In shying away from 2002 Downing St memo, a timid press shirks its duty

[wishlist]

The Asheville N.C. Citizen-Times printed this editorial today.

"In the wake of the memo, about 90 Democratic members of the House of Representatives are demanding to know if its contents are accurate. "No need'' to respond was the official line from White House press secretary Scott McClellan.

The question won't go away. Was a pre-emptive war really the last resort, or were we sold a bill of goods? The main claim for war, the threat of weapons of mass destruction, has now proven to have been an illusion. Nearly 1,700 U.S. servicemen and women now lie buried because of our involvement in Iraq, hundreds of billions of tax dollars have been expended and according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released Wednesday, most Americans now believe the effort hasn't made us safer. That is almost certainly true in that National Guard and reserve units have been run ragged and the Army is lagging badly in recruiting - for May, it originally set a goal of 8,050 recruits. It later revised that goal to 6,700. It got about 5,000.

We are left with the elephant in the living room: Did this war have to happen?

Have we used lives and resources on an undertaking that wasn't necessary, when we find ourselves in a world where there are in fact enemies posing threats and battles that must be fought?"

Entire editorial laying out all of the details of the memo:

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

[katinmn]

1. good to see another paper follow its conscience.

[Dawgs]

2. Plain and simple...

"Was a pre-emptive war really the last resort, or were we sold a bill of goods?"

Here is the question that should continously be asked of Bush and Blair.

[Rex_Goodheart]

3. Excellent editorial...

and from Asheville, no less. This story has created a second one... that our media and press are right wing shills.

[rodeodance]

4. grand--

[rodeodance]

6. "If fact, coverage has been curiously meager,"

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 authenticity of the memo has not been debunked. A number of reasons have been cited for the dearth of coverage, including the memo's timing and the fact the case has already been made in books and news stories that the administration made a decision to strike Iraq shortly after Sept. 11, 2001.......

[CTyankee]

5. Maybe after they find the girl in Aruba

and the jury finishes deliberations in the Michael Jackson trial and the runaway bride finally gets married and Brad and Angelina go their separate ways and Tom Cruise calms down, the press will at last have enough time to cover the DSM. Ya think?

[rodeodance]

7. hate to say this--but our lame media will find another similar 'crisis"

[CTyankee]

8. Not holding my breath

n/t