by Peter Dale Scott
In August 2007, Congressman Peter DeFazio, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, told the House that he and the rest of his Committee had been barred from reviewing parts of National Security Presidential Directive 51, the White House supersecret plans to implement so-called “Continuity of Government” in the event of a mass terror attack or natural disaster. ( 1 )
Norm Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, commented, “I cannot think of one good reason” for denial. Ornstein added, “I find it inexplicable and probably reflective of the usual, knee-jerk overextension of executive power that we see from this White House.” ( 2 )
The story, ignored by the mainstream press, involved more than the usual tussle between the legislative and executive branches of the U.S. Government. What was at stake was a contest between Congress’s constitutional powers of oversight, and a set of policy plans that could be used to suspend or modify the constitution.
There is nothing wrong with disaster planning per se. Like all governments, the U.S. government must develop plans for the worst contingencies. But Congress has a right to be concerned about Continuity of Government (COG) plans refined by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld over the past quarter century, which journalists have described as involving suspension of the constitution. ( 3 )
In the 1980s, a secret group of planners inside and outside the government were assigned, by an Executive Order, to develop a response to a nuclear… Continue reading
March 31, 2008
By Paul Craig Roberts
The US Congress, the US media, the American people, and the United Nations,
are looking the other way as Cheney prepares his attack on Iran.
If only America had an independent media and an opposition party. If there
were a shred of integrity left in American political life, perhaps a third act
of naked aggression–a third war crime under the Nuremberg standard–by the
Bush Regime could be prevented.
On March 30, the Russian News & Information Agency, Novosti, cited “a
high-ranking security source: “The latest military intelligence data point
to heightened US military preparations for both an air and ground operation
According to Novosti, Russian Colonel General Leonid Ivashov said “that
the Pentagon is planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran’s military
infrastructure in the near future.”
The chief of Russia’s general staff, Yuri Baluyevsky, said last November that
Russia was beefing up its military in response to US aggression, but that the
Russian military is not “obliged to defend the world from the evil Americans.”
On March 29, OpEdNews cited a report by the Saudi Arabian newspaper Okaz, which
was picked up by the German news service, DPA. The Saudi newspaper reported
on March 22, the day following Cheney’s visit with the kingdom’s rulers, that
the Saudi Shura Council is preparing “national plans to deal with any sudden
nuclear and radioactive hazards that may affect the kingdom following experts’
warnings of possible attacks on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactors.”… Continue reading
by David Ray Griffin
“The Commission” by Philip Shenon has performed a great public service, letting the world know that there are good reasons to be suspicious of “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The main problem is the fact that the Commission was almost entirely under the control of Philip Zelikow, who was closely connected to the Bush White House. Although my book “Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11″ revealed some of the facts about Zelikow that showed him to be one of the worst possible choices for the Commission’s executive director, Shenon has revealed even more facts.
It was already known that Zelikow had been on the National Security Council (NSC) with Condoleezza Rice during the administration of the first President Bush; that he wrote a book with her while the Republicans were out of power; that he helped her make the transition from the Clinton to the Bush NSC; and that he wrote at her request the 2002 version of “National Security Strategy of the United States of America” (NSS 2002), which enunciated a new doctrine of preemptive war that was used, in Shenon’s words, to “justify a preemptive strike on Iraq.”
But now Shenon reveals more: that in applying to Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, for the position of executive director, Zelikow failed to reveal some of his conflicts of interest, especially his authorship of NSS 2002 and his role on the transition team; that he continued, contrary to his promise,… Continue reading
It is now undeniable that the Federal Government has failed us completely.
We have asked our representatives to hold the Bush Administration accountable.
Instead, they have blocked the Impeachment movement all over our country.
As we approach the anniversary of the illegal Iraq invasion, we have not given
up on the idea of holding the criminals in the Bush Administration or those
who enable them accountable. Justice can only come through peace. Since the
Bush administration has insisted they will not end the occupation while they’re
in office, if we wish for the occupation to end before 1/20/09, we must impeach.
There is something that YOU can do. It is now time for Plan B.
Impeach for Peace researched a method for impeaching the President or Vice
President using a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the U.S.
House of Representatives (“Jefferson’s Manual”). This document actually
empowers individual states to initiate the impeachment process. All that’s required
is that the MN House and Senate pass an impeachment resolution.
So spread the word, tell your friends, your family, your coworkers, your allies.
