REPORTAJE
La República italiana, en caída libre
Las encuestas muestran un creciente desprecio hacia la clase política y las instituciones
ENRIC GONZÁLEZ - Roma - 25/05/2007
¿Se aproxima un nuevo colapso del sistema político italiano? Son muchos quienes lo creen. Entre ellos, Massimo d'Alema, vicepresidente del Gobierno y ministro de Asuntos Exteriores. La sombra de 1992, cuando la Primera República se hundió en un marasmo de corrupción y gastos faraónicos, reaparece como una amenaza. Quince años después, los italianos vuelven a sentir desprecio por la clase política más cara e incompetente de Europa.
En una entrevista al Corriere della Sera, Massimo d'Alema dio la voz de alarma: "Sufrimos una crisis de credibilidad de la política que volverá a inundar el país con sentimientos como aquellos que en los años noventa marcaron el fin de la Primera República". El historiador Paolo Prodi, hermano del primer ministro, declaró que los italianos no tenían "la más mínima confianza en la política", "no sólo por los costes y privilegios, sino por la parálisis del sistema". Los sondeos resultaban claros: sólo uno de cada 10 ciudadanos expresaba confianza en los partidos, y sólo dos de cada 10 confiaban en el Gobierno y el Parlamento. Piercamillo Davigo, ex fiscal de la Operación Manos Limpias, aseguró que "la corrupción política mantiene una expansión geométrica" y que la situación "es peor que en 1992".
Ezio Mauro, director del diario izquierdista La Repubblica, publicó el miércoles un artículo en primera página en el que reclamaba con urgencia "una reforma del sistema", que "quizá llegue a tiempo para salvar las instituciones del colapso y para evitar que la antipolítica se convierta en el sentimiento dominante". Mauro expresaba también su temor ante el riesgo de que un posible hundimiento de los partidos propiciara el ascenso de un salvador populista, como apareció Silvio Berlusconi en 1994, o la creación de un sistema de poder tecnocrático.
Temores como los de Ezio Mauro parecieron concretarse ayer en la asamblea de la patronal Confindustria. El presidente de la organización, Luca Cordero di Montezemolo, presidente de Fiat y Ferrari y una de las personalidades más populares del país, concluyó su mandato con un discurso durísimo contra el sistema. Denunció que la clase política italiana costaba "más que la suma de todos los políticos alemanes, británicos y españoles" y carecía por completo de "un proyecto" de modernización. Entre el público se sentaban Romano Prodi, una docena de ministros y varios parlamentarios de la oposición.
Prodi no quiso hablar tras el discurso de Montezemolo. "Se comenta por sí solo", declaró irritado. El democristiano Pierferdinando Casini, ex presidente de la Cámara de los Diputados, interpretó el sentimiento general: "Montezemolo ha planteado un manifiesto político y se ha propuesto como líder", dijo. Las reacciones al manifiesto del empresario fueron negativas, con algunas excepciones. Piero Fassino, presidente de los Demócratas de Izquierda, calificó el discurso de "latigazo" y añadió que "sería un error ignorarlo".
Eluana Englaro our Terry Schiavo.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 21:04:26
From: org.opn.lists.right-to-die@lists.opn.org
Subject: The italian medical Code
J would like to correct this affermation of "The International Tribune" reported on 15 May 2007 (org.opn.lists.right-to-die Digest, Vol. 13, Issue 91): " (In Italy) The Constitution supports that right ( right to reject medical treatment), but the medical code does not require doctors to respect it, and in fact instructs doctors to try to keep patients alive."
The italian medical Code (2006) prohibits aggressive medical treatment in its art. 16.
In art. 35 the medical Code says that medical treatment cannot be carried out against the patient's will and, if the patient is incompetent, the doctor must not use aggressive medical treatment and must take into account the advanced will of the patient.
Art. 36: the doctor must take into account the will of the patient, when he offers emergency aid.
