Skip to main content

Unfortunately, the mainstream media in the United States was too busy with wall-to-wall coverage of a "runaway bride" to cover a bombshell report out of the British newspapers. The London Times reports that the British government and the United States government had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in 2002, before authorization was sought for such an attack in Congress, and had discussed creating pretextual justifications for doing so.

The Times reports, based on a newly discovered document, that in 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a meeting in which he expressed his support for "regime change" through the use of force in Iraq and was warned by the nation's top lawyer that such an action would be illegal. Blair also discussed the need for America to "create" conditions to justify the war.

The document itself is revealing as it indicates that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." This is the British government proclaiming foreknowledge of the manipulation of intelligence many of us have alleged for some time.

It also quotes the British Foreign Secretary as stating about the case for war: "the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force."

This should not be allowed to fall down the memory hole during wall-to-wall coverage of the Michael Jackson trial and a runaway bride. To prevent that from occuring, I am circulating the following letter among my House colleagues and asking them to sign on to it:

May ___, 2005

The Honorable George W. Bush President of the United States of America The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write because of troubling revelations in the Sunday London Times apparently confirming that the United States and Great Britain had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in the summer of 2002, well before the invasion and before you even sought Congressional authority to engage in military action. While various individuals have asserted this to be the case before, including Paul O'Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Richard Clarke, a former National Security Council official, they have been previously dismissed by your Administration. However, when this story was divulged last weekend, Prime Minister Blair's representative claimed the document contained "nothing new." If the disclosure is accurate, it raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of your own Administration.

The Sunday Times obtained a leaked document with the minutes of a secret meeting from highly placed sources inside the British Government. Among other things, the document revealed:

* Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a July 2002 meeting, at which he discussed military options, having already committed himself to supporting President Bush's plans for invading Iraq.

* British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw acknowledged that the case for war was "thin" as "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, or Iran."

* A separate secret briefing for the meeting said that Britain and America had to "create" conditions to justify a war.

* A British official "reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

As a result of this recent disclosure, we would like to know the following:

1) Do you or anyone in your Administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?

2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?

3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?

4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?

5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?

We have of course known for some time that subsequent to the invasion there have been a variety of varying reasons proffered to justify the invasion, particularly since the time it became evident that weapons of mass destruction would not be found. This leaked document - essentially acknowledged by the Blair government - is the first confirmation that the rationales were shifting well before the invasion as well.

Given the importance of this matter, we would ask that you respond to this inquiry as promptly as possible. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Originally posted to Congressman John Conyers on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:02 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Thank you Mr Conyers (4.00)
    If we can't get answers out of this administartion over this how can we help.

    Why is the media so quite and what about other countries......if The USA asked Britain to prepare they must have also approached both Australia and Canada.

    I'm curious to find out how long this has been going on.

    And Thank you so much for often being the lone Voice of Reason.

    •  I may also ask (4.00)
      How did British Military officals leave with the impression that war was "ineivatable"  when Congress had yet to vote on this matter.  Had you already approached Congressional Republican Leaders?
    •  I just wish the dems... (4.00)
      would dispense with all of this by lining up all of the questions and evidence and state clearly that when they get control of the house and senate the first thing they will do is start investigations and that they will prosecute people and put them in federal prison for these transgressions against the American people.

      This actions are criminal to say the least and treasonous to say the most, "we the people" must get to the bottom of this and hold every one of them accountable.

      No holds barred...

      •  Well unfortunatly we don't have much power (none)
        Right now the republicans now control the house, senate and the whitehouse....and they are if not anything else partisan.

        We should be targeting moderate republicans for comments on smart question.

        •  won't be able to prosecute -- (4.00)
          Bush will pardon everyone  -- including himself  -- on the way out the door.  Executive clemency is unlimited and irrevocable.  I remember having a correspondence about this with respect to Nixon with my then Senator Richard Schweicker back in early 1974.

          But (1) I believe that all rights and benefits of being an ex=President could be stripped, either legilstaively or by impeachment.  (2) The US could agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the international criminal court and turn overf the parties involved to that body.  It would not be a violation of ex post facto because the actions were in violation of international law and international agreements at the time they occurred, and protection by clemency from US Federal prosecution in no way limits the abiolity of any other competent body to prosecute.

          But believe me --  the pardons will be flowing in a way that makes Bill Clinton seem like a piker.  

          Those who can, do. Those who can do more, TEACH!

          by teacherken on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:20:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  International Criminal Court (4.00)
            "Executive clemency is unlimited and irrevocable..." in the United States. But that wouldn't stop the ICC from taking action. Could this be why Bush didn't want us to be a part of the ICC?

            "The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State, because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government" - Teddy Roosevelt

            by mrboma on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:36:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  We had two presidential pardons (none)
            in Argentina concerning the military. It took us some 23 years, but we did overturn them. That we cant do so here in the US now, doesn't mean that we cant do it in the future: when there is a will there is a way. Also Pinochet sought to make himself "untouchable" and every single day that pases, he is closer to ending his days in jail. Maybe 4, 10 or 20 years from now we can finally make him face justice!

            If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your companies to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

            by cruz del sur on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:51:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ccould not do w/o amending constitution (none)
              in two places   --  first, you would ahve to in some way limit the powers of executive clemency;   econd, you would have to elimnate the rstrictions on ex post facto, or amend to declare that the removal o fprevious celmency would not qualify under ex post facto

              Argentina's situation in that regard was somewhat different constitutionally, was it not??

              Those who can, do. Those who can do more, TEACH!

              by teacherken on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:39:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You might not need to (none)
                What we did was to look for an alternative way. Lets say Bush pardons himself for war crimes. Then you bring charges for crimes against peace. Lets say hi pardons himself for man slaughter. You carge him with life endangerment. He will probably pardon himself for a variety of things. However life is full of ironies. He will leave something out.

                If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your companies to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

                by cruz del sur on Mon May 02, 2005 at 06:26:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  The would have had to been convicted of a crime... (none)
            first right, additionally, does that extend to treason?
          •  ... with all due respect, (4.00)
            Bush is NOT the President of the United States and he has NEVER been the President of the United States.

            It is an openly acknowledged fact that the state of Florida
            (which is ruled by the brother of the man who is currently pretending to be the President)
            violated the Fifteenth Amendment during the last two Presiential elections.

            Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
            Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

            The Supreme Court abdicated its reponsibility to uphold the Constitution when five of its members installed Bush into the White House. By this act of bad behavior, they forefeited their offices as well as any and all compensation they receive for such.

            In 2002, the right of the people to vote was again abridged by the Bush campaign. GW Bush (and JeffJames GannonGuckert) may reside within the White House, but without the benefit of legal mandate.

            Since Bush is NOT President,
            then any and all acts performed by him acting in that capacity are null and void.
            In other words, Dubya CANNOT legally grant himself nor anyone else, a Presidential pardon.
            This also means that any piece of legislation that bears his signature ain't worth diddly-squat, unless you are selling it on eBay.
            All those laws he signed -- mean nothing.
            That Department of Homeland Security -- illegal.

            Foidermore,
            Article IV
            Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

            Bush is a Republican and his party, under his leadership, is calling for the extermination of judges. Yet his administration is supposed to follow through on the Constitional promise to protect the States against domestic violence.
            Bush selected Dick Cheney to act as his president of vice. Mr. Cheney occasionally emerges from an undisclosed location (courtesy of Halliburton) to threaten the populace of the States with harm from outsiders should they deviate from the will of the sock-puppet. And yet the Constitution promises that each State within the Union shall be protected from invasion and that this promise shall be safeguarded by the people currently occupying the White House.
            From their actions so far, we have no choice but to conclude that the Bush Maladministration has no intention WHATSOEVER, of upholding the Constitution of these United States of America.

            We all saw that Bush changed his clothes on September 11 before leaving Emma E. Booker Elementary.
            How did they get soiled?
            Why was he forced to sit very still in his seat
            awaiting the departure of the children from the room?
            We all saw the bruises inflicted upon his face by a pretzel which bested him in a fight. And yet he feels that he can defeat the Afghanistan and Iraq.
            And Syria.
            And Iran.
            And North Korea.
            And Mars.
            To this end he has deputized Yosemite Sam as ambassador to the United Nations where he has will cross every single solitary line he encounters with or without a dare.

            Mighty big hat, for such a small shrub.
            This brings us back to the case of Iraq.

            * A British official "reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

            Try to reconcile THAT act of the Bush Maladministrion with THIS:
            We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

          •  actually? (none)
            the ICC is the only court that has jurisdiction in this regard.

            Bush can pardon all he likes to, but it has already been established at Nuremburg that no single nation has jurisdiction to punish crimes against peace, and therefore no single nation, or the leader of same has jurisdiction to PARDON those crimes.

            We turn him over to the ICC and if he is found guilty?

            He swings.

            And the very act of turning him over would send a chilling message to each and every potential dictator or war monger out there in the future.

          •  I hate it when people of knowledge (none)
            Rain on my fantasies!
          •  I'm not certain that (none)
            Bush can pardon himself.  That may be a limit.
        •  Yes, I'm saying it should be a tactic used... (4.00)
          like the "Contract with America" to get votes for dems in the 2006 elections so that they can take back power and do the investigations.
        •  Dear President Conyers, (3.88)
          I gather from the post above in this thread that some of us are stymied because we do not have "much power."  Neither did Raoul Wallenberg.  Neither did Rosa Parks.  Neither did that nameless man who stood before a tank in Tiananmen Square.

          We, the powerless, walk with you, write and call with you, reason and harangue with you, and are not hopeless or undone because we are with you.  

          Please avoid balconies, hotel kitchens, and convertibles near grassy knolls for the duration.  And kick back now and then to have some fun, please.  Because we, the powerless, know that you are one of history's Great Americans and as a day unwinds and we take  just one off a train to a death camp, take a seat and face all but deadly condemnation, and stand where we stand and face the future that would eliminate all of us, we don't have to do it alone.

          As some Jewish guy said a while ago, "The meek shall inherit the earth."  But he did not mean we'd wait to have its cinders handed to us.  And it wasn't a dare.  It was just a fact.  

          Thank you for helping us on with the fact.

          "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

          by KateCrashes on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:07:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Freedom March! (none)
          Are we ready to invade DC yet? I call for all Americans to march on DC the 4th of July and demand that this President and all criminals lined up next to him in his bubble be IMPEACHED.

          What will it take to take to the streets? Do we really want to wait for the 06 elections? I would think seeing the media covered the mass March in the Ukrain they might be forced to drop the 799 day of the Michael Jackson trial to cover a million plus Americans for Truth march on DC? If MADD can acheive this why cannot we?

          Anyone else up for this? Beats typing out our frustration here every day...imho.  

          The more understanding one posesses, the less there is to say and the more there is to do.

          by Alohaleezy on Tue May 03, 2005 at 06:11:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm up for it!!!! July 4th stands for Freedom..... (none)
            but aren't most people picknicking on that day and not watching the news.

            Wouldn't it have more media impact if it was on a weekend when the media was at work, and shouldn't we be moving on this sooner, to fan the flames and put the pressure on?

            •  Well (none)
              we can keep making excuses or we can fight back. Get Up, Stand up, stand up for your rights!!!!!Will it ever be a good time for the media. The only way to get their attention is in mass. The emails, LTE's, the faxes for the phone calls just aren't doing it.

              The more understanding one posesses, the less there is to say and the more there is to do.

              by Alohaleezy on Tue May 03, 2005 at 12:21:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  ::WE WILL HAVE OUR ON PICNIC:: (none)
              Start the fire works now,just maybe if we light the match,now we can hear the boom as BUSH&CO,explode on their asses.I'll bring the hotdogs,they already have the kool-aide:::;
      •  It was criminal... (4.00)
        ... and the crime, morally speaking, is akin to nothing short of murder.

        If you want an illustration, consider the following:

        IMMEDIATE RELEASE
        May 02, 2005
        Media Contact: Army Public Affairs - (703) 692-2000
        Public/Industry Contact: (703)428-0711

        DoD Identifies Army Casualties

        The Department of Defense announced today the death of two soldiers who
        were killed supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.  They died April 29 in Baghdad,
        Iraq, when an improvised explosive device detonated near their dismounted patrol.
        Both soldiers were assigned to 2nd Battalion, 14th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade
        Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Drum, N.Y.

        The soldiers were:

          Pfc. Darren A. Deblanc, 20, of Evansville, Ind.

          Pvt. Charles S. Cooper, Jr., 19, of Jamestown, N.Y.

        These men, Pfc. Deblanc and Pvt. Cooper, are just the latest two Iraq casualties confirmed by the Dept. of Defense.  It is the third such e-mail News Release that I received just today.  They tell of the deaths of 7 human beings, American patriots all, who would still be alive but for the crimes of this president.

        At what point can we call it a crime?  At what point can we call it an impeachable offense?  These are not rhetorical questions.  At what point?

        UncommonSense

        •  The point is now. (4.00)
          There is nothing left to wait for.

          "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

          by KateCrashes on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:09:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  There was a folk song (none)
          that included the line
          "Every corpse is a patriot."
          The point being that the warmakers always claim the allegiances of men who can't speak up for themselves.
          Lets not do their work for them.
          Lets be careful about making claims about the patriotism or other matters of opinion on the part of people we don't know. Not every soldier is filled with patriotic feeling, and frankly I think thats a good thing.
          For all we know every last one of those men died cursing their country as a nation of bloated buffoons  that allowed a pack of venal plutocrats to march them to their death.

          "Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories." -- Amilcar Cabral

          by Christopher Day on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:24:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hmm. (4.00)
            I refer to war dead as patriots not because they served the bloated, venal plutocrats who sent them to die in the desert.  It is because, whether they had doubts about the war or not, they served their country.  They did not chant war slogans from the comfort of their booth at Hooters, checking out the girls, slurping the sauce off of a basket buffalo wings, watching FOX "News" blare its propaganda from the TV on the wall.  

            Not every corspse is a patriot, granted.  But, I believe the men and women who lose their lives in Bush's illegal war deserve, at the very least, the benefit of the doubt.

          •  Thank you (none)
            for putting this truth up there!
      •  asdf (none)
        we will write to you in Gitmo.

         

      •  If you really (none)
        want them to sweat?

        No matter how long it may take to get back into power, we need to make it a priority if Bush and Blair are still alive... to push for them to goto the Hague.

        Since, it is an already established precedent of international law that the US congress does not, nor does any one nation, have jurisdiction in this regard.

        Check out the crimes listed at Nuremburg, one of the crimes against humanity is a crimes against peace.  Any national leader that purposefully engages in aggressive wars can and should be tried under that statute.

        And that principle is one THAT WE the UNITED STATES and BRITAIN established....

        So it sure as shit has to apply to us as well as anyone else.

        I know that they GOP rages against foreign courts trying US citizens in this regard but they really have no leg to stand on since it is WE that set the precedent.  Besides anyone that breaks those laws really has given up all rights to US citizenship or US protection.

        We afterall punish those that transgress.. we do not defend them.  

    •  Just to get this (none)
      out there...

      Sure we may not have enough Dems in the house to carry the day on impeachment proceedings...but.

      It still needs to be put forth on the floor, and I don't know what the procedure for that would be.  Does it need to go through a commitee of can it be moved for by simply being recognized by the chair?

      It needs to be done, the mear act of doing it may be enough of a splash news wise that it can be used to get the overall message and information OUT to the general populace.

      It would have to be talked about on the news, and they are going to have to give some information on what it is about etc.  Considering Bush approval numbers at the moment this information could be just enough if widely known to push the proceedings forward.

      It is worth a shot, and history will look kindly upon the effort.

  •  Are there other... (4.00)
    representatives that write as many letters to the President as you do?

    Thanks for asking the questions the presstitutes refuse to.

    •  Let me add my thanks (4.00)
      to all the others' given here. My concern is that many Americans have made up their mind on this issue and will not be swayed by facts. But, like everything else the Bush administration applies its force to (Social Security, environmental regulations, budget, etc.), the real agenda is never spoken. At one point, I thought Senator Kennedy's claim that the war was for political reasons was extreme. Now, I am inclined to agree.
      •  Political or economic reasons for this war? (4.00)
        Who benefits most from having Iraq  bombed, rebuilt, and having access to their oil supplies? Those who get non-bid contracts or the American people who buy the refined gas? If we were about spreading Democracy, why have we made so little effort in a non-violent way and supported so many tyrants?

        Of course, the Iraqi  "mission" was to have been accomplished very quickly, the invaders were to have been greeted with flowers, the oil was to flow freely, etc., etc.

      •  YOU DID? (none)
         It's generally good practice to assume the most nightmarish possible reasons for anything these criminals do. It's been my M.O. since 11/200, and I can't see where I've been wrong yet

        Can't spell screwed without Dubya!

  •  I recommend you every time Congressman (4.00)
    Because you've earned it with all the selfless work you have done on behalf of our country.

    Thank you.

    It is a very mixed blessing to be brought back from the dead.

    by Steven D on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:10:02 PM PDT

  •  asdf (4.00)
    thanks again Congressman Conyers.  You give us all hope.

