Chavez 'Inspired' by Anti-Bush Protesters: "Wanna bet on a horse? Of course! Of course!"
He just keeps grabbing the headlines no matter what.
In the infowars we're fighting, that's a crucial weapon.
I guess he's da man, and that's gotta be the plan...
BTW, "free trade" is bullshit, it's been disproven, and here's my own personal minifesto on it...
Monday, September 26, 2005
Beauty is Skin Deep: "The beauty products from the skin of executed Chinese prisoners" (The Guardian Unlimited - UK)
Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, left, speaks to the crowd along with Argentine soccer star Diego Armando Maradona during a rally against the presence of U.S. President Bush in the fourth Summit of the Americas in Mar del Plata, Argentina on Friday Nov. 4, 2005. (AP Photo/Marcelo Hernandez)
Chavez 'Inspired' by Anti-Bush Protesters
By DAN MOLINSKI, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 22 minutes ago
MAR DEL PLATA, Argentina - A crowd of 10,000 protesters chanting "Get out Bush!" swarmed the streets of this Argentine resort Friday, hours before the hemisphere's leaders sat down to debate free trade, immigration and job creation.
Before dawn, thousands greeted a train bringing the last group of fellow demonstrators from Buenos Aires, including Bolivian presidential hopeful Evo Morales and soccer great Diego Maradona, who donned a T-shirt accusing President Bush of war crimes.
Chanting "Fascist Bush! You are the terrorist!" the protesters hung from the engine and moved up the sides of the train, trying to shake hands with those inside.
Later, they took to the streets, heading toward a stadium where Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez made a speech before joining the Summit of the Americas.
Chavez arrived early Friday, saying he was "inspired" by the protesters, who also oppose the U.S.-led negotiations to form a Free Trade Area of the Americas stretching from Alaska to Argentina.
"Today the FTAA is dead and we are going to bury it here. We are here to change the course of history," he said after stepping off his plane.
But Mexican President Vicente Fox, one of the region's biggest free trade proponents, told reporters that Venezuela and other nations opposed to the FTAA may be left behind as the rest of the hemisphere considers moving forward on creating a huge free trade zone.
One marcher, Canadian steelworker Dennis Matteau, said free trade must be stopped.
"We have NAFTA, so we know about free trade deals," he said. "They are not good for workers."
The march was mostly peaceful, although some self-proclaimed anarchists spray-painted slogans on a bank. Most businesses along the route had closed, except for a fruit stand protected by a wall of wooden crates.
"So far, I've only lost four bananas," owner Blas Zanghi said.
Shuttling between luxury hotels, Bush met with Argentine President Nestor Kirchner as well as Central American and Andean leaders Friday before joining the 34-nation summit.
Leaders attending the two-day summit agreed ahead of time to focus on creating jobs and reducing poverty. In recent days, however, attention has shifted to the free trade issue and sparring between the United States and Chavez, a leftist whose government has used his country's vast oil wealth on social programs for the poor.
Washington maintains the proposed free trade accord, which has stalled amid opposition by several Latin American countries, is vital to creating jobs and increasing wealth in the region.
Chavez, who regularly claims Washington is trying to overthrow him, has said free trade is being forced on Latin American countries and the deal would only help the rich. Instead, he is promoting anti-FTAA deal based on socialist ideals.
Bush arrived Thursday, the same day Venezuela staged a mock U.S. invasion of its own territory. The event was the latest exercise intended to prepare soldiers and civilian volunteers for what Chavez says is a possible attack by American troops.
U.S. officials deny any such plan.
Chavez and Bush will likely see each other Friday at the summit's inauguration but are not scheduled to meet one-on-one.
Jose Miguel Insulza, secretary-general of the Organization of American States — the Washington-based group that organized the summit — said he was disappointed by the attention given to the free trade deal.
"This is not a summit about the FTAA," a frustrated Insulza told reporters.
But Bush seemed to be winning over supporters. A high-ranking Brazilian official, who said he was not authorized to give his name, told reporters 28 of the 34 countries participating in the summit had agreed to relaunch trade talks as early as April.
Associated Press writers Nestor Ikeda, Vivian Sequera, and Alan Clendenning in Mar del Plata and Kris Kitto in Buenos Aires contributed to this report.
On the Net: http://www.summit-americas.org
* Email Story
* IM Story
* Printable View
RECOMMEND THIS STORY
SOURCE - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051104/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/americas_summit_34;_ylt=Am.7aKBon2TUDM8uHyv_jiT.ucsA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
BONUS: Well, this is just impeach-y...
Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment If He Lied about Iraq
By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans say that President Bush should be impeached if he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.
The poll was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,001 U.S. adults on October 8-9.
The poll found that 50% agreed with the statement:
"If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him."
44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 3.1% margin of error.
Those who agreed with the statement were also more passionate: 39% strongly agreed, while 30% strongly disagreed.
"The results of this poll are truly astonishing," said AfterDowningStreet.org co-founder Bob Fertik. "Bush's record-low approval ratings tell just half of the story, which is how much Americans oppose Bush's policies on Iraq and other issues. But this poll tells the other half of the story - that a solid plurality of Americans want Congress to consider removing Bush from the White House."
Impeachment Supported by Majorities of Many Groups
Responses varied by political party affiliation: 72% of Democrats favored impeachment, compared to 56% of Independents and 20% of Republicans.
Responses also varied by age and income. Solid majorities of those under age 55 (54%), as well as those with household incomes below $50,000 (57%), support impeachment.
Majorities favored impeachment in the Northeast (53%), West (51%), and even the South (50%).
Support for Impeachment Surged Since June
The Ipsos poll shows a dramatic transformation in support for Bush's impeachment since late June. (This is only the second poll that has asked Americans about their support for impeaching Bush in 2005, despite his record-low approval ratings.) The Zogby poll conducted June 27-29 of 905 likely voters found that 42% agreed and 50% disagreed with a statement virtually identical to the one used by Ipsos.
Ipsos 10/8-9 Zogby 6/27-29 Net Change
Support Impeachment 50 % 42 % + 8 %
Oppose Impeachment 44 % 50 % + 6 %
Impeachment Margin + 6 % - 8 % + 14 %
After the June poll, pollster John Zogby told the Washington Post that support for impeachment "was much higher than I expected." At the time, impeachment supporters trailed opponents by 8%. Now supporters outnumber opponents by 6%, a remarkable shift of 14%.
Support for Clinton Impeachment Was Much Lower
In August and September of 1998, 16 major polls asked about impeaching President Clinton (http://democrats.com/clinton-impeachment-polls). Only 36% supported hearings to consider impeachment, and only 26% supported actual impeachment and removal. Even so, the impeachment debate dominated the news for months, and the Republican Congress impeached Clinton despite overwhelming public opposition.
Impeachment Support is Closely Related to Belief that Bush Lied about Iraq
Both the Ipsos and Zogby polls asked about support for impeachment if Bush lied about the reasons for war, rather than asking simply about support for impeachment. Pollsters predict that asking simply about impeachment without any context would produce a large number of "I don't know" responses. However, this may understate the percentage of Americans who favor Bush's impeachment for other reasons, such as his slow response to Hurricane Katrina, his policy on torture, soaring gasoline prices, or other concerns.
Other polls show a majority of U.S. adults believe that Bush did in fact lie about the reasons for war. A June 23-26 ABC/Washington Post poll found 52% of Americans believe the Bush administration "deliberately misled the public before the war," and 57% say the Bush administration "intentionally exaggerated its evidence that pre-war Iraq possessed nuclear, chemical or biological weapons."
Support for the war has dropped significantly since June, which suggests that the percentage of Americans who believe Bush lied about the war has increased.
Passion for Impeachment is Major Unreported Story
The strong support for impeachment found in this poll is especially surprising because the views of impeachment supporters are entirely absent from the broadcast and print media, and can only be found on the Internet and in street protests, including the large anti-war rally in Washington on September 24.
The lack of coverage of impeachment support is due in part to the fact that not a single Democrat in Congress has called for impeachment, despite considerable grassroots activism by groups like Democrats.com (http://democrats.com/impeach).
"We will, no doubt, see an increase in activism following this poll," said David Swanson, co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org. "But will we see an increase in media coverage? The media are waiting for action in Congress. Apparently it's easier to find and interview one of the 535 members of Congress than it is to locate a representative of the half of the country that wants the President impeached if he lied about the war. The media already accepts that Bush did lie about the war. We know this because so many editors and pundits told us that the Downing Street Memo was 'old news.' What we need now is journalism befitting a democracy, journalism that goes out and asks people what they really think about their government, especially George Bush."
