portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article portland metro

government | human & civil rights | imperialism & war

M9 Impeach Bush Rally Images

Pictures from the Impeach Bush rally and march in Portland on March 9
Pictures from the Impeach Bush rally and march in Portland on March 9
Wow 11.May.2003 03:28


Gee, looks like 100 people showed up. I also can't help but notice that most of the people are fairly young (most young folks don't vote).

Katz and Kroeker? 11.May.2003 08:27


When is the "IMPEACH KATZ AND KROEKER" rally and march?

Nice pictures - thank you. What was the statue of Bush made of?

Because we can get rid of Bush 11.May.2003 12:00

Educating Trolls

The troll writes "Why so much aimed at President Bush when so much of the world's misery is caused by so many others."

Because the Bush Administration's policies cause a great deal of misery in their own right. It's difficult to quantify how much is caused by them and how much by other entities throughout the world.

In addition, the American people have the power to get rid of George W. Bush, unlike many of the other "misery-inducers." Hell, the man's not even the elected President of the USA. That's reason enough to pull the plug on his reign.

There's not much that we can do about North Korea, except to get rid of Bush. They'd started to feel less threatened by the rest of the world and perhaps open up more, until Dumbass got into the White House and encouraged them to accelerate their nuclear weapons program. The current wave of terrorism and 9/11 are direct results of Reagan and Bush, Sr.'s meddling in Middle Eastern and Central Asian affairs. Remember, who trained the Taliban? Or at least, who trained the Pakistanis to train the Taliban? Who sold Saddam Hussein his weapons of mass destruction? Bush, Jr. is following in Daddy's footsteps, and that's just a phenomenal way to incite more terrorist incidents.

The best way to reduce the misery of the world is to remove from power the dumb fucks who are causing so much of it. And the easiest one to reach (who just so happens to be one of the primary culprits) is Mr. George W. Bush.

lest we forget... 11.May.2003 16:20


What was the Bush administration doing during the mutitude of warnings about the impending terrorist attack? Lest we forget, they were making preparations to take advantage of the situation, not doing anything to protect the country. They were crafting their war plans (to invade afghanistan and iraq) and writing legislation to gut our constitutional protections. Believe me, as someone who lost family on september 11 I will not forget that.

9-11: Another Reason to Impeach (and Prosecute) the Bush Regime 11.May.2003 18:30


Hey JayJay, are you still clinging to the Lie that 9-11 was NOT an inside job? All of you warmongers always invoke 9-11 to justify whatever bloody policy you need to justify next. Playing the 9-11 card will backfire however as it is increasingly obvious that the American Government did 9-11.

This is yet another reason to impeach the Bush Regime--(not to mention bringing them up for War Crimes charges) .

Don't forget the facts. 11.May.2003 21:02


The 9/11 attacks were NOT an inside job.

1. The Pentagon was hit, killing hundreds. I don't think anyone who works at the Pentagon would oversee a direct attack on their own workspace.
2. Osama bin Ladin has taken responsibility for the attack.
3. If it was an inside job, that story would be worth millions to major corporations. While the President may have influence over the policy of CNN, the New York times, Time, Newsweek, etc... I can't see major news source buring that story since the President will only be in power till 2008. Major corperate news sources will be making money for years to come.

sigh 11.May.2003 22:18


If you really don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job than you must believe that the administration is massively incompetent. Afterall, how could they have ignored warnings from every major intelligence agency on the planet including our own and not taken any action except to stop flying commerical planes. But oldblueeyes response to your your points:

1) The unoccupied under construction wing of the pentagon was hit which is why only hundreds and not thousands were killed, motly low level workers doing construction. Also, I'm not a fan of the either complicity or incompetence. Frankly I think it was both, meaning they knew there was going to be an attack but they may not have estimated the scale of the attack. That would explain why Bush was left to read to children looking unmoved during the attack until all of a sudden the secret service started panicking.

