St. Petersburg Times: The American people have been had

[G_j]

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/06/12/Columns/The_American_people_h.shtml

The American people have been had

By PHILIP GAILEY
Published June 12, 2005

---------------------------------------------------------------

The war has taken a dangerous turn - not in Iraq but here at home. It has lost the support of a majority of Americans.

According to the latest Washington Post/ABC News Poll, for the first time since the war began a majority of the American public doesn't believe the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime has made the United States more secure. The survey also found that nearly three-quarters of respondents say the casualty rate in Iraq is unacceptable; two-thirds believe the U.S. military is bogged down; 60 percent say the war was not worth fighting.

<snip>

Bush may not realize it, but Amnesty International may have done him a big favor. The controversy the human rights group ignited over the treatment of Muslim detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has deflected the attention of journalists and war critics from an even more disturbing story - how all the president's talk about going to war as a last resort was just a ruse.

Seven months before the "shock and awe" bombing began in Baghdad, the Bush administration was bending intelligence to suit its purpose, which was to go to war come hell or high water.

Who says so? The head of British foreign intelligence, that's who.

..more..

[skooooo]

1. drip drip drip

[Karenina]

3. A blast from the past...

[fasttense]

2. I'm not sure that Amnesty International did brush a favor.

If not them than something else would have been thrown out their to divert our attention. There are so many problems with this regime that the administration would have created a media distraction if Amnesty International had not come along.

[Coastie for Truth]

4. The AI report did crowd the DSM off of the sound bite MSM

[leesa]

10. Only because the media chose to report on it rather than Downing Street

They chose their poison and they knew the concentration camp abuse was less explosive because Americans don't care if Iraqis and Afghans are tortured.

[G_j]

12. and AI's membership and donations skyrocketed

It's all turning to crap for the Bush gang,
the inevitable result of the intersection of complete arrogance and chronic lying.

[bpilgrim]

5. the neoCONs and the M$MWs are to BLAME - will they EVER be held to ACCOUNT

great article thanks for sharing :toast:

peace

[indepat]

6. That the American people had been had was painfully obvious on 12-7-00:

Iraq was just the icing on the PNAC cake.

[G_j]

7. Another: "A missing story?"

*** I would say WE are making some real waves now. Don't let anyone tell you we are powerless!
--------

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edppubccol061205061205jun12xx,0,1608564.column?coll=orl-opinion-headlines

A missing story?

Published June 12, 2005

A secret document about the Iraq war released four days before Prime Minister Tony Blair's recent re-election has prompted a wave of press coverage in Britain but barely a ripple in the United States.

<snip>

That prompted Sentinel reader Lynne Reed of Orlando to comment, "It's not that Americans don't care; you can't care when you don't know."

She has a point.

The American press has failed to call adequate attention to the document, which, although British in origin, describes the United States government's plans for a war that continues to cost dollars and lives.

The Sentinel actually has carried three references to the memo since it surfaced 43 days ago. Two of those, though, appeared in articles that focused on other issues, and -- as has been the case in most American newspapers -- none was on the front page.

The issue is not whose version of events anyone believes.

It is whether the press is doing its job in keeping Americans informed so they can decide for themselves what to believe.

[G_j]

9. and from our own paper:

http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050610/OPINION01/506100315/1039/OPINION01

In shying away from 2002 Downing Street Memo, a timid press shirks its duty

published: June 10, 2005 6:00 am

The coverage, or lack of coverage, of a story regarding notes from a meeting of British intelligence officials dubbed the "Downing Street Memo'' is quite a mystery.

If fact, coverage has been curiously meager, although the contents of the memo were reported in early May by the Sunday Times of London. The intervening weeks have seen the American media focus on runaway brides (Jennifer Wilbanks), runaway mouths (Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean) and a runaway Congress dominated by filibuster fights and stem cell debates.

Lost at times has been the running battle going on in Iraq, and that is why the contents of the Downing Street Memo could be of import.

The memo came from a gathering of top British security officials on July 23, 2002. In part it gives input from Sir Richard Dearlove, at the time leader of MI-6, essentially the British counterpart of our CIA. The most damning sections state: "(President) 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...''

..more..

[Just Me]

8. They betrayed their own people.

bastards :grr:

[leesa]

11. They also murdered their own people on 9-11 to kick-start this fiasco.

[G_j]

13. sure looks like it n/t