portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting portland metro

actions & protests | government

PDX City Council Hears Another Impeachment Speaker

Text of the statement to the Portland City Council on Dec. 19, 2007 by Glen Owen Supporting a Resolution to Impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney
Statement to the Portland City Council on Dec. 19, 2007 by Glen Owen Supporting a Resolution to Impeach President George W. Bush and
Vice President Richard B. Cheney

I am Glen Owen and I have lived and voted in Portland Oregon since May of 1996. I am active in the 9/11 accountability movement in this city and, thus, by necessity a committed, vocal and demonstrable activist in advocacy of official support by this city for impeachment of national office holders who have in truly countless ways desecrated the commitments they have made as holders of public office in America.

I am here this morning to focus on a decision you have made and are making as holders of public office in this city and state.

Electorates are almost always more likely to eject leaders from office in the net election for manifestly wrong or corrupt decisions than for refusal to consider compelling underlying issues that, frankly, everybody wishes would simply go away.

The resolution by this City Council to advocate impeachment of national, ostensibly elected, officials—introduced in this chamber on May 10th of last year, more than 19 months ago—is one such issue.

Essentially, if nobody among you sponsors a vote on the issue, voters presumably cannot hold you accountable for a corrupt decision. On the face of it, impeachment of national officials should have little or any bearing on the responsibilities that you are charged with by your electorate to manage.

But let's think again.

One of you is charged with law enforcement. Could anybody legitimately say that the rules for the collection and admissibility of evidence in a criminal action are NOT critical to faithful discharge of your responsibilities?

Think about it. Does gathering of evidence really matter anymore?

For example, existing, publicly disclosed technology provides the means electronically to manufacture any kind of communications evidence one would need to adduce guilt or, moreover, complicity to perform a specified, proscribed action.

Leaving aside visual special effects made possible by today's highly sophisticated digital technology, let us consider voice-morphing technology.

Voice morphing is a process by which a small sample of speech by a given individual can be sampled, analyzed and reconstructed to deliver a highly credible simulation of that person saying anything that a prosecutor would wish a targeted individual to have said to support his case for indictment and conviction—including timbre, pacing, rhythm, inflection, pronunciation, prevailing stress level and so on.

Furthermore, the removal of Constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure as pertains to voice communication through telephone and like sources means that the designated authorities have license to collect unlimited speech samples of anybody and everybody they might seek to convict on any charge or pretext whatsoever.

Just imagine if you will, a lightning fast, sure-shot means to incriminate and incarcerate anybody who becomes inconvenient to your personal or associational interests.

What if the proposition were from henceforth, Portland'[s Commissioner for Law Enforcement and his duly installed subordinates may designate anybody they choose to be convicted of capital or any other offenses at any time for any reason that serves the interests of that Commissioner.

That is what anybody installed as Portland's Mayor can do right now if he so chooses.

And that description does not even include his passive approval of military tribunal dispensation on anybody he can persuade Federal officials to finger as "enemy combatants," "terrorism malefactors," etc. etc.

It would seem then that it would be incumbent on that city official to forswear such sweeping, limitless powers to condemn, not only for himself, but also for all other holders of that office in at least relative perpetuity.

There would seem to be a compact among you that one of you should sponsor the resolution to impeach those national officials who have delivered that set of absolute, unimpeachable privileges to one among your number.

And that, Gentlemen, is in effect exactly the statement you are making and have made for 19 months in succession to Portland citizens and the world at large every Wednesday morning.

Tell me, Gentlemen, are you proud of that decision?