Art. 38: the doctor must observe the will of the patient regarding the medical treatment and must respect the dignity, freedom and autonomy of the patient.
Art. 53: the doctor cannot force a patient, who does not want to eat.
Eluana Englaro, who has been hospitalized in a deep coma (SVP) since an auto accident in 1992, continues to live because she is given artificial feeding and liquids, but she did not write advanced directives. There are testimonies provided by her parents and friends , but, as there is not yet a law about advanced directives in Italy, it is not possible for the moment to act in the same way as in the case of Terry Schiavo.
Maria Di Chio (vice-chairman of the society "Libera Uscita").
Dear World Can't Wait Supporter,
Continuing our discussion of what damage the Bush regime could do in the next 19 months, check these events from only this week. How much more clearly can it be shown that the Bush regime is setting the terms of political discourse, than the utter collapse of any plan to end the Iraq war from the Democratic leadership?
Every conversation I’ve had recently has only reinforced the urgency and clarity of our Call to Drive Out the Bush Regime: “create a political situation where the Bush regime's program is repudiated, where Bush himself is driven from office, and where the whole direction he has been taking society is reversed. We, in our millions, must and can take responsibility to change the course of history.” Get the Call out to everyone you know, and talk amongst yourselves…
From worldcantwait.org:
Bush Approves Covert Operations to Overthrow Iranian Government : According to an investigative report from ABC News, Bush has given approval to a CIA program for a covert operation to overthrow the Iranian government. Bush's approval for the secret operations has gone in private and without any oversight from Congress.
Bush will get $100 billion to continue the slaughter of the Iraqi people. No strings attached, except for a few so-called "benchmarks", which Bush has agreed to.
The justifications given for the Democrats' betrayal, of, well, probably everyone that voted them in to Congress, are the typical refrain that "we have to support our troops", and "we had to pass something Bush would approve". The fact is, the troops are in Iraq killing and being killed in an unjust war, and this justification can only come down to saying "we want to fund a military that's committing war crimes:.
This latest betrayal by the Democrats, when a crucial moment is before the future of the Middle East and the world, once again goes to show that if this war is going to be stopped, the millions of people who hate the war will have to stop taking dictates from what the Democratic Party deems acceptable, and start acting outside of these dictates and end the war ...
Sincerely, Debra Sweet
Director, The World Can’t Wait – Drive Out the Bush Regime
A Letter from Michael Moore: 'Sicko' is Socko in Cannes!
May 23rd, 2007
Friends,
Well, as you may have read by now, our premiere of "Sicko" at the Cannes Film Festival has been an overwhelming success. The 2,000 people inside the Lumiere Theater were alternately in tears and laughing during the two-hour film -- and when it was over, they gave it a standing ovation that seemed to go on for nearly 15 minutes! Many came up to me and said (and critics seem to agree) that this is my best film yet. I don't know about that, and it seems weird to compare any of these movies in the first place. But I do feel safe in saying that I am very, very happy with this film and I can't wait to show it to you when it opens on June 29th.
Cannes is a crazy place. There are film lovers here from nearly every country in the world. And then there are the people in "show business." These dark forces have virtually ruined this art form (invented by the French and nurtured to brilliance by the country I call home). There are so many bad, awful films now and less and less people are going to the movies. Many who run Hollywood believe that the American people are too stupid to enjoy a film that respects their intelligence.
At the press screening for "Sicko," the Wall Street Journal reported that hardened reporters and critics wept. Even those who have been harsh to me in the past, or who have not agreed with my politics, were moved. Aside from my stated desire that "Sicko" ignite a fire for free, universal health care (and a larger wish that we, as Americans, do a better job of treating each other with a true sense of solidarity and respect), I continue to hope that I can make a contribution to the art of cinema and give people a good reason to get out of the house for a few hours.
