When nine white men met and plotted at
#10 Downing Street in London,
England, on July 23, 2002, they probably did not anticipate that three years
later a small group of U.S. Congress Members, led by black men and women,
would make that meeting a focus of public attention. But when Congress
Members John Conyers, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Charles Rangel, Sheila Jackson
Lee, and others hold town hall forums all over this country on the three-year
anniversary of the meeting recorded in the Downing Street
Minutes, they will be demanding an investigation supported by a majority of
Americans. Indeed, the outcome of their campaign could be more than the
erosion of support for the war in Iraq; it could be the erosion of American credulity
for the next several wars that presidents try to sell us on false
pretenses.
Number 10 Downing Street is, of course, the residence of the Prime Minister
of England, Tony Blair. He met there three years ago with his Foreign
Secretary, Defense Secretary, Attorney General, Chief of Secret
Intelligence, Joint Intelligence Committee Chief, the head of Britain's
armed forces, and a foreign policy advisor who has since become Ambassador
to the United States. Also present was a foreign policy aide who took the
minutes. These weren't just any white guys. These were the men who controlled
the United Kingdom and, against the will of its people, made it the chief ally
of the United States in its attack on Iraq. Britain's Chief
of Secret Intelligence (the head of MI6) reported at this meeting on
discussions he had just held in the United States with the head of the CIA,
George Tenet, and – it appears very likely – with National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice.
The Downing Street Minutes and related documents (all available at www.afterdowningstreet.org)
provide new and compelling evidence that
President Bush, by the summer of 2002
- had secretly decided to go to war,
- had agreed to go to the United Nations only as a (failed) attempt to
legalize a predetermined invasion,
- and had decided to deceive and mislead the Congress and the American people
with false claims about both weapons of mass destruction and ties between
Saddam Hussein and 9-11.
The Bush Administration's conspiracy to deceive Congress culminated in
a fraudulent letter to Congress on March 18, 2003, claiming continued
U.N.
inspections would endanger the national security of the United States.
This fraud violated the federal anti-conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371,
which makes it a felony "to commit any offense against the United States,
or
to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any
purpose..."; and The False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C.§ 1001,
which makes it a felony to issue knowingly and willfully false statements to
the United States Congress.
This criminal action constitutes a High Crime under Article II, Section 4
of
the United States Constitution, which says: "The President, Vice President,
and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on
impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes
and misdemeanors."
Congress Members are not yet using the I-word, but they are moving the issue
forward, and the public is drawing the appropriate conclusion on its own.
A June 23-26, 2005, ABC/Washington Post poll found
52 percent of Americans believe the Bush administration "deliberately
misled the public before the
war," a nine-point increase in three months. And 57 percent say the Bush
administration "intentionally exaggerated its evidence that pre-war Iraq
possessed nuclear, chemical or biological weapons."
A June 27-29, 2005, Zogby poll found 42 percent of Americans say that "if
it
is found that President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for
going to war with Iraq, Congress should hold him accountable through
impeachment." According to Zogby, in Eastern and Western states supporters
of impeachment outnumber opponents.
The 42 percent above is significantly higher than the 27 percent of Americans
who favored impeachment of President
Clinton before impeachment
proceedings began in 1998.
Despite this popularity for questioning Bush's pre-war claims and for
considering the possibility of impeachment, most Congress Members are
predictably hesitant. A majority of them are members of a political party
that operates like a dictatorship. And many of those in the nominally
opposition party aren't quite sure they want to oppose anything. As the
Black Commentator has skillfully documented, this includes some corporatist members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Nonetheless, the Congress Members whom activists have learned to turn to are
disproportionately black, although the Congress is disproportionately white.
Let's look at some numbers.
Eight percent of the members of both houses of Congress (43 of 535) are
black, one percent of senators (1 of 100), and 10 percent of House members
(42 of 435).
But 44 percent (27 of 62) of the members of the newly formed Out
of Iraq Caucus are black, including five of the eight co-founders, and the chair,
Maxine Waters. The numbers for the Progressive Caucus, out of which this caucus
formed, are similar.
When Congressman Conyers held a hearing on
the Downing Street Minutes on
June 16, nearly half of the 35 Congress Members who squeezed into the small
room in the basement of the Capitol - the only room the Republicans had
allowed - were black. As were five of the seven members who then delivered
a letter to the White House and spoke at a rally in Lafayette Square Park
organized by the After Downing Street coalition. The letter, written by
Conyers, asked Bush five simple questions about the Downing Street Minutes,
and had by that point been signed by over 560,000 Americans and 123 Congress
Members.