We will hold a rally Monday, March 17th, on the steps of the Capitol Building
in St Paul. When we are finished with the rally, we will storm the Capitol Building.
We shall demand that the Minnesota House and Senate immediately pass a resolution
calling for the Impeachment of George W Bush and Dick… Continue reading
March 5, 2008
by Dave Lindorff
In Mansfield, CT, the town where I grew up, there were no police. Oh, there
was a resident State Police officer with a big cruiser, but mainly, his job
was patrolling the stretch of four-lane highway that ran north of us between
Hartford and Boston. The University of Connecticut, a sprawling ag school at
the time, had a few police, but their job was limited to patrolling the campus.
If something happened, like a kid stealing candy from Phil’s, the local
Five and Ten, or if there was some kind of domestic dispute, it fell to the
local town constable—an elected position—to handle.
Up in the town of Marlboro, VT, population 1000, the town constable may have
a new job. If President George W. Bush, or Vice President Dick Cheney should
happen to stop by there, perhaps to pick up some freshly made maple syrup or
maple sugar candy, he’d have to arrest them. Last night, the citizens
of Marlboro voted in their annual town meeting to indict both men for war crimes,
obstruction of justice and perjury. The vote was 43-25, with three abstentions.
Residents of nearby Brattleboro, population 12,000, did the same, voting 2012-1795.
It might be a challenge for the local constabulary, given the gaggle of stone-faced,
ear-wired, Secret Service agents in their dark sunshades who encircle and protect
the president and his regent whenever the two suspects travel out of the secure
confines of the White House and Executive Office… Continue reading
BRUSSELS, European Parliament, 26th February 2008.
Mark Dermul (www.911belgium) reporting.
On Tuesday 26th February, Europarliamentarian Guilietto Chiesa invited his colleagues and the press to attend the screening and debate of the Italian-produced documentary named ‘ZERO, an investigation into the events of 9/11′. Object of the screening was to create political awareness of the faulty official investigation into the events by the 9/11 Commission.
Besides Mr Chiesa, the panel consisted of Japanese parliamentarian Fujita, Dr David Ray Griffin, film distributor Tim Sparke & the director and producers of the film.
After his opening statements, Mr Chiesa welcomed his guest speakers. Then he pointed out that he was unable to find any distributor in his native country of Italy and was happy to find a company in the UK, led by Mr Tim Sparke, to handle worldwide distribution of this important film. ‘It is important to realize,’ he emphasized ‘that the movie was made thanks to contribution and donations of hundreds of citizens who feel a new investigation is more than warranted.’ No less than 450 people worked on this documentary on a voluntary basis. They never received any kind of payment. Their reward is the movie itself, which they feel is an instrument to create awareness and a means to provoke a political debate in Europe.
Since the movie projector didn’t work, Mr Chiesa invited the public to ask questions until the technical problems were solved and we could start watching the movie.
A new report on the August 30 incident in which six nuclear-armed advanced
cruise missiles were effectively “lost” for 36 hours, during which
time they were, against all regulations, flown in launch position mounted on
a pylon on the wing of a B-52H Stratofortress, from Minot AFB in North Dakota
across the continental US to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana, has left unanswered
some critical questions about the event.
Directed by retired Air Force Gen. Larry D. Welch, the task force’s Report
on the Unauthorized Movement of Nuclear Weapons found plenty wrong with the
way the US military handles its nuclear weapons, but appears to have dealt lightly
with the specific incident that sparked the inquiry—only giving it a few
According to the report, when nuclear-capable missiles are placed onto a pylon
assembly (in the case of the B-52, these pylons can hold six missiles), procedures
call for a clear distinction to be made as to whether they are armed with nuclear
weapons or with dud warheads. In the storage bunker, pylons with dud warheads
are supposed to be encircled with orange cones like those used by highway repair
crews, and placards announcing that the warheads are duds are supposed to be
hung on all four sides. This reportedly was not done, leaving no distinction
between one pylon containing six nuclear-armed missiles, and two others that
had missiles carrying nukes.
A second failure was in record keeping. According to regulations for handling
nuclear weapons, every step… Continue reading
by David Ray Griffin
This essay is the second in a series of articles written by Dr. David Ray Griffin for The Canadian. This particular one is an abbreviated version of Chapters 2 and 3 of Dr. Griffin’s 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, March, 2008).
