NEWSWEEK: From Downing Street to Capitol Hill - Now confirmed Up High

[BigBearJohn]

June 15 - Two senior British government officials today acknowledged as authentic a series of 2002 pre-Iraq war memos stating that Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program was "effectively frozen" and that there was "no recent evidence" of Iraqi ties to international terrorism—private conclusions that contradicted two key pillars of the Bush administration's public case for the invasion in March 2003.

A March 8, 2002, secret "options" paper prepared by Prime Minister Tony Blair's top national-security aides also stated that intelligence on Saddam's purported weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was "poor." While noting that Saddam had used such weapons in the past and could do so again "if his regime were threatened," the options paper concluded "there is no greater threat now than in recent years that Saddam will use WMD."

The options paper was written just one month before Blair met with President Bush in Crawford, Texas. According to another leaked internal memo, Blair agreed at the meeting to support a U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam’s regime provided that “certain conditions” were met. Those conditions, according to the newly leaked memo, were that efforts be made to “construct a coalition” and “shape” public opinion; that the Israeli-Palestinian crisis was “quiescent,” and that attempts to eliminate Iraqi WMD through the return of United Nations weapons inspectors be exhausted.

The British documents are becoming something of a cause celebre among Capitol Hill Democrats and other critics of the Iraq war who see them as evidence that the Bush administration had privately committed to an invasion far earlier than it has publicly acknowledged—and then “fixed” the intelligence about Iraq to justify the policy.

{emphasis added}

SOURCE: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8234762/site/newsweek/

[berni_mccoy]

1. Oh man, this is gonna be explosive!!!

:popcorn:

[driver8]

4. How are they going to try and "spin" their way out of this one?

Who is going to fall on their sword for king Georgie??

[AndyTiedye]

37. Karl Just Tells The Media to Talk About Something Else

[corbett]

65. That's Why Blogs Are So Important

Slowly, KKKarl is losing that ability, despite being in his cushy new office at 1600.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

86. ... and the media followed..

but now it is too big.

[janx]

44. They will attempt to say that this information has been

available all along and that it is nothing new.

WATCH--I promise you this is what will happen.

[POAS]

51. Move along, nothing to see here!

[hootinholler]

57. And for once they wouldnt be lying.

It's laid out in broad brushstrokes on the PNAC site fer chrissakes.

Then there's all the people who've been booted out talking, but, not covered or spun away.

Funny how Schavio has been resurrected, er, so to speak.

-Hoot

[shadowknows69]

67. True. Then we should take that as a confession.

And prosecute the impeachment immediately. People are dying.

[TroglodyteScholar]

69. 1 9 8 4

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

[bunny planet]

81. Yup, either that or they'll frame it that the President knew he had to

'color the truth' a little bit in order to take a dangerous dictator out of power. The kool-aid drinkers will go for it. We must have an equally compelling frame set up in response.

Heard about this website on Thom Hartman's program today. This guy Feldman has got some very good ideas about how Dems can reframe some of the debates Repubs usually clobber us with.

http://www.frameshopisopen.com/

[magellan]

99. Good read, thanks, Bunny Planet!

I especially liked:

Americans Serve When the Cause is Just and True: Democrats must quickly and effectively reframe the idea of military service. If the GOP frame is true (To Serve in the Armed Forces is to be a Good American), then the shrinking number of Americans willing to join the military must mean that America is running out of good citizens. This is obviously wrong. The problem is that the GOP frame of "blind service" to the military is not the way Americans see it. Instead, most Americans believe that serving in the military makes one a good American if the cause is "just and true." This is the great lesson of Vietnam: Many Americans joined up willingly to serve in the military, and those same Americans became disillusioned when they discovered that the American cause in Southeast Asia was wrong and that the reasons Washington gave for being there were untrue.

That's a great point, one so obvious it's easy to overlook. This country has never lacked in volunteers to fight a battle. It's only when the government lies about the reasons for war that things eventually unravel, because "the truth will always out"...and most people aren't suicidal.

[Gregorian]

83. And double duty Diebold's will be in force in 2006

Maybe it won't take a major change in the Congress to impeach. But I am guessing it won't happen unless another election is won (ie. stolen).

Although, my 80 year old mom says, it doesn't matter because at this point in time the damage is done and they'll go down in infamy.

