Author's posts
Feb 01 2008
Conyers article – annotated
WHY NIXON SHOULD HAVE
BEEN IMPEACHEDby John Conyers, Jr.
from The Black Scholar, Vol. 6, Number 2, October 1974
Reprinted with permissionRICHARD NIXON, like the President before him, was in a real sense a casualty of the Vietnam War, a war which I am ashamed to say was never declared. Since the hearings of the House Judiciary Committee began on May 9th, 1974, we have had a professional staff of some 89 men and women gather in great detail over 42 volumes of information that was considered throughout some 57 sessions. My analysis of the evidence clearly reveals an Administration so trapped by its own war policy and a desire to remain in office that it entered into an almost unending series of plans for spying, burglary and wiretapping, inside this country and against its own citizens, and without precedent in American history.
Let us turn back to 1969 when the war was still going on and the President authorized the bombing of infiltration routes that passed through two independent and sovereign nations, Cambodia and Laos. On May 9, 1969,shortly after the bombing began, William Beecher, the Pentagon correspondent for the New York Times, published a story disclosing that “American B-52 bombers in recent weeks have raided several Viet Cong and North Vietnamese supply dumps in Cambodia for the first time.” That story triggered the beginning wiretaps and shortly thereafter, the Administration embarked upon a program of illegal surveillance involving both members of the press and of the Government.
And so this secret war in Cambodia, which seemed at first incidental as I studied the record before us, has emerged as the starting point which enables me to understand the tremendous amount of surveillance and spying and burglary that has characterized the evidence and this Administration, and led to eventual impeachment proceedings.
THE JUDICIARY Committee undertook its impeachment inquiry with a clear recognition of the gravity of its responsibility to the Congress and the Constitution. Our task was unique in modern history and complicated by the sheer weight of the evidence to be evaluated. But the process of impeachment is not, and was never intended to be, familiar, convenient, or comfortable. It was framed with the intention that it be used only as alas constitutional resort against the danger of executive tyranny. The Congress should not lightly interpose its judgment between the President and the people who elect him, but we cannot avoid our duty to protect the people from “a long train of Abuses and Usurpations.”
The articles of impeachment recommended by the Judiciary Committee, although narrowly drawn, are fully consistent with our constitutional responsibility. There is clear and convincing proof that Richard Nixon violated his oath of office and committed high crimes and misdemeanors which jeopardized the liberties of the people. In calling him to account, we also re-establish the proper parameters of presidential conduct. It is essential, therefore, that the record of our inquiry be complete so that no future president may infer that we have implicitly sanctioned what we have not explicitly condemned.
President Nixon’s determination to extend the Vietnam War throughout Indochina led him to conclude that the infiltration of men and supplies through Cambodia and Laos had to be interdicted. This could have been done by bombing North Vietnam, but at the cost of destroying the fragile Paris Peace talks, then in progress. His only recourse, given his assumptions, was to bomb the supply routes in Cambodia which led into South Vietnam At the same time, he apparently realized that public disclosure of such bombing would create a firestorm of Congressional and public protest.
The logic of the White House becomes clear: Vietnamization required the bombing01 Cambodia, which in turn required secrecy at all costs. The pressures of concealment led in turn to a spirit of distrust within the administration which spread as the President and his aides became increasingly enmeshed in the snare of lies and half-truths they had themselves created. Having decided that the People and the Congress could not be trusted with the truth, Mr. Nixon’s distrust was soon extended to his own foreign policy advisors and assistants.
The authorization and concealment of the Cambodian bombing, and the means he employed to prevent its disclosure, illustrated in the very first months of his administration that the President was prepared to do anything he considered necessary to achieve his objectives. To defend both the bombing and the subsequent wiretapping, he invoked the concept of national security, a convenient rationalization to be used whenever the occasion demanded an explanation for some concealed governmental conduct. The imperial presidency of Richard Nixon came to rely on this claim as a cloak for clandestine activity, and as an excuse for consciously and repeatedly deceiving the Congress and thepeople.
NIXON TURNED on his critics with a vengeance, apparently not appreciating that others could strenuously disagree with him without being either subversive or revolutionary. He took full advantage of the FBI’s willingness to invade people’s private lives without legal justification and without regard for their civil liberties. This willingness was documented during Congressional Black Caucus hearings on governmental lawlessness in June, 1972, which revealed that the files of the FBI and the Secret Service are laden with unverified information, often inaccurate and slanderous, on thousands of citizens, particularly blacks, who have had the temerity to speak out against racism, injustice, or the Indochina war. This surveillance of government critics by the FBI began, of course, before Mr. Nixon took office, but his administration gave renewed approval to some of the ugliest abuses of governmental power.
Obsessed by the notion that the disruptive activities of the blacks and students who criticized him were receiving foreign support, he repeatedly demanded that the FBI and CIA conduct extensive investigations to verify this potential conspiracy. But, even with additional authority conferred on these agencies, their reports continually indicated that his fears were unfounded. The inability of the FBI and CIA to substantiate the President’s conviction that many of his critics were engaged in subversion or international conspiracy led him to increasingly question their operational efficiency.
Hence, the President’s approval of the Huston plan in July, 1970, represented nothing more than an extension of an already demonstrated willingness to harass and spy on his political opponents. Even if the Huston plan itself was subsequently tabled, its spirit lived on in the White House and soon took tangible form with attempts to use the Internal Revenue Service for discriminatory personal and political purposes, and with the activities of the Plumbers unit.
The Plumbers put the essence of the Huston plan into practice and provided the President with his own secret intelligence force to investigate his critics and discredit them by any means possible, without even the most elementary regard for individual privacy or public morality.
With the assistance of the President’s closest advisors, the Plumbers violated the charter of the Central Intelligence Agency by seeking CIA assistance to impugn the integrity of Senator Edward Kennedy, and to assess the administration’s potential vulnerability from ITT’s Dita Beard, whose confidential memo implied that a bribe had been offered to settle the ITT antitrust case.
They sought to discredit the Democratic party by falsifying State Department cables to implicate President Kennedy in the assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem. They broke into the Los Angeles office of Dr. Fielding in an attempt to gain medical information that would defame Daniel Ellsberg and, through him, the critics of the President’s war policies.
In these ways, and perhaps in other ways still undisclosed, they violated every canon of morality and legality which stood between them and their goal of discrediting and undermining the President’s “enemies”.
THESE ACTIVITIES demonstrate that the break-in and bugging of the Democratic National Committee, and the subsequent cover-up specified in Article I, were not inexplicable aberrations from a standing presidential policy of strict adherence to the law. Instead, in proper perspective, the Watergate break-in emerges as only one incident in a continuous course of conduct which had its origins in the first months following President Nixon’s inauguration.
The subsequent concealment was intended not merely to protect the White House from its complicity in the Watergate incident itself, but to avoid disclosure of the entire train of illegal and abusive conduct that characterized the Nixon presidency:
- Obstruction of justice;
- Perjury and subornation of perjury;
- Offers of executive clemency;
- Attempts to influence a federal judge;
- Destruction of evidence;
- Disclosure of secret grand jury proceedings;
- Withholding information of criminal activity;
- Impoundment of Congressional appropriations;
- Willful tax evasion;
- Possible bribery in connection with the ITT antitrust and milk price support decisions;
- And interference with the lawful activities of the CIA, FBI, IRS, Special Prosecutor, House Banking and Currency Committee, Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, and finally, the House Judiciary Committee.
In these ways, the President sought to avert disclosure of a seamless web of illegality and impropriety.
