Washington Post columnist George Will has made some great contributions to American letters. I’ve enjoyed reading many of his columns. But it seems he is still lost in an old-fashioned conservatism which is no longer alive. A recent column of his proves my point.

There’s no doubt he makes a great point when he says that Americans do not understand their common history. When visitors to the Gettysburg battlefield remark that it couldn’t have possibly been that brutal because there are no bullet holes in the monuments, it is clear that ignorance of history is just a small symptom of the real disease: There has been a decline in rational thinking.

But Will’s own sentiments are just as discouraging:

Ten years ago, this column asserted that disrespect for the national patrimony of Civil War battlefields should be a hanging offense, and said: “Given that the vast majority of Americans have never heard a shot fired in anger, the imaginative presentation of military history in a new facility here is vital, lest rising generations have no sense of the sacrifices of which they are beneficiaries.”

In other words, ten years ago George Will would execute capital punishment on people just for not respecting an idea. But the meat of his own ideological sin is in the quotation marks that follow that Nazi-like assertion, namely, that Americans owe a debt to the sacrifices of which we “are beneficiaries.” In other words, we should honor the dead for giving us what they gave us. But what was that?

The benefits of the Civil War can be summed up in these points:

• Freedom for thousands of men, women, and children who had been considered property to someone else prior to the war
• A unified country that would endure for more than 150 years afterward
• A collection of national monuments to preserve the memory of the massacres
• An increase in government intervention, regulation, and oversight of citizen lives
• The birth of a military-industrial culture that has grown so large and powerful that it might never be brought under control
• A glorification of war in the national consciousness
• The near deification of the man who instigated the war
• An irrational fear of war on our own soil that leads us to insist that all conflicts be fought somewhere else

As you can see, this is a mixed bag of “benefits” and curses. The preservation of the union at all costs has led us to a place where culturally, politically, and socially we no longer respect the rights of other nations. Our irrational fear of war on our own soil causes us to attack other nations when there is no clear need to and without provocation. The fact that most Americans have never “heard a shot fired in anger” simply means that we have no idea of the consequences of war. We somehow believe that we have a right to dominate other cultures for fear that they might pick us with their dangerous and primitive needles. Worse, our fear of a nuclear holocaust and preoccupation with apocalyptic literature makes us see the world in a very cynical dark light. The Iraq War is the latest development in the natural decline of moral judgments that come from a belief in divine right. Somehow, I don’t think George Will is so concerned with that decline, nor are many other media personalities. We are, after all, “the greatest nation on earth” and we must prove it.

I do not deny that we are beneficiaries of good things. Many of those good things were delivered to us by men who sacrificed their lives for a greater cause. But if we are truly to understand history then we must not be so focused on the good benefits that we ignore the downside. We might be better off today in many ways, but if we don’t get control over those who control our military and national policies then the patrimony of our own time will look a lot like that of Ottomans today.

Check out the Gettysburg Pennsylvania Blog.

Finally, we’ve got an evangelical public figure with as much brains as balls. Frank Schaeffer is on the road calling Sarah Palin a “lipstick fascist” and makes some very strong arguments that the Republican Party is using the same tactics that the Nazi Party used in Germany to usher Hitler and the Third Reich into power. Is he being too harsh?

I don’t think he is. While I think there are still sufficient checks and balances in the system (for the time being) to prevent an all-out fascist takeover, I do believe that we’ve been on the slow track to fascism for the better part of a century. It’s only been recently, just in the last 20 years, that a major political party has been so brazen as to blatantly advocate fascist policies in America. The Bush Administration has taken that brazenness to a new level. Frank Schaeffer is absolutely correct that if McCain and Palin win then the next four years will see America slide further and deeper into labor camps.

Here’s an interesting blog post that brings up some ethical questions regarding contemporary news practices at the local level. Maybe ethics isn’t the right word, but propriety.

The real question, though, is not so much what the media did, but what parade organizers allowed. Didn’t someone approve the floats? Who was in charge of this parade? Didn’t someone tell these folks to leave that mess at home?

In order for these floats to have made it into the parade someone had to pay an entry fee (I’m guessing) and someone had to line them up in the right order and give them the go ahead to march. Who did that?

