(If you're having trouble watching the Make Your Call commercial, please watch it on youtube, subscribe, and add us as a friend. Thanks!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sukyLclVhGI)
Call, Write, and Follow up with YOUR Representative and Senators REPEATEDLY
INSIST that they:
1) Stop the War
2) Restore the Bill of Rights and
3) Impeach Bush and Cheney
SEE How to Make Your Call:
The War in Iraq is a “war of aggression” by international, and therefore American, standards, the “supreme international crime,” because it was not approved by the UN Security Council, and there was no legitimate threat to the United States.
We were literally tricked into believing that Iraq and Saddam Hussein were somehow connected to 9/11, with justifications like WMDs and terrorist links, which have repeatedly and widely been proven false. (see Article I for Bush under “3. Impeach Bush and Cheney”)
The justification then moved to the “liberation of the Iraqi people,” though most see us as an occupying force, not liberators. A million Iraqis and over 3,000 of our brave men and women have been killed based on blatant, self-serving lies.
We are not acting as a liberating police force; we are acting like an aggressive outlaw state. We are not more secure, in life or in freedom, since we invaded Iraq: we are in much more danger than ever (see “the War INCREASES TERRORISM”).
We must stop the war because it’s illegal, counterproductive, and wrong. And especially, we must stop the war because we CAN.
The invasion of Iraq, which we’ve been told has made us safer from future terrorist attacks, has, in reality, made us much less safe than we were before 9/11.
Between 1980 and 2003, there were 315 suicide attacks worldwide. Since the US invasion, estimates range as high as 400. This means that for the 23 years prior to the invasion, the number of terrorist attacks averaged at 13 per year; since the invasion they have averaged at 100 per year. 4
Research fellows at the Center for Law and Security at the NYU School of Law have found that “the Iraq War has generated a stunning sevenfold increase in the yearly rate of fatal jihadist attacks, amounting to literally hundreds of additional terrorist attacks and thousands of civilian lives lost.” 5
According to the New York Times, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States” from 2006 claims that the war in Iraq has had a direct role in increasing the diffusion of the radical jihad ideology. The National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the CIA have also put out reports saying that the invasion of Iraq would or has, respectively, increased the threat of terrorism. 6
Reports by an Israeli think tank and Saudi intelligence conclude that the vast majority of foreign fighters in Iraq are not former terrorists, but became such because of the war itself. A study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found that 85% of Saudi militants who went to Iraq were not terrorist sympathizers, but were radicalized almost exclusively by the invasion. 7
It is important to empathize with the Iraqis, to put ourselves in their position. Imagine that another country, perhaps China, was attacked by terrorists from, say, Canada, and decided that Bush, and therefore the United States, was a threat to China. Imagine that China invaded and occupied the United States, killed thousands of civilians, rounded people up and held them indefinitely on suspicion of terrorism, tortured and humiliated people, and cut off basic needs such as water, food and medical supplies. How would we feel? What would we do?
The killing of innocent people should never be condoned, and neither should any form of terrorism, but we must also realize what causes terrorism. It is not simply the religion of Islam that creates terrorists, but the actions of the provocateur. We should not humiliate, maim, and murder 100s of 1,000s of people, for that tends to make people hate us. We must not create terrorists faster than we can kill them.
Osama bin Laden has said that the US wants to invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab country, and we gave him credibility with the Muslim world , which considered terrorism a dangerous fringe until the invasion, by doing just that. If we are to stop terrorism, our foreign policy should not advocate behavior that exacerbates anti-US sentiment and the threat of terrorism.
By invading Iraq in 2003, the Executive Branch violated international treaties, which are the “supreme law of the land” according to our constitution. These treaties include the UN Charter and what emerged from the Nuremberg trials, which tried Nazi war criminals for making aggressive war. 2
Under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, to which the United States is a party, a nation's use of force is authorized under only two circumstances: in individual or collective self-defense, as outlined in Article 51, OR pursuant to a Security Council resolution, as outlined in Article 42.
The United States was not allowed to invade Iraq via the Security Council circumstance, nor via the circumstance of self-defense. The case made by the Bush administration, that Iraq posed an “imminent threat,” was based on lies and manipulations of intelligence to suit their desire for war with Iraq, as many experts agree. (see Article II under “3. Impeach Bush and Cheney”)
In addition to the overall illegality of the war because it is a war of aggression, the laws of war, found in the Geneva Conventions and other precedents, require certain responsibilities of the occupying force during war. The occupying power is obliged to restore and ensure public order, safety, and basic service provision, and is restricted from using weapons that cause unnecessary suffering, torture, and attacking medical units or journalists. The US has or is violating these and other laws of war, making this an illegal war in many ways.