With regard to the morning of 9/11, everyone agrees that at some time after 9:03 (when the South Tower of the World Trade Center was struck) and before 10:00, Vice President Dick Cheney went down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), sometimes simply called the “bunker,” under the east wing of the White House. Everyone also agrees that, once there, Cheney was in charge—that he was either making decisions or relaying decisions from President Bush. But there is enormous disagreement as to exactly when Cheney entered the PEOC.
According to The 9/11 Commission Report, Cheney arrived “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58” (The 9/11 Commission Report [henceforth 9/11CR], 40). This official time, however, contradicts almost all previous reports, some of which had him there before 9:20. This difference is important because, if the 9/11 Commission’s time is correct, Cheney was not in charge in the PEOC when the Pentagon was struck, or for most of the period during which United Flight 93 was approaching Washington. But if the reports that have him there by 9:20 are correct, he was in charge in the PEOC all that time.
Mineta’s Report of Cheney’s… Continue reading
Last night, I took to the floor of the House of Representatives (Ed., transcript appended)and outlined our case as to why this Congress must hold immediate hearings on Rep. Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment.
I didn’t do it alone: I was armed with nearly 200,000 signatures of support from you and so many others. Please watch the video (below) of this speech and forward it to as many people as possible. I’ve posted it on the front page of www.WexlerWantsHearings.com
This morning, I delivered letters to all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives, urging them to support Cheney Impeachment Hearings. You can read a copy of both the letter to my colleagues as well as the letter to Chairman Conyers I am asking them to sign at:
Additionally, I have delivered to my colleagues in the Judiciary Committee a list of names who have signed up at www.WexlerWantsHearings.com. We now have almost 200,000 patriotic Americans dedicated to this cause.
We are beginning to make some progress. I have urged the Democratic Leadership to enforce the subpoenas being ignored by Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten by holding them in contempt of Congress.
This fight is not over. You must continue the pressure on your representatives and the media, or Congress will take no notice. That would be a historic mistake — one we must prevent Congress from making.
We stand at a critical juncture in our efforts. Forget all of those arguments that it is too late or that we have run out of time.…Continue reading
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
The official story of 9/11 is riddled with internal contradictions. One of these contradictions involves the question of how long President Bush remained in classroom in Sarasota, Florida, on the morning of 9/11.
Bush was there to publicize his education policy by being photographed listening to students read. He arrived at the school at 8:55 AM, at which time he reportedly first learned that a plane had struck one of the Twin Towers. Dismissing the crash as an accident, Bush said that they would go ahead and “do the reading thing anyway.”
Bush entered the second-grade classroom of teacher Sandra Kay Daniels at about 9:03. At about 9:06, the president’s chief of staff, Andrew Card, came in and whispered in Bush’s ear, telling him, Card later reported, “A second plane hit the second Tower. America is under attack.”
What Happened Next
Thanks to Michael Moore’s film Fahrenheit 9/11, which came out in 2004, the world knows what happened next: Bush remained sitting there minute after minute after minute.
Journalists, however, had reported Bush’s strange behaviour much earlier. On September 1, 2002, for example, Jennifer Barrs had reported in the Tampa Tribune that, after Card whispered in Bush’s ear, the president picked up his book and read with the children “for eight or nine minutes.” In his 2002 book Fighting Back, Bill Sammon, the White House correspondent for the Washington Times, said that even after the reading lesson was over, Bush… Continue reading
December 28, 2007
MONTPELIER, Vermont (AP) — President Bush may soon have a new reason to avoid left-leaning Vermont: In one town, activists want him subject to arrest for war crimes.
Kurt Daims of Brattleboro, Vermont, speaks Friday about his movement against Bush and Cheney.
A group in Brattleboro is petitioning to put an item on a town meeting agenda in March that would make Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney subject to arrest and indictment if they visit the southeastern Vermont community.
“This petition is as radical as the Declaration of Independence, and it draws on that tradition in claiming a universal jurisdiction when governments fail to do what they’re supposed to do,” said Kurt Daims, 54, a retired machinist leading the drive.
As president, Bush has visited every state except Vermont.
The town meeting, an annual exercise in which residents gather to vote on everything from fire department budgets to municipal policy, requires about 1,000 signatures to place a binding item on the agenda.
The measure asks: “Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictment for consideration by other municipalities?”
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. The press office did not immediately respond to an e-mail.
