The final nail in the coffin

[Bullypulpit]

<center><h1><a href=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html>IT'S IMPEACHMENT TIME!</a></h1></center>

In a memo labeled "<b>SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY</b>" and dated 7/23/2002, lies evidence that has led, up to this point, 87 US House members to sign a <a href=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002265205_intel06.html>letter</a> demanding an explanation from the Bush administration about the content of this memo. Especially, <blockquote>Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But <i><b>the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy</b></i>. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. <b>There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action</b>.</blockquote>

The administration was "fixing" the intel around the policy. In other words, the intel was being cherry-picked and spun to fit the policy. Any intel which didn't support the policy or contradicted it was quietly shunted aside and ignored.You know, like the findings of the IAEA under Mohammed el-Baradei...UNSCOM's Scott Ritter...But this administration has never let inconvenient facts stand in its way.

America went to war in Iraq based upon a fabric of lies. If the information in this memo does not substantiate charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" against Dubbyuh and members of his administration...nothing will. We can take the Constitution out of its case and burn it, as it will no longer be needed...the Republic will have died.

The followint link is to the FULL TEXT of the memo.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

 

[dmp]

 

[CSM]

<center><h1><a href=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html>IT'S IMPEACHMENT TIME!</a></h1></center>

In a memo labeled "<b>SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY</b>" and dated 7/23/2002, lies evidence that has led, up to this point, 87 US House members to sign a <a href=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002265205_intel06.html>letter</a> demanding an explanation from the Bush administration about the content of this memo. Especially, <blockquote>Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But <i><b>the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy</b></i>. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. <b>There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action</b>.</blockquote>

The administration was "fixing" the intel around the policy. In other words, the intel was being cherry-picked and spun to fit the policy. Any intel which didn't support the policy or contradicted it was quietly shunted aside and ignored.You know, like the findings of the IAEA under Mohammed el-Baradei...UNSCOM's Scott Ritter...But this administration has never let inconvenient facts stand in its way.

America went to war in Iraq based upon a fabric of lies. If the information in this memo does not substantiate charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" against Dubbyuh and members of his administration...nothing will. We can take the Constitution out of its case and burn it, as it will no longer be needed...the Republic will have died.

How interesting. I read the article you linked to and did not see the part you quoted...but then I am old and senile I guess...or did you add that yourself?

 

[CSM]

Ah, reading the related articles I see where the partial quote comes from. Interesting that the intelligence and facts were in relation to the evidence for connecting Iraq to 9/11 and not necessarily the whole justification for war. You very deftly lifted and skewed that.

Nice try Bully, you are getting better at being disingenuous (sp?)!

 

[Avatar4321]

<center><h1><a href=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html>IT'S IMPEACHMENT TIME!</a></h1></center>

In a memo labeled "<b>SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY</b>" and dated 7/23/2002, lies evidence that has led, up to this point, 87 US House members to sign a <a href=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002265205_intel06.html>letter</a> demanding an explanation from the Bush administration about the content of this memo. Especially, <blockquote>Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But <i><b>the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy</b></i>. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. <b>There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action</b>.</blockquote>

The administration was "fixing" the intel around the policy. In other words, the intel was being cherry-picked and spun to fit the policy. Any intel which didn't support the policy or contradicted it was quietly shunted aside and ignored.You know, like the findings of the IAEA under Mohammed el-Baradei...UNSCOM's Scott Ritter...But this administration has never let inconvenient facts stand in its way.

America went to war in Iraq based upon a fabric of lies. If the information in this memo does not substantiate charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors" against Dubbyuh and members of his administration...nothing will. We can take the Constitution out of its case and burn it, as it will no longer be needed...the Republic will have died.

Bully, you should realize by now that if you are trying to argue the President lied about something. you should have some evidence to support that. Like perhaps what exactly it is that he lied about and what was so wrong with pursuing regime change in Iraq. I mean its not like it was the paradise you would have us believe.

