[Sosfbay-discuss] [Fwd: Re: [GPCA-CC] County poll: Impeachment Resolution]
Gerry Gras
gerrygras at earthlink.net
Fri Jun 2 20:53:52 PDT 2006
Here is my report to the county poll coordinators,
Gerry
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [GPCA-CC] County poll: Impeachment Resolution
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 20:52:06 -0700
From: Gerry Gras <gerrygras at earthlink.net>
To: Michael Borenstein <thebor at cagreens.org>, Matthew Leslie <mrl at greens.org>
The Green Party of Santa Clara County had its monthly
business meeting yesterday.
=============
The short version is 1 Yes / 3 No / 0 Abstains.
=============
The long version:
There was consensus for an impeachment resolution.
There was consensus for all parts of this resolution
except sections VI and IX.
I do not know if the problem(s) with IX contributed to
any of the "No" votes. I believe that the problems with
section VI led to the 3 "No" votes.
Thoughts about VI:
Everyone agreed with VI up to and including "covering up
the truth about the 9-11 attacks". But beyond that was
problematic. Essentially the statement is extreme. The
issue was not whether the statement was correct or not.
The issue was that the statement as is is not defensible
at this time.
Beyond this it gets a little fuzzy. But it is my impression
that the best approach here is to say that the past 9/11
investigation was inadequate, that the adminstration did
not cooperate with the investigation.
Thoughts about IX:
I don't think there was any blocking concerns with this
section as it. No one was arguing against the statement
of treason. The only concern that I recall was the part
about "caused significant damage to U.S. national security".
I think that there was general agreement that the implications
for national security were not that significant. I pointed
out that I had heard that Valerie Plame was supposed to be
involved in getting information about the Iran nuclear program,
and this outing of Ms. Plame may have hurt those efforts.
But that seemed to have little effect on their thinking.
... And I agree, even with that info, I think that this
did not cause "significant damage". (But yes, it was
treasonous).
Hmm, maybe saying something like "there might have been
significant damage", or "it was security risk", or ...
Gerry Gras
member of County Council of Green Party of Santa Clara County
Michael Borenstein wrote:
> CC,
>
> The following has been forwarded @ about 11:00am for distribution to
> the GPCA county contacts list.
> /mb
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> GPCA active counties,
>
> This polling of GPCA's active counties is to determine if the GPCA
> can take a positive stance on the attached Impeachment Resolution.
>
> This email contains 3 sections:
>
> 1. Purpose and background of this poll
> 2. Polling instructions
> 3. The proposal: Impeachment Resolution
>
>
> SUBJECT
>
> GPCA polling of the counties on the Resolution to proceed with the
> Impeachment of George W. Bush, President of the United States, and
> designated members of his cabinet and administration.
>
> PURPOSE
>
> -To initiate GPCA action on the impeachment issue while it's at the
> top of the national agenda, rather than to act 'after the fact'.
> -To bring this proposal directly to a wider grass roots audience of
> Green county organizations, limiting the need for extensive floor time
> at the next General Assembly.
>
>
> BACKGROUND
>
> -This issue has demonstrated support as evidenced by 5 GPCA counties
> independently endorsing similar impeachment resolution[s].
> -The GPCA has the opportunity to act in a relevant and timely
> fashion. Other organizations, including other state Green Parties,
> the Peace and Freedom Party, have passed impeachment resolutions,
> attracting valuable publicity to themselves. Prompt considerations
> help to amplify GPCA's presence and news worthiness during this
> election cycle
> - Other progressive entities are considering weaker statements. It
> is important for the GPCA to establish itself as the preeminent
> alternative party in CA with a clear stand on this issue. It is
> important to demand an even higher standard of governmental
> accountability at a time when the impeachment issue is gaining in
> national prominence.
>
> PROCESS
>
> Please provide the Poll Coordinators with vote results, on or before
> deadline (6/20 AT 10:00pm), from your county in the following form.
>
> "Yes," "No," or "Abstain"
>
> PLEASE SUBMIT VOTES IN THE AMOUNT ALLOTTED TO YOUR COUNTY AT THE LAST
> PLENARY. For example, if your county had 2 delegates to the Yolo
> General Assembly, you would submit 2 votes in any combination of
> positions on the proposal. Votes from counties with more than one
> delegate vote need not be unanimous. Counties with only one delegate
> will be allowed to split their single vote, but such counties are
> encouraged to attempt to cast a whole number vote if possible.
>
> Your county should rely on it's own internal processes to determine its
> vote(s). To find out how many delegate votes your county has, please
> check the last page of the Yolo plenary packet at this address:
>
> http://www.cagreens.org/plenary/archives/minutes/delegates_0512.html
>
> Any county activated after the 'Yolo delegate list' was published,
does receive
> its delegate vote(s). Those delegates are added as:
> Delegate/vote #101, #102, etc. Reference GPCA bylaw 4-2.2d).
>
> This poll utilizes GPCA's standard initiative polling process which
> calls for a 50% quorum of active counties participating (16 of 38),
> and a threshold of 80% for passage.
>
>
> TIMELINE
>
> THE VOTING PERIOD BEGINS ON: Sunday 5/21/06 AT 10:00 P.M.,
> AND ENDS ON: Tuesday 6/20/06- 30 full days] AT 10:00 P.M.
> Votes received after the closing date and time will be noted
> in the results, but not counted.
> Submit all votes to both the following email addresses:
>
> Matthew Leslie
> mrl at greens.org
> 714.401.0168
>
> Michael Borenstein
> thebor at greens.org
> 530.620.6659
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> Appended proposal
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION PROPOSAL-
>
> Sponsor: GPCA-CC, as amended from the GROW/GP Nevada County proposal.
