USA Today tunes in to Downing St. Memo

[reprehensor]

Rate this baby 5 stars at Yahoo!

'Downing Street memo' gets fresh attention

By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY Wed Jun 8, 6:58 AM ET

A simmering controversy over whether American media have ignored a secret British memo about how President Bush built his case for war with Iraq bubbled over into the White House on Tuesday.

At a late afternoon news conference, Reuters correspondent Steve Holland asked Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair about a memo that's been widely written about and discussed in Europe but less so in the USA.

It was the most attention paid by the media in the USA so far to the "Downing Street memo," first reported on May 1 by The Sunday Times of London. The memo is said by some of the president's sharpest critics, such as Democratic Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, to be strong evidence that Bush decided to go to war and then looked for evidence to support his decision.

The Sunday Times said the memo is the minutes of a meeting that British Prime Minister Tony Blair had with some of his top intelligence and foreign policy aides on July 23, 2002, at 10 Downing Street, the prime minister's official residence. The story said the memo indicates that Blair was told by the head of Britain's MI6 intelligence service that in 2002, the Bush administration was selectively choosing evidence that supported its case for going to war and ignoring anything to the contrary. The war began in March 2003.

more@link

[Dhalgren]

1. WTF is with this weasel-wording?!

"The Sunday Times said the memo is the minutes of a meeting "; "The story said the memo indicates"... Can this reporter not get a copy of the published minutes? Why doesn't he look at the minutes, himself, and decide what is being said? Why does he have to try and make the story about the "Times" article and not the DSM, itself? I am glad someone is mentioning the smoking gun in print, but this watering down of the actual story just pisses me off to no end!