Thursday, July 28, 2005
You can lead a horse to water, but...
I recently wrote to Senator Wayne Allard to ask him to support Congresswoman Barbara Lee and 29 co-sponsors, who are backing a Resolution of Inquiry which, if passed, will require the White House and the State Department to "transmit all information relating to communication with officials of the United Kingdom between January 1, 2002, and October 16, 2002, relating to the policy of the United States with respect to Iraq."
For anyone who may have been living in Antarctica for the past couple of months, the Downing Street Memos are secret British government documents that provide a "smoking gun" that strongly demonstrates that Bush had decided to go to war long before the March 2003 invasion, and that he was willing to contort existing evidence in any way necessary to support his policy. If you'd like to read the Downing Street documents, you can find all of them online at www.afterdowningstreet.org
I don't launch such endeavors with any expectation that I will sway the senator; it's rare that we agree, and I hardly expect him to support an investigation of his beloved Supreme Leader based on something I've said. Nevertheless, I try. I think it's every citizen's sacred duty to speak up, and let your representatives know how you feel about matters of public policy that concern you.
The Senator's reply to my entreaty is contained in my subsequent letter to him, below:
Dear Senator Allard:
I recently contacted you to encourage your support for further investigation into the Downing Street Memos, the official British briefing documents that contain strong evidence, stated by senior British government officials, that President Bush and his administration had a pre-determined objective to attack Iraq, and that the president, at the very least, grossly misrepresented the facts in order to persuade the American People to support the Iraq war.
In your reply to my message, you said:
"I do believe that President Bush has truthfully stated the reasons to go to war in Iraq. In doing so we have maintained a coalition with many other countries throughout the world, including Britain. I do feel that the President has done a good job at trying to rebuild Iraq. It will not be an easy or quickly resolved task, but we will do our best to help Iraq to become a stable and productive country."
I wonder which of the president's reasons you believe? These are four of the justifications for war that the president has offered the American People at different times:
Did we attack Iraq to disarm its WMDs?
Did we attack Iraq to halt its "WMD Programs?"
Did we attack Iraq to liberate its people from an evil, despotic dictator?
Did we attack Iraq to establish a democracy there?
Each of the previous justifications was proven to be unfounded. The Downing Street Memos are among the latest in a series of revelations that support a thesis that the president was indeed not truthful about his reasons for going to war. As his deceptions have become more and more obvious, the administration has several times changed its rationale for going to war.
Blaming the CIA for generating these false justifications simply shunts responsibility off of the president, who is ultimately responsible for his decisions.
We have made a horrible mess of Iraq. I don't know how hard the president is working to rebuild that country, but I do know that its people are lucky to have electricity a few hours each day, that they don't have enough fresh water, that there is sewage running through the streets of Baghdad, and that a bloody insurgency kills many innocent people, nearly every day.
We have lost nearly 1,800 American GIs in this war, and maimed more than 35,000 others. I have read several estimates stating that between 35,000 and 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. We have already spent nearly $300 billion on this war, and there is no end in sight. I feel heartbroken and ashamed when I consider all of the ways this blood might have been spared, and how all of this money might have been spent on things to better the lives of the American People.
Senator Allard, I know that you believe that the president has been truthful, and I don't begrudge you the right to hold that belief. But how can you be sure if you refuse to look at any evidence to the contrary? It's time to put politics aside, and to be an American first. Once again, I urge you to support further investigation into the evidence in the Downing Street Memos. In light of growing criticism of the war policy, not to mention the many pre-war assertions by the Administration that have subsequently been discredited, this is your greatest opportunity to prove once and all that my doubts, along with the doubts of many other Americans, are unfounded.
Sincerely,
(Yours truly)
I think that the senator and many others will eventually have to capitulate to the overwhelmingly obvious. In the meantime, I am deeply troubled by how transparently his hypocricy, in the cause of political expedience, shines through. This is the same senator who, several years ago, so adamantly assured me that Bill Clinton's lies about his sex life were indeed an impeachable offense
To which I say,
"Never, ever trust a man who says he has never lied about sex."