[Andromeda]

102. They already are...

saying DSM is "old news."

[are_we_united_yet]

2. wow n/t

[Bob3]

3. I'd like to say to whoever is leaking these memos.

Keep up the good work.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

72. I'm thinking that it has to be somebody or some group of people....

...within the CIA that's working with allies in the UK and the media both within the UK and the US. I think that they also have the backing of some major corporations, some high-ranking military officers, and some high-level folks within government. Right now, IMHO, the CIA has the biggest set of reasons for wanting to bring down the NeoCons.

As I've stated before, only two sitting presidents attempted to buck the CIA...JFK and Nixon...and neither finished their current terms. The CIA has even more reason to want to depose this sitting dictator that has made them look bad, has driven their Director from his position, has deliberately exposed an operative along with her network, and has tried to outright destroy them.

[AndyTiedye]

89. You'd Think Bush I Woulda Told His Son Not To Screw the CIA

[flyarm]

104. DO REMEMBER MANY OF THE TOP CIA

AGENTS have resigned or taken early retirement since porter goss took over and many since december!!

[anitar1]

93. I've thought that they would "fix" their leader eventually. n/t

[teryang]

97. I agree with your analysis

A break among the elites is the only thing that has potential to bring this administration down.

The problem is that the constitutional framework is seriously damaged and power has shifted from the formal governmental structures and their typically unnaccountable counterparts (the so called invisible government) to a structured but loose affiliation of rigid ideological interests that could be seen as a clique or cult with W as its figurehead. The truly central figures are Cheney and Rumsfeld. Whatever power bush had emanated from his fathers lingering control of intelligence infrastructure combined with his son's political future. His father's influence on the wane with W's total lack of political relevance at this time, but the Pentagon contractors and energy interests are still pre-eminent. This means that it is more important to remove Cheney and Rumsfeld from the political scene.

Frist looks to be someone who might take advantage of the leadership vacuum at this point. Frist and Negroponte could take over. I wonder if they have established contact yet. If those who manipulate the corrupted elections process throw in with them, we are in for an even more bizarre future. Frist is freaking scary. Just like Cheney is scary.

[patrice]

5. So why is this stuff coming out of GB now? Tony disappointed

in his failure with his personal mission to convert George re Global Warming?

[IndianaGreen]

13. The DSM was published by Rupert Murdoch a month ago

Old Rupert had lost his infatuation with Blair.

[David Zephyr]

20. You might be on to something, IG.

There's some strange signals coming from Newscorp lately.

[blm]

35. Cuz if Blair lost then a Tory would have won. You think the fascists would

ever be loyal to Blair? He's not fully on board with their agenda. He actually considers the environment and programs for the poor and third world countries.

Anyone think Bush cared if Blair won or lost? As long as he got back into power, he could care less about anyone else.

[hootinholler]

58. Tony's a lame duck, so the party is cleaning house?. n/t

[NashVegas]

63. I Wonder As Well

Perhaps it's a warning to the Bush administration re: if they want to try it in Iran.

[The_Casual_Observer]

6. Is all this why that scientist guy committed suicide

around the time of the start of the war in Iraq?

[patrice]

9. I was wondering that too. What was his name?

I felt pretty bad for that guy.

[Gregorian]

14. Dr David Kelly

Oops, forgot to add this-

[alphafemale]

19. But didn't they conclude that it WASN'T a suicide?

As I recall.

His wrists were slit but that wasn't the cause of death...

nor was an overdose.

I think cause of death ended up being "undetermined."

[IndianaGreen]

23. David Kelly's "suicide" is still being disputed

There are more doubts about the official version of Dabid Kelly's suicide than they are about Princess Di's car accident.

Remember that we are dealing with people to which human life means nothing!

[Roland99]

25. bushbodycount.com

:scared:

[AuntiBush]

52. How about this one...

http://www.bushbodycount.com/list.php?catid=15&blogid=2

Shew... everyone should take time to read these counts and keep this close to your heart when in fear:

“When one fears government, tyranny has found victory.”
Thomas Jefferson

Think of what "fear" did to us after 9/11. We have nothing to "fear but fear itself." Franklin D. Roosevelt

[Roland99]

53. Ayup.

:scared:

[starroute]

39. And look at the timing

Joseph Wilson started speaking to the press in May 2003. He wrote openly of his visit to Niger on July 6, 2003. His wife Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative by Robert Novak on July 14.