Of the 123 Congress Members who signed Conyers' letter, 30 percent (37) are
black. Of the 52 who signed a more recent, and yet to be answered, Freedom
of Information Act request (also initiated by Conyers) demanding information
from the White House, State Department, and Defense Department related to
the Downing Street Minutes, 27 percent (14) are black.
And black leadership extends to other steps taken to question or oppose the
war. Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is white, but 41 percent (14 of 34) of the
cosponsors of her resolution calling for immediate withdrawal from Iraq are
black. Woolsey and Lee are co-chairs of the Progressive Caucus.
While only 34 congress members have co-sponsored that resolution, 128 voted
for an amendment Woolsey proposed on the floor of the House, which would
have required the White House to formulate an exit strategy and a strategy
for rebuilding Iraq. Those 128 were, again, disproportionately black.
In the last congress, 50 percent (13 of 26) of those backing a resolution
by
Congresswoman Lee to disavow the doctrine of preemption were black, as were
39 percent (18 of 46) of those backing a Lee resolution to create an
independent commission or select House committee to investigate U.S.
intelligence relating to the war.
We all recall that only Congresswoman Lee dared to vote against the war on
Afghanistan. Only Congressman Rangel has dared to introduce legislation to" remove
all restrictions from the public, the press, and military families in mourning
that would prohibit their presence at the arrival at military
installations in the United States or overseas of the remains of the
Nation's fallen heroes, the members of the Armed Forces who have died in
Iraq or Afghanistan."
And only Congressman Conyers has made dragging the truth of the Downing
Street Minutes into the light of day a major mission. In fact, he's
tentatively planning an investigative trip to London next month focused on
finding out more about U.S. pre-war planning, something the people of our
democracy seem best able to learn of via British sources.
Meanwhile, Lee is planning to introduce a Resolution of Inquiry, which will
likely be referred to the International Relations Committee, seeking
information from our government contemporaneous to the meeting at #10
Downing Street.
Promoting that Resolution of Inquiry will be part of the agenda of nationwide
forums, study circles, and house parties on Saturday, July 23, a week from
next Saturday. (To find, or create, an event in your area, see:
www.afterdowningstreet.org).
Meanwhile, in the Senate, things are quieter. The Senate Intelligence
Committee had committed to investigating pre-war intelligence, but put it
off until after the election of last November, and then declared it not
worth looking into. On June 22, ten senators sent a letter to the committee
asking for the investigation to be done. The Senate's one black member did
not sign the letter and has not been heard from on the question of the
Downing Street Minutes. And the Senate's 99 white members are a lot harder
for activists to work with than are those members of the House, mostly
black, who seem to better understand popular movements.
Last Saturday night another leak came out of England, this one suggesting
that the US and UK are secretly planning major reductions of forces in Iraq,
timed to precede the 2006 US elections. While this would be tremendously
good news, if true, there is a danger that it could cause us to ease the
pressure both for an investigation of what caused this war and for the
complete liberation of Iraq from U.S. occupation. At this point, it becomes
critical that we demand a real exit strategy and a guarantee that the Iraqi
people maintain
control of their oil.
While eight major US military bases are being built in Iraq, together with
the world's largest embassy and huge new US prisons for Iraqis,
Congresswoman Barbara Lee has introduced a "Bill to Prevent Permanent
Bases
in Iraq."
"We need to make it perfectly clear," Lee said in a press release, "that
there will be no permanent US military presence in Iraq. An open-ended
military presence in Iraq will only fuel the insurgency and make our troops
more vulnerable."
On April 13, 2004, President Bush said: "As a proud and independent people,
Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation and neither does America."
On February 17, 2005, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, testifying
before the Senate Armed Services Committee, said "We have no intention,
at
the present time, of putting permanent bases in Iraq."
Lee said of her new legislation: "the aim of this bill is to simply codify
the sentiments expressed by the President and the Secretary of Defense that
we will not have a permanent military presence in Iraq."
David Swanson is a co-founder of After Downing Street, a writer and
activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a board member
of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive Council of
the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as a
newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press
Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator
for the International Labor Communications Association, and
three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of
Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree
in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997.
|