At my festival press conference, the only negative word came from the Canadians. Two critics didn't like all the nice things I said about their health care system. Yes, Canadian health care has its flaws, but when I asked the two critics if they would exchange their health care cards for mine, they said "No!" Of course they wouldn't. Canadians live longer than we do and their infant mortality is not as high as ours. Their system is underfunded because their leaders have been trying to push for more American-style health care.
The rest of the week has been good and I am now on my way back to the U.S. The New York Post reported Sunday that the Bush administration, in addition to going after me for filming scenes in or near Cuba, may now go after the 9/11 rescue workers I took with me to get the medical care they were denied by our own government. I couldn't make up irony like this if I wanted to, and I will do whatever is necessary to defend the human right of these true American heroes to receive the medical attention they deserve.
We've also received word that the HMO and pharmaceutical industries are gearing up to fight "Sicko." We received so many great whistleblower letters while we were making the movie from employees of these companies. We'd like to hear from you again! Send us the internal memos and any other plans you run across at the company copying machine or internet server. It will help to stay ahead of whatever they are up to, and it will also give us a chance for a bit of fun at the industry's expense.
I will soon have a special section of my website devoted to "Sicko." Until then, we'll move forward toward our June 29th release date. Hope to see you all there that weekend!
Yours,
Michael Moore
michael@michaelmoore.com
MichaelMoore.com
La RAI autorizó
ayer la compra de un documental de la BBC sobre sacerdotes católicos pederastas que ya ha sido criticado por el Vaticano. Michele Santoro, uno de los periodistas más famosos y polémicos de la televisión italiana, pretende que el trabajo de la cadena pública británica se estrene en su programa de debate Annozero, que se emite por el segundo canal público, RAI 2. El director general de la RAI, Claudio Cappon, ha pedido a Santoro que emita el reportaje en un espacio donde estén "ampliamente representadas" todas las partes que aparecen en pantalla.
El reportaje, titulado Crímenes sexuales y el Vaticano, emitido en octubre de 2006 por la BBC, habla de la existencia de un documento, Crimens sollicitationis, redactado por el Vaticano en 1962 y en el que, supuestamente, se insta a los sacerdotes a mantener en secreto los casos de pederastia en los que estén implicados otros curas. La producción británica ya ha levantado gran revuelo en el mundo político, televisivo y religioso italiano, divididos sobre la oportunidad o no de que la RAI emita el reportaje de la BBC. Según el secretario de la Conferencia Episcopal Italiana (CEI), Giuseppe Betori, el contenido "no respeta la verdad", ya que se atribuye al actual papa, Benedicto XVI, "la autoría de un documento emanado de la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe en 1962, 19 años antes de que fuese nombrado prefecto de ese dicasterio, que dirigió hasta su elección como pontífice, en 2005". En aquella época, Joseph Ratzinger era un "simple teólogo", precisó el obispo Betori. El prelado también consideró como "falso" que en el reportaje se hable de una "cierta actitud de perdón de la Iglesia" ante los casos de curas pederastas. Asimismo aseguró que no pretenden "censurar" el reportaje, pero manifestó que, en el caso de que se emita en Italia, "queremos que al menos haya una clara toma de distancias ante todas las falsedades que este documental parece contener".
El trabajo, que incluye confesiones de sacerdotes pederastas en Estados Unidos, Irlanda y Brasil, ya ha sido colgado en algunos portales de Internet con subtítulos en italiano.
Found here
Video
Living will and Civil rights in Italy
From: org.opn.lists.right-to-die Digest, Vol 13, Issue 91
The International Herald Tribune reported on 15 May 07:
Europeans grapple with right-to-die issue
By Elisabeth Rosenthal
ROME: When Pope John Paul II was dying of complications of Parkinson's disease in 2005, he ultimately refused to return to a hospital from his Vatican quarters, rejecting interventions like breathing machines and kidney dialysis; he was dead a day later.
