Posted by Frank James at 10:45 am CDT
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) was going to have a press conference today to discuss his plan to push for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney.
But he's postponed it because of the vice president's unscheduled medical exam to re-examine a blood-clot discovered last month in one of his legs.
Kucinich's website bore this terse statement:
“News reports this morning indicate the Vice President was experiencing a medical crisis. Until the Vice President’s condition is clarified, I am placing any action on hold,” Kucinich said.
The postponement won't change much since Kucinich's call for impeaching Cheney because of his major role in the run-up to and the continuance of the Iraq war is, at best, a quixotic quest similar to his presidential campaign.
Suffice it to say, Kucinich's impeachment articles won't be going anywhere.
Kucinich is one of the few members of Congress who can make the liberal Rep. John Conyers look conservative. Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, will likely make sure Kucinich's legislation withers away in committee.
The irony is that in recent years, Conyers had himself raised the prospect of impeachment proceedings against President Bush. But he stopped that kind of talk before last year's election because it might've turned off the independents while motivating conservative voters to vote in greater numbers for Republican candidates.
And to neutralize the impeachment question as a campaign issue before the election that put Democrats in power, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed there would be no impeachment of Bush and by extension the vice president.
Indeed, she let it be known before Election Day that certain grizzled Democrats in line to chair committees because of seniority might not necessarily get those posts, a public warning thought to be directed in large part towards Conyers.
So Kucinich's impeachment articles are a dead letter. But if you're a third-tier presidential candidate not getting much media attention, raising the specter of impeachment gives you a prayer of getting a little face time before the cameras. Only not today.





Comments
He is the man behind the cutain. Worst ever!
Posted by: bill r. | April 24, 2007 11:07 AM
So many crimes committed by Bush/Cheney, so little time. Might as well start impeachment proceedings ASAP.
Posted by: RomanB | April 24, 2007 11:08 AM
Sure start impeachment hearings immediately- Look busy, activity=results..
These guys must be paid by the hour.
I can't believe he is letting a little thing like a life threatening condition slow him down...
Posted by: heartburn | April 24, 2007 11:18 AM
Isn't little Dennis funny?
Posted by: Jeff | April 24, 2007 11:27 AM
Is Kucinich afraid that a call for impeachment will push Cheney over the edge? Not likely. "The man's too big. The man's too strong." (Dire Straits.)
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | April 24, 2007 11:27 AM
IMPEACH!!!!
IMPEACH BOTH OF THE DICTATORS !!!
IMPEACH !!!
IMPEACH PREZ CHIMPY !!!
IMPEACH DARTH VADER...CHENEY !!!
IMPEACH !!!
Posted by: Sieg Heil George W Bush | April 24, 2007 11:32 AM
He's still getting "face time" today. You wrote about it, right? I'm guessing several political talk shows also will discuss this topic.
Posted by: Siobhan | April 24, 2007 11:33 AM
Dennis the Menace. Isn't he the same man who was mayor of Cleveland when the river there caught fire due to pollution?
Posted by: Shanika | April 24, 2007 11:58 AM
To mislead Congress is an impeachable offense.
Posted by: Michael Anthony | April 24, 2007 12:05 PM
April 23, 2007
9 US Troops killed by an IED explosion.
IMPEACH PREZ CHIMPY AND VICE-DICTATOR CHENEY!
Posted by: Sieg Heil George W Bush | April 24, 2007 12:12 PM
Yes Shanika, Dennis was mayor of Cleveland when the river caught fire. See what happens when Reagoon doesn't enforce environmental laws?
Posted by: RomanB | April 24, 2007 12:18 PM
Dennis the Menace. Isn't he the same man who was mayor of Cleveland when the river there caught fire due to pollution?
Posted by: Shanika
No, It was mayor Carl Stokes.
Posted by: kg123 | April 24, 2007 12:24 PM
Mr. Bush & Mr. Cheney are truly criminals, and deserve to be impeached... not only was Iraq a LIE, but what led us to Iraq in the first place, 911, was also a LIE & an Inside Job.
No NORAD response, despite 67 incidents in the previous year of a military response to offtrack civilian aircraft. No pilots inputting the standard procedure emergency code "HJCK" on their transponders (jet version of a bank's "silent alarm"), but instead the hijacking had to be "called in" on phones. WTC falls & disintegrates into dust due to "jet fuel fire" which miraculously saves Mohammed Atta's passport. The 47-story WTC7 falls without getting hit by a plane but by 2 small fires, which on any other day, would have led to a major investigation - despite the fact that WTC7 is not addressed in the 911 commission. Pentagon has anti-aircraft missile batteries & tons of surveillance cameras, but no missile response despite the fact that WTC attack had started 45 minutes earlier, and also only 1 video (with no plane in it) is publicly released. FBI confiscates video from nearby Citgo gas station + Sheraton hotel. While "jet fuel fire" allegedly destroys the 2 WTCs, UA93 plows into the ground, disintegrates, and leaves almost no fire at all. AA77 & UA93 leave no trace of engines, fuselage, wings, tail, airline seats, luggage, etc, or even aircraft parts with identifiable serial numbers. Alleged cellphone calls are made at heights of +10,000ft & +300MPH, which is nearly impossible.