The war in Iraq, in addition to being illegal in many ways, has killed a million innocent people; 20% of Iraq’s pre-war population of has been killed, wounded, exiled or displaced. It would still be horrible, yet more understandable, if Iraq posed a grave threat to the United States, or if we were truly helping the country, but neither is the case, and so this is unacceptable. 9
Our soldiers trusted our commander-in-chief to send them to war only when absolutely necessary, but this war was not necessary; it is, in fact, counterproductive. We owe it to our brave men and women to stop this war, so that they’re not the victims of expected retributions from angry people. Soldiers cannot oppose Bush without us, so we are the ones who must ensure that they’re no longer used as cannon fodder for an administration that has sent them to die based on lies.
This war, the opposite of the moral intentions of freedom, peace and security claimed by the Bush administration, is a war of imperialism, where the current leadership of our country seeks to expand it’s power. This is a war for oil and strategic positioning, and no one should die for the profit of others alone.
If we allow this war to continue, though we have the power to stop it, then we allow our country to behave as an empire with our consent. The people of the world won’t stand for it, and as civilized, just-minded human beings, we shouldn’t either. We can say NO to this entire paradigm by acting in our numbers.
Requests of our Congresspersons on Stopping the War:
Our brave men and women are sitting ducks in Iraq for the terrorists that flock there in their anger at the occupation. They don’t know who is and who is not a terrorist, so, understandably, they kill innocent people. The vast majority of Iraqis want the troops to leave, and who could blame them? The troops would probably like to leave as well. 10
By no fault of their own, our soldiers’ continued presence in Iraq has created one of the largest humanitarian crises we’ve seen, worse than the Rwandan genocide.
The troops cannot help by staying there. They cannot prevent the violence which may occur when we leave, for thus far, our presence has only increased violence (there were virtually no terrorist attacks in Iraq before the invasion).WE must protect our soldiers from unnecessary harm if their commander-in-chief will not do so. 11
specifics:
INSIST that your congresspersons support the troops by bringing ALL troops, non-combative and combative alike, as well as those who are or will be stationed at the 14 permanent bases we've built in Iraq, HOME!
Republican President Eisenhower warned us to beware that the Military Industrial Complex does not grip our government or there will be war for war’s sake, not for necessity or protection. Many believe we are currently in a state of this complex, but that does NOT mean that we, as the American people, cannot STOP it.
We must PRESSURE congress to stop funding this war, for that is the largest part of why it continues – it is profitable, for the contractors who help fight the war, rebuild after the destruction, or gather the oil that foreigners that’s now more open to the public.
The war has cost us over 450,000,000,000 (450 billon) so far, not to mention our over 9,000,000,000,000 (9 trillion) dollar debt AND deficit. These funds should be used for REAL anti-terrorist activities that actually help to lessen terrorism. Rebuilding and securing Iraq (via an outside agency) would be a better investment that destroying the country, making it ripe for a terrorist takeover in the chaos. 12
Congress has the power to stop this war by stopping the money flow into it. If Congress has the power, then we have the power – we just need to make sure our congresspersons know how serious we are about this issue.
specifics:
INSIST that your congressperson vote for NO MORE MONEY for the war in Iraq once all troops are brought home. They should use that money in their plan to finance the rebuilding of Iraq and the lessening of hostile feelings.
We cannot stay in Iraq. The majority of the people see us as occupiers and would like us to leave. We, as Americans, have no more credibility with the Iraqi people as whole, and so cannot hope to stay to win their hearts and minds. It is counterproductive for the Iraqis, and it is dangerous to our soldiers for us to stay and try to remedy this situation ourselves. 13
Therefore, it is our responsibility to use the money we’re spending to destroy Iraq to finance the reconstruction and security of the country via an neutral, outside agency, like the UN or Red Cross, or a collection of countries, who could check one another from abusing their positions. This will be the most difficult request of all, but using diplomacy and going around this arrogant president, it is possible.
The point is, the U.S. cannot be the ones who stay to rebuild – we have already lost the Iraqis’ trust by telling them we came bearing freedom only to then occupy and destroy the country. We must stop fighting the war so that the Iraqis will know that those who come after are there to truly aid them and help rebuild their broken country.
specifics:
INSIST that your congressperson take steps to create a plan with outside groups and agencies NOT part of the coalition or contractors who are making money off of the destruction of Iraq to rebuild and secure the country using the U.S. funds we’d otherwise spend on the war.
Under the pretext of the “war on terror,” the Bush administration, with the help of a complacent Congress, has pushed legislation through the House and Senate which severely limit the freedoms afforded to us in the Bill of Rights.
The Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006 is a lesser known violation of our freedoms, but is perhaps the most serious attack on the Bill of Rights in American history. This law was passed in response to the Supreme Court’s decision that the president CANNOT round-up, hold indefinitely, and deny people access to US courts, citizens or not, at will.
