The 9/11 Bill of Rights ~ Voice of Freedom

The President of Iran's Letter To President Bush

2009-04-27T14:47:00.000-07:00

Translated by "Le Monde"
Posted 05/09/06

Mr George Bush,

President of the United States of America

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions
that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political
forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have
prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might
bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God,

Feel obliged to respect human rights,
Present liberalism as a civilization model,
Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs,
Make “War and Terror” his slogan,
And finally,
Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which
Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern,
But at the same time,
Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on
the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire
village, city or convey set ablaze.

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around
one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed,
close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens
broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions
of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of
thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away
from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much
psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer
depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and
their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples
of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to
begin with.

Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the
announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was
toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy
about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was
supported by the West.

Mr President,

You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can theses actions be
reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of
Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness...

Full letter: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12984.htm

FBI says, “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

2009-04-27T14:16:00.000-07:00

June 6, 2006 – This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Mr. Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Usama Bin Laden.[1] (See bottom of this web page for Most Wanted page) In the e-mail, the question is asked,

“Why doesn’t Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of September 11, 2001?”

The FBI says on its Bin Laden web page that Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people. The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” Bin Laden by saying, “In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.”

On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11.

The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Full story: http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html

Third plane WTC 911 - never seen

2009-04-26T12:08:00.000-07:00

New Democrat Donkey, Tshirts and gifts

2008-10-07T17:35:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama, Buttons and stickers

2008-09-23T18:43:00.000-07:00

Get Barack Obama bumper stickers here.

Provocateurs Call For Violence To Demonize Legitimate Protesters At DNC

2008-08-27T08:05:00.000-07:00

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, August 26, 2008

The spectacle of two individuals caught on camera calling for violence and then affiliating themselves with peaceful demonstrators in Denver has raised questions about who is behind apparent “agent provocateurs,” intent on demonizing legitimate protest groups at the Democratic National Convention.

Several news outlets reported that nationally syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones had “threatened” neo-conservative pundit Michelle Malkin during a confrontation between the two yesterday.

The same websites then claimed that people affiliated with Jones had screamed “Kill Michelle Malkin” and advocated violence against the columnist.

“Jones and his lackeys chased Michelle around the protest threatening to kill her!” claims the Gateway Pundit blog.

Other news sources, including People’s Press Collective and Political Byline, re-iterated the false charge and alleged that Jones had threatened Malkin.

In reality, the You Tube video of the incident shows two young men in court jester outfits approach Jones, claim they are fans of his and then put their arms around him for a photo opportunity. They then go off camera and advocate the murder of Malkin, continuing their threats despite the best efforts of Jones’ colleague Luke Rudkowski to make them cease their outburst.

Tellingly, the man in green (and Jones’ “lackey” according to the reports) also shouts, ”Alex Jones is a capitalist stooge.”

Impeachment not our business, council says

2008-08-27T03:47:00.000-07:00

Majority declines to support resolution asking Congress to act
By Robert Speer
roberts@newsreview.com
More stories by this author...

After listening to some 20 of his fellow Chicoans explain why they wanted Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Councilman Larry Wahl, a former Navy fighter pilot who served in Vietnam, had a blunt reply.

“We’re at war, folks, with a bunch of Islamofascist extremists who want us dead or back in the ninth century,” he declaimed, adding emphatically that he supported the president and vice president in the war on terrorism.

But Wahl wasn’t the only veteran in council chambers Tuesday night (Aug. 19). Michael Pike, a former Green Beret captain who served in Vietnam and Laos, also spoke, and he gave a first-hand account of why he believed impeachment was appropriate.

As part of his Special Forces training, to prepare him in the event he was captured, he was waterboarded—twice. “I can tell you it was the most terrible thing I’ve ever gone through,” Pike said. He was willing to climb a 10-foot barbed-wire fence that shredded his hands rather than go through it again. He said he’d also been subjected to electroshock, and waterboarding was worse.

