Read the homepage of democrats.com and you will see the various inquiries and events staged for just such a purpose.

If it were anyone but georgie - he would have been impeached already and hung out to dry.

This BushCO tonite will probably 'cover their a**' for the time being. --Although he knows that 'war justification' and 'timetables' aren't something Bush can confront w/o lies.

They've created another 'war' of sorts. That is the 'war of terror for life' was the title of the book -and BushCo have come full-circle w/i the world of surrealism.

The Bush administration planned and are managing the 'war strategies' & are carrying out 'war tactics' under the plan of fear. --'We the people' know that this is failed mission --the 'insurgents' somehow have won their stance.

Stupid and Stubborn' are the adjectives describing this administration. --Unlike other war Presidents --Bush is being caught between a 'rock and hard-a**' type resistence --I don't believe he knew the extent of his enemy nor had taken time out to read into the history books. --

I know one thing; BushCo have created a whole new 'type of war' and with their 'oil-for-war' particiaption the 'insurgency and terrorism' in Iraq is much more vigorous and is a 'business' that somehow the MBA Bush didn't bank on or did he?

Do you remember your childhood ? Do ever remember telling a lie ? Did you ever have to cover up that lie ? How did you do it ? With another lie right ? Did you ever get so enthralled in the lies that you couldn't remember when they started or why ? This will be the demise of the criminal administration , Let the bastards hang theirselves !!

gave a succinct explanation as to why
Bush seems to get away with everything.

The primary discussion had started with
Bush's low poll numbers, then progressed to his problems--iraq etc.

Bottom Line, Greenfield explained while:
Bush has the lowest poll numbers of any President in History--He Has Something No Other President in History has had.

He Has a Republican Congress, Senate
and House,which gurantees there will be no investigation of any of the complaints we all know exist.

Guys 2006 is so much more important than 2008

Only Republicans have Subpoena power
which strengthens hearings. Dems do
not have this .

"Why does'nt anybody hold President Bush accoutable for the lies?"

I've been trying to figure this out for two and a half years now. It seems that we've been going through the same cycle--
1. a new lie or atrocity is uncovered
2. the Bush fans come to his defense
3. Bush and the administration deny it
4. Bush and the administration are confronted with
irrefutable evidence
5. Bush and company poo-poo it and make arrogant
explanations
6. there may or may not be a hearing
7. the matter fades into oblivion.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON HERE ?!?!?!!!!

People Rights Organization of America

As I've said all along, I'm all for impeaching bush and making him stand trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The laws don't apply to Bush and this administration apparently, we don't care about the Geneva Convetion, we don't care about decency in general, we don't even care about telling the truth. Bush wants to appoint Alberto Gonzalez to the Supreme Court.

The last part of the article that Greg Palast wrote on the Tom Paine web site in the days following the election in November still sticks out to me, becasue it is so true to what is going on in this country.

What now? Kerry won, so hold your victory party. But make sure the shades are down: it may be become illegal to demand a full vote count under PATRIOT Act III.

I used to write a column for the Guardian papers in London. Several friends have asked me if I will again leave the country. In light of the failure—a second time—to count all the votes, that won't be necessary. My country has left me.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php

Religion is becoming a gateway psychosis... Courage is the antidote to fear!

Thanks GM,

It worked! I guess I just had to hold my mouth right.

http://www.democrats.com/node/5761

...Or maybe you waved your magic wand?

Save Our Soldiers

Wrong link! This one's right:

http://www.democrats.com/node/5761

Save Our Soldiers

Evil Doers Lottery Ticket

http://itadsup.net/NGLotto.htm

Hmmm, what is the rule here. It is utterly clear that the USA was implicated in the assassination of Salvador Allende. Of Patrice Lumumba. And that may JUST be the start. If the UN is supposed to penalize Syria due to the APPEARANCE of involvement in the death of a Lebanese politician, what should the UN do about these past assassinations which the US helped arrange. Maybe we need a Truth Commission on CIA crimes to determine what the scale of justice is here?

Bush needs to distract the American public, so what does he come up with. Criminal charges against a British politician for supposedly lying to a congressional committee. http://tinyurl.com/czqmj. Huh? Bush lied to the whole DAMN CONGRESS. How about prosecuting him first, dammit!

Sweet Victory: United Methodist Church Calls For Withdrawal
by Katrina vanden Heuvel

It's one thing when former high-ranking members of your own Administration come out against your war. It's another thing when two-thirds of the country calls the invasion and occupation a mistake. It's really something when your own church issues a statement urging you to pull out the troops now.

Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.

"As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq," the statement read. "Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought.... We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home."

The board also issued a strong statement against torture, urging Congress to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate detention and interrogation practices at Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan.

"It is my hope and prayer that our statement against the war in Iraq will be heard loud and clear by our fellow United Methodists, President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Jim Winkler, General Secretary of the UMC's Board of Church and Society. "Conservative and liberal board members worked together to craft a strong statement calling for the troops to come home and for those responsible for leading us into this disastrous war to be held accountable."

