The Case for Impeachment

I often write blog entries, expecting nothing more than someone nod politely in agreement. That gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling, and most of the time, that’s enough. Today’s blog entry is not like that. I hope you read this article, take direct and immediate action and then pass this article on to everyone you know. I hope to add my voice and yours to a non-violent revolution to impeach the imperial president, George W. Bush and his bulldog, Dick Cheney.

When I first began this blog, I started with an article that listed several areas that deeply upset me and motivated me to begin writing. That was July, 2006. After more than 18 months, I’m angrier than ever. So, perhaps it’s time for another list of grievances. As the writers of the Declaration of Independence declared:

“…The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

Therefore, “King” George W. Bush, Imperial President, unresponsive to the will of your people, we do hereby submit these facts to a candid world:

He has sent the NSA to spy on the people without warrant and without cause. He uses unconstitutional broad warrants, as aggrieving as the writs of assistance” were to the colonists.

He purposely ignores the minimal FISA requirements that were legally passed by the will of the people, violating the law.

He issues signing statements negating the law of the land and declaring himself to be above the law.

He has held prisoners indefinitely, without charges and incommunicado. He has held people, many of whom are still unaccounted for, in secret prisons.

He arbitrarily declared people, including US Citizens to be “enemy combatants.” He has stripped the fundamental right of Habeas Corpus from prisoners.

He has declared that the requirements of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention do not apply during times of war, an argument that was rejected by the United Nations Committee Against Torture. He has ordered the torture of prisoners and allowed evidence of the torture to be destroyed.

He has carried out a campaign of “extraordinary rendition” (outsourced torture) while hiding behind a cloak of “states secrets” and “executive privilege.”

Therefore, investigative hearings should be convened by Congress as soon as possible to determine whether these and other actions constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors” as defined by the Constitution, leading to impeachment.

Don’t just Boot Bush – Reboot

It’s pretty clear that the American people want to boot Bush & Co. out of the Whitehouse. Barack Obama’s message of change absolutely resonated in Iowa, stunning the country with an astounding win. Even on the Republican side, the insurgent who criticized the President’s “bunker mentality” beat the corporate Bush-apologist in Iowa. Change has been the recurring theme of this campaign so far. However, I think we need more than change. We need to not just boot out Bush: we need to reboot the system.

Let’s face it. If any of the Democrats are elected, change will come. There is little doubt that Barack Obama, John Edwards or Hillary Clinton would change some of the Bush policies. Let’s be honest here. If you read the position papers of all three Democrats, you will find that most of the differences in position are tinkering around the edges. The core messages are the same. Healthcare is broken and needs to be fixed. The environment is in crisis and must be healed. Education is weak and has to be supported.

We also need to restore America’s standing in the world. The pictures of Abu Ghraib still circulate on the internet as inspiration for would-be terrorists. The Bush Administration has held prisoners without trial, based on secret evidence, while Bush hides behind a veil of “state secrets” and executive privilege. It is shameful.

One difference between Barack Obama and his Democratic rivals is his ability to not just change the reputation of America in the world, but to reset it, to give us a fresh start, to reboot the political system. The election of Barack Obama as president does more than continue the conversation with different players and an altered message. It completely changes the context of the conversation.

There are times when a system doesn’t just need to close the old programs and open new ones. Until we completely reset the system, there are programs that can continue to run in the background unnoticed. We need to reboot with Obama.

The Wisdom to Know the Difference

For those of you who read this blog, you know that I've spent the last several months being upset. I've been stuck on the idea that America "should" be leading the world in civil liberties and human rights. I keep thinking the US government "should" stop spying on its citizens and torturing people. We "should not" indefinitely hold people in Guantanamo and other secret prisons. The more I think about the way things “should” be, the more upset I become. In response to my level of upset, I write my blog and take an active role in protesting, but it never seems like enough.

I've come to realize that "should" only increases my level of struggle, and struggle increases my level of upset. Like Deepak Chopra said, "At the level of the ego, we struggle to solve our problems. Spirit sees that struggle is the problem."

Recently I saw a counselor who reminded me of the serenity prayer. "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference." I have been meditating on this prayer and it has helped me a lot. I am beginning to distinguish between the things I cannot change and the things that I can change. I am still upset about what is going on in the world, but I'm not as consumed as I once was. I guess you could say I'm in the process of recovery, though I've got a way to go.

The question I get to ask myself is, “Where is the balance?” How do I balance between standing up for civil liberties and maintaining my serenity? The answer seems to lie in the “wisdom to know the difference.” Yes, I get to accept those things I cannot change. That makes sense. I have never lacked for the courage to change the things I can change. That’s not an issue. My challenge is in knowing the difference and being determined to set boundaries.