The U.S. government’s use of torture such as waterboarding was one of the reasons a group calling itself the Chico Impeach Team approached the council, presented it with petitions containing more than 1,000 signatures, and asked it to support a resolution calling on Congress to initiate impeachment. Several California cities—including Santa Rosa, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Arcata and, naturally, Berkeley—have passed similar resolutions.

The Bush administration, with its warrantless wiretapping, suspension of habeas corpus, deceitful war-mongering, preemptive invasion of a sovereign nation (Iraq), secret “black sites” and use of torture, has shredded the Constitution and broken both American and international law, speakers charged.

In an initial PowerPoint presentation, Bill Donnelly, representing the Chico Impeach Team, argued that impeachment is a local issue because councilmembers take an oath of office to defend the Constitution. The Bush administration has put the Constitution in danger, and the council had a duty to act, he insisted.

Full Article: Impeachment not our business

Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 to Obama

2008-08-15T05:10:00.000-07:00

Published by Luke Rosiak on August 14, 2008 9:52 AM

During World War II, soldiers crouching in foxholes penned letters assuring their sweethearts that they'd be home soon. Now, between firefights in the Iraqi desert, some infantrymen have been sending a different kind of mail stateside: two or three hundred dollars -- or whatever they can spare -- towards a presidential election that could very well determine just how soon they come home.

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.

Despite McCain's status as a decorated veteran and a historically Republican bent among the military, members of the armed services overall -- whether stationed overseas or at home -- are also favoring Obama with their campaign contributions in 2008, by a $55,000 margin. Although 59 percent of federal contributions by military personnel has gone to Republicans this cycle, of money from the military to the presumed presidential nominees, 57 percent has gone to Obama.

Complete Article: The Center for Responsive Politics

Top CIA official confesses order to forge Iraq-9/11 letter came on White House stationery

2008-08-09T17:56:00.000-07:00

John Byrne
Published: Friday August 8, 2008

In damning transcript, ex-CIA official says Cheney likely ordered letter linking Hussein to 9/11 attacks

A forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks was ordered on White House stationery and probably came from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a new transcript of a conversation with the Central Intelligence Agency's former Deputy Chief of Clandestine Operations Robert Richer.

The transcript was posted Friday by author Ron Suskind of an interview conducted in June. It comes on the heels of denials by both the White House and Richer of a claim Suskind made in his new book, The Way of The World. The book was leaked to Politico's Mike Allen on Monday, and released Tuesday.

On Tuesday, the White House released a statement on Richer's behalf. In it, Richer declared, "I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document ... as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book."

The denial, however, directly contradicts Richer's own remarks in the transcript.

"Now this is from the Vice President's Office is how you remembered it--not from the president?" Suskind asked.

"No, no, no," Richer replied, according to the transcript. "What I remember is George [Tenet] saying, 'we got this from'--basically, from what George said was 'downtown.'"

"Which is the White House?" Suskind asked.

"Yes," Richer said. "But he did not--in my memory--never said president, vice president, or NSC. Okay? But now--he may have hinted--just by the way he said it, it would have--cause almost all that stuff came from one place only: Scooter Libby and the shop around the vice president."

"But he didn't say that specifically," Richer added. "I would naturally--I would probably stand on my, basically, my reputation and say it came from the vice president."

"But there wasn't anything in the writing that you remember saying the vice president," Suskind continued.

"Nope," Richer said.

"It just had the White House stationery."

"Exactly right."

Later, Richer added, "You know, if you've ever seen the vice president's stationery, it's on the White House letterhead. It may have said OVP (Office of the Vice President). I don't remember that, so I don't want to mislead you."

Full article: The Raw Story

Flashback: Seven years ago today, Bush received ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.’ memo.»

