And I'm saying that because I realize you ARE dear to me, having hung
in there all this time for impeachment and other issues I believe in—
It will probably take a couple of days to get straight exactly what
happened in Marlboro and Brattleboro this week, and what is happening
in New Hampshire and Kennebunkport, but I'll try to keep you fairly
up-to-date on what I can get clear about.
On Tuesday, on Kurt Daims' initiative, by a vote of 2012 to 1795,
Brattleboro, Vermont, passed the following resolution:
"Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments
against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against
our Constitution, and publish said indictments for consideration by
other authorities, and shall it be the law of the Town of Brattleboro
that the Brattleboro Police, pursuant to the above-mentioned
indictments, arrest and detain George Bush and Richard Cheney in
Brattleboro if they are not duly impeached, and prosecute or extradite
them to other authorities that may reasonably contend to prosecute
them?"
Marlboro, Vermont, passed a similar resolution the same day by 45 to
23, but I do not yet have the text.
The Brattleboro resolution was placed on the ballot by a petition
signed by 5% of Brattleboro voters, the number needed to put a
non-binding resolution on the ballot. 20% is needed to make it
binding. I believe this means that Brattleboro itself cannot make the
resolution binding until next year's town meeting. However, now that
Vermont voters know that such a resolution can win a majority vote in
some towns, since 41 Vermont towns voted for impeachment last year, I
expect that some other Vermont towns—and other towns and cities around
the country (in Oregon and California, for instance—may now take the
initiative to put similar but binding resolutions on their own
ballots.
So a new movement has started: the impeachment movement is now an
impeachment-indictment movement.
MEANWHILE:
1) Two updates on New Hampshire from Susan Serpa and Tim Carpenter:
the impeachment bill in the legislature can use our help. Please send
emails, letters, and phone calls to support it. See below.
2) A reminder from Harold Burbank that Rumsfeld was RE-indicted in
Germany in November, 2006. See below.
3) Flo Woodiel reminds us that our supposed leaders are dragging their
feet slowly in the right direction: Pelosi is moving towards suing
Bush. See below.
4) Bush is firing Admiral William Fallon, who appears to have been one
of the people in the military most responsible for preventing Bush and
Cheney from committing war crimes against Iran. As Dave Mortenson
warns us, there are still 320 days until January 20, 2009, plenty of
time for Bush and Cheney to create lots more hell on earth. See below.
5) Tonight at 7:30 the Westport Unitarian Church will show "Buying the
War," a Bill Moyers documentary. See below for complete notice.
Richard Duffee
__
1) Updates from Susan Serpa and Tim Carpenter on the New Hampshire
bill to impeach Bush and Cheney:
a) First Susan Serpa, who turns the argument of the majority report inside- out:
To the Legislators of New Hampshire,
I wish to appeal to the NH House of Representatives as a concerned
fellow citizen and patriot. I have received the following report
released from the New Hampshire State Committee for Federal Relations
and Veterans Affairs containing the committee's recommendation
regarding the House vote on H24:
Majority report: "The majority of the committee believes that the
world is in perilous and uncertain times and this House Resolution
will encourage intolerance, violence and hatred around the world. Our
President is the Commander in Chief. Our United States military has
many troops along with many civilian contractors in Iraq and
Afghanistan since the attacks on United States soil on September 11,
2001. This House Resolution will encourage terrorists to continue
their attacks and hurt the morale of the United States' military
forces and civilian contractors throughout the world. It will also
undermine our troop's ability to pursue and accomplish their mission,
which is the protection and security of the United State of America"
The statement above contain compelling reasons to support HR24. The
world is indeed imperiled and riddled with uncertainty. Hatred of
United States is spreading because of the policies and actions
fostered by George Bush and Richard Cheney. The ill will toward to US
spreads as terrorist groups add to their recruitment. Terrorist
recruitment has not only grown during the past seven years, but has
spread to more arenas - there were NO Al Qaeda in Iraq before the Bush
invasion. Terrorist recruitment is accomplished by touting the need to
combat US policies adopted under this renegade administration. Under
the current administration, US policies are seen as those of a rogue
nation bent on infiltrating all nations for corporate interests under
the guise of national security. It is in our best interests to
demonstrate that the citizens do NOT support the deceitful,
law-breaking, unconstitutional corporate interests of a rogue
administration.