David Kelly spoke with a BBC reporter in May 2003. His name was publicly revealed on July 9, 2003. He went out for a walk and never came back on July 17.

Some freaky synchronicities there.

[IndianaGreen]

48. There are too many corpses laying around to ignore

Bush and Blair look more and more like Al Capone and Lucky Luciano.

[ninkasi]

95. I don't buy the suicide theory...

I thought there were too many little things wrong, that when all added up, pointed in another direction. And I have never forgotten, and never will, that the people currently in control of this country are completely devoid of conscience.

Nothing they do would surprise me. It make me furious, or sick, but they are, indeed, capable of anything to further their agenda.

[mzmolly]

7. Wow.

:wow:

[tmooses]

8. This seems like it could be a direct contradict to Bush's terra claim..

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Career Prole]

10. I was about to say

"Oh no! The k-Isikoff of Death!", but come to think of it, the dialogue on Gitmo sure has opened up since the Quran story.

[lala_rawraw]

79. Mike Smith is a solid journalist

And hence a solid source.

[PurityOfEssence]

11. The Empire Strikes Back

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of fellas.

[Singular73]

12. WHAT WE NEED for this to be REAL serious

We need Blair to resign.

[redacted]

Even more serious: get Blair IMPEACHED

See: http://www.impeachblair.org

Although the "Latest News" section of the site is somewhat dated, some may find that the site's position paper "A Case to Answer" contains useful research relevant to the case against Shrub. Brief excerpt:

Entering into a secret agreement with the President of the United States:

202. According to Sir Christopher Meyer, the former British ambassador to the United States, the Prime Minister was aware that the US would invade Iraq during the term of the first Bush administration from 20 September 2001. The Prime Minister and President Bush had dinner on that date at the White House, which Meyer also attended. Meyer's account was contained in an article in Vanity Fair:

"On Thursday, September 20, Tony Blair arrived in Washington for a meeting at the White House. Until now, many assumed his and Bush's early talks had been limited to the coming war in Afghanistan. In fact, they also spoke of Iraq. At a dinner in the White House, attended also by Colin Powell, Condi Rice, and the British ambassador to the United States, Sir Christopher Meyer, Bush made clear that he was determined to topple Saddam. 'Rumors were already flying that Bush would use 9/11 as a pretext to attack Iraq,' Meyer remembers. 'On the one hand, Blair came with a very strong message-don't get distracted; the priorities were al-Qaeda, Afghanistan, the Taliban. Bush said, "I agree with you, Tony. We must deal with this first. But when we have dealt with Afghanistan, we must come back to Iraq."'"

203. On 29 January 2002, President Bush declared in his State of the Union address that Iraq was part of an "axis of evil". This was followed up by explicit commitments in public to effect a change in the Iraqi leadership. On 4 April 2002, he told British journalist Trevor Macdonald:

"I made up my mind that Saddam needs to go. That's about all I'm willing to share with you. <…> I'm confident that we can lead a coalition to pressure Saddam Hussein and to deal with Saddam Hussein."

204. This was followed up by President Bush's statement at a press conference with Tony Blair in Crawford, Texas on 6 April 2002. He said:

"I explained to the Prime Minister that the policy of my government is the removal of Saddam and that all options are on the table."

[Jackpine Radical]

71. I deon't think you can impeach a PM.

[Spazito]

76. Actually, impeachment can happen to a PM

it certainly doesn't look like it has ever been successful but the process is there.



Forsyth joins impeach Blair call

Twenty-three MPs have signed a Commons motion calling for the prime minister to be thrown from office.

They say he misled Parliament over the case for invading Iraq and want a probe by MPs to examine his conduct in relation to the war.

But the impeachment bid is widely expected to fail and probably will not even be debated in the Commons.

snip

The last attempted impeachment was of Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston back in 1848.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4037375.stm

[Jackpine Radical]

85. I stand...errr, sit...corrected. Not coming from a parliamentary system,

I assumed that the proper recourse would either be to call for a vote of (no) confidence or for the majority party to choose a new leader. We have means of removing people from office because they serve terms that are ordinarily of fixed length & the impeachment process is the only prescribed means of aborting the term of a miscreant officeholder.