2008-08-08T15:48:00.000-07:00

Today marks seven years since the day President Bush received a President’s Daily Brief entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” (See the memo here.) At the time, Bush was vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, TX and stayed on vacation the rest of August 2001. Here’s how the administration reacted, according to the 9/11 Commission report:

"President Bush did not recall discussing the August 6 report with the Attorney General or whether Rice had done so."

"We have found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States."

DCI Tenet visited President Bush in Crawford, Texas, on August 17 and participated in the PDB briefings of the President between August 31 (after the President had returned to Washington) and September 10. But Tenet does not recall any discussions with the President of the domestic threat during this period.

The day after he received the memo, “Bush seemed carefree as he spoke about the books he was reading, the work he was doing on his nearby ranch, his love of hot-weather jogging, his golf game and his 55th birthday,” the Washington Post noted. Today — 2,557 days later — Bin Laden still remains free and “determined to strike in U.S.”

Article Source: Think Progress

Dick Cheney and 9/11

2008-08-02T11:32:00.000-07:00

How he planned a New Pearl Harbor

A New Strategy for a New World

2008-07-16T01:51:00.000-07:00

Barack will lead a new foreign policy based on restoring America's military strength and global respect, cooperating with allies, and reversing failed Bush policies. Scroll down for the full text of Barack's Speech.

Senator Barack Obama’s New Strategy for a New World

As Prepared For Delivery
Washington, D.C.
July 15, 2008

Sixty-one years ago, George Marshall announced the plan that would come to bear his name. Much of Europe lay in ruins. The United States faced a powerful and ideological enemy intent on world domination. This menace was magnified by the recently discovered capability to destroy life on an unimaginable scale. The Soviet Union didn't yet have an atomic bomb, but before long it would.

The challenge facing the greatest generation of Americans - the generation that had vanquished fascism on the battlefield - was how to contain this threat while extending freedom's frontiers. Leaders like Truman and Acheson, Kennan and Marshall, knew that there was no single decisive blow that could be struck for freedom. We needed a new overarching strategy to meet the challenges of a new and dangerous world.

Such a strategy would join overwhelming military strength with sound judgment. It would shape events not just through military force, but through the force of our ideas; through economic power, intelligence and diplomacy. It would support strong allies that freely shared our ideals of liberty and democracy; open markets and the rule of law. It would foster new international institutions like the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank, and focus on every corner of the globe. It was a strategy that saw clearly the world's dangers, while seizing its promise.

As a general, Marshall had spent years helping FDR wage war. But the Marshall Plan - which was just one part of this strategy - helped rebuild not just allies, but also the nation that Marshall had plotted to defeat. In the speech announcing his plan, he concluded not with tough talk or definitive declarations - but rather with questions and a call for perspective. "The whole world of the future," Marshall said, "hangs on a proper judgment." To make that judgment, he asked the American people to examine distant events that directly affected their security and prosperity. He closed by asking: "What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?"

What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?

Today's dangers are different, though no less grave. The power to destroy life on a catastrophic scale now risks falling into the hands of terrorists. The future of our security - and our planet - is held hostage to our dependence on foreign oil and gas. From the cave-spotted mountains of northwest Pakistan, to the centrifuges spinning beneath Iranian soil, we know that the American people cannot be protected by oceans or the sheer might of our military alone.

The attacks of September 11 brought this new reality into a terrible and ominous focus. On that bright and beautiful day, the world of peace and prosperity that was the legacy of our Cold War victory seemed to suddenly vanish under rubble, and twisted steel, and clouds of smoke.

But the depth of this tragedy also drew out the decency and determination of our nation. At blood banks and vigils; in schools and in the United States Congress, Americans were united - more united, even, than we were at the dawn of the Cold War. The world, too, was united against the perpetrators of this evil act, as old allies, new friends, and even long-time adversaries stood by our side. It was time - once again - for America's might and moral suasion to be harnessed; it was time to once again shape a new security strategy for an ever-changing world.

Imagine, for a moment, what we could have done in those days, and months, and years after 9/11.