 

[no1tovote4]

Bully, you should realize by now that if you are trying to argue the President lied about something. you should have some evidence to support that. Like perhaps what exactly it is that he lied about and what was so wrong with pursuing regime change in Iraq. I mean its not like it was the paradise you would have us believe.

Especially when Regime Change had been official US policy since 1998 when the Congress passed the resolution and the President signed it....

Maybe we should reimpeach Clinton for making it US policy and especially for the reasons that were listed.... (psst.... *cough* WMD *cough*).

 

[fuzzykitten99]

what's wrong bully? i don't see a reply yet from you...
whassamatta? did your mouse bite your fingers?

 

[OCA]

Bush will never be impeached, there is nothing to impeach for.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Ah, reading the related articles I see where the partial quote comes from. Interesting that the intelligence and facts were in relation to the evidence for connecting Iraq to 9/11 and not necessarily the whole justification for war. You very deftly lifted and skewed that.

Nice try Bully, you are getting better at being disingenuous (sp?)!

Sorry, I amended the post to include a direct link to the full text of the memo. You will find the section quoted in the second full paragraph. Further on in the memo you'll find that it goed on to state that:

<blockquote> It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. <b>Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran</b>.</blockquote>

And golly guess what...North Korea is going to soon have the capability to mount their nukes on a balistic missile and Iran will soon have nuclear capability.

The only ones who have lifted and skewed anything are Dubbyuh and his merry band in their "fixing intelligence and facts" to support their policy of regime change in Iraq.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Get over it Bully, Bush will not be impeached and Blair has been re-elected so there as not as many buffoons out there like yourself!

Even if it was all based on lies it don't matter, the U.N. is not functional enough and has proved it time over again! Iraq had to be dealt with one way or another.

Mohammed el-Baradei?? Scott Ritter?? what a joke those two are, credibility can not be considered with these two names.

The only reason Dubbyuh won't be impeached is because the Republican controlled Congress can't be counted on to fulfill its Constitutional duty in bringing articles of impeachment against Dubbyuh and those members of his administration who were complicit in this fraud.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bush will never be impeached, there is nothing to impeach for.

Hows about waging wars of aggression in defiance of the US Constitution, the UN Charter and the rule of law?

Or perhaps, lying to the citizens of the US, Congress and the UN in providing false rationales for war?

Still not enough...? Rejection of, and withdrawal from, treaties protecting protecting peace and human rights.

You want more...? Abrogation of habeas corpus through the indefinite detention without charge and without legal representation of US citizens.

Still more...? How about sending our troops into harms way on a tissue of lies that make those about the Tonkin Gulf, promulgated by the Johnson Administration, look like an innocent, little white lie.

No matter how you want to slice it or dice it, Dubbyuh and his merry band have violated their oaths to support and defend the Constitution and are unworthy to hold the offices they now occupy. They are the "enemies of the Constitution" you spend so much time prattling about OCA. The more patriots who come forward with more evidence of the duplicity involved in the run up to this war, especially here in the US, the sooner we can put paid to these traitors.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bully, you should realize by now that if you are trying to argue the President lied about something. you should have some evidence to support that. Like perhaps what exactly it is that he lied about and what was so wrong with pursuing regime change in Iraq. I mean its not like it was the paradise you would have us believe.

The whole rationale for war with Iraq was built upon a tissue of lies, and this memo is but the smallest tip of the iceberg.

 

[Stephanie]

The whole rationale for war with Iraq was built upon a tissue of lies, and this memo is but the smallest tip of the iceberg.

So what are you going to tell, those 150,000 service, men and women, over there right now, call them up and say, hey we(bully and all the anti war haters). We concluded that Bush and Blair lied, and we think you all should quit, and come home. I hope to god, they never see posts like yours oversees, and see how hateful and disgusting you all can be.......

 

[Merlin]

Hows about waging wars of aggression in defiance of the US Constitution, the UN Charter and the rule of law?

Or perhaps, lying to the citizens of the US, Congress and the UN in providing false rationales for war?

Still not enough...? Rejection of, and withdrawal from, treaties protecting protecting peace and human rights.

You want more...? Abrogation of habeas corpus through the indefinite detention without charge and without legal representation of US citizens.