Look at the evidence. There is literally tons. Smoking guns of cordite & thermite everywhere.
For a brief overview, go to google video & watch for free "Loose Change" (General 911), "911 Mysteries" (WTC Demolition), "Pandora's Black Box" (Flight 77 Pentagon).
Reopen the 911 investigation. Don't trust Republicans or Democrats. 911 is the whole entire justification for Iraq, the "war on terror", the Patriot Act, the social subsidization of the defense/arms industry, Halliburton/Blackwater war profiteering, etc.
Posted by: Evanel L. | April 24, 2007 12:29 PM
I think the blood clot is in his head, the only people that want to Impeach Bush or Cheny are either
1. Mentally impaired due to Blood Clots in their brains.
2. Hateful leftist bigots that are hypocrites when dealing with the issues of tolerance.
3. Graduates from Chicago public schools and Public universities.
Posted by: Brandon | April 24, 2007 12:32 PM
Mr. 20% approval should stay on his meds.
Posted by: athena | April 24, 2007 12:43 PM
All I hear on these boards is:
Cons are selfish, hypocritical, imperialistic, trigger-happy, pro-corporate war-mongerers
while the Libs are nothing but a bunch of educated, social-minded, mature, free-thinkers who will stop at nothing to make the world a better place...
You people really ought to stop and hear yourselves...
Posted by: Smirky McFlightsuit | April 24, 2007 12:48 PM
Evanel,
The W. administration used 9/11 to invade Iraq and to curtail our constitutional rights but they weren't behind making 9/11 happen.
The W. administration couldn't start a pillow fight without messing it up,there's no way they are competent enough to pull off a 9/11 style attack.
Posted by: John E | April 24, 2007 12:54 PM
I think the blood clot is in his head, the only people that want to Impeach Bush or Cheny are either
3. Graduates from Chicago public schools and Public universities.
Posted by: Brandon | Apr 24, 2007 12:32:27 PM
Ahh, I see we have a Fortunate Son on our hands.
Posted by: Jeff C. | April 24, 2007 12:58 PM
We are really lucky to have Kucinich as no other Presidential candidate cares about what the American people want: the impeachment of the crooks who cost more than 3000 servicemen and 700,000 Iraqis their lives for a lie aimed at allowing Bush and Cheney to loot the US Treasury and steal the hard-earned money of the American people. After these guys are impeached and removed, they deserve life.
Posted by: Ruth | April 24, 2007 1:08 PM
Ruth,
Really? That's what the American people REALLY want? Good to know. Have you written to the presidential frontrunners? I'm sure they'd love to adopt that position as part of their platform. Sure to be a winner.
Posted by: JB | April 24, 2007 1:18 PM
Jeff... (from earlier thread)... you're quoting Teddy Roosevelt's "Speak softly and carry a big stick" in defense of our current foreign policy and as argument against using ex-president Clinton for diplomacy shows a stunning historical ignorance on your part.
If you'd take the time to look into it, you'll find Bill Clinton was much more Teddy Roosevelt than George W. Bush is.
Let's look at Teddy Roosevelt's history on the White-House's own website:
"He won the Nobel Peace Prize for mediating the Russo-Japanese War, reached a Gentleman's Agreement on immigration with Japan, and sent the Great White Fleet on a goodwill tour of the world.
Some of Theodore Roosevelt's most effective achievements were in conservation. He added enormously to the national forests in the West, reserved lands for public use, and fostered great irrigation projects.
As President, Roosevelt held the ideal that the Government should be the great arbiter of the conflicting economic forces in the Nation, especially between capital and labor, guaranteeing justice to each and dispensing favors to none.
Roosevelt emerged spectacularly as a "trust buster" by forcing the dissolution of a great railroad combination in the Northwest. Other antitrust suits under the Sherman Act followed."
That does NOT sound like George W. Bush to me... in fact, in their constant peace brokering through diplomatic channels while showing willingness to use military force when needed, and a democratic platform at home, Clinton and Roosevelt were cut from the exact same policy cloth.
George Dubya's version of "Speak Softly and carry a big stick" is more like "Screw speaking, swing the Big Stick and ask questions later".
Posted by: dave | April 24, 2007 1:20 PM
Roman B., REAGAN wasn't anywhere near the presidency when the river in Cleveland burned. Can you perpetually-ignorant Lefties EVER get your facts straight?