It might sound like a platitude, but I like this saying. “I may be only one, but I am one. I may not be able to do everything, but I can do something.” I feel like that’s my mission, to do the something that I can do and no more. I will continue to fight, but with balance and serenity. That way I’ll be here for the long battle ahead.

Do You Know Joe?

Do you know the name Jose Padilla? You might think, “Wasn’t he caught trying to set off a dirty bomb?” or maybe, “Wasn’t he fighting in Afghanistan?” I’m afraid you’d be wrong on both counts, though it’s easy to see how you would be confused with all of the misinformation that has been spread by the Bush Administration. Despite the fact that his name is mentioned regularly on the national news, you might have lost him in all of the terror-related news since September 11, 2001. Let me help you to get caught up.

Jose Padilla is a citizen of the United States. He was born in Brooklyn, NY and lived in Chicago. In 2002 Jose traveled to the Middle East. Upon his return on May 8, 2002 he was arrested on a warrant as a “material witness” to the September 11th attacks. No connection was ever made to September 11th, only a vague material witness allegation. On June 9th, President Bush arbitrarily declared Jose Padilla to be an “enemy combatant.” The effect of this designation was to take Jose out of the criminal system while not affording him the rights provided under the Geneva Conventions. Jose Padilla, a US citizen was cast into a legal no-man’s land.

Before we go on with this story, I want to pause just to make sure you get what I just said. Jose Padilla was arrested in Chicago, not on some far off battle field fighting American forces. He has not been tried on any charge. He was simply declared by one person in the US, President Bush, to be an “enemy combatant,” and just like that, all of his rights went away. Upon President Bush’s order, Jose Padilla was taken away from his family and his attorney and sent to a Navy brig in South Carolina. The scary thing is, this could happen to you or me.

In June, 2002 the Bush Administration made sweeping allegations about Jose Padilla’s intention to set off a dirty bomb in the US. An attorney, Donna Newman took up his case. Despite dogged opposition from the Bush Administration, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Jose’s case in November, 2005, three and a half years after his capture. Two days before the case was to go to the Supreme Court, the Bush Administration decided to drop the military charges and instead file charges in criminal court alleging that Jose had “conspired to murder, kidnap and maim people overseas.” Nowhere in the charges did the Bush Administration allege a plot to blow up a dirty bomb or to commit any other criminal act in the US.

Jose’s day in court is scheduled for April 16, 2007, almost four years after his initial capture. In the mean time, his lawyers allege that he has been tortured to the point where he cannot assist in his own defense. According to recent testimony in his competency trial it was revealed that Jose was kept in sensory depravation for years. His windows were blacked out and the one light in his cell could only be activated by his jailers. He had no clock or visibility to the outside. When Jose was moved outside of his 8’ x 8’ cell, heavy goggles and headphones were placed on him to keep him in sensory deprivation. At other times he was subjected to intense lights and pulsating sounds. According to reports, Jose Padilla was kept under these conditions for 1,307 days. His interrogators covered their name badges when they questioned him for hours on end. This information has just begun to trickle in. More revelations could be forthcoming.

Jose Padilla was only able to find his way out of this hell because he had the power of habeas corpus, the right to have his day in court. Last year the Republican-led Congress stripped all enemy combatants of their habeas corpus rights in a bill called the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This Act and the general treatment of “enemy combatants” have brought on the scorn of the UN high commissioner for human rights.

Today, Jose Padilla has been found competent to stand trial. However, the judge also commented that she may conduct another hearing into torture allegations, and so the revelations will continue. What is being uncovered in this trial is not a mad bomber about to explode a dirty bomb. Instead the trial is revealing a rogue US administration violating international laws with flagrant disregard. If this is the democracy that the Bush Administration wants to export, I don’t blame the world for being frightened. We could all suffer the fate of a US citizen named Jose.

Who Counts?

According to an article on MSNBC, in his proposed 2008 budget, President “Bush has asked for an additional $100 billion for Iraq and the global war on terrorism this year, on top of $70 billion already sought…the Pentagon is scheduled to get a hefty increase in spending authority of 11 percent, pushing its 2008 budget to $481.4 billion.” Now, get this. We’re talking about $170 billion, plus $481.4 billion for a total of $651.4 billion. Maybe it’s just me, but this seems like a lot of money. As Senator Everett Dirksen is reported to have said, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”

Since these numbers are a little hard to comprehend, let’s see if we can gain some perspective by doing a little bit of counting. If we counted $1 per second around the clock, it would take us 31.69 years to count $1 Billion. If we counted $1 per second, how long would it take us to count $651.4 Billion? It would take us 20,641 years. Even if we cheated and counted $100 bills, it would still take us over 200 years of around-the-clock counting to reach the combined defense and war budget.