Still more...? How about sending our troops into harms way on a tissue of lies that make those about the Tonkin Gulf, promulgated by the Johnson Administration, look like an innocent, little white lie.

No matter how you want to slice it or dice it, Dubbyuh and his merry band have violated their oaths to support and defend the Constitution and are unworthy to hold the offices they now occupy. They are the "enemies of the Constitution" you spend so much time prattling about OCA. The more patriots who come forward with more evidence of the duplicity involved in the run up to this war, especially here in the US, the sooner we can put paid to these traitors.

If I have read the Constitution correctly, we have a Republic here in the United States. Majority rules. He is doing exactly what the majority of us want him to do. He could be a little tougher on most of the issues, but I guess we can't have everything. Traitors??? Bullypulpit, go look in your mirrow and you will be staring at a true traitor!!!!!

 

[Bullypulpit]

If I have read the Constitution correctly, we have a Republic here in the United States. Majority rules. He is doing exactly what the majority of us want him to do. He could be a little tougher on most of the issues, but I guess we can't have everything. Traitors??? Bullypulpit, go look in your mirrow and you will be staring at a true traitor!!!!!

Does the misleading and manipulation of "the majority" through spinning and fabrication of intel, altering the facts, withholding information, and outright propaganda truly constitute the will of the majority? No. It only constitutes an easily distracted and uninformed majority all to willing to cede their responsibilities to a seemingly strong authority figure. Hitler and Stalin played much the same game.

To be honest, I can't decide which I find more disturbing...The willingness of so many here to be distracted by non-issues such as whether same-gender couples wish to marry or abortion. Or, the willingness of so many here to let this Administration pass on its violations of Constitutional and treaty obligations as well as those of international law. Both have their roots in the same bitter well...fear and ignorance...Both are symptoms of a civilization in decline. And to think, they impeached Bill Clinton for consensual sex in the Oval Office. Seems rather trivial in comparison, don't you think? Lying about a blow-job versus lying about the rationale for war...Not even close to being moral equivalents.

As for the traitor remark, I'll let that pass since you and OCA seem to be drinking the same kool-aid.

 

[dilloduck]

Does the misleading and manipulation of "the majority" through spinning and fabrication of intel, altering the facts, withholding information, and outright propaganda truly constitute the will of the majority? No. It only constitutes an easily distracted and uninformed majority all to willing to cede their responsibilities to a seemingly strong authority figure. Hitler and Stalin played much the same game.

To be honest, I can't decide which I find more disturbing...The willingness of so many here to be distracted by non-issues such as whether same-gender couples wish to marry or abortion. Or, the willingness of so many here to let this Administration pass on its violations of Constitutional and treaty obligations as well as those of international law. Both have their roots in the same bitter well...fear and ignorance...Both are symptoms of a civilization in decline. And to think, they impeached Bill Clinton for consensual sex in the Oval Office. Seems rather trivial in comparison, don't you think? Lying about a blow-job versus lying about the rationale for war...Not even close to being moral equivalents.

As for the traitor remark, I'll let that pass since you and OCA seem to be drinking the same kool-aid.

Look at this in perspective, Bully. We coulda had Kerry and that hot babe who's money he married. He woulda given the country away to Europe by now. We woulda apologized to Iraq and Saddam and be giving Mexicans 10,000 a piece bonus to come help pick American tomatoes.

 

[Bullypulpit]

All based on your opinion here Bully, these allegations are only heresay like most of the stuff that you post!

Like him or not, and I can say this till I'm blue in the face before I'll ever get through to you but Iraq was going to be dealt with one way or another!!!

By hook or by crook...Eh? You've had too much of the kool-aid as well. How sad.

 

[Merlin]

Does the misleading and manipulation of "the majority" through spinning and fabrication of intel, altering the facts, withholding information, and outright propaganda truly constitute the will of the majority? No. It only constitutes an easily distracted and uninformed majority all to willing to cede their responsibilities to a seemingly strong authority figure. Hitler and Stalin played much the same game.

