Rep. Kucinich introduces Bush impeachment resolution – washingtonpost.com
WASHINGTON — Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a former Democratic presidential contender, said Monday he wants the House to consider a resolution to impeach President Bush. Speaker Nancy Pelosi consistently has said impeachment was “off the table.”
Kucinich, D-Ohio, read his proposed impeachment language in a floor speech. He contended Bush deceived the nation and violated his oath of office in leading the country into the Iraq war. Kucinich introduced a resolution last year to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. That resolution was killed, but only after Republicans initially voted in favor of taking up the measure to force a debate. Kucinich won 50 percent of the vote in a five-way House Democratic primary in March, beating back critics who said he ignored business at home to travel the country in his quest to be president.
Our tolerance for corruption has certainly changed since Nixon’s, and then Clinton’s Presidency. Or, do you think back room deals were made?
#90 What or which nation are you speaking of? The UN inspectors said no WMDs and most of the 1st world – England, Germany, Italy, France…stated that they would abide by what the inspectors found, which was nothing. Now, years later, it turns out that the inspectors were correct. No, my friend… the prez had his Picard -Make It So – moment and his crew obliged. That priceless smirk on his, chainey’s, and rove’s face pretty much summed up how they view their fellow Americans; suckers! Congress? Bought and paid for by the greatest lobby in the world. Have you ever seen chickens in a yard with their heads cut off? My friend, it is time to clean house. We have got to give these maniacs their marching orders, stop this lunacy toward world war. I for one don’t want to wake up duckin and runnin. Arthritis
> The UN inspectors said
> no WMDs and most of
> the 1st world
That is not what the UN inspectors said. They said they had not as yet found any WMDs or programs however it was clear that the Iraqis were being uncooperative and deceptive and could very well be hiding WMDs and their development programs which turned out to be partially true. They *were* hiding WMDs just not in the quantities we expected.
Thomas,
Quote:- “By the way, in your wiki link about the UN, did you note the numerous times that Hussein used chemical weapons?”
Do mean the chemical weapons GIVEN to SADDAM by USA, in better, friendlier 1980’s, for use against Iran … to fight an 8 year US organized proxy war against Iran, for kicking out their friendly SHAH? The war that was lost regardless?
Does USA hold chemical weapons? Does US hold WMDs? Has USA used depleted Uranium weapons in Iraq during two wars? Afghanistan? Balkans? How does this stack up against your arguments. The current war with Iraq was contrived. It was required and had been planned for years. Hence 9/11. MOLTEN STEEL and all.
Do you have any idea what US use of “depleted” Uranium has done in the Middle East and will continue to do as the dust is spread by winds unrecallably around the world? Read about it. Ask returned service personnel still alive. Ask those who are dying from inhaling DU dust. Ask th e unfortunate people of Iraq.
Then think again about what you are saying regarding Saddam and chemical weapons.
> Does USA hold chemical weapons?
> Does US hold WMDs? Has USA used
> depleted Uranium weapons in Iraq
> during two wars? Afghanistan?
> Balkans? How does this stack up
> against your arguments.
Yep we have WMDs. The difference is that we are trusted to be responsible with them whereas Hussein clearly was not; we have never used WMDs against our own people to “send a message.” Depleted uranium is not considered a weapon mass destruction since it can only take out a single target whereas a WMD can take thousands or more at once.
Yes, we gave Saddam chemical weapons because at the time Iran and the Soviet Union were a bigger threat. Times changed. You don’t see a difference between the US and Hussein who used the chemical weapons on his own people?
Why don’t we ask the fortunate people of Iraq whether having a tyrant who tortured his own people worth the cost of getting rid of him?
#127, Thomas,
Yep we have WMDs. The difference is that we are trusted to be responsible with them whereas Hussein clearly was not
Several times over the past couple of decades the US has invaded some very small countries for nefarious reasons. So what happens when we get bogged down and another powerful country opposes us. Do you think Bush or McCain would leave our WMDs on the shelf while they play war? They could do like Reagan did in Lebanon and pack up everything and leave.