That cover-up continued to the end, in that the President attempted to deceive the Congress and the American people by concealing and misrepresenting his knowledge and participation in these activities, and even while resigning, refusing to admit his complicity. Additionally, he withheld necessary information from the Special Prosecutors and fired Special Prosecutor Cox for his efforts to fully discharge his responsibilities. He refused to comply with the legal and proper subpoenas of the Judiciary Committee, as charged in Article III. He mutilated and destroyed evidence in his possession or caused that to happen, and did very nearly everything in his power to impede, delay, and obstruct the proper course of justice.
In my judgment, this course of presidential conduct, outlined above and specified in Articles I, II, and III, provides irrefutable evidence that Richard Nixon was not fit to enjoy the trust and authority which reposes in the Presidency of the United States.
But of at least equal importance is the uncontroverted evidence that Mr. Nixon authorized an illegal war against the sovereign nation of Cambodia, and sought to protect himself from criticism and possible repudiation by engaging in deliberate policies of concealment, deception, and misrepresentation.
On July 30, 1974, I proposed the following article of impeachment:
In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, on and subsequent to March 16, 1969, authorized, ordered and ratified the concealment from the Congress of the facts and the submission to the Congress of false and misleading statements concerning the existence, scope and nature of American bombing operations in Cambodia in derogation of the power of the Congress to declare war, to make appropriations, and to raise and support armies, and by such conduct warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office.
Although this article was not recommended by the Committee, it is fully supported by the facts and the Constitution.
The President of the United States must exercise only those powers which are legally and constitutionally his to exercise, and, by his actions, he must demonstrate due respect for the democratic rights of the people and the constitutional responsibilities of the Congress. The manner in which the Cambodian bombing was initiated, conducted, and reported clearly exceeded the constitutional powers of the presidency, and presented indisputable evidence of impeachable conduct.
President Nixon unilaterally initiated and authorized a campaign of bombing against the neutral nation of Cambodia. For the next four years, he continually deceived the Congress and the American people as to when the bombing began and how far it extended. In so doing, he exceeded his constitutional power as commander-in-chief. He usurped the power of the Congress to declare war, and he expended monies for a purpose not authorized or approved by the Congress. In so doing, he also denied the people of the United States their right to be fully informed about the actions and policies of their elected officials.
It is important to note that the facts pertinent to the Cambodian bombing are not in question. On 11 February 1969, General Creighton Abrams, Commander of the United States Military Assistance Command Vietnam, recommended and requested authorization to conduct bombing strikes in Cambodia. Between 12 February and 17 March 1969, this request was considered by the President in meetings of the National Security Council. On 17 March 1969, President Nixon authorized the bombing of Cambodia.
The bombing began on 18 March 1969 and continued unabated until 15 August 1973.From 18 March 1969 to 1 May 1970, when the United States initiated ground combat operations in Cambodia, 3,695 B-52 sorties were conducted, during which a total of 105,837 tons of bombs were dropped on Cambodia. From the beginning to the end of the bombing campaign in August, 1973, more than 150,000 sorties dropped in excess of 500,000 tons of bombs in Cambodia.
The bombing operations took the form of three different operations, code named “Menu Operation”, “Patio”, and “Freedom Deal”. Under the procedure instituted for reporting “Menu Operation” bombing missions, the regular, operational reports prepared after each mission indicated that the strikes had taken place in South Vietnam rather than in Cambodia. Most “Patio” bombing missions were not reported at all; forty-eight “special” “Patio” strikes were reported as having occurred in Laos rather than Cambodia. The “Freedom Deal” tactical air strikes began on 30 June 1970, the date on which the last contingent of American ground forces was withdrawn from Cambodia. These strikes were reported as having taken place in Cambodia, but in many cases, the targets of “Freedom Deal” strikes weren’t those which were authorized and reported.
SIMILARLY, THERE is no dispute that the President made a decision to keep the bombing secret. When President Nixon approved the first bombing strikes in Cambodia, he directed General Earle Wheeler, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to inform General Abrams that the bombing operations were not to be discussed with any unauthorized person, even though this meant circumventing the normal chain of command which would otherwise have included the Secretary of the Army, the Vice Chief of Staff for their Force, and the Commander of the Seventh Air Force.
The President’s policy of concealment, deception, and misrepresentation was consistently reflected in his own public statements and in the Congressional testimony of his military and civilian subordinates.
Conyers goes on to cite several specific examples of lies told by Nixon and other representatives of the executive branch regarding the conduct of the war in Cambodia. The recitation uncannily presages the recent recounting of the 935 lies told by the BushCheney administration in the runup to the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. (It is safe to assume that Conyers only cites Conyers then summarizes:
Richard Nixon authorized the bombing of Cambodia. In a series of subsequent public statements, he deliberately and intentionally lied to the American people. And in their testimony before duly authorized committees of the Congress, his civilian and military subordinates failed to testify fully and accurately. Whether his subordinates deceived the Congress intentionally or unintentionally, the fact remains that the President must have known that they testified inaccurately, and he made no attempt to correct the record.BY HIS SECRET bombing of Cambodia, President Nixon unquestionably exceeded his powers as commander-in-chief, for not even the most tortured interpretation of Article II, Section 2 could support a war begun and pursued in secrecy. He also violated Sections 7 and 8 of Article I, which give to the Congress the authority to make appropriations and declare war. For the “power of the purse” to have any meaning, the Congress must know how the money it appropriates is spent.
By conducting a war without the knowledge of the Congress, President Nixon further eroded whatever remains of the constitutional power of the Congress to decide when and where the United States shall be at war. We cannot sanction such a policy of deliberate deception, intended to nullify the constitutional powers of the Congress to legislate for the people we represent.
By the same policies of secrecy and deception, Richard Nixon also violated a principal tenet of democratic government: that the President, like every other elected official, is accountable to the people.
For how can the people hold their President to account if he deliberately and consistently lies to them? The people cannot judge if they do not know, and President Nixon did everything within his power to keep them in ignorance. In all good conscience, we must condemn his deception regarding Cambodia with the same fervor and outrage we condemn his deception regarding Watergate.
The difficult question is not whether the secret bombing of Cambodia constitutes impeachable conduct. That is too obvious to require further argument.
Instead, the question we must ponder is, why the Congress has not called Mr. Nixon to judgment for the bombing of Cambodia? The painful answer is that condemning the Cambodian bombing would also have required us to indict previous administrations and to admit that the Congress has failed to fully meet its own constitutional obligations.
Perhaps the most important message of Conyers’ 1974 essay is the recognition of the devastation that the Nixon administration’s actions, if left unchecked, would have on the relative power of Congress. Conyers’ warning is 100% prescient when viewed in light of the BushCheney administration’s dismissal of law via “signing statements” and the utterly fantastic theory of the “unitary executive”:
WHETHER INTENTIONALLY or not, the Congress has participated in the degeneration of its power to declare war. Although a War Powers Act was passed recently, over the veto of President Nixon, no legislation is self-executing. Whatever its limitations and faults, this legislation, and the constitutional provisions on which it is based, will only have meaning to the extent that the Congress invests them with meaning . . .The Congress may not be subject to impeachment, but it is subject to emasculation.
We must directly confront the fact that the secret bombing of Cambodia is only the most recent and egregious illustration of the disintegration of the war power of Congress, and that the Congress has participated in this process, wittingly or unwittingly.
If, during the impeachment proceeding, we have failed to learn this lesson, then we deserve the obloquy, not the gratitude, of the people of the United States. If we do not now fully dedicate ourselves to regaining every bit of constitutional ground we have surrendered, then – to paraphrase one of the President’s men – we shall have lost our constitutional and moral compass.
‘Nuff said.