The passion of impeachment supporters is directly responsible for the Ipsos poll. After the Zogby poll in June, activists led by Democrats.com urged all of the major polling organizations to include an impeachment question in their upcoming polls. But none of the polling organizations were willing to do so for free, so on September 30, AfterDowningStreet.org posted a request for donations to fund paid polls (http://afterdowningstreet.org/polling). As of October 10, 330 individuals had contributed $8,919 in small donations averaging $27 each.
AfterDowningStreet.org has commissioned a second poll which is expected soon, and will continue to urge all polling organizations to include the impeachment question in their regular polls. If they do not, AfterDowningStreet.org will continue to commission regular impeachment polls.
1. AfterDowningStreet.org is a rapidly growing coalition of veterans' groups, peace groups, and political activist groups that was created on May 26, 2005, following the publication of the Downing Street Memos in London's Sunday Times on May 1. The coalition is urging Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war.
2.Here are the complete tables from the Ipsos poll, plus the definitions of regions used by Ipsos and the U.S. Census Bureau.
3. Zogby asked: "If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him through impeachment."
4. Pollsters have offered various reasons for refusing to poll on impeachment. For example, Gallup said it would do so "if, and when, there is some discussion of that possibility by congressional leaders, and/or if commentators begin discussing it in the news media."
- Indymedia Chiapas, Mexico
BACK TO ZOGBY IN THE MEDIA
SOURCE - http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=11982
BONUS: I don't care who you are, they're trying to take your shit...
House Vote Counters Eminent Domain Measure
Associated Press | November 4 2005
By JIM ABRAMS
This is a major victory against those who would seek to completely undermine property rights. Now we must lobby our representatives in the Senate to support this legislation and curb this rampant employment of "eminent domain" before it gets even more out of control.
WASHINGTON - Conservative defenders of private property and liberal protectors of the poor joined in an overwhelming House vote to prevent local and state governments from seizing homes and businesses for use in economic development projects.
The House legislation, passed 376-38, was in response to a widely criticized 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court last June that allowed eminent domain authority to be used to obtain land for tax revenue-generating commercial purposes.
That decision, said the House's third-ranked Republican, Deborah Pryce of Ohio, "dealt a blow to the rights of property owners across the country."
The bill would withhold for two years all federal economic development funds from states and localities that use economic development as a rationale for property seizures. It also would bar the federal government from using eminent domain powers for economic development.
It now goes to the Senate, where Sen. John Cornyn R-Texas, has introduced similar legislation.
The ruling in Kelo v. City of New London allowed the Connecticut city to exercise state eminent domain law to require several homeowners to cede their property for commercial use.
Conservatives were in the forefront in arguing that this was a dangerous interpretation of the "takings clause" in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution that allows the government to seize property for public use, with just compensation.
"Governments should not be able to bulldoze a person's home or business to benefit other individuals," said Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-Texas.
Liberals warned that it could make it easier to tear down poor neighborhoods. "We don't need you on this one," Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said to those arguing that eminent domain can lead to beneficial urban renewal projects. "We need you to respect the right of those minorities and those poor people to hold on to what is their own."
Opponents of the legislation argued that its exclusion of economic development was too broad and that the federal government should not be interceding in what should be a local issue. "We should not change federal law every time members of Congress disagree with the judgment of a locality when it uses eminent domain for the purpose of economic development," said Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va.
About half the states are also considering changes in their laws to prevent takings for private use.
The Bush administration, backing the House bill, said in a statement that "private property rights are the bedrock of the nation's economy and enjoy constitutionally protected status. They should also receive an appropriate level of protection by the federal government."
The House, by a voice vote, approved a proposal by Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., to bar states or localities in pursuit of more tax money from exercising eminent domain over nonprofit or tax-exempt religious organizations. Churches, he said, "should not have to fear because God does not pay enough in taxes."
Eminent domain, the right of government to take property for public use, is typically used for projects that benefit an entire community, such as highways, airports or schools.
Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the majority opinion in Kelo, said in an August speech that while he had concerns about the results, the ruling was legally correct because the high court has "always allowed local policymakers wide latitude in determining how best to achieve legitimate public goals."
Several lawmakers who opposed the House bill said eminent domain has long been used by local governments for economic development projects such as the Inner Harbor in Baltimore and the cleaning up of Times Square in New York. The District of Columbia is expected to use eminent domain to secure land for a new baseball stadium for the Washington Nationals.
REAL SOURCE - http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/eminent_domain_house_vote_counters_measure.htm
Download a documentary and it's classic sequel to Save The World...