Yahoo!! This is great news, will be glued to this story, will the truth finally get out there??? With the Repuglicans controlling the judiciary, is it possible Bushit could really be impeached?? I am crossing all my fingers and toes this will happen!!! Keep fighting the good fight folks!!!

Thank The Lord!!!! I have been praying for this,this man is an avocate for the Devil,and I know the Lord will bring him down!!!!!!!!!

As far as Bush is concerned, I am at a loss of words (go figure). Actually "Yeah Boy" comes to mind. Also just posted this on conyersblog:

What is going on in Texas? Tom Delay takes another hit on the “ethical” front. A Texas Judge in a civil trial determined that his Political Action Committee failed to report $600,000 in corporate contributions. This is a direct violation of Texas law. I must acknowledge that it will be a sleepless night for me as I wonder how such an activist judge, particularly from Mr. Bush’s home state, could possibly find this mainstay of moral principles guilty of anything other than poor taste in ties. Where are John Cornyn and Bill Frist when you need them?

Could be a great day in Muddsville today!

Alan

Sarah, the judiciary is not controlled by any political party. Impeachment happens in the congress. It is controlled by the majority which is republican.

Maxie, this is an inquiry. It is miles and miles and miles from an impeachment which is quite unlikely in this congress.

After the '06 election if the elections are not rigged again and if the republicans loose some seats and the democrats regain the majority, then there is a opening for the inquiry.

But even that is not a slam dunk for impeachment and conviction. It is more difficult than that as you saw with Clinton. The impeachment in the house was not translated into a conviction in the Senate, because some republicans did not vote against Clinton even tho some democrats did.

Dredd - Just to add a small nuance to your point. A "Resolution of Inquiry" may be voted on by Congress. Such a Resolution would then either be voted up or down, putting each of the voters on record whether they'd like to look into the matter.

So the "Resolution of Inquiry" vote could move forward no matter who is controlling Congress.

Not sure if your comment took that into account or not, so trying to clear that up as best as I can (based on my understanding of "Resolutions of Inquiry" anyway).

This is OT for this thread, but concerns the election fraud issue. Reuters has a story about state legislatures reviewing voting laws. However, it seems to focus on the issue of checking ID's of voters, rather than the real problem of paperless voting machines with unverifiable software. So it's mainstream media, but it's focusing on a side issue. Here's the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/rights_voting_dc

Come-on you guys,we have to have hope here,With God,nothing is impossible.I BELIEVE!!!

Has anyone noticed that some Republicans seem to be breaking ranks lately with the lame duck White House? Maybe they're looking at those polls, and if they don't have Diebold or ES&S machines in their state, they have to worry about being re-elected. In that case, it's possible some GOPsters might actually cut the neocons loose, especially if the press gets behind this resolution of inquiry widely. Which means an impeachment case might actually have a shot.

Oh, my God, what am I saying? Sorry, for a second I thought I was on Vulcan. I forgot this is the illogical Earth we're talking about here.

Actually, both Brad and Dredd are wrong and right. Brad is right if this were drafted as a privileged motion. In the 105th Congress, Rep. Alcee Hastings offered such a motion and it was voted on by the full House.

However, the actual resolution of inquiry against Nixon and Clinton were not drafted as a privileged motion and instead were referred to the House Judiciary Committee. There, with majorities not supportive of Nixon and Clinton, the resolutions were reported out of committee favorably, and passed on the House floor.

Here, some questions to think about --- if a privileged motion were introduced in this House it would quickly go to a vote, where it would lose by a huge, huge margin. At the same time, it would shoe who was for accountability and who was against it.

If the motion was drafted as per the Clinton and Nixon ones it would be referred to Committee. During that time, grassroots supporters could pressure representatives to sign on to it.

I am agnostic about which is the better course, but wanted to lay that on the table.

This is going to have to get a lot worse before THIS congress will impeach a president from their own party.

It COULD get a lot worse, but, so far, they just seem to feint-and-jab with every punch thrown. It's going to take a lot to deliver a knock-out, with the present congress in place (sorry, Jim Lampley's influence).

Maybe if some of them can get voted out of office in the mid-term elections........but, this is what they have Diebold machines for, right?

A small point in the larger context... But, FWIW I read a lengthy and heated discussion on another blog (had to have been on Conyers' blog, DailyKos, or DU) about the use of the word "memo". The bottom line was that the Downing Street "memo" was not a memo, but were officially recorded "minutes" of a meeting that took place. The lawyerly types pointed out that "minutes" are actual records of meetings, and therefore have a much higher legal weight than a memo does. There was a lot of hand-wringing (or whatever) about the continued use of "memo". I'll try to find a link. It seems to me that this is important if the use of "minutes" rather than "memo" will help raise public awareness. On the other hand, it might just be a unneeded distraction from the major point (Bush lied). Comments?

The British memo is a plus. But I agree it isn't enough alone to support an impeachment inquiry, especially since it conforms to a private agreement between Reagan and Thatcher (for which both should be impeached in absentia/posthumously).

Two stolen elections remain the best opportunity for impeachment, with the added plus that Cheney couldn't assume office. He'd be impeached, too.