IT HAS FREQUENTLY been argued during the past weeks that the Committee’s inquiry and the President’s subsequent resignation demonstrate that “the system works.” But such satisfaction or complacency is misguided. We must recognize that we were presented with a seemingly endless series of public revelations and presidential actions which did more to undermine Mr. Nixon’s position than any independent investigation undertaken by this Committee or its staff.
The Congressional inquiry has been the beneficiary of literally years of work by investigative reporters
– huh? What was that word you used?
– the Special Prosecutor’s office, and the Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities. And most importantly, the President himself documented his words and actions through his secret taping system, without which our inquiry might never have even been begun. The President himself did more than anyone or anything to insure his removal from office.
- and, unfortunately for him, didn’t accidentally delete 5 million tapes e-mails or have any convenient fires to take care of evidence.
If the system has worked, it has worked by accident and good fortune. It would be gratifying to conclude that the House, charged with the sole power of impeachment, exercised vigilance and acted on its own initiative. However, we would be deluding ourselves if we did not admit that this inquiry was forced on us by an accumulation of disclosures which, finally and after unnecessary delays, could no longer be ignored.Perhaps, ironically, and certainly unintentionally, we have ourselves jeopardized the future of the impeachment process. Before this inquiry, the prospect of impeaching a president was disquieting because it had not been attempted in more than a century. Now with our inquiry as a precedent, future Congresses may recoil from ever again exercising this power. They may read the history of our work and conclude that impeachment can never again succeed unless another President demonstrates the same, almost uncanny ability to impeach himself.
Clearly, Republics in 1998 did not get this memo – only Democrats in 2007 did.
If this is our legacy, our future colleagues may well conclude that ours has been a pyrrhic victory, and that impeachment will never again justify the agony we have endured. It is imperative, therefore, that we speak to them clearly: impeachment is difficult and it is painful, but the courage to do what must be done is the price of remaining free.
Jan 28 2008
Conyers Ulysses
Conyers Ulysses: Some work of noble note
(Part 2 of a series)
Ulysses
by Alfred, Lord Tennyson
It little profits that an idle king,
By this still hearth, among these barren crags,
Match’d with an aged wife, I mete and dole
Unequal laws unto a savage race,
That hoard, and sleep, and feed, and know not me.
I cannot rest from travel; I will drink
Life to the lees. All times I have enjoy’d
Greatly, have suffer’d greatly, both with those
That loved me, and alone; on shore, and when
Thro’ scudding drifts the rainy Hyades
Vext the dim sea. I am become a name;
For always roaming with a hungry heart
Much have I seen and known,– cities of men
And manners, climates, councils, governments,
Myself not least, but honor’d of them all,–
And drunk delight of battle with my peers,
Far on the ringing plains of windy Troy.
I am a part of all that I have met;
Yet all experience is an arch wherethro’
Gleams that untravell’d world whose margin fades
For ever and for ever when I move.
How dull it is to pause, to make an end,
To rust unburnish’d, not to shine in use!
As tho’ to breathe were life! Life piled on life
Were all too little, and of one to me
Little remains; but every hour is saved
From that eternal silence, something more,
A bringer of new things; and vile it were
For some three suns to store and hoard myself,
And this gray spirit yearning in desire
To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
Beyond the utmost bound of human thought . . .
There lies the port; the vessel puffs her sail;
There gloom the dark, broad seas. My mariners,
Souls that have toil’d, and wrought, and thought with me,–
That ever with a frolic welcome took
The thunder and the sunshine, and opposed
Free hearts, free foreheads,– you and I are old;
Old age hath yet his honor and his toil.
Death closes all; but something ere the end,
Some work of noble note, may yet be done,
Not unbecoming men that strove with Gods.
The lights begin to twinkle from the rocks;
The long day wanes; the slow moon climbs; the deep
Moans round with many voices. Come, my friends.
‘T is not too late to seek a newer world.
Push off, and sitting well in order smite
The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds
To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths
Of all the western stars, until I die.
It may be that the gulfs will wash us down;
It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles,
And see the great Achilles, whom we knew.
Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are,–
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield
First page of argument re: Nixon indictment
http://amhist.ist.unomaha.edu/…
second page of argument re: Nixon indictment
http://amhist.ist.unomaha.edu/…
http://amhist.ist.unomaha.edu/…
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
“I’m not doing this to fail,” he said. “This goes back to a little bit of my civil rights background. We were in an impossible situation. The civil rights leaders came to Martin King and said, please, we hear you’re going to start a civil rights movement in the South, you’ll get all of us killed, Martin, don’t do that!” But if he hadn’t, said Conyers, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would never have passed.
“We’ve lost more rights and constitutional prerogatives in this short period of time than under any president that my studies reveal,” he continued. “So now’s the time. What we have to do is, we have to work on faith. We have to believe that there are enough American people who will agree with us that enough is enough. We’ve got to believe that, and we’ve got to work on that between now and November, and I think we’ll win.”
– John Conyers, March 2006
http://www.salon.com/news/feat…
http://library.csustan.edu/bsa…
Conyers, John. “Why Nixon Should Be Impeached.” Black Scholar 6:2(1974): 2-8
http://www.thenation.com/blogs…
The two-page ad, headlined “A Resolution to Impeach Richard M. Nixon,” called on the newspaper’s readers to support House Resolution 976, which had been proposed several weeks earlier by Michigan Congressman John Conyers and several other liberal representatives.
http://www.time.com/time/magaz…
In May 1972, Conyers introduced a resolution on the House floor demanding that Nixon be removed from office for his conduct of the Vietnam War. The measure went nowhere, but Conyers kept at it for the next two years, and when the Judiciary Committee finally voted in favor of impeaching Nixon, Conyers relished his vindication. “Impeachment is difficult, and it is painful,” Conyers said at the time, “but the courage to do what must be done is the price of remaining free.”
— Time magazine, September 28, 1998
Do a google search for the word impeach along with the names of all your hellos see read and Manuel
In the autumn of 1974, a young firebrand on the House Judiciary Committee, unhappy about the way the Watergate investigation had turned out, penned an article for the Journal the black scholar.. Sat down to write an article for the Journal, the black scholar. The young man was dissatisfied with the way the Watergate investigation turned out. He felt very strongly that justice had not been done, and, perhaps more importantly, that the long-term interests of the United States in the defense of the Constitution had been ill served by the resignation of President Richard Nixon. This article was written before the pardon issued by President Gerald Ford.
Look for some of Conyers quotes, recent quote, about impeachment.
A re reading of Conyers article, these 34 years later, evokes many thoughts and feelings. Overall, the piece could serve as a virtual template to for a manifesto arguing for the impeachment of the current administration. Conyers main thrust in the 1974 article, his main rationale for the absolute necessity of impeaching Richard Nixon, centers around the illegality of the conduct of the war in Vietnam.; specifically, the illegal invasion and bombing of Cambodia. Conyers argues that the usurpation of congresses war making our is, in itself, an impeachable offense:
Insert a block quote year
http://www.watergate.info/judi…
from the document, Rodino’s opening statement:
Mr. Rodino. Three months ago the House of Representatives considered H.
Res. 803. The resolution read as follows:
“RESOLVED, That the Committee on the Judiciary, acting as a whole or by
any subcomnlittee thereof appointed by the Chairman for the purposes hereof and in
accordance with the rules of the Committee, is authorized and directed to investigate fully
and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to
exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United
States of America. The Committee shall report to the House of
Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations
as it deems proper.”
The House adopted that resolution by a vote of 410 to 4. We are proceeding
under the mandate of that resolution.
I do not need to stress again the importance of our undertaking and the wisdom,
decency and principle which we must bring to it.
We understand our high constitutional responsibility. We will faithfully live
up to it.