So, the President wants us to hand over to the Department of Defense so much money that it would take over 20,000 years to count it at $1 per second. Of course, that’s not all. There is also a lot of additional military spending that falls outside of the Department of Defense. For example, did you know that the Department of Energy spends around $7 billion a year on nuclear weapons projects maintaining nearly 10,000 nuclear warheads?

If we’re going to understand President Bush’s priorities, we need to compare the Defense Department numbers to spending in other areas. For example, according to Reuters, Bush has asked for $56 billion for Education. Is the President saying that education is less than one tenth of the priority of defense and war? The Education budget is 8.6% of the combined defense and war budgets. So, despite brave rhetoric from President Bush about the importance of education, in the Bush budget kids don’t count.

How about the poor and seniors? Do they count? President Bush proposes cutting $78 billion for Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years. No, they don’t count either.

With the recently released report on global warming, you would think that the Environmental Protection Agency could count on a boost in funding, right? Guess again. The EPA will actually see its budget reduced. I guess in the world that President Bush occupies, the earth doesn’t count.

It seems that defense contractors and war profiteers are the only ones who can count on George W. Bush. The New York Times reports that spending on government contractors has nearly doubled from $207 billion in 2000 to $400 billion last year.

As President Eisenhower said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

Isn’t it time that we have a government we can count on?

You’re Only as Sick as Your Secrets

Alcoholics Anonymous has a saying - You’re only as sick as your secrets. Over the past six years the Bush Administration has exploited it’s authority by using “state’s secrets,” in order to cover its abuse of power in the name of the so-called “war on terror.” Two examples of the use of the government secrecy to shield its actions can be seen in the warrantless NSA spying program and in the act of “extraordinary rendition.”

If you want a primer on the Bush Administrations’ inconceivable use of secrecy, simply look at the case of Oregon charity, al-Haramain Islamic Foundation. This case is related to the NSA’s illegal warrantless spying program. Click here for my mid-2006 analysis of the constitutionality and legality of the NSA warrantless spying program.

A recent New York Times/International Herald Tribune article provides surreal examples of government secrecy. For example, one government lawyer declined to divulge whether he had a particular security clearance, saying information about the clearance was classified. Other revelations from this article include:

• Judges have to make an appointment to review the government’s filing in the case and then cannot keep a copy. Lawyers for the plaintiffs cannot see the government’s filings at all. I’m no lawyer, but I would imagine it difficult to mount a counter-offence to a document that you cannot view.
  
• Judges have been told to use only Justice Department computers to write their decisions. The Justice Department asked to inspect and delete files from the computers on which lawyers for the plaintiffs had prepared their legal filings.
  
• The Justice Department has filed legal papers, not with the court but by placing them in a room at the Department of Justice. As the article says, “They have filed papers, in other words, with themselves.”

Despite the Bush Administration’s concerted efforts to keep the details of warrantless domestic surveillance secret, details are leaking out. Because of pressure from the public and the newly-elected Democratic majority in Congress, the Justice Department has begrudgingly “allowed” judges from the FISA court to review the NSA warrantless spying program (which they have been legally required to do all along). They also have decided to allow select members of Congress to view documents related to the program. Public pressure and Congressional oversight is slowly shedding light on the secret NSA Spying program.

A second example of how the US uses States Secrets to cover up its misdeeds is in the area of “extraordinary rendition,” the practice of capturing private citizens off of the street and sending them off to a country such as Syria or Egypt to be tortured. Two names that you may already be familiar with are Khaled el-Masri and Maher Arar. El-Masri is a German citizen, who was on his way to family vacation when he was picked up in Macedonia in December, 2003. He was beaten, stripped naked, and drugged. He was then flown to a CIA interrogation center in Afghanistan where he continued to be beaten and interrogated. Despite overwhelming evidence of his innocence, the CIA continued to hold El-Masri until May, 2005, at which time they released him without charge, without apology and without comment. When El-Masri tried to sue the US, the Bush Administration claimed “states secrets” and asked for the case to be dismissed. The case was thrown out on May 16, 2006.