Please Read!!!

Has anyone ever thought of what the network news has done to the timespan of major events....Think about how long ago 2001 feels.

I was watching MSNBC the other day and they have 15 minute updates 24 hours a day.

The best way I can explain what I am thinking is, imagine looking at a movie screen standing right in front of it, you cant see the whole picture. Now step back. It gets clearer.

Perhaps the 24 hour network news is a psycological trick to clutter peoples minds with new information every 15 minutes or so, in order to make them forget the big picture. There is always something new to worry about.

Proof is every major news story since 9/11 (and if my hypothisis holds true perhaps longer) from 9/11 itself, to the hunt for osama, to WMD, to torture, to bankruptcy bill, to the patriot act, etc....

Clutter every Americans head with pointless shit 24 hours a day and they forget after a month. Sure everyone is outraged by Abu Garib when it first happened, but then it was old news. It was spun and forgotten. Except by us.

I think we need to go back as far as 1950's and look at what might be the bigger picture. A plan on such a larger scale that it spanned generations. Or not even that long ago, what did the cronies write in the late 90's about how to make America the dominant country in the next century.

Lets find a starting point, and build our case from there. Don't forget how all the things that pissed us off in the past may have been part of a bigger plan than we still need to put together.

Charlie

Please Read!!!

Has anyone ever thought of what the network news has done to the timespan of major events....Think about how long ago 2001 feels.

I was watching MSNBC the other day and they have 15 minute updates 24 hours a day.

The best way I can explain what I am thinking is, imagine looking at a movie screen standing right in front of it, you cant see the whole picture. Now step back. It gets clearer.

Perhaps the 24 hour network news is a psycological trick to clutter peoples minds with new information every 15 minutes or so, in order to make them forget the big picture. There is always something new to worry about.

Proof is every major news story since 9/11 (and if my hypothisis holds true perhaps longer) from 9/11 itself, to the hunt for osama, to WMD, to torture, to bankruptcy bill, to the patriot act, etc....

Clutter every Americans head with pointless shit 24 hours a day and they forget after a month. Sure everyone is outraged by Abu Garib when it first happened, but then it was old news. It was spun and forgotten. Except by us.

I think we need to go back as far as 1950's and look at what might be the bigger picture. A plan on such a larger scale that it spanned generations. Or not even that long ago, what did the cronies write in the late 90's about how to make America the dominant country in the next century.

Lets find a starting point, and build our case from there. Don't forget how all the things that pissed us off in the past may have been part of a bigger plan than we still need to put together.

Charlie

Hi, Dredd #4 - I sincerely hope you are being overly negative. While the Congress is majority Republican, the coalition is several million strong and growing. Not all republicans are neocon bullies. And as you know, when bullies are faced down by people their own "size" or "larger", they dissolve into the cowards they really are. Are all the Republicans going to be willing to go down with Bush? I don't think so. Bush has been useful, but the rats will desert the ship to avoid drowning. May we have JUSTICE, and have it SOON!

If the Congress and whoever try to whitewash this and sweep it under the carpet, it is up to Americans to take to the streets in millions in order to inform the neocons exactly whose country it is, and exactly who is working for whom. Don't let the bastards take your children's lives, take your money, take your reputations, take your freedoms. They are a handful of bullies. They can be beaten far more easily than you think. You need only to stand up to them and not let them walk all over you! Raise your voices like Galloway did. TELL THE NEOCONS THEIR DAYS OF DESTRUCTION ARE OVER!!

Peggy#16

Millions marching in the streets to take back our government would be great, except for one minor problem - there is no organization or cohesion of all the people who feel this way. Most people don't realize what the hell is going on in this country, and many don't give a damn anyway. The media has not presented to most of the public what has actually transpired in the past 4 1/2 years. People I talk to everyday are dumfounded when I speak of the corruption in the Ohio election. Most think I am making the shit up! Not everyone has access to a computer, especially the older generation, so they cannot read the truth on BradBlog or RawStory - they must rely on television or the local newspaper. Needless to say, what news they get is structured to fit the Administration's needs. I would run out into the streets and shout my revulsion for this President and his Administration, but I would be alone. I am sure there are many who share my views, but how in the world do I find them in this community? We are a collective group when we are on the internet, but when we shut off the computer, we are but one. I write to my Congressman, Senators, newspapers and any elected official I figure would have any influence whatsoever to help. I sign petitions almost everyday, I have "Impeach Bush" stickers on my 4 x4, and I corner anyone I can to speak the truth about this administration. My wife thinks I am obsessed with politics, but I don't have a political bone in my body. I hate politics, but I cannot stomach what Bush and his Republican cronies have done (and still are doing) to this country. My question is this, "How do we get a million people out into the streets to fight this injustice?" How do we organize locally?

{ed note: Deleted. Same poster posting as different names. When he posts as Atty Jim again his posts will be allowed to stay.}

{ed note: Deleted. Same poster posting as different names. When he posts as Atty Jim again his posts will be allowed to stay.}

Robert #17 -

It's true, we are very scattered even online. One way to organize everyone would be for the major blogs (BRAD BLOG, Kos, DU, RawStory, etc.) to coordinate events. Can you imagine our numbers just on these few sites? The word would spread through the blogs and we in turn would spread it through emails.