We could have deployed the full force of American power to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all of the terrorists responsible for 9/11, while supporting real security in Afghanistan.

We could have secured loose nuclear materials around the world, and updated a 20th century non-proliferation framework to meet the challenges of the 21st.

We could have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in alternative sources of energy to grow our economy, save our planet, and end the tyranny of oil.

We could have strengthened old alliances, formed new partnerships, and renewed international institutions to advance peace and prosperity.

We could have called on a new generation to step into the strong currents of history, and to serve their country as troops and teachers, Peace Corps volunteers and police officers.

We could have secured our homeland--investing in sophisticated new protection for our ports, our trains and our power plants.

We could have rebuilt our roads and bridges, laid down new rail and broadband and electricity systems, and made college affordable for every American to strengthen our ability to compete.

We could have done that.

Instead, we have lost thousands of American lives, spent nearly a trillion dollars, alienated allies and neglected emerging threats - all in the cause of fighting a war for well over five years in a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

Full speech: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newstrategy

Judiciary Members Demand Answers from Attorney General on 9/11 Surveillance

2008-04-06T18:49:00.000-07:00

For Immediate Release
Contact: Jonathan Godfrey
April 3, 2008

(Washington, DC) - Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee Chairmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Robert "Bobby" C. Scott (D-VA) sent a letter to United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey demanding answers about a recent public statement claiming there was a pre-9/11 call from a terrorist safe house in Afghanistan that was apparently not intercepted by federal authorities.

The members also followed up on previous requests for an October 2001 Office of Legal Counsel memo providing legal analysis about the president's war powers. The letter notes: “The notion that the president can claim to operate under 'secret' powers known only to the president and a select few subordinates is antithetical to the core principles of this democracy."

The full text of the letter

Senator Barack Obama: 'A More Perfect Union'

2008-03-19T17:28:00.000-07:00

Information will be free: Wikileaks still up, despite order

2008-02-21T12:09:00.000-08:00

By Nate Anderson Published: February 19, 2008 - 10:37AM CT

Swiss banks have always taken their privacy seriously, and the Bank Julius Baer is no exception. On Friday, the bank obtained a US temporary restraining order against the site Wikileaks, which currently hosts a clutch of documents alleged to come from inside the bank. In addition, the judge issued a permanent injunction against Dynadot, the registrar for wikileaks.org, demanding that the site's information be locked and its domain name scoured from the Internet.

Bank Julius Baer calls itself the "leading dedicated wealth manager in Switzerland," and it's not good for dedicated wealth managers to be linked with scandal. The bank was unhappy about material hosted on Wikileaks that appears to show corruption in the bank's Cayman Islands branch. It filed a federal lawsuit against the site in San Francisco and has so far been on a roll in the case.

On February 15, the bank obtained a permanent injunction against Dynadot that requires the registrar to "lock the wikileaks.org domain name" and to "disable the wikileaks.org domain name and account to prevent access to and any changes from being made to the domain name and account information." Wikileaks.org does not currently resolve.

The order isn't particularly effective (the site can be accessed simply by going to wikileaks.be, wikileaks.de, and wikileaks.cx, among others), but the fact that it can happen seems incredible. Rather than just put a hold on the particular documents in question, a judge has attempted instead to remove the entire site from the Internet. Wikileaks was not present at the hearing where the decision was made, saying that it was notified only by e-mail and given just a few hours' notice. As is common in such situations, the order was essentially written by the bank and then adopted by the judge.

In addition to the Dynadot block, Wikileaks itself is ordered to remove all documents from the bank that "are internal non-public company documents" and to do so "whether or not such documents and information are authentic, semi-altered, semi-fraudulent or forged."

Based on the correspondence between Wikileaks and a US lawyer representing the bank, the bank appears to be claiming copyright over these internal documents. A lawyer for the bank complained repeatedly about the lack of a designated DMCA agent for Wikileaks and warned the site, "You act at your own peril" and "govern yourselves accordingly." (Biggest question raised by the letter: real lawyers actually write this sort of stage villain stuff?)