For those who say Bush and Cheney lied to Congress, again wrong. Congress has been getting the same intel on Iraq since the Clinton years and before that Bush. Kennedy, Daschle, Kerry, et al made the same speeches about Iraq in 1998 that they made in 2002. Sorry to burst your little bubbles with truth and reality.
And again, we have the same ultra loonies from the left: Impeach Darth Cheney! Impeach Prez Chimpy! 9/11 was a conspiracy! How did the buildings fall?!?!?!
Bozos, the buildings fell because airplanes loaded with thousands of gallons of jet fuel at a high rate of speed. Steel tressels were damaged. The outershell of the buildings were breached. Hot, hot fires raged. Because of the impact of the planes, fire-resistant insulation was sheared away, enabling the steel to melt. Because of the hot fires, the weakened steel tressels and the breached outer shell, the buildings gave way at the areas of impact, putting tons of weight on each floor, so once the process began the entire buildings fell upon themselves.
American Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. It wasn't a missile but a plane with people on it. The plane was kidnapped by aliens. American Airlines did not conspire with Bush and Cheney to forever hide the plane and its occupants.
United 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. The people on the plane died. They are not on the TV show Lost. Watch the movie United 93. Remember, people made phone calls from the planes. All the families are not part of the conspiracy.
But why am I wasting all this on a bunch of people who are so whacked out that no mental institution would take em in because they are impossible to help??
Posted by: John D | April 24, 2007 1:23 PM
"We are really lucky to have Kucinich as no other Presidential candidate cares about what the American people want:"
Yes, thanks to Dennis, Communist Party USA didn't field a presidential candidate because they felt D. Kucinich represented their veiws sufficiently. It's true, look it up.
Evenal,
You know you are in trouble when you have John E. pulling you from the brink.
Get some help.
Posted by: JD | April 24, 2007 1:24 PM
I would rather fight the war overseas than here in the USA. All of this name calling and talk of impeaching our leaders. All this does is take away from the support for our country and our men and woman serving overseas.If we pull out too soon, then all of the lives that have been lost so far, will have been in vain, and we will leave Iraq in a more unstable condition than before. We will also lose respect from other countries by abandoning the Iraqi people when they need us.We need to finish what we started and the Democrates need to quit using this as a political agenda to further their own careers and start supporting our country and our men and women of the armed forces.
Posted by: Susan, former Army Reserve Capt. | April 24, 2007 1:29 PM
I would rather fight the war overseas than here in the USA. All of this name calling and talk of impeaching our leaders. All this does is take away from the support for our country and our men and woman serving overseas.If we pull out too soon, then all of the lives that have been lost so far, will have been in vain, and we will leave Iraq in a more unstable condition than before. We will also lose respect from other countries by abandoning the Iraqi people when they need us.We need to finish what we started and the Democrates need to quit using this as a political agenda to further their own careers and start supporting our country and our men and women of the armed forces.
Posted by: Susan, former Army Reserve Capt. | April 24, 2007 1:30 PM
So you better Impeach that Psycho Draft Dodger
Delusional Dick Cheney First and then Impeach
Liar in Chief Foul UP George W Bush,then Impeach
Pathological Liar Shyster Bush Crony Turned US
Attorney General Impersonator Alberto "I Can't
Recall" Gonzales next,and go all the way down
the line of High Govermnemtal Officials who are
subject to Impeachment and throw them and that
Village Idiot Democrat Mental Midget Co-President
Wannabe Madame Speaker Damascus Nancy Pelosi and
her Stooges for Treason and Aiding and Abetting
Treason,Obstruction Of Justice,Blocking Impeachment,War Crimes,Mass Murders and Crimes
Against Humanity as well! I am totally fed up
with both the Gutless Eqaully Corrupt Lying
Democrats and Republicans letting two Power Mad
Psychotic War Criminals Run The US!
Posted by: Sandy | April 24, 2007 1:35 PM
I can understand everyone's frustration with the Bush administration and I am certainly no fan of them, but anyone who seriously holds out hope of an impeachment for Cheney or Bush is just delusional.
It would be political suicide for someone to recommend shaming the President of our country for anything less than iron-clad reasons. Bush is a bad President, but he isn't a criminal and his office still deserves a certain level of respect, or at a minimum common decency.
So everyone who is ranting about impeachment, please just stop embarassing yourselves.
Posted by: Devin | April 24, 2007 1:47 PM
I say go ahead with it. Impeach all of them now.
Posted by: Cheryl | April 24, 2007 2:06 PM
Ruth: You're right. I think many of those who deride Dennis Kucinich would agree with much of his platform.
Our MSM is focused on money. Ideas are secondary. That might be the main reason we have such low voter turnout.
Posted by: George Moss | April 24, 2007 2:14 PM
Killing continues, increase in troops, another potential surge in the future and Cheney is the number one WAR PROFITEER. He deserves impeachment!