    We do not grow by knowing all the answers, but by living with the questions

    by juslikagrzly on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:12:40 PM PDT

  •  Please Please Please (4.00)
    Keep their feet to the fire on this for us. So many have died and suffered because of this
  •  Go, Conyers, go! (4.00)
    This letter is fine. I hope you get some traction with it.

    Even better, of course, would be for the House Democratic leadership to say something - anything - about this issue that is lighting up the British election.

    It's not "old news" to hear that a leaked document from Blair's own administration said that Bush and Blair "sexed up" the reasons to go to war.

    It's one thing for Bush to dismiss Clark and O'Neill. It's another to dismiss a document produced by Blair's own people.

    -What have you got that a man could drink with just a minimum risk of blindness and death.

    by Toadvine on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:13:32 PM PDT

    •  Gilligan and Dr. Kelly vindicated. (4.00)
      It's not "old news" to hear that a leaked document from Blair's own administration said that Bush and Blair "sexed up" the reasons to go to war.

      Indeed.  It brings to mind the case of Dr. Kelly and Andrew Gilligan.  I wonder if Gilligan will have anything to write about the leaked document.

      •  I wonder, too. (4.00)
        It would also be nice to see Richard Clarke in front of a camera about now.

        It's sick the way the people who were un-afraid to speak out have been pilloried as essentially "disgruntled ex-employees", on both sides of the Atlantic.

        This memo really is a big deal. This is THEM describing THEMSELVES, not Clarke, or O'Neill or somebody describing them.

        But, given the US press' reaction to, say, "Bin Ladin determined to strike in US", I can't get my hopes up.

        -What have you got that a man could drink with just a minimum risk of blindness and death.

        by Toadvine on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:38:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Let's play "Match Game '05" (4.00)
    The American people were so repulsed by the realization they had been misled, they urged the filing of Articles of... blank.

    Articles of... blank.

    Charles Nelson Reilly, what did you have for an answer?

    •  Impeachment???? (none)
      Did I get it right?? Huh, did I, did I?? Oh, come on..did I??? Not Charles Nelson Reilly, but I am a good guesser..so did I get it right???? LOL

      What happens when Bush takes Viagra? he gets taller. Robin Williams

      by Demfem on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:52:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  conferderation... (none)
      sorry, circle gets the square.  next: we go to willie tyler and "lester."

      mr. conyers:  this is but one more revelation about how the administration lied us into this war, and how they are still lying about it.  but as a political matter, so what?

      all the democrats in washington knew the case for the war as a matter of self-defense was thin to non-existent when it was made.  it was a political calculation most democrats made that to oppose the administration would be political suicide.

      so go get your colleagues first to apologize for (or at least to say that they have learned the lessons of) their collective lack of moral courage.  

      but please don't come to us now, individually or collectively, and say that you are shocked, shocked to find out that our nation's worst foriegn policy disaster (so far) was a put up job from the word go.  

      for further inflamation please don't go to my blog cuz i don't have one

      by 2nd balcony on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:11:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I believe that Mr. Conyers (4.00)
        is one of the few that voted against the use of force in Iraq.

        There are a few Democrats that had spines and they deserve our recognition of that as well as our support.

        •  "few" (4.00)
          2/3 of house democrats and just under 1/2 of senate democrats voted against the IWR. while it was far less than is excuseable, it was not a "few" democrats who saw the bullshit at the time. congressman conyers was in the majority of his party; the leadership - many now retired or voted out of office - were not.
      •  "shocked, shocked" ?!! who do you think (3.70)
        you're talking to? I would suggest you know very little about Congressman John Conyers.

        Oh, it's all old news, anybody with a brain knew this at the time (damn, do I have to defend all the Kos posters with "brains" I used to argue with because, at the time, they were convinced by the WMD bullshit? I wasn't convinced, but hey, I'm not saying y'all don't have "brains"), ho hum, why is anybody surprised, etc. etc. etc.

        Do all you "old news" posters realize that's exactly what Mr. Blair's spokespeople are saying? "Nothing new" in the minutes, they say. Nothing worth responding to.

        The Bush strategy is always denial denial denial denial until the very last minute that's possible, then a sudden switch to "ho-hum, old news, nothing new, we've answered all those questions before, let's move on."

        so odd to see so much of it here.

        •  jp: (none)
          the democrats in washington knew.  (really, even we knew: when andy card said on the record that the administration would wait to start the drumbeat for the war until september (2002) because "august is a bad month to start a marketing campaign," that put everyone on notice.)

          but the issue now is not the wickedness of the bush administration.  polling shows that people are coming around to that conclusion themselves, without a lot of self-serving encouragement from democratic politicians.

          the question is whether the democratic party can offer something better.  mr. conyers can't do that by himself.  nor can he cloth so many of his fellow democrats in his integrity.  they'll have to earn it back, and i still don't know how many of them are inclined to try and do so.

          that's the "reformed" part of reformed democrat.

          for further inflamation please don't go to my blog cuz i don't have one

          by 2nd balcony on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:01:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If you want to put it in religious terms: (none)
            A Reform(ed) Democrat = A Redeemed Democrat

            By that I don't mean that the Party "needs Jesus" (which is the Republican's version), but rather that the party needs a spiritual/philosophical rebirth, and that is the core definition of redemption in the terms of any faith.

            And, thats where we and people like John Conyers come in.

          •  We bitch and moan about (none)
            why our representatives don't stand up and do something. Then when they do, they get knocked down. Hmmm....
        •  I agree (none)
          that reminding the masses is important.

          I think the "old news" mantra really stems from the fact that this was explicitly stated by both Paul O'Neil and Richard Clarke (before a formal hearing).  They stated this and the Rovian Spin machine took over.  W was wobbled but not levelled.  It was dismissed as "disgruntled" employees.  Heck, Condi was publically flayed and she still got her appointment approved.  Her lies were laid bare for the world to see did most of America care?  Most rethugs wanted people to lay off.

          I personally don't share the specter of cynicism that the "old news" folks have raised, but don't be surprised if Joe/Jane Public couldn't care less.  For him its old news and not bothering him/her.

          I recommend a brief article on the, Triumph of the Idiot Culture to explain a possible outcome regarding the public.

      •  A Relevance Test (none)
        I don't think that a majority of Democrats would have supported the use of force authorization if this document had been leaked before the vote. Consequently, I don't think that attacking the moral courage of those Democrats is appropriate or relevant to how we react to the release of this document.

        . . . solutions emerge from [our] judicious study of discernible reality.

        by realitybased on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:06:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  the question is not about (none)
          this specific document.  its about how democrats in (and running for) congress should address the citizens' widening realization that the iraq war is both morally wrong and damaging for the country.

          if what you say is true, how come mr. conyers is releasing his statement by himself (not that he couldn't get a few dozen of "the usual (progressive caucus) suspects to support him)?  why aren't those democrats who voted for the war (that you say wouldn't have, if only they'd known of bush's "invade at all costs attitude") gatheing on the steps to demand impeachment because they were so badly "fooled?"

          in politics, you can't beat something with nothing.  the gopers have something.  its wicked, its evil, and left unchecked it will impoverish and possibly outright destroy this country.  but its there.  yet the democrats you don't wish to "attack" are the one's who have encouraged the "nothingness" of the democratic party.  its really that "nothingness" that i'm attacking

          mr. conyers post may make you feel better, but if its just him its worse than nothing because it just serves to highlight the irresponsibility of his colleagues.

          when churchhill took power in 1940 (while hitler was overruning france) he knew he was finally in a position to revenge himself on those who had abused him and heaped scorn on him for his relentless repudiation of appeasement.  he didn't do that though, saying that "if we argue about the past, we'll lose the future."

          if we stay strong, united and focused on how we're going to get our nation out of the mess that the bushies have landed us in, we may do some good.

          history will condemn the rethugs and blair, (and some spineless and complicit democrats, too) as it condemned baldwin, chaimberlain, charles lindberg, and that ilk.  i say let's just let it happen, sharpen our knives, and make plans to do better.

          for further inflamation please don't go to my blog cuz i don't have one

          by 2nd balcony on Mon May 02, 2005 at 04:08:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Leveraging the widening realization (4.00)
            its really that "nothingness" that i'm attacking
            I support challenges to spineless Democrats where the challenger can win both the primary and the general election. Unfortunately, I don't think there are a lot of these opportunities. Our greatest payback will come from targeting the "evil" Republicans.
            if we stay strong, united and focused on how we're going to get our nation out of the mess that the bushies have landed us in, we may do some good.
            The only way we'll get the nation out of this mess is to get the present crew out of power. Conyer's letter is one way to raise the visibility of issues that can help us do just that.
            history will condemn the rethugs and blair, (and some spineless and complicit democrats, too) as it condemned baldwin, chaimberlain, charles lindberg, and that ilk.  i say let's just let it happen, sharpen our knives, and make plans to do better.
            Popular history is written by the victors. Academic history is only read by people like us. If history was some kind of process that automatically righted wrongs, the world wouldn't be as it is today, and if we act as if it were such a process, the world will get much worse.

            . . . solutions emerge from [our] judicious study of discernible reality.

            by realitybased on Mon May 02, 2005 at 04:53:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Democratic vote on UoFA (4.00)
            House Democrats: 126 against, 81 for
            Senate Democrats: 21 against, 29 for

            The majority of Democrats in the House did oppose the measure (better than 3:2). Only five Democratic Senators would have needed to change their votes for  a majority of Democratic Senators to also have opposed the UoFA.

            Obviously there wasn't enough spine to get anywhere near stopping the measure, but 147 Democrats voting against is hardly "nothingness."

            . . . solutions emerge from [our] judicious study of discernible reality.

            by realitybased on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:41:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  It was all known before the vote. (none)
          Check out this WaPo article from one month after the July 2002 meeting: August 26, 2002.
          The administration was prepared to go to war with or without congressional approval.  The vote just made it that much easier.  And it was in September of 2002 that the IAEA report came out that put to rest any questions about the WMD capablities.
          The problem was the snowball effect of the news coverage.  This Post article and similar glimpses of the truth were like wandering innocent children in a mob scene of bloodlust and disinformation.

          In fact, even thought the resolution passed, the administration neglected to carry out the terms of the contract:
          PUBLIC LAW 107-243--OCT. 16, 2002
          AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY
          FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

          (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.--In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
          (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
          (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

          Bush did nothing of the sort...

          Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

          by intrados on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:43:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And that's why this document is important (4.00)
            The problem was the snowball effect of the news coverage.  This Post article and similar glimpses of the truth were like wandering innocent children in a mob scene of bloodlust and disinformation.
            Which is exactly why this document could have made a substantial difference if it was released before the vote. It was the political considerations that caused many of the Democrats (and nearly all of the Republicans) to do the wrong thing. Having this documents could have changed the balance of those political considerations.

            . . . solutions emerge from [our] judicious study of discernible reality.

            by realitybased on Mon May 02, 2005 at 08:32:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Democrats' Weakness (4.00)
        Is no excuse to excuse the frauds in the administration  Impeach Bush!!
      •  Rep Conyers is providing proof, (none)
        something we never had before. All we had was this inate feeling Bushco was insane  - with no proof.

        Testimonies from Richard Clark to Wesley Clark could not be proven. Condi lied her way out of the PDB. Now we have proof from our staunchest ally.

  •  mainstream (4.00)
    Thank you very much Mr. Conyers. Your untiring efforts are greatly appreciated by regular folk like me.

    Now...
    We need to somehow bring these revelations out to the mainstream media!

    No more gooper LITE!

    by krwada on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:14:57 PM PDT

  •  We just have to get the media interested in this. (4.00)
    There is little doubt no as to whether or not Bush is a war criminal. At some point in time he needs to be brought to justice for what he has done. It's besmirched all of the ideals that this country was built upon. I wonder what it will finally take to see this administration do down in flames.
    •  Let Keith Olbermann know (none)
      Of all the cable news shows that have a spine, I think that Keith is the most likely person to cover this story.... he after all covered the vote in Ohio. Email him at kolbermann@msnbc.com, or go to the Countdown show on msnbc.com Insist that he show responsibility as a news anchor and cover this story. He will respond, I just know it, if enough of us email him. It may get the ball rolling. In fact I'm gonna do a diary on this to catch more attention.
      •  email him (none)
        I sent him a copy of the memo yesterday praising him for his past persistence in covering the Ohio vote fraud issue.  Someone should send him Conyers letter. KOlbermann@MSNBC.com
        Make sure you let him, and the network, know how much you appreciate his balanced journalism.
        •  Blair will keep this in the news (none)
          Even if the US MSM is afraid to pursue it, the Brits are after Blair, so the story won't die immediately.
          Poor Tony...its hard for him, rully rully hard:

          Mr Blair said. "And some of those decisions are very, very difficult."

  •  Let Us Know Who Doesn't Sign, Please!! (4.00)
    and/or who does -- we'll do our part to keep some feet to the fire as well!

    Thank you, Congressman for all that you do!

    To write in plain vigorous language one has to think fearlessly, and if one thinks fearlessly one cannot be politically orthodox. George Orwell, 1946

    by deepintheheartoftx on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:18:02 PM PDT

    •  Great Idea (4.00)
      Is there any way we can keep track of who's signed on to this letter?  I'm sure my Rep (Van Hollen - MD) will sign and I'll call his office now to make sure he's aware of this effort.  But if we could get a link to the current co-signors then maybe we could help put some pressure on folks and help drum up some support.

      BTW - Thanks for all you do Congressman.  You make me proud to be a native of the Detroit area.

    •  VAN HOLLEN'S staffer (4.00)
      wasn't aware of this letter but will be getting in touch with Conyers' office to see if they can get a copy.  I have no doubt he'll be a co-signer before the week is out.

      Come on folks - call your Reps!

  •  Thank you, Mr. Conyers! (none)
    Isn't is sad that you have to constantly dun this administration for information?  

    Gee, you'd think they must have something to hide.  <snark>

  •  Thank you for your efforts! (none)
    Please keep us updated on progress and on the disposition of this letter!

    Freedom isn't free. So why are you bitching about taxes?

    by Sylvester McMonkey Mcbean on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:21:14 PM PDT

  •  I'm grief-stricken and flabbergasted (4.00)
    that ANY president of the US would so blatently and cynically lie and manipulate us into a war he privately decided was a good idea. I've watched it happen, and this is certainly no new revelation, but I am nontheless still grieving and flabbergasted and horrified. To me Mr Bush's actions were treasonous.
    •  In my dreams (4.00)
      the Dems take back Congress next year and immediately begin hearings on the many high crimes and misdemeanors committed by BushCo. Then impeachment, then indictments, then a perp walk ... sweet dreams, all!

      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mohandas Gandhi

      by trueblue illinois on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:37:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Get thee to your party HQ (4.00)
        Start NOW.

        To win in '06, we have to be working toward it now.

        The voter files in each town in every state need to be pristine in time for the start of the campaign season. That's work that takes a boatload of time and can be started today. It's tedious, but absolutely crucial. Starting earlier means you have a better chance of completion before it's needed.

        Go volunteer!

        Also, run for office! or at least keep your eyes open for people who would make good local candidates in your area/state.  If you think somoene would be fantastic, talk to them about it.  We need a solid crop of excellent candidates up and down the ticket.

        Beware the everyday brutality of the averted gaze.
        ePluribus Media - Donate!

        by mataliandy on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:56:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  don't get flabbergasted (4.00)
      get even, and remember it may be even worse:
      9/11 was the PNAC coming-out party, the moment they had been waiting for (funny how that worked)...

      We underestimate this crew at our peril.

  •  THANKS for this diary and letter (4.00)
    ...and let's hope this gets the ball rolling to hold President Bush responsible for clearly and unequivocally misleading the public into war.

    It is by now patently obvious to any sentient human being that the White House manipulated and manufactured intelligence in order to justify a war.

    It is so starkly clear, from so many sources, in fact, that it's truly remarkable that anyone (Democrat or Republican) would attempt to dispute it.

    Thus, the letter's question:

    "Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?"

    Can ONLY be answered yes: the Bush administration systematically manipulated the evidence, and we know this beyond a shadow of a doubt: there is not just one smoking gun, there are several!

    Furthermore, anyone who thinks a very detailed action plan (not a contingency plan) to invade Iraq was not in fact drawn up (Clark tells us this in his book) as soon as Bush took office (long before 9/11) is kidding themselves.

    Mr. Conyers, let's IMPEACH Bush for lying to the American people in the lead up to this disasterous and unnecessary war.

  •  What will it take? (none)
    What will it take to finally nail these criminals?

    Thank you Congressman Conyers.

  •  Bushes UN Speech in Sept 2002 (4.00)
    "If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis -- a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty, and internationally supervised elections."

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html

    My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately, decisively to hold Iraq to account. We will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolutions. But the purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced -- the just demands of peace and security will be met -- or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power.

    really he said he'd work with the UN when he already told the British he was going to wat 4 months before.

  •  At what point (4.00)
    does impeachment become an option?  I don't know that it would even be a good idea, but I am all ears.
    •  Impeachment (none)
      Impeachment is a political option; only when the People demand it will it occur and will it be completed.

      (The Republican powergrab Impeachment of Bill Clinton doesn't count, as evidenced by the fact that BC was not convicted.)

    •  Impeachment only an option with a Dem House (none)
      Republicans control the House, therefore there will be no impeachment.

      Unless Dems take the House in 2006.