Similarly, Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen was picked up in the United States in September, 2002. The US Government sent Arar to Syria where he was routinely tortured until his release in October, 2003. Again, the US government was sued and again, the Bush Administration appealed to the courts using the argument of State’s Secrets. In February 2006, a judge ruled in favor of the Bush Administration, saying that rendition of Arar was a matter of national security.

Both of these would be very sad cases indeed if they were allowed to remain shrouded in the secrecy of the Bush Administration. However, moves from the Democrats in Congress are promising to shed light on the dark secrets of the extraordinary rendition program. Senator Patrick Leahy, the new Democratic chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has insisted that US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales share all documentation on the rendition of Arar.

Outside of the US, the pressure continues to mount over the Bush Administrations’ extraordinary rendition program. In Canada, the Prime Minister has issued a formal apology to Maher Arar. The Canadian government has also agreed to pay Arar $8.9 million. This increases the pressure on the US government to come clean in it’s involvement in the Arar case in particular and in extraordinary rendition in general. In Germany, prosecutors have issued arrest warrants for 13 CIA agents involved in the rendition of El-Masri. In another case, in Italy, a Judge is deciding whether to put 26 CIA agents on trial for the 2003 rendition of Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr. Nasr, who is also known as Abu Omar, was taken from Milan, Italy to Egypt where he was tortured and beaten. Once again, the power of public opinion is working to shed light on the cover of darkness required for the Bush Administration to carry on its unconstitutional and illegal activities.

There’s another saying about secrets – If you name the secret, you get its power. For the last six years the Bush Administration has held all of the power in the NSA spying and the practice of extraordinary rendition. Now we citizens have a chance to take back the power. Transparency in government is a cornerstone of our democracy. Without transparency, we are not citizens of a democracy but are instead prisoners in a totalitarian state. It is up to us, the citizens of the United States to insist on transparency in government. It is vital to our freedom that we demand the truth on warrantless spying and on extraordinary rendition. Only by demanding the truth can we heal the sickness of the Bush Administration’s secrets.

It's STILL the Economy, Stupid

From my kitchen table I watch the snow sticking to our porch screen, whiting out my usual view of the woods behind our house. I am waiting for the snow to stop so I can plow the driveway. It is mid-January in Cedar Rapids, Iowa and this is the first snow of any consequence, so plowing the driveway really isn’t such a burden. On some years by this time I was worried I was going to wear my snow blower out, but not this year.

My name is Tony. You can picture me as a middle-aged man, with a middle-management job, a mid-range income, and unfortunately middle-age spread, sitting at his kitchen table in the Midwest. I’m not an economist or a political pundit, just your average guy with a driveway full of snow. That’s my caveat for what is to follow. I’m going to give you the view from my seat at the kitchen table. Your view might be very different.

I started my political life as a Reagan Republican. I loved his "city set on a hill" vision of America. Keep in mind that when President Reagan took office, the biggest problem facing the nation was "stagflation," the wicked combination of a stagnant economy and uncontrolled inflation. Reagan's theory was to ignore the problem of inflation while stimulating the economy. President Reagan loved the phrase "a rising tide raises all boats." This began an economic boom that continued, with sustained attention and adjustments, for many years through several administrations.

On the other hand, if I could describe George W. Bush’s fiscal policies in a simple phrase it would be “a rising tide raises all yachts.” He has siphoned the tidewater from the open ocean of the economy and walled it up behind a dam of privilege where only the powerful benefit. But just like New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina, that levee will eventually come crashing down, revealing all that has been hidden, in all of its repugnant splendor. The only choice we have is, do we want to wait until it all crashes on us at once, or do we want to begin a controlled reduction of the pressure from the imbalance in the economy?

From here in Middle America there is a belief that there must be a middle way, not of soft-headed socialism or hard hearted capitalism, but of people-powered progressivism. I still believe that stimulating the general economy while rolling the extra tax revenue into social programs is the best way to resolve the disparity of wealth. If we can grow the economy in a way that the impact is felt at every financial stratum, we will provide hope for all the people of America, not just the privileged few. If we want to create hope where there is currently despair, wealth has to be circulated into the economy, not horded at the top. The purpose of wealth is to help others achieve some level of wealth. Obviously that’s not what we’ve been doing for the last six years.

Of course, as I’m writing this, I’m typing on my new laptop, sitting at my lovely kitchen table in middle-America, which is quite the seat of privilege. So, I could be wrong. Right now, instead of looking for a third way, I’ve got to go plow my driveway. I’ll see all of you in the living rooms and meeting rooms of Iowa as we try to work this way out together.

Why Oppose an Escalation in Iraq?