I will of course defer to the superior knowledge of a Canuckistanian on this issue.

[flyarm]

106. vote of no confidence from parliment and his party!!

can take out blair!!

[democrat in Tallahassee]

15. Ah the revenge of Isikoff--wasn't he the one smeared by the

KOran thing? Or was he smeared for something else? So many smears against journalists.

[eleny]

16. Uh-Oh

[tmooses]

17. Cheney directly claimed Saddam had ties with terrorists.

Does the media remember anything? Just so happens this came out exactly one year ago: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5215019/

[jarnocan]

24. Please tell the truth, and stop intimidating journalist.

<http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/591048046> We the undersigned, endorse the following petition:
We the people demand our right to know the facts.
Target: George Bush President USA...

We the people demand our right to know the facts.

Dear Mr. George Bush;

We the people, have a right to know the truth.

We want you to answer the questions by the Hon. Rep. Conyers and 89 other members of congress, concerning the Blair/ Downing Street memo, your plans for the invasion of Iraq, and the actions you took to distort information,in order to advance your preconceived agenda.

We want to know why Scott McClellan your press secretary, blamed Newsweek magazine, for the actions of policemen in Iraq shooting and killing 15 protesters. Military officials appear to refute your claims, that a statement in the magazine referring to an investigation, of possible disrespect, and inappropriate behavior of an interrogator resulted in this violence.

We want to know who planned this course of action, apparently to further intimidate our media. As a democracy a free and non-partisan media is critical.

We further implore you to encourage unencumbered, investigations into the anomalies of the 2004 presidential elections. Please allow the investigators to examine the vast amount of documentation by voter's rights groups and University professors.

Please make a public statement encourage the media to explore this documentation and report it, without concern of retribution from your administration. We can not have real voter reform, nor restore faith in our democracy without a free press and fair elections.

Sign petions and then do whatever else you can, to help the truth bust out in June!

[Cha]

18. WE have an English

Mark Felt, guys! :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[Dragonfli]

30. "Deep Thought"

He has provided us with the answer, all that is left now is to formulate the proper question.

The nickname "Deep Thought" for the British Deep Throat is just a personal nickname I have come to use for him, I look forward to an actual name some day

[Cha]

47. I like that.."Deep Thought"!

Kinda Englishy! And plays on the "Deep" part and not all rated X like the American counterpart. :P

Welcome to DU, Dragonfli!

[Dragonfli]

54. Thanks!

:hi:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

21. And the cherry on top...

The "Roadmap."

[NorCalDem]

22. I would like to thank all of the members of the British

government, citizenry, whoever, and here is why:

Thank you to the corrupt MFer's in your government who manipulated people into trusting you to take us to war as a "last option," but at least have the balls to document your world-altering decisions unlike our countries counterparts, whose documents immediately find the shredder, if they ever existed at all.

Thank you to the British people and press for actually doing your democratic duty and questioning your government. Never is this more important than in time of war, and you people had the courage to do so.

Thank you to all the bloggers out there in the world who found this story out of the UK and made it public knowledge to everyone in the world (except 40% of the voting population in America). Because of your journalistic savvy, we have come to know the truth about our countries leaders.

And f*cking finally, the American media is the last to jump aboard, often reluctantly. Finally at last you are remembering how to DO YOUR F&C$#NG jobs!

Thanks everyone!

Disclaimer: If you, the reader of this message are an active voting member of the Republican Party, or would consider yourself a Republican politically, FUCK OFF! This message is not a Thank You, to you.

[Straight Shooter]

29. Bwahahahaha! Bush in Berkeley, remind me at Christmas

to buy you some velvet gloves to go with those iron fists of yours. ;)

[NorCalDem]

68. Haha,

no problem. I'm particularly fond of my own rants too :D The gloves better be red too, otherwise I'm returning them.

[ElectroPrincess]

36. Yes, but I got to let you know Berkley that honest Conservatives

and Moderate Republicans exist. Look how the Neo-Cons jerked the chains of the opposition? We joke about our pink tu-tu Democratic Leaders but consider being on "the team" and realizing that THEY are not supporting Our Constitution? :scared: Yes, Republicans IMO far to often follow "lock step" (team players), but that's why they are so damn hard to beat.