When you are the civilians and some airplane drops a cluster bomb that wipes out your neighborhood, that is a WMD. When a soldier fires a machine gun at your car killing your entire family, that is a WMD. When a helicopter gunship fires a missile into home, that is a WMD.
Yes, we gave Saddam chemical weapons because at the time Iran and the Soviet Union were a bigger threat.
No. We gave Saddam chemical weapons so he could use them against Iraq. No threat. Just vindictiveness.
RE #123,
First, there is something fishy about an article that concludes that Rumsfeld was directed to fabricate evidence to invade Iraq without providing a shred of evidence to back that accusation.
Ok, you don’t like my link. Let see how valid your link is. Ooopps, there ain’t one. I provided five cites from four different locations. And you criticize one because you don’t like what it says? And I did that just to satisfy your request for information about others KNOWING Bush lied.
Thomas, I really want to believe you are more intelligent than Lyin’ Mike.
Impeachment is the right way to go.
> When you are the civilians
> and some airplane drops a
> cluster bomb that wipes out
> your neighborhood, that is a WMD.
> When a soldier fires a machine
> gun at your car killing your
> entire family, that is a WMD.
> When a helicopter gunship
> fires a missile into home, that is a WMD.
What sophist nonsense. So if a machine gun qualifies as a WMD, then Hussein *definitely* had *plenty* of WMDs.
> No. We gave Saddam
> chemical weapons so
> he could use them
> against Iraq. No threat.
> Just vindictiveness.
Check. And Kennedy invaded Vietnam cause he didn’t like the way they smelt.
> I provided five cites from
> four different locations.
No. You provided one cite that said anything about Bush “knowing” that Hussein did not have WMDs (which given the above, we know he definitely did) which simply threw out an accusation that Rumsfeld orchestrated evidence with absolutely nothing to substantiate it. Everything else simply backed the idea that French and Germans wanted the inspectors to *continue*. If they thought that Hussein did not have WMDs, they would have *also* felt the inspections were pointless. Let’s not forgot that the French had another motive to continue the weapons inspections as an invasion would (and did) uncover their complicity in the Oil-for-Food scam.
CIA Report 2002
IAEA chief: no evidence so far of revived Iraqi nuclear arms programme
Thomas,
If Depleted Uranium is not considered a weapon of MASS destruction, how do you react to the possibility of greater quantities wind blown DU dust from Middle East entering US via North Africa, then across the Atlantic Ocean. How “MASS” is that? Just hold your breath, particularly if you live in Florida or Texas, where it has already been detected. I understand it is regularly found in monitoring air samples above London, GB.
Check web for pix of horribly distorted babies born to Iraqi mothers and also to US babies fathered by returned servicemen, obviously contaminated by their own DU weapons. Chickens coming home to roost?
It is still up for debate as to whether DU weapons are WMDs. The big difference is that WMDs are *designed* to kill indiscriminately whereas DU weapons are not. That there are side affects from the use of DU weapons has come to light in the past couple of decades and they may eventually end up on the WMD list in which case we’ll stop using them. Regardless, Hussein never had DU weapons so it is irrelevant to the discussion about whether Bush “knew” Hussein possessed actual WMDs.
Thomas …
The debate IS over the truth of Intelligence used to start a long-desired war with Iraq. No WMDs WERE EVER FOUND either before or after that war began. The reason was therefore changed, dramatically, to be Saddam and his treatment of the Kurds, using chemical weapons, (given him by an earlier US administration to fight a proxy war with Iran.) You know that to be so.
Strangely, Israeli intelligence greatly exceeded US intelligence, leading up to 9/11. Refer ‘The 5 dancing Israeli spies, 9/11.’
How do cluster bombs fit in with your measure of what are or not considered WDMs? Do children count in your judgement?