      But for that we need to address the Republican-controlled voting machine industry.

      So we're really in a pickle.

      "Blogging doesn't make it so" - Sen. Hayworth (R) AZ 1/6/2005. Oh yeah?

      by bejammin075 on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:47:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well... (none)
        rather than bitch on a blog we should be out talking to our neighbors about next year's congressional races.  Knock on doors.  Send money to worthy candidates.  Write letters to the editors of our local papers.  Op ed pieces.  Man or woman the phone banks.  

        Each and EVERY House seat is up for grabs next year.  One third of the Senate.  We have to do all we can to send good people like Congressman Conyers back and we need to weed out the likes of Delay & Santorum & Frist and Spector... (the list goes on and on and ON).

        There are literally a million things to be done if we're to re-take the House and the Senate.  We need answers to letters like the one above - but we also have to keep our eyes on the big picture and there are things we could be doing now to make a difference.

      •  In my mind (none)
        the idea isn't so much about actually impeaching Bush (because we all know that's not going to happen any time soon), but more with the effects of the media picking the story up.  When non-political people read in their papers that someone in congress suggested that Bush be impeached, that's going to reach them.
      •  Impeachment. . . . (none)
        Not such a good idea for our democracy: two in a row, and it looks like a partisan attack tool.

        Better if we just take both houses of congress.  With a good leader or two, we won't need voting machines fixing. . . .  

        •  I don't care what it looks like (4.00)
          I wouldn't impeach Bush just to get revenge for Clinton. I would impeach Bush for TREASON, lying to start a war with a country that was not a threat, "cooking the books" to make a fake case for the war, etc. I can't believe what you are saying.

          If ever there were a reason to impeach, this would be it.

          Again, I don't care what it looks like.

          "Blogging doesn't make it so" - Sen. Hayworth (R) AZ 1/6/2005. Oh yeah?

          by bejammin075 on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:51:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Lying about almost everything.. not just war.. (none)
            I think that many of us are just so shocked that we are dumbstruck.. but the fact is, the world HAS seen this pattern many, many times before, and its the prelude to fascism..

            We NEED to stop pretending that its just a disagreement, that its politics..

            Giving it the name it deserves is the first step to building a bipartisan coalition to defeat it..

            Again and again, in country after country, fascism HAS been defeated by coalitions of concerned, INVOLVED citizens..

            The important key is TALKING OPENLY ABOUT THEIR LIES and KEEPING RECORDS and CALLING THEM ON THEM..

            Also, fascists are very VAGUE about their (lack of a) program.. because they want to get the support of the middle class..

            But the right's version of America's future DOESNT HAVE A MIDDLE CLASS.. only a small number of rich and a large number of poor..
            Do some reading on fascism.. this is a very dangerous thing.. the political system with the most potential for evil that you could possibly imagine..

            Their agenda could eventually include:

            Institutionalized racism that could eventually include mass deportations or executions of nonwhite Americans and their children, and/or naturalized citizens.

            Eugenics (many GOP policies are clearly eugenics based..) sterilization.. etc. The first step along this road is what is called 'genelining' which is basically allowing insurance companies to exploit data on people's families to create classes of uninsurable people.. "so they can maintain profitability" Those people will be marked for life.. Eventually, they may not be able to marry..they will be stigmatized, etc. Do a search on "redlining" "greenlining" and "assymetric data"

            Theocratic laws based on what they claim are 'biblical' teachings (they aren't, they are based on hate)

            Extreme sexual repression including punishment for being gay or for having premarital or extramarital sex, even if your partner consents to it..

            Reversion to an ancient kind of justice that pretends that all contracts are entered into 'by choice' for an example, see
            http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=us/198/45.html

            (a long-discredited precedent case that Janice Brown - a potential Bush judicial appointee - cited as a legal precedent! this standard would make all laws regulating workplace safety or hours illegal!)

            AND ON AND ON, AD INFINITUM...

    •  If they tried it (none)
      for a blow job, I think this bs more than qualifies.
  •  The basic question (4.00)
    Is this government answerable to the people for its actions?  Is this an administration by the people and for the people, or is this an administration in spite of the people.  

    No administration is bound, thank God, to mob rule.  Both morality and pragmatism require that the government sometimes acts contrary to the desires of the majority.  However, there is no excuse under the law -- or beyond it -- that allows the government to mislead the people, and no permission granted for them to act without consequence.

    If we fail to hold them responsible in this fruitless expenditure of blood, good will, and funds, then were are the limits?  What horror is so great that it demands an answer?

    •  azerty (none)
      Is this government answerable to the people for its actions? Is this an administration by the people and for the people, or is this an administration in spite of the people.  

      Actually, the bogus president and his co-conspirators form an administration which only moves to spite the People. It is revenge for the terrible fright they got when Hitler was defeated and their dismay at the consequences: 30 years of prosperity.

      •  Bush's grandfather actually helped to fund Hitler. (none)
        read the biography of the first George Bush at

        http://tarpley.net

        it's a mindblower..

        Prescott Bush was one of the financiers for the fascists in Germany, and he was prosecuted here in the US for it under the "Trading with the enemy act"

         But they just slapped his hands..

  •  Great! (none)
    The ball needs to get rolling on this.
  •  Thank you Rep. Conyers (none)
    You are, as usual, the first to step up to the bat.  I don't know what it will take to get the MSM to start reporting the real news, so that the people of this country can see what is really happening.  I wrote them all letters earlier today, though I do not expect it to help.  Maybe one day we will wake up from the nightmare that is the Bush Administration and they will all be held accountable.
  •  Iran (4.00)
    It seems as if the Bush administration may be praparing to attack Iran, just haveing sold several hunderd bunker-busters to Isreal, and the rhetoric that the Bush administration has been using in regards to Iran.  Such a thing will hopefully never happen, but if it does, are you prepared, and is the Democratic Leadership prepared?
  •  Thank you Congressman! (4.00)
    Dear President Bush,

    Doesn't "erring on the side of life" mean erring on the side of peace?

    Sincerely,
    Another guy who thinks you're a shameless hypocrite.

    p.s.
    While we're on the subject, it was revealed some time ago that as the war approach a desperate Saddam Hussein offered the US and UK just about everything we could have asked for. Including elections in Iraq in two years to pick Saddam's successor. Why hasn't this been investigated by Congress?

  •  Thank you (4.00)
    For the courage to ask the right questions.

    Now it is time for all Americans to stand up and demand answers.

    We should flood the gates of the White House on Memorial Day weekend to demand answers.  We should stake tents and protest, and see if the media dares   to give us the same amount of coverage they gave the Schiavo protestors.

    •  Perhaps if... (none)
      ...Congressman John Conyers stakes a tent with us, then the media will pay the appropriate attention.

      As with most causes, the media takes notice only when the ideological legions stick together.

      We would be easily dismissed if the minions of the DLC (Lieberman and his ilk) belittle such efforts as 'peacenik idealists' -- effectively and quickly distracting from the true issue of Bush's criminal, preemptive, concocted invasion.

  •  You make us Michiganders proud (4.00)
    Conyers is definately Fighting the Good Fight!
  •  This makes me furious. (4.00)
    Here I am, an old lady, little nobody secretary in Utah, fer pete's sake, and I knew from the first word out of his mouth that there was absolutely no justification for attacking Iraq. I wrote letters pleading for congressmen not to get us involved in this quagmire and all I got back was a bunch of baloney rationalization.

    For the FIRST TIME ever in my LIFE I was politically active. What was the matter with everyone? You only had to listen to that .... whatever he is... and you could tell he was lying through his teeth. I wish I could explain how horrified I was at the lockstep acceptance of his absolute nonsense.

    I'm no longer certain that the government of our country didn't abet 9/11, if not by action, then by inaction, because it suited the goals of the administration. What a thought to take into the dark hours of the night! It's a consolation that the truth is finally emerging. If this man isn't impeached for destroying this country and Iraq, it will be a blot on our honor for decades.

    Thank you for your efforts. I hope they succeed.

    utahgirl

    •  I knew it too. (4.00)
      So did a lot of people. Afghanistan, that I could understand. Didn't necessarily agree with how it was handled, but I understood why.

      But Iraq? No reason at all. Saddam was NO threat. He had NOTHING. North Korea was WAY more of a threat. WAY more. And is a WORSE threat now.

      •  So, why did Bush want regime change in Iraq? (4.00)
        We all know bush lied and had his minions give him the fake truth so he could invade, but nobody tell us his true reason? There must be a reason Bushco felt it was important to do this. I can only guess the oil and money, but was that really all?  

        It won't matter anyway because the sheeple will just say, OK, so what. 911 justifed attacking Iraq and the chimp will just roll along on his merry way.

        •  The reason (4.00)
          I posted this down below. Apologies for the repeat... "He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said to me: `One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, `My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He said, `If I have a chance to invade....if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

          But do not reject these teaching as false because I am crazy. The reason that I am crazy is because they are true.

          by kenjib on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:01:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  yeah, I remember reading that. (none)
            what a vain, selfish little twit excuse for a homosapien this f*k*r is. bully, coward, spoiled brat, Oh if only we could impeach this *sshol. That would be letting him off easy again I'm afraid. There will be no justice, no penalty to right this horror upon our soul.
        •  Saddam may have had (none)
          something on the Bush family. Or the Bush family may have felt that Saddam had double-crossed them, after some agreement that they may have had went sour. Their hatred of Saddam dates from '91, when 41 stated that Saddam was "evil," and even compared him to Hitler.

          Then, too, 43 was upset that Saddam had tried to kill 41 in Kuwait.

          Also some of 43's camp followers were comparing the most recent invasion of Iraq to D-Day. There may be some envy -- guilt -- over their fathers' successes in WW2.

          On the day that Saddam's statue was taken down, Cheney was on the Radio, heralding the arrival of $0.60/gallon gasoline and palm-lined expressways between Israel and its neighbors.

          My personal opinion is that the invasion of Iraq was driven by an indescribable delusion.

          •  Saddam and the Bushes (none)

            Or the Bush family may have felt that Saddam had double-crossed them, after some agreement that they may have had went sour

            Yes - he invaded Kuwait, instead of just taking part of the oil feilds along the border.

            Also some of 43's camp followers were comparing the most recent invasion of Iraq to D-Day. There may be some envy -- guilt -- over their fathers' successes in WW2.

            That's just the crap coming from the PR shills. And it was as odious as anything else they used to pimp their war. A disgusting slap in the face to Europeans. And as to Bush Sr.'s exploits in WWII: i recall reading about how he was seen to bail out quit early from his (admittedly crippled) plane, leaving his two fellow crewmen to plummet into the sea.

            In any case, Iraq was probably seen as the easiest place to begin the neo-con plan to overrun the Middle East. They'd been crippled by ten years of harrassment and the Saddam-boogeyman shtick had already been well laid out. Geographically, it seems like the obvious place the neo-cons would like to begin.

        •  Jean: oil, oil, oil, oil, and (4.00)
          oil. and Israel. and the Saudis and their oil, and Iran. To have a permanenet military foothold in the CENTCOM region to protect the vital asset (declared such since Carter) of oil in a peak-oil world. Between Saudi and Iraq, that's the largest reserves in the world by far. It's the crude, dude.
          •  Oil and Saddam--and Clinton (none)
            George Bush and the entore GOP went absolutely batshit when Clinton was elected.  To this day that cannot fathom how a President "won" a war and then lost re-election just 24 months later.

            Americans figured out we didn't win squat--freedom for Kumaitis, big whup.  We'd been lied to, Saddam was called the new Hitler, yet there he still was.

            The GOP bases hates it, but they know in their hearts that not removing Sddam the first time was a great mistake that allowed Clinton to trump the other "win" aspects of the war.

            So getting Saddam was a way of exorcising the Clinton demon.  It makes no sense to me personally, but that's how these freaks think.  George Bush was no different--he was getting Saddam because not getting him the first time helped Clinton.

    •  You touch on... (none)
      some things that many here share - new political activism, and shock that we were led into a war on false reason so easily.  When they first brought up Iraq I was dumbfounded.
    •  Same here... (none)
      Until I listened to this speech by David Ray Griffin in Madison last week I thought the "conspiracy theory" of Bush being behind 9/11 was bogus, but I'm far less sure now.  It puts everything his administration has been doing since into a much more logical framework than just "the guy is nuts".
      See for yourself:

      Audio and speech document: http://indymedia.us/en//2005/04/6673.shtml

      Video:
      http://www.911blogger.com/2005/04/proper-release-of-griffin-in-madison.html

      "It does not take many words to tell the truth." Chief Joseph

      by Gabriele Droz on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:16:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ugh (rant alert) (none)

        I just glanced at the IndyMedia site and started reading the Jonathan Gramling article in the Madison Times. But i stopped reading when i saw that Griffin raised questions about the buildings collapsing. I find it really dis-heartening to see these questions coming up over and over. I'm sure those who want the questions of culpability swept under the rug just love it whenever someone destroys their credibility by suggesting the buildings were wired with explosives beforehand.

        Look: they were 2 of the frickin' tallest structures on this planet. The top of one of them was leaning over before it collapsed. Windows lower down blew out and debris was seen jetting out as the floors above collapsed. Evidence of explosive charges?! Here's a clue: take paper bag, blow air into opening and hold closed. Strike bag with hand. Come on, it's pretty simple.

        That building 7 came down is also not a big surprise. Two enormous skyscrapers had just collapsed next door for crying out loud! How is that not going to very seriously affect the stability of surrounding structures. The media didn't give that place the tag "Ground Zero" for nothing. It was a fucking hellish nightmare.

        And what of the statement that the FDNY was thinking of "pulling" building 7 before it collpased on it's own? Evidence that it was already wired? Um, no. It was huge frickin' secondary disaster waiting to befall upon those poor bastards who were trying to find their colleagues in the rubble. They knew it was going to come down so they thought it might be best if they had some control over that.

        Anyhoo, can we please stop with the Black Helicopter crowd's nonsense about explosive charges? Please? It completely undermines every other question we have on this subject!

        There, i feel better now.

        Addendum: Fuck - no i don't. After previewing this, i just want to apologise to all those who read this and are once again reminded of that sick fucking day. I'm tearing up. But, please, it's such an important thing to make sure those responsible pay for this that we can't afford to undermine ourselves by parrotting the unhinged, stupid fantasies that the towers were blown up.

        i need some mint tea - stat.

      •  Gabriele Droz (none)

        that rant was not aimed at you, btw. Peace.

    •  Letters (4.00)
      I hear you, utahgirl.  When I first heard that Bush was talking about invading Iraq, I was shocked.  I knew something was terribly wrong.  I too sent letters to my worthless automaton Texas Senators (Hutchison and Cornyn) as well as Dick Cheney demanding reasons why suddenly they were shifting their focus from capturing Osama bin Laden, to bombing Iraq.  Their responses all consisted of the same talking points about the unequivocal intelligence that confirmed Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction, and was ready, willing, and able to use them.  But why, I kept asking, why now?  What precipitated this rush to invade? I have yet to get that answer.

      I believe Dubya invaded Iraq for political exploitation, to get "re-elected" and other irresponsible and immature reasons.  But the neocons also had the oil revenues on their greedy minds.

      But what I don't understand is that even now there are people who still support the invasion. This war has been a catastrophic failure from the beginning.  The torture of prisoners, the obscene waste and fraud by mega-corporations in the "reconstruction", the lack of any kind of successful war plan or strategy for dealing with an urban insurgency, the lack of an exit plan, the lack of armor and equipment for our troops--the inexcusable loss of life, for God's sake! Innocent children and women getting killed for the hubris of chickenhawk warmongers.

      I have participated in every petition, every effort I know about to protest this horrible war.  I applaud Representative Conyers for his tenacious demands for accountability.  In light of this new, tangible evidence, maybe there is hope.  

      However, I remain skeptical because of the monied interests and the extremist lawmakers who do their bidding. I also remain skeptical that the 2006 elections will change anything since I have lost confidence in our elections.  The Rethugs are making sure no real voting reforms will be passed by 2006.  There has been no accountability for the stolen elections of 2000 or 2004, and I don't see how corruption will be prevented in 2006.

      All we can do is keep hammering the media with the truth, staying politically active, and pray for some miracles that will bring the light of truth to the masses.  Even then, it will be a battle to make any meaningful changes in our corrupt government.

    •  God bless you utahgirl (none)
      There are blue voters everywhere!  Utah bluepockets unite!

      Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.

      by TrueBlueMajority on Mon May 02, 2005 at 08:52:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Don't forget this sentence from the minutes: (4.00)
     "The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record."

    Hmmm, what "material" might that be?

    "material" re: U.S. supplying our ally Hussein with support and weapons 20 years ago -- right about the time all those Kurds just found in a mass grave were killed?

    I wonder if the strategy re: "hey, we can blame the intelligence agencies" when the truth comes out re: no WMDs was also already drawn up in 2002. talk about "weakening the country"!

    I'm signing off to fax my Congressman a request to sign on to Rep. Conyers' letter.

  •  have the freepers ... (none)
    Have the freepers started claiming that this memo is a fake yet?  Or is it just some ho-hum "historical document" to them?