The MCA nullifies the 5th and 6th amendments, which provide us the freedoms of due process, and a speedy, fair, and public trial respectively.
This law allows the president and others to detain on suspicion, hold indefinitely without due process (including the right to habeas corpus, a speedy trial, notice of charges, no hearsay evidence, and no evidence under coercion, or Geneva conventions), and operate secret trials for whomever they may declare an “unlawful enemy combatant,” which is a word used to call anyone they choose a terrorist and therefore unworthy of the Geneva Conventions, which the president has the authority to interpret the meaning of. The courts have no jurisdiction to review these commissions, and detainees cannot bring charges against any US personnel when their rights are violated. 14
Though many say that “as long as one does nothing wrong, one has nothing to fear from these new laws,” little could be further from the truth. We have the Bill of Rights (or what’s left of it) today because the framers knew that if we did not specify the limitations of government loudly and clearly, they would most likely become tyrannical. The government can only take away rights we allow them to take away, so let’s not allow it.
The Bill of Rights were not meant to be bent to what the president declared “necessary” for a war on terror that will never end; they were meant to always protect the people of the United States from their government’s abuse of power.
Whether or not you are feeling the dire consequences of our constitution’s dismantling today or not, many are, but they are only the first, and their stories are often kept secret. Whether or not you trust this president, this congress, or the next president is not the issue, either. It takes one person with impure motives to destroy the intent of the law and initiate a complete dictatorship in this country, the groundwork for which has been laid with this law.
specifics:
INSIST that your congresspersons repeal the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Most Americans, or people for that matter, don’t like the Bush administration. Perhaps even most Americans prefer the Democrats to the Republicans. BUT THIS IS NOT THE REASON THAT BUSH AND CHENEY SHOULD BE IMPEACHED!
Warrantless spying on Americans, far beyond the extent of any other president; Lying to Congress and America to wage an illegal war in Iraq; Ignoring international laws and treaties by massively violating human rights; and Concentrating the greatest powers yet in the Executive Branch – These are a few reasons that the Cheney and Bush must be impeached.
Vice President Cheney and President Bush must be impeached because they have failed to protect the Constitution and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. They should be impeached because they have committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors. But mainly, they should be impeached because they have sullied the name of America as never before.
Some Articles of Impeachment, listed here, have been put fourth by the Center for Constitutional Rights and modified in some cases. The full, original Articles have been published and can be purchased. Send them to your congressperson.
Article I
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice 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 purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.
Article II
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice 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, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.
Article III
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice 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 openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States.
Several of the supporting reasons for the impeachment articles run counter to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other neo-con doctrines, which have been embraced by Emmanuel and his colleagues. These include:
- Cheney actively and systematically seeking to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United1 States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
- Cheney pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States although Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq Cheney was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
- Cheney subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
- Cheney actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. In particular, Cheney ignored Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: ''Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.
- Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
- Cheney's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
Make Your Call
|
|
Help Us Do What's Right |
What You Can Do To Help
|
Article I
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, has abused his power by violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, contravening the laws governing agencies of the Executive Branch, and failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed by directing or authorizing he National Security Agency and various other agencies within the intelligence community to conduct electronic surveillance outside of the statutes Congress has prescribed as the executive means of 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. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Article II
The impeachment of George W. Bush, President of the United States, is warranted by his initiation of the Iraq war. The initiation and continuation of the war constitutes a high crime and a misdemeanor and is illegal as well. In undertaking that war, George W. Bush violated his oath of office and constitutional obligation that the laws be faithfully executed.
George W. Bush 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 the war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as the Congress. He denied the electorate to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy.
George W. Bush also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading the Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war.
George W. Bush acted contrary to his trust as president, and subverted the constitutional government to the prejudice of law and justice and the manifest injury to the people of the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, buy such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
(see war is illegal)
Article III
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, has abused his power by violating the constitutional and international rights of citizens and non-citizens by arbitrarily detaining them indefinitely inside and outside the United States, without due process, without charges, and with limited – if any – access to counsel or courts.
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.
George W. Bush has offended our system of government by attempting to expand his power at the expense of the other two branches of government. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Article IV
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the Office of the 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.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:
He has violated federal law by conducting surveillance of US citizens on US soil without a judicial warrant, as is required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was specifically enacted to check executive power.
He has engaged in mass detentions both in and outside of the United States without permitting and judicial review of such detentions.
He has formally declared his intent to violate the laws enacted by Congress by appending a “signing statement” to legislation that asserts his right to carve out exceptions to legislation as he sees fit, thereby arrogating to himself legislative powers reserved solely to Congress.
In all of this, George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as president 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 the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
We should also make sure Cheney gets impeached: http://impeachpac.org/node/976
specifics:
INSIST that your Congresspersons impeach Bush and Cheney.
6 Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism
Threat, Mike Mazzetti, New York Times, 2006.