I've always been curious how big our numbers are in the activist online community. We discuss this often on the CCN (Clark Community Network) blog - most everyone would be up for demonstrations/marches. People ARE ready!! Our endless letters, emails and phone calls are having an effect, but the corporate controlled media can easily ignore us. Our physical presence in massive numbers could not be ignored.

The trolls are out again. That can only mean we're making progress.

Hi, Robert #17 - Here's one answer:

A.N.S.W.E.R. ACT NOW TO STOP WAR & END RACISM

Each person must do whatever is in his/her capacity to do: write letters, attend a rally, leave flyers on the subway or bus, exchange thoughts and ideas on the internet. You are doing it now. If you want to march in Washington DC, here's one you can attend. Every individual small act will amount to a huge push in the direction we all want to go. We are many...we are 6 or 7...

It's curious how some people are so comfortable with the state of the country. How bad will things have to get before they see what we know?

Doubters - read up - see where your president is taking our country... you may not care now, but you may when it's too late.

The Gathering Darkness
America In The 21st. Century

The Origins of the Overclass

The only fraud that is taking place here is Brad beating the drum for a fraud that never took place.

* OHIO COIN-GATE BREAKS WIDE OPEN *
It's posted here at Americablog

Has the domino effect begun?

GANNON revisited. I am sorry to post off topic but there is some explosive stories about Gannon. From sex rings to kidnapping. If any of this is true then we are in for some huge smoke screens.

NEW Gannon site and an in-depth report in a forum.

I found this on the new Jeff Gannon site.
http://www.jeffgannon.com/

May 24, 2005

Liberal media activists to meet Conyers today

Democratic Rep. John Conyers summoned liberal media activists to Capitol Hill today for a panel discussion: "Media Bias and the Future of Freedom of the Press". It will likely focus on how liberals should go about maintaining their exclusive franchise on the mainstream media. Unfortunately for them it is too late.

Scheduled to appear:

Al Franken, the Al Franken Show, Air America Radio David Brock, founder of liberal Media Matters
Randi Rhodes, the Randi Rhodes Show, Air America
Joe Madison, The Black Eagle Radio Show
Justin Webb, senior Washington correspondent, BBC Eric Alterman, senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress
Steve Rendall, liberal media watchdog group, FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting)
Mark Lloyd, senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress.

Now read what people are saying about a child SEX ring that could involve Jeff or Johnny or James.

THIS IS EXPLOSIVE!
http://www.dynamictruth....;f=9&t=012887#000003

Mark

OT must read (if you haven't already)
"Dear friends,

We have a wonderful opportunity to break the 9/11 story even further into the mainstream media. We've already had some amazing breakthroughs on 9/11 media coverage lately, including Dr. David Ray Griffin's powerful 9/11 lecture being featured two weekends in a row on nationally televised C-SPAN. I'll be sending out an email soon detailing the many recent articles and shows which have appeared in the media questioning the official 9/11 story. We've also seen a few key media pieces debunking the 9/11 cover-up, which demonstrate that those behind the cover-up are beginning to feel the issue can no longer be ignored.

We now have a major opportunity to take 9/11 media coverage a step further. A reporter for New York's Newsday, one of the 10 largest circulation newspapers in the US, contacted Dr. Griffin, who referred him to me and others. I talked extensively with this gentleman on the phone yesterday. This Newsday reporter informed me that he and his colleagues have received information that a significant number of agents in the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence services are talking about the complicity of rogue elements within the US government in the 9/11 attacks. He is pulling together information to write an article about officials within government who do not believe the government's official story.

I am making a special request right now to any of you who know of government officials who, either on the record or off the record, are willing to talk about their doubt of the official story of 9/11. Please encourage them to contact me so that I can give them information on how they can be involved in this important news story. "

http://www.wanttoknow.info/050525opportunity911

SAME REPUGLICAN SHIT,
DIFFERENT TROLLS!

{ed note: Deleted. Same poster posting as different names. When he posts as Atty Jim again his posts will be allowed to stay.}

Caring-

Perhaps it is because you are so used to sitting on the couch drinking beer that you brain no longer has the compacity to recognize fact from fiction. Our facts our real, you points are trivial. Our facts can be sourced, your talking points trivial. The other day on John Stewart they showed Governer Bush (pre-2000 in texas) debating president Bush.....man was that funny. Him debating himself showed how unsubstantiated your side of the field is. In regards to Brad, I doubt he is making nearly as much off the bloggers as the MSM is off your little trolls like your self. After all if it weren't for trolls like your self listening to their (2000) to date and counting unsubstantiated later proven wrong reports, then they wouldn't have the coporate sponsors they have.

Get a life loser, perhaps attend an AAA class.

Charlie

gannon's friends are out again I see,he's famous for hanging out with arseholes as we all know.