The people of all nations naturally want freedom. The eyes of the
world that thirst for freedom are upon us. They seek a model of
democracy. In that model they do not seek a nation "united" at all
costs behind it's president; they look to a nation that will stand up
for the rights of mankind.
Backing this resolution will send the message that the citizenry of
our Nation value justice and the rule of law above an unquestioning
obedience to the Executive. This message will not only receive
applause from our allies, but will serve to dissolve support or
terrorist organizations who recruit using fear of the current US
policies promoted by the Bush Administration. It is precisely in the
interest the national security to pass HR24 as it will serve to mount
international support and diffuse the terrorists.
Therefore, I strongly urge the Representatives of the New Hampshire
House to vote in favor of HR 24 in support of the Constitution, our
troops and national security. The US Constitution has been a model
for the free world. New Hampshire has historically been the seat of
democracy, freedom and independency in America. History calls upon
your great state once again to defend the rights of the individual and
the rule of law as stated in the US Constitution.
Please vote affirmative to pass HR24:
PETITION TO COMMENCE IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES
IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS
WHEREAS, Section 603 of the Manual of the Rules of the U.S. House of
Representatives provides for impeachments to be initiated on a motion
based on charges transmitted from a state legislature, and
WHEREAS the right to vote, being the right that protects all other
rights, and the right which ratified the Constitutions of our state
and country, is a right that is collectively inalienable, in that
elections may not be generally suspended or terminated; and,
WHEREAS under Paragraph 2 of the Declaration of Independence, our
government is "instituted to secure these rights", including the right
of elections, which are necessary to Liberty; and,
WHEREAS the Executive branch is responsible for enforcing the law and
guaranteeing these rights; and,
WHEREAS, instead of ensuring that the people of New Hampshire have
guaranteed to them mechanisms for reliably altering or abolishing
their representatives, pursuant to Paragraph 2, President George W.
Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney have engaged in a pattern and
practice of threatening litigation against states and people who
refuse to institute mechanisms of voting that require votes to be
counted in trade secrecy and outside the observation and control of
citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the invisibility and secret vote counting means that citizens
no longer control their elections, and that members of the Executive
branch and the Election Assistance Commission do control elections,
together with any criminal who may seek to alter the trade secret
software; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
have committed high crimes and misdemeanors, as they have repeatedly
and intentionally violated the United States Constitution and other
laws of the United States, particularly the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act and the Torture Convention, which, under Article VI
of the Constitution is a treaty as part of the "supreme law of the
land," and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
have acted to strip Americans of their constitutional rights by
ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to legal
counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a
civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the
discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an
"enemy combatant", all in subversion of law; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Cheney have
ordered and authorized the Attorney General to override judicial
orders for the release of detainees under U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (formerly INS) jurisdiction, even though the
judicial officer, after full hearing, has determined that a detainee
is held wrongfully by the Government; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
have ordered at least thirty times the National Security Agency to
intercept and otherwise record international telephone and other
signals and communications by American citizens without warrants from
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly
constituted by Congress in 1978, and designated certain U.S. citizens
as "enemy combatants," all in violation of constitutional guarantees
of due process; and,
WHEREAS President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
have admitted that they willfully and repeatedly violated the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act and boasted that they would continue to
do so, each violation constituting a felony; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
have violated the United Nations Charter and other treaties
prohibiting aggressive war, by invading Iraq without just cause or
provocation, and have misled the US Congress by deliberate or
negligent falsehoods to obtain the Authorization for Use of Military
Force Against Iraq resolution (Public Law 102-1); and,
Whereas, President George W. Bush has now admitted that his 20-Year
"War on Terror" includes a permanent U.S. presence in Iraq and the
Middle East, consisting of a lavish embassy and dozens of military
bases; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney
continue to authorize the use of depleted-uranium (DU) munitions in
Iraq and Afghanistan, the use of which spreads radioactive
contamination to non-targets, including innocent civilians, animals,
food and water sources, and the use of which has been declared illegal
by the United Nations Subcommittee on Human Rights; and,
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush has subverted the laws of our
nation, in whole or in part, through the use of "signing statements"
on more than 1200 occasions, unprecedented in U.S. history,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
NEW HAMPSHIRE GENERAL COURT submits that the actions and admissions of
President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney constitute
ample grounds for their impeachment, and that the House of
Representatives of the New Hampshire General Court has good cause for
submitting charges to the U.S. House of Representatives under Section
603, as grounds for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and
Vice-President Richard Cheney.