I have faith that MANY conservatives are beginning to understand that *'s Neo-Cons do not care for the people of this Country. They know that their a**es will be in a sling politically if both Bush and Cheney are allowed to slither out of Government and into Carlye Group with the Lion's share of Military Industrial (and OIL!) Corporate Contracts and Wealth.

In essence, if the * Administration is able to pull this off and finish out this term, NOT only the President, but the entire Executive Branch will take their marching orders from Wolfie at the WTO, Bolton at the UN, and those within the Bush Dynasty at Carlye.

Now the above is forming a very "ugly picture" in the minds of TRUE conservatives who believe in upholding The Constitution. Sounds a little bit like ... um ... One World Order.

I sure hope and pray that the *honest conservatives* and *moderate Republicans* continue to do the right thing. :thumbsup:

[mod mom]

60. Conyers needs to tell them to investigate or they are COMPLICIT. Let's

give them the chance to come clean if not, they are held partially responsible when the war tribunals begin.

[stlsaxman]

26. I may take off work tomorrow afternoon to watch c-span3

to see how THAT pans out...

:popcorn:

drip... drip... drip...TSUNAMI!!!!!!

[Triana]

27. HOLY Neocons, Batman!

This is getting hot, hot, hot!

[Roland99]

28. The good stuff is at the end of page 3

The memos were first obtained by Michael Smith, a London-based reporter who previously wrote for The Daily Telegraph and now works for the Sunday Times of London. Smith told NEWSWEEK he obtained a first batch of six documents last summer when he still worked for the Telegraph from a source inside the British government who he could not otherwise identify. On the advice of the Telegraph’s lawyers, the paper had a secretary retype the documents verbatim on separate paper—then returned the originals to his source. Smith received another three documents when he went to work for the Sunday Times. Some of the retyped documents have recently begun to appear on Web sites such as Raw Story, a liberal site that is critical of the Bush administration. Smith told NEWSWEEK that nobody in the British government has disputed their authenticity, and he was even threatened last year with criminal investigation for violating Britain’s Official Secrets Act. “I’m struggling to understand why they would threaten to investigate the leak of official secrets if these were not official secrets,” he said.

A spokesman for No. 10 Downing Street, the office of the British prime minister, said today, “We would never comment on internal documents.” But two senior British officials, who asked not to be further identified because of the sensitivity of the material, told NEWSWEEK in separate interviews that they had no reason to question the authenticity of either the documents published by the Sunday Times or the related documents—including the March 2002 options paper.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

38. OMG, the second coming of Deep Throat, the British incarnation

I love this snippet:

from a source inside the British government who he could not otherwise identify. On the advice of the Telegraph’s lawyers,

Do I dare believe, once more, that this is the final straw on the proverbial camel's back?

I'm skittish about getting hopeful, but could it be? MKJ

[Roland99]

73. Crossing my fingers and toes!!

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

75. lol, crossing all of the above, plus arms, legs and eyes!

If I could cross my ears and nostris, I'd do that, too! MKJ

[NashVegas]

59. Hey! Those Memos Are Forgeries!

Shades of Rathergate, I couldn't resist.

But I can't help but wonder if Little Green Footballs will soon lead the charge.

[lala_rawraw]

80. Stop already...

At least 5+ journalists have now verified them, others have admitted to knowing about them, they have been authenticated, admitted to at least in some ranks, and not denied by either government... and used in the Butler report. I used two sources, is that enough? Good grief.

[lala_rawraw]

82. Okay, now I am really pissed

Aside from the obvious...really screwed over and that is that. Feel free to read additional materials.

http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/muriel/path_of_war_timeline_613.htm

[Pirate Smile]

88. Congrats lala. A mention in Newsweek will certainly bring some

more traffic and attention.

Excellent work.
:toast:

[lala_rawraw]

91. not like that...

"a liberal web site critical of the bush admin"?????

that is a slam, not a tap.

[Pirate Smile]

92. Well, getting the name out isn't exactly a bad thing.

[EC]

31. I'm beginning to believe the Brits are "helping" us with this...

I think they are thinking this will get rid of Blair too...

[BigBearJohn]

42. Maybe we should encourage THEIR side to drop TONY

How can we help them???