    Proud member of the reality-based minority

    by Bearpaw on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:46:40 PM PDT

  •  Thank you! (4.00)
    Con. Conyers,

    I knew this before the war.  Bombing a city the size of Chicago was no response to Osama bin Laden, neither was flying his family out of the country.

    Please keep up the good fight.  Because of your pursuit of the Gannon records that you FOAI'ed recently, I am able to now ask a most stunning question.

    "If there is such a huge "liberal" bias in the media, why is a gay, Christian, conservative, "military" whore lobbing questions to Pres. Bush?"

    You should hear the resounding silence....it is truly beautiful.

    With your help I am able to guide people to the proof that Gannon had full access to the White House.  As a liberal, I don't give two hoots if Gannon wants to marry another man, but there is a huge security issue I'd say.  And maybe one of hypocrisy...

    Transparency in gov. is a founding fathers' principle.  Bush claimed he would have it, but you are showing us what this truly means.

    "...we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past years." Hitler

    by quartzite on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:49:25 PM PDT

  •  Keep Their Feet to the Fire (none)
    Many thanks for all your great work, Representative Conyers.

    Conyers/Boxer '08!

  •  Bush & Blair Planned Decided to Invade (4.00)
    and then ginned up the reasons for going to war - who knew?!?!

    Seriously - I doubt many of us are all that surprised but now we have PROOF!  And we're seeing it all unfold again over Iran.  I heard recently that shrubco have approached Scott Ritter to try to recruit him for this new war.  He told them to feck off and well he should have.

    The drums are being beaten again folks and we need to take shrubs toy away before he gets more people killed.  Call your Reps and DEMAND that they sign on to Congressman Conyers' letter.

  •  Another vote for Impeachment here (4.00)
    Too bad I'm not a member of the House of Representatives, then my vote would count.

     

    Reality is just... a point of view - Philip K. Dick; Beautiful thing, the destruction of words. (from Orwell's 1984)

    by LionelEHutz on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:53:08 PM PDT

  •  So many lives lost for Bush's lies (4.00)
    So many are brainwashed by the media
    So many are pacified into inaction by the TV

    When will the madness end?
    When will there be justice?
    When will Bush be held accountable for lying about war?

    "Blogging doesn't make it so" - Sen. Hayworth (R) AZ 1/6/2005. Oh yeah?

    by bejammin075 on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:54:09 PM PDT

  •  I hate to be a party pooper, but...... (3.00)
    ....is ANY of this 'news?'  Is anyone surprised that GWB planned to go to war with Iraq?  I think this was discussed in the MM.  As I remember (and my memory fails me more and more as I get older), didn't the MM report that Mr. Bush wanted to implicate "Sod-dom" Hussein on 9/12/01?

    AND, does anyone expect an answer from this administration --  even a basic denial of the charges?

    call me cynical.........  or maybe I REALLY am the crazy one!

    ""Look Daddy, I--" "Don't say anything. Sit down." "Look here, let's try to forget this. If you promise--" -- Song of Solomon, CW

    by chloe wofford is my fav on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:54:11 PM PDT

    •  It's old news (4.00)
      It's old news to us...BUT it is more proof that we were right.  

      Today at the library, on top of the waist high shelves of Political Books, someone had placed some Pro-Bush Books.  I fixed that by re-shelving them and placing such gems as Imperial Hubris, Worse than Watergate, Lying Liars, Bushwacked...etc.  I didn't feel guilty at all, Indiana readers need the books I displayed more than the ones that were there.  

    •  Yes it is important - one more bit of evidence (none)
      After all this administration is still promoting people who make a policy out of creating false intelligence to support the military or other action they want. Truth be dammed.

      Bolton? - Damn scary. we need to keep screaming this from the rooftops.  Its not that they did it once. Its that they keep doing it. Its policy, not a mistake.

      interesting quotation from the memo


       Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.
      •  Extortion Under Color of Official Right (EUCOR) (none)
        Bolton:  Footsoldier for corruption and misrepresentation since entering Reagan team in 1980.

        Like Bush running up the invasion of Iraq.  Brow beat subordinates to espouse a false view of reality.  When subordinates would not "go along to get along" with doctrinaire delusions portrayed as truth take "official actions" to move aside anyone who told the truth which disagreed with his fraudulent view.

        This is a tool of corrupt organizations, organized crime, the Klan, grafting politicians, the right wing, theocrats and Bush's felons all over the world.

        Old Army process:  "pay the schilling".  Go along with the corrupt and inept; the moral salve is to say when I am in charge I won't demand the schilling.  Bolton is one of many Bush  administrations' demanders of schillings.  The schilling is to lie for the boss and be the intelligence analyst who they will use as expert source to sell the lies.

        It appears that at State Bolton found an analyst who would not lie for him.  He then began to EUCOR the guy.  It failed in part because General Powell knows very well about paying schillings and would not allow it in his term at State.

        Unfortunately for America Powell paid the Bush schilling once too often in Feb 2003.  

        It is time we demand the US government not be run by corruption and that extortionists be impeached not confirmed.

        Those who deny reality have no place representing a just nation, if indeed we continue to be so righteous after the corruption of the past 4 years.

        •  AMEN (none)
          Sounds like you know wherof you speak.
          •  Been Attacked for (none)
            Saying the tests were failed but the Colonel wanted to get into production.

            Then worked an equipment in a company which was on US Army helicopters.  The design was not tested, it would slow deliveries to qualify the design.  So build something that does not meet spec and hope no one gets killed.  Whistleblow that one and gone.

            More........ it is mostly "go along to get along".

            Bolton merely got stymied by Powell policy.

            Bolton tried to retaliate against a truth teller.

            One survived most do not.

  •  Okay Folks alot of you may be asking (4.00)
    Why is this important.

    Very simply because during the run up to the election Richard Clarke and others showed that this was true.  Now we have a important voice to support what he said.....and to show that they have lied.

    •  Clark will be a credible candidate (none)
      imho
      •  Typo or ? (none)
        If you are suggesting Richard Clarke as Democratic candidate for President, I think that's premature. Clarke is a true hero, and I am extremely impressed with him, but he's a Republican. Unless he is forthcoming with detailed policies that we can support in areas beyond national security, I think we should assume we can do much better. He probably should be a Republican candidate, but I doubt the Republican party will recover enough sanity to make that possible, at least not by 2008.

        If you are suggesting General Clark, please pardon my misinterpretation.

        . . . solutions emerge from [our] judicious study of discernible reality.

        by realitybased on Tue May 03, 2005 at 01:44:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Dear Rep. Conyers: (none)
    Are you going to be the one screaming about this on the House floor until it gets the coverage it deserves (or even a fraction of it)?  

    Will you call a press conference to bring media attention to it?  And if no one shows up, will you keep calling press conferences until someone does?

    Will you be the one who introduces articles of impeachment against Bush and his puppeteers, knowing full well that nothing will come of them while the GOP controls Congress?  

    If you won't do these things, then who will?  I have to say this, and I do not mean any disrespect to you, Rep Conyers, but I am really starting to lose hope in the whole process.  "They" always seem to win, no matter how much of the truth is on our side.  

    Will you be the one who actually fights, and not just talks?  Please, for the love of god, please be the one who fights.   We need at least one.  

    Sincerly
    - A pissed off (and almost hopeless) American.  

    Would you rather live in the ascendancy of a civilization, or during its decline? --Poindexter

    by Billy Shears on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:55:26 PM PDT

    •  FYI (4.00)
      Congressman Conyers HAS been fighting for things like this.  Check out his voting record and his work at the committee level.  He's been in Congress for as long as I can remember and is one of our true heroes on the Hill.  A serious work-horse on the issues others would have given up on long ago.

      I have no doubt that he's anything but serious about keeping this issue alive and on the front pages. Now it's up to us to help pressure our reps to sign on - and make sure the press gets wind of this.

    •  What about... (4.00)
      ...all the other legislators, journalists, and the voting public who should be concerned about this?  Why does Rep. Conyers seem to be a voice in the wilderness?  

      Members on both sides of the aisle need to take this seriously as the impeachable offense it is.  Mr. Bush twice swore to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," and he's broken that promise.  Many times over.  

      Billions of taxpayer dollars, thousands of lives, tons of Iraqi assets (especially all those looted ancient artifacts), and our standing in the world are gone.  What a crime.

      Nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus... (Now is the time to beat the earth with unfettered foot...)

      by a2jean on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:44:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  To be fair to Rep. Conyers, he has (none)
      been one among a very few people who have kept the pressure on this administration. Henry Waxman is another one.
  •  You are a ray of hope Rep. Conyers! (none)
    Your perserverance for accountability and truth from the Bush Administration and the GOP are an inspiration. Thank you so much.

    Go get 'em Mr. Conyers! And to the other Dem leaders, what are you waiting for?

    I don't want to be a downer, but I don't expect this story to get any traction. As mad and as fed up as I get with this Bush Administration, I find myself equally or even more pissed at our corporate media for giving them pass, after pass, after pass...."Look, over there, The Runaway Bride!".

  •  Thank you so much... (none)
    I can't believe this has flown under the radar here for the past couple days, especially considering some of the non-news the media is spewing out.
  •  John Conyers (4.00)
    '08 !

    Culture of life? More like Republican cesspool of violence.

    by vancookie on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:57:53 PM PDT

  •  The war started in 1999 (4.00)
    "He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said to me: `One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, `My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He said, `If I have a chance to invade....if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency."

    But do not reject these teaching as false because I am crazy. The reason that I am crazy is because they are true.

    by kenjib on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:58:58 PM PDT

  •  Now that it has pretty much (none)
    been proven that Bush planned to go to war with Iraq long before 9/11, probably to get the oil, I would like you to ask him a couple of questions, if you please, Congressman.

    I want to know..1) Is it true, as the NYTimes reported, that your family has made over $7 billion dollars off the spiralling oil prices?? 2) Do you think the profits from the oil and the profits to Halliburton are worth over 1,600 lives lost in this war?

    And don't let him get away with any patriotic claptrap, either. Thank you for being so vigilant and purposeful on our behalf.

    What happens when Bush takes Viagra? he gets taller. Robin Williams

    by Demfem on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:59:01 PM PDT

    •  Ouch (none)
      Wow - where does that $7 billion figure come from?

      But do not reject these teaching as false because I am crazy. The reason that I am crazy is because they are true.

      by kenjib on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:03:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  duh (none)
        Sorry - I didn't read carefully enough. Do you recall when it was in the NY Times or have a linke?

        But do not reject these teaching as false because I am crazy. The reason that I am crazy is because they are true.

        by kenjib on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:04:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, I didn't see it myself, (none)
          a friend of mine told me he read it in the NYTimes, and I looked for it, but would have had to pay fees, since I don't subscribe, to search the archived returns on the search. Perhaps a NY Kossack could either call them or, as a subscriber, do a search???

          What happens when Bush takes Viagra? he gets taller. Robin Williams

          by Demfem on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:22:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  While I like your thinking, I disagree (none)
      Those questions are better put in editorials, commentaries, and letters to the editor over the coming days as we try to get this issue out to the public. Putting those questions in Congressman Conyers' letter would be impolitic and would make it much more difficult to get other representatives to sign onto and endorse the letter. When that is a goal we desire in order to raise the issues' profile, then being politic is important. But, that doesn't mean we have to be so politic out here.
      •  I was thinking he would ask them in (none)
        person, not in a letter. But I guess Bush won't face questions from Congress much better than he does from the press.

        What happens when Bush takes Viagra? he gets taller. Robin Williams

        by Demfem on Mon May 02, 2005 at 08:42:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN (4.00)
    for caring enough about this important matter to act upon it.

    It may not matter to many right now, but if the Democratic leadership chooses to do so, you all could turn this into a mighty issue.

    For the execcutive branch to plan a war with an allied country without first informing congress, let alone seeking authority from them, is TREASONOUS.

    We are a nation of laws.  No man is above them.  

    Prosecute this crime, Congressman!  You have the full backing and support of at least one half of this fine country.

    "The government is us...you and me!" -Theodore Roosevelt

    by Republic Not Empire on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:59:19 PM PDT

  •  Rep. Conyers (none)
    You are one great American and I admire you for the work you do for our country! Thank you!

    Blue guy in a red state.

    by txbirdman on Mon May 02, 2005 at 01:59:29 PM PDT

  •  Mr. Conyers (4.00)
    Will you please call for a Special Prosecutor to investigate whether this constitutes illegal actions on behalf of George Walker Bush and his administration? It's obvious that the corrupt Republican-led Congress and Senate are incapable of conducting an honest investigation.
  •  Terrible? Yes. Shocking? No. (4.00)
    We knew this.  We knew this from the start.  We knew this the moment we found out Bin Laden was in Afghanistan and Donald Rumsfeld wanted to bomb Iraq because "They have better targets".

    We know what this president did.  We know when he did it.  And, I think we know who in this country accepts it and who still chooses to live in a right wing republican fantasy where W can do no wrong.  There is an element in this country that is not unlike a battered housewife who believes every lie her husband tells her ("I love you", "I promise I'll stop", etc) because to accept what is obviously the truth will only mean that her suffering has been in vain.

    This country is suffering.  Her children are dying in a far away land.  Her once beautiful lands are foul and scarred.  Her liberties are being raped and killed.  And yet, every time the man responsible says "it's for our own good" or "I would never lie to you, I love you" our media and a good portion of the public lower their bruised heads and mutter "I believe you.  I'll try harder next time".

    "Who is the bigger fool? The fool? Or, the fool who follows him?"

    by Magnus Greel on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:01:39 PM PDT

  •  I forwarded the story to some of the MSM. (none)
    Maybe if they hear enough screaming they'll take a break from the "Runaway Bride" and mention it. I'm disgusted, but forever grateful to Rep Conyers for consistantly pushing truth toward the surface.
  •  Thank you for posting here Cognressmen Conyers (none)
    Now when and how will you and other Democratic elected officials going to beat this drum in the media, on the Sunday shows, etc.?

    cheers,

    Mitch Gore

    Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

    by Lestatdelc on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:05:20 PM PDT

  •  Here's the media list -Sorry long, but worth it (4.00)
    Media Contacts (4.00 / 11)

    Just copy and paste this into your emails.  I apologize in advance for posting such a long comment but this is really important and I hope all of you will send emails out to all of the media and let them know that this young woman is being executed.  
    Set 1:   Primarily National Television News media

    countdown@msnbc.com;KOlbermann@msnbc.com ;CJ@MSNBC.com ;
    JTrippi@MSNBC.com;hardball@msnbc.com;abramsreport@msnbc.com;
    dshuster@msnbc.com;dennis.sullivan@msnbc.com;norville@msnbc.com;

    joe@msnbc.com;msnbcinvestigates@msnbc.com;feedback@msnbc.com;
    rreagan@msnbc.com;viewerservices@msnbc.com;brian.williams@msnbc.com;
    imus@msnbc.com;chris.matthews@msnbc.com;msnbcreports@msnbc.com;

    today@nbc.com;info@cnbc.com;dateline@nbc.com;nightly@nbc.com;MTP@nbc.com;
    tom.lea@nbc.com;steve.majors@nbc.com;susan.dutcher@nbc.com;rod.prince@nbc.com;
    jonathan.wald@nbc.com;lisa.hsia@nbc.com;betsy.fischer@nbc.com;mtp@nbc.com;

    NETAUDR@abc.com;2020@abc.com;nightline@abcnews.com;wnn@abcnews.com;
    support@abcnews.go.com;niteline@abc.com;abc.news.magazines@abc.com;
    phil.boyce@abc.com;thisweek@abc.com;mimi.gurbst@abc.com;mark.nelson@abc.com;

    virginia.moseley@abc.com;penny.britell@abc.com;muriel.pearson@abc.com;
    sharon.newman@abc.com;meredith.white@abc.com;gil.pimentel@abc.com;
    stu.schutzman@abc.com;

    evening@cbsnews.com;earlyshow@cbs.com;48hours@cbsnews.com;ftn@cbsnews.com;
    60m@cbsnews.com;thismorning@cbsnews.com;bpc@cbsnews.com;dij@cbsnews.com;
    efm@cbsnews.com;mkx@cbsnews.com;pma@cbsnews.com;rbc@cbsnews.com;
    sundays@cbsnews.com;grain@cbsnews.com;realitycheck@cbsnews.com;
    pls@cbsnews.com;pjh@cbsnews.com;

    wolf@cnn.com;360@cnn.com;aaron.brown@turner.com;Paula.Zahn2@cnn.com;
    crossfire@cnn.com;daybreak@cnn.com;jeff.greenfield@cnn.com;livefrom@cnn.com;
    loudobbs@cnn.com;newsnight@cnn.com;tom.hannon@cnn.com;wam@cnn.com;
    livetoday@cnn.com;am@cnn.com;

    andrea.koppel@turner.com;bill.schneider@turner.com;bruce.morton@turner.com;
    carol.lin@turner.com;daryn.kagan@turner.com;david.ensor@turner.com;
    jeanne.meserve@turner.com;jim.walton@turner.com;deirdre.walsh@turner.com;
    kelly.wallace@turner.com;kyra.phillips@turner.com;lou.dobbs@turner.com;
    miles.obrien@turner.com;paula.zahn@turner.com;candy.crowley@turner.com;

    Set 2:  New York Times and various National & International Print media...