Why was testing of DU weapons, on US soil, ceased some years ago? Was it because they were too heavy? No? Was it because in use they burned and vaporized into extremely fine radio active particles, which DO MAIM AND KILL INDISCRIMINATELY. It took a while, as such things usually do. Regardless, they are still in use today in Iraq and Afghanistan. But of course these people are not considered human, as were not the Vietnamese in an earlier war, also resulting from a pack of lies.
In essence, Saddam killed far fewer human beings, of whatever nationality, than has the current US administration. I’m sure you know that. What should you do?
#133
Thomas
Your President does not agree with you. He admits that no WMDs were found, this is why he changed the rules, making Saddam the only reason for the invasion. OOPS.
Your Administration is responsible for the huge death roll, of both US servicemen and those murdered in the current wars of Mass Oil Robbery. Interestingly, we are today informed that the major oil companies are queuing up vying for ownership of Iraqi oil. Truth is out at last. It wasn’t the non-existent WMDs, it was the OIL, buddy, the OIL. What now for you? Are you an OIL man?
Are you bipolar? On the one hand you are claiming that bombs and machine guns are WMDs and on the other you are claiming we did not find WMDs. You cannot have it both ways.
> He admits that no WMDs were found,
You have proof of this of course. Given that we *did* find chemical weapons I am suspicious of any such official claim coming from Bush.
By the way, if you are American, it is *also* your President whether you voted for Bush or not.
Thomas …
You clearly know I am talking about Cluster Bombs, you know … the ones designed to continue killing children, long after the initiating bombs have exploded and completed their intended damage to property and life… I stand by my description as WMDs.
What do you know about DU weapons, so heavily used by US for last 19 years of seemingly endless wars in remote, invaded countries? At least 20,000 tons in Iraq alone, all reduced to microscopic radio active dust. The results of this use will be around for the rest of time, wind blown fully world wide. As I say maybe you or your family will breathe in just one micro particle, so producing the effects visited by US on the civilians of these countries. Try to read something of them to understand what I am trying to tell you. These weapons are of course WMDs, considering the world population as a mass of human beings. How MASS can you get? The whole of Earth.
As for Bush, simply Google the obvious search words. You will actually see his lips moving while he is telling you about lack of WMDs in Iraq, if you are clever enough.
#136
As of right now, the international community has not declared DU weapons to be WMDs although it has been brought up on occasion. If they do ban them, the US (and Britain and France…) will adjust its arsenal. Until that time, they are fair game. If you are a general about to send thousands of men and women into harms way, you want them to have the most effective weapons they can. I believe Tungsten weapons have the same effect. The problem is that the majority of the world’s supply of Tungsten is in China.
Far more people have been killed by land mines left on the battlefield than all of the DU deaths combined. No question that DU weapons are messy, but they were not designed to intentionally poison an opponent. They were designed to blow through tank armor like a hot knife through butter and destroy the damn thing along with all of its occupants.
No weapon is “designed to continue killing children.” All weapons are designed to kill or maim human beings.
#136 “You clearly know I am talking about Cluster Bombs, you know … the ones designed to continue killing children, long after the initiating bombs have exploded and completed their intended damage to property and life…”
Umm, wrong. They are designed to detonate immediately. They aren’t land mines. There is no “initiating bomb”. There is a shell that opens thus dropping many smaller bombs onto the target.
Please engage brain before posting.
DV hasnt been around or in wars long enough to Prove its lethality…
or long term effects..
Pat,
I think he is discussin the laying of Clusters of land mines..along borders..
the ones that have been there for 40-50 years..
#139 – “Pat,
I think he is discussin the laying of Clusters of land mines..along borders..
the ones that have been there for 40-50 years..”
You’re kidding? That has nothing to do with cluster bombs. He should really go see the wizard before posting again. 😉
#138 – Paddy
“Umm, wrong. They are designed to detonate immediately. They aren’t land mines. There is no “initiating bomb”. There is a shell that opens thus dropping many smaller bombs onto the target.