For some time we have known that the real security of this nation lies in the
integrity of its institutions and the trust and informed confidence of its people. We conduct
our deliberations in that spirit.
Do a google search for the word impeach along with the names of all your hello see read Emmanuelle
In the autumn of 1974, a young firebrand on the House Judiciary Committee, unhappy about the way the Watergate investigation had turned out, penned an article for the Journal the black scholar.. Sat down to write an article for the Journal, the black scholar. The young man was dissatisfied with the way the Watergate investigation turned out. He felt very strongly that justice had not been done, and, perhaps more importantly, that the long-term interests of the United States in the defense of the Constitution had been ill served by the resignation of President Richard Nixon. This article was written before the pardon issued by President Gerald Ford.
Look for some of Conyers quotes, recent quote, about impeachment.
A re reading of Conyers article, these 34 years later, he evokes many thoughts and feelings. Overall, the piece could serve as a virtual template to for a manifesto arguing for the impeachment of the current administration. Conyers main thrust in the 1974 article, his main rationale for the absolute necessity of impeaching Richard Nixon, centers around the illegality of the conduct of the war in Vietnam.; specifically, the illegal invasion and bombing of Cambodia. Conyers argues that the usurpation of congresses war making our is, in itself, an impeachable offense:
Insert a block quote year
Why would Conyers – a man who wrote a pamphlet entitled, “impeaching the president” or whatever it’s called – suddenly tone down his rhetoric regarding impeachment? And why would he do it immediately after the November 9, 2006 congressional elections?
Use this for the introduction to the first of Conyers’s diary:
In September 1974, John Conyers Jr. had been a congressman for five years. Elected in 1968 as the youngest member ever to represent such a district in Michigan, . Conyers and your describes the work he did during Watergate hearings so forth. But before the judiciary committee could serve its articles of on Nixon, he resigned. His resignation, however, did not dissuade certain people from demanding or believing that his crimes should not go unpunished. One of those people was John Conyers. In the September 1974 issue of the journal the black scholar, Conyers wrote a piece entitled, “why Nixon should have been Impeached.” In the essay, Conyers lays out his case for the necessity of impeaching Richard Nixon, in spite of the fact that he no longer was in office. The parallels between the Nixon administration’s history of malfeasance and that of the current administration are striking. With very few minor changes, what Conyers wrote in 1974 could have been written last week.
Conyers of central thesis is that one of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon-an article he actually drafted, and which he reprints in the article-should have held them makes into account for his illegal waging a war against Cambodia. Conyers makes the point that, aside from starting an illegal war, the administration usurped congressional power by using money (that is, to wage war against Cambodia) in a way not authorized by Congress. Conyers says that Congress the road at its future efficacy by allowing such a usurpation to go forward without mention.
Conyers also lists several examples of Nixon administration officials going on the record with misstatements of fact (known in the vernacular as “lies”) arguing in support of the Cambodian invasion. Conyers’ recounting of these public lies immediately brought to my mind the recent documentation of the “935 lies” by the Center for Public Integrity, lies that the BushCheney administration told to rationalize the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.
As I read through the entire Conyers article, I would highlight those passages in which I found striking parallels to today’s situation. By the time I finish the article, I found that I highlighted nearly the entire thing. What John Conyers wrote in 1974 applies nearly perfectly in nearly every instance to this current administration. The misdeeds of the Nixon administration resulted in articles of impeachment being drawn up by a House Judiciary Committee whose members included, not only John Conyers, but also Charlie wrangle of New York.
The absolute necessity to defend our Constitution against “a long train of usurpations” is no less pressing today than it was back then., and I wonder how it is that John Conyers of 2008 can look upon the last seven years of the Bush Cheney administration and not find it worthy of every bit of the opprobrium and constitutional accountability that the Nixon administration so richly deserved, but managed to squirm out from under a, much to the chagrin of the then 45-year-old Conyers. I wonder whether Conyers, perhaps against the better Angels of his nature, has been ordered to stand down on the subject of impeachment of this most criminal administration in our nations history, and is even now writing an update for his 1974 article, to be published in February 2009, entitled the why Bush and Cheney should have been a peek.
Add to the earlier paragraph: ordered to stand down by a weak willed Democratic “leadership,”
It would be a shame if Conyers only legacy.
John Conyers is 75 years old now.
John Conyers and 79 years old now. It would be a shame if his only legacy with respect to bringing this criminal administration to account consists of a few ineffectual hearings and a couple of articles that no one will notice, and very few will be able to find on a Google search 35 years hence.
As for the dismantling the arguments diary: news
Some would argue that all that is needed to deal with this criminal administration is the result of a new general election. And, of course, at this point, it appears likely that-absent election fraud-id. the Craddick administration will take its place in the White House next January. This argument, of course, holds no water. Because of the magnitude of the crimes that were committed to, both against many peoples of the world and against the Constitution of the United States, the many many wrongs of the Bush Cheney administration cannot go unaccounted for., anymore than good for crimes of any other war criminal. Think about it: much of the rest of the world wants to put Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney on trial as war criminals, yet there are those in this country seriously propose to let them off scot free, as if they had done no wrong whatsoever.
For the Conyers Ulysses jar: some work of noble note.
Just for the dismantling the arguments diary:
Site the diary by Mark the shark
And so what if nothing further gets done by the hundred 10th Congress? What has been done by the hundred 10th Congress? Let’s take a look at the record: and here cite the votes on FISA if I as a, and other bad votes, and the failure to stop the war in Iraq, and the veto of S. Chip, and the failure of subpoenas,
In May 1972, then 45-year-old John Conyers, a second term congressman from Michigan, introduced a resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives calling for the impeachment of President Richard M. Nixon. Conyers is resolution, HR976, cited Nixon’s conduct of the war in Vietnam as grounds for his removal from office for the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors pursuant to the Constitution.
Conyers is resolution went nowhere, but neither did Conyers. The groundswell of support for Nixon’s impeachment continue to grow, and two years later, Nixon resigned from office.
Conyers was a member of the House Judiciary committee that drafted the articles of impeachment for Nixon, articles that were never served, preempted instead by Nixon’s resignation on August 9, 1974. Or obviated by Nixon’s resignation. Those are three articles cited Nixon’s obstruction of justice and beer fill in the blank as grounds for impeachment. The issue of Nixon’s conduct of the war was not included in. But Conyers did not forget what Nixon had done that originally inspired the young congressman’s call for impeachment. Paragraph
Two months after Nixon’s resignation, an article appeared in the Journal the black scholar. Written by John Conyers Jr., the article, entitled White Nick “why Nixon should have been impeached,” was a recounting of the mendacity and malfeasance of the Nixon administration. In much of the article con, Conyers details his rationale for impeachment, viewed through the lens of the conduct of the war in Vietnam.
And we are put in the paragraph about how reading the article now is so familiar.
And after that, put a citation, a block quote, that summarizes the article.
Rereading the article, one cannot help but think that if the wrongs he enumerated by Conyers in 1974 were sufficient to lead to the drafting of articles of impeachment, the far more egregious transgressions of the Bush Cheney administration over the past seven years certainly warrants as equals want to treatment. Or it’s certainly warrants being addressed in the same manner.
Year, cite another block quote.
Then, put in the quote for the section about highlighting almost the entire article.
Jan 28 2008
Is life so dear
Is life so dear
Patrick Henry’s speech
http://www.historyplace.com/sp…
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
torture
sam harris’s tortured logic: if you’re willing to accept collateral damage (i.e., civilian casualties), you ought to accept torture
Are we willing to accept the certainty of the sacrifice of our most fundamental and defining civil liberties, in exchange for the mere possibility – and a very dubious one it is, at that – that our physical safety might be enhanced just a wee bit?
martin luther king
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu…
…though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus and extremist for love: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” Was not Amos an extremist for justice: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like am ever-flowing stream.” Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” Was not Martin Luther an extremist: “Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God.” And John Bunyan: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln: “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . . .”
