the intelligence community's judgments concerned not WMD (there was indeed a broad consensus that such programs existed), but the relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda.
FROM CNN REPORT: Bush and top aides publicly made 935 false statements about security risk posed by Iraq. Bush made 232 false statements, including 28 about Iraq's links to alqaeda.
The War Crimes Act and Hamden vs Rumsfeld The Bush Administration knew that it was violating this Act along with the Geneva Conventions. In their argument that members of Al qaeda didn't qualify for Geneva protections, they were forced to acknowledge that there had been instances wherein captured individuals had been subjected to "enhanced" interrogation, which is the buzzword for torture. Thanks to precedent set by the United States, Russia, France and Brittain after WW2, the leaders of a nation that condone and authorize the use of unlawful tactics towards human beings can be held criminally liable for the actions of their subordinates, which is what happened following the Nuremburg trials. BUSH IS SEEKING IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION
The Bush administration is fully aware of these facts and has been working diligently to find any available loophole, even to the point of issuing a pardon for himself, so that he can avoid US prosecution for his actions. That pardon does not prevent The Hague from pursuing further actions, or governments of the countries that had citizens arrested by the US and tortured. US EMBASSY BRIEF ON TORTURE
Bush Authorizes Illegal Strikes into other Countries
Obstruction of Justice Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee today that President Bush personally halted an internal Justice Department investigation into whether Gonzales and other senior department officials acted within the law in approving and overseeing the administration's domestic surveillance program. FROM NATIONAL JOURNAL
RECKLESS DISREGARD FOR THE LIVES OF AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND OTHER LIVES Soldiers Killed: 4136 Wounded: 30182
Number of Iraqi's Killed: from 655,000 to 1.2 million (from military actions, civil infighting and sectarian violence) since invasion. FROM CNN REPORTS
Reference Documentaries: "Taxi to the Dark Side" : "Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers" : "Uncovered: The War on Iraq"--Each documents war crimes, cover ups and more. If you can watch these documentaries and still make excuses for what has transpired, then you must seek counseling immediately!
Cat's got your tongue Bryan? Gary Callaway | 11.26.08 - 10:03 pm | #
Bryan,
No can you list in detail the 17 UN resolutions that Saddam violated prior to Gulf War II in 2003 with the same "legal pulpit" in mind? Sid | 11.24.08 - 9:57 pm | #
Ah crap Bryan. I posted a response to you but I think it got lost in the ether.
Let me try again:
I honestly appreciate all your effort, but here's my problem:
You provide the text of a few laws, but you fail to provide specific examples of the Bush Administration violating them.
"9/11 linked to Iraq". WHEN? I've been paying attention and I've NEVER heard this stated by Bush or his people. I don't know anyone who thinks this. Guide me to the text of a speech or document that makes this claim.
Outright lie: "Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in". He sure jerked 'em around though.
Reckless disregard: "Iraq is a grave and gathering threat". Can't you remember the Clinton's, Albright, Cohen, Feinstein saying the same thing? Should we hang 'em all?
War crimes. What war crimes Bill? GITMO? The actions of a few rogue soldiers, who were prosecuted for their offenses?
Obstruction of justice? Show me the evidence. PLEASE provide me with something more than your feelings, Bill.
Bring it on. I'm waiting. Gary Callaway | 11.24.08 - 9:29 pm | #
Well done Bryan. Lots of effort. But here's my problem.
You provide the text of a few laws that you believe the Bush Admin violated, but you leave out specific examples of the violations.
Provide me with a specific example of the Administration linking 9/11 to Saddam or Iraq. I've payed attention and I've NEVER heard this connection being put forth. Lead me to the text of a speech or document that makes this claim.
"Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in". You claim this is a lie?Certainly you will remember how the inspectors were being jerked around by Iraqi officials.
Reckless disregard: "Iraq is a grave and gathering threat". Bryan, I remember those words being coming from Bill and Hillary clinton, Diane Feinstein, Madeline Albright,etc. Lets hang 'em all shall we.
War crimes? What are you talking about? GITMO? A few out of control individuals who were prosecuted for their offenses.
Obstruction of justice? Bring it on. Prove it. Give me some verifyable examples.
If bush, Cheney, or anyone in their admin could be proven to have violated the law, BELIEVE ME, there'd be a pack of lawyers jumping on it.
So come on. Give me something more than your feelings.
I will give you a couple of examples: Title 18, USC 371: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States is a specific federal crime prohibited by Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. Put simply, it is an agreement to use deceit and misrepresentation to "obstruct or impair" the normal functioning of government. It has been charged numerous times, including against defendants in the Watergate case and the Iran/contra scandal.
What are some examples of Bush's and Cheney's misrepresentations? Bush, Cheney and their top aides made hundreds of misrepresentations to deceitfully convince people to accept their plan. Here are a few examples:
Deliberate Misrepresentation- The linking of Iraq and 9/11
Outright Lie- "Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in."
Reckless Disregard - "Iraq is a Grave and Gathering Danger"
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
Bush is on record lying several hundred times to get us into the war.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441§ 2441. War crimes
(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
Prohibited conduct listed under this code includes: Cruel or inhumane treatment Torture murder sexual assault or abuse (abu graib) intentially inflicting bodily harm rape.
Title 18 Obstruction of Justice § 1519. Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy
Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
I will continue to compile the full list of over 32 federal violations, of which 4 carried the death penalty for someone found guilty under them because their actions have caused the death of American forces and loss of US assets.
