Forwarded to me by a Repub--help with a rebuttal?

[Orrex]

I know, I know, it's NewsMax, and anyone who reads NewsMax for news should have his head examined, but I'd prefer to attack the argument in dealing with this particular Repub friend.

Is there any truth to this?

Sorry if this has already been discussed elsewhere. A cursory search didn't reveal any obvious duplicates...

Thanks!

[BlueStateModerate]

1. All that matters is right here:

"British officials hadn't disputed the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo"

It's even in the NewsMax article.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. No they have nto been desroyed

waht they are trying is to send them the fate of the Bush TANG service... and they are making this story out of whole cloth

[brainshrub]

3. Blair has already admitted that the memo is real.

They are saying that the conclusions of the memo are wrong, that the evidence was not altered.

Plus, there are 6 other memos that say essentially the same thing, the DSM is the most damning 'tho.

[wryter2000]

4. Ask for a link the original article

There's no way to disprove it because they haven't provided any evidence. You might also point the person to the home page where someone here got the entire text of a longer article directly from Smith. But I doubt your "friend" wil read anything at DU.

First, though, ask for a link to the article that reports this. It's extremely fishy to me that they didn't give that information. Looks to me as if they made the whole thing up.

[Lexingtonian]

5. No truth to it

It's been verified multiple times by British officials.

The journalist who destroyed his xeroxes did it so that the person it was addressed to couldn't get his/her copy identified from the stamps or markings or lack thereof.

It's all a God-of-the-gaps theology on the Republican side. And emotional associationism.

There are actually news stories online- I remember them- from late July or early August of 2002 where British officials were telling their own papers that war against Iraq was already decided upon and there was only haggling about the excuses and the time table. They verify the contents.

And I suspect Downingstreetmemo.com has a section on how they've been authenticated.

Tell him that he can't bias his benefit of the doubt some way and expect a truthful conclusion. His "faith" is being appealed to.

[kentuck]

6. Cling to the last thread....

George W Bush would not lie to you... He's a good Christian man. Republicans aren't dumb....are they?

[Orrex]

7. Thank you, everyone

You've made excellent points--I'll forward them to my friend and see how he reacts.


Thanks again.

[bunkerbuster1]

9. Another unmentioned point

to differentiate this from the (idiotic) Rathergate Killian memo "scandal":

The author of these minutes is NOT dead.

Picking on superscripts is not going to work.
There's no weaseling out of this one.

[indie_voter]

13. not to mention, these are MINUTES

Minutes are usually distributed to everybody who attended the meeting. It is part of the official record (documentation).

[indie_voter]

8. Originals NOT destroyed, given back to source. Photocopies destroyed

Backstory from Raw Story:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Backstory_Confirming_the_Downing_Street_0614.html

[Orrex]

10. Excellent! Thanks!

That's exactly what I was looking for. My friend won't be swayed by reasoned arguments from me, but a link to a thorough online examination will go a long way.

Thanks again.

[jobycom]

11. Kick him in the nuts and forget about it

He's a Republican. If he hasn't been convinced by the testimony of Joseph Wilson, Paul O'Neil, and a dozen other Bush people who have accused Bush of essentially the same thing, and if he hasn't been convinced by Blair's office admitting the memos were real, and he hasn't been convinced by the Republicans themselves, whose first line of defense wasn't "The memos aren't true," but rather "Of course they're true, but we've all known that for a long time," then he won't be convinced by anything.

In larger terms, maybe if you put it to him this way: Everything Bush said leading up to the war has been proven false by his own administration. Everything the opponents of the invasion said leading up to the war, from our proof that there were no WMDs or no terrorist connection to either 9-11 or al-Queda, to our claim that Bush would never subdue Iraq and would instead slaughter hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, none of whom would throw flowers at our feet or welcome our invasion, was true.

Which means we were right, and either Bush was lying, or he's stupid. Take your pick, either makes him unfit to continue as president. Which do you believe--that he lied, or that he was fooled? Which do you think speaks more highly of him? Remember, if he was fooled, then so were Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfield, Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, and the rest. If he lied, then they all lied, because they all went along with what he said. Tell your friend to take his pick--Bush and his whole administration are either stupid, or murderers.

[Lochloosa]

12. Here is a link to All of the Memo's

Let him read those...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/leakedmemos.html

[grumpy old fart]

14. Be sure to point out to your "friend" that his RW source has LIED again...

as they so shamefully and blatantly do, over and over and over....and will so long as the sheeple will keep lapping it up, over and over and over......