2) The only claim by bin laden taking responsiblity for the attack is in an obviously forged video with someone who looks nothing like bin laden talking about how the towers would collapse, something most engineers couldn't have predicted. And this tape of bin laden's funniest terrorist confessions was left lying around ahouse where a us soldier just happened to find it. Please, if you believe this I have several bridges here in portland I'll sell to you, real cheap. BTW, don't tak ethis as my claiming bin laden wasn't involved because he almost certainly was involved with at least financing and moral support (but then so were the bushes)

3) Actually the story would be worth nothing now to the news corporations as they have benfitted trmendously under the bush administration (you are following the fcc's deregulation schemes aren't you). If they brought the story to light now they would also lose any remaning shred of credibility they hold with the majority of the american public.

Now, here's some points for you to ponder. If you're so sure that the administration wasn't complicit in 9/11 there are some questions I've been waiting for over a year and a half to have answered:

1) Why were fighters not launched from andrews airforce base to protect dc when anyone who has lived in dc knows that that is what always happens. The average incercept time is like 13 minutes and usually in 7. Yet on 9/11 they were never launched at all.

2) Why did the Bush administration block fbi investigations into Abdullah and Omar Bin Laden until 9/13/2001, 2 days after the attacks when coincicentally the administration flew them out of the country (with 9 other of the Bin Laden family) when all other air traffic was still grounded. These two had been under investigation, and "coincidentally" lived right near the dc and ny hijackers in virginia and were know to have links to them. Yet the Bush administration flew them out of the country 2 days after the attacks and then allowed the fbi to investigate them. Learn about from this clip:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/cta/progs/newsnight/attack22.ram

3) Why doesn't it bother anyone that the Bush and Bin Laden families (as well as Rumsfeld, Cheney, and the rest of the administration) have ongoing business connections and a long history of business dealing? You do know that Bush Jr. made his first million running Harken energy which was funded by the Bin Laden's.

4) Why is the Bush Administration doing everything it can to block investigations into 9/11? If they have nothing to hide why don't they act like it. My guess is that if people were willing to believe the level of complicity and/or incompetence it would be the end of the Bush reign.

5) Why did was the patriot act written and sitting on Bush's desk days before the attacks waiting for the right "opportunity" to push it through congress?

Of course, as anyone who has actually looke dinto this knows there are many, many more unaswered questions but these are the ones I've tried to find out about that no one seems to want to answer, so I'll leave it at that for now.

On the number of people 12.May.2003 10:10


Yeh, blue eyes, there were like a hundred or so people there. Which is more than were at the toppling of the statue of Sadam Hussein, and much was made of that in the corporate media. (And, as was later shown on mad as hell tv and other places, some of those people were employees of the US government.)

Wake Up 12.May.2003 17:32


Observer, the folks who pulled down the statue of Saddam needed help doing it. That's why some troops were there. The people of Iraq don't have groups like ANSWER to help organize protests. So when a few hundred people try to pull down a statue, it's a spontanious act. Not like the scene shown above. These pictures show a bunch of kids who want to don't have much else to do with their time and can't see how other people are using them to acheive their own political end.

You Tell em', Old Brown EYE 12.May.2003 21:10


You stated "...the folks who pulled down the statue of Saddam needed help doing it...". That is absolutely correct. The Bush cabal didn't fly Chalabi and his supporters all the way to Iraq for nothin'. The least they can do is pull down a statue or two. And the M88 recovery vehicle on site just shows that the army was prepared. They thought of everything. Even having several TANKS on hand, in case any actual Iraqis thought about screwing up up photo op. The Saddam statue photo fraud was even covered on ABC Nightlie for cryin' out loud. But Fox prevailed, since it is obviously the superior news source.

(BTW- don't worry about not having answered any of the 911 questions posted above. The bunch of kids who use this website are clearly too stupid to have noticed your failure to offer any explanation.)

Actually I did answer those questions. 13.May.2003 01:33


I did respond to those questions. Just not in this forum.

