← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · sylver
Thread ID: 20328 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2005-09-22
2005-09-22 01:50 | User Profile
WHY IS GEORGE W. BUSH ABOVE THE LAW?
[img]http://tvnewslies.org/assets/images/scalesjust.jpg[/img]
No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. Theodore Roosevelt
THE BRAVADO
Once again, a massive failure of leaderships has been displayed in Washington. And, once again, George Bush has escaped an independent inquiry into his irresponsible actions. For the fourth time in less than five years, the President of the United States and his cohorts been placed above the law. That, in itself, is a major American disaster.
When, if ever, could this have happened before? When else could one administration have pulled off four major scandals; four devastating, potentially impeachable screw-ups, and never have to answer for them? When else, in the United States of America, could so many crimes of an elected president and his cadre remain unexplained, unchallenged, and unpunished? When? Probably never. When in history have the media sat silent through criminal scandal at highest levels of government?
Weââ¬â¢re not talking mistakes, here. Weââ¬â¢re not talking poor judgment or failed policies. Weââ¬â¢re not talking politics as usual, with its underhanded array of pork and perks. But we are talking about very serious violations of the public trust, and very possibly the law, perpetrated by the elected leader of this nation and his handlers.
Even more amazingly, we are talking about the shameful reality that not a single one of these offenses has been investigated by a truly independent, non-political, neutral commission, armed with subpoena powers and adequate funding, and answerable ONLY to the people of the United States of America. Not a single one.
In every one of the scandals in question, calls for a nonpartisan, independent commission were thwarted by the very people accused of misdeeds and crimes. Something is really wrong when an American president who is accused of misconduct can determine who will delve into the facts behind his own actions? Something also is really wrong when incriminating evidence can be redacted and withheld from the public by the very people incriminated by that evidence.
Something is even more seriously wrong when cover up after cover up goes unreported and unchallenged by the same corporate media that spent eight years in relentless pursuit of scandals related to Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Paula Jones and that awful threat to national security, Monica Lewinsky.
Of course, the targets of the media, and ultimately a Special Prosecutor, were Bill and Hillary Clinton, not George W. Bush, and accountability was not yet a dirty word. And of course, in that far more innocent time, challenging the president was not considered to be an act of treason. Tragically, today, it is.
THE SCANDALS
Below are capsulated descriptions of the four most egregious events that took place under the watch of President George W. Bush. Serious questions have been raised about the role of the administration in each of these incidents. The public has a right to hear the answers to these questions and to know the extent to which the president may have been involved.
George W. Bush was the man at the helm when each of the following occurred. For that reason alone he is fully accountable to the people of the United States for a clear and rational explanation of the role of his administration in each of the outrages below:
1. The devastating attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. 2. The WMD hoax designed to gain public support for an unprovoked, illegal and ineptly planned invasion and occupation of Iraq. 3. The criminal outing of a CIA operative Valerie Plame by a person or persons in the Bush White House. 4. The profound failure of the US government, FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
Every one of these actions resulted in real or potential death and other harm to uncalculated numbers of people. Each action, therefore, raises valid questions of criminal culpability and/or negligence by the President himself or people closely connected to the White House.
As a result, the moves by the administration to thwart, postpone, or control investigations into these travesties are highly suspect to say the least. And yet, the moves to do so were successfully maneuvered at each and every turn.
For THE STING and THE FACTS BEHIND THE SCANDALS: [url]http://tvnewslies.org/html/why_is_george_w__bush_above_th.html[/url]
2005-09-22 10:57 | User Profile
What a bunch of leftist bull****! :thumbd:
2005-09-22 12:50 | User Profile
Gabrielle,
Yes, it is from a Leftwing site. At the same time there is alot of truth in these charges to various degrees. My complaint about this column is that it leaves out the most serious charge against the corrupt and Stupid One. Bush's aiding and abetting the violations of our border laws. As bad as the Iraq War is, the US can recover from that. Changing the nation's demographics to minority White is something the US can't recover from. I've heard that under the Bush Administration that more illegals have come to this country than all the years under Clinton. That's pretty bad. What is even worse is Bush's outright treason by his quiet promotion of a merger with Canada and Mexico. [url=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19196&highlight=nafta]CFR's Plan To Merge U.S., Canada & Mexico[/url]
One day, if there is still an America to write a history of, historians will refer to these years not as a golden age, but as the Bush-Clinton years where corruption and treason not only occured, but were applauded by so many.
2005-09-22 13:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorious]Yes, it is from a Leftwing site. At the same time there is alot of truth in these charges to various degrees. My complaint about this column is that it leaves out the most serious charge against the corrupt and Stupid One. Bush's aiding and abetting the violations of our border laws. As bad as the Iraq War is, the US can recover from that. [/QUOTE] I second the motion of the distinguished gentleman from Atlanta. (See, Sert, we could be Senators . . . ) :smile:
One day, if there is still an America to write a history of, historians will refer to these years not as a golden age, but as the Bush-Clinton years where corruption and treason not only occured, but were applauded by so many.[/QUOTE] They will note that the Baby Boom went 0 for 2 in its initial Presidential at bat . . . let's hope the Boomers don't strike out in 2008.
Crap, who is there to vote FOR? So many to vote against .
Nader in 2008? runs screaming into traffic
Will Tancredo run?
AE
2005-09-22 15:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Gabrielle,
At the same time there is alot of truth in these charges to various degrees. [/QUOTE]
There is truth to [B][I]one[/B][/I] charge, that being the flim flam used to get us into the "war for Israeli happiness". The attacks on 9/11 were not a matter of government policy and occured when Chimp Face was in office a little over eight months. Why didn't the author include in his drivel, that it was the Clinton administration administration that dropped the ball - even to the point of not grabbing Bin Laden when they had the chance?
The "outting" of CIA clerk Plame, likewise was not the result of administration policy and can hardly be called a "scandal".
As concerns FEMA and the Fed response to Katrina, the government did more than was required either legally or morally ( using OUR money, of course ). Disaster relief is the job of the state and local governments, with the Feds playing an [I]assisting [/I] role.
2005-09-22 15:35 | User Profile
Opera,
This is the operative term: [B]..."various degrees."[/B]
What exactly would you call Bush's dealings about the border and Mexico? As far as Clinton goes, fine. Put him on trial as well.
2005-09-22 18:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Opera,
This is the operative term: [B]..."various degrees."[/B]
What exactly would you call Bush's dealings about the border and Mexico? As far as Clinton goes, fine. Put him on trial as well.[/QUOTE] I was responding to the "scandals". There was no mention of the border. When it comes to that subject however, I agree with Pat Buchanan in that Chimp Face's refusal to honor his oath of office and protect the borders is an impeachable offense.
2005-09-22 21:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OPERA96]I was responding to the "scandals". There was no mention of the border. When it comes to that subject however, I agree with Pat Buchanan in that Chimp Face's refusal to honor his oath of office and protect the borders is an impeachable offense.[/QUOTE] So why don't the Senators and Reps on the Left move for impeachment? Where are their testicles? What holds them back? They spend a lot of time giving the Pres a hard time, where's the meat?
AE