Please engage brain before posting.
I guess you’re not up on your warfare technology. When cluster bombs are dropped, some of the “bomblets” explode immediately. Many do not, and lie scattered around the landscape, looking like kiddy toys, waiting for some young innocent to pick them up and be blown to bits or horribly disfigured.
Google it. You’ll see.
#141 “I guess you’re not up on your warfare technology. Google it. You’ll see.”
Go visit China Lake and then get back to me. Google? LOL! Go get some 1st hand data. Warfare tech? You make me laugh.
Thomas
Patrick
ECA
I said cluster bombs and meant cluster bombs, like the ones used by Israel in Lebanon a year or so ago. Many children died or were hopelessly mutilated by the ones that didn’t “explode”. Whatever they are designed to do isn’t always the case. Are they deliberately painted up to make them attractive to a child? Seems to do the trick very well.
DU weapons are nuclear weapons in effect. The result of their use will remain deadly to all for the rest of time, wherever the wind patterns take it. Tungsten and uranium have similar densities and are equally useful, but tungsten is very expensive, considering the quantity required to wage needless wars. “Depleted” Uranium is costless, as it a direct by-product of building nuclear weapons. US has a huge stockpile.
Why do you think testing of DU weapons ceased on US soil some years ago? Precisely because, oops, the resulting dust is radio active. Lets go use it elsewhere.
No place to hide now. the gene is out of the bottle, never to return. Watch where you are breathing chaps.
#143
Again, the issue with cluster bombs is the same as that with DU. At the time we invaded, they were not (and at the moment still not) considered WMDs. The generals in charge of the war used the best ordinance available to save the most soldier’s lives. Whether they are *now* considered WMDs is entirely irrelevant to the issue of whether they were considered WMDs *at the time*. Call it the Romanowski approach.
Thomas,
What don’t you understand about DU? By using these weapons knowing that, in use, it converts into microscopic wind blown radioactive particles, US in effect declared war on the entire world. There is no telling where or when YOU may suffer the same consequences as many of the invaded populations and indeed many US troops forced to use them, uninformed. Chickens coming home to roost?
Imagine just for a second that you are a general in charge of thousands of soldiers lives. In your arsenal is an incredibly effective weapon at destroying enemy armor however there is a *possibility* (and that is all that it is at the moment) that it has residual effects although you have taken precautions with your troops in dealing with the effects. It has not been banned by the international community nor has it been declared a WMD. Do you use it? Damn right you use it!
Even if tomorrow, the international community declared DU weapons to be WMDs and banned, the US would still be justified having used them prior to that declaration as they were not considered WMDs **at the time**.
Was Truman justified in using nuclear weapons? Absolutely! Would he have been justified in using them in Korea? No.
Thomas…
The generals you mention are given the weapons they must use and the orders to use them. The US Administration does that. The generals really have no options. Their troops were placed in their hazardous positions by the same Administration by contrived means. They are the people responsible.
You failed to mention an earlier contrived war waged upon Nth. Vietnam, where 53,000 US troops met their doom and well over 2,000,000 Vietnamese, mostly civilians were murdered. The means used were WMDs, in the form of Napalm and defoliant Agent Orange, which, in reality, is Dioxin … one of the most potent poisons yet made. Many generations of Vietnamese and certainly offspring of returned US servicemen have yet to pay the price of this crime. The Tonkin Gulf Incident was used to allow US to Constitutionally declare war on Vietnam.
9/11 was also such a ploy for invading Afghanistan and Iraq and you know it.
All I ask of you is to answer the simple SMOKING GUN question … WHAT MELTED THE STEEL found beneath each of the THREE collapsed WTC buildings. Of course, you can’t, because any answer must be … an agent which will not be found in any normal office building. Be honest with yourself and shed the false umbrella you continue to hide beneath. Get it of your chest.
