Downing Street Memos....Smoking Gun?

THE "SMOKING GUN" DOWNING STREET MEMO: DID BUSH AND COMPANY "FIX" THE WAR?
by carol harvey (carolharveysf (at) yahoo.com) 31 May 2005 rating: 127

Representative John Conyers, Jr. and 89 members of Congress send a letter to President George Bush requesting a response to serious questions raised by the Downing Street Memo.
THE SMOKING GUN MEMO: DID BUSH AND COMPANY “FIX” THE WAR?

On May 1, 2005, The Times of London printed a highly classified document containing minutes of a July 23, 2002 meeting at 10 Downing Street.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

This memo was sent during the time the White House was insisting it had no plans to invade Iraq.

“The Smoking Gun Memo,” was a report by the head of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, Sir Richard Dearlove, to Prime Minister Tony Blair regarding his talks in Washington with the Bush Administration to determine its plans for action in Iraq.

The Times quotes Dearlove’s memo as saying “Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD (weapons of mass destruction). But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The (National Security Council) had no patience with the U.N route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.”

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune editorial: “Memorial Day/ Praise Bravery, seek forgiveness,” now circulating the Internet at light speed, states that “former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke and former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill were right. Both have been pilloried for writing that by summer 2002 Bush had already decided to invade.”

http://www.startribune.com/dynamic/story.php?template=print_a&story=5427

It also throws kudos to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, who on May 22, provided “further evidence that the administration did, indeed, fix the intelligence on Iraq to fit a policy it had already embraced: invasion and regime change.”

Pincus wrote that, mere days before Bush’s January 2003, State of the Union Address, the National Security Council staff “put out a call for new intelligence to bolster (weak) claims” about Saddam Hussein’s WMD programs.

The Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting website’s May 20, 2005 Action Alert castigates the print media for downplaying this story. Its headline reads “Network Viewers Still in the Dark on “Smoking Gun Memo.”

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2520&printer_friendly=1

Sources say a new memo has surfaced detailing the Bush Administration’s military provocation of Hussein, bombing Iraq to goad him into giving them an excuse for going to war. Countless Iraqi citizens died during this “pre-emptive strike.”

On May 20, 2005 the White House issued a pre-Memorial Day Press release.

http://www.desausa.org/memorial_day_2005.htm

It describes U.S. soldiers as “unrelenting in battle, unwavering in loyalty, and unmatched in decency.” It further states, “Because of their selfless courage, millions of people who once lived under tyranny now are free, and America is more secure.”

However, the Star-Tribune editorial, a lone media voice, sorrowfully observes, “As this bloody month of car bombs and American deaths – the most since January – comes to a close, as we gather in groups small and large to honor our war dead, let us all sing of their bravery and sacrifice. But let us also ask their forgiveness for sending them to a war that should never have happened. In the 1960s it was Vietnam. Today it is Iraq. Let us resolve to never, ever make this mistake again. Our young people are simply too precious.”

By clicking on the following link, you can sign a letter submitted to President Bush on May 5, 2005, by Representative John Conyers, Jr. and 89 members of Congress requesting a response to serious questions raised by the Downing Street Memo.

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

[Botnst]

I'm not sure where you were in 2002, but this is hardly news.

If you enjoy pursuing this subject, I suggest an excellent place for sharing your interest with like-minded people is here: http://www.mbnz.org/forums/forums/forum-view.asp?fid=46

They'll love you, I promise.

Bot

[H2O2]

While it's nothing new to folks who've been paying attention to this perfidious administration, it does plainly reveal that this president lied and manipulated his way into an unprovoked and unwarranted attack, invasion and occupation--those are treasonous grounds for impeachment. The sooner that junta is frog-marched out to the stockade, the sooner the state of world security improves.

[MTI]

Originally Posted by H2O2

While it's nothing new to folks who've been paying attention to this perfidious administration, it does plainly reveal that this president lied and manipulated his way into an unprovoked and unwarranted attack, invasion and occupation--those are treasonous grounds for impeachment. The sooner that junta is frog-marched out to the stockade, the sooner the state of world security improves.

Have you noticed the deafening silence from the Democratic "leadership"?

[H2O2]

Isn't a nation this size supposed to have an honest-to-goodness opposition party? Where the hell is the US media?

[Honus]

Originally Posted by Botnst

I'm not sure where you were in 2002, but this is hardly news...

Newsworthiness is in the eye of the beholder. To my eye, documentary evidence that the administration mislead the country is newsworthy, even though ample evidence of the their mendacity already existed. The Downing Street memos are not conclusive of anything, but they are obviously news.

[MTI]

Since the last election, what "opposition party" are you referring to?

[GermanStar]

Originally Posted by dculkin

Newsworthiness is in the eye of the beholder. To my eye, documentary evidence that the administration mislead the country is newsworthy, even though ample evidence of the their mendacity already existed. The Downing Street memos are not conclusive of anything, but they are obviously news.