To be honest, I can't decide which I find more disturbing...The willingness of so many here to be distracted by non-issues such as whether same-gender couples wish to marry or abortion. Or, the willingness of so many here to let this Administration pass on its violations of Constitutional and treaty obligations as well as those of international law. Both have their roots in the same bitter well...fear and ignorance...Both are symptoms of a civilization in decline. And to think, they impeached Bill Clinton for consensual sex in the Oval Office. Seems rather trivial in comparison, don't you think? Lying about a blow-job versus lying about the rationale for war...Not even close to being moral equivalents.

As for the traitor remark, I'll let that pass since you and OCA seem to be drinking the same kool-aid.

Treaty obligations are not important and should be ignored. What in the hell does international law have to do with us???? They can stick international laws where they can't reach with their elbow. And as for lying to the public, I consider myself ignorant on a lot of issues, but I supected some of the things he was up to. And I like it!!!!!

 

[insein]

Hows about waging wars of aggression in defiance of the US Constitution, the UN Charter and the rule of law?

Define "rule of Law" and how it applies to US interests. Then tell me what UN Charter we breached considering it was the UN that presented the most damaging evidence against Saddam throughout the 90's. Finally, how was the Constitution "defied" when the Congress voted to grant the president the power to goto war?

Or perhaps, lying to the citizens of the US, Congress and the UN in providing false rationales for war?

Where are these lies? I have yet to see a one. No WMDs? Thats debatable with evidence showing that syria received many shipments pre-war that they could not have manufactured themselves. Saddam was waging genocide? Thats been proven by the mass graves found in Iraq. Protecting US security? Saddam was unfriendly to the US and was found to have communications with our current enemy Al Queda and Terrorists in general. With his possession of WMD's combined with his hatred of the US, an alliance could have and probably was made to attack the US through his subvergant allies.

Still not enough...? Rejection of, and withdrawal from, treaties protecting protecting peace and human rights.

Such as? Geneva convention does not apply to terrorists as they are "non-uniformed combatants." Geneva only applies to opposing armies of states. Terrorists pose as non-combatants and attack crowds of civilians to inflict fear into a population.

You want more...? Abrogation of habeas corpus through the indefinite detention without charge and without legal representation of US citizens.

Despite all the moaning and groaning, i have yet to hear or see a single case of a "US citizen" being detained against their will. I have seen many terrorists of foreign lands to which they have no official sanction being captured and questioned. Show me some proof since you seem to be hell bent on Impeachment. The seriousness of the charge will not do.

Still more...? How about sending our troops into harms way on a tissue of lies that make those about the Tonkin Gulf, promulgated by the Johnson Administration, look like an innocent, little white lie.

Now i think your allowing your true colors to shine through. Comparison of Vietnam and Iraq is what you and your kind have been after since day one. You need to equate the 2 in order to prove that your life has purpose. The only time aging hippies felt alive was during their protests of Vietnam. If they can convince people that Iraq is Vietnam or wors, then they feel their lives validated. More of a psychological problem on the part of the accuser then an impeachment statement for the accusee.

No matter how you want to slice it or dice it, Dubbyuh and his merry band have violated their oaths to support and defend the Constitution and are unworthy to hold the offices they now occupy. They are the "enemies of the Constitution" you spend so much time prattling about OCA. The more patriots who come forward with more evidence of the duplicity involved in the run up to this war, especially here in the US, the sooner we can put paid to these traitors.

For all your antics and speeches, i wonder if youv'e ever read the Constitution. You might learn a thing or 2.

 

[sitarro]

Wow Bully,
I see that you are quoting that extraordinary paper , The Times of London . If they say it , it must be true ! They certainly wouldn't have an agenda against the Bush Administration . I just finished one of their editorials disguised as a news story about how that awful Bush has opened up all of the National forests to drilling , mining , and logging . . . nothing misleading there. They are still whining about the Kyoto rippoff that our extremely wise President kept us out of . That one act showed me that he has the balls to go against the people around the world with aims of taking our country down .
Who are you going to quote next , the National Equirer or Star ?