Lies continue - Tillman, Jessica Lynch
Memories fade so easily with the administration -
Libby, Gonzales.
Complete incompetance perfected.
Posted by: LIsa | April 24, 2007 2:15 PM
If the same standards were applied to this administration by Congress that were applied to the Clinton administration by a Republican-fueled witch-hunt, it's clear that both Cheney and Bush would be impeachable. Aside from the incompetence and conceit of their administration, the hubris, lies, and outright criminality of their leadership is cause for legal proceedings. This 8 years of insanity will leave us poorer, less-respected, less-feared, less-protected, less-secure, and most of all, with less protection of our democratic rights than ANY previous administration. Time for both go, and sooner the better.
Posted by: Mark | April 24, 2007 2:18 PM
Until we all learn that business and government don't go together, we will never stop the Military Industrial Complex !
What we really need is an Accountable government !
As long as the NSA and other government agencies are allowed to work with Microsoft and other corps on our dollar while they are getting paid by the corp as well and report to no one.
We will never have a good government...
THINK
Posted by: Xavior | April 24, 2007 2:25 PM
Boston Globe reporter Charlie Savage
has won a 2007 Pulitzer Prize for revealing how President Bush had “quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office” through the use of presidential signing statements.
Posted by: Michael | April 24, 2007 2:26 PM
Would Cheney resign due to health reasons to allow for the next Republian nominee to get a VP spot?
Posted by: Brian | April 24, 2007 2:28 PM
While I certainly don't look forward to the VP (or anyone else) suffering ill health, should the proverbial lightning bolt come down from heaven and split his cranium, I might actually "become a believer".
Today's diatribe against Reid (whose temperament is not ideal for his leadership spot) is another carefully calculated set of lies. Cheney's own interpretation of Iraq-9/11 ties has even been disputed by Bush, but it continues. All Reid has done is put conditions on troop funding (not refused it), and this first "pass", it will be the President's veto that blocks funding.
My own theory is that the Congress, rather than a pullout date, should have "attached" a call for the Iraq Study Group to report in September as to the effectiveness of the surge, and offer a revised outlook on the situation - the SecDef was a member of the ISG. The real hangup here is the failure of Iraqi leadership, not our military. Bush's early policy failures led to where we are now, and whatever ensues in the future, it's Bush's (and the Neocons') fault for poor strategy, and being oblivious to the situation in Iraq and the Mideast when launching a war.
It will be more difficult, in terms of future problems, to assemble an alliance of those who've contributed troops in Iraq, and have now left.
Posted by: pb | April 24, 2007 2:54 PM
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have committed several impeachable offenses, it is the responsibility of Congress to pursue impeachment, especially in this case where our domestic freedoms and our nation's reputation in the world have been damaged so greatly due to this administration's actions. Others have been impeached for FAR less.
Posted by: Nick | April 24, 2007 2:58 PM
I don't think Pelosi or anyone else in leadership took a possible Cheney impeachment off the table. That might have been Frank James own "by extension".
Kucinich is wise to go after Cheney for a number of reasons even if it is a "Quiotic" act. Kucinich is a smart guy. It would be instructive to see in one place on the national stage many if not all of the actions of this Administration that have undermined the foundation of our Country.
Posted by: Art | April 24, 2007 3:29 PM
The whole administration should be impeached and tried for war crimes. If this doesn't happen, America will be forever tainted. These ruthless criminals do not represent the will of the people, were not actually 'elected', and have violated our sacred Constitution over and over and over again.
Posted by: stealth | April 24, 2007 3:40 PM
I am in Texas, let me know if a plan is coming up to IMPEACH BOTH OF THE DICTATORS . I am a retired B & R (Hallaiburton ) employee. This person was not any good when he run this company and he sure has not changed a bit while running this country.
I am ready to stand up for this country anainst people like these two people.
Thanks
Bob Dow
Posted by: Bob Dow | April 24, 2007 3:41 PM
I believe Cheney should be impeached of many crimes, but especially for his role on 9/11 - when a missile struck the Pentagon. See the Google video online entitled:" Dick Cheney commanded NORAD on 9/11"
" For the past 50 years, NORAD has had the duty of protecting US airspace from attack, and has always been under the direct command of select US Military Generals. Three months before the attack of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power, and consequently, the Pentagon, WTC2 and WTC7 were left unprotected, and then destroyed, resulting in the death of thousands of innocents. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation."
Cheney is a monster. Impeach him now - hang him later for war crimes! (from Marblehead)
Posted by: Harold S Kramer | April 24, 2007 3:50 PM
Boy, this particular item sure has brought out the foaming-at-the-mouth looniest of the Loony Left.
