BUSH's LIES ARE AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENCE

[kpete]

POLITICS/Seattle Weekly
When Presidents Lie
by Geov Parrish

One by one, President Bush's lies are unraveling—the lies used to justify talk of mushroom clouds over America, the lies that led a majority of Americans to believe Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. The yellowcake uranium in Niger. The weapons stories peddled by Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi's and Ahmad Chalabi's goons. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi operatives in Prague. The aluminum tubes for processing uranium. All these are now known to be lies, intelligence that had been discredited and discarded by the CIA or State Department before being seized as war rationales by the eager chicken hawks of the White House Iraq Group.

Once stripped away, there remains not one shred of evidence that in 2002–03 Iraq posed any threat whatsoever to the security of the United States—much less an imminent threat, which is the only rationale, under American and international law, that makes it permissible to short-circuit the diplomatic process and launch an unprovoked invasion. We now know all this, too late for more than 2,000 American soldiers and untold scores of thousands of Iraqis.


But Democrats like John Kerry and John Edwards, who are only now slowly coming around to criticizing the war, have themselves to blame as well. History and common sense told us at the time that there was a high probability the White House was lying. Such Democrats and Republicans owed it to themselves, their party, their constituents, and their country to question and investigate White House claims far more closely than they did.


The lies of George W. Bush's White House are, in my opinion, an impeachable offense. I've said so for two and a half years. But if there is no "Iraq Syndrome"—if Democrats as well as Republicans seize upon these misdeeds but then continue to call for the casual projection of American military power anywhere and everywhere in the world—then the lives lost in Iraq really will have been in vain.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0548/051130_news_geovparrish.php

[mmonk]

1. yes Parrish, among other things.

"...if Democrats as well as Republicans seize upon these misdeeds but then continue to call for the casual projection of American military power anywhere and everywhere in the world—then the lives lost in Iraq really will have been in vain."

exactly.

[Deep13]

2. I'll settle for that.

In the old days the penalty for treason was to be drawn and quartered.

[Benhurst]

3. Don't leave out any of the good stuff, Deep13. It was

HANGED, drawn and quarted.

:hi:

[Deep13]

4. It is the judgment of this court...

...that you be hanged by the neck, but not until dead and that your body yet living be removed from the gibbet and that your entrails be drawn and burnt before your eyes and your limbs struck from your body and may God have mercy on your soul.

[Benhurst]

5. In England they also used to ...

to castrate traitors the night before their execution so they wouldn't go to their fate as "men."

[JuniperLea]

6. Brutal!

Yet, Bush is so deserving:)

[Toots]

7. It doesn't matter if they were lies or not Congress acted in an unconstitu

The US Constitution is very explicit in that only the US Congress can take America to war. They can not transfer that power to another person without breaking the Constitution. Every single congressperson that voted for IWR voted for an unconstitutional act. Whether there was truth or lies about Iraq. If what was said was true then the US Congress needed to act but they decided instead to transfer their authority to Bush* which goes entirely against the Constitution and they all swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. This is what they need to be upbraided over not voting for war but voting to transfer a vested power unconstitutionally...