The interesting thing about this parade is its 100-year-old traditions. According to one community member:

The floats were part of the parade which has “been in existence for over 100 years and a portion of the parade is designed to poke fun at local and national events,” the committee said.

So if the parade is designed to poke fun at local and national events, does that include teen pregnancy? Does it include a particular act by a particular individual even if it is a teenager? Should the local media “report” on such an event and show the video footage of the “tasteless” acts by those in the parade?

These are all legitimate questions, but it seems to me that if this is a community event and it is designed to poke fun of the culture at large then it has done precisely what its objective is. Offensive? Sure, considering the nature of the culture, how could we expect otherwise?

Five years ago, when the Iraq war had just started to heat up, an event took place which sparked the rally cry of the United States. It was the story that would set the tone of the war for years to come.

Jessica Lynch, a U.S. Army PFC whose Humvee was ambushed near Nasiriyah and had been taken by her captors to a nearby hospital, freed herself, emerged from her hellhole and with guns blazing managed to escape, killing many Iraqi’s in the process while sustaining several wounds of her own.

Another story spoke of a joint operation directed by the Bush Administration. The mission reportedly included Marine Corps artillery distracting enemy soldiers as Army Rangers secured the hospital grounds while Navy Seals extracted Private Lynch while being fired upon going in and coming back out.

Although the stories were completely false, it wasn’t until about a month following the incident that the truth surfaced thanks to a Toronto Star reporter, whose sources told him that Lynch had been well cared for at the hospital, that her captors had left up to two days before the raid and that fire from U.S. forces had prevented hospital staffers from loading her in an ambulance.

It just goes to show you, you can’t believe everything you see or hear, especially when someone else has an agenda.

The same news media that was all over the impeachment of Bill Clinton barely gives any space or time to impeachment against Cheney and possibly Bush. With Bill Clinton, it involved sex so it sold newspapers and brought in viewers and listeners.

But when it comes to much more serious charges leveled at Bush and Cheney, the backers of impeachment proceeedings have a hard time getting any coverage at all.

MEMORANDUM
To: Rep. John Conyers, Jr.
From: John C. Bonifaz
Date: May 22, 2005
RE: The President’s Impeachable Offenses

The recent release of the Downing Street Memo provides new and compelling evidence that the President of the United States has been actively engaged in a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people about the basis for going to war against Iraq. If true, such conduct constitutes a High Crime under Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution: “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.”

The following is about The Downing Street Memo;

The document reveals that, by the summer of 2002, President Bush had decided to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein by launching a war which, Dearlove reports, would be “justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD [weapons of mass destruction].” Dearlove continues: “But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” Dearlove also states that “[t]here was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.”

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw states that “[i]t seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided.” “But,” he continues, “the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, and Iran.”

British officials do not dispute the document’s authenticity, and, on May 6, 2005, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported that “[a] former senior U.S. official called [the document] ‘an absolutely accurate description of what transpired’ during the senior British intelligence officer’s visit to Washington.” “Memo: Bush made intel fit Iraq policy,” The State, Knight Ridder Newspapers, May 6, 2005.

The Rest of The Story here

The following are articles of impeachment that were drawn up while Donald H. Rumsfeld was still in office;

Articles of Impeachment
Of
George W. Bush, President of the United States,
Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States and
Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense of the United States

Part of Article 1:

On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney initiated hostilities amounting to a declaration of war against Iraq without the informed consent of Congress.

The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included on or more of the following:

1. making, or causing to be made, false or misleading statements to the United States Congress;
2. withholding relevant and material evidence or information from the United States Congress;
3. misuse of the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
4. misuse of the military of the United States;
5. making, or causing to be made, false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into supporting hostilities against the sovereign nation of Iraq, and continuing to make such misstatements.

In all of this, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have acted in a manner contrary to their trust as President and Vice President of the United States, respectively, and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of United States.

WHEREFORE, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

The Rest of The Story here

This is a more recent and detailed explanation of charges against Bush;

George W. Bush has violated the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, by threatening the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iran. Bush’s threat of force against Iran has included the possibility of nuclear force. Bush has secretly supported preliminary acts of war within Iran with neither approval from nor funding by Congress.

Bush has initiated the development of new nuclear weapons, in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Article VI of the United States Constitution makes the U.N. Charter and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty the law of the land.