Peggy #16

You are exactly right. They will do everything necesarry to sweep this under the rug. I have believed for a long time that the final act in this struggle will be when the streets become filled with those who have finally come to the conclusion that they are out of alternatives. The question is, what will the tipping point be? Bombing Iran? A nuclear exchange with N. Korea? The draft? I don't know, but whatever it is, I think that it won't be long before we find out. Every aspect of American government is now poisoned and something has to give.

Robert #17

You and I are asking the same question. How can we get a million people into the street? I think Jen's #20 comment begins to answer that question and is what I was thinking. Shit, Dkos alone has close to 50 thousand registered users, although at an institutional level, they don't seem to be very open to coalition building. However, individually they are dedicated activists. Maybe Brad, with his connections to other blogs and sites could help us to begin organizing mass protests. In the mean time, United For Peace and Justice has lists of local and national protests and actions that you might find helpful.

There is a lot of energy and many good comments and ideas on this thread tonight. You people are awesome.

Oh, and BTW, Fuck the trolls. Figuratively of course.

Re: RLM # 21
"The trolls are out again. That can only mean we're making progress."

The sudden rise in the Dow Jones Troll Weighted Index [DJTWI] would indicate substantial and sustained gains across The Reality-Based Community [RBC] stocks driven by an unpresidented (sic) collapse in consumer confidence in Bush [POTU$] stocks and Cheney [VPOTU$] bonds.

The Reality-Based Community [RBC] stocks
Recommendation: BUY (Mortgage your house)

Main Stream Media stocks remain Junk (in default)
Recommendation: Dump!

Hey WillyWacker, that looks like Madeleine Albright.

Hey Charlie, it's AA, not AAA. I doubt there are many anti-aircraft artillery counseling groups. My God, are you all really that stupid?

MMIIXX #27

Add this circa 1962 Declassified information to what we believe about 9/11 --- this will make you realize just what goes on behind closed doors:

From ABC NEWS Sept. 30, 2004
U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." **MORE**

Follow this link to see (.pdf) copies of the actual Joint Chiefs of Staff document --- re: Operation Northwoods

political leanings aside ,PRAeTorian your quite an arsehole when it comes down to it.IMHO of course.

re #36 yep, Kira! Operation Northwoods can easily be seen as the ancestor of 9/11. (I wonder what the code name for 9/11 was.)

My Pet Goat?

{ed note: Deleted. Same poster posting as different names. When he posts as Atty Jim again his posts will be allowed to stay.}

Kira Operation Northwoods I know about!

PRAeTorian thinks the ends justify the means , whats the

Sorry MMIIXX --- when I said "you" I meant everybody! (Especially our little gnat-trolls. Of course when your brain rolls around in your head like a b-b in a boxcar, there's not much hope for comprehension.)

So - if the Joint Chiefs of Staff were making these horrible plans in 1962, plus the PNAC plans we've seen (put together by the current WH bunch) --- well, I guess thinking individuals can put 2 & 2 together.

Hey MMIIXX re: PRAeTorian/giggler (66.177.196.246) whoever?
Have you seen this guy's resume?

"Being an American military officer who aided commanders both in the field and the Pentagon for the last four years,"

Yes we're witnessing the "bloody" fruits of his expertise in Iraq on a daily basis!

Some free advice for PRAeTorian, hang on tight to that Pizza delivery-boy job of yours!

Re: #34 Nah! This is Condoleezza Rice's Bio pic from her website.

Why isn't he in Iraq now , OSP

OSP ??

Yes - I hear they have a shortage of recruits. Hey - with a name like Praetorian and with his "credentials," why isn't he in Iraq instead of wasting his time in the 101st keyboardist wingnut reserves?

Pentagon's Office of Special Plans

"The Bush administration develops plans for post-war Iraq. But the process is plagued with infighting between a small, highly secretive group of planners in the Pentagon and experts at the CIA and State Department who are involved with the “Future of Iraq Project” (see April 2002-March 2003). The two opposing groups disagree on a wide range of topics, but it is the Pentagon group which exerts the strongest influence on the White House's plans (see Fall 2002) for administering post-Saddam Iraq. One State Department official complains to The Washington Post in October 2002 “that the Pentagon is seeking to dominate every aspect of Iraq's postwar reconstruction.” The group of Pentagon planners includes several noted neoconservatives who work in, or in association with, the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans (see September 2002) and the Near East/South Asia bureau. The planners have close ties to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), two think tanks with a shared vision of reshaping the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East in favor of US and Israeli interests. The Pentagon planning group “had a visionary strategy that it hoped would transform Iraq into an ally of Israel, remove a potential threat to the Persian Gulf oil trade and encircle Iran with US friends and allies,” Knight Ridder Newspapers will later observe."

link

Re #17, #27, #36 Anectotal example of most people's understanding of 9/11:

A couple of days ago, my wife and I went to buy new glasses. The lady who waited on us expressed her guilt at having just mailed her 18 year old son's information to selective service under explicit threat of being jailed if she didn't do so. I asked her if she believed that the government might have been behind the 9/11 attack. Her reply was, "Why would they do it if they would only have to re-build?" Her reaction is not unique. She is too busy working to do anything other than watch TV and read the "news" paper. Therefore, her son could now become cannon fodder.

That should have been "anecdotal."