Well Then... 13.May.2003 17:59


I supect that you are full of it. However, if you have already answered those questions in a different forum, it should be no trouble to post those answers here. I would love to see them.

Sorry.. 13.May.2003 18:57


Sorry, I try not to argue with people I can't see. I also don't like to argue with people who use circumstancial evidence, without having proof to back it up.
For example suppose a bank is robbed. I have the means, motive and opportunity to rob the affore mentioned bank. This does not mean that I commited the crime.

obl is right 13.May.2003 20:23

you are full of it

Why don't you just admint you can't answer the questions? Also, I don't think you understand what the word circumstantial means. There is nothing in the above post which is circumstantial. If someone was claiming that because of the facts listed Bush was responsible for 9/11 that would be circumstantial, but those facts are facts, nothing circumstantial about them. As for the failure of the administration to answer for them, well, we can all draw our own conclusions about that. As for your claims of not arguing, that's funny since you seem to argue with people all over this site, you just seem to slink away when our outmatched. I say put up or shut up, let's hear you defend the role of the Bush administration before, during, and after 9/11. There's a great story here detailing Bush's response (or lack there of:  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/05/264689.shtml It's a long read but I'm sure you're up for it.

funny thing is 13.May.2003 20:37


If you have the means, motive, and opportunity to have committed a crime you are considered a suspect and you are investigated. Yet any investigation into the bush administration's role in 9/11 has been blocked. And what, we're supposed to believe that because they're such nice guys they didn't do it. And even if they didn't do it, don't we as citizens deserve to know what happened and who screwed up?

Also, oldbrowneye... 13.May.2003 21:02


You wrote: "I have the means, motive and opportunity to rob the affore mentioned bank. This does not mean that I commited the crime."

Right again browneye! What it does mean however, (you legal genius, you), is that you are a PRIME SUSPECT WORTHY OF A FULL INVESTIGATION! I also don't much believe that you 'try not to argue with people I can't see', but maybe someone else using your handle has been blathering all over this site. So, I have enclosed a photo so that we can argue face-to-face.

Now, try to answer ANY of the questions, if you can.
2 Outta' 3 ME
2 Outta' 3 ME
oldbrowneye Meets His Hero
oldbrowneye Meets His Hero

Oops 13.May.2003 21:30


Sorry about that ".", I guess you already made the suspect point.

Right Wing Spelling Errors 13.May.2003 22:32

Osama bin Bush

I can't help commenting that it is almost always the ignorant right that misspells every other word (corperate). The first error I bend to a typo but the second and 3rd, etc. leave no other conclusion than there is a serious gulf between the IQ of the right and the left. For one thing it has been confirmed that most people that support bush (if you'll pardon the expression) get their news mostly from the television and from newspapers while those that opposed the unlawful attack on iraq by an administration that was shuttled in via voting fraud in florida get their news primarily from the international press that is available via the internet. in fact, the story about the florida election fraud wasn't even touched by the mainstream media in this country while it was front page news in the rest of the world. there were no photos of dismembered and burned iraqi babies on the tv news. and where are the WMD (if you'll pardon the joke)-- the stated reason for the pre=emptive strike against another virtually defenseless nation. And voting fraud. How many of those holding a candle for adolf bush know that there were 3 republican victories in the last election that were won with exactly the same vote margin? voting machines were used in all of those elections. well, it is a good thing that we now have a former business partner of osama bin laden in the white house-- GOD forbid we might have been stuck with someone who couldn't keep his dick in his pants-- 12,000,000 spent on that investigation and only 3,000,000 will be spent on the 9/11 investigation. Thank GOD we have an administration that knows where to spend money.