Support for the measure is far from universal, even in Vermont, where the state Senate voted earlier this year to support impeaching the president. Anti-war rallies are regular occurrences here, and “Impeach Bush” bumper stickers are common.…Continue reading
What is Probably in the Missing Tapes
By Naomi Wolf, Monday, December 13, 2007*
To judge from firsthand documents obtained by the ACLU through a FOIA lawsuit, we can guess what is probably on the missing CIA interrogation tapes — as well as understand why those implicated are spinning so hard to pretend the tapes do not document a series of evident crimes. According to the little-noticed but extraordinarily important book Administration of Torture: A Documentary Record from Washington to Abu Ghraib and Beyond (Jameel Jaffer and Amrit Singh, Columbia University Press, New York 2007), which presents dozens of original formerly secret documents – FBI emails and memos, letters and interrogator "wish lists," raw proof of the systemic illegal torture of detainees in various US-held prisons — the typical "harsh interrogation" of a suspect in US custody reads like an account of abuses in archives at Yad Vashem.
More is still being hidden as of this writing — as those in Congress now considering whether a special prosecutor is needed in this case should be urgently aware: "Through the FOIA lawsuit," write the authors, "we learned of the existence of multiple records relating to prisoner abuse that still have not been released by the administration; credible media reports identify others. As this book goes to print, the Bush administration is still withholding, among many other records, a September 2001 presidential directive authorizing the CIA to set up secret detention centers overseas; an August 2002 Justice Department memorandum advising the CIA about the lawfulness of waterboarding [Italics mine; nota bene, Mr.…Continue reading
By Representatives and Members of the Judiciary Committee:
Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
On November 7, the House of Representatives voted to send a resolution of impeachment of Vice President Cheney to the Judiciary Committee. As Members of the House Judiciary Committee, we strongly believe these important hearings should begin.
The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution. The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.
Now that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan has indicated that the Vice President and his staff purposefully gave him false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert agent to report to the American people, it is even more important for Congress to investigate what may have been an intentional obstruction of justice. Congress should call Mr. McClellan to testify about what he described as being asked to “unknowingly [pass] along false information.” In addition, recent revelations have shown that the Administration including Vice President Cheney may have again manipulated and exaggerated evidence about weapons of mass destruction — this time about Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
Some of us were in Congress during the impeachment hearings of President Clinton. We spent a year and a half… Continue reading
Ellsberg Says Sibel Edmonds Case ‘Far More Explosive Than Pentagon Papers’
‘Gagged’ FBI Whistleblower, Risking Jail, Says American Media Has Refused Her
Offer to Disclose Classified Information, Including Criminal Allegations, Information
Concerning ‘Security of Americans’
Charges Several Mainstream Publications Have Been Informed of ‘Full Story’
by Other FBI Leakers Nearly a Year Ago, Have Remained Mum…
Brad Friedman, The BRAD
“I’d say what she has is far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers,”
Daniel Ellsberg told us in regard to former FBI translator turned whistleblower
“From what I understand, from what she has to tell, it has a major difference
from the Pentagon Papers in that it deals directly with criminal activity and
may involve impeachable offenses,” Ellsberg explained. “And I don’t
necessarily mean the President or the Vice-President, though I wouldn’t be surprised
if the information reached up that high. But other members of the Executive
Branch may be impeached as well. And she says similar about Congress.”
The BRAD BLOG spoke recently with the legendary 1970′s-era whistleblower in
the wake of our recent exclusive, detailing Edmonds’ announce that she was prepared
to risk prosecution to expose the entirety of the still-classified information
that the Bush Administration has “gagged” her from revealing for the
past five years under claims of the arcane “State Secrets Privilege”.
Ellsberg, the former defense analyst and one-time State Department official,
knows well the plight of whistleblowers. He himself was prepared to spend his
life in prison for… Continue reading
October 11, 2007. Ralph Nader, activist, author and lecturer, shared his views in the matter of the “Next Steps for the Peace Movement,” at a panel discussion on Oct. 11, 2007. The event was held at Bus Boys and Poets, in Washington, D.C. It was a fundraiser for DemocracyRising.US. For more information, please go to: www.democracyrising.us. Mr. Nader’s latest book is entitled “The Seventeen Traditions.”
by Ralph Nader
Friday, October 12. 2007
The meeting at the Jones Library in Amherst, Massachusetts on July 5, 2007 was anything but routine. Seated before Cong. John Olver (D-MA) were twenty seasoned citizens from over a dozen municipalities in this First Congressional District which embraces the lovely Berkshire Hills.
The subject–impeachment of George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney.
The request–that Cong. Olver join the impeachment drive in Congress.