I think the repubs. are splitting. On maine radio today, Olympia Snowe asking for explanation from Pentagon IN 7 DAYS, as to how they chose the base closings. She is not supporting nuclear option or Bolton. She also stated in op ed the Notheast will be defenseless. Bringing troops home from Europe. Guess where they will go? Red states.

Comment #11, while the document has come to be called The Downing Street Memo, I state in my article, that the memo is actually meeting minutes...

Just FYI

Molly #49 -

Dear Olympia's voter base IS the military: Bath Iron Works, the Portland Shipyards, etc. Poor dear, she's betted all on a losing horse. I'm not wasting any pity. She's sold out the republic for the party.

NOW she protests!

Praetorian - I've allowed your comments to stay, as silly as they make you look, because you've at least posted under the same name (and because they make you look silly).

If you'd like me to continue extending you this courtesy, then knock off the personal attacks and insults to other commenters.

There's really only those two rules here. Good boy for minding #1. But unless you mind #2 you're gone.

Please don't make me treat you like the four-year old we have to treat Atty Jim as. Thanks.

Consider yourself politely warned.

Not sure what fabric is being woven in this rather wandering thread. My take on the "memo" always has fixed upon the word "fix" in it. When push comes to shove, the definition of that word, particularly in the UK, always can turn out to have been meant to be "to concentrate upon" rather than change the facts around.

Molly #49

Hi, has Snowe come out and said she would vote against Bolton? Another thing. She must understand what is happening with the base closings shouldn't she? She is being punished, along with Collins, for her moderate ways, on top of the whole blue state to red state shift of bases and jobs. On thune regarding Ellsworth, I think the Admins. is setting him up to be a hero when they reverse the Pentagon's decision on that base.

I would agree that language does matter and that "minutes" is a far stronger statement than "memo". Is jazzolog #55 correct in the meaning of fix in the UK? That would put the statement in a different perspective for me and seems to make it harder for us to use it against Bush and Co.

#55 and #57

"But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

re: fixed. I lived in England for 10 years, and I can attest to the fact that "English English" and American English are different in sometimes subtle ways. But, as far as I know "fix" has the same range of meanings there as here. "The fix is in" means the job has been done by arm twisting or bribery or whatever, but "fixed around" could also mean "arranged around" or "selectively chosen" or "(he was) fixated on"...

Since the statement in the minutes had to do with a report of a meeting in the US, I'd say that at the very least the meaning was "selectively chosen" information, and that Bush was especially seeking (and presenting) intelligence and "facts" to justify a war and ignoring and/or not seeking information that didn't fit his mission (no due diligence!). Hard to say if "fixed" meant more than that-- the Brits at the Dowing Street meeting (who is C?) obviously had access to their own intelligence reports, and how well these compared (or didn't) with info presented by Bush might give a further meaning to "fixed"-- but without that context, it's a ????.

Brad #5 My purpose was to set the stage for no-one being disappointed. I have no problem with the inquiry and think it should happen regardless. Anything less is negligent.

I do think it is a mistake to link it to impeachment mechanisms at this time, and evidently that is the thrust of the language:

"the Committee on the Judiciary is directed to investigate and report to the House of Representatives whether sufficient grounds exist to impeach George W. Bush, President of the United States. Upon completion of such investigation, that Committee shall report thereto, including, if the Committee so determines, articles of impeachment."

This tactic may cause the inquiry to fail. I would liked to have seen language that focused and directed in inquiry more as follows:

"the Committee on the Judiciary is directed to investigate and report to the House of Representatives whether sufficient grounds exist to find that George W. Bush, President of the United States, intentionally misled or lied to congress and the american people about the reasons for invading Iraq. Upon completion of such investigation, that Committee shall report thereto, including, if the Committee so determines, a formal congressional finding of facts on this matter."

At any rate the inquiry is a must do procedure if congress is to maintain any health at all.

It seems to me that getting the inquiry done and the facts on the record is a better incremental tactic because it does not bind it to what, at this stage of the game, is an unreachable place.

#57

I've lived here (UK) all my life and my interpretation of 'fixed' is that it varies with the context as Valleygirl states. Jazzolog is right that it can be used to mean to concentrate on or give attention to something - as in 'my broken television was is at the shop being fixed' or the obvious 'he fixed his full attention on it'. But it is more often used as in 'the election was fixed' (as you say yours were by the Republicans) or as in this memo's case 'facts were being fixed around the policy'.

For me there is no doubt what it meant. Especially so considering its context within the larger paragraph : -

'..Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.'

Most of us here take that to mean : -

Bush wanted this done and wanted to be seen to have an excuse to do it - however the proof just wasn't there, so they manufactured it accordingly - the NSC hated the slow, peaceful, multilateral UN method (as usual) and couldn't be bothered to get info on Saddam themselves - But then, there was no need for discussion since they already knew they were going to bomb Iraq to smithereens and not even consider any longer term objectives for the country once they'd done so.