Like I said.... 13.May.2003 22:49


I don't argue over the internet. That sort of thing is reserved for sissies. Sorry about the spelling.
Anyone out there know of proof, REAL proof, that the President had previous knowledge that a plane would strike the World Tade Center / Pentagon before Sept. 11 2001.

you asked for it 14.May.2003 01:31

here's your proof

1) 1994. FBI videotaped an informant being recruited as a suicide bomber by two men, one of whom was linked to Osama bin Laden.
(Los Angeles Times 5-27-2002)

2) 1995. Project Bojinka: plans were uncovered by Philippine authorities, [of terrorists seeking] to crash hijacked plane into CIA headquarters.
(Gomez and Solomon 3-5-2002; see also Baker et al. 10-23-2001; Fainaru and Grimaldi 9-23-2001; Ressa 9-18-2001; Martin 1-16-2002; Grigg 3-11-2002; Shelon 5-18-2002; Hersh and Isikoff 5-27-2002; Public Information Center 5-2002)

3) 1996-2001. The FBI investigating suspected terrorists enrolled in U.S. flight schools.
(cited in Fairnaru and Grimaldi 9-23-2001; Martin 1-16-2002; Shelon 5-18-2002)

4) May 18, 1998. FBI memo observed that an 'unusually' large number of Middle Eastern men were attending flight schools.
(Washington Post 5-30-2002)

5) Oct. 24-26, 2000 - Pentagon officials carry out a "detailed" emergency drill based upon the crashing of a hijacked airliner into the Pentagon.
[Ref: www.copvcia.com/ Source: The Mirror, May 24, 2002]

6) Early 2001. Court proceedings revealed that al Qaeda operatives were training in American flight schools.
(USA vs. Usama bin Laden et al.; Foden 9-13-2001; Martin 1-16-2002)

7) January 2001 - The Bush Administration orders the FBI and intelligence agencies to "back off" investigations involving the bin Laden family, including two of Osama bin Laden's relatives (Abdullah and Omar) who were living in Falls Church, Va. -- right next to CIA headquarters. This followed previous orders dating back to 1996 that frustrated efforts to investigate the bin Laden family.
[Ref: www.copvcia.com/ Source: BBC Newsnight, Correspondent Gregg Palast, Nov. 7, 2001]

8) Summer, 2001. Jordon's General Intelligence Division (GID) warned Washington of an attack planned on the U.S. mainland using aircraft.
John Cooley (5-21-2002) (also Bubnov 5-24-2002)

9) June 6, 2001. German intelligence warned both the CIA and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture.
(Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung on September 13).

10)July 26 2001. The 'threat assessment.' CBS News reported that Attorney General John Ashcroft was no longer using commercial airliners to travel - even for personal business - because of a "threat assessment" issued by the FBI.
(CBS News 7-26-2001)

11) Summer 2001. Former chief investigative counsel David Schippers warned U.S. Justice Department that FBI believed terrorists were planning to attack lower Manhattan.
(www.infowars.com, see book, "War on Freedom")

12) July 2001 - The G8 summit at Genoa, Italy is surrounded by anti-aircraft guns, and local airspace is closed off after Italian and Egyptian officials (including President Hosni Mubarak) warn American intelligence that airliners stuffed with explosives might be used to attack President Bush.
[Ref: www.copvcia.com/ Source: Los Angeles Times, Sept. 27, 2001]

13) July 10 2001. FBI agent Kenneth Williams in Arizona sends a memo warning that men with suspected ties to terrorist groups were training in Arizona flight schools, mentioning Osama bin Laden by name and speculating that his organization may be attempting to infiltrate the U.S. aviation industry with pilots, security guards, and maintenance workers.
(Solomon 5-3-2002; Risen 5-4-2002; Johnston 5-15-2002; Hersh and Isikoff 5-27-2002; Johnston and van Natta 5-21-2002; Cornwell 5-25-2002; Lumkin 5-25-2002)

14) August, 2001. Israel warned U.S. about "imminent" large-scale attacks on the U.S. mainland.
(Jacobson and Wastell 9-16-2001; Davis 9-17-2001; Stafford 9-13-2001; Serrano and Thor-Dahlburg 9-20-2001; Martin 1-5-2002; Martin 1-16-2002)

15) August 6 2001. Memo. President George Bush receives an intelligence briefing, titled "Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S." that warned that "bin Laden may attempt to " hijack airplanes."
(Eggen and Woodward 5-18-2002; CBS News 5-16-2002; Boncombe 5-19-2002).

