I'll preface this post by saying that this is not a radical departure from the point of this blog. However, I am no political activist. This story is a serious issue that the weak-kneed media is not giving due attention to. Consider this my first "editorial" post: if CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and other media outlets are going to sweep this story under the carpet, then I will be one of the sources that treats this issue with the gravity that it truly carries. If this blog will truly call itself "The Truth for Youth," this story is an example of that truth. If you have not heard about the report of the Bush Administration's deception of the American public, please scroll to the bottom of this post and click the top or bottom link to familiarize yourself and then read on.
The headlines are out. The trumpet has been sounded. The drums are beating. Treason, treason, treason.
Nine hundred and thirty-five. That is a large number. Imagine if you had a friend who, over the course of two years, lied to you... let's say for comparison's sake, fifty times. Imagine most of these lies were about another friend of yours, and they were so well done and believable that you were utterly deceived and destroyed your relationship with your second friend. Imagine that five or six years later, another one of your friends finds out that all of those things your first friend said about the second were lies. You would be pretty mad at the lying friend, right? If you still maintained contact with them, better yet if they were a close friend, you would probably lose all trust in them and likely become their enemies. Yet, they have already made themselves your enemy when they lied to you all those years ago.
This is the context of the Bush Administration's lies to America.
This is the most serious galvanization of the trust of the American people in history, period.
The Centre for Public Integrity calls it "an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanised public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses." A campaign consisting of nine hundred and thirty-five specific cases of duping the American people into believing Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction. For the record, nine hundred and thirty-five equals one to two lies per day for three years from the Bush Administration. At the time, most of the readers of this post were in their early teens, so the magnitude of this situation is significantly harder to grasp; we have no real frame of reference for this "campaign." However, it does not take a political science degree to know when an unprecedented act of corruption has occurred. To use a familiar colloquial phrase, it does not take a rocket scientist to understand (with a primer) that this campaign of deliberate lies sets a most dangerous precedent for the American people.
A reference to "galvanization" and any other thing would cause serious uproar. Again, if your friend was found lying to you even fifty times you would cut off ties with them, so why, in a matter of global importance, is a war that was started by nine hundred and thirty-five lies not being prosecuted?
Why has our spineless Congress not taken action? Where is the conviction of politicians in Washington when an executive, which I might remind you the Founders intended to be constantly restrained, is allowed to run rampant: lying to the American people, lying about those lies, and orchestrating a war based on those lies? Where is the voice of the American people, and why has it not risen up and demanded action against this tyrant we call our President? I hate to be rhetorical, but what is a tyrant if not a leader of a nation who lies to his people for his own gain?
Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States of America reads, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
At this point, I would like to establish my right as an American citizen to interpret the Constitution. Of course, my interpretation has no real world weight; that power lies solely with the Supreme Court. However, I will give non-Supreme Court interpretation precedence with a quote from transcript dated from year ago, January 16th, 2007. It deals with the suspension of habeas corpus for prisoners from Guantanamo Bay.
---
Senator Specter (R-Pennsylvania): Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?
Alberto Gonzalez, (Former) Attorney General: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended.
---
Alright, so now that we have established that non-Supreme Court justices can have almost comically misguided interpretations of the Constitution, I will try my hand. (For the record, "habeas corpus" is the right to challenge someone when they accuse you of a crime of being mistaken about it- that principal is a tenet of our legal system and by extension, our democracy.)
If the Constitution states that the President should be impeached in the case of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors," then I suppose we have to define treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors. Treason, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "the betrayal of a trust." Well, actually, the Constitution defines treason in Article 3,
Martin Bormann, Karl Donitz, Hans Frank, Wilhelm Frick, Hans Fritzsche, Walther Funk, Hermann Goring, Rudolf Hess, Alfred Jodl, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Wilhelm Keitel, Konstantin von Neurath, Erich Raeder, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Alfred Rosenberg, Fritz Sauckel, Baldur von Schirach, Arthur Seyss-Inquart, Albert Speer, Julius Streicher. All names of men prosecuted at the Nuremberg Trials for the crimes of "participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of crime against peace," "war crimes," "crimes against humanity," or "planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace."
Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan. Names of men and a woman who must be held accountable for their lies against the American people, regardless of their knowledge or lack of knowledge about the lies they were committing. At the very least, an extensive investigation must be done NOW, not after the administration leaves, but NOW, today, January 23rd, 2008.
Regardless of your stance on the war, the fact remains that the pretense for war was the Weapons of Mass Destruction and the imminent threat that the Bush Administration proposed Saddam Hussein was. President Bush in 2005 said "much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong." He went on to say "it was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power." This is the flimsy justification for the lies against the American public, and does not change the fact that we entered this war believing we were dismantling a serious threat to the American people, not to unseat Saddam Hussein.
The argument is clear. Treason has been committed, the government of the American people has been sold out to criminals, and Congress must act, or the American people will soon be acting for it.