So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvery’s hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime — the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth, and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation, and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.
cia oldies
http://www.washingtonindepende…
tsa and facecrimes
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
Jan 28 2008
national parks
National Parks
google search
http://www.google.com/search?q…
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/…
http://com.miami.edu/parks/iss…
http://www.democrats.com/node/…
http://foi.missouri.edu/federa…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17…
National Wildlife refuges budget cuts 20 percent staff reduction by 2009.
“Our national wildlife refuges are literally crumbling before our eyes. Across the country we’re seeing how the culmination of years of negligent funding devastates these special places,” said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife.
budget cuts at np
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
2007 budget proposal “worst yet”
http://ga1.org/npca/notice-des…
http://democrats.senate.gov/dp…
jenna engaged at acadia – this from 2004:
http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/…
Acadia National Park in Maine, a 47,500 acre park sheltering over 1,000 species of plants and wildlife, including threatened and endangered species, and over 5,000 years of human history, faces a 53% budget shortfall. Acadia is understaffed by some 100 full-time positions, including an anticipated shortage of 20-30 seasonal rangers. Shortfalls in patrol staffing have resulted in damage from illegal snowmobile and allterrain vehicle use, illegal trail cutting, and poaching.
bush vetoed bill to restore everglades
http://ga1.org/npca/notice-des…
Jan 28 2008
A series of remarkable coincidences
A series of remarkable coincidences
Look up and FAA safety study that was shut down.
Look into the blackwater/portrero connection especially with regard to the fires.
Another coincidence Re: armor holdings: the fire at HP White the day before congressional testimony.
jerry lewis and cerberus
white house fire w/photos 12-19-07
colorado decertification of voting machines
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
http://www.rockymountainnews.c…
riecher suicide
white labs fire re body armor
lott leaves senate just before lobbying rules change
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
In the old days, every single one of these coincidences would’ve been fodder for a full-blown investigative piece.
mukasey’s son represents verizon
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
lute u.n.
http://www.innercitypress.com/…
Jan 28 2008
Dismantling the arguments against impeachment
Dismantling the arguments against impeachment
conyers’ lame-ass excuses
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
rahm emanuel’s lame-ass excuses
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
lawyers’ letter to lahy, conyers
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
patrick henry’s speech
http://www.historyplace.com/sp…
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth — to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?
Wow. I guess we’re back on impeachment.
Okay by me.
Sounds like we’re in for a rehash of the impeachment wars of December 2006.
There are four primary arguments used by those who oppose the impeachment of Dick Cheney and George Bush, and we’ve all heard them before: it’s too politically risky. (Put this one last). Show the results after the 1974 impeachment process, contrast that with post-Clinton impeachment, which was a farce of an impeachment.
It will take too long.
Democrats will be seen as partisan, vindictive, and or vengeful. This is actually a subset of the quote “politically risky” argument.
We don’t have the votes.
Include Pelosi’s quotes about it not being worth it.
cite the January 1974 poll that showed that 51% of Americans opposed the impeachment of Nixon; contrast that with recent polls regarding potential impeachments of Bush and or Cheney.
It will diminish the effectiveness and value of impeachment. This is an argument that is ridiculous on its face. Compare the process that led to the near impeachment of Richard Nixon to that of the process that actually led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
A recurring theme. I would like to believe that thinking Democrats have not fallen victim to the belief that the Clinton impeachment set the standard for impeachments. I rather would like to believe that the Clinton impeachment brought into stark relief the difference between a farcical impeachment and a serious one, the serious one, of course, being that of Richard Nixon. Here’s how serious the Nixon impeachment was: Nixon resigned from office rather than be impeached, because he knew that the case against him was solid, and he would go down in defeat, dragging the Republican Party with him. Clinton, on the other hand, knew that the case against him was a joke.
Any potential impeachment of George Bush or Dick Cheney, once the investigations and hearings have run their course (provided, of course, that they are substantive), will place current day Republicans in the same quandary: they will be faced with a choice between standing side by side with a president and vice president who will have been demonstrated to have been thoroughly corrupt and criminal – an act of political self immolation – or facing the music, and choosing to preserve not only their own political hides, but the future existence of the Republican Party. If any reader of this site to has any doubts that substantive hearings would reveal wrongdoing on a scope heretofore unprecedented in American history, then I do not know what to say to them. Further, if any reader of the site believes that revelation of such wrongdoing, and solid, bulletproof documentation of such wrongdoing, will not prove politically fatal to Republicans, then I also do not know what to say to them.
Dean will get done during the time of impeachment. Check the arguments that Dean used.
Arguments against impeachment: some have even argued (Armando) that resorting to impeachment will weaken the relative standing in Congress to check abuses of the executive branch. The power of future congresses to check the abuses of the executive branch.
I completely disagree. Like John Conyers in his 1974 essay, “Why Nixon Should Have Been Impeached,” I would argue that failure to impeach weakens the power of the legislative branch, for the very reason that Kagro alludes to: as long as the executive branch knows that the legislative branch is not willing to use its own mechanisms of enforcement, the executive branch knows it can act with utter disregard of the legislative – a fact that has been thoroughly borne out over the course of the 110th Congress so far.
ONE YEAR ON:
kos, December 7, 2006:
We can spend 2007 either pushing impeachment (which isn’t as popular as Zogby claims, see Bowers’ piece), or we can use it educating the American people about what a Democratic government would look like — passing meaningful legislation that would improve their lives like the minimum wage, health care reform, ethics reform, stem cell research funding, policies that help families and the middle class.
Impeachment does none of that.
- and neither, as it turns out, does a Democratic Congress.
More:
Don’t worry about Bush and company. Congress will pursue its oversight duties. Waxman and Slaughter and Conyers and the rest of those guys aren’t about to take the next two years off. People will be held accountable. Impeachment isn’t the [only] path to accountability.
- except, as we no know, the administration has defied their subpoenas and obstructed their investigations. Now what?
Kagro X, within days of being handed his new responsibilities as a front-pager at DailyKos, circumspectly answered the question, “But what can Congress do when the executive branch defies congressional subpoenas, and the administration’s Justice Department refuses to enforce them?”
So if you’re conducting oversight of, say, the NSA spying program, and you want answers from Gonzales regarding the program’s legality, and you subpoena him and he tells you to take a flying leap, what do you do?
You could try going to court, but not only will that pretty much run out the clock, but the courts are quite likely to tell you, “What are you crying to us for? You have your remedy. If you’re too chicken to use it, that’s your problem.”
Kagro goes on,
Instead, it’s about contemplating the place of impeachment as a procedural tool. Just as it’s the threat of a filibuster that ultimately provides the “power” that makes the “Senatorial hold” possible, so is impeachment the power that makes Congressional subpoena power possible for use against the executive branch.
And whereas the Democratic Congress has demonstrated its willingness to cave in the face of mere threats of obstruction by Republicans, the Republicans on the other hand have shown that they will stop at nothing – the so-called “cataclysmic fight to the death” promised shortly after the November 2006 elections – to keep Democratic initiatives from moving forward. This Democratic Congress, truly, is left with only one option, an option clearly spelled out in the Constitution: impeachment.
of course, the one argument against impeachment but I cannot successfully fight is the unstated argument. Some have suggested that Republicans might be holding compromising information certain if not most Democratic congress members.