The House of Representatives of the New Hampshire General Court
further submits that Articles of Impeachment should charge that
President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard Cheney have
violated their constitutional oaths to execute faithfully the office
of President and Vice-President to the best of their ability to
preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
In all of this, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Richard
Cheney have acted in a manner contrary to their trust as President and
Vice-President, subversive of constitutional government, to the great
prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury
of the people of the State of New Hampshire and of the United States.
WHEREFORE, President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney,
by such conduct, warrant impeachment and trial, removal from office,
and disqualification to hold and enjoy any offices of honor, trust or
profit under the United States.
Be it resolved further by the legislature of the State of New
Hampshire, that our senators and representatives in the United States
Congress be, and they are hereby, requested to cause to be instituted
in the Congress of the United States proper proceedings for the
investigation of the activities of President George W. Bush and Vice
President Richard Cheney, to the end that they may be impeached and
removed from such office.
Be it resolved further, that the Secretary of State of the State of
New Hampshire be, and is hereby, instructed to certify to each Senator
and Representative in the Congress of the United States, and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, under the great seal of the
State of New Hampshire, a copy of this resolution and its adoption by
the legislature of the State of New Hampshire. The copies shall be
marked with the word "Petition" at the top of the document and contain
the original authorizing signature of the Secretary of State.
Impeachment is mentioned six times in our Constitution. If not now,
When? If not for the crimes listed in HR24, For what? This is our
moment history to rescue our country by backing our Constitution
through the use of Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual.
Thank you for your consideration,
Susan C. Serpa
Worcester, MA
Note: forwarded message attached.
Susan C. Serpa
www.neimpeach.org
From NH Rep. Betty Hall: HR24 REPORTS
Dear Sophie,
New Hampshire's House Resolution 24, an effort to commence impeachment
procedures in the US Congress is part of a history making effort
originating from Thomas Jefferson's Manual, Sec 603, and for the
People's Voice to be heard, in a call for action.
--- HR24 GOES TO VOTE ---
NEWS . . . FROM CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE: MAJORITY AND MINORITY REPORTS RELEASED
The New Hampshire House of Representative's "full" House Vote is
scheduled tentatively in this week's New Hampshire House Session. The
exact date and time is yet to be determined, but it's likely the vote
will either be Wednesday, March 5th or March 12th. The House is in
regular session on Wednesdays, but may add a day in the case of a full
schedule.
--- HR24 REPORTS ---
HR 24, petitioning Congress to commence impeachment procedures.
MAJORITY: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE.
Rep. Pamela D Coughlin for the Majority of State-Federal Relations and
Veterans Affairs: The majority of the committee believes that the
world is in perilous and uncertain times and this House Resolution
will encourage intolerance, violence and hatred around the world. Our
President is the Commander in Chief. Our United States military has
many troops along with many civilian contractors in Iraq and
Afghanistan since the attacks on United States soil on September 11,
2001. This House Resolution will encourage terrorists to continue
their attacks and hurt the morale of the United States' military
forces and civilian contractors throughout the world. It will also
undermine our troop's ability to pursue and accomplish their mission,
which is the protection and security of the United States of America.
Vote 10-5.
MINORITY: OUGHT TO PASS.
Rep. Eleanor Glynn Kjellman for the Minority of State-Federal
Relations and Veterans Affairs: This bill is a petition to the US
House of Representatives to commence impeachment procedures. Under
Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of Parliamentary Practice, a state
legislature may bring this action. Many citizens and several
representatives of the NH House of various political persuasions and
parties, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents and Democrats,
appeared before the committee in favor of this resolution. It appears
to be not only bi-partisan but also multi-partisan.
This resolution does not impeach the president, but requests that the
US House begin an investigation regarding the various grievances of
the petitioners. It is not our prerogative in the NH House to argue
the merits of the grievances, or to seek proof of their validity,
indeed that is the purpose of the impeachment inquiry in the US House.