**NOTE: These are MY views and MY VIEWS ONLY. I, Josh, the author of this post will take all criticism. If you don't agree with these views, please don't punish my fellow editors by ignoring our blog. Just ignore me. Thank you.
Sources used:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23098129-401,00.html?from=mostpop
http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Default.aspx?src=home&context=overview&id=945
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/washington/23database.html?ei=5124&en=8874f78501ec940b&ex=1358830800&adxnnl=1&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink&adxnnlx=1201140338-N6cIDyP/LZsVYAnjAbOOhA
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/19/gonzales-habeas/
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A2Sec4
7 comments:
I REALLY enjoyed reading this article.
I feel the same way. Regardless if you are a Democrat, Republican, or Independent the Bush Administration must be called accountable for their lies that they told the American Public. Democrats and Republicans (ex. Clinton & Obama) were tricked by this administration accusations.
I hate to sound radical, but justice needs to happen and change must come. It's almost as if our government feels they can do anything without any consequences. Well, like our society and religion teaches us that with every action comes a consequence.
I understand that these are YOUR opinions and YOUR opinions only, but I was under the impression that this website was created to present UNBIASED information on politics in America. Although I generally support the Bush Administration, I am trying my best to confront this situation with a sense of neutrality. I have been an avid reader of this blog since it was created because the writers consistently presented reliable, impartial information. Thus, I came here looking for that sought after information. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. I realize that these are YOUR opinions and YOUR opinions only, but I was under the impression that this website was created to present UNBIASED information on politics in America.
While I understand that you want me to refrain from punishing all of the editors of this blog, I no longer know if I can trust this website to present me (and other readers) with dependable information.
@ anonymous:
I would encourage you to read the sources presented at the end of the post and try to pass better judgment on whether or not this post can be viewed as "biased." Never once do I mention Bush being a Republican; this is not a partisan issue. The study that this post was based off of is from the Center for Public Integrity: a nonpartisan third party source.
Furthermore, I believe it is my (and our, as blog writers) duty to present important information such as this in a light that is appropriate for its context. My feeling is that the light is impeachment and prosecution, and these comments certainly exist to provide argument against or argument for that. Covering our ears and eyes and pretending the Bush Administration is, excuse my French, shitting daisies.
I encourage you to read the sources provided, and come back to this comment sheet with an argument for or an argument against impeachment. I appreciate your concern that our blog is becoming "biased," but I consulted with our two right-leaning authors and they had no problem with this post going up. Any other criticism (writing style, information, sources) is highly encouraged and appreciated. Thank you.
Okay, first off: I love you Josh and this blog =]
Secondly, whatever I have probably felt about the going ons in the capital was neatly put in your post, and I thank you for being so honest about it.
Thirdly: Dear anonymous reader, everything else in the blog has been taken into account with a sense of neutrality. I think its fair to say that if the blog authors vividly point out that a certain post is of their own opinion, they are entitled to do so, without fear of tainting the neutrality of their blog. With a warning in place, readers can choose to read or not read that certain opinionated post. If I may be so bold as to say that you too are entitled to your own opinions and this is the place to do so. So please, use the comment box to leave your own political opinions and let the authors do the same.
Lastly: Josh, might I suggest a section for the authors' own opinionated posts. This way, the blog can still maintain the unbiased neutrality it was created to have, but still express some form of opinion.
I do not see a post like this as being biased at all. The fact is that he lied. It could be misconstrued as a biased post, but there is only one party to, for lack of a better term, attack in this issue.
Also, I agree with Jacob. A section where you, the authors, can express your opinions without going against the mission statement of the blog would be very interesting, especially considering how opinionated Josh and Marco are.
Just put them under a certain section and the readers of this blog can read at their own risk.
Excellent post, Mr. Healy. Seriously, bravo.
The American people, for the most part, is a lazy, ill-informed population. Many fail to realize that they have a voice, a choice in how their government is run, and that is exactly why this sort of thing is allowed to occur in our nation. It disgusts me how many times I hear things like, "I'm not voting, it doesn't even count," or "I don't pay attention to that sort of stuff," when the conversation turns to the 2008 election or current events in general. And I mean, this is on the campus of a major university, the sort of place that is usually considered to be a hotbed of change, progressivism, idealism, and so on. An ill-informed and disinterested electorate leads to the election and actions of candidates like G.W. Bush and his cronies.
The sad fact is that this disinterest and lack of information is going to allow Bush and his administration to simply fade out of power completely unscathed, without being forced to be held accountable for their transgressions.
Truth, principles and values are never found without seeking them, and questioning, and measuring the alternatives.
Democracy requires citizenship engagement sufficient to be willing to seek the truth upon which to base the trust that a free people have every right to expect in a republic of the officials it elects as leaders.
Denying that is merely the illusion of democracy, and the falsity of government with the qualified judgment sufficient to lead any nation, much less one with America's history.
Government taken for granted is government waste, and the waste of the power Americans hold as reserved to themselves for self government.
Americans have always had to dig for their democracy to plow their fields for planting freedom, not allowing the weeds of dictatorship to usurp that freedom.
Post a Comment