Take Harold, for example: For the past 50 years, NORAD has had the duty of protecting US airspace from attack, and has always been under the direct command of select US Military Generals. Three months before the attack of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else, had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on 9/11. He did not exercise that power, and consequently, the Pentagon, WTC2 and WTC7 were left unprotected, and then destroyed, resulting in the death of thousands of innocents. Three months after 9/11, he relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military operation."
Where oh where did Harold get this nonsense? Cheney and Cheney alone had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners? You mean Cheney overrules Bush in calling for this?
WTC was hit, what about 30 minutes after WTC1? There was still confusion and the lacking of knowing a full-scale terrorist act was in place. Also, no one knew where the second plane was at that time.
WTC7 fell down because of the damage it received from the WTC 1 and 2 collapsing. It was not hit by an airplane.
And, the thought of shooting down civilian airliners is one that everyone dreaded and took time to make. Shooting down civilian airliners should not be made rashly.
Good god, you Loonies are really whacked up today!
Posted by: John D | April 24, 2007 4:30 PM
I don't agree with the author of this post. Those fools in the White House have gone too far and impeachment is a must.
Posted by: Mike | April 24, 2007 4:36 PM
"Can the Democrats impeach Bush?" asked Thomas R. Eddlem (radio talk show host, member of the Boston-based Antiwar League and an occasional contributor to LewRockwell.com, AntiWar.com, and The New American magazine).
"Yes, but they could much more easily bungle an impeachment effort, making themselves look ridiculous by piling on such 'crimes' as 'lying us into war.' But by sticking to torture and its relationship to lack of due process, and focusing upon the many innocent victims of unconstitutional Bush Administration torture, they have a real chance to end the Bush presidency before January 2009.
"As a conservative who believes in small government, I hope that’s what happens," Eddlem wrote in a Jan. 9, 2007, column, "If the Democrats Are Smart," at www.LewRockwell.com.
Posted by: Lyndall Caldwell | April 24, 2007 4:37 PM
Bush and Cheney have done nothing but lie to and deceive the American people since they took office. They are pathological liars, criminals, and illegitimate cowards. They have violated the Constitution and the will of the American people. Cheney can be impeached for lying to Congress about 9/11, Iraq, and other things. Bush wouldn't be able to function without him. As I stated before, I wouldn't compromise with this administration in the very least.
Posted by: Doug R. | April 24, 2007 4:38 PM
JohnD wrote-
"Where oh where did Harold get this nonsense? Cheney and Cheney alone had the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners? You mean Cheney overrules Bush in calling for this?
WTC was hit, what about 30 minutes after WTC1? There was still confusion and the lacking of knowing a full-scale terrorist act was in place. Also, no one knew where the second plane was at that time.
WTC7 fell down because of the damage it received from the WTC 1 and 2 collapsing. It was not hit by an airplane."
You clearly know next to nothing about the events of that day; and either through ignorance or deliberate decision you ignore copious and mutually reinforcing news accounts, both on that day and post 9/11 from MAINSTREAM media sources of all kinds (print and electronic) and persuasions that contradict virtually every word, inference and conclusion you wrote above.
Posted by: Dave | April 24, 2007 5:11 PM
Thanks Evanel & Harold for trying to bring the truth to light about 9/11. Vice-President Cheney, in conjunction with Alf, plotted the attacks. I know it sounds far-fetched, and that many of you thought Alf disappeared when the ratings for his show dipped, but he has been here all along - watching, waiting. With the help of Mork, and possibly Chewbacca, Alf remote-control detonated the trade center, then flew Mork's egg into the Pentagon. For this, Cheney, Alf, Mork and Chewy should be brought in front of the intergalactic tribunal for crimes against the planet earth. This tribunal is 100 million light years away, and Harold, your flight is now boarding.
Posted by: Fredo | April 24, 2007 5:19 PM
Shanika wrote:
> Dennis the Menace. Isn't he the same man who was mayor of Cleveland
> when the river there caught fire due to pollution?
If you're referring to the 1969 Cuyahoga river fire that symbolized pollution as a problem nationally, and helped start the Clean Water Act, no.. it was Mayor Carl Stokes. He drew attention to the fire to raise awareness of the need for pollution regulation. (The EPA did not exist at this time.)
The river had caught fire many times before, larger fires in 1952 and 1936.
The Mayor's efforts after the fire of 1969 to raise attention to pollution problems were caught by Time magazine, which ran an article in August of that year (link below) which gained the issue national attention.
RomanB wrote:
> Yes Shanika, Dennis was mayor of Cleveland when the river caught fire.
> See what happens when Reagoon doesn't enforce environmental laws?
Not the 1969 fire, no.