JJ
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Ask Your Representative to Investigate the Downing Street Memos
Now is the time to write to your congressional representative to request an investigation of the Downing Street Memos and other evidence that we were hoodwinked into going to war against Iraq. Congresswoman Barbara Lee and 29 co-sponsors are backing a Resolution of Inquiry which, if passed, will require the White House and the State Department to "transmit all information relating to communication with officials of the United Kingdom between January 1, 2002, and October 16, 2002, relating to the policy of the United States with respect to Iraq."
Today I wrote to my representative, Congressman Joel Hefley, of Colorado. So far, he does not support this resolution. Here's what I said to Mr. Hefley:
"I contacted you several years ago to ask you not to support the impeachment of President Clinton for a lie that he told about a personal matter that was of no consequence to the People of the United States. In your reply, you strongly disagreed with my position, and you stated your belief that lying about a personal indescretion was indeed a Constitutionally "high crime or misdemeanor," which was quite worthy of impeachment.
The Downing Street Memos and other evidence persuasively indicate that President Bush and members of his administration willfully misrepresented the facts and even lied in order to lead this country into an unprovoked war against a sovreign, unarmed country. This resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and nearly 1800 U.S. military personnel. Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers are wounded, and this senseless war has cost the People of the United States more than $300 billion, which would have been more wisely spent on Education, Healthcare, Energy Independence and many other worthy endeavors. We shall continue paying for this war in many ways, for many years to come.
I sincerely hope that you find the evidence in the Downing Street Memos a bit more troubling than President Clinton's lie about his sexual indescretions, and I urge you to support Rep. Barbara Lee's iniative to investigate these matters further."
JJ
Today I wrote to my representative, Congressman Joel Hefley, of Colorado. So far, he does not support this resolution. Here's what I said to Mr. Hefley:
"I contacted you several years ago to ask you not to support the impeachment of President Clinton for a lie that he told about a personal matter that was of no consequence to the People of the United States. In your reply, you strongly disagreed with my position, and you stated your belief that lying about a personal indescretion was indeed a Constitutionally "high crime or misdemeanor," which was quite worthy of impeachment.
The Downing Street Memos and other evidence persuasively indicate that President Bush and members of his administration willfully misrepresented the facts and even lied in order to lead this country into an unprovoked war against a sovreign, unarmed country. This resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and nearly 1800 U.S. military personnel. Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers are wounded, and this senseless war has cost the People of the United States more than $300 billion, which would have been more wisely spent on Education, Healthcare, Energy Independence and many other worthy endeavors. We shall continue paying for this war in many ways, for many years to come.
I sincerely hope that you find the evidence in the Downing Street Memos a bit more troubling than President Clinton's lie about his sexual indescretions, and I urge you to support Rep. Barbara Lee's iniative to investigate these matters further."
JJ
Friday, July 22, 2005
Senator Wayne Allard (R Colo.) on Flag Burning
Shortly after posting my thoughts about the pending anti flag-burning legislation, (June 23, below), I sent similar letters to my congressman (Joel Hefley), and both senators, (Wayne Allard and Ken Salazar). To his credit, Senator Allard is the only one of them who actually replied to my letter. To his discredit, he completely overlooked, although I'm sure he did not miss my point: The American flag is a symbol of freedom; and that if we take away the freedom it represents, the flag is just a rag.
I guess I should cut the senator some slack. He doesn't know any better. Before becoming a U.S. senator, he was a veterinarian, practicing his noble craft on the desolate plains of northern Colorado, where there live very few green things (making a lot of the locals not-so-regular guys), and a lot of very bored people who spend their cold, lonely nights BS'ing about God, Gays and Guns. I also would bet that his veterinary studies earned him a double PhD in Bovine Scatology.
(That reminds me of a point that I'll rant another time: We often hear legislators complaining about all of the lawyers in the Legislature. When Pete Coors ran for Senate in 2004, a primary plank in his platform was that he wasn't a lawyer. I don't believe that one must have a Law degree to serve in Congress, but I do believe that a profound ignorance of and a lack of respect for our legal process is in large part the reason why so many senators and congressmen come up with so many harebrained laws, many of which end up being "de-legislated from the bench." Why do you think they call them legislators, anyway?)
Here's Senator Allard's response to what I had believed to be my thoughtful appeal for him to stop this ridiculous exercise of panderbation:
"Thank you for your letter regarding an amendment to prohibit desecration of the flag. The American flag is a great symbol of this nation, and it should be regarded with highest honors.