Impeachment is a tool of accountability – part of the checks and
balances process of our democracy - which is available to the citizens
in our democracy.
The people have a right to petition their representatives and we have
a duty to respond and act – regardless of the timing, convenience,
political expediency or other concerns which are secondary to the
preservation of the democratic process. We believe the process of
impeachment should be exercised to maintain accountability in the
office of the Presidency.
The NH House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee
voted 10-5, 1 protest vote and 3 not present for ITL, or inexpedient
to legislate, but continues to go forward, for the full House vote of
New Hampshire's Honorable Representatives.
- Join Rep. Hall: I.Support.HR24@gmail.com -
And to New Hampshire residents, be sure to sign your email with City
and State, as in Brookline, NH.
When HR 24 passes, it does not need the New Hampshire Senate's vote in
order to go on and it does not require the New Hampshire Governor's
signature in order to be brought to the US Congress.
When HR24 passes the House, HR 24 will be enacted as a petition,
transmitted to Congress as a directive from the State level to the
U.S. Congress and finally without the gridlock of Washington DC
politics,
Commence Impeachment Hearings!
Representative Betty Hall needs huge support from everywhere in order
to succeed. We ask YOU to send your message to the legislators of New
Hampshire telling them for the sake our country, vote in the
affirmative for HR 24!
Send your message to: I.Support.HR24@gmail.com
And to New Hampshire residents, be sure to sign your email with City
and State, as in Brookline, NH.
The emails will be printed for every legislator to read the People's
concern and support of HR24.
The number of emails is growing, approaching 1000 letters of support,
as of Sunday.
What is unique to New Hampshire, is that every bill introduced and
sent to committee receives a vote in the full House. In New Hampshire
there are 400 House legislators from a relatively small population. In
order for HR24 to be brought to Washington DC, only House passage is
needed to commence impeachment in the US Congress.
In addition, The New Hampshire Bill of Rights, Sec. 10, retains the
right of REVOLUTION enacted and never changed since 1784. There is no
wonder the state's motto "Live Free or Die" applies to the people's
trials and especially tugging at the hearts and minds of the People.
Now we gather to be heard — a voice from the past . . . waiting for
the Voice of the People be brought to Washington for the hearings to
commence.
Yours for Peace and Accountability,
Tim Carpenter,
National Director
__
2) A reminder from Harold Burbank that Rumsfeld was RE-indicted in
Germany in November, 2006;
New German case v Rumsfeld filed in 2006:
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Rumsfeld war crimes complaint filed in Germany
Holly Manges Jones at 10:01 AM ET
[JURIST] Eleven former Abu Ghraib detainees and one Guantanamo
detainee all claiming to have been victims of US torture initiated a
criminal complaint [introduction in English, PDF; full complaint text in
German, part one and part two, PDF] in Germany Tuesday asking that the
German Federal Prosecutor [official website] investigate and ultimately
prosecute former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other top US
officials and advisors [CCR list] for authorizing the commission of war
crimes in the US "war on terror." As anticipated [JURIST report], the
complaint was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by a coalition of US and
international rights groups - among them the New York-based Center for
Constitutional Rights (CCR), the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), the
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and the German Republican
Attorneys' Association (RAV) [advocacy websites] - invoking Germany's
universal jurisdiction [AI backgrounder] law, which allows the prosecution
of war crimes no matter where they were carried out.
US and German lawyers jointly allege that Rumsfeld personally ordered
harsher torture methods against Mohamed al-Qahtani [Wikipedia profile], the
so-called "20th hijacker" from the Sept. 11 attacks being held at the US
prison camp in Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive], when he did not confess
to terrorist activities under initial interrogation sessions. It
additionally cites alleged orders to commit or failures to prevent torture
by US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [official profile], former CIA
director George Tenet [official profile], and recently retired [JURIST
report] US Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez [Wikipedia profile], the former
commander of all US forces in Iraq. CCR provides additional background
materials.