I saw my first impeach yard sign today. It was very heartening.
The same mindset that would justify immunity for the telcos in FISA would justify forgoing impeachment: perpetrators of crime should not be held accountable for their crimes.
Jan 28 2008
body armor latest
where to find defense contracts
PRINTED
bae goes after MTC Dec. 2007
http://www.forbes.com/2007/12/…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/mon…
PRINTED
blair blocked bae investigation dec. 2007
http://www.guardian.co.uk/baef…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/baef…
http://www.businessday.co.za/a…
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9e3c…
the guardian has an entire web page devoted to BAE scandal
http://www.guardian.co.uk/baef…
PRINTED
saudi arabia warns it might stop cooperating vis terrorism if bae investigation goes forward january 30 2008
http://www.thebulletin.us/site…
PRINTED
so. african president-elect jacob zuma involved in bae
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t…
PRINTED
bae to go forward with ah purchase jun 8
http://news.independent.co.uk/…
dhb/pint blank gets $52 million order for OT
armor holdings press releases
http://www.google.com/search?q…
ARMOR HOLDINGS conference calls
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph…
PRINTED
seattle times – earmarks
http://community.seattletimes….
armor holdings contracts 2006 $800 million
http://www.usaspending.gov/fpd…
armor holdings $32.1 million Feb. 24, 2006 contract
http://www.usaspending.gov/fpd…
detail on contract
http://www.usaspending.gov/fpd…
how the info works on usaspending.gov
http://www.usaspending.gov/abo…
PRINTED
simula gets $46 million contract for ESAPI inserts on Nov. 29, 2007; same day, BAE holdings get total of nearly $1 billion in contracts, including for Stewart & Stevenson
http://www.defenselink.mil/con…
PRINTED
from hasc hearings: cool powerpoint on army’s may 2006 dragon skin “findings” (PDF FILE)
http://www.defenselink.mil/dod…
PRINTED
from a comment on TPM Muckraker June 7 2007
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/ar…
Re Dragon Skin vs Interceptor body armor
Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh Shelton and former Secret Service Director Brian Stafford joined the board of Ceramic Protection Corporation (CPC) last year.
CPC manufactures a lot of the boron ceramic inserts that go into the Interceptor armor at its Newark DE facility. Last year, it purchased a Florida manufacturer of the soft body armor that goes into the Interceptor system.
Around the time that Shelton and Stafford joined the CPC board, CPC got a slew of new body armor contracts from the DoD.
I’ve been following body armor news and I wonder if magnesium ceramic body armor is going to be the next big thing.
One of the investors in CPC, PA-based financier Heinz Schimmelbusch, has a financial interest in a company that produces and markets mangnesium.
Dynamic Defense Materials DDM, a tiny defense contractor based in Bootwyn PA, has been trying to develop contoured magnesium ceramic body armor. Katherine T. Leighton, DDM officer, has a patent application pending which involves the manufacutre of magnesium ceramic body armor.
Leighton and Schimmelbusch both have ties to a Newark DE company, Lanxide, that went belly up in 1999.
DDM contributed more than $17k to Curt Weldon’s last campaign and is now a client of Weldon’s firm, Defense Solutions LLC.
I suspect the big shots in the Army have already picked out the next generation of body armor and it isn’t Dragon Skin. Lisa Myers of NBC just didn’t ask the right questions.
PRINTED
armor holdings names to replace 156,000 Second Chance vests July 2005
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph…
PRINTED
air force seeks to debar pinnacle
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfe…
PRINTED
david brooks wants out of jail dec 22 2007
http://www.examiner.com/a-1119…
PRINTED
judge approves house arrest for brooks
http://www.newsday.com/news/lo…
PRINTED
brooks sued by Point Blank for $4 million dec 7 2007
http://www.bizjournals.com/sou…
PRINTED
air force times and navy times editorial calling for fair testing (june 18 ’07?)
http://www.airforcetimes.com/c…
http://www.navytimes.com/commu…
PRINTED
“bloggers’ roundtable with gen. brown may 21, 2007 (PDF FILE)
funny – i don’t know of anyone who was invited
http://www.defendamerica.mil/p…
pogo on debarment
http://www.pogo.org/p/contract…
http://www.pogo.org/p/contract…
what is debarment
http://www.fedmarket.com/artic…
can be debarred for illegal immigrants
http://www.ffhsj.com/cmemos/00…
can be debarred for not maintaining a drug-free workplace
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/…
contractors accountability act of 2003
http://www.theorator.com/bills…
should boeing be debarred?
http://www.commondreams.org/ne…
large contractors tough to debar, gove exec.com
http://govexec.com/dailyfed/05…
bush admin proposes repeal of contractor responsibility rule 2001
http://www.ombwatch.org/articl…
anti-scofflaw rule proposed 1999
http://www.ombwatch.org/articl…
iraq contractors’ debarment may 2007
http://www.usatoday.com/news/w…
parsons debarment a good sign
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/po…
steve kelman
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/po…
some of parsons’ iraq failings
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/…
Federal Acquisition Regulations, Part 9.4
http://www.arnet.gov/far/curre…
sba proposal may 2007 to include tax violations as cuase for debarment
http://www.sba.gov/advo/laws/c…
oversight pendulum swinging bakc may 2007
http://www.washingtontechnolog…
air force stopped testing in 2006
http://www.defensereview.com/m…
http://www.military.com/NewsCo…
navy bans body armor june 13
http://www.military.com/NewsCo…
PRINTED
army addresses norwood in nbc interview
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18…
captain’s journal compliments occams hatchet june 1
http://www.captainsjournal.com…
u.s. opens bae investigation june 15 latimes
http://www.latimes.com/news/na…
PRINTED
bae appoints judge to examine bae’s ethics – at $10,000/day june 15
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/…
PRINTED
bae’s self-examination not setting well with MPs
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/mon…
PRINTED
bae now sells more in u.s. than u.k.
http://business.timesonline.co…
bae acquisition of armor holdings closed july 31
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap…
pentagon balked at pleas for safer vehicles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/m…
analysis of injuries
http://www.fayobserver.com/art…
norwood
http://news.google.com/news/ur…
aei’s and pnac’s michael donnelly “NBC’s body armor embarrassment” june 20
http://news.google.com/news/ur…
PRINTED
pentagon losing control to contractors – business week june 25
http://www.businessweek.com/ma…
bae shares drop with u.s. investigation june26
http://www.forbes.com/markets/…
army seeks better plates aug 07
http://www.defensenews.com/sto…
armor holdings $1.1 million export fine August 20
http://news.moneycentral.msn.c…
armor holdings $1.2 million air pollution fine august 20
http://www.azcentral.com/arizo…
armor holdings armored vehicle 1,200 ordered; others out August 16
http://blog.wired.com/defense/…
force protection loses; look for it to be bought by Armro Holdings
http://www.fool.com/investing/…
dragon skin unlikely to get side-by-side test august 16
http://www.ksee24.com/news/loc…
arizona congressman pushes for armor holdings contracts august 2007
http://www.bizjournals.com/pho…
fewer mraps to be delivered august 2007
http://news.google.com/news/ur…
PRINTED
“bribery is normal” – rightwing publication august 2007
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/vi…
cns news whackos
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/…
http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind…
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…
PRINTED
hold earmarks for bae – under investigation
http://thehill.com/business–l…
$15 million in fines paid for dfectine armor
http://www.portfolio.com/views…
http://www.pacificnewscenter.c…
mrap contractors narrowed to 3 – including Armor Holdings
http://www.defenselink.mil/tra…
mrap contractors
http://www.fool.com/investing/…
bae chief quits
http://www.forbes.com/facesint…
bae armor holdings individual body armor contract $43 million
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/…
Washington attacking corporate corruption elsewhere in the world
Justice Dept. probes British firm’s suspect payments to Saudis
corpwatch – fcpa heating up dec 07
http://www.corpwatch.org/artic…
PRINTED
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…
evolution armor supposedly has level 4 armor – don’t hold your breath waiting for professional soldiers or OpFor to jump down evolution’s throat about their utterly untested armor
http://www.evolutionarmor.com/
http://www.evolutionarmor.com/…
The Skaalar Exo-Skin product line is available now, but only for special forces teams and their operators. It’s completely flexible level 4 armor capable of addressing the ESAPI and XSAPI requirements with no gaps in coverage and is custom designed per each teams requirements. Also available in early 2008 we have a level 3+ Exo-Skin coming for law enforcement personnel using a new method of creating flexible comfort. Check back with at the first of the year for details about the Gen 3 product for law enforcement.
