Houston Democrats

Ron and I will definitely be watching the hearing on C-SPAN. I am so glad this information is finally coming to light and getting some airtime. Hopefully, we will be able to get a resolution of inquiry into whether or not the Chimp, Cheney and Rumsfailed can be impeached. Hopefully, there will be enough evidence to begin impeachment proceedings IF enough Repukes get on board and demand an investigation.

It is my ultimate wish to see the Chimp, Cheney, Rummie and anybody else that can be convicted tried and convicted for high crimes against the United States. I would hope we could get a trial in an international criminal court. Maybe all the murdering thugs could be sent to the Hague.

Aaaaah, the noose is beginning to tighten.....

The Downing Street Memo demonstrates that Blair and the M6 were complicit with Dubya in manufacturing false evidence. The testimony of Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, Rand Beers, and Paul O'Neal all provide sufficient evidence that Bush was ginning up the case against Iraq.

In addition, "one outsider", Scott Ritter provides expert testimony that dangerous chemicals such as VX are unstable and denature after five years; therefore, those stocks produced after 1997 would not have been dangerous after 2002. If Ritter is accurate, then Powell's testimony to the UN - that Iraq could not prove it had destroyed the old VX stock - is irrelevant. Our burden regarding the danger of these chemical weapons would have been to present credible evidence that the Iraqis continued to have labs and materials for continued productions of these chemicals. Ritter testified that they could never find such capability. Nor have we found them since we invaded.

Just what would it take for the neo-nuts to acknowledge Iraq was not a threat to us?

Perhaps the DSM will bring many "Bush-moderates" back to the reality-based community.

The "neo-nuts" are not going to acknowledge anything about the war in Iraq, since they are the ones who brought it on. They got, in theory, just what they wanted--a catastrophe--the destruction of the Twin Towers--so they could put their plan, "A Project for the New American Century," in motion. And they did it. Now, they're either in power everywhere in Washington--I'm talking about Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Feith, etc., etc, ad nauseam--or they're out in the woods somewhere trying to figure out how they can pull together what remains of our poor ol' citizen armies in Iraq so they can go on to invade the next victim, Iran. And after that, Syria, etc. If you don't know about their plans, you need to get busy and READ THEM, FOR GOD'S SAKE. Of course Bush and his puppet masters were doing exactly what the Downing Street memo says they were doing: arranging for the war with Iraq, which the Neo-Cons had been planning since the 1980's. And of course Bush's handlers knew we would go to war as soon as they could get him into the White House. And of course he's lying in his teeth now. To say he deserves to be impeached and thrown out of office for high crimes and misdemeanors is a little like saying, "Gee, folks, I've figured out that the sun rises in the east EVERY DAY. How about that!"
The pity is that we can't do the same thing to Cheney and all the rest of them. (For Cheney I might settle for tarring and feathering and dropping him off in Bill O'Reilly's lap--after we've wrapped him in orange Christmas lights that spell out "WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?" and plugged him in at Fox.)

After watching the minority DSM forum on C-SPAN today, I read this (linked on Buzzflash from "The Independent").

US lied to Britain over use of napalm in Iraq war
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor

17 June 2005

American officials lied to British ministers over the use of "internationally reviled" napalm-type firebombs in Iraq.

Yesterday's disclosure led to calls by MPs for a full statement to the Commons and opened ministers to allegations that they held back the facts until after the general election.

Despite persistent rumours of injuries among Iraqis consistent with the use of incendiary weapons such as napalm, Adam Ingram, the Defence minister, assured Labour MPs in January that US forces had not used a new generation of incendiary weapons, codenamed MK77, in Iraq.

But Mr Ingram admitted to the Labour MP Harry Cohen in a private letter obtained by The Independent that he had inadvertently misled Parliament because he had been misinformed by the US. "The US confirmed to my officials that they had not used MK77s in Iraq at any time and this was the basis of my response to you," he told Mr Cohen. "I regret to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."

Mr Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between 31 March and 2 April 2003. They were used against military targets "away from civilian targets", he said. This avoids breaching the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), which permits their use only against military targets.

Britain, which has no stockpiles of the weapons, ratified the convention, but the US did not.

The confirmation that US officials misled British ministers led to new questions last night about the value of the latest assurances by the US. Mr Cohen said there were rumours that the firebombs were used in the US assault on the insurgent stronghold in Fallujah last year, claims denied by the US. He is tabling more questions seeking assurances that the weapons were not used against civilians.

Mr Ingram did not explain why the US officials had misled him, but the US and British governments were accused of a cover-up. The Iraq Analysis Group, which campaigned against the war, said the US authorities only admitted the use of the weapons after the evidence from reporters had become irrefutable.

Mike Lewis, a spokesman for the group, said: "The US has used internationally reviled weapons that the UK refuses to use, and has then apparently lied to UK officials, showing how little weight the UK carries in influencing American policy."

He added: "Evidence that Mr Ingram had given false information to Parliament was publicly available months ago. He has waited until after the election to admit to it - a clear sign of the Government's embarrassment that they are doing nothing to restrain their own coalition partner in Iraq."

The US State Department website admitted in the run-up to the election that US forces had used MK77s in Iraq. Protests were made by MPs, but it was only this week that Mr Ingram confirmed the reports were true.

Mike Moore, the Liberal Democrat defence spokes-man, said: "It is very serious that this type of weapon was used in Iraq, but this shows the US has not been completely open with the UK. We are supposed to have a special relationship.

"It has also taken two months for the minister to clear this up. This is welcome candour, but it will raise fresh questions about how open the Government wished to be... before the election."

The MK77 bombs, an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea, carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that, like napalm, the gel sticks to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilising fins, making them far from precise.

I have seen video of dead Iraqis taken by unembedded journalist Dahr Jamail while he was in Fallujah. These were undoubtedly victims of napalm.....Bellwether

I bet Bush is getting quite aggravated with these reports coming out of Britain. Those pesky Brits and their free press. First, the Downing Street memo, now this report about the use of napalm-type firebombs. I tend to think that someone in Britain is letting these things out in an effort to take control of the Labour Party and/or defeat Tony Blair in the next general election. However, a byproduct is that more in more information is getting out to us in the United States that the administration is keeping under wraps. The consequence: more and more information that supports John Conyers' investigation into whether impeachment proceedings should be held, something that looks increasingly likely. Whether Bush is actually impeached is another question, but it appears more credible evidence is coming to light to support such proceedings. I hope that as Conyers moves on with his investigation to determine the truth that more representatives come to support him.

I saw part of the hearing on C-span's website today. It impressed me a great deal as well as the fact that so many people were able to crowd into the small basement room under the Capitol building. It's appalling that Democrats working to discover the truth are relegated to some basement room that doesn't appear like much more than the interns' lounge, basically a closet.

"It's appalling that Democrats working to discover the truth are relegated to some basement room that doesn't appear like much more than the interns' lounge, basically a closet."

Via Atrios, see how Conyers tells the Washington Post how it is.