How Berkeley can they be?
The Berkeley City Council
is set to vote on whether or not to place a referendum on the ballot in Berkeley this November to establish a "task force" to seek the impeachment of President Bush
as recommended by the Berkeley "Peace and Justice Commission
Now, interestingly enough, rather large parts of the proposed law
are based on lies, misstatements and unsubstantiated claims almost straight from IndyMedia and the mooniest of Moonbat theories and claims.:Lie
"They claimed, and the President asserted in the 2003 State of the Union
address before a joint session of Congress that Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium for a
nuclear weapon from Niger"
No, the President asserted no such thing. What he said was "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa
Notice, not one word about Niger. In fact, President Bush has been backed up on his statements by not only the US Senate Intelligence Committee but by a seperate British investigation as is ellucidated by FactCheck.Org "Bush's '16 Words' on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying"Unsubstantiated Claims:
There are numerous, but let's cover just one:
The claim that: "They have permitted the torture of detainees in violation of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions."
They provide no evidence of this. None. Zip. Nada. "But what about Abu Ghraib!" That's not torture people. That's not even close to torture. Even so, the actions were not permitted nor condonded as evidenced by the various investigations, trials and sentencing of guilty parties. In point of fact, the military had already begun investigations into treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib BEFORE the media found out about it. But the media (and the Moonbats) took credit for "breaking" the storyMisstatements
"In violation of federal statutes, they have caused to be published the identity of a CIA covertagent after that agent's husband published a newspaper article revealing that his officialinvestigation had shown that claims Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium for nuclearweapons from Niger were not reliable."
Hmm, first of all, neither the President nor the Vice-President have been charged with revealing Ms. Plames name. Secondly, there is some serious question about whether Ms. Plame was even a covert agent (Chicago Tribune investigation
). Lastly, the US Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into the "16 words" stated that Mr. Wilson's report actually "lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal."
"They have declared that the Executive Branch is not bound by the Detainee Treatment Actof 2005..."
The administration argued that the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 did not apply to detainee's at Guantanamo Bay. Not that the Executive Branch was not bound by the act, just that the act itself stripped the detainee's at Guantanamo Bay from using it. An assertion backed by Human Rights Watch
Aww heck, while we're at it, let's just finish out the above misstatement:
"...and onmore than 750 occasions, President Bush has executed "Signing Statements" asserting the Executive's right to ignore provisions of Acts of Congress as his Administration sees fit,including provisions requiring the Executive to report its activities to Congress and provisions enacted specifically to prohibit activities the Bush Administration had previously undertaken."
Oh no! Not a "Signing Statment"! Horror! Wait, what's a "signing statement" you ask? It means that when the President signed a bill (thereby making it law) he attached a statement to the Bill, noting which provisions he believes interfere with his powers.
Oh that wascally wabbit! He's using some evil thing called "Freedom of Speech" to make his opinion known! The "signing statements" have, and let's be perfectly clear on this, absolutely no impact on the law and do not change, alter, negate, nor enhance any law that they are attached to
. Therefore, the statements are a free speech matter. Apparently President Bush is not entitled to the very thing that the "Peace and Justice Commission" is so adamant to enforce in Berkeley.
The "Peace and Justice Commission"'s mission statement states that it "Advises the Council and the School Board on issues of peace and social justice. Creates citizen awareness and develops educational programs."
Please note that this is the very same "Peace and Justice Commission" that:
1) In essence Blamed the United States for the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Berkeley encourages the Administration and Congress to undertake a comprehensive review of United States policies to identify which policies can be changed to help redress legitimate grievances
and improve the underlying conditions in which people live
, so as to reward the support we have been given in these difficult times, to increase the respect and goodwill of people toward our country, and to reduce animosity toward the United States
2) Killed a resolution in January calling the denial of the Holocaust by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mohamed Mahdi Akef "profound[ly] dismay[ing] to the people of Berkeley"
by tabling it at each meeting that it came up at (which is technically a violation of Roberts Rules of Order as there was no pending priority business to address first and is considered unfair as a simple majority vote can effectively kill an issue whereas it normally it would take a two-thirds vote to do that.) and during the February meeting it was tabled indefinately
(or at least it is so in the meeting minutes)
Of course the real telling as to the "Peace and Justice Commission"'s attitudes towards Holocaust denial is exemplified in the two abstentions in the original move to table the issue:
"Commissioner Beltran abstained because she was not clear on the issues concerning the Holocaust and Israel."
"Commissioner Bohn abstained because she was torn about taking a position on the statements made by the public officials from Iran and Egypt because she wants to make sure we are not taking part in the escalating tensions between the United States and Iran."