Despite high-profile cases like his, and other tragedies that can dominate the news, ordinary Italians do not have the clear right to reject aggressive medical treatment. Decades after the U.S. adopted living wills and health proxies, Europe is slowly moving in that direction. But resistance is also mounting from place to place, where the question of legal rights for the gravely ill get mixed up in a melee of other socially contentious issues, from euthanasia to gay marriage.
Here in Italy procedures are muddled, as they are in many other nations.
The Constitution supports that right - but the medical code does not require doctors to respect it, and in fact instructs doctors to try to keep patients alive.
A new law is being debated in the Italian Senate that would affirm the right to reject aggressive treatment, but it is unlikely to have enough votes for passage any time soon. Other countries have adopted legislation only lately. France, Spain and Britain have passed "living will" laws only in the last two years.
For nearly two decades, the right to refuse medical treatment has been entrenched in U.S. law, and hospital patients must fill out forms indicating their wishes, called advanced directives. Many states were spurred on by landmark cases like those of Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan.
Many Europeans still do not have legal rights in this field, which religious lobbies, political divides and a more ideological political climate have made contentious. Instead of being seen as part of a patient's right to have "informed consent" for medical procedures - as they generally were in the United States - living-will laws here are perceived as part of a constellation of issues like abortion, euthanasia and gay marriage.
"There is nothing here that protects you - it's a wasteland," said Beppino Englaro, whose daughter has been hospitalized in a deep coma and undergone many types of unwanted treatments here since an auto accident
in 1992. "Eluana had been very explicit about her wishes and our request to the doctors was always the same. But they told us, 'No, here in Italy we have a culture of life.' "
The family has been to court seven times to try to get life support stopped, and judges concluded that "stopping treatment is against the law."
There are two types of advanced directives: living wills, in which patients indicate which procedures and treatments they would reject, if they fell into a hopeless, life-threatening situation. A second type,called a "medical power of attorney" or "health care proxy," allows the patient to choose a person with the legal right to make such decisions on the patient's behalf should he be incapacitated.
"There are so many inconsistencies and so much conceptual confusion here in Italy," said Cristiano Vezzoni, an expert in European health care law at the University of Milan.
"Theoretically everyone recognizes the right to informed consent, and the theoretical right to refuse futile treatment," Vezzoni said. "But then they say, 'Oh you can not stop treatment if it would cause death.'
Or they argue that tube feedings should not count as medical treatment - even though it is internationally accepted that it is medical treatment in this case."
Last year, Italy was galvanized by the case of Piergiorgio Welby, a poet with a progressive neurologic disorder who had petitioned repeatedly to be disconnected from the ventilator that kept him alive. A doctor complied with the request and Welby died. No one has been prosecuted,although there were calls for the physician to be charged with murder.
In Italy, as in many Catholic countries, there have been loudly voiced fears that allowing patients to refuse treatment could readily lapse into euthanasia. "We worry that the new law will introduce a form of euthanasia," or assisted suicide, said Luisa Capitanio Santolini, of the Union of Christian Democrats. She worried, too, that the law would turn doctors into bureaucrats. "You can not bypass the judgment of the medical class to respect the desires of a sick person," he said.
Only three European countries - Denmark, Belgium and Netherlands - have long had strong laws protecting the right to refuse treatment, said Penney Lewis, a reader in law at University College London.
Courts in some others, like Britain, have for the last decade generally supported the notion that people could refuse treatments that forestalls their death, including refusing artificial feeding. But they did not uniformly respect those wishes, unless a patient was gravely ill. And patients had no right to appoint proxies.
Britain passed a law in 2005 that takes effect in November. "As of November the practice will become codified in law, which is important," Lewis said. "In Italy it's been and remains very unclear for doctors and patients what you could and couldn't do."
Even new laws have been laced with religious politics and ambivalence.
In Britain, at the urging of conservative policy makers and Anglican Bishops, lawmakers added a clause that patients could refuse treatment but "could not be motivated by a positive decision to cause death."