professional soldiers.com still very smug
http://www.professionalsoldier…
bae (with 2 entities) gets order for !,268 of 3,100 MRAPs
http://www.defenselink.mil/rel…
force protection could be takeover target
http://news.google.com/news/ur…
mrap contracts given to big contractors (ceradyne also mentioned)
http://www.fool.com/investing/…
bizarre: huff post columnist recommended dragon skin to bhutto
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
bhutto needed export license for dragon skin
http://lakeexpo.com/articles/2…
army regs re foia 25-55 – PDF FILE
http://www.army.mil/usapa/epub…
value of mraps debated dec 27 2007 latimes
http://www.latimes.com/news/na…
british SFO investigating drug companies for oil-for-food corruption dec 31
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq…
PRINTED
riechers suicide dec 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12…
PRINTED
pimco challenge to boeing (vis riechers) upheld dec 28 2007
http://www.al.com/business/mob…
http://www.flightglobal.com/ar…
bbc world service podcast on procurement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldserv…
PRINTED
british anti-corruption laws have teeth (legal advice) dec 2007
http://www.metrocorpcounsel.co…
PRINTED
company fined for falsely claiming fed contract with bae jan 2008
http://www.unionleader.com/art…
PRINTED
s. african arms deal may fall apart jan3 2008
http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/…
PRINTED
not happy with dragon skin dec 2008
http://www.michaelyon-online.c…
with armor holdings having been bought by bae, it’s got even more leverage – bae is scattered all across the u.s., in several states and dozens of congressional districts.
bae probe may tear south africa apart january 10 2008
http://www.businessday.co.za/a…
http://www.thoughtleader.co.za…
saudis “urge” MI6 to drop bae investigation jan 2008
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
guy who actually worked for pinnacle jan 2008
http://a-gunguy.livejournal.co…
bae wins contract for mine-clearing vehicles jan 10 2008
http://www.military-quotes.com…
Designed for use by US forces, BAE’s “medium mine-protected vehicles” are built to clear routes littered with mines and improvised explosive devices, which, according to the defence department, are responsible for almost two-thirds of US casualties in Iraq.
Orders for standard counter-insurgency vehicles, supplied currently by BAE, are likely to fall, said Colin Crook, a UBS analyst.
But he said that the deal suggested “the sustainability of BAE’s military vehicle work is much better than many commentators may fear”.
cheney in dragon skin?
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/…
michael yon’s comment
http://www.michaelyon-online.c…
profile of yon in NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01…
sov-300 for sale on ebay feb 6 2008
http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayI…
turtle skin armor
http://blog.wired.com/defense/…
ADDED FEB 9 2008
british firms don’t know they have to comply with FCPA
http://www.ethicalcorp.com/con…
ADDED FEB 18 2008
bae chief retiring, history of scandal feb 17 08
http://business.timesonline.co…
high court says blair put irresistible force against investigation feb 14 08
http://business.timesonline.co…
judges to rule on dropped investigation feb 15 08
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/bus…
The SFO lawyer Philip Sales was frequently interrupted by one of the judges with questions about the stance taken by the SFO and the British government in the face of an alleged “serious and imminent” threat to national security.
Lord Justice Moses said it appeared that Britain had simply “rolled over” instead of trying to make the Saudi government withdraw the threats, which amounted to criminal offences under British law.
But Mr Sales hit back: “We in the UK can’t compel the Saudi Arabian government to adopt a different stance.”
Documents released to the court showed the government thought “British lives on British streets” would have been at risk if the inquiry into alleged bribery had not been dropped.
In the documents, Helen Garlick, assistant director at the Serious Fraud Office stated:
“If this caused another 7/7 how could we say that our investigation, which at this stage might or might not result in a successful prosecution, was more important?”
judge says govt “rolled over” on saudi threat feb 14 08
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl…
icr hired in 2003 to raise Armor HOldings profile
http://www.icrinc.com/web/feat…
dragon skin on ebay – ksee video report feb 15 08
http://www.ksee24.com/news/loc…
ADDED FEB 20 2008
http://www.themanufacturer.com…
bae chief says
Appearing on the Sky Jeff Randall Live programme, Turner described the accusations as having gone too far, and having come from “a small portion of the UK media and minority groups who have a strange distorted view of the world”. He also deemed the High Court case as damaging for the country.
ADDED MARCH 2 2008
british probe focuses on commissions, only 4 countries
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/mon…
oecd starts investigation into great britain corruption march 2008
http://www.guardian.co.uk/busi…
Jan 28 2008
Important If True: Things I didn’t know edition
Important If True: Things I didn’t know edition 1/20
BLIND SQUIRREL, OR DOUGHY PANTLOAD?:
http://www.latimes.com/news/op…
joe conason book review
http://www.latimes.com/feature…
georgia gun bill
http://news.mywebpal.com/partn…
Gen. Robert Scales on ATC january 11 – very end of the broadcast
http://www.npr.org/templates/s…
The reason we’re in Iraq is to establish a military presence there. Finally – someone comes out and admits that the reason we illegally invaded and occupied a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us was to fulfill the agenda of the Project for the New American Century, first laid out in 1997 and more fully explicated in 2000.
defense secretary gates on gunboats
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200…
Asked about the Iranian charge of fabrication, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said: “I think that the most appropriate answer is actually the one that I heard on television last night from former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen, who said, ‘Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?’
I’LL BET YOU DIDN’T KNOW THIS: thompson not even in the same ballpark – he’s on a little league diamond
http://www.humanevents.com/art…
Fred Thompson knew he had to hit it out of the park last night — so he did.
more scintillating commentary from the same columnist, Ericka Andersen (a real piece of journalistic work herself):
Huckabee wasn’t the only one out of place last night. Ron Paul, who was invited to the debate only after receiving 8% of the New Hampshire vote, displayed his lack of understanding of the military by second-guessing on-scene commanders who didn’t fire on Iran speedboats in the incident last Sunday in the Strait of Hormuz. Worse still, Paul seemed to suggest that the American version of the incident — in which a radio transmission from the Iranian boats included a threat, “you will explode in two minutes” — was untrue.
Paul suggested that “voice may not even have come from those vessels” and argued that “there are people in this administration and in Washington DC that are looking for a chance” to go to war….an excuse to bomb Iran.”