    krugman@nytimes.com;vannatta@nytimes.com;tiwein@nytimes.com;miwein@nytimes.com;
    weisman@nytimes.com;liptaka@nytimes.com;bobherb@nytimes.com;reissc@nytimes.com;
    public@nytimes.com;dabrooks@nytimes.com;dakirk@nytimes.com;dasang@nytimes.com;

    editorial@nytimes.com;erschm@nytimes.com;executiveeditor@nytimes.com;
    febarr@nytimes.com;foreign@nytimes.com;justice@nytimes.com;burns@nytimes.com;
    cushman@nytimes.com;markoff@nytimes.com;judym@nytimes.com;letters@nytimes.com;

    ligree@nytimes.com;nytnews@nytimes.com;managing-editor@nytimes.com;
    liberties@nytimes.com;mossm@nytimes.com;national@nytimes.com;news-tips@nytimes.com;
    nicholas@nytimes.com;pekilb@nytimes.com;ropear@nytimes.com;rotone@nytimes.com;

    stolberg@nytimes.com;slabaton@nytimes.com;weisman@nytimes.com;lewin@nytimes.com;
    tiwein@nytimes.com;topurd@nytimes.com;washington@nytimes.com;safire@nytimes.com;
    executive-editor@nytimes.com;managing-editor@nytimes.com;

    bduffy@usnews.com;letters@usnews.com;gborger@usnews.com;jallen@usnews.com;
    kwalsh@usnews.com;mzuckerman@usnews.com;vpope@usnews.com;whispers@usnews.com;
    alevin@usatoday.com;astone@usatoday.com;bslavin@usatoday.com;bnichols@usatoday.com;

    bwelch@usatoday.com;editor@usatoday.com;dmoniz@usatoday.com;ghager@usatoday.com;
    gflanders@usatoday.com;jlawrence@usatoday.com;jdrinkard@usatoday.com;
    jbiskupic@usatoday.com;editor@usatoday.com;jkeen@usatoday.com;kkiely@usatoday.com;

    kjohnson@usatoday.com;mhall@usatoday.com;rbenedetto@usatoday.com;
    rwolf@usatoday.com;spage@usatoday.com;tsquitieri@usatoday.com;tlocy@usatoday.com;
    theforum@usatoday.com;wshapiro@usatoday.com;

    letters@economist.com;amity.shlaes@ft.com;letters.editor@ft.com;philip.stephens@ft.com;
    greg.hitt@wsj.com;wsj.ltrs@wsj.com;wsjcontact@dowjones.com;jeanne.cummings@wsj.com;
    jane_mayer@newyorker.com;themail@newyorker.com;deborah.barfield@newsday.com;
    ken.fireman@newsday.com;

    Editors@newsweek.com;WebEditors@newsweek.com;howardfineman@aol.com;
    Letters@newsweek.com;letters@time.com;lettersbwol@businessweek.com;

    letters@washingtontimes.com;gpierce@washingtontimes.com;jmccaslin@washingtontimes.com;
    dkeil@bloomberg.net;wroberts@bloomberg.net;ghall@bloomberg.net;hprzybyla@bloomberg.net;
    jcohen@bloomberg.net;

    NewsAlert@letters.washingtonpost.com;letters@washpost.com;webnews@washingtonpost.com;
    georgewill@washpost.com;jimhoagland@washpost.com;ombudsman@washpost.com;
    powellm@washpost.com;kurtzh@washpost.com;abramowitz@washpost.com>;

    <achenbachj@washpost.com>;<allenh@washpost.com>;<allenm@washpost.com>
    <aranam@washpost.com>;argetsinger@washpost.com>; <asherm@washpost.com>;
    <chuck.babbington@washingtonpost.com>;<bakerp@washpost.com>;<balzd@washpost.com>;

    <barbashf@washpost.com>;<barkerk@washpost.com>;<barkinr@washpost.com>;
    <barrj@washpost.com>;<barrs@washpost.com>;<beckerj@washpost.com>;
    <behrp@washpost.com>;<belmanf@washpost.com>;<bennettp@washpost.com>;

    <benningv@washpost.com>;<bersellie@washpost.com>;<beyersd@washpost.com>;
    <blumj@washpost.com>;<bonesteelm@washpost.com>;<boustanyn@washpost.com>;
    <religion@washpost.com>;<bredemeier@washpost.com>;<brennanp@washpost.com>;

    <brooksd@washpost.com>;<brownw@washpost.com>;<browar57@aol.com>;
    <carlsonp@washpost.com>;<castanedar@washpost.com>;<cavendishs@washpost.com>;
    <chans@washpost.com>;<chandlerc@washpost.com>;<rajiv@washpost.com>;

    <cheaterry@washpost.com>;<chod@washpost.com>;<claiborneb@washpost.com>;
    <clarkp@washpost.com>;<cohensh@washpost.com>;<cohnd@washpost.com>;
    <coopermana@washpost.com>;<copelandl@washpost.com>;<davenportc@washpost.com>;

    <davisp@washpost.com>; <dawsone@washpost.com>;<dayk@washpost.com>;
    <deanec@washpost.com>;<deaned@washpost.com>;<deinerj@washpost.com>;
    <deyoungk@washpost.com>;<dirdam@washpost.com>;<dobbsm@washpost.com>;

    <drezenr@washpost.com>;<duttj@washpost.com>;<dvorakp@washpost.com>;
    <edsallt@washpost.com>;<eggend@washpost.com>;<ahrensf@washpost.com>;
    <aizenmann@washpost.com>;<nightwatch@washpost.com>;<donovanc@washpost.com>;

    newsonline@bbc.co.uk;editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk;politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk;
    foreign@guardian.co.uk;letters@guardian.co.uk;politics@guardian.co.uk;online@guardian.co.uk;
    foreigneditor@independent.co.uk;newseditor@independent.co.uk;

    letters@iht.com;ellengoodman@globe.com;ombud@globe.com;kcooper@globe.com;
    letter@globe.com;johnson@globe.com;brelis@globe.com;oliphant@globe.com;
    editor@scoop.co.nz;alastair@scoop.co.nz;selwyn@scoop.co.nz;jhoward@minidata.co.nz;
    andrew@scoop.co.nz;wade@scoop.co.nz

    jgreenburg@tribune.com;jzeleny@tribune.com;jzuckman@tribune.com;jcrewdson@tribune.com;
    MPossley@tribune.com;rkemper@tribune.com;bjapsen@tribune.com;csimpson@tribune.com;
    fjames@tribune.com;GWashburn@tribune.com;gdelama@tribune.com;mdorning@tribune.com
    JPeres@tribune.com;cgarrett@tribune.com;

    oped@csps.com>;<vanslambrouckp@csps.com>;<ingwersonm@csps.com>;<cookd@csps.com>;
    <dillinj@csps.com>;<jonesc@csps.com>;<armstrongs@csps.com>;<sullivanc@csps.com>;
    <grierp@csps.com>;<axtmank@csps.com>;<chinnid@csps.com>;<kieferf@csps.com>;
    <marksa@csps.com>;<mclaughlina@csps.com>;<ron@csmonitor.com>;<richeyw@csps.com>;
    <grays@csps.com>;

    Set 3:  The Los Angeles Times

    letters@latimes.com;readers.rep@latimes.com;aaron.zitner@latimes.com;
    barbara.serrano@latimes.com;barry.siegel@latimes.com;James.Rainey@latimes.com;
    bill.rempel@latimes.com;bob.drogin@latimes.com;chuck.neubauer@latimes.com;

    davan.maharaj@latimes.com;david.kelly@latimes.com;david.savage@latimes.com;
    david.willman@latimes.com;david.zucchino@latimes.com;deborah.nelson@latimes.com;
    don.frederick@latimes.com;don.woutat@latimes.com;doyle.mcmanus@latimes.com;

    ellen.barry@latimes.com;esther.schrader@latimes.com;faye.fiore@latimes.com;
    glenn.bunting@latimes.com;greg.miller@latimes.com;janet.hook@latimes.com;
    joan.springhetti@latimes.com;joel.havemann@latimes.com;johanna.neuman@latimes.com;

    john.glionna@latimes.com;john.hendren@latimes.com;john.stewart@latimes.com;
    jonathan.peterson@latimes.com;josh.getlin@latimes.com;josh.meyer@latimes.com;
    judy.pasternak@latimes.com;julie.bowles@latimes.com;ken.silverstein@latimes.com;

    kevin.sack@latimes.com;leslie.hoffecker@latimes.com;letters@latimes.com;
    linda.finestone@latimes.com;lisa.getter@latimes.com;maggie.farley@latimes.com;
    maria.laganga@latimes.com;marjorie.miller@latimes.com;mark.barabak@latimes.com;

    mark.mazzetti@latimes.com;mark.porubcansky@latimes.com;maryann.meek@latimes.com;
    mary.braswell@latimes.com;mary.curtius@latimes.com;matea.gold@latimes.com;
    maura.reynolds@latimes.com;michael.finnegan@latimes.com;michael.kinsley@latimes.com;

    michael.muskal@latimes.com;millie.quan@latimes.com;nick.anderson@latimes.com;
    patrick.mcdonnell@latimes.com;patt.morrison@latimes.com;paul.feldman@latimes.com;
    peter.wallsten@latimes.com;readers.rep@latimes.com;richard.cooper@latimes.com;

    richard.simon@latimes.com;robin.abcarian@latimes.com;roger.ainsley@latimes.com;
    scott.gold@latimes.com;scott.kraft@latimes.com;stephanie.simon@latimes.com;
    steve.braun@latimes.com;tom.furlong@latimes.com;tom.hamburger@latimes.com;
    tom.mccarthy@latimes.com;elizabeth.mehren@latimes.com;alan.miller@latimes.com;

    Set 4:  Misc. National media, incl. Newswires,Radio,Mags & Internet....

    feedback@ap.org;jloven@ap.org;lmargasak@ap.org;msilverman@ap.org;npickler@ap.org;
    rfournier@ap.org;sjohnson@ap.org; pr@ap.org;thunt@ap.org;traum@ap.org;info@ap.org;
    pr@ap.org;cochs@ap.org;pressreleases@upi.com;tips@upi.com;investigations_desk@upi.com;
    politics_desk@upi.com;info@ap.org;

    editor@reuters.com;patricia.wilson.reuters.com@reuters.net;todd.eastham@reuters.com;
    stella.dawson@reuters.com;arshad.mohammed@reuters.com;randall.mikkelsen@reuters.com;
    steve.holland@reuters.com;john.whitesides@reuters.com;news@capitolhillbureau.org;

    sheberer@pbs.org;charlierose@pbs.org;newshour@pbs.org;danschiedel@kozk.pbs.org;
    theworld@pri.org;newshour@pbs.org;ombudsman@npr.org;atc@npr.org;morning@npr.org;
    totn@npr.org;morning@npr.org;rsiegel@npr.org;ombudsman@npr.org;sstamberg@npr.org;

    totn@npr.org;freshair@whyy.org;watc@npr.org;wesat@npr.org;wesun@npr.org;
    npronsirius@npr.org;worldwide@npr.org;wesat@npr.org;atc@npr.org;ataylor@npr.org;
    bwilson@npr.org;bnaylor@npr.org;ombudsman@npr.org;cflintoff@npr.org;

    emcdonnell@npr.org;corrections@npr.org;cwindham@npr.org;dschorr@npr.org;
    dardalan@npr.org;dgonyea@npr.org;jlyden@npr.org;jcochran@npr.org;jwilliams@npr.org;
    krudin@npr.org;lhansen@npr.org;ombudsman@npr.org;mliasson@npr.org;lusa@npr.org;

    mblock@npr.org;atc@npr.org;morning@npr.org;nconan@npr.org;ntotenberg@npr.org;
    atc@npr.org;pfessler@npr.org;ombudsman@npr.org;pbreslow@npr.org;

    newstips@wdtn.com;drobinson@wdtn.com;ddmarko@wdtn.com;jason.pheister@wbns10tv.com;
    jason.pheister@wbns10tv.com;gramshaw@newshour.org;stephanie@stephaniemiller.com;
    brian_hill@metronetworks.com;mcurtis@njn.org;mail@uttm.com;maureensm@ffww.com;

    tgrieve@salon.com;talbotd@salon.com;kberger@salon.com;gsealey@salon.com;
    michelle@salon.com;mjacoby@salon.com;kaufman@salon.com;mfollman@salon.com;
    mkeeley@salon.com;modonnell@salon.com;kamiya@salon.com; scottr@salon.com;

    lauram@salon.com;ruth@salon.com;kaufman@salon.com;bwyman@salon.com;
    jmillman@salon.com;boehlert@salon.com;szacharek@salon.com;jsweeney@salon.com;
    abenfer@salon.com;ayork@salon.com;fmorgan@salon.com;klauerman@salon.com;

    jtapper@salon.com;daryl@salon.com;amontgomery@salon.com;cchocano@salon.com;
    ccolin@salon.com;areiter@salon.com;dawn@salon.com;dcruickshank@salon.com;
    boehlert@salon.com;stark@salon.com;letters@slate.com;  

    ekelly@gns.gannett.com;fbremner@gns.gannett.com;jcarroll@gns.gannett.com;
    kscott@gns.gannett.com;lbivins@gns.gannett.com;mgroppe@gns.gannett.com;
    mmadden@gns.gannett.com;pbrogan@gns.gannett.com;rchebium@gns.gannett.com;
    aradelat@gns.gannett.com;cweiser@gns.gannett.com;dabrahms@gns.gannett.com;

    rrhodes@airamericaradio.com;tawalker@airamericaradio.com;geoff@radioleft.com;
    contact@pacifica.org;jonsintown@airamericaradio.com;me@glennbeck.com;
    nealznunze@cox.com;brinkerbob@aol.com;howie@wnir.com;colmes@foxnews.com;

    johncorby@clearchannel.com;bsteigerwald@tribweb.com;mitch@albom.com;
    sternshow@howardstern.com;buzzflash@buzzflash.com;kos@dailykos.com;
    mail@democracynow.org;imusshow@yahoo.com;info@jimhightower.com;

    billy.house@arizonarepublic.com;oped@thestar.ca;rob@opednews.com;
    jsmyth@plaind.com;mnaymik@plaind.com;feedback@necn.com;alan@alan.com;
    jnorman@dmreg.com;jconason@observer.com;editorial@progressive.org;

    news@michaelmoore.com;maillist@michaelmoore.com;MMFlint@aol.com;
    media@michaelmoore.com;info@michaelmoore.com;mike@mikemalloy.com;
    fair@fair.org;phart@fair.org;shohauser@fair.org;

    galbraith@mail.utexas.edu;dcorn@thenation.com;info@thenation.com;drshow@wamu.org;
    online@tnr.com;connectionweb@wbur.bu.edu;email@wrn.org;justicetalking@asc.upenn.edu;
    dastor@editorandpublisher.com;Lionel@LionelOnline.com;onthemedia@wnyc.org;

    editorial@flashpoints.net;now@thirteen.org;jridgeway@villagevoice.com;
    plorris@univision.net;dmedrano@telemundo.com;abenitez@univision.net;
    evaldez@univision.net;rvizcon@telemundo.com;

  •  Do None Dare Call It Treason? (4.00)
    That's its name and we know it. That's the only "framing" that matters.
    •  Impeachment. (none)
      This certainly meets the "high crimes and misdemeanors" criteria.

      When someone in the Congress stands up and calls for the impeachment of George W. Bush, then I will know that my country is coming back.

      The Bush administrations's dereliction of duty pre-9/11 is criminal negligence.

      by thinkdouble on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:23:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  please tell me (4.00)
    how does a journalist, a television reporter, a blogger read such information and then say: "no, nothing to discuss here, move along..."  

    Why, in <someone's, surely not god's, name> does such information regularly land with such a thud!!!

    Am I wrong?

    Let's watch the threads tomorrow and see if we're still discussing this post...

  •  thank you Congressman (4.00)
    Bush and all those involved with this illegal war should be prosecuted as war criminals.

    When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.

    by Sargent Pepper on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:11:44 PM PDT

  •  King Abdullah of Jordan (4.00)
    was quoted in a Financial Times story quite some time ago saying that BushCo had told him in July 2002 that he intended to invade Iraq. The story also said Abdullah asked BushCo if there was any way he could change his mind and he replied "no."

    I don't have access to the FT archive any more to pull the story up. It had to be at least a year ago if not more.

    Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has. -- Margaret Mead

    by Cordelia Lear on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:16:21 PM PDT

  •  Eye witnesses (4.00)
    Osama Siblani, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of the "The Arab American" talked about this in a recent interview on Democracy Now. He had this to say of a discussion he had with Bush before he was even the Republican nominee in 2000:

    MY GOODMAN: You met with the President of the United States?  

    OSAMA SIBLANI: Yes, when he was running for election in May of 2000 when he was a governor. He told me just straight to my face, among 12 or maybe 13 republicans at that time here in Michigan at the hotel.  I think it was on May 17, 2000, even before he became the nominee for the Republicans.  He told me that he was going to take him out, when we talked about Saddam Hussein in Iraq. And I said, `Well, you know, I totally disagree with you. You just can't go around taking leaders out of their countries, you know...

    I'd like to know who the 12 or 13 Republicans are who heard this conversation.