George W. Bush also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war.

George W. Bush also misappropriated funds with which to conduct the preliminary stages of this war, prior to receiving any funding or any form of authorization from Congress.

George W. Bush, in violation of the United Nations Charter, which is the law of the land under the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, launched an aggressive war neither in self-defense nor under authorization of the UN Security Council.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has allowed the U.S. military to violate treaties to which the United States is party and has failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for these abuse.

These violations include the targeting of civilians, journalists, and medical personnel, and the illegal use of a variety of weapons, including:
-Land mines, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Article 85, and Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons;
-Cluster bombs, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Article 85, and Protocol I of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons;
-Depleted uranium munitions, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol 1, Articles 35.2, 35.3, 48 and 55.1;
-Napalm or Mark 77 Firebomb, used in Iraq in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Article II.1.b;
-White phosphorous, which Defense Department spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Barry Venable confirmed on November 15, 2005 was deployed “as an incendiary weapon” in urban areas of Fallujah, Iraq, where there were high concentrations of civilians, during Operation Phantom Fury (November 2004-January 2005), making the said deployment of white phosphorous a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Article II.1.b;
-BLU-82B/C-130 “daisy cutter” bombs, used in Afghanistan in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Articles 35, 48, 51 and 55.

has directed or authorized the National Security Agency and various other agencies within the intelligence community to conduct electronic surveillance outside of the statutes Congress has prescribed as the exclusive means for such surveillance, and to use such information for purposes unknown but unrelated to any lawful function of his office; he has also concealed the existence of this unlawful program of electronic surveillance from Congress, the press, and the public.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has arrogated excessive power to the executive branch in violation of basic constitutional principles of the separation of powers.

George W. Bush has formally declared his intent to violate the laws enacted by Congress by appending a “signing statement” to legislation, asserting his right to carve out exceptions to legislation as he sees fit, thereby arrogating to himself powers reserved solely to Congress. George W. Bush has, in several instances, gone on to act on his self-declared right to violate these laws. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.

George W. Bush has abused his power and failed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States by allowing his administration to condone torture, failing to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refusing to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

has allowed his administration to fire United States Attorneys in retaliation for the proper performance of their jobs when that performance conflicted with the partisan interests of the President, and has failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for this abuse.

has sought to mislead the people of the United States and the Congress by hiding information without justification, selectively releasing misleading pieces of information, funding misleading journalism, producing misleading video reports falsely presented as independent journalism, using the U.S. military to target journalists in Iraq, threatening officials with retribution should they reveal information, and exacting retribution against whistle blowers.

George W. Bush has abused his power and failed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States by allowing his administration to reveal the identity of a covert agent of the Central Intelligence Agency and the front-group she worked for, and by failing to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for this security breach.

The following are charges against Dick Cheney;

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has conspired to exceed his constitutional authority to wage war, in that:

Richard B. Cheney has violated the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, by threatening the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iran. Richard B. Cheney’s threat of force against Iran has included the possibility of nuclear force. Article VI of the United States Constitution makes the U.N. Charter the law of the land.

These violations of the law pose a grave threat to the national security of the United States. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.

Richard B. Cheney has subverted the Constitution, its guarantee of a republican form of government, and the constitutional separation of powers by undermining the rightful authority of Congress to declare war, oversee foreign affairs, and make appropriations. He did so by justifying a war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as Congress. He denied the electorate the right to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy.

Richard B. Cheney also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war. Cheney pressured intelligence services to produce false and misleading reports, and Cheney used those reports to mislead the Congress and the people of the United States.

Richard B. Cheney and his subordinates have advocated for a legal theory of the “unitary executive” aimed at placing the President above the rule of law.

has violated the rights of citizens and non-citizens by arbitrarily detaining them indefinitely inside and outside of the United States, without due process, without charges, and with limited, if any, access to counsel or courts.

Richard B. Cheney has condoned torture, failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refused to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

Richard B. Cheney has offended our system of government by attempting to expand executive power at the expense of the other two branches of government.

has sought to mislead the people of the United States and the Congress by hiding information without justification, selectively releasing misleading pieces of information, threatening officials with retribution should they reveal information, and exacting retribution against whistle blowers.