France's law protects the right to refuse lifesaving treatment, but only for the terminally ill.
Here in Rome, Senator Ignazio Marino, a transplant surgeon who practiced in the United States for many years, said the lack of clarity on the subject meant that doctors make life-or-death decisions in a hushed manner, afraid to consult patients for fear of prosecution.
"Most physicians in the ICU will decrease the intensity of treatment,but they do it in a way that is not declared or discussed - it's all foggy," he said, using the abbreviation for intensive care unit. "It's like New Jersey in '76: We cannot say enough is enough, this person cannot get back to consciousness or meaningful existence. We cannot say,comfort measures only. We know it's against the law."
The Vatican's own mixed messages on the subject have given ammunition to both sides of the debate. Pope Benedict XVI once wrote, "The stopping of medical procedures that are dangerous or extraordinary or disproportionate compared to the results you can expect could be legal and accepted."
But terms like "extraordinary" and "disproportionate" are open to broad interpretation, and the Church deems food and water, even if through a tube, not to be a medical procedure.
Eluana Englaro has been in a deep coma in a hospital for more than 15 years, but during that time but has never needed dramatic life-support machines like a ventilator or a kidney dialysis. She has been given artificial feeding, liquids, seizure medicines and antibiotics for infections. Like Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman whose husband sued successfully to remove a feeding tube in 2005, she has been a magnet for controversy.
Her father says his daughter's treatment should be withdrawn. His daughter understood the choices, he says, since a close friend of hers had been left comatose after a car crash the year before her own accident.
"We spoke openly about this - she had very direct knowledge about intensive care units and said this is not for me," he said. "She trusted her parents to enact her wishes, but we couldn't. It's been 15 years that we've lived with this guilt."
Dear World Can't Wait Supporter,
Have you seen the electronic key chains with the "countdown" of how many days Bush have left in office? "Only 600 more days or 20 months" some people tell me, "why worry about Bush anymore? He’s over."
But Joshua Bolten also handed those devices out, reminding Bush operatives that the clock was ticking on the Bush agenda.
The important question for us to grapple with now is, what further damage will Bush do if not removed from office before January 2009?
So many people are against what Bush has done. But people have also grown accustomed to living with "that which you do not resist and mobilize to stop."
Nancy Pelosi said on April 24th, when Dennis Kucinich put in articles of impeachment for Dick Cheney, "I totally oppose the impeachment of the President," she explained. "We will do more to make for our own reelection, and maintain a Democratic Congress...and have a Democratic President," she said. "And frankly, for impeachment, George W. Bush is just not worth it."
What is your answer to the question:
Is 2008 too late? What could the Bush administration do in the next 20 months?
Sincerely,
Debra Sweet
Director, The World Can’t Wait – Drive Out the Bush Regime
At 18 a lad has already witnessed 200,000 murders on TV. He’s grown up well. Where there’s an abundance of arms like in the United States, they don’t think twice. And they do their own little slaughter. In other cases, like in Europe, the dead who are murdered are no longer disturbing. As an adult he can have his daily dose of media without trauma.
Once upon a time the goodie never killed, today he kills to show that he is good. The epicenter of the culture of death on TV is Hollywood. It’s not an anti-American question, simply a fact. Compare a French or Italian “cops and robbers” with a stars and stripes one and do the count of dead bodies.
If we see an injured person on the street as the result of an accident, we cover the eyes of our children. Then at home we delegate the televisionbabysitter. The child goes to his room to watch Hannibal Lecter devouring a brain.
The vision of violence, now at any time of day, can only produce violence. This could be OK for the NRA, the arms company that elected Bush, but not for parents. I am losing the battle with the youngest children. They know better than I do how to kill a man with a knife under the chin. Or how to hang.
Or how to torture, or drown or machine gun. They have seen more blood than the top dog in the hospital of Genoa. Forbid the children to watch TV is a waste of time. A dad can’t be worse than a film on TV.