The restraining order against Wikileaks is temporary, and in the order Judge Jeffrey White notes that the group can fight the block during a February 29 hearing. Wikileaks says that it has several lawyers in San Francisco willing to work pro bono on the case.
Further reading:

* Correspondence between Wikileaks and the bank's lawyers
* The case was filed in California's Northern District, and the case number is 3:08-cv-00824-JSW
* The case has even caught the attention of media outlets as large as the BBC

“Loose Change Final Cut” on Google Video

2008-02-07T05:23:00.000-08:00

We here at Louder Than Words and Alex Jones Productions are proud to officially release “Loose Change Final Cut” on Google Video in the highest quality possible. Encouraging people to copy these films and hand them out, as well as hold screenings in Coffee Houses and Churches was a good start, but has not been enough in the past.

Our success in spreading awareness about the truth behind September 11th, 2001 is in large part with our ability to share our films freely through internet. We are hoping that all of you who have not seen the Final Cut will not only watch it, but email it to everyone you know, embed it on your Myspace or personal website, blog it, and post it on forums worldwide.

With the former Italian President saying it is well known within the intelligence community that 9/11 was a CIA and Mossad Op, and the Prime Minister of Japan and his cabinet being questioned about Insider Trading and the implosion of World Trade Center 7 by the opposition party, global interest in 9/11 truth is exploding.

If you decide today to share this information with everyone, family members may finally recieve answers to their many questions, and those who were criminally complicit may be tried and exposed. Its as easy as sending a link folks. Loose Change Final Cut puts the official government fable of 9/11 to rest, it truly is the nail in the coffin if you decide to be the hand that holds the hammer.

LCFC is available in high-quality at www.prisonplanet.com and www.loosechange911.com.

New World Order, a world government is just the beginning

2008-02-05T16:36:00.000-08:00

US Air Force UFO Identification chart

2008-02-03T14:21:00.000-08:00

The FBI at the Super Bowl

2008-02-01T20:38:00.000-08:00

SUPER SUNDAY SECURITY
Behind the Scenes
02/01/08

Thousands of people are headed to Phoenix this week, but some are not in town to watch the big game. They are there to help protect the players and fans at Super Bowl XLII and related events.

We’re talking about the hundreds of FBI employees and other law enforcement personnel who have converged upon the Valley of the Sun in support of local police and public safety officials.

The Department of Homeland Security has designated the game a level one national security event, which allows federal agencies to bring in resources from across the country. Several federal agencies—including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; the U.S. Secret Service; and the Department of Homeland Security, just to name a few—are in Arizona to do their part. In all, more than 30 federal, state, and local agencies are involved.

Although local authorities are responsible for overall security, the FBI takes the lead in working to prevent terrorist attacks and in gathering, analyzing, and sharing intelligence related to potential threats. In addition to dozens of personnel responding from our Phoenix field office, we’ve sent more than 150 agents, intelligence analysts, bomb technicians, hazardous materials experts, SWAT professionals, crisis negotiators, police, and media representatives from across the country to the scene.

Like the two teams squaring off on Sunday, it has taken us months of planning and teamwork to reach this big day. Good luck to both the Giants and Patriots!

To read about our intelligence work at last year’s Super Bowl, see our story of July 13, 2007.

Cheney Impeachment Gains Traction in House Judiciary Committee

2008-01-21T15:43:00.000-08:00

Marjorie Cohn on 21 January, 2008 15:59:38

Common Dreams - Nine out of 23 Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee favor starting impeachment hearings against Vice-President Dick Cheney. Six of the nine are co-sponsors of H.R. 799, which contains three articles of impeachment.

Articles I and II of H.R. 799 accuse Cheney of purposely manipulating intelligence to deceive Congress and the American people about a fabricated threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, respectively. Article III charges Cheney with openly threatening aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the United States.