Richard B. Cheney has abused his power by conspiring to reveal the identity of a covert agent of the Central Intelligence Agency and the front-group she worked for.

has maintained an improper and unethical relationship with his former employers at Halliburton and has promoted its agenda and interests over those of the American people.

Richard B. Cheney has allowed a small group of corporate executives to plan national policies in secret, and enacted policies that benefited a corporation from which the Vice President financially profited.

(1) In January 2001, the vice president did oversee a secret task force composed of corporate lobbyists and executives from the oil, gas, coal, and nuclear-energy sector, known collectively as the National Energy Policy Development Group, instructing them to meet regularly and develop the nation’s energy policy.

(2) By conducting these meetings in secret, the vice president did endeavor to impart influence to corporate interests without public knowledge, eclipsing not only the oversight function of Congress generally but the specific role of the energy committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

(3) During the course of these secret meetings, the vice president allowed lobbyists representing the oil, coal, gas, and nuclear-energy industries to compose, word-for-word, the national energy policy adopted by the Department of Energy, in gross violation of the public trust and all ethical norms.

On March 25, 2002, and thereafter, the Vice President did willfully disobey court orders to identify the members of the National Energy Policy Development Group. In September 2002, and prior thereto, the Vice President did also refuse requests by Representatives Henry Waxman and John Dingell, as well as the Government Accountability Office, to release transcripts and papers produced by the aforementioned group. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.

The Rest of The Story here

It doesn’t matter if you agree with these charges or not.

It doesn’t matter whether you think they can prove all or part of these charges.

They are serious charges. The charges are much more serious than those filed against Bill Clinton. If you supported the impeachment of Bill Clinton and do not support the impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, then you are being hypocritical.

Approving of impeachment proceedings does not mean they will be impeached. They could also be exhonerated and found to be not guilty of the charges at all. This would just mean there would be an investigation and a hearing on the charges.

There are a lot of average citizens arrested on less evidence than there is here and they have to stand trial. They are assumed innocent until proven guilty just as Bush and Cheney should be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Assumed innocent does not mean that it does not get tried however. There is enough evidence that there should be investigations and a trial or hearing. Impeachment is the process by which we do this with presidents and Vice Presidents.

If you believe Bush and Cheney are innocent of these charges then you should have no problem with there being a full investigation and hearing to clear them once and for all.

Ten Reasons to Impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney
I ask Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney for the following reasons:
1. Violating the United Nations Charter by launching an illegal “War of Aggression” against Iraq without cause, using fraud to sell the war to Congress and the public, misusing government funds to begin bombing without Congressional authorization, and subjecting our military personnel to unnecessary harm, debilitating injuries, and deaths.

2. Violating U.S. and international law by authorizing the torture of thousands of captives, resulting in dozens of deaths, and keeping prisoners hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.

3. Violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel.

4. Violating the Geneva Conventions by targeting civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and using illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and a new type of napalm.

5. Violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant.

6. Violating the Constitution by using “signing statements” to defy hundreds of laws passed by Congress.

7. Violating U.S. and state law by obstructing honest elections in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.

8. Violating U.S. law by using paid propaganda and disinformation, selectively and misleadingly leaking classified information, and exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative working on sensitive WMD proliferation for political retribution.

9. Subverting the Constitution and abusing Presidential power by asserting a “Unitary Executive Theory” giving unlimited powers to the President, by obstructing efforts by Congress and the Courts to review and restrict Presidential actions, and by promoting and signing legislation negating the Bill of Rights and the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

10. Gross negligence in failing to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina, in ignoring urgent warnings of an Al Qaeda attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, and in increasing air pollution causing global warming.

You can sign the petition to impeach bush and cheney here

Urban legends have been around a long time. Usually they are spread through e-mails sent from friend to friend until millions of people have read and been influenced by ridiculous propaganda that isn’t true. That’s why I’ve taken to checking out every little piece of pablum I receive from my friends, even my own mother, at www.snopes.com. These people do a great job of checking sources to see if the legends are true or false.

I recently received such an e-mail and went to Snopes to see what I could find. Surprisingly, I found that this one is actually true. That’s usually not the case. However, the story is about a year old.

(more…)