Failed States, Noam Chompsky, p.18-19
7 ibid, p. 20
8 Osama bin Laden said US wants to invade and occupy oil-rich, arab country
Last ibid, p. 22
9 20% of Iraq’s pre-war population has been killed, wounded, exiled or displaced
10 Iraqis want troops out
11 No terrorism in Iraq before invasion: Dying to Win, Pape
12 Cost of the War
Debt and Deficit at 9 Trillion
13 Iraqis see us as occupiers
14 Military Commissions Act of 2006
habeas corpus – Sect. 5; a;
evidence obtained under coercion – Sect. 948r; c;
charges specified – Sect. 948q; b;
Geneva Conventions – Sect. 948b; g;
hearsay evidence – Sect. 949a; b; 2; E; ii;
speedy trial - Sect. 948b; d; 1; A
secret trials - Sect. 949d; d
unlawful enemy combatant - Sect. 948a; 1; A; ii
president interprets Geneva Conventions - Sect. 6; a; 3; A
court have no jurisdiction – Sect. 7; (e)(1)
no charges against US for human rights violations – Sect. 7; 2
Amnesty condemns the Military Commissions Act
ACLU breaks down the Military Commissions Act
15 On December 17, 2005, Bush admittedto the nation that, under his command, the National Security Agency (NSA) has for over four years engaged in a program of widespread warrantless electronic surveillance of phone calls and emails.
-The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows for court authorization of surveillance only when the government produces evidence that the individual who is a target is an agent of a foreign power or foreign terrorist group.
-Congress has mandated that FISA and specific provisions of the criminal code shall be the “exclusive means by which electronic surveillance…may be conducted.”
-Former NSA Whistleblows about Police State
-Whistleblower outs NSA spy room
-Judge Finds Wiretap Violates the Law, Adam Liptak and Eric Lichtblau
-CCR files lawsuit against Dept. of Justice
16-Bush said "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." in his State of the Union Address.
-The documents supporting that statement were forged. Bush has been informed by intelligence officials months before his speech that the sale likely never took place and that the documentary evidence had been forged.
-Bush led people to believe that
Iraq was involved with 9/11 by repeatedly linking them in his speeches. This was so effective that at one point 70% of Americans actually believed Saddam was behind 9/11.
-Bush has since admitted that Iraq was not connected to 9/11.
-Bush has stated that Congress had access to all the same information that the White House had. Thus he should not be blamed for making the mistake of going to war. But Bush was briefed many times about the falsehood of various stories and this information never reached Congress.
-Bush, Cheney, Rice and Powell said that some aluminum tubes
Iraq attempted to buy were intended for use in a uranium centrifuge to create nuclear weapons. These were the only physical evidence he had against Iraq. But it turns out this evidence had been rejected by the Department of Energy and other intelligence agencies long before Bush used them in his speeches.
-Bush still insists that there was
a "relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. But the 9/11 Commission released a report saying, among other things, that there was no "collaborative relationship" between Al Qaeda
and Iraq. The nature of the relationship seems to be that Al Qaeda asked for help and Iraq refused. Al Qaeda was opposed to Saddam Hussein because Saddam led a secular government instead of an Islamic government.
-Bush and his team repeatedly claimed that Iraq possessed mobile weapons labs capable of producing anthrax. Colin Powell showed diagrams of them at his speech before the UN to justify invading Iraq. These claims originated from Curveball, a discredited Iraqi informer who fed Bush many of the stories related to WMD. On May 29, 2003, two small trailers matching the description were found in Iraq. A team of bio-weapons experts examined the trailers and concluded they were simply designed to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. But, for over a year, Bush claimed these were part of Iraq's bio-weapons program. The expert's report was suppressed and only recently made public.
-Bush insisted that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction but his "evidence" consisted mostly of forged documents, plagiarized student papers, and vague satellite photos. The United Nations was on the ground in Iraq and could find nothing. After extensive searches Bush was finally forced to admit that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/index.html
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2003/02/WeeklyReview2003-02-11#2003093001...
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,892045,00.html
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1307530,00.html
17 -By November 2001, the police and FBI had already arrested and detained by some estimates up to three thousand Muslim or Arab noncitizens in the United States. These people were not even suspected of terrorism; they were merely non-US citizens who had allegedly violated some immigration procedure. Many of these people effectively disappeared in US jails; a number were beaten and ultimately deported. Guantanamo:
What the World Should Know, Michael Ratner and Ellen Ray
-The US government admits [Guantanamo] is an interrogation camp, though it denies torture is used there. However, the administration admits to using techniques that legally constitute cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, which is prohibited under law. ibid
-Bush rounds up people, holds them indefinitely without charges:
-Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture
-Guantanamo Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal Court
-Bush administration memos on torture
18 -Signing statements, claims he doesn’t have to obey the laws