[eleny]

32. So the Brits are going to help save our republic

I guess they didn't mind our little revolt way back when.

[chomskysright]

84. HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: CAN WE DENY IT?

[AX10]

33. It's up to the Dems and us to keep this alive.

The ball is rolling and it is up to us keep it rolling.

[hiley]

34. very good !

:applause:

[Blaze Diem]

40. Thanks for this great post BigBearJohn..May we all breath one BIG Sigh..

of relief, momentarily..
before we deeply inhale another breath for Phase 2 of the road to redemption for George Bush & pals.

Many will be jumping ship in the coming months, partly, due to the upcoming 2006 elections. Surely there will be some explaining to do for their constituents back in the home-states.
"Who's side are you on, Bush or America?"

Question:
What Senators/Congressmen up for relection in 2006, stand to be most damaged by Bush's Big Lie?

To the Christian Right:

How many times did that cock crow again?
Maybe that is the real Trifecta.

Bush sould be on slow roast as he decends into that firey pit of hell for the innocents who have lost their lives under his evil watch.

Thanks
Blaze

[BigBearJohn]

43. I SALIVATE at the thought of MSM eating black dingy dirty CROW

[thecrow]

55. Aargh, the visuals!!!

[proud patriot]

41. Hallelujah

O8)

[SlavesandBulldozers]

45. kick

kick:kick:

[borlis]

46. I am keeping my fingers crossed that this is FINALLY it!!!!!

I have had high hopes so many times for nothing.

[Frederik]

49. Oh boy

"stating that Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program was "effectively frozen" and that there was "no recent evidence" of Iraqi ties to international terrorism"

If there is any sanity left in the world, this should mean impeachment.

[redacted]

50. Another KICK and thank you again BBJ for posting

[buddysmellgood]

56. kick

[Kelvin Mace]

61. "web exclusive"

We on the web already KNOW this. If it makes the COVER of Newsweek, then something will have been accomplished.

D.

[lala_rawraw]

87. Yeah, really... exclusive to Raw Story. N/t

[noshenanigans]

62. This is MAJOR grounds for impeachment, right?

Clinton just lied about getting his bugle played by an intern, how on earth could this not result in a major shakedown of the Administration?

I hate so many people have been put into complete misery by all of this, but maybe *maybe* there's some light coming at the end of this tunnel.

[distantearlywarning]

64. Anybody know what the British reaction to this is?

What is the average Brit saying about it? Is it being covered by British media?

[magellan]

101. If you mean their reaction to how this is developing here

...our friends in the UK find it puzzling and a bit amusing, but only because they've known about all this for far longer than we have. It's like, "What took you so long?!" The secret documents began leaking over there -- or appearing in the British press -- in September last year if I'm not mistaken. And their press (excluding Sky News -- sister to Faux News -- and NewsCorp rags) has covered the war with more fact than cheerleading from the start.

I'm not sure they truly get how censored our press is by comparison, or how skillfully BushCo uses propagranda to manipulate sections of society. Or maybe they do get it and it just reminds them too uncomfortably much of Nazi Germany. When I lived in the UK, I was surprised to find that the general population still harbors a deep, unabiding mistrust of Germany. But then the UK suffered Hitler's murderous ambition directly, and for much longer, than we did.

I think overall they hope we're waking up to the hideous truth, just like they have. The Brits love us Americans for the most part. They just wish "some" of us, and our government, would get off the Rambo kick and join everyone else in the 21st century.

(Not speaking for all, you understand. This is just what I take away from discussions with our British colleagues and friends.)

[icymist]

66. But, but.... in March 2002 we were engaged in a war after being attacked!

We were after Osamba Bin Ladin! Wasn't that the war cry?
:sarcasm:

These people are guilty of no less than High Treason!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

70. I'm beginning to REALLY like what I'm reading!

[DearAbby]

74. Dear Abby Okie Dokie Dance....care to join me?

This is awsome, This is gonna be the straw that breaks the camel's back.


:popcorn:

[lala_rawraw]

77. Lib Web Site Critical of Bush?

How about Progressive news site critical of corruption? Anyway, I am just glad Issi wrote this excellent piece.

Edit: what I am talking about is the mention of Raw... I am retarded, so I speak without context... sorry for making no sense. End of edit.