Those who declare wars, make the rules.
#147
> The generals you mention are
> given the weapons they must
> use and the orders to use them.
Completely wrong. The generals are given weapons they CAN use and the GENERALS decide how best to use them if at all. At most the President can restrict what weapons are made available (FAE’s, nukes etc).
RE: Vietnam
Vietnam was mismanaged by Johnson (and Kennedy) and his staff from the beginning. Yes, in *Vietnam*, the President and his administration mucked with the duties of their generals and it turned into a disaster. However, both Iraq wars were handled much differently specifically because of the mistakes made at Vietnam.
RE: 9/11
You just donned the tin foil hat. I’m not going to debate whether 9/11 was contrived. Needless to say, until someone provides specific and incontrovertible evidence of people in the act of conspiring to mastermind 9/11, it must be accepted that it was simply the work of a bunch of fanatical loonies.
Thomas,
re 9/11
So you are saying, in effect, that you are not prepared to put your mind towards offering what substance melted steel in those 3 WTC locations. This is all that is required to prove that something very, very abnormal happened within those buildings at that time. Once that is established, THEN you will know for sure that local people were responsible. The official reports you lean on so heavily fail to even mention the existence of MOLTEN STEEL … WHY? What do YOUR OWN EYES tell you, if you have yet managed to find some of the recorded facts of the presence of that MOLTEN STEEL? DO TELL.
You don’t get it. Forgot *ALL* of the physical evidence. It is all completely circumstantial. Where is the incontrovertible evidence that points to specific people committing specific acts of conspiracy?
Thomas …
Firstly, you must admit to yourself that something very abnormal happened within those 3 buildings. That SOMETHING will obviously point to a crime having been committed. Only then do you start looking for the criminals. You don’t start with the criminal, then look for the clues. The clues take you to the criminal.
Already, 7 years have been lost. The criminals have played havoc by initiating terrible wars on the basis of those collapses. Too many innocents have died due to those 3 contrived collapses.
Why are you so complacent? Who pays you to be so? Where are your thinking powers?
If you want another thinking point, consider this. Why did VP Cheney stand in the White House Bunker, on that fateful morning, loudly stating several times that a rogue plane approaching the Pentagon be NOT SHOT DOWN each time he was informed of its closing distance? Google it.
#151–Logician==something abnormal did happen to those three buildings==they got hit by two airplanes loaded with gas.
All kinds of unknown consequences flow from that alone, so mysteries and inconsistencies should only be expected unless the news is completely controlled by a central source.
We don’t have that, we have every freaking monkey with their own whacked out opinions==which is how we have yours.
Molten Metal?==came up on a recent thread. You got buildings with who knows what stored inside. Whats wrong with the notion that some batteries melted? Unknowns are like that.
#151
Clearly, you and the other 9/11 nuts think you have sufficient evidence to be suspicious. The ONLY way you are going to convince people of the existence of a conspiracy is to find tangible evidence than be used in a court of law to convict specific people of wrong doing. Then and only then will anyone lend any legitimacy to the idea of a conspiracy.
#152, Bobo…
Two buildings were each hit by a plane, the Third building WAS NOT. ALL THREE had molten STEEL beneath their rubble piles. Jet fuel is kerosene, which has no hope of ever melting STEEL, even under the best air feed conditions.
The media as a whole has played the official game for 7 years. Popular Mechanics is typical. For 7 years we have had your breed of monkeys mindlessly performing for those responsible.
You certainly don’t know much about batteries and the metal used … if you are speaking of lead acid batteries. What color is molten lead? Melt some on your gas stove and pour it. Not a bit like MOLTEN STEEL and is not likely to remain molten for 17 weeks.. Go back to your cage, read the official report again and try for another brilliant thought.
Simply give us the key to that MOLTEN STEEL, then we can identify the responsible criminals.