It was Nixon who was in office at the time, who signed into law the EPA (Environmental Protection Act) in 1970. Later the Federal Water Pollution Control Act in 1972 was passed by congress, and later became known as the CWA (Clean Water Act) in 1977. (sources: epa.gov, fee.org, time.com) The EPA also enabled SUPERFUND (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) which funded cleanups of many toxic waste sites, which until recently had been funded via taxes on the industries generating the waste. PBS often runs a NOVA series called "Preserving The Legacy" which highlights many of the details of waste management, and highlights SUPERFUND related issues, and some of the politics thereof.
I remember it was the early 70's where pollution really became a government issue. Our schools had educational films documenting how bad things were, and what was being done about it. Many of the federal regulations you see now were started during that time.
More info/references for the above:
www.epa.gov/region5/water/cwa.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Water_Act
www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/cuyahoga.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River
www.epa.gov/superfund/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfund
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901182,00.html
www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=1821
www.jcu.edu/chemistry/naosmm/2007/Cuyahoga%20Revisited.htm
www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/cwru-msc061704.php
Posted by: ge | April 24, 2007 5:41 PM
VOLTAIRE in the 1700's said: THE MEN IN HATS AND THE MEN IN TURBANS HAVE BEEN FIGHTING EACH OTHER FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS FOR SOMETHING THEY CAN NOT HAVE IN THE NAME OF SOMEONE THEY WILL NEVER MEET.
Posted by: TAKEONIG | April 24, 2007 6:22 PM
No matter how you feel about Bush and Cheney, isn't it astonishing the number of those who have served for them taking in the shorts? If you are a friend of Bush, or if he asks you to help him with energy (Lay); law (Gonzo); war (Rummy), et al, you will pay the price. I view Bush and Cheney as human lightning rods, and especially Bush as a sort of modern day Macbeth.
Posted by: jeff | April 24, 2007 6:31 PM
I view Bush and Cheney as human lightning rods, and especially Bush as a sort of modern day Macbeth.
Posted by: jeff | Apr 24, 2007 6:31:30 PM
Does that make Cheney Lady MacBeth?
Posted by: jj | April 24, 2007 7:47 PM
August 30, 2004
On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International. The poll of New York residents was conducted from Tuesday August 24 through Thursday August 26, 2004. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.5.
The poll is the first of its kind conducted in America that surveys attitudes regarding US government complicity in the 9/11 tragedy. Despite the acute legal and political implications of this accusation, nearly 30% of registered Republicans and over 38% of those who described themselves as "very conservative" supported the claim.
The charge found very high support among adults under 30 (62.8%), African-Americans (62.5%), Hispanics (60.1%), Asians (59.4%), and "Born Again" Evangelical Christians (47.9%).
Less than two in five (36%) believe that the 9/11 Commission had "answered all the important questions about what actually happened on September 11th," and two in three (66%) New Yorkers (and 56.2% overall) called for another full investigation of the "still unanswered questions" by Congress or Elliot Spitzer, New York's Attorney General. Self-identified "very liberal" New Yorkers supported a new inquiry by a margin of three to one, but so did half (53%) of "very conservative" citizens across the state. The call for a deeper probe was especially strong from Hispanics (75.6%), African-Americans (75.3%) citizens with income from $15-25K (74.3%), women (62%) and Evangelicals (59.9%).
W. David Kubiak, executive director of 911truth.org, the group that commissioned the poll, expressed genuine surprise that New Yorkers' belief in the administration's complicity is as high or higher than that seen overseas. "We're familiar with high levels of 9/11 skepticism abroad where there has been open debate of the evidence for US government complicity. On May 26th the Toronto Star reported a national poll showing that 63% of Canadians are also convinced US leaders had 'prior knowledge' of the attacks yet declined to act. There was no US coverage of this startling poll or the facts supporting the Canadians' conclusions, and there has been virtually no debate on the victim families' scores of still unanswered questions. I think these numbers show that most New Yorkers are now fed up with the silence, and that politicians trying to exploit 9/11 do so at their peril. The 9/11 case is not closed and New York's questions are not going away."
Nicholas Levis of NY911truth.org, an advisor on the poll, agrees, "The 9/11 Commission gave us a plenty of 'recommendations', but far more plentiful were the discrepancies, gaps and omissions in their supposedly 'final' report. How can proposals based on such deficient findings ever make us safe? We think these poll numbers are basically saying, 'Wait just a minute. What about the scores of still outstanding questions? What about the unexplained collapses of WTC 7, our air defenses, official accountability, the chain of command on 9/11, the anthrax, insider trading & FBI field probes? There's so much more to this story that we need to know about.' When such a huge majority of New Yorkers want a new investigation, it will be interesting to see how quickly Attorney General Spitzer and our legislators respond."