The use of violence is a refuge from the lack of ideas. Instead of a beautiful naked bottom. Forbidden in the evening slot, there’s a bullet in the middle of the forehead. At the beginning of a film, I would put the number of assassins, say 58, 231. Then you know where you are.
And in the credits at the end, at the side of the names of the actors, the cause of death. To give complete information.
For a bit now, death on TV is making me nauseous. I hope that it is a contagious nausea.
Violence is the last resort of criminals and of film producers. Let’s open the door of our homes and go out and play with our children.
From Beppe Grillo
Push the cover
Welcome in Italy, Mr. Ferlinghetti!
The video
Well I climbed the seven summits
And I swam the seven seas
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
I fought in the jungles
And I fought in the streets
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
Once I had a reason
Don't know what it could be
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
Well I sang to myself
That I want to be free
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
I walked the empty desert
And I was burned in the heat
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
I crossed the frozen wasteland
And in the bitter cold did freeze
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
And I will knock on every door
For I do not have a key
And the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
Well I sang to myself
That I want to be free
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
They shot a man in Soho
Couldn't guess his age
I found his empty journal
I filled up every page
I called up my state senator
They said he wasn't there
The secretary took my name
And man she sounded scared
So I counted my misfortunes
I added up the blame
I picked through all the garbage
I checked off all the names
I read in the newspaper
They'd questioned all my friends
They hoped that they could find me
Before I struck again
Well I sang to myself
That I want to be free
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
So when thirsty I will drink
When hungry I will steal
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
So tonight I walk in anger
With worn shoes on my feet
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
And I will sing to myself
That I'm gonna be free
But the road I must travel
Its end I cannot see
There's a sign along the highway
But it's too dark now to read
American people, stand up, please.
Damn them! Follow them.
Bravo
Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts…
In building and shaping the site I’ve always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We’ve always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code.
But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you’ve made it clear. You’d rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won’t delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.
If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying.
Digg on,
Kevin
digg this story
Iran & the Nuclear Bomb
President Bush and all the leading presidential contenders have said when it comes to Iran that no option including the nuclear option should be off the table. Today 3 aircraft carrier groups are presently conducting military exercises in the Gulf of Hormuz, the U.S. military command in the Middle East has been assumed for the first time by an admiral and plans currently exist to be able to launch an air attack on Iran within 24 hours.
1) The possibility of war with Iran:
a) is a good thing
b) never gonna happen – it’d be too crazy
c) will be prevented through sanctions on Iran
d) a real and present danger that could widen the current war in Iraq and Afghanistan and further inflame the whole region
2) What country in the Middle East refuses to officially confirm or deny that it has a nuclear weapon program and refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
3) Iran has agreed to be monitored by the IAEA and opened up its country to IAEA inspectors.
Yes or No?
4) The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) severely criticized _____________________ for falsifying information on Iran’s nuclear program. (name country)
5) What country(ies) has/have used nuclear weapons on civilian populations?
6) How many Iraqi civilians died between 1991 and 1997 due to sanctions imposed by the U.S.?
a) 55,000
b) 655,000
c) 1.2 million
d) 1.5 million
Follow up question: How many children in Iraq died per month under U.S.-imposed sanctions?
a) 50
b) 500
c) 2,500
d) 5,000
Find the answers here. The quiz was so helpful in getting people to think at Coachella, that we’re encouraging everyone to use it. Download and print here.
Sincerely,
Debra Sweet
Director, The World Can’t Wait – Drive Out the Bush Regime
Great Debra
Dear World Can't Wait Supporter,
Response to Bush's Veto:
Four years after his infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech on an aircraft carrier, George Bush vetoed Congress's Supplemental Appropriations Bill, which authorized $100 billion more for the war and set an un-enforced timetable to begin withdrawing American troops from Iraq by October, 2007. Bush insists he must have unchecked authority to continue waging an unjust, brutal war that has already cost the lives of approximately 655,000 Iraqis.