The American Flag represents all that is good and just in this nation. In the past few years, 49 states have passed memorializing resolutions that ask Congress to give states the opportunity to ratify an amendment to the Constitution protecting the flag. This is well over the three-fourths majority needed for ratification and clearly demonstrates the popularity of protecting the American Flag.
I am proud to state that I am one of the original Cosponsors of S.J.RES.12, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States. S.J.RES.12 was introduced on April 14, 2005 Senator Orrin Hatch, and was referred to the Judiciary Committee where it awaits further action.
Thank you for writing to share your concerns. I look forward to hearing from you again. If you would like more information on issues important to Colorado and the nation, please log on to my website at http://allard.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
A Wayne Allard
United States Senator
WA:SM "
###
Well, Senator... If three-fourths of the states approve, would you support an amendment to imprison anyone who refuses to salute the flag? Maybe we could have an amendment that would extend Bill-of-Rights protections only to Christians. How about an amendment to lock up all of the homos, or to burn witches? And what should The Majority do about all of those nasty people (including Yours Truly), who dare to question the wisdom of our illustrious Supreme Leader?
To quote nearly everyone's dear old Mom, "If everybody was jumping off of a bridge, would you follow?" And have you never heard of "the Tyranny of the Majority?"
I'll soon be writing to you again, Senator, to once again ask you to stop wasting your time and our tax money on this flag-burning nonsense. I'll be asking you to get busy "forming a more perfect Union, establishing Justice, insuring domestic Tranquility, providing for the common defence, promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." Isn't that what you are sworn to do?
JJ
I guess I should cut the senator some slack. He doesn't know any better. Before becoming a U.S. senator, he was a veterinarian, practicing his noble craft on the desolate plains of northern Colorado, where there live very few green things (making a lot of the locals not-so-regular guys), and a lot of very bored people who spend their cold, lonely nights BS'ing about God, Gays and Guns. I also would bet that his veterinary studies earned him a double PhD in Bovine Scatology.
(That reminds me of a point that I'll rant another time: We often hear legislators complaining about all of the lawyers in the Legislature. When Pete Coors ran for Senate in 2004, a primary plank in his platform was that he wasn't a lawyer. I don't believe that one must have a Law degree to serve in Congress, but I do believe that a profound ignorance of and a lack of respect for our legal process is in large part the reason why so many senators and congressmen come up with so many harebrained laws, many of which end up being "de-legislated from the bench." Why do you think they call them legislators, anyway?)
Here's Senator Allard's response to what I had believed to be my thoughtful appeal for him to stop this ridiculous exercise of panderbation:
"Thank you for your letter regarding an amendment to prohibit desecration of the flag. The American flag is a great symbol of this nation, and it should be regarded with highest honors.
The American Flag represents all that is good and just in this nation. In the past few years, 49 states have passed memorializing resolutions that ask Congress to give states the opportunity to ratify an amendment to the Constitution protecting the flag. This is well over the three-fourths majority needed for ratification and clearly demonstrates the popularity of protecting the American Flag.
I am proud to state that I am one of the original Cosponsors of S.J.RES.12, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States. S.J.RES.12 was introduced on April 14, 2005 Senator Orrin Hatch, and was referred to the Judiciary Committee where it awaits further action.
Thank you for writing to share your concerns. I look forward to hearing from you again. If you would like more information on issues important to Colorado and the nation, please log on to my website at http://allard.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
A Wayne Allard
United States Senator
WA:SM "
###
Well, Senator... If three-fourths of the states approve, would you support an amendment to imprison anyone who refuses to salute the flag? Maybe we could have an amendment that would extend Bill-of-Rights protections only to Christians. How about an amendment to lock up all of the homos, or to burn witches? And what should The Majority do about all of those nasty people (including Yours Truly), who dare to question the wisdom of our illustrious Supreme Leader?
To quote nearly everyone's dear old Mom, "If everybody was jumping off of a bridge, would you follow?" And have you never heard of "the Tyranny of the Majority?"
I'll soon be writing to you again, Senator, to once again ask you to stop wasting your time and our tax money on this flag-burning nonsense. I'll be asking you to get busy "forming a more perfect Union, establishing Justice, insuring domestic Tranquility, providing for the common defence, promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." Isn't that what you are sworn to do?
JJ