More than just opinion was being conveyed to Cong. Olver, a then 70 year old Massachusetts liberal with a Ph.D. in chemistry from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These Americans voted overwhelmingly during formal annual town meetings in 14 towns and two cities in the First District endorsing resolutions to impeach the President and Vice President.
Presented in the form of petitions to be sent to the Congress, the approving citizenry cited at least four “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
They included the initiation of the Iraq war based on defrauding the public and intentionally misleading the Congress, spying on Americans without judicial authorization, committing the torture of prisoners in violation of both federal law and the U.N.…Continue reading
In case you’d like to remind representatives of their Federal Oath of Office when you make the calls . . .
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
*Impeachment Next Step: Judiciary Committee HEARINGS*
(Ed.: What follows has been adapted, with appreciation, from Democrats.com. Lest you think this is a “Democrats-only” issue, please see the two articles at the end of this call to action.)
Thanks to Dennis Kucinich, Tuesday was an historic day for impeachment!
As promised, Kucinich requested a floor vote on H.Res. 333, and as expected, BushDemocrat Leader Steny Hoyer moved to table the bill. And then all hell broke loose as 165 Republicans voted with Kucinich and 85 other brave Democrats to force a debate on impeachment and thereby embarass Nancy Pelosi.
To block that debate, Hoyer moved to send H.Res. 333 back to the Judiciary Committee, and that motion passed with the support of all but 5 Democrats (Kucinich, Bob Filner, Marcy Kaptur, Maxine Waters, and Ed Towns). A live blog of the proceedings is posted at http://impeachcheney.org
Representatives Wexler and Shea-Porter have now announced support for hearings:
In an e-mail to supporters on November 7, 2007, Representative Robert Wexler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, stated that
I will urge the Judiciary Committee to schedule impeachment hearings immediately and not let this issue languish as it has over the last six months.…
You wouldn’t know it if you just watch TV news or read the corporate press,
but this past Tuesday, something remarkable happened. Despite the pig-headed
opposition of the Democratic Party’s top congressional leadership, a majority
of the House, including three Republicans, voted to send Dennis Kucinich’s long
sidelined Cheney impeachment bill (H Res 333) to the Judiciary Committee for
The vote was 218 to 194.
Now the behind-the-scenes partisan maneuvering that preceded that vote was
arcane indeed, with Kucinich first exercising a member’s privilege motion to
present his stymied impeachment bill to the full House, only to have Speaker
Nancy Pelosi arrange for a colleague (Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD) to
offer a motion to table it. The Republicans, anxious to embarrass the Speaker,
threw a wrench into that plan, though, by voting as a bloc to oppose tabling.
Since Kucinich already has 22 co-sponsors for his bill, it was clear that the
tabling gambit would fail. As soon as that became apparent, rank-and-file Democrats,
unwilling to be seen by their constituents as defending Cheney, rushed to change
their votes to opposing the tabling motion. In the end, tabling failed by 242
to 170 with 77 Democrats supporting a pleasantly surprised Kucinich.
To avoid a floor debate on the merits of impeaching the eminently impeachable
Vice President Cheney, Pelosi and her allies then moved to send Kucinich’s bill
directly to the Judiciary Committee. They were joined by three Republicans,
including maverick Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX).
Now… Continue reading
During today’s [11/5/07] White House press briefing, spokeswoman Dana Perino condemned Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s declaration of “emergency rule” in Pakistan. She said that the administration is “deeply disappointed” by the measure, which suspends the country’s constitution, and believes it is never “reasonable” to “restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism”:
Q: Is it ever reasonable to restrict constitutional freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism?
MS. PERINO: In our opinion, no.
Watch it at http://thinkprogress.org/2007/11/05/musharraf-freedom/.
The Bush administration never suspended the U.S. Constitution; instead, it interpreted the document so broadly as to provide all the powers they desired. A look at some of the ways the White House has overstepped its constitutional powers in the name of national security:
First Amendment: In September, a federal judge ruled that the FBI’s use of secret “national security letters” to obtain citizens’ personal data from private companies for counterterrorism investigations “violate[d] the First Amendment and constitutional provisions on the separation of powers.”
First Amendment, Fourth Amendment: In Aug. 2006, a federal district court in Detroit ruled that the Bush administration’ss NSA warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional, violating the “separation of powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III.”
Article I: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales attempted to justify the administration’s detainee policy by claiming, “There is no express grant… Continue reading