All three articles say Cheney’s actions have damaged our national security interests.

Three of the nine Judiciary Committee Democrats who advocate launching impeachment hearings against Cheney, Reps. Robert Wexler (D., Fla.), Luis Gutierrez (D., Ill.) and Tammy Baldwin (D., Wis.), co-authored an op-ed that appeared on December 27 in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

They wrote, “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 the Constitution. The allegations against 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.”

There is also credible evidence that policies set in Cheney’s office authorized the torture of prisoners in U.S. custody, in violation of three treaties the United States has ratified, as well as the U.S. Torture Statute and War Crimes Act. The policies on the treatment of prisoners emanating from Cheney’s office triggered the abuse and torture, according to Lawrence Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff.

“It was clear to me that there was a visible audit trail from the Vice President’s office through the Secretary of Defense down to the commanders in the field,” Wilkerson, a former colonel, said on National Public Radio’s “Morning Edition.”

In November, the House of Representatives sent the impeachment resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for further proceedings. However many Democrats oppose impeachment, citing the year and a half of testimony about Bill Clinton’s personal relations. They think impeachment will detract from Congress’s other pressing business.

Yet, the three congresspersons noted, the Clinton impeachment “must not be the model for impeachment inquiries. A Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for Clinton.”

And, they argue, the hearings would “involve the possible impeachment of the vice president - not of our commander in chief - and the resulting impact on the nation’s business and attention would be significantly less than the Clinton presidential impeachment hearings.”

Seventy percent of American voters think Cheney has abused his powers and 43 percent say he should be removed from office, according to a Nov. 13 poll by the American Research Group. Organizations, including the National Lawyers Guild, have called for the impeachment of Dick Cheney.

Impeachment hearings against Cheney would not only fulfill the Constitution’s command that high officials who commit high crimes and misdemeanors be brought to justice. It would also deter the vice president from committing additional crimes that threaten the national security of the United States.

Any impeachment proceeding would have to start in the House Judiciary Committee. The nine Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee who favor impeachment hearings are: Robert Wexler, Fla.; Luis Gutierrez, Ill.; Anthony Weiner, N.Y.; Tammy Baldwin, Wisc.; Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas; Steve Cohen, Tenn.; Keith Ellison, Minn.; Maxine Waters, Calif.; and Hank Johnson, Ga.

Here is a list of the entire House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx

For information about the campaign to impeach Dick Cheney, see http://impeachcheney.org.
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and President of the National Lawyers Guild.
Her newest book is Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law.
You can visit her blog or see archived articles at www.marjoriecohn.com

New Missouri bill thumbs its nose at federal Real ID Act

2008-01-21T10:47:00.000-08:00

By Lee Logan
POST-DISPATCH JEFFERSON CITY BUREAU
01/18/2008

JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri would defy federal drivers licensing requirements in the name of privacy under a bill filed by a crusading legislator Thursday.

Sponsored by Rep. Jim Guest, the bill would prohibit Missouri from complying with the Real ID Act of 2005.

Responding to security concerns after Sept. 11, Congress passed the program, which sets common licensing rules that essentially make it harder to falsely obtain a drivers license.

Since then, Guest, a Republican from King City in northwest Missouri, has been rounding up other states to oppose the law based on privacy concerns.

"We have a federal government that is out of control," Guest said.

The Legislature overwhelmingly passed a resolution asking the federal government to repeal the program last year; Guest's bill would go a step further by prohibiting the state from participating in the program entirely.

Guest said he has no problem with a common set of standards for drivers licenses, but he's worried about the provisions that require "machine-readable" technology in the cards, which could leave personal information in the wrong hands.

"It will make ID theft very easy in the future," he said.

Because Real ID would be required for so many common tasks, Guest said it amounts to a national identification card.

"Almost everybody would be affected by it," he said. "It is the first step to Big Brother watching you."