I don't think I've met anyone who even tries to argue that the wording can be more innocent than it's been taken to mean. Generally it's a question of ignoring it by the government in the hope it will go away. And that policy must be working, for despite that memo being printed on 1st May, it more or less died a death as a news item and isn't being pursued much anymore. The papers here are more interested in the fact that Liverpool won the European football cup - maybe there's something to that 'Some say football is a matter of life and death, but it's much more serious than that' quote. Maybe you'll have more luck in your country with this kind of revelation, but I doubt it.

Valley Girl #58

Let's remember that the president has some of the habits of the fundamentalist religionists.

There is a common practice in that realm that is know as "proof texting". The way it manifests in religious doctrine is that a preacher or teacher will have a preconceived notion and will go thru a religious source, e.g. Bible, and select verses that support the preconceived notion, and will ignore or pass by text that would tend to indicate the contrary or at least weaken the preconceived notion.

This is why there are 450-500 denominations that have different doctrines while they claim the said doctrine is based upon the same source material.

In the intelligence source material case the way a "proof texting" operation would go is that reports or segments of reports would be highlighted and quoted to support the preconceived notion (invade Iraq - its got lotsa oil), while any reports or segments of reports to the contrary would be ignored and passed by.

So, any indication whatsoever that there might be WMD's and nukes in Iraq would be used no matter how spurious the source or the likelihood of it being sound.

That is how "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy". The policy was invade Iraq so the case needed to be made that WMD's and nukes were in the hands of a brutal dictator and it was a security threat to the US. Waiting could mean a mushroom cloud in america.

#61

"Let's remember that the president has some of the habits of the fundamentalist religionists."

Do you think genuinely believes in those kind (or much of any kind) of religious beliefs? I ask since I've always felt him to come across as very smug and phoney, and not believing in much of anything except his own aggrandisement. I know you said 'some of the habits of' and he's possibly made use of their ways too for his own ends, like the cowboy ways etc., but my question would be do you think there is anything at all genuine in the stance that he's taken?

Awesome wild man Brad! That is the piece, the plan, the direction to carry this in, with the link to submit signature on a petition, and add our own comments, and it says it goes directly to our very own Congressmen!! I love it!! NOW you are truly rockin' Brad!! Everyone - sign tha petition, and pass it along to your friends and hand it out on all the other blogs! The wave is breaking over them from this point on in! I love it Brad!

My additional comments pose the following to our Congressmen in the effort to put them into a position of either standing by a liar/President, or declaring their innocence of the whole thing and not standing by a liar right now. Rock ON!!
Gh

The first question is: Mr. Congressman did you know that President Bush was lying to you and to me about the pretext for going to war in Iraq?
The second question is: Mr. Congressman, do you think President Bush should be allowed to lie to the American people and to you, our United States Congress, about the pretexts for going to war against Iraq?
The third question is: Mr. Congressman, do you approve of the president lying to the Congress and the American people? Is that your position on this, that you think it's okay for the President of the United States to lie as he commits our forces to attack another country? Where does it end? Can he attack Canada for instance?

I hope to see you all on the Fourth of July in DC, five million of us in tinfoil hats (hope for a sunny day - the effect in photos will be outstanding!) massed around the Capitol Steps! If just one other person promises to meet me there, I'll fly over from Prague for the occasion! We have to mass there and not leave until this ugly matter is cleared up. And compare the weather we'll have compared to what the Ukrainians put up with! The time for talk is over - it's time to take our country back!

Donna #62 It is difficult to tell.

Accidents do happen:

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." — Bush in Greece, New York (link here, bold added).

In that quote he was telling the truth and being sincere on accident.

Perhaps that happens in the religious context too.

What seems more important than whether or not I think he is for real is whether or not he does.

I mean if he really thinks God is talking to him and guiding him, that can lead to more significant events than whether or not we think God is talking to him or not.

#58 and #60
Thank you for your interpretations of fix. I always enjoy your comments. Keep smiling, it drives trolls nuts!

MMIIXX #27 Thanks for the post.

If this is true then really the only thing that can really break the story is happening!

Everyone should read the story and check out its accuracy (link here).

Larisa #50 -

And MINUTES it is! I don't understand this complete opacity on the part of the supposedly-enlightened. Langauge matters!

MMIXX #27, like Dredd, I also thank-you for the post. What you said made my day. Thanks to a link at Bradblog a few months ago, regarding the pentagon strike on 9/11, I couldn't believe what I was reading, however it piqued my curiousity to read more on this subject. After much reading on different websites, I came to the horrifying conclusion that the "official story" of 9/11 was absurd! In fact it REEKS! I am now reading David Ray Griffin's book, and much of what I am reading, is out there online on some great websites. Mr. Griffin has not yet mentioned the 120 BILLION dollars of fraudulent Gold Bonds that were to come due on the 11th or 12th of September 2001, that, had they been paid, would have exposed the perpetrators of this fraud. Guess where these Gold Bonds were stored??? At the bottom of the World Trade Centre!!!! Hmmmmm, How convenient ey!!! (please forgive me for the "ey" I can't help myself, as I am Canadian) I read that "nugget" on Karl Schwarz's website. I pray the truth will come out, on that, and of course the most recent election fraud! If I was American I would be printing up articles on these websites and leaving them everywhere (an idea someone had posted on Bradblog a while ago). It is difficult to try to convince people of this horrific crime against the people of America, as I have tried to tell my mom and my sister and they refuse to believe it, even though they saw the "Pentagon Strike" video. This is bursting inside of me and I want to tell everyone the real story of 9/11. Is there anything as a Canadian that I can do?? I pray that 9/11 doesn't go the way of JFK, our futures depend on it!!! I salute all of you here at Bradblog and everyone trying to get the truths out there!!