With its bold stands against the Administration, the UMC is fulfilling the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who called for the church to be "not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion" but "a thermostat that transformed the mores of society."

Bush has asserted that he entered Iraq on a direct order from God. Now, he has a direct order from his own church to leave. Is he listening?

This is like Nixon and Reagan. For them, church is a place for photo-ops. Never, NEVER do they let it interfere with serious matters of state!

But Bush's personal "talks with God" are probably just him talking to Karl Rove. To him Rove is God just like a dog owner is God to the dog.

Truthout has a link to a long article by Bush Justice Dept lawyer John Yoo. It is really kind of scary. He reminds me of people like Martin Bormanna and Heinrich Himmler. I wonder if there ever is warm crimes trials for all the people involved in the War on Terror, if we'll see John Yoo hauled up before the bench. He seems to have that quality of banal evil that Hannah Arendth talked about.

http://tinyurl.com/cotbt

Saddam, facing a possible death sentence, is accused of mass murder, torture, false imprisonment and the use of chemical weapons. He is certainly guilty on all counts. So, it now seems, are those who overthrew him.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111605E.shtml

Under Bush, we are become Saddam. Well, we are the anti-Saddam resistance, but a hell of a lot of Americans are equivalent to Saddam supporters.

Bush is worse than Saddam. Bush threatens Iraq's neighbors on almost a daily basis, Chimp Boy has WMD, uses chemical weapons against the Iraqi population, torture is rampant, U.S. is NOT following the UN charter, Halliburton is stealing the oil for corrupted officials, etc, etc, etc.

I heard InSeanity talk about how the "fly paper" theory is working for us. Really? If Iraq is attracting ALL the terrorists then why the Madrid, London, Jakarta, Bali, Jordan, etc, bombings? I thought all the terrorists were in Iraq. What about the Taliban regrouping in Afghanistan? Guess they are just regrouping there so they can charter the bus over to Iraq. I can't believe people are dumb enough to buy this crap! I can't believe the administration actually shovels out this crap!

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security

- George W. Bush in a debate in St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000

When Bush finally emerged from his hide-outs on remote military bases well after the first crucial hours following the pre-empted attack on Iraq, he gave sound-bytes instead of solutions.

He did not trust us to be ready to sacrifice, build up our public and private security infrastructure, or cut down on our energy use to put economic pressure on the enemy in all the nations where he hides. He merely told us to shop, spend, and pretend nothing was wrong.

Rather than using the billions of dollars expended on the invasion of Iraq to shore up our boundaries and go after Osama bin Laden and the Saudi Arabian terrorists, the funds were used to initiate a war with what Bush called a more immediate menace, Saddam Hussein, in oil-rich Iraq. After all, Bush said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction trained on America. We believed him, just as we believed it when he reported that Iraq was the heart of terrorism. We trusted him.

Newspaper’s promoted Bush and the invasion of Iraq to Londoners in a BBC interview during the time that the administration was wooing the support of the now lame duck Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Again, he let the world down.

We presumed the President had solid proof of the existence of these weapons, what and where they were, even as the search continued. Otherwise, our troops would be in much greater danger and the premise for a hurried-up invasion would be moot, allowing more time to solicit assistance from our allies.

Instead we were duped into following yet another privileged agenda.

Now he argues unconvincingly that Iraq was providing safe harbor to terrorists, his new key justification for the invasion. It is like arguing that America provided safe harbor to terrorists leading to 9/11.

Once and for all, George Bush was President of the United States on that day. No one else. He had been President nine months, he had been officially warned of just such an attack a full month before it happened. As President, ultimately he and only he was responsible for our failure to avert those attacks.

What has evolved from the virtual go-it-alone conquest of Iraq is more gruesome than a stain on a White House intern’s dress. America’s reputation and influence in the world has diminished, leaving us with brute force as our most persuasive voice.

Iraq is now a quagmire: no WMDs, no substantive link between Saddam and Osama, and no workable plan for the withdrawal of our troops. We are asked to go along on faith. But remember, blind patriotism can be a dangerous thing and “spin” will not bring back to life a dead soldier; certainly not two thousand of them.

$87 billion for troop funding would promote poor policy in Iraq, privileged Halliburton and other corporate friends of the Bush administration would profiteer from the war, and forced debt upon future generations of Americans.

Vice President Cheney’s Halliburton has been awarded multi-billion-dollar contracts without undergoing any meaningful bid process — an enormous conflict of interest — plus the company has been significantly raiding the funds of Export-Import Bank of America, reducing investment that could have gone toward small business trade.

is 'being called on'...

What would be so 'wrong' if Bush retreated ; is it because Bush 41 [Dad] retreated --and didn't finish the mission [war]..and Bush 43 doesn't want to 'look like a failure'; or is that Cheney-Bush invested too much in the 'marketing and business venture' of this war...