SCOPE: The poll covered five areas of related interest: 1) Iraq - do New Yorkers think that our leaders "deliberately misled" us before the war (51.2% do); 2) the 9/11 Commission - did it answer all the "important questions" (only 36% said yes); 3) the inexplicable and largely unreported collapse of the third WTC skyscraper on 9/11 - what was its number (28% of NYC area residents knew); 4) the question on complicity; and 5) how many wanted a new 9/11 probe. All inquiries about questions, responses and demographics should be directed to Zogby International.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855
Posted by: In Search of Truth | April 24, 2007 9:16 PM
Dave, why don't you enlighten us all about the events of 9/11 if I don't know what happened that day!
Or let me do it for you: Bush deliberately went to Florida that day, knowing the events about to occur. The reason he continued reading to the kids was because he orchestrated the whole thing, so why leave?
Planes did not hit the World Trade Center, it was all done by special effects. No plane crashed into the Pentagon and no plane crashed into Pennsylvania. All of them flew somewhere else and the people on them are held at Gitmo.
There were no fires on the WTC, all an optical illiusion. The people who jumped from the 100th floor were stunt men who landed safely, we just think they died.
The phone calls from the planes and the transcripts of the planes with Arabs speaking on them are all false.
The buildings fell because there were bombs on each floor, which is why the collapsed within a minute or so.
Do I have that about right, so far Dave?
Personally, I think Fredo has it more right. I loved Alf, very funny little alien creature. Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are also part of the conspiracy though! As well as Dr. Doom, the Red Skull, Lex Luthor and Richard Nixon's ghost.
Posted by: John D | April 24, 2007 11:20 PM
Re: "Does that make Cheney Lady MacBeth?"
Lady Macbeth felt guilt, and Cheney feels none. I think that this is more appropriate for Cheney:
"it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
I suppose, next Cheney will tell us that "Birnam wood do come to Dunsinane"
Posted by: pb | April 25, 2007 2:08 AM
The only thing more frustrating than getting a neo-con to define success in Iraq is trying to get a 9/11 conspiritorial theorist whack job to get professional help - and god do they need it.
Posted by: Doug Zook | April 25, 2007 7:07 AM
Doug, I no longer remember which Swamp post it is in, but I did answer your request as to what should occur in Iraq. You're just going to have to find it yourself. I believe I wrote it MOnday, so it could be in a Swamp item from Monday or over the weekend.
And, yes, the 9/11 conspiracists need big time psychobabble help.
Posted by: John D | April 25, 2007 8:35 AM
OK... I need to start using an initial for my last name. There's more than one dave in here
I'm the one that understands what "speak softly and carry a big stick" means, but doesn't believe in whacked out 911 conspiracies.
Posted by: dave k | April 25, 2007 8:39 AM
Here's a conspiracy theory - The Israeli Intelligence services were well-aware of the 9-11 plot, but Israeli authorities failed to fully inform the US, as to the immediacy and scope of the danger, because the Israeli government reasoned that the US needed a "wake up call" - to join Israel in its never-ending "war on terror". The ends justified the means, from an Israeli standpoint.
Is this just an anti-Semitic, fantasy scenario, or is there a logic to this theory?
Qui bono? Who benefited from the 9-11 tragedy?
Aid to Israel is at an all-time high. The Roadmap to Peace is a dead-end disaster. Israel calls the shots, the Arabs of Palestine are being starved into submission.
When President Jimmy Carter recognized apartheid in Palestine and spoke out about it, no American politician defended him. Why not?
The US is trapped in an "occupied territories" situation in a Muslim country, Israel should have warned us about what that entails; instead, the Israelis hyped-up the phony WMD allegations and suckered the US into invading Iraq. They did not join the coalition of the willing; the Israelis hold Uncle Sam's cloak, while he mud-wrestles with suicidal fanatics. How did this happen?
Rep. John Boehner recently said that if the US leaves Iraq prematurely, then that would be the end of Israel as we know it. If that is so, then the allegations, that the Israelis instigated the Iraq War and that we are fighting the war at Israel's behest, become highly credible.
And now we have this "existential threat" against Israel, the Jewish State, coming from Iran, the Islamic Republic. Certainly our born-again, commander-in chief will not tolerate much more of that; God talks to George Bush.
The Great Theocratic wars of the 21st Century are now in progress. Will our humanity survive?
Posted by: new_york_loner | April 25, 2007 10:33 AM
A bi-partisan committee should go to the white house & tell the president to resign or face impeachment & a trial. It's obvious neither party wants responsibility for the Iraq war. Whoever stops it will always be accused of loosing it. That's why bush won't stop it, he's leaving it for the next president to stop it & then he will lay the blame of losing the war on someone else. bush & cheny ARE criminals. They are more dangerous than the wackos in the middle east.
Posted by: tom | April 25, 2007 10:45 AM
It's too bad (and a bit sad) that John D, dave K, and others can only claim that 911 "conspiracy theorists" are "crazy" "looney" or "whacked". I suppose they should be considered rational, intelligent human beings because they cannot consider the possibility that people in governments would attack & frame their own citizens, when human beings have been doing it all throughout history.