    And it's a hard rain's a-gonna fall -- Dylan

    by Rp on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:17:59 PM PDT

    •  RE: taking leaders out of their countries (none)
      Unfortunately,
      the US has acquired a habit of of going around and attempting to take  leaders out of their countries.
      A few examples:

      Congo Kinshasa

      Haiti

      Equatorial Guinea

      Haiti:AGAIN

      and even
      Zimbabwe

      Which is precisely why PR firms and think tanks
       thrive in Washington DC.

      Consider the case of a recently deceased
      gay Republican political operative named R. Gregory Stevens.
      In 1992, Mr. Stevens, 30, went to work for the Republican lobbying powerhouse of Black, Manafort, Stone & Kelly.
      Roger Stone, a former partner, remembered Mr. Stevens as a "very engaging, fun guy to talk to" and a "quintessential staff man, very thorough and focused."
      Early on, Mr. Stevens made clear he wanted to work overseas, Mr. Stone said, and the firm, which played a behind-the-scenes role in elections in Angola, Kenya, Nigeria, Thailand and the Philippines, among other countries, was happy to oblige.
      ....
       "The guy was brilliant," said Neil C. Livingstone, chief executive of GlobalOptions, a risk management and security firm, who worked with Mr. Stevens in various corners of the world and Republican politics. "It takes someone else a week to figure out all the angles, but Greg would walk in and two hours later he'd say, 'This is what's going to happen; this is what we have to do.' "
      Mr. Livingstone said Mr. Stevens had compiled a record of 18 victories for presidents or prime ministers in 26 elections worldwide.

  •  I'm calling Jim McDermott (none)
    my rep. I KNOW he'll sign, so I'll thank him in advance.
  •  "So what?" (4.00)
    The difference between previous info (from Richard Clark, Paul O'Neil, Wesley Clark, etc) and this document, is that the previous info was from people whereas this is about a DOCUMENT.

    as in

    SMOKING GUN

    "Blogging doesn't make it so" - Sen. Hayworth (R) AZ 1/6/2005. Oh yeah?

    by bejammin075 on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:19:18 PM PDT

    •  What's New? (4.00)
      1.  It's a document (not only based on the recollections of people)
      2.  Shows evidence of Bush recruiting allies for a war before war was declared by Congress (at the same time that his public stance was "we haven't made up our mind yet").
      3.  Shows evidence not only of Bush's determination to go to war, but of his conspiring with British to provoke Iraq to initiate war or to fabricate intelligence to justify war.

      "I think it was 'blessed are the cheesemakers.'" ... "it was not to be taken literally. It refers to any manufacturers of dairy products."

      by Rusty Pipes on Mon May 02, 2005 at 04:20:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Are you asking other representatives to join you? (none)
    Please make your letter available for other representatives to sign.  Thank you for doing this.  Does the Pres. ever respond to these types of letters?
  •  The thing that is so ironically horrendous (4.00)
    -- and horrendously ironic -- about all this is that the man who is responsible for this mess, along with all the others he is perpetrating and trying to perpetrate, has no right to be where he is in the first place. We must also, and always, keep clearly in mind how he "won" both of his "elections" to office.

    He has illegally occupied Iraq. But before that, he illegally occupied the United States.

    When is the country, with the media in the front line, going to wake up out of its stupor?

    Thank you, Congressman Conyers, for your courage, honesty, integrity, patriotism, and clearness of mind.

  •  smoking guns (4.00)
    corporate media in australia can't/won't even report on the british election in general, cos the bombshells and revelations keep coming.
    of course our corp media had daily reports on  ukraine/georgia/zimbabwe etc before and after their elections.
    when the sh** started hitting the fan, corp media whores worldwide began the mantra: the british elections are dull, giving themselves an 'excuse' for not mentioning them.
    u would think britain didn't exist if u watched australian news.
    BOYCOTT THE MEDIA.
    btw, anyone who tries to downplay the significance of the bombshells and revelations is also playing games - THESE ARE THE SMOKING GUNS WE'VE SPENT TWO YEARS TRYING TO UNCOVER.
  •  Recall! (4.00)
    Not realistic, but we know this war was based on lies, we know this administration is corrupt beyond comprehension, we know they are waging class warfare, we know they're trampling all over the Constitution, we know they weren't even elected in the first place...I can't believe the American public is really more outraged over the "runaway bride" than the daily outrages that make sane minds reel. It's just what the corporate noise machine is feeding us. How do we grab the mike?  
  •  Thanks Congressman Conyers (4.00)
    It's good to know we have someone like you fighting for the truth in Washington.

    Here's the famous quote by Hermann Goering because it simply cannot be repeated enough:
    "Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

  •  God bless you Mr Conyers (4.00)
    Demand the truth. We're so far in the mud now that it's going to take a miracle and a lot of work to get the truth to come out of this criminal administration.

    Blog this! Visit me at K Street Blues. It will change your life.

    by AggieDemocrat on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:29:27 PM PDT

  •  Mr. Conyers, (4.00)
    I have notified my congressman, Mr. James Walsh of the 25th District, of the circulation of your letter.

    My e-mail to him is as follows:

    "Dear Mr. Walsh,

    Congressman John Conyers is passing around a letter To Mr. Bush, that I urge you, as my congressman, to sign.  It relates to the latest news detailing that the British government and the U.S. Government deliberately trumped up reasons to go to war with Iraq.  In case you haven't seen it, it follows below:

    (The Text of your letter)

    I have notified Mr. Conyers of my sending you this, in case you have any questions for him.

    Sincerely,

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    9/11 was the Neocon's Reichstag fire.

    by Bulldawg on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:30:08 PM PDT

  •  Keep up the great work Congressman Conyers (none)
    Don't let the bastards get you down.  

    Let's take back our country.  

  •  hope (none)
    Thank you is so small.  Many of us feel our country has been stolen.  Thank you for your work and Please let us know the many ways we can help.  Maybe we'll win yet!!!  
  •  A stain on our country... (4.00)
    This war is a stain on our country, as the leaked memo confirms.  What adds insult to injury, however, is that no one in the press seems to care.  To the extent it's been covered at all, it has been treated as a small story about Tony Blair's electoral troubles, instead of the national scandal it should be here.  Ho hum.  Abu what?

    I hope Rep. Conyers and others can push this to the fore.

    "When the intellectual history of this era is finally written, it will scarcely be believable." -- Noam Chomsky

    by scorponic on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:42:51 PM PDT

  •  "Honorable" GW is not likely to reply (none)
    I would recommend proposing a congressional inquiry of some sort into this matter.  These are very serious charges, and when taking into account the persistency of the Bush administration to (falsely) convince the public that Iraq was an imminent threat to our society, they imply nothing less than treason.

    Not to mention the billions of American tax dollars given to the Vice-President Cheney's former employer to carry out a war fabricated by his own administration.  

    This is clearly the unjust extortion of the American tax payer, and deserves further investigation.

    then ends do not justify the means, rather, the means dictate and determine the out come.

    by chinkoPelinke on Mon May 02, 2005 at 02:49:23 PM PDT

  •  we should be so lucky (none)
    as to find anyone who cares. I can't say I'm even remotely surprised. So many of us thought the attack on Iraq sounded like it was based on a trumped up bunch of bullshit - at the time. So hell-effing-o to people who didn't realize it including various members of the senate who voted to support it - but I think they knew exactly what was going on. We're average people, not even involved. If the people knew it didn't add up....

    The current administration makes Nixon's look like Mr. Roger's Neighborhood. It's like nothing matters any more, once you shatter the outer boundaries of decency....

  •  Haven't you heard? (none)
    Freedom is on the march! We had our "accountability moment" in November! Mandate! Political capital!

    I think I'm going to go throw up now...

  •  Thank you, John Conyers! (none)
    You are the Man of the Hour!  Hour after hour...  Thank you!
  •  Congressman Conyers-- (none)
    My heartfelt thanks for your initiative on this issue--you have done and continue to do so much on behalf of Americans concerned for the state of our democracy, that I felt my request yesterday in another of your diaries that you and your colleagues follow up on the BBC disclosure was somewhat grumpy and ungrateful--but today I feel "heard," and more hopeful there are those in congress who share both my alarm and my priorities in terms of addressing the corruption of this administration.  Let us know what we can do from our end to get this into the public consciousness--and to keep it there. Also, know that there are many of us who will try our best to watch your back. Again, thank you so much for this.

    ...the White House will be adorned by a downright moron...H.L. Mencken

    by bibble on Mon May 02, 2005 at 03:21:03 PM PDT

  •  If Only the Cowardly pResident Had to Answer (4.00)
    Can't you just see Congessman Conyers peppering GWB with question after question on all of it?  His whole rotten record of scandalous lies?  His staggering abuse of the United States?

    After ten minutes the chimperor would be stammering and stuttering, covered in drop-sweat, frantically groping for an ear-piece that wasn't there; for some electronic lifeline to Karl or Uncle Dick Cheney to tell him what to say to this mean man asking him about his war crimes, his treasonous acts, his soulless debasing of the trust of the American people?

    If only there were justice in this world, what a sight it would be.

    •  Interesting question... (none)
      While I'm sure this letter will go right into W's trash bin, if the Dems do well enough in the 2006 elections, is it conceivable they could garner enough votes for an official investigate? I mean if we can spend millions to investigate a hummer, why not this unethical behavior?
    •  It's "flop sweat" (none)
      Easily confused with the symptoms of cocaine and/or alcohol abuse.

      However, I fully expect the individual to make a joke of it, similar to the one videoed when he went under the desk in the Oval Office to look for WMDs. You'll get James Baker, III pracing around calling it all "political differences".

      Those "political differences" on which he so smugly relies for his benefit, however, are those which are produced by a firm dedication to crime and crimminal abuse of the Law and due process.

  •  Thank you, Congressman (none)
    I just wanted say thank you for all the work you have done, and continue to do, on behalf of the American people and in support of our Constitution.  

    I live in your district.  I can't begin to tell you how grateful and proud I am to have you as a representative.  

    You give me hope that some day soon we will have our country back.

  •  Troubling Questions (none)
    Regarding The Integrity Of The Bush Administration

    Yes, Mr. Congressman, you are absiolutely correct. Troubling questions, indeed. Well done.

    Thank you for your superlative on-going efforts on behalf of the American people and our democracy. Thank you very much.

  •  In this upside down reality (none)
    we are being forced to live in, it is good to know Sir, that you are with us and for us in this fight. I among many here, knew well in advance of the war that Bush was lying and that the war was inevitable, and it is a mind numbing realization when you come to finally understand that nothing is going to stop it, that no matter how many documents, memo's and lies are revealed, that this President continues to be given a pass by the media and the inability of many Americans to see outside their own naive beliefs in the inherent goodness of this country. I am counting on you, as you count on us, to continue fighting to bring light and truth back to American discourse and exercise of justice.
  •  Another Michigander here (none)
    who is very grateful for and proud of your efforts.

    I did hear about the leaked document on NPR news today (but nothing about Runaway Bride, so maybe it's apples and oranges of sorts).

    Thanks, Congressman Conyers, and keep it up!

    kzoo leftie

    •  Has it yet emerged that (none)
      the "Runaway Bride" is anorexic and another Terri Schindler-Schiavo waiting to happen? Can a compassionnate blogger get an interview with her?

      Dems could own the "Life" argument. If they only had heart. All you really need is heart.

  •  Lather, Rinse, Repeat (none)
    the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy

    But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy

    But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy

    It's unconscionable that these people are still running the country. Seriously. By any reasonable measure, these people should not still be running this country.

    And I don't mean impeachment. I mean that EVERY American should be outraged by this. Screaming in the streets about what our government has done.

    It's a sad, sad commentary on us.

    At least there's a few sane people here at dKos.

    And some in our Congress, too. Thanks, Congressman Conyers.

  •  Bush and Blair should BOTH be impeached. (4.00)
    It doesn't get any simpler than that: they are both, through their collusion in this illegal "regime change", guilty of directing their respective governments to commit war crimes.

    Of course (sighs) it'll never happen---we all know that.  Blair is heading for a record third term, and he'll probably crush his Tory opponents in the bargain.  What a shame that the British equivalent of Bill Clinton has turned out to be such a staggering disappointment.  

    OTOH, this is truly bi-partisan ... a guy for whom I'd have probably voted (if I were English) gets no free pass on this, either.

  •  Impeachable Offence! (none)
    This is an impeachable offence committed by the President and a gross abuse and criminal perversion of public office. The blood of 1600 of our own children lie in waste as cannon fodder because of George Walker Bush's fraud and lies. The blood of 100,000 innocent men, woman, and children lie in the streets and sands of Iraq on account of this barbarism. The once admired United States have been turned into the greatest purveyor of terror, destruction, and torure on the planet. It is time for the Democratic Party to stand up as a unified block and say enough is enough. The Iraq war has been a horrofying display of needless human carnage and slaughter. The war is a total fiasco wholly without merit. It is time for the Democratic Party to act like an opposition party to this criminal fraud and murder. George Walker Bush is a war criminal and history will regard him as such. He should be removed from office by any means possible.
    •  Democratic Party? (none)
      Why not all Americans? Why does this have to be a "party" thing. I don't get it! It's a crime against all Americans Democrat, Republican, Independent.
      •  The difference is ... (4.00)
        Huge!

        George W. Bush lied to Congress, and lied to the public, and lied to the United Nations and lied to the world.  He did so knowingly in a calculated, premeditated fashion.

        The Democrats who voted for the authorization of force assumed that force would be used only as a "last resort".   In other words, only if the U.N. Inspectors turned up real evidence of an impending threat.

        Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Rice-Powell-Tont Blair all did something very different.

        They masterminded fraudulent reasons to start a crimal bloody invasion on a helpless country and all the while marshalled forward fake and phony evidence and shameless fearmongering rhetoric by design in order to dupe both Congress and the public into thinking it was "necessary".

        The responsibility is theirs.

        I agree, however, the Democrats should have been 'smarter' than they were. They should have known, first of all, not to ever trust the Bush-Cheney cabal on any middle-east related issue given their considerable loyalities and relationships with Oil & Energy monopolists.   They also should have thought back to the days of John Kennedy who resisted pressure to launch an invasion of Cuba, during the "Cuban Missile Crisis", when there were, in fact, real WMDs (of the nuclear kind) right next door to us (we had photos), and, to his credit, was able to instead steer the country into a peaceful resolution with no blood being spilled.  That's what a real "President" does.

        However, you do have to separate the perpetrators of a crime and those who are simply passive followers of false information and caved into a rubics cube of human carnage that they did not even imagine.

        The blood is squarely on the hands of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice etc.  This is their phony holocaust and bloodbath.  They are the ones whose heads should be hung.

        •  hanging's too good for 'em (none)

          I know that's not what you meant but i couldn't resist.

          Hey - i just had a crazy idea for a reality show (NOT that i normally give a damn for that particular brand of entertainment).

          So, we impeach Bush & Cheney and lock 'em up together with Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Saddam, and heck, Bolton as well. Then we watch their crazy antics as they bicker about who's responsible for fucking the whole thing up. What a whacky show that'd be!

  •  Thank you, sir, for your courage (none)
    This is one of those days that makes me proud as hell to be from Michigan.
  •  Dear Senator Reid, (none)
    Again and again, thank you for continuing to pursue the current administration for their devious and devastating actions. It appears that they are relentless and without conscience in their attempt for absolute power. I want my America back, and I am grateful for your persistence and courage.

    I *gladly* donated to ePluribus Media. Support citizen journalism!

    by nancelot on Mon May 02, 2005 at 04:50:07 PM PDT

  •  Congressman Conyers (none)
    Several of us noticed this over the weekend and couldn't believe that it could fall so completely through the cracks.

    Could it be timing, again?  The House must act on this and raise the issue so forcefully that the media is shamed into doing its job.

    WE are with you and thank you for fighting every day as hard as you do.  You need help.

    Tell this community what you need from us, and you know you have another source of relentless, tireless workers.

    Speak truth to power.

    PoliticalStrategy

  •  Thank you Congressman Conyers, (none)
    Thank you so much for everything that you are doing.  Words can't describe how much you are appreciated.  Please let us know if we can help you in any way.
  •  I am so happy you are acting (none)
    Congressman.  This revelation demands attention, and I trust that you will see that it gets it.  I'm also glad that Kossacks are rallying in support of action.  I was writing up a call to action while this Diary appeared; I just posted it a few minutes ago.  It is imperative that all people of good will become involved in holding our government accountable, especially now that Rep. Conyers is showing the way.  Let's do everything possible to build a groundswell of support.
  •  I think our priorities until Thursday (4.00)
    should be convincing the British to vote LibDem instead of Labour. I think a Blair setback, even if Labour still has a majority, would help us a lot. The media wouldn't be able to ignore a bad election for Blair.
    •  More to the point (4.00)
      The Labour party won't ignore a bad election - in Britian the party can and will fire the leader - remember what happened to Thatcher - went for a jaunt to Europe and by the time she returned to England she was out of a job.

      'Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it'. - GBS

      by stevej on Mon May 02, 2005 at 05:53:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sent an e-mail (none)
    to my congressman, Bill Pascrell.  Have you sent one to yours?
  •  Bolton is involved, as well (4.00)
    Bolton was one of the signatories to a letter sent by PNAC to President Clinton on January 26, 1998.