CCR and four Iraqi citizens initially filed [JURIST report] a war
crimes complaint [English translation, PDF] in Germany against Rumsfeld and
seven other high-ranking US officials in October 2004, seeking to hold them
accountable for acts of torture allegedly carried out at Abu Ghraib. That
complaint was rejected [JURIST report] by a German prosecutor in February
2005 and a German court later upheld [JURIST report] the prosecutor's
dismissal of the complaint. Attorneys representing the 12 detainees in the
current suit believe they have a better chance this time because they have
obtained records from the 2005 congressional hearings on al-Qahtani's case,
and because Rumsfeld's recent resignation [JURIST report] may alleviate
political pressure on German prosecutors to dismiss the challenge. AP has
more. From Germany, Der Spiegel has local coverage.
Attorney Harold H. Burbank, II
__
3) Meanwhile our supposed leaders are dragging their feet slowly in
the right direction: Pelosi is moving towards suing Bush
Roll Call - Pelosi Taking Steps for Lawsuit Against Bush
March 4, 2008
By Jennifer Yachnin, Roll Call Staff
House Democrats said a civil lawsuit could be filed as early as this
month that challenges the Bush administration's claims of executive
privilege in curtailing aides from testifying on Capitol Hill.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Friday that the House would
pursue the civil litigation in the wake of Attorney General Michael
Mukasey's decision to not enforce contempt of Congress citations
against former White House counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief
of Staff Joshua Bolten.
Under a resolution approved in mid-February that follows the House to
pursue such a lawsuit, Pelosi is required to "consult" with the
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group - which includes herself as well as
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Majority Whip James Clyburn
(D-S.C.), Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)
and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) - before authorizing the House general
counsel to initiate the case.
Pelosi is expected to consult this week but had not convened the group
as of early Monday afternoon. The meeting is largely perfunctory,
however, as lawmakers are not required to vote on the authorization.
According to Democratic sources, staff is working expeditiously to
finalize the lawsuit, which is expected to be filed in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia before the House recesses
for two weeks on March 14.
The general counsel, which will file the lawsuit on behalf of the
House Judiciary Committee, is expected to urge the federal court to
rule on the legitimacy of the Bush administration's claims that
executive privilege protects conversations between Miers and Bolten
and the president. The court also could compel both
individuals to testify before the House committee.
Democrats had sought testimony from Miers and Bolten in connection to
their probe of the firing of nine federal prosecutors in 2006. White
House counsel offered to allow the aides to be informally interviewed
but not under oath and without a transcript.
Democratic lawmakers declined that offer, and the House subsequently
issued contempt citations in July 2007, then voted to enforce those
citations last month.
"Our investigation into the firing of United States Attorneys revealed
an administration and a Justice Department that seemed to put politics
first, and today's decision to shelve the contempt process, in
violation of a federal statute, shows that the White House will go to
any lengths to keep its role in the US Attorney firings hidden,"
Conyers said in a statement Friday. "In the face of such
extraordinary actions, we have no choice but to proceed with a lawsuit
to enforce
the committee's subpoenas."
Although the House is widely expected to seek expedited action on the
case, it remains possible it could stay in the courts even as
President Bush leaves office in January 2009. That could require the
next president, including the would-be Democratic nominees, Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) or Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), to
determine whether to continue the lawsuit or give in to
Congressional demands.
Flo Woodiel
__
4) Bush is firing Admiral William Fallon, who appears to have been one
of the people in the military most responsible for preventing Bush and
Cheney from committing war crimes against Iran. As Dave Mortenson
warns us, there are still 320 days until January 20, 2009, plenty of
time for Bush and Cheney to create more hell on earth.
Dear Friends:
This was sent to me by a concerned friend. We need to wake people
up. It's a long time until January 20.
Dave Mortensen
**************************************
Subject: Possible firing of level-headed general
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 17:19:46 -0500
who has stood up to Bush/Cheney?
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/05/fallon-bush-fire/
Bush May Fire CentCom Chief Adm. Fallon, Replace With Commander More
'Pliable' To War With Iran
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has called CENTCOM commander Adm.
William Fallon "one of the best strategic thinkers in uniform today."
Fallon opposed the "surge" in Iraq and has consistently battled the
Bush administration to avoid a confrontation with Iran, calling
officials' war-mongering "not helpful." Privately, he has vowed that
an attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch."