>
> Contact information:
> Michael Borenstein, 530.620.6659, <thebor at cagreens.org>
> Kent Smith, PH# on request, kentwsmith at yahoo.com
>
> Subject:
> Impeachment of President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense,
> Attorney General.
>
> Background and purpose:
>
> The governance of our country has entered an era where it has become
> debilitating to:
> -The worldwide reputation of its citizenry,
> -Hopeful prospects of building world peace,
> -Prospects of material and social resources worldwide being used
equally for the
> betterment of all lives of all living things on earth.
>
> Whereas goals and values of Green Parties worldwide yearn to reverse
these
> debilitating factors within governments and social structures. We
purpose to
> energize this reversal through the legal means of impeaching those
> facilitating these debilitating factors. The GPCA may join this
worldwide effort
> by endorsing this proposal, attached language and actions.
>
> Proposal:
>
> To forward this resolution (included at bottom) through any and all
proper GPCA
> channels to proper government and media entities that the GPCA's
> opinion is:
>
> That our President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense and Attorney
> General have committed high crimes and misdemeanors, and
>
> Therefore, the Green Party of California demands the impeachment and
consequent
> removal from office of:
> President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary
> of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
>
> Be it further resolved that the Green Party of California petitions
the House of
> Representatives of the U.S. Congress to initiate Impeachment
proceedings against
> all four identified officials under the authority given them by
> Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution and the duty given them
by their
> constitutional oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution."
>
> Be it further resolved that copies of this Resolution be sent to our
> Congressional representatives and to all members of the House Judiciary
> Committee.
>
> Timeline:
> Immediately, and/or as soon as proper letters, releases and
> notifications can be most accurately drafted an delivered.
>
> Resources:
> GROW, GPCA-CC, Media SC volunteer time, Between $100 and $300 for
> printing and postage.
>
> +++++++ RESOLUTION +++++++
>
> A RESOLUTION OF THE GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA in defense of the
Constitution of
> the United States, demanding the impeachment of George W. Bush,
> Richard B. Cheney, and two complicit associates.
>
> Whereas the Declaration of Independence declares securing
"unalienable Rights"
> including "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" to be the
> purpose of government, and
>
> Whereas the Constitution of the United States establishes the firm
foundation
> for our rule of law, and its Bill of Rights provides for the precious
individual
> rights and freedoms guaranteed to all American citizens, and
>
> Whereas, in the conduct of their offices, President George W. Bush,
> Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H.
Rumsfeld,
> and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, in violation of their
> constitutional oaths to "preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution" and to
> "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," have committed any
or all of
> the following "high Crimes and Misdemeanors":
>
> I. WARRANTLESS SEARCHES:
> Ordering the National Security Agency to conduct secret, warrantless
searches
> and seizures of the private personal communications of American
citizens,
> without oversight by the legislative or judicial branches of the
government, in
> violation of the 4th Amendment of the Constitution and the Foreign
Intelligence
> Surveillance Act of the Congress (FISA 1978);
>
> II. TORTURE:
> Authorizing and permitting torture against human beings, in violation
of the
> Geneva Conventions (1864-1949) and the United Nations' Convention
against
> Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (1985);
>
> III. INDEFINITE DETENTION:
> Depriving both American citizens and non- citizens of their
constitutionally
> guaranteed rights regarding unjust imprisonment and speedy and public
trial, in
> violation of their rights to guaranteed liberty and due process of
law in the
> 5th and 6th Amendments;
>
> IV. WAR OF AGGRESSION:
> Launching an illegal, unjust, and undeclared war against the
sovereign state of
> Iraq, in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution and
Chapters 1,
> 6, and 7 of the Charter of the United Nations (1945);
>
> V. USE OF ILLEGAL WEAPONS:
> Authorizing the use of illegal chemical and radioactive weapons in
military
> campaigns, notably white phosphorous and depleted uranium in Iraq, in
violation
> of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948);
>
> VI. DELIBERATE DECEPTIONS:
> Repeatedly, consciously, and with forethought, lying to the American
people and
> the U.S. Congress by providing false and deceptive rationales for an
unjustified
> and illegal war in Iraq; covering up the truth about the 9-11
attacks, namely,
> that the Bush administration, at a minimum, had foreknowledge of the
attacks and
> intentionally failed to prevent them, and at worst, were complicit
in the
> attacks themselves, creating the myth of Al Qaeda as a pretext for
starting a
> war "that will not end in our lifetimes", the so-called "War on Terror";
>
> VII. ATTACKING CIVILIANS:
> Authorizing, ordering, and condoning direct military attacks on
civilians and
> civilian homes and communities, thereby causing massive death,
maiming, and
> destruction in Iraq, in violation of Article 3 of the Universal
Declaration of
> Human Rights;
>
> VIII. VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES:
> Violating and unilaterally abrogating lawful signatory treaties, such
as the
> Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (1972) between the United States and
Russia, the
> Treaty of Rome (1950) establishing the International Criminal Court,
and the
> Geneva Conventions providing for humane treatment of combatants and
civilians,
> in violation of Article VI of the Constitution acknowledging these
treaties to
> be "the Supreme Law of the Land."
>
> IX. TREASON:
> Betrayal and disclosure of identifying information of a CIA agent and
the
> operational cover by White House officials caused significant damage to
> U.S. national security thereby giving aid and comfort to the enemy in
> violation of USC Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 37 § 793 , § 794, and the
> Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982.
> _______________________________________________
> gpca-cc mailing list
> gpca-cc at marla.cagreens.org
> http://marla.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc
>
>
More information about the sosfbay-discuss
mailing list