They are pretty conclusive -- the problem is that they're conclusive of what's been obvious all along, hence they don't seem newsworthy.

[H2O2]

Originally Posted by MTI

Since the last election, what "opposition party" are you referring to?

Clearly not the Dems, they've been consistently AWOL. Must be off somewhere waiting for the polls to give them a sense of what to do next--pathetic really.

[Brian Carlton]

Originally Posted by H2O2

Clearly not the Dems, they've been consistently AWOL. Must be off somewhere waiting for the polls to give them a sense of what to do next--pathetic really.

It is pathetic. I see nobody on the horizon that can possibly be elected as a Democrat. I'm fairly sure Dean can't pull it off and Hillary won't hold enough sway in the red states. It sure would be fun to watch Hillary run, though.
(Bonehead will go into orbit )

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

(Bonehead will go into orbit )

He's already out there! I will agree with BHD about Kerry though, Kerry is a complete phony, he isn't even Irish, and while Kerry might have been seen by many as less threatening, he and Bush are from the same society, Skull & Bones, that is! Either way, I don't think there would have been much difference in the big picture. Now, lets talk about China!

[Brian Carlton]

Originally Posted by BusyBenz

........ he and Bush are from the same society, Skull & Bones, that is!

............wasn't that society named Smoke and Mirrors?

[boneheaddoctor]

Originally Posted by BusyBenz

THE "SMOKING GUN" DOWNING STREET MEMO: DID BUSH AND COMPANY "FIX" THE WAR?
by carol harvey (carolharveysf (at) yahoo.com) 31 May 2005 rating: 127

Representative John Conyers, Jr. and 89 members of Congress send a letter to President George Bush requesting a response to serious questions raised by the Downing Street Memo.
THE SMOKING GUN MEMO: DID BUSH AND COMPANY “FIX” THE WAR?

On May 1, 2005, The Times of London printed a highly classified document containing minutes of a July 23, 2002 meeting at 10 Downing Street.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

This memo was sent during the time the White House was insisting it had no plans to invade Iraq.

“The Smoking Gun Memo,” was a report by the head of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, Sir Richard Dearlove, to Prime Minister Tony Blair regarding his talks in Washington with the Bush Administration to determine its plans for action in Iraq.

The Times quotes Dearlove’s memo as saying “Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD (weapons of mass destruction). But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The (National Security Council) had no patience with the U.N route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.”

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune editorial: “Memorial Day/ Praise Bravery, seek forgiveness,” now circulating the Internet at light speed, states that “former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke and former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill were right. Both have been pilloried for writing that by summer 2002 Bush had already decided to invade.”

http://www.startribune.com/dynamic/story.php?template=print_a&story=5427

It also throws kudos to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, who on May 22, provided “further evidence that the administration did, indeed, fix the intelligence on Iraq to fit a policy it had already embraced: invasion and regime change.”

Pincus wrote that, mere days before Bush’s January 2003, State of the Union Address, the National Security Council staff “put out a call for new intelligence to bolster (weak) claims” about Saddam Hussein’s WMD programs.

The Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting website’s May 20, 2005 Action Alert castigates the print media for downplaying this story. Its headline reads “Network Viewers Still in the Dark on “Smoking Gun Memo.”

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2520&printer_friendly=1

Sources say a new memo has surfaced detailing the Bush Administration’s military provocation of Hussein, bombing Iraq to goad him into giving them an excuse for going to war. Countless Iraqi citizens died during this “pre-emptive strike.”

On May 20, 2005 the White House issued a pre-Memorial Day Press release.

http://www.desausa.org/memorial_day_2005.htm

It describes U.S. soldiers as “unrelenting in battle, unwavering in loyalty, and unmatched in decency.” It further states, “Because of their selfless courage, millions of people who once lived under tyranny now are free, and America is more secure.”

However, the Star-Tribune editorial, a lone media voice, sorrowfully observes, “As this bloody month of car bombs and American deaths – the most since January – comes to a close, as we gather in groups small and large to honor our war dead, let us all sing of their bravery and sacrifice. But let us also ask their forgiveness for sending them to a war that should never have happened. In the 1960s it was Vietnam. Today it is Iraq. Let us resolve to never, ever make this mistake again. Our young people are simply too precious.”

By clicking on the following link, you can sign a letter submitted to President Bush on May 5, 2005, by Representative John Conyers, Jr. and 89 members of Congress requesting a response to serious questions raised by the Downing Street Memo.

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

And this guy thinks I can't get past Clinton.......how about this...get over it...it never happened....its in the past...

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

And this guy thinks I can't get past Clinton.......how about this...get over it...it never happened....its in the past...

Bush is still in office, Clinton has been gone 5 years!

[boneheaddoctor]

Originally Posted by BusyBenz

Bush is still in office, Clinton has been gone 5 years!

Clinton actually did the things I complain about ...and the libs want it forgotten....

Bush has done NONE of the things you accuse him of................and the libs absolutely can't stand the fact he is a far better man than Slick Willy