16) August 2001. FBI warned by a flight instructor in Oklahoma that an Arab student he was training, (Zacarias Moussaoui) could be a terrorist. The FBI responded to the lead only after receiving repeated calls from the instructor. He was arrested, but not intensely investigated until after 9-11, at which point it was discovered that he would have taken part in the 9-11 hijackings had he not been arrested.
(Eggen 1-2-2002; Barnett et al. 9-30-2001; Martin 1-5-2002; Martin 5-27-2002).....

Personal notes written by a Minneapolis agent had speculated that perhaps Moussaoui was planning to "fly something into the World Trade Center.
(cited in Isikoff 5-20-2002; see also Johnston 5-15-2002; Cloud, Fields, and Power 5-20-2002).

Investigators were denied a warrant to search Moussaoui's computer hard drive.
(Rowley 5-21-2002)

17) August/September 2001 - According to a detailed 13-page memo written by Minneapolis FBI legal officer Colleen Rowley, FBI headquarters ignores urgent, direct warnings from French intelligence services about pending attacks. In addition, a single Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) in Washington expends extra effort to thwart the field office's investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, in one case rewriting Rowley's affidavit for a search warrant to search Moussaoui's laptop. Rowley's memo uses terms like "deliberately sabotage," "block," "integrity," "omitted," "downplayed," "glossed over," "mis-characterize," "improper political reasons, "deliberately thwarting," "deliberately further undercut," "suppressed," and "not completely honest."
[Ref: www.copvcia.com/ Source: Associated Press, May 21, 2002]

18) September 1, 2001. "Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Russian intelligence to warn the U.S. government 'in the strongest possible terms' of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings.
[Ref: Ruppert 11-2-2001; 4-22-2002 based on MS-NBC interview with Putin, September 15.]

19) May 28, 2002 " Tyrone Powers, a former.... FBI special agent announced on NYC's urban contemporary radio station 98.7 KISS FM... that he had credible evidence strongly suggesting the Bush administration did in fact allow the September 11th attacks to further a hidden agenda.
Dr. Powers says that the administration miscalculated, though, and "didn't believe that [an attack] would be on this scale."
"The Bush administration relied strongly on these pathologies when it deliberately ignored warnings from stand up agents in Federal law enforcement and other intelligence agencies and allowed what they only thought was going to be the 'high jacking' of a single airliner."

20) August 22, 2002: U.S. government officials admit that a "Top US Intelligence Agency was to simulate plane crash into gov't bldg. on September 11, 2001..... in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings.

Circumstantial 15.May.2003 19:38


All of this is circumstantial. When I say proof I want evidence that shows without a doubt that the President knew a plane was going to fly into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. All of these threats and memos happen every day. If anything this shows that the FBI failed to protect our country. You have not shown anything that proves that the President had knowledge that planes were going to fly into two skyscrapers and the headquarters of our nation's defense.
For example proof that Bill Clinton had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky is his cum stain on her dress.
At best this evidence shows that an independant council should be appointed to review 9/11 and the events that led to it. But guess what, that council has been appointed and they didn't find a connection between the President and the 9/11 attacks.

well you know what they say 16.May.2003 12:05


You can lead a horse to water... just don't let yourself die of dehydration.

As for the 911 investigation committee, maybe you should follow a little more closely to what's been going on. What they are finding are many connections between the bush and the attacks, and surprise, surprise the bush administration is blocking all access to the documents that prove it, even the ones that have already been testified about by intelligence agents. But don't take my word for it, go ahead and find the details yourself.

I mean Why??? 14.Nov.2003 12:10

James Johnson (cali)

i mean what is the whole puprose of trying to go to war with these people even if someone does take full responsibilty for something. How do we even know for sure if the planes that crashed into the world trade centers were all planned. Uh, we can't...which is exactly what i am saying.