Last night President Bush announced his plans for what is being euphemistically called a troop “surge.” In military parlance it’s called an escalation. When faced with over 47,000 wounded and more than 3,000 dead, the president has decided to escalate – to pick up the pace. That seems to me to be heading the wrong direction.

The President, when faced with the message from the American people that “stay the course,” was an unacceptable practice, was faced with two options. He could draw down the troops, or he could escalate the war. I don’t think the President quite understood what we meant. I say, support our troops. Bring them home now.

There are three reasons why I oppose the escalation of troops. First, the President has proven himself untrustworthy. Second, the President is asking us to NOT trust reliable experts. And third, we’ve already tried this strategy with tragic consequences.

In his speech, the president has said, in essence, “Trust me.” This is the president who said:

• Trust me. Iraq is linked to September 11th.
  
• Trust me. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction that are a clear and present danger to the US
  
• Trust me. We can do this war on the cheap with very few troops,
  
• Trust me. Armor only slows our troops down. We don’t need armor.
  
• Trust me. We will be greeted as liberators.
  
• Trust me. Your National Guard troops are needed for a short period of time.
  
• Trust me. Mission accomplished!

No, President Bush. Like the national debt, I’m afraid your “trust” account is badly overdrawn.

To trust President Bush, we have to NOT trust such experienced voices as the Generals on the ground, former Secretary of State Colin Powel and the entire bipartisan Iraq Study Group. In fact, General Abizaid stated before the Senate Armed Services Committee, "I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey… And I said… if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no."

Keep in mind that this strategy has already been tried. Last summer we increased U.S. troops in Baghdad by 12,000. Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you already know the results – more injuries to US soldiers, more deaths, more civilian casualties and a strong upsurge in violence. The President and the military have had the opportunity to ask for more troops for several years.

In conclusion, I’d like to propose an alternative approach. If the President is looking for an escalation, he can escalate diplomacy. In a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland, 82% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans said we should directly engage with Syria and Iran to establish a political solution in Iraq, as was unanimously recommended by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Otherwise, what he can expect is an escalation in protests from the American people.

Here are ten actions you can take today to oppose the escalation of the war in Iraq:

1. TODAY - Attend a rally to stop the escalation in Iraq. You can look at Moveon.org or AmericaSaysNo.org to find a local rally. Can’t find one? Create one!
   
2. Call, email and text message all of your friends and encourage them to attend a rally.
   
3. Call your Senators and Congressman/Congresswoman and express your concern over the plan to escalate the war in Iraq. Call 202-224-3121.
   
4. Join Tom Vilsack’s campaign to Communities Opposed to Escalating the War Resolution. After you sign the pledge, you’ll be given instructions on how to pass a resolution in your home town, county and state.
   
5. Use the power of the pen (or word-processor)! Write a letter to the editor at your local paper. It’s best to actually print it out and carry it in. If not, most newspapers will accept an email, but not as an attachment. Or you can blog for peace. Hey, you read this, didn’t you? Why not write your own blog? If you would rather speak than write, call in to local radio shows to oppose the escalation of the war in Iraq.
   
6. Go big or stay home – literally. Join in the March for Peace. See http://www.unitedforpeace.org. The government brought the troops home from Vietnam, after we took to the streets in massive numbers. It's time to take to the streets today. On January 26th I’m going to be on a bus headed for DC. What are you going to be doing?
   
7. Sign the Mandate for Peace.
   
8. Jump on a train that is already moving! Join your local peace and activist groups. There are general activists groups. For example, John Edwards has formed One Corps. Moveon.org has set up Operation Democracy. There are also specific groups that deal with Human Rights, such as Amnesty International or Civil Liberties, such as the ACLU. And there are groups specifically devoted to peace activism such as United for Peace & Justice, Gold Star Families for Peace or Code Pink.
   
9. Create a photo petition. See the instructions here.
   
10. Support a candidate who supports peace. Two declared presidential candidates have come out in favor of bringing our troops home - Tom Vilsack and John Edwards. You can contribute to their campaigns. You can volunteer to work for them. You can hold rallies in your home to support them. If you contact the campaigns, they will give you plenty to do to work toward peace.

An Open Letter to President George W. Bush

Dear President Bush,

I strongly oppose adding more troops to Iraq, in what is being described as a "surge." To do so would be to override the expressed concerns of Generals on the ground, Secretary Powell, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and the American people. Please bring our troops home. There is no military solution to this political problem.

Furthermore I would like to see the findings of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group implemented right away. We need to engage in aggressive diplomacy, not aggressive military operations.

Sincerely,

Tony Loyd