    Here are some choice quotes from Bolton re WMDs:

    Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq's procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand.
    John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
    Speech to the Hudson Institute - 11/1/2002

    We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program.
    John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
    Speech to the Hudson Institute - 11/1/2002

    John Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control, said that whether Saddam's regime actually possessed weapons of mass destruction "isn't really the issue." "The issue I think has been the capability that Iraq sought to have ... WMD programs," Bolton said.
    John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
    Interview with The Associated Press - 9/4/2003

    www.lunaville.org

  •  Misappropriation of Funds. (4.00)
    To the Honorable Representative Conyers:

    The document indicates that there was planning and actions (spikes in activity) in advance of the authorization by Congress for the war in Iraq. This implies the expenditure of funds by the direction of Administration prior to those funds being authorized by Congress.

    In addition to the questions you have asked I also think it is important for the Congress to follow up on the Misappropriation of Funds implied by this document. The Congress and the people need to know if any of this funding was diverted from legitimate military and anti-terror activities. Perhaps the funding should have been spent on armor for troops going into harms way instead of drumming up reasons to send them into harms way.

  •  Can I sign it too? (none)

    "Deeply Blue in a Blood Red State"

    by Fernando Poo on Mon May 02, 2005 at 06:36:37 PM PDT

  •  Thank you, Representative Conyers (none)
    for keeping up this long, hard, thankless slog.
  •  Another great moment for one of the greats (none)
    Looking forward to hearing the results--especially if any Repubs turn this down out of hand.

    Planning to email my congresswoman, Sue Myrick about this--it might be a waste of time since she's nothing more than a DeLay/Bush shill, but it's worth a try to see if she has an attack of morality.

    •  My email to Myrick (4.00)
      Dear Congresswoman Myrick,

      As you are probably aware, a story in yesterday's (London) Times spells out evidence that the American and British governments had already committed to attacking Iraq well before the president received authorization from Congress.

      The memo is viewable here:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

      Congressman John Conyers is circulating a letter to the president addressing this memo.  This is very serious, and I urge you to put partisan differences aside and sign it.  I've included the text of the letter below:

      (Congressman Conyers' letter)

  •  It is soooo good to see you here... (none)
    and it is wonderful that you stop by often... I was surprised myself that I had to hear about this first on dkos this morning in C&J... but at least when it shows up here it goes elsewhere...

    Thanks for keeping it alive... let us know how to help...

    Act as if it were impossible to fail. - Dorothea Brande

    by crkrjx on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:01:01 PM PDT

  •  Congressman Conyers (none)
    Do you have a website or PAC with info for us rank & filers?  Things like calls to action, fundraising, important, urgent issues.

    I'm signed on to Senator Boxer's PAC, & I'd be proud to support you as well.

    I'm very lucky to have George Miller and Barbara Boxer representing me & my neighbors.  You give me hope that our country is not lost.

    It's good to have Fighting Democrats in DC.

    Keep shining the Light & speaking Truth.  The current Republican power grab is a disgrace to our nation.  They  are proving daily that they don't give a damn about America.  They care only for Corporate Crooks.

    Thank you for your courage, stamina, & heart.

    A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future. Leonard Bernstein

    by x on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:07:48 PM PDT

  •  Amen... (4.00)
    Unfortunately, the mainstream media in the United States was too busy with wall-to-wall coverage of a "runaway bride" to cover a bombshell...
    Amen...

    They don't even have to raise the terror warning level these days. The media appears to just know it should look away from anything bad for the Bush administration...

    The Shapeshifter's Blog -- Politics, Philosophy, and Madness!

    by Shapeshifter on Mon May 02, 2005 at 07:22:25 PM PDT

  •  John C onyers (none)
    This man makes me wish that I was African American.  This may sound unusual to most of you, but if I were African American I would be stronger and fighting harder.
  •  18 USC 1001 (4.00)
    Seems to me high officials in the administration are guilty of violations under paragraphs 2 or 3 or both, below.

    Time to end the corruption!!!

    Will anyone enforce the law in this once 'nation of laws'?

    "Statements or entries generally

    a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any

        matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or

        judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly

        and willfully -

            (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or

          device a material fact;

            (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent

          statement or representation; or

            (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the

          same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent

          statement or entry;

        shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5

        years, or both."

  •  Thanx Con. Conyers (none)
    We need to follow the Ukraine example. March on Washington.
  •  Thank you, Congressman (none)
    I'll be urging Rep. Fattah (my Congressman) to sign onto your letter first thing in the morning. Assuming he hasn't already signed it, of course.

    [The National Government] regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life. -- Hitler, 1933

    by abw on Mon May 02, 2005 at 08:38:56 PM PDT

  •  I Work In The Mainstream Press (4.00)
    ...and I posted the Independent article on the bulletin board here at work - I don't know if anyone noticed, it certainly didn't make it into the broadcast.

    There are some of us in the NEWS who still believe the public deserves to know the truth...

    Others believe the public are a bunch of dopes who will watch whatever sensational nonsense is put up there...

    PLEASE CONGRESSMAN - focus on bringing back the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE so we can go back to covering REAL news and REAL ISSUES that matter to the GREAT PEOPLE of our GREAT LAND.

  •  You are the king of pointed inquiries. (none)
    Seriously, ever since your series of letters to Ken Blackwell, I have been a big fan.  So polite... yet not polite.  I love it.
  •  Two words (none)
    Impeachable offenses.

    sign the petition at http://www.impeachbush.org

    by DrKate on Mon May 02, 2005 at 09:19:48 PM PDT

  •  Thank you Sir. (none)
    Your diligence and effort is greatly appreciated. Since this memo came to light a few days ago we have been following the (lack of) story and hoping that someone would pick it up here in the United States and run with it. You, the wonderful Rep. Louise Slaughter, and the others you work with are greatly appreciated and counted on by us to make our voices heard.

    Thank you.

    "We have the power. Sorry if you don't like the fact that we've decided to use it." Posted by Jeremey*in*MS at February 3, 2005 01:59 PM

    by Andrew C White on Mon May 02, 2005 at 09:51:41 PM PDT

  •  It's matter of (none)
    protocol to refer to memembers of the govt as the "Honorable..so and so"...In Mr. Conyers case the title fits.

    Thank you Mr. Congressman for being a voice for those of us who feel we have none.

    GWB will pry my 19 year old son from my cold dead fingers.

    by Momagainstthedraft on Mon May 02, 2005 at 09:52:23 PM PDT

  •  Thank you, (none)
    Rep. Conyers, for being a true patriot.

    Your courage will spread and affect others. If not the House and Senate, the Republic, which is made up of the people, bred by the Constitution of the United States of America.

  •  Don't Forget the Greg Palast Story too (none)

    posted here on my blog
  •  Another breathtaker! (none)
    Every one of your diaries is so fierce! It's truly exhilarating!

    Yours is truly "Speak softly and carry a big stick" politics. You are one of our warrior heros in the Congress. We will all "will go far" with our warriors in the vanguard.

    "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

    by Glinda on Mon May 02, 2005 at 10:41:44 PM PDT

  •  Not a word was heard... (none)
    ...coming from my TV or radio about this topic.  This is the kind of thermonuclear information I was hoping for all along...and nothing seems to be coming of it.  

    Double U.  Tee.  Eff!

  •  not a forgery... (none)
    don't get confused.  the alleged forged memo of lord goldsmith's has nothing whatsoever to do with the Times' story on the july 2002 meeting.

    however, what if the goldsmith memo is NOT a forgery, which perhaps it isn't? it would just add more fuel to the fire.  only "The Scotsman" initially reported on this memo goldsmith says is forged, tho other media in britain did receive it.

    THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE LEAKS IN BRITAIN AND THE JULY 2002 MEETING IS ABSOLUTELY, TERRIFYINGLY REAL. IMPEACH THEM ALL.

  •  Congressman PLEASE (none)
    After today you really should be called SENATOR CONYERS...
    Thank you so much for everything you've done for all of us.

    "We are all worms. But I do believe I am a glow-worm" Winston Churchill

    by Duke1676 on Mon May 02, 2005 at 11:11:44 PM PDT

  •  Did you ever notice letters don't work? (4.00)
    I suggest Democratic Congressmen and Senators stand on the steps of the Capitol and announce this to the world at a press conference. It would force the media to cover the story. Nothing prevents the Democrats from going directly to the people in this way. With the exception of Mr. Conyers and a few others, our party fails us by adding to the deafening silence and Mr. Conyers isolated courage and determination only make their moral cowardice more glaringly apparent.

    Darkness washed over the Dude...darker than a black steer's tookus on a moonlight prairie night...there was no bottom

    by moon in the house of moe on Mon May 02, 2005 at 11:44:52 PM PDT

    •  This is a great idea! Perhaps while doing so (none)
      submitting a list of all the unanswered questions that Rep Conyer's has asked to the powers that be within the last 6 months to the media covering it too. I'd be interested in seeing the list, its getting longer and longer.
      •  "Unanswered Questions" ... (none)
        should be a mantra for the forces of positive change on the Left, Right, and all around.  Especially the questions neither party OR the press wants to answer (with an obvious exception for the few brave Congressmen and women asking these questions).  
  •  Thank you, Congressman Conyers! (none)
    It is so encouraging to see you and other members of Congress taking a stand against the numerous lies and misrepresentations this administration has put our nation through.  Keep up the good work!

    "I like your Christ; I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." - Mohandas Gandhi

    by htasca on Tue May 03, 2005 at 12:55:52 AM PDT

  •  At last (none)
    All those damn diaries where I wanted the relevance of what was happening in the UK to be used politically in the US.

    Congressman Conyers, I salute you. Many. many thanks.

    I now need to get your letter today to the Britsh media. Fast. Anyone help on getting out a Press Release?

    We build the pressure on both sides of the Atlantic - each action in each country fuelling the other. The purpose? To stop it ever happening again. The short=term objective? Political capital and embarrassment for Bush/Blair.

    Again, thank you Congressman!

    New European Times, the forum where US and European Kossacks meet.

    by Welshman on Tue May 03, 2005 at 03:47:33 AM PDT

  •  Bravo Congressman Conyers (none)
    Thank you for your leadership now and on so many vital issues.  
    I do hope many of your House and Senate colleagues will want to co-sign your letter.
    I want to point out though, that I believe the UK Foreign  Secretary, to which the July 2002 memo refers, was Robin Cook rather than Jack Straw.  Robin Cook was foreign Secretary until March 2003, when he resigned from the Government, due to his concerns about the war in Iraq, and specifically his view that it was not a legal war according to UK law.  Perhaps Mr Cook is also the individual referred to in the memo as "C", who reported following a meeting in Washington that war was being seen there as inevitable.  
    Mr Cook is a man of conscience, as you are, Congressman Conyers.  I think correctly identifying him, particularly in light of his subsequent resignation, strengthens the point you are making.
  •  So many comments to respond to (4.00)
    My thanks to all of you for your comments to this post.  A few responses:

    First, many of you have opted to contact your Representative and request that he or she sign on to this letter.  That is more helpful than you know.  One commenter stated that, if I am the only signatory on the letter, it is "just a drop in the ocean".  Not sure I agree but it doesn't really matter.  I am not alone and with your help many, many Members of Congress will sign on to the letter and many, many media contacts will hear about this report.  One strategy of the right wing is to make you feel powerless and that your efforts do not matter.  You must not and cannot allow that to happen.

    A corollary to that is the view, reflected by many commenters, that this is "old news".  I agree that many of us have known and believed for a long, long time that the case for this war was a deliberate lie.  The worst mistake in politics, however, is to assume that everyone else knows what you know.  Many, many of our fellow Americans have not come to this realization yet.  We need to continue to get this information out to them.

    What makes this different is the source.  In the past, when others -- including former Administration officials -- made similar allegations, the response was an attack on the messenger.  While these attacks were ultimately ineffective in denting the credibility of these whistleblowers, they did serve their purpose: to muddy the waters and confuse the issue long enough so that the message never really got through.  However, the credibility of the source of this information in this instance is beyond dispute.

    (I would add that one commenter, in good faith, posted a now-discredited article falsely claiming that this document is a forgery.  The Blair governement has verified that this document is real.  The right wing bloggers can put away their IBM selectrics and arcane manuals of typefacing.)

    Second, a number of commenters have questioned whether I (or other Democrats) will press ahead with these matters.  I am committed to taking this wherever it leads, and taking whatever action it requires.

    Obviously, what I -- and other Democrats -- can do is limited by the fact we are the Congressional minority.  In this vein, one commenter suggested we should therefore run in the midterm elections by making a promise that we will investigate and get to the bottom of these matters.  I completely agree.  If I am reelected (I do not take that for granted) and the Democrats take back the House, I will be the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and I do everything in my power restore checks and balances, and accountability to our government.

    Third, a few commented on my use of the term "the Honorable" in reference to Mr. Bush.  I do that out of respect for the office and my country, not any one man.  A similar comment revolved around whether I should use the word President with regard to Mr. Bush because of the extremely questionable nature of his two election "victories".  My thoughts on this, I think, are well known and, if not, I'll let the quotation marks in the previous sentence do the talking.

    Fourth, one commenter asked about whether I have a PAC.  I greatly appreciate the inquiry.  However, I do not want to turn this into a fundraising solicitation on my part.  The issues we are discussing are far too important.  I hope it seems appropriate to direct this commenter to my campaign website (www.johnconyers.com).  It has all of the information you need.  While you are there, go to my blog (also at www.conyersblog.us), to keep up with what I am doing.

    •  I Put Conyers' Letter on Petitions On Line (none)
      I put Congressman Conyers' letter concerning the case of the Bush/Blair Iraq War Agreement on Petitions on Line.  Once he confirms by email its good to go.

      There are something like 320 posts to this diary, did every single one of these people contact their representative in Congress?  I certainly hope so.

      Has the email-the-media campaign got results yet?  So far I can only find the Conyers' letter on Raw Story.

    •  Thank you (none)
      For your hard work, dedication, and service to this country in the US House of Representatives.

      I respect you for speaking out on vital issues and giving us hope.

      We choose hope over despair; possibilities over problems, optimism over cynicism.-John Edwards

      by wishingwell on Fri May 06, 2005 at 10:05:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  UK (4.00)
    Your letter is also being sent to all the UK newspapers.

    Fuelling the issue one side of the Atlantic fuels the other.

    Thank you Congressman.

    New European Times, the forum where US and European Kossacks meet.

    by Welshman on Tue May 03, 2005 at 04:29:08 AM PDT

  •  Call to UK Kossacks (none)
    A request for help in getting this letter as widely circulated as possible is being made here

    New European Times, the forum where US and European Kossacks meet.

    by Welshman on Tue May 03, 2005 at 04:42:07 AM PDT

  •  This should be finishing off.. (none)
    the political careers of Blair and Bush. We'll see where it leads, and I will contact my representatives.
  •  I don't know what we would do without (none)
    you and Boxer!  It scares me to think about it.  Thank you so much for sharing your letters here, it keeps my faith alive that we can do something in 2006 and start really cleaning up some of this mess!  God Bless you for what you are doing for my children and grandchildren, keeping their nation afloat in its hour of need.
  •  People in Denial (none)
    It happened the way it happened because too many Americans are happy to let their govt. make immoral choices that make them personally more prosperous.  I think we need to cut the screen away so people can't hide behind ignorance of govt true reasons for war.  You want to drive the RAM 3500 truck and go to war to keep the oil flowing, then dammit, take the moral, ethical responsibility for it.  You ARE the govt.
    •  To a great extent... (none)
      I agree with this. Americans know what they want to know, and are otherwise in denial. The media reports what it does because those who watch it would rather be entertained. Hence, you have endless speculation on a bride who choked at the altar.

       But remember, there are millions of adult Americans who don't watch the mainstream media. Many don't follow the news at all, which is another form of denial, but many of these people are working parents, and place news very low in priority.

      Many who don't watch the media are like myself, and strive to create, and are creating, alternative forms of media.

      We're dropping the pretense of objectivity and sharing information and opinions instead. Much healtheir, than the mainstream media.

  •  Senators, too? (none)
    sending emails like mad to media (thanks for that awesome list above) and to my rep. Bernie will sign, I'm sure. Do you want Senate signatures, or is that a whole separate deal?
  •  Fairness doctrine-misinformation campaign (none)
    I agree with Congressman Conyers that the greatest mistake is assuming that eveyrone knows waht you do. Robert F. Kenney Jr. has a great piece in the current issue of Vanity Fair arguing that the mis-information campaign waged by Republican operatives was successful in losing the election for Kerry because the MAJORITY of people voting for Bush thought that he supported many things that, in fact, he did not. Kennedy reviews that PIPA surveys which came out last year showing that, if people had had accurate information, they would have voted differently. They BELIEVED all of the reasons Bush put forth for going to war with Iraq. The reason this memo is important is that it shows those people that he lied.
  •  My Congressman doesn't have an email address (none)
    Or so I was told when I contacted Congressman Dent's (PA-15) local office to ask for it.  When I expressed disbelief, and insisted that there had to be a way to email somebody in his office, the woman I was talking to hemmed and hawed, and finally told me that I could find a form on his website that would allow me to send comments.  The problem is that his website is exceedlingly vague about how contact them except by phone (you have to go through the 'send me email updates' page to find a comments form.  How sad.  Somehow Dent has convinced voters that he really cares about them--but don't try to contact him!
  •  Contact Congress Through Congress.org (4.00)
    You can contact your representatives in Congress, and every single member, if you're willing to take the time... through Congress.org.
    It just took me about an hour to contact the members of the Foreign Relations Committee.  When Congress.org asks you where you're from just remember, "When e-mailing Rome.... use a Roman address."