..in Iraq's future; there will be another Saddam --this mission will not end the dysfunctional Islamic revolution.

This type mentality has the U.S. in the worst position and a failed position; what needs to happen; is leave Iraq and say 'Mission Accomplished' --Iraqi's have survived before Bush and they will survive after Bush.

Bush's plan is to keep the ;fire burning; for years in order to capitalize and keep the military in an entrenched war ; for the purpose of his party and his 'fake war on terror'..

.[yes, there are terrorists out there and many of them]...but this "war" isn't minimizing the terrorists; instead it's fighting an 'insurgency' of resistance [way different than 'suicide bombers and thugs]...

THIS IS THE WORST FOREIGN POLICY EVER IN THE HISTORY OF FOREIGN POLICY!!

When you say "we believed Bush", who is the we? Some people in Congress excuse voting for war by saying Bush lied to them. Well, maybe. But not all the people lied to believed him. Most Americans did, and that's the real explanation for Congress' vote. It was Democrats surveying the mass delusion Bush was producing and concluding a pro-war vote was necessary. I suppose they were temporizing, waiting for the facts to emerge over time, so that they could switch positions and say, now with unmistakeable confirmation, that the war was mistaken. Bush is finding out what Napoleon found out in Spain, what the French found out in Mexico, what the British found out in India, what the Russians found out in Afghanistan. You can't really defeat a nationalist movement. You can remain as long as you want in a country if you can tolerate the losses you will take, but you will never really OWN the country. Why do Europeans own the USA? Easy, the natives were nearly wiped OUT. If we set out to do the same in Iraq by whatever means, we could own the country once it was empty. But if we claim to be helping them, we lose that option. Then its just a matter of WHEN we get defeated. As long as Muslims fight, we lose.

Geez, as a country that threw out a great power, you'd think we would know this!

Headline on a news story: "Bush: Iraq retreat is recipe for disaster"

Haha! Bush has a large recipe file for different kinds of disasters, so when you talk about disaster recipes, he does know what he's talking about. The real question is about WHOSE recipe for disaster? Right now we're using his, which I guess he thinks is a better recipe.

The reason why no-one holds Bush responsible is that you can not hold responsible a man who is representing the powers that would be. The very authority that we look to for punishing him is lead by him. The Democrats are against what he is doing, as well as most of the citizens of the United States, however, we are not the ruling party. The Republicans and the Bush Administration, along with Oil coropartions, banks, international construction and drilling companies, and any major company with a global investment at risk. These are the ruling parties of this nation, they control the money, the fuel, the power. So, why would they want to punish George Bush, under him, they have recorded record breaking profits, invested billions into over seas ventures( such as contracts to rebuild in Afganastan and Iraq) have grown to such levels of wealth and power, they have come to feel a sense of royalty, and we know how royalty can act if corrupt.
So, until we can change the seat of power, we as a nation have no say over who is punished for what. So, I implore all of you, continue to write your Repersentatives and Senators about what you as a citizen and a constiuant, expect from your government. Come election time in 2006, be sure to elect the person running who will be for impeachment of George W. Bush, then we will be able to take our country back, and be Proud Americans once again.

When George W Bush seized power his father ordered him to implement the Iraq Liberation Act, enacted by congress and signed by Clinton in 1998. Bush in his presidential campaign vowed to 'take out' Saddam Hussein. Bush took the oath of office on January 20th and hours later a missile attack south of Iraq in Samawa near the Saudi border took-out a cattle feed depot killing six warehouse workers. Later raids on 'so called' chemical factories killed two hundred and sixty civilians, mostly women engaged in manufacturing brake fluid and herbicides.

Bush increased the funding to the INC & INA and planned to assassinate Saddam using CIA intelligence gathering and trained agents from within the INA. American money was spent on a sophisticated covert communications network and increased satellite spying.

The INA was headed up by Dr Ayadh Allawi, an active supporter of the Iraqi Ba’ath party. He was effectively a secret service agent for the Iraqis and killed Baath party dissenters in Europe. A failed attempt in 1977 resulted in another counter assassination on Allawi with an axe that put him in hospital for a year. He was known to carry a gun around London and often showed it to medical students. Through the 1980’s he recruited mostly military defectors. In December 1990 Allawi announced the Iraqi National Accord(INA) which received American financial backing, Allawi was recruited by the CIA in 1992. The CIA would test the ability of this group to remove Saddam but it was a disaster despite covert funding of $11m for training and equipment - along the way Allawi’s mob managed to blow-up a school bus filled with Iraqi children. It was Allawi who channelled the 45 minute claim from an Iraqi officer (agent) that caused the BBC/British government confrontation and the alleged suicide of British scientist Dr David Kelly. Gabriella Kraz-Wadsak has said that Kelly may have been murdered.

This will be investigated in our next series.

Up to 1997 $100m had been spent on deployment of agents, training & equipment, including radio and tv stations in northern Iraq.

Check back for Part 3