In vetoing the bill, Bush argued that any timetable for withdrawal would strengthen Al Qaeda and demoralize the Iraqi people. But the Iraqi people are demoralized by seeing their loved ones killed by an unjust war, military checkpoints and now walls surrounding their neighborhoods, a destroyed infrastructure, and billions given to American contractors who never build anything. As long as the United States continues this unjust occupation, nothing good can come out of it for the people. And in terms of Bush's talk about the threat of terrorism to the American people, the fact is that the war in Iraq has only further provoked and spawned terrorists in Iraq. Al-Qaeda, for example, had no organization or support in Iraq before the war started.
Second, Bush has the arrogance to complain that with the Democrats' bill, "America's commanders in the middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from politicians 6,000 miles away in Washington, D.C. This is a prescription for chaos and confusion, and we must not impose it on our troops." This coming from a president who has completely ignored the advice of his own generals and intelligence and created a total debacle in Iraq.
Moreover, Bush couched his whole speech with the argument that not passing a funding bill acceptable to him would not be supporting the troops. The fact is, you cannot "support the troops" without ultimately supporting the war they are in Iraq waging. And the argument that, "after all, we have to support our troops" is now being used to put together a compromise funding bill between Bush and the Democratic leadership.
What this veto demonstrates more than anything is that while the Iraq war is a complete disaster, and the difference over how to handle this within the halls of power are heating up, the Bush regime is nonetheless undeterred from continuing to wage this unjust war and to reshape the whole Middle East. This has to be stopped by massive resistance from people in the US who refuse to accept any compromise worked out between Bush and Congress, but instead insist that this war end now and Bush be impeached for war crimes.
Go all out between now and Wednesday afternoon to get everyone you can to the protests planned for 5pm. If no protest plans exist, get everyone you can together and make it happen!
Suggested reading on worldcantwait.org:
Sincerely,
Debra Sweet
Director, The World Can’t Wait – Drive Out the Bush Regime
Many Thanks, California!
Text of CA Democratic Party Impeachment Resolution
April 30, 2007, San Diego, CA
CALLING FOR FULL INVESTIGATION INTO ABUSES OF POWER
BY PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH AND RICHARD B. CHENEY
WHEREAS, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have acted in a manner contrary to their trust as President and Vice President, subversive of the Constitution, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of California and the United States of America, by intentionally disseminating and propagating knowingly false and fabricated “evidence” regarding the threat from Iraq in order to wage a tragic, bloody war with the loss of thousands of brave American troops and Iraqi civilians, and
WHEREAS, it is clear that since September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have abused their powers of office by: 1) using information they knew to be false as justification for the U.S. invasion of Iraq; 2) condoning and authorizing the torture of prisoners of war; 3) authorizing wiretaps on U.S. citizens without obtaining a warrant; 4) disclosing the name of an undercover CIA operative contrary to law in order to harm her for her husband’s opposition to the Iraq War; 5) having suspended and denied the historic Writ of Habeas Corpus by ordering the indefinite detention of so-called enemy combatants without charge and without access to legal counsel; and 6) overstepping Presidential authority by signing statements used to ignore or circumvent portions of over 750 Congressional statutes he brought into law; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the California Democratic Party supports vigorous investigation of these charges by the Congress of the United States, including the full use of Congressional subpoena power authority to completely disclose the actions of the Administration to the American people and to take necessary action to call the Administration to account with appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment.
Submitted by Senator Art Torres (Ret.), Chairman of the California Democratic Party; CDP Resolutions Co-Chairs; Emily Thurber; Bob Farran; Michael Barnett; Tim Carpenter, Joye Swan; Patrick Henry Demo Club; 69th AD Cmte.; The Hull-Richters; Alexandar, Mark and Natasha
(Adopted April 29, 2007)