    I just Googled the 4,500 sources in the news... and nothing comes up for Conyers' letter.  This is also do-able for anyone who is patient and willing.  Let's get to work!

     Attached Image


    Congressman John Conyers, Jr.
    669 Federal Building
    231 W. Lafayette
    Detroit, MI 48226
    http://www.johnconyers.com  

  •  Recommended (none)
    I hope the typos didn't go to Prez in the original.  I also stumbled over, "a variety of varying reasons..."

    Oh well, he'll get the point.  We're after him.  He who lives by WMD dies by WMD.

    Sack the neocons, America's going blue.

    Bring home the troops, cut DOD appropriations, pay back the trust fund, rejoin Kyoto, crash-cut oil imports by 100% in 2 years.

  •  You are fantastic, Mr Conyers. (none)
    You are my absolute hero.  Everytime I find myself wishing somebody would DO something - you do it.

    Can't you run for President?

    From a British admirer.

  •  I called Nancy Pelosi's office (none)
    Directed the intern to this page, asked that he bring it to her attention and urged that she sign on to the letter.

    Thank you Congressman Conyers!

  •  Thank You Rep Conyers (none)
    You are a courageous man. I have emailed all the media outlets I can think of to get them to cover this. We all need people like you in our government, you give me a tiny bit of hope. Joy Williams Santa Cruz
  •  Thank you (none)
    However -- and this is not directed at Mr. Conyers of course -- didn't we know this shit back in 2002?  Didn't most congressional Democrats roll over and play dead at the time?  

    I can only be so pissed at Bush.  After all, didn't we know what we were getting when he appointed almost every signatory of the PNAC letters to top Pentagon and State positions?

    Congressional Democrats, however, are the source of my never-abating rage for foregoing the only opportunity to air the doubts about attacking Iraq while dissent was still deemed appropriate by the public (before the troops are in harm's way).  And if anyone who voted for the war resolution ever called for articles of impeachment against Bush, I hope that they'd tender their resignations immediately thereafter.

  •  Here's my letter to my representative (none)
    Jim Leach (R-IA)

    Dear Representative Leach:

    Your colleage, John Conyers (D-MI), will be sending a letter he has drafted to President Bush.  He will be asking you to sign it, and I encourage you to do so.

    Representative Leach, your ethics have never been questioned, even by those who disagree with you.  As an ethical person, I assume that you expect nothing less from others, including the President of the United States.

    You tried to get President Bush to ask former presidents Carter, Bush and Clinton to go to the middle east on a peace mission.  Your efforts were rebuffed.  

    Bravely, you voted against authorizing the war with Iraq.  As has become crystal clear, especially with the release of the memo regarding the British Prime Minister's meeting of July 23, 2002, the entire world was misled -- no -- was lied to by the President and members of his administration.  It is time that he be held accountable for these lies, especially before he commits our military to attacking Iran this summer.  

    I sincerely hope that you'll sign Representative Conyer's letter, and help put a stop to the numerous lies being told to the American people, the world, and yes, even you.

    Thank you for your consideration.  

  •  Fox news was banging the war drum (none)
    last week on a show.  Can't remember the name.
    But it looks like Chimp is getting meat hungry again.
  •  Update (none)
    I began circulating this letter for signatures on the House floor this evening.  I was able to personally ask fifteen to twenty colleagues to sign on to the letter.  Every single one of them signed the letter.  I will be giving this another push in the morning and I expect many more will sign on.  Thanks for your help and continued efforts to bring this matter to the attention of your Representative.
    •  Hurray! (none)
      Dear Rep. Conyers, Terrific news! Thank you! Can you post which Representatives decided to sign on? I sent a letter to about 500 emails in the media today, so hopefully they will start covering this today: To all of you, Rep. John Conyers has sent a letter to the President and to his colleagues that discusses a Leak to London Times. He posted to the Daily Kos at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/2/16258/65970 and it has all the links to both the leak, and the story about the leak. This is a critically important story and reveals plans by Bush and Blair to create justifications for going to war with Iraq....ie, contrive it. It is journalists' responsibility to tell the truth and to investigate to be a balance against abuses of power, ie, the 4th branch.... Please investigate this. The American and British people were lied to, and this could very well be treasonous. Too many people have died because of this war. All Saddam was doing was building castles and writing a romance novel. He wasn't going to do ANYTHING to us. There was no WMD and Bush and Blair knew that and then lied to the US, the UN and the British people. The Iraqis knew this. Please do your jobs...people are dying. Joy Williams Santa Cruz, CA Thank you for all you do Representative Conyers, you are a true American Hero! You may be our most dedicated Patriot. Sincerely Joy Williams Santa Cruz, CA
    •  Thank you Congressman Conyers (none)
      I have just sent an email to my Congressman, Earl Blumenauer (Oregon), and have encouraged him to sign your letter.

      I'll hope you'll start a new diary once you have all the signatures, so we know whom to write and thank.

      Your efforts, and hard work (not the Bush kind of "hard work") never cease to amaze me.

      Thank you again.

    •  That's Great News, Congressman!!! (none)
      Thanks for keeping us posted.  Take care of yourself.... we need your kind of leadership!!
    •  Your actions Sir continue to bring me hope (none)
      that I am still part of this democracy.

      Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither. (Paraphrasing B. Franklin)

      by p a roberson on Wed May 04, 2005 at 04:11:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You are a true American hero, Mr. Conyers! (none)
    Thank you for repeatedly speaking out and taking a stand for what's right.

    "Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." Rudyard Kipling

    by MamaBear on Tue May 03, 2005 at 07:26:05 PM PDT

  •  You are so awesome, Congressman but (none)
    you always only make me wonder, WTF is wrong with the REST of the Democrats? EVERY Democrat should be signing this letter. EVERY DAMN ONE! Even those who voted for this frickin' disaster. Some of the fools actually BELIEVED Bush. They should be even more pissed than the ones who already knew what a lying SOS he was/is.  Anyway, thank you Congressman for carrying on the brave lonely fight. You will be vindicated one day. Meanwhile you give us hope.
  •  Where is the "Liberal" Press? (none)
    Thank you Congressman Conyers. I emailed your letter to my Congressman (Wynn).

    I have been following this story with a mixture of disgust and cynical disbelief.

    Where is the story in the "Liberal" press.  I have not seen in the Washington Post and have not heard it on any broadcast.  The only place I've heard it is on Air America.

    This should be screaming front page headlines.  We need to stop being spoon fed stories about Michael Jackson and runaway brides.  I flipped through the channels yesterday morning just in time to see those bozos on "Fox & Friends" cutoff a discussion about Social Security so that the moderator could ask the republican talking head to change to s "serios subject" and describe how Laura Bush's performance at the White House Press Corps dinner humanized the President.

    I still have not gotten over my anger about all the softballs thrown at the President during last weeks press conference.  Why didn't someone ask him to explain why he should not have to answer about the final report that vindicated the UN Inspectors and the IAEA.  Why didn't someone ask him why we are retaliating against the UN and the IAEA for being right?

    Are there any real reporters left out there and if so, can they compete with party hacks and male escorts for a press pass?

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining" - LBJ

    •  no kidding (none)
      And I had to call Mike Malloy to even get it coverage on Air America.... Go figure. Most important news of the day and it get's ignored. Can we say ORWELL?
    •  Where's The Media? (none)
      This story is HUGE in the UK where Blair is up for re-election tomorrow.  It is virtually non-existent in the US, and that includes the Blogosphere.  It is enormously difficult to get through to the press, including letters to the Editor.

      Two of the best articles I found are:

      How to legitimise a war in 10 days
      May 2, 2005, Pretoria News

      and

      Tony Blair Is A War Criminal

      If anyone else finds coverage, would you please post it in a reply here?  Thanks.

      •  Tony Blair Is A War Criminal (none)
        sorry, try this link instead.

        Tony Blair Is A War Criminal

        •  Bush/Blair War Criminals (none)
          Sorry, again, it's the first link that works.

          From her conclusion:

          "* Blair knew in March 2002 that the attack on Iraq was illegal, and has known this ever since.

          • Blair was ordered to attack Iraq by Bush in April 2002.

          • Blair and his inner circle arranged to set up Saddam in July 2002.

          • When he couldn't get a UN resolution, Blair arranged for both American and British pressure to be placed on Lord Goldsmith, until he was so worn down that he issued an opinion written by Blair's inner circle.

          • Blair lied about the state of the legal advice he had been given, and refused to hear advice he knew he wouldn't like.

          • Both Blair and Bush have consistently lied in claiming that the war was not inevitable.

          Tony Blair is a liar and a war criminal."
  •  From Conyer's Staff (none)
    The Congressman saw your inquiry on dailykos asking what members had signed his letter.  He asked me to respond to you directly.  The following is the most current list:

    *John Conyers, Jr.
    *Sheila Jackson Lee
    *Jerrold Nadler
    *Barney Frank
    *Carolyn C. Kilpatrick
    *Barbara Lee
    *Stephanie Tubbs Jones
    *Diane E. Watson
    *Ike Skelton
    *Debbie Wasserman Schultz
    *Peter DeFazio
    *Michael Michaud
    *Ed Markey
    *Earl Blumenauer
    *Maurice Hinchey
    *Tammy Baldwin
    *Dennis J. Kucinich
    *John W. Olver
    *Louis V. Gutierrez
    *Jan Schakowsky
    *Louise Slaughter
    *James McGovern
    *George Miller
    *Donald Payne
    *Jose Serrano
    *Edolphus Towns
    *Lynn Woolsey
    *Carolyn Maloney

    Feel free to spread the word.  Thanks for your help.

    Ted Kalo


    Minority General Counsel

    House Judiciary Committee


    Let's give these representatives a round of applause folks and drop them a note of thanks

  •  Wonderful (none)
    It's good to see that there are still some politicians out there who will stand up for the people and do what's right.

    I'm so proud that Michael Michaud has signed this.

pontificator, Leslie in CA, CA Pol Junkie, thirdparty, sdf, arthur, Bob Johnson, reef the dog, Soj, Mark Sumner, Louise, racerx, wozzle, bink, Tripleg, Lestatdelc, Jett, Alumbrados, Bob, Civil Sibyl, paradox, MichaelPH, Baseballgirl, libby, SwedishChef, Ralph, stevelu, DavidW in SF, Chris Andersen, molly bloom, Toadvine, Ducktape, pb, ROGNM, Felicia, Irfo, Jonathan, filkertom, DMark, James Benjamin, Phoenix Woman, VAdem, CrazyDem, jennifer poole, Lush, matt n nyc, slinkerwink, Sparhawk, casamurphy, ali in nyc, AlanF, lipris, Fro, folgers, timber, jdavidson2, MattBellamy, HippoRider, RHunter, santoriello, Phoenix Rising, GreenSooner, Dump Terry McAuliffe, lrhoke, lamcgil2, tiggers thotful spot, js7a, JenK, dcdanny, Southern Bird, Erasmus, demnomore, plover, Pandora, pHunbalanced, teddyk, markymarx, TrueBlueMajority, Tuffy, jaysea, vancookie, emal, Alan S, RunawayRose, Winger, jjc4jre, Citizen Clark, sjct, TechBob, krwada, lebowski, Elizabeth D, Hummingbird, Titian, MsSpentyouth, donna in evanston, Andrew C White, Astral, rogun, CaptUnderpants, CleverNickName, cotterperson, kelvinchapman, liz, shumard, wintersnowman, maddercow, Imp of the Perverse, scottmaui, OLinda, jrod, Troutfishing, pacified, Heteraetcaetera, BRockNYLA, movie buff, ZoBai, Pompatus, terhuxtim, polecat, shetquaker, PhillyGal, akreit, BinaryDaisy, figdish, leftyboy666, x, Gary in NY, DocSocrates, DFWmom, acuppajo, MilwMom, frisco, theran, lilorphant, Muboshgu, Abou Ben Adhem, pollyusa, Sandia Blanca, floridagal, DrSpike, bumblebums, jancw, Cache, editman, jleslie, tom 47, zeitshabba, JacksonBlogs, redtravelmaster, mrCurmudgeon, Cecrops Tangaroa, silence, memberofthejury, atom, Bruce The Moose, Eternal Hope, Cupcake, RubDMC, Jean, loudGizmo, maggiemae, catnip, mrsdbrown1, JohnDrake, mlafleur, joyous, rwsab, Xeno of Elia, smintheus, kwinz, GregNYC, bronte17, super simian, mediaddict, Intellectually Curious, Joe Sixpack, edkra, Dr Know, segmentis, powerplay40, indybend, skrymir, pessullivan, alysheba, silas216, sadhu, landrew, macdust, DrKate, mmacdDE, araina, baba durag, daisy democrat, bonddad, bcorbs, Mary Julia, AikidoPilgrim, saint, demdragon, Ti Jean, rukkus, colinb, Welshman, grrtigger, b2witte, demokath, Prog Grrl 68, stevetat, wharfrat, mxwing, ksh01, scamp, luna, Christopher Bair, muledriver, pixelthief, citizengeo, mkfarkus, AllenB101, SoulWind, buckhorn okie, moiv, mrblifil, jbmccarthy, xopher, smokem2271, Aquarius40, khloemi, michelle, taonow, MisterOwl, Appstate, ovals49, Seemabes, sgilman, LondonYank, cognitive dissonance, retLT, larryrant, Mean Green, juslikagrzly, CodeTalker, jbeach, bincbom, k2winters, a2jean, pdxcutter, jpatchen, Woundweavr, JRowan, lpettit4662, Boxers, not lois, Spindizzy, corncam, chrisfreel, Shaniriver, hiley, Nate Roberts, lilnubber, Terre, fumie, Glinda, ctsteve, kitebro, Jesterfox, Gonzophile, demokerryat, Alna Dem, amherstprep, csuchas, texan in exile, sele, emmeke, jdjonsson, Georgia Logothetis, bejammin075, gjking, Alohaleezy, nicky, nio, LawStudent, DemocracyLover in NYC, SneakySnu, Embee, kharma, jhwygirl, chinkoPelinke, scorpiorising, dejavu, fight2bfree, Alizaryn, rcvanoz, Miss Alabama, NYC Sophia, cscs, realitybased, tepster, jlynne, Miss Jones, missliberties, nj mom, bogdanmi, coldwynn, Chicago Lulu, crkrjx, fishhawk, zootfloggin, Febble, november3rd, kenjib, BlueMomInRedState, mott street, Andrea inOregon, sba, wont get fooled again, baxxor, Hawksana, original practice, Caldonia, Bulldawg, DEFuning, wdrath, Potone, Persimmon, Jill Lehnert, OuijaBoy, GN1927, joan reports, Penny Century, discontent73, DeanFan84, On The Bus, WaitingForLefty, snakelass, renaissance grrrl, applegal, Maria in Pgh, btyarbro, Ascendent, graciella, Troutski, mrsnart, rlharry, osf, lecsmith, Eddie Haskell, sommervr, lcrp, East Bay Molly Girl, Sargent Pepper, fritzrth, BWasikIUgrad, CAKE, TheJohnny, cevad, Cablep, General Disarray, bwintx, count, Court Smith, seaside, horatio in il, NasusNovacaine, Bluefish, Noisy Democrat, txbirdman, KateCrashes, fugue, Apian, Willow72, Sembtex, glattonfolly, WV Democrat, museh, Eckhart1234, retired, paisa, glooperoo, Clzwld, NapaJulie, Deward Hastings, Heartpine, Marianne Benz, fran1, Steven D, 2nd balcony, alix, d to the f, DrewDown, densityland, rickeagle, kd texan, notcho, BigBite, jerbear57, Ameranth, Mikecan1978, Captain Doug, kzoo leftie, califdweller, pontechango, gsbadj, Shapeshifter, babaloo, My Philosophy, lam2b2g, Gowrie Gal, supersoling, Tirge Caps, tami33, Sylvester McMonkey Mcbean, Nindid, libnewsie, John3, Anglico, MichDeb, AZRider, Los Diablo, trueblue illinois, Fabian, ukexpat, chumley, Duke1676, OyBurger, Fiction59 Fool On The Hill, sandblaster, lefthanded, ZZZzzz, chememom, rabid decline, 3goldens, logan, pattyp, Maduin, deepintheheartoftx, Minister AlX, mpc 12, Steve M, liberal atheist, Bensch, gillmp, Chimpy von Chimpibush, patrioticliberal, Alegre, hiredman, seesdifferent, revbludge, drbjs, LisaZ, chinook, Independent Musings, zaraspooksthra, Alice Marshall, wobblie, liberalis, pursewarden, tolerant, tricky dick, Doc Sarvis, ejmw, Blood Clot, Closet VB Coder, kamarvt, Kda

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site