Yes - here's an article from the Guardian UK:

Papers Reveal a Commitment to War

The document is a minute, drawn up by Matthew Rycroft, a Downing Street foreign policy adviser, of a high-level meeting at Downing Street on July 23 2002.

Sarah - follow Brad's advice to us all --- "keep making NOISE!" Thanks for getting the word out.

#60 Donna,

Thanks for adding your informed perspective as to how the minutes/ memo are being interpreted in the UK. I am pretty good with "English English" and its subtle social uses, but I'm still learning.

#61 Dredd,

Thanks for introducing me to the phrase "proof texting"- that's a useful one. I was aware of the use of this technique by the fundamentalists, but didn't know what to call it. Your explanation in the context of Bush and Iraq was great- I was trying to explain that Bush might not be "lying" according to a strict definition, but was actually doing something worse- twisting the information, but I couldn't quite nail it. You did.

I hope no one interpreted my attempts to explain "fixed" in the context of the minutes, ending with a ??? to mean that I was defending Bush in anyway whatsoever. I actually believe (have so for several years) that he's a "sociopath" by one important measure at least (more probably)- that of being able to tell lies freely, with absolutely no sense of guilt or remorse about any of his actions. Sociopaths can be very charming and are often extremely smart in a deviant kind of way. Same as Ted Bundy. I really didn't understand fully about "sociopaths" until I had to deal with a couple of them in my line of work-- and they can be very hard to deal with, for some of the reasons above, and a they can fool a lot of people.

Thanks also to Dredd for helping me to understand American politics a little more. You guys are fantastic!

#27 #67 et al.

Dredd and MMIIXX, I almost missed your 9-11 related links, but I'm having a kind of twilight zone experience as a result of those readings.

Sorry to all about not remaining "on task" about the July 4 plannings, but this has turned into an extremely interesting thread in other ways.

After I posted my opinion that Bush is a sociopath, I went to google to find some more information, "Bush sociopath." Here's one link (sorry, I haven't figured out how to do 'actual' links, so you'll have to cut and paste to read:

Bush isn't a Moron, He's a Cunning Sociopath
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/conover01.htm

And then !!!!, with one click on an article linked on that site, I ended up at:

Psychopaths, Secret Societies and the New World Order
http://www.911-strike.com/psychopaths.htm

The above is a really long, scholarly type of article, despite the title.

And, the page itself has many links to exactly what was referenced by Dredd and MMIIXX- questions as to the 9-11 attacks. I haven't had time to explore them all. But, it does seem kind of creepy that I got from "Bush sociopath" to "9-11" by clicking on one single link.

I have been so focused on election fraud that the alternative 9-11 explanations have been totally off my radar screen, so to speak. Now, I'll read more, and wanted to provide the "links" for anyone else who has also just tuned in to this 9-11 topic.

VG

Valley Girl - welcome to the grim reality club. It happened to me last December. I was in shock, really, for several days while I allowed the truth to sink in. It's truly awful. The Twilight Zone it is.

#73 Kira

The grim reality club!!! Count me in. As if I wasn't depressed enough already about what's been going on! The only therapy is to keep making NOISE, as you rightly advised someone before, on this thread.

VG

Hey All

I think the vote on the Iraq debate shows why I advocate going one step at a time on The Resolution (see my post #59 above).

The debate on the Iraq matter did not go well because of the high percentage of democrats voting against it, and the low percentage of Republicans voting for it (link here). Names of each voter and how they voted here.

So that is why I say we would do better if we just tried for a resolution to look into the Downing Street Minutes rather than impeachment based upon it. First things first.

Hey Dredd

You're probably right ... but you can see why some people are so impatient, no?

WP #76 I totally understand the impatience, the rage, the hurt, and all the rest cause I have been there too.

Kira #77 Remember that the congress, whether they let us know or not, feel guilty about the Iraq debacle because they are complicit.

Under our constitution only congress has the power to declare war. They authorized the war.

The rhetoric against the president is also against them to the extent they were negligent.

The fact they were lied to is the path to seperate them from the debacle. But it is too soon to jump to impeachment - votes wise. Not enough are ready by a long shot. Even if the law was broken. Like a jury they must look at the facts before they look at the law.

But enough of them could be persuaded to look into the lies the president and cabinet used to get the war going I think.

Especially since elections are approaching and they need some way to distance themselves from the unpopular president.

Then again, Dredd, WP & All --- Raw Story Downing Street Memo
reports:

"...“Within 48 hours after the attack on Iraq, the president wrote a letter to Congress indicating that Iraq posed a serious and imminent threat to national security and if he knew that was not true at the time he submitted that letter it is a clear violation of the False Statements Accountability Act of 1996,” Bonifaz said.