WELL, I’LL BE A FILIPINO MONKEY’S UNCLE:
http://ap.google.com/article/A…
http://www.ncseweb.org/resourc…
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
my kids are all in favor of schools being required to validate opposing views. In fact, one of my daughters is adamant that her algebra teacher give as much weight to the belief that holds that factoring
o’reilly and trained monkey fling poo
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
creationism museum closing
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
depending upon the 40,000 year age of an artifact
The meek shall not inherit the scorched earth: everybody knows there’s a difference between campaigning and governing. Campaigning can be exciting: the adrenaline rush, the strategizing, the maneuvering, the gamesmanship,-but what to do once the election is won? Putting aside for the moment we illegality of the entire enterprise, the “defeat” of the Iraqi army took a little bit over three weeks. That was the easy part, and the most telegenic. The hard part-and the part for which those who carried out the Blitzkrieg had no plan and no clue-came afterward. So what is my point? Simply this: conducting a scorched earth Blitzkrieg campaign whose sole object is to win, regardless of the costs, consequences or repercussions, might be a nice tactic, but a terrible strategy. Just sayin.
alcides moreno
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01…
Jan 28 2008
It’s what they do
It’s what they do
college loan fiasco – new york
willie sutton of gov’t
inspector general on iraq c. 4/30
Principi
Norwood
baroody cpsc, incl. $150,000 bonus
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18…
smihsonian, national parks,
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
FEMA’s Brown and his predecessor
Rumsfled, Cheney, Bush
EPA people
excellent political cortex on rogue’s gallery
http://www.politicalcortex.com…
another good list
http://crap713three.blogspot.c…
original(?) ap list april 2007
http://www.boston.com/news/nat…
supreme court rules SEC is enough; no stockholder anti-trust suits on IPOs june 18
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
investing in infrastructure
http://www.progressivestates.o…
check out the millennium challenge
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
Minneapolis bridge repair
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
kagro x’s augu 19 story on rove
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
Noarth American Union – Granny Doc’s diary august 20
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
fdr speech
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
rumsfeld and aspartame
http://www.mercola.com/article…
http://www.google.com/search?q…
http://www.conspiracyplanet.co…
Amid this controversy, Rumsfeld was hired as Searle CEO on March 8, 1977 and immediately began cleaning house. Rumsfeld, who had no previous business executive experience before becoming CEO of Searle, reorganized several departments in the company and fired many of its high-level managers, replacing them with other politically-connected Washington, D.C., insiders.
http://www.assatashakur.org/fo…
ralston turkey lockheed
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
earmarks, incl. defense
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
from diary on visiting iraq mercenary compound
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
The first question here is always “who are you with?” rather than “where are you from?” The contractors hold their corporate identity above their national identity. Indeed, they come from many nations and the common corporate culture bonds them and allows them to work together for their mutual benefit. It is eerily reminiscent of the post-nation state futures depicted in dystopian corporatocracy science fiction or anime. To a person, the contractors we talked to were confused by us because we were with an NGO and not a corporation.
fedex loses independent contractor suit
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
repubs rely on money to hold Iraq, afghanistan together
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12…
cs monitor on parks budget
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/…
really good article on national parks
http://www.alternet.org/story/…
good site: http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/
nrdc page
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord…
mention yosemite – new cabins for vendor, not govt. employees
nbc news
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
jerome’s story on defiance of lenders in light of subprime fiasco jan 2008
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
sirota on class warfare jan 2008
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
It is important to bear in mind that this worldview will not die with this presidency. This is a worldview that is older than the Magna Carta; its manifestation during the Dark Ages we now call “feudalism.”
money? or people?
downsizing, outsourcing newspaper work
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
Remove the profit motive. Examples: military service, police protection, highways, all of the government programs that work.
powell memo 1971
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/co…
h/t Christopher Day
http://www.dailykos.com/commen…
elaine chao at labor feb 2008
http://shameonelaine.org/2008/…
Jan 28 2008
Are you f-ing kidding me?
Are you f-ing kidding me?
coburn article
http://online.wsj.com/public/a…
diaries
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
background noise’s diary on medicaid cuts
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
fuck you, I got mine
Ratzinger on exorcism
huckabee on bhutto and muslims
giuliani aide on muslims, bhutto “caves”
Jan 28 2008
News Flash: Republicans are hypocrites!
News Flash: Republicans are hypocrites!
George Bush
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…
Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical
show photos of Karla Faye Tucker, Iraq
robokos’ story on brawling priests
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
Jan 28 2008
Torture
Torture
You made me look like an asshole. I promised all those people I called on the phone that the new Democratic Congress would change things. All you’ve succeeded in doing, is continuing to do what they Republics were doing – only not quite as well as them.
Do Democrats in Washington think the people of this country are still cowering in fear in their basements, quaking in dread about the next terrorist attack? Do they believe that most Americans think it’s OK to wiretap their phones, track their Internet usage and torture them – because that is what we are coming to, and if you do not believe that, I do not know what to say to you – because those Americans think it will keep them safer?
Do Democrats in Washington believe that most people in this country believe that our continued occupation of Iraq is keeping us safer from terrorist attacks? Do they think that we believe that our interests are served by Blackwater and KBR receiving hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to continue doing what they’ re doing?
Never faced an enemy like this before? What – an enemy that beheads its prisoners? An enemy that tortures its prisoners? An enemy that targets innocent women and children? [HERE RUN OKLAHOMA CITY PHOTO] Wrong. [LINK THAT TO TORTURE DIARY]
The so-called “ticking time bomb” scenario can also be blown out of the water [USE MARINE INTERROGATOR ON GUADALCANAL] During a time of war. And if anybody can actually point to a single example of the ticking time bomb scenario actually happening, I’d like to hear about it.
Nytimes article on zubaydah from sept 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09…
http://www.progressive.org/mag…
Advocates of the ticking bomb often cite the brutal torture of Abdul Hakim Murad in Manila in 1995, which they say stopped a plot to blow up a dozen trans-Pacific aircraft and kill 4,000 innocent passengers. Except, of course, for the simple fact that Murad’s torture did nothing of the sort. As The Washington Post has reported, Manila police got all their important information from Murad in the first few minutes when they seized his laptop with the entire bomb plot. All the supposed details gained from the sixty-seven days of incessant beatings, spiced by techniques like cigarettes to the genitals, were, as one Filipino officer testified in a New York court, fabrications fed to Murad by Philippine police.
More on bojinka wapo 2001
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
ticking time bomb
http://www.progressive.org/mag…
outstanding essay on crooked timber
http://crookedtimber.org/2005/…
and on fafblog
http://fafblog.blogspot.com/20…
va law review (PDF)
http://www.virginialawreview.o…
(Even the logic of the ticking time bomb scenario falls apart under any reflection. To wit: We are dealing with people who are willing to die – indeed, who look forward to dying – in the pursuit of their terrorist aims. If one of them is captured, for what possible reason on earth would they not be willing to die under interrogation? And – make no mistake – waterboarding is not “simulated” drowning; it is actual drowning, the pace of which is administered at the discretion of the interrogator.)
zubaydah bullshit
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
iraqi torutre complex found
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
Paragraph from RadioShack get a headset. The palest cellular get the new phones.
If torturing were necessary as a result of the terrorist bombings of September 11, why wasn’t it necessary as a result of the terrorist bombings of the Oklahoma City federal building?
Look up the Marine Corps General who advocated on or about December 20 for the mass release of Iraqi detainees. Also, on the same day in the LA Times, look for the story of the Iranian who was released.
The destruction of the CIA torture tapes will reveal that Ilya carry out in this story, or whatever the agents suppose that name was, completely bogus. No information of value was obtained, and torture definitely to place. Where are the suppose of plots that were stopped as a result of this interrogation? Who are the suppose that it terrorist operatives who were intercepted as a result of this interrogation? Administration is never fail to trumpet its “successes” in this so-called war on terror; even though most of them have turned out to be dismal failures. And here referenced the many court cases that have fallen apart for ridiculous so-called terrorist groups in the United States.
Mail the reimbursement check to the credit union.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
nosenko story
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20…