Unfortunately, this level-headed thinking and willingness to stand up
to President Bush may cost him his job. According to a new article by
Thomas P.M. Barnett in the April issue of Esquire magazine (on
newsstands March 12), Fallon may be prematurely "relieved of his
command" as soon as this summer:
[W]ell-placed observers now say that it will come as no surprise if
Fallon is relieved of his command before his time is up next spring,
maybe as early as this summer, in favor of a commander the White House
considers to be more pliable. If that were to happen, it may well mean
that the president and vice-president intend to take military action
against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander
standing in their way.
In the Esquire article, Fallon also said that he was in "hot water"
with the White House for meeting with Egyptian president Hosni
Mubarak. Fallon noted that such meetings are his job, and essential to
making sure that regional leaders don't get "too spun up" by the
administration's war rhetoric.
In today's White House press briefing, a reporter asked spokeswoman
Dana Perino about the Esquire piece. Perino refused to say whether
Fallon's position is secure until the end of his tenure, instead
attacking "rumor mills that don't turn out to be true." Watch it:
According to Barnett's piece, Fallon also denied ever calling Petraeus
an "ass-kissing little chickenshit." He called the allegations
"[a]bsolute bullshit."
Digg It!
Transcript:
QUESTION: Dana, I know you have (inaudible), but if you'll trust me to
quote from it, there's an article in Esquire magazine about Admiral
William Fallon that says this: Because of Fallon's caution on Iran,
Fallon may soon be unemployed because he is doing what a generation of
young officers in the U.S. military are now openly complaining that
their leadership didn't do on their behalf in the run up to the war in
Iraq. He's standing up to the commander in chief and he thinks he's
contemplating a strategically unsound war.
Is that an accurate portrayal of their relationship?
PERINO: You're right. But before I came here, I told you I haven't
seen the article. I don't know who wrote it. I've never heard anything
of that sort, except for in rumor mills that don't turn out to be
true.
So, I'll check it out, but I don't think…
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: … opposing views on Iran?
PERINO: I don't know.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: … saying that he's been in hot water with the White House
because — even meeting with Mubarak.
PERINO: President Bush's position on Iran is very clear. It doesn't
mean that other people can't have other thoughts or positions, but I'm
not going to characterize Admiral Fallon.
And let me take a look at the article and then we'll try to get back to you.
__
5) The Unitarian Church in Westport REEL JUSTICE FILM SERIES presents
BUYING THE WAR
"A devastating documentary that should be required viewing. This is
the kind of work television can do brilliantly when given time and
resources and the talents of a questioner like Bill Moyers." Denver
Post
THIS FRIDAY, MARCH 7 AT 7:30 PM
10 LYONS PLAINS ROAD
WESTPORT, CONNECTICUT
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=10+lyons+plains+rd,+Westport,+CT&sll=41.141375,-73.269347&sspn=0.006787,0.013583&ie=UTF8&ll=41.176264,-73.354597&spn=0.013567,0.027165&z=15
On May 1, 2003 President Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS
Lincoln wearing a flight suit and delivered a speech in front of a
giant "Mission Accomplished" banner. He was hailed by media stars as a
"breathtaking" example of presidential leadership in toppling Saddam
Hussein. Despite profound questions over the failure to locate weapons
of mass destruction and the increasing violence in Baghdad, many in
the press confirmed the White House's claim that the war was won.
MSNBC's Chris Matthews declared, "We're all neo-cons now;" NPR's Bob
Edwards said, "The war in Iraq is essentially over;" and Fortune
magazine's Jeff Birnbaum said, "It is amazing how thorough the victory
in Iraq really was in the broadest context."
How did the mainstream press get the war in Iraq so wrong? How did the
evidence disputing the existence of weapons of mass destruction and
the link between Saddam Hussein to 9-11 continue to go largely
unreported? "What the conservative media did was easy to fathom; they
had been cheerleaders for the White House from the beginning and were
simply continuing to rally the public behind the President — no
questions asked. How mainstream journalists suspended skepticism and
scrutiny remains an issue of significance that the media has not
satisfactorily explored," says Moyers. "How the administration
marketed the war to the American people has been well covered, but
critical questions remain: How and why did the press buy it, and what
does it say about the role of journalists in helping the public sort
out fact from propaganda?"
___________________________
david@uuwestport.org, 227.7205 x14