[Rainscents]

78. What do you think, past few days, Bush is coming out swinging at

Democrats. Lier had been caught in his lies and he is on defense by swing it at Democrats. Lie is, Lie is Lie, Mr. Bush!

Bookmarking this! I may need it later! This is a real smoking gun!!!

[Mechatanketra]

90. None of this will matter.

As I wrote during the build-up to war, the elephant in the room for anti-war campers waiting for all the lies and deceptions to break in the public view, is that the lies and deceptions weren't really necessary. America is such an intellectually crippled culture, so thoroughly indoctrinated in the simple us-against-them, white-hat/black-hat worldview of the school sporting field, that Joe Sixpack just doesn't care. So long as it's not his son or brother or best friend in the flag-colored coffins, the only justification he needed for a war was "Saddam's the bad guy"; the rape, the torture, the murder, and all the other atrocities that have come to light will be ignored, nay, actively supported and defended, because it's "our team" and you have to root for "our team".

It wasn't ever about the weapons; Joe Sixpack didn't really care if they were there, it just made it easier to bloviate at the water cooler in case some Smartass Liberal Pansy(tm) dared to raise questions about an invasion. It was about a chance to "win" -- something, anything -- dangled in front of a population that lacks the cognitive sophistication to segregate real life and death and bloodshed from a football game. The only reason Bush bothered with the lies was because saying "f*** him, we're taking him out" from the press podium -- while it would have raised few objections and maybe even cheers from Joe Sixpack -- might also have convinced some of the rest of the world that we were an imminent threat.

This is what the press really means when they say "it's old news", what Cheney means when he says "it's all in the record" -- they mean that the lies were identified as lies in realtime, and it didn't matter. The people weren't fooled -- they bought in. So pointing out the lies is only going to annoy them, not outrage them.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm just too beaten down by bad news to resist the siren call of misanthropy. But I'll bet money I'm not.

Dilbert: "The naysayers were right."
Dogbert: "We usually are."

[cap]

94. 500K people say you are wrong

they signed the petition regarding the DSM -- see John Conyers

[Mechatanketra]

105. Great! That's, uh, a whole tenth of a percent!

Sense of scale here? I think that's comparable to the number of people who saw Gigli on opening day. Didn't make it a hit.

FWIW, those people aren't "saying I'm wrong", because I'm not saying Conyers is wrong. These documents are important, and they do need to be pursued. But those 500K are a drop in the bucket of a country with nearly 300 million people in it. And in all probability (and I don't say this from smug pride but bitter, bitter melancholy) those 500K will, in a few months, be drowned out and forgotten by the rest of the sludge in the bucket. Just like with Gannon's fraud ... and Plame's endangerment ... and Halliburton's theft ... and Enron's bribery ... and ... and ... and ...

10 good men may save Sodom from God, but they can't save it from Sodom.

[stickdog]

96. Yes, of course. But BushCo is LOSING BIG on the killing fields.

.. And that has made all the difference ...

[teryang]

98. The military failure is associated with a fiscal failure

Nothing fails like a military failure.

[Azathoth]

100. That's an extraordinarily cynical way of looking at it

And unfortunately, I tend to agree with you. It's the only possible reason why support for this war hasn't plummeted into single digits. The level of apathy outside of political activist circles toward this deception and the ongoing disaster it has produced is truly amazing.

[bklyncowgirl]

107. You are correct many Americans will feel that the end justifies the means.

These people are the 35 to 40% who will support Bush come hell or high water.

Then there are the 35 to 40% who despise Bush and everything he stands for. Many of them are unaware of the degree of deception. When they learn of it, they will be outraged.

Then there's the 20% or so in the middle. These are the ones who we have to reach. Many of them are religious conservatives. While some will continue to support the adminstration, others will be outraged.

We will not turn 100% of the American people to our side. 60% will do nicely.

[Not_Giving_Up]

103. NAIL IT TO THE DOOR!!!!!!!

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/061505X.shtml

[Boomer]

108. Treason

There's no other word for what * and Co. have done.

[speedingbullet]

109. This is News?

The media should really be talking about more substantive issues. What about that runaway bride? Micheal Jackson's verdict? Who is feuding with Paris Hilton? How about all the positive news from Iraq? Didn't we restore infrastructure to like a whole square meter of the country?