Nationally, the movement against Real ID has sparked wide-ranging fears that the next step might be microchipping citizens, or that the cards have a connection to the biblical prophesy of the "mark of the beast."

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security says the program provides a much-needed security boost, and that the department has worked with states on implementation.

"There's been a public outcry for more secure identification," department spokesman Russ Knocke said.

If a state decides not to comply, its citizens would be unable to use their drivers license to fly on airplanes and would need additional documentation, such as a passport.

The rules are set to take effect in May, though states have until December 2009 to fully implement the program.

The Missouri Department of Revenue would have to implement the licensing rules, which were released to states last week.

Spokesman David Griffith said the department is still reviewing the rules to determine the impact on Missouri. One of the key questions, he said, is calculating the program's cost for the state.

The Homeland Security department has estimated that the program will cost at least $3.9 billion nationwide.

More than 20 states have passed legislation or resolutions opposing the program, including several that have passed laws saying they will not participate — essentially calling the feds' bluff.

Despite the outcry, a few state legislators think Real ID isn't such a big deal.

Rep. Clint Zweifel, D-Florissant, was one of three lonely legislators to vote against the resolution last year.

"I just don't like the idea of thumbing your nose at a pretty modest security recommendation," he said, noting that the program was suggested by the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission.

Wexler's Goal Of 50,000 Signatures For Cheney Impeachment Surpassed In 24 Hours

2007-12-17T15:25:00.000-08:00

By: Logan Murphy on Sunday, December 16th, 2007 at 4:01 PM - PST

Blue Gal posted Rep. Robert Wexler’s video yesterday, asking for citizens to sign the petition on his website in support of impeachment hearings for Vice President, Dick Cheney. Wexler was hoping to get 50,000 signatures and it didn’t take long — it took just 24 hours to meet his goal and the signatures are still rolling in.

If you haven’t signed the petition yet, you can find it here.

More from OpEd News:

As of Sunday morning, 54,000 people had signed the petition at WexlerWantsHearings.com calling for action now. And names are being added at a rate of one every one or two seconds!

Wexler has said he wanted at least 50,000 signatures. But why stop there? If people get behind this, and if the impeachment movement spreads the word, he could easily get closer to 500,000 signatures over the next few days. Read on…

The more signatures Wexler gets, the more clout they’ll have with members of the Judiciary Committee who are on the fence. Let’s show Wexler the power of the netroots to get behind and support elected officials who are representing our values and desires.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith Olbermann video on Bush and Iraq - MSNBC

2007-12-10T14:27:00.001-08:00

How the End Began 6: Cheney, Bin Laden, and the CIA

2007-12-06T12:13:00.000-08:00

Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America

2007-12-01T22:44:00.000-08:00

Wednesday, November 28, 2007 by: Mike Adams

The end of Free Speech in America has arrived at our doorstep. It's a new law called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, and it is worded in a clever way that could allow the U.S. government to arrest and incarcerate any individual who speaks out against the Bush Administration, the war on Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security or any government agency (including the FDA).

The law has already passed the House on a traitorous vote of 405 to 6, and it is now being considered in the Senate where a vote is imminent. All over the internet, intelligent people who care about freedom are speaking out against this extremely dangerous law: Philip Giraldi at the Huffington Post, Declan McCullagh at CNET's News.com, Kathryn Smith at OpEdNews.com, and of course Alex Jones at PrisonPlanet.com

This bill is the beginning of the end of Free Speech in America. If it passes, all the information sources you know and trust could be shut down and their authors imprisoned. NewsTarget could be taken offline and I could be arrested as a "terrorist." Jeff Rense at http://www.rense.com/ could be labeled a "terrorist" and arrested.

Byron Richards, Len Horowitz, Paul Craig Roberts, Greg Palast, Ron Paul and even Al Gore could all be arrested, silenced and incarcerated.

This is not an exaggeration. It is a literal reading of the law, which you can check yourself here: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h1955_rfs.xml

Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America