Under this Act, amending 18 U.S.C. § 1001, it is a crime knowingly and willfully (1) to falsify, conceal or cover up a material fact by trick, scheme or device; (2) to make any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) to make or use any false writing or document knowing it to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; with respect to matters within the jurisdiction of the legislative, executive, or judicial branch.

He goes on to discuss the other statutes and laws that may have been violated, including but not limited to the Federal Anti-Conspiracy Statute (more per above link).

When asked if the Inquiry of Resolution would apply to others involved in the alleged effort to mislead the public into war, Bonifaz explained that the procedure requires that a full inquiry begin from the top of the chain of command.

“Provisions in U.S. Constitution guarantee that when a President abuses power, engages in excesses, and subverts the constitution, the people have a recourse through their elected officials in congress,” he said."

Now I know we have a problem with our "elected" officials in congress - but - if the millions (or 6 or 7 of us) stand up to the jellyfish ... can we make a "citizen's arrest???

The congress has put itself in a box-they did not oppose, they did not debate, they did not question and now that bush is in decline if they now do anything that makes the war go bad (remember the news is so controlled that many think that things are just wonderful in Iraq--our trolls for example) then it will be the congress that will take the fall for the desaster to come.

Bonifaz is a brilliant lawyer with boundless passion. If he were prosecuting Bush in a court of law, I have no doubt he'd convict him of high crimes and misdemeanors.

But Dredd is right that Congress isn't prepared to vote that way at this point. One step at a time, one revelation at a time, one failed P.R. effort by the White House at a time...patience is needed.

Minutes, not memo.

The story of the Downing Street Minutes has not died by a long shot. It just took 30 days to drill into the lazy dopy minds of the US media and public. You see, this document is not and never was a “memo” like the US is used to i.e. Gonzales Bybee Yoo, etc.

This document is MINUTES of the highest level intel briefing. Copies were distributed only to those attending that meeting. One look at them and any secretary could tell you what they were and how important/dangerous they are. Anybody read them, really read them?

"IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents"

Anybody that read even that far would know they are minutes of a meeting. RECORD of a highly classified meeting. This ain't no memo!

So this story has not yet begun, and it has to do with using words that describe the facts. After 5 years of Bushspeak the people aren’t used to this. And they have dumbed down their language to the point that the most explosive evidence has just appeared on the scene, incontrovertible… and the public is acting rather numb about it. What’s another memo? they seem to be asking.

The WH press corps, Scott McClellan, and Sen. McCain have minimized the importance of this story by using the minimal term “memo” It’s a way to make it go away in the media and in the public awareness. The public only picked up on the wrong word because they got it from the media. The media that shapes public opinion, depending on which regime they are trying to protect or expose.

For more on the story of “Minutes, not Memo” see dKos

A Matter of Minutes — DOWNING STREET DOSSIER, and

OF MINUTES & MINISTERS — Legal Considerations of Downing Street Minutes, and

NYT Editor Gets It — Minutes not Memo — Down With Bushspeak!!

A group of us are forming a news outlet to counteract the WH spin, and to try to clear up some of the confusion generated around these documents. If you want memos, just keep watching... there's loads of them!

For now, I would refer them to sign Congressman John Conyers letter demanding that Bush account for the evidence in the Downing Street Minutes, (www.conyersblog.us) Then they can go to AfterDowningStreet.org where they can get more resources for evidence and activism.

OK, it's minutes and not a memo. But as much as I'd like to see Bush's ass in a wringer, I can't see how Congress could or would convert this into an impeachable offense. I fervently hope I'm wrong.

In our system the Executive branch conducts foreign policy. That includes public treaties AND PRIVATE AGREEMENTS between leaders. Cloak and dagger stuff has been going on since the French helped us surreptitiously against England in the 18th century. If Reagan and Thatcher agreed to go to war for each other on request, what is it about the Bush/Blair "understanding" that sets the Downing Street minutes apart and makes them impeachable?

Hello... Use, Copy, Free, WRITINGS and IMAGES or other, IMPEACH BUSH information... From... http://www.RogerART.com

NEW... WRITINGS
Direct link to... ( Re-Written ) for 2001/2/3/4/5/6 -
DECLARATION of INDEPENDENCE
http://www.rogerart.com/RE_WRITTEN%20Dof%20I.htm

NEW... IMAGES...
Direct link to... 15… Democracy… PROTEST-PAINTINGS
http://www.rogerart.com/..._PATRIOT%20DEMOCRACY.htm

Thank you, e-mail… Roger@RogerART.com Web site… www.RogerART.com
______________________________________________________
Also see, A Earth Citizen, Global Project for a more Peaceful Planet… Click here… http://www.OneGlobalCommunity.com

America has been brain washed into this war! More evidence is needed to wash all the bullshit Bush and his oil buddies gave us.
Everytime that puppet Bush moves his mouth nothing but " BUSHIT " comes out!

America has been brain washed into this war! More evidence is needed to wash all the bullshit Bush and his oil buddies gave us.
Everytime that puppet Bush moves his mouth nothing but " BUSHIT " comes out!

free sex chat rooms