As I said before, I encourage all others to watch any of the free videos on Google, and decide for themselves whether or not the government's official story version is credible or not.
"Loose Change","911 Mysteries", "Painful Deceptions" "Pandora's Black Box" are all good places to start. Watching the movie "United 93" is simply one movie, which defies the laws of physics, since cellphone calls can't be made above 8,000 feet at high speeds... and there is such a thing as voice morphing technology. (And of course, the cellphone company never released the records of those calls, either.)
All Americans owe their dead fellow citizens & soldiers to at least hear the other side of the story.
Posted by: Evanel L. | April 25, 2007 10:57 AM
John D,
Did you forget which RNC copy/paste job it was?
Posted by: Doug Zook | April 25, 2007 11:03 AM
dENNIS THE MENANCE, JUST A LITTLE MAN THAT WANTS TO BE BIG, HES NUTS AND NOW WHILE YOU DEMO. ARE RUNNING THE SHOW , BETTER MAKE THE BEST OF IT BECAUSE IT WONT BE LONG AND WILL PROBABLE BE THE LAST TIME ,SO SHOW YOUR ASS ONCE MORE AND THEN GOOD BYE, WELCOME INDEPENDENTS
Posted by: HAROLD | April 25, 2007 12:28 PM
I really would like to urge you to look into this. I think this, if properly investigated, would provide the most damning evidence in the case to impeach Dick Cheney.
http://www.alternet.org/story/12525/
- Scarcely a month after Bush moves into the White House, Vice President Cheney has his first secret meeting with Ken Lay and other Enron executives on February 22, 2001. Other meetings follow on March 7 and April 17. It is the details of these meetings that the Bush Administration is seeking to keep private....A series of e-mail memos obtained by the Washington Post and NY Daily News in January revealed that the National Security Council led a "Dabhol Working Group" composed of officials from various Cabinet departments during the summer of 2001. The memos suggest that the Bush Administration was running exactly the sort of "war room" that was a favorite subject of ridicule by Republicans during the Clinton years.
Posted by: David | April 25, 2007 12:43 PM
Scanning thru these opposing replies, makes it clear that many people are in total denial of the tragedy visited upon the world AND America, courtesy of Cheney/Bush. As a Vietnam vet, let me assure you: it is just ACT II, but MANY times more horrific, moronic, and unnecessary than the losing war that killed 56,000 troops, and polarized a nation for a decade.
Now our democratically controlled (just barely) congress, utterly devoid of the courage to standup to our national nightmare, has made it crystal clear that they seek only to cover their political asses, and will not move on Kucinich's bill.
Posted by: Jimbo | April 25, 2007 12:50 PM
Evanel... who said I couldn't consider the potential for a conspiracy? I considered it for about 10 seconds, thinking about the scope of such a project, and the probability that our government (especially the current group of f*ups) could pull it off without multiple high-level leaks and reams of real evidence (not subjective UFO-video quality "evidence") showing undoubtably that the government was in on it.
then I decided that there was no way in he!! that was possible, as any reasonable person would. Not to mention that you really have to just think that our leaders are truly pure evil. I don't. Purely incompetent? Sure. Purely ideological? Absolutely. Purely evil? no.
Posted by: dave k | April 25, 2007 12:59 PM
Actually the entire Bush administration should be impeached.
Please read "United States vs. George W. Bush, et. al." by former US prosecutor Elizabeth De La Vega. In it Ms. De La Vega lays out a one count indictment of many in the Bush Admnistration for "conspiracy to defraud", which is the same charge that brought down the house of Enron. She presents the case to an imaginary Grand Jury.
It's an excellent book and should be required reading for every member of the Legistlative branch.
Posted by: Steve | April 25, 2007 6:38 PM
Dave K:
Thanks for the civil reply. I do believe, however, that 10 seconds is not long enough to come to a reasonable conclusion without looking at the evidence.
Again, to bring up only ONE point to discredit the government's official version: how could cellphone calls be made over +10,000 feet at +300mph? Not physically possible.
I don't think our leaders are "pure evil", but I do think when you're Top Dog, and you don't mind making certain small sacrifices in lives for what you perceive to be the greater good (or personal good). In fact, in some cases it is necessary. Generals & even CEOs do it all the time.
Again, most of our leaders are probably not geniuses, which is why there are so many unexplained holes in the official version. They are counting on the apathy, ignorance, incredulity, and short-term memory of the American public to buy into the government's story, and not question it.
Posted by: Evanel L. | April 26, 2007 2:45 AM
Kucinich, thanks for the stand. This really differentiates you from all the double-talking presidential hopefuls.
Posted by: Seth de l'Isle | April 27, 2007 7:32 PM