This isn't a witch hunt, it's federal law. I didn't write them and I didn't break them. But, as a society that claims to be interested in "Justice for All" then no one can be above the law, especially our President. Bryan Galt | Homepage | 11.23.08 - 9:35 pm | #
To Brian Your disrespect, ingratitude, and disloyalty of our military men and women is blaring loud in your statement: "I don't think that just because they gave a half-hearted effort to protect America."
I'd like to see you say that face to face, to one of our soldies and/or their families who have sacrificed so much to protect our country, and our Constitution.
Its people like you who spin lies about other people lieing, then suggest we shoot our President. Sick, really sick. redpeach | 11.23.08 - 5:44 pm | #
Question for Bryan Galt. What laws did Bush break, specifically. Gary Callaway | 11.23.08 - 3:49 pm | #
Thanks for the feedback Arch.
I've had lots of co-workers and neighbors respond positively to my letter and I've even recieved a phone call from a woman who says she's going to cut it out and save it.
I've learned to ignore partisan spin and instead simply look at facts. I'm stunned at the separate reality that many liberals exist in. Whatever they imagine, exists to them. Fortunately, their credibility suffers in the bargain.
With only 200 words available, I had to leave out Bush's legacy of record low unemployment, steady GDP growth, rising wages, lower taxes (which contrary to the "separate reality", have shifted the tax burden even more onto upper income earners), higher student test scores resulting from "No Child Left Behind" (fact), etc. Maybe I'll have to write a sequel.
The recent economic downturn is being blamed on Bush, but any honest look at the lead up to these events, puts the blame squarely on liberal action designed to increase low income and minority home ownership. Again, Bush warned early in his term that we were headed for a train wreck, but he was ignored.
If you'll recall, also Bush tryed to set the stage for Social Security reform, but was stifled. Watch the Democrats try to blame it on him when it gets to a crisis stage.
Anyway, that's all history now, it's now time to resist the slide into repressive socialism. Hang in their friend. Gary Callaway | 11.23.08 - 10:16 am | #
redpeach, if you can find any reference to our countryman, our soldiers or our country in my statement, then youo have some incredible reading abilities.
It wasn't all that long ago that attacking the Constitution or even threatening to do so would be consider treason.
I suggest that loyalty to the government is not the same thing as loyalty to its foundations, which is the Constitution.
Without it, we have nothing. bryan galt | 11.22.08 - 7:06 pm | #
Arch, Thank you for bringing to light these truths. Do not give the post by bryan gult an oz of consideration. He is a willing victim of the Hate-Bush syndrome that has affected so many Americans. It is an absolute national shame, radicals like Galt think and say about our leaders, our countryman, our soldiers, and our country. His statement saying Bush should be shot is example of how far he has fallen off the ledge into hatred, and shows his absolute lack of loyalty to his country. redpeach | 11.22.08 - 10:48 am | #
If anyone truly feels that Bush did well enough to get a pass on all the things that he botched, or broke the laws on, then we are required as a moral and just society to open the gates of every prison in America and let those people out too.
Frankly, I am willing to bet that there are plenty of good people who made bad decisions in there, even people who were doing "good" in the eyes of their friends, family and communities.
But, in America we rarely let the good in someone's heart get greater value than even a single illegal act, much less the monumental and ongoing acts of crimes that Bush has committed.
Just for the record, I believe that any President who has attacked the constitution in the manner that Bush has removed from office and maybe even shot, even if the he/she was someone that I originally respected or admired.
I don't think that just because they gave a half-hearted effort to protect America cannot and must not allow them to escape getting justice for their actions. bryan galt | 11.22.08 - 5:04 am | #
Misrepresenting the Al qaeda-Iraq Connection From New American by Thomas R. Eddlem 2-9-04 Colin Powell's recent admission that the Bush administration had no "concrete evidence" tying Saddam Hussein's regime to al-Qaeda was a full reversal of his statement to the United Nations Security Council on February 5, 2003. In that speech, Powell stated: "Iraq officials deny accusations of ties with al Qaeda. These denials are simply not credible." More importantly, the specifics cited by Bush and Powell were--at best--deceptive. For example, when Mr. Bush stated in his February 8, 2003 radio address that a "terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner ... runs a poison and explosive training camp in northeast Iraq," he failed to mention that the area in question was in Kurdish-held territory, outside Saddam Hussein's control. Bush on 9-27-02: “The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations, and there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq,” Bush said Thursday after a meeting with House members to promote a congressional resolution authorizing the president to use force against Iraq. <a href=" <a href="www.alternet.org href? "%20originalAttribute='"href"%20originalPath="%3CA%20href="'> Iraq Threat</a>
Council on Foreign Relations March/April 2006 The greatest discrepancy between the administration's public statements and the intelligence community's judgments concerned not WMD (there was indeed a broad consensus that such programs existed), but the relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda. <a href="< >CNN<>> Bush">www.cnn.com>CNNhttp://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/index.html?iref=newssearch">CNN</a> Bush and top aides publicly made 935 false statements about security risk posed by Iraq. Bush made 232 false statements, including 28 about Iraq's links to alqaeda.
The War Crimes Act and Hamden vs Rumsfeld The Bush Administration knew that it was violating this Act along with the Geneva Conventions. In their argument that members of Al qaeda didn't qualify for Geneva protections, they were forced to acknowledge that there had been instances wherein captured individuals had been subjected to "enhanced" interrogation, which is the buzzword for torture. Thanks to precedent set by the United States, Russia, France and Brittain after WW2, the leaders of a nation that condone and authorize the use of unlawful tactics towards human beings can be held criminally liable for the actions of their subordinates, which is what happened following the Nuremburg trials. <a href="< >http: JOURNAL</a>
Comments