Frank Rich, NYT, on Franken -- Downing Street Memo "no big deal"

[kaitykaity]

"We already knew this" from Clarke, O'Neill,
Woodward.

MSM once again rolls over and plays dead.

Do they not get it on purpose? That the DSM
is an official gnvernment document much different
than a couple of biographies and a warmed over
Woodward?

:grr:

[acmejack]

1. Rich has been a "terrific" gain to the NYT oped page

Just another Reichwing hack.

[Don Claybrook]

10. Frank Rich is anything but a right wing hack

Sorry, but I can't take cognitive dissonance, no matter where it comes from.

[Jacobin]

22. Um, go read some of his columns

He is the opposite of how you describe him.

[BattyDem]

2. "We already knew this from Clarke, O'Neill, Woodward."

True ... but they were called liars. They were accused of holding a grudge or having an agenda. The DSM is "official" :evilgrin:

[Blue Belle]

27. Yep...

That was just what I thought. they were called liars, yet everyone believed tham so it's a non issue.

[BlueEyedSon]

3. He's right you know, the INFO is not new.

The question is how to get the whole thing to have traction & results....

[Darkhawk32]

4. We all "KNEW" Bush lied, but the memo is tangible evidence that he did...

Not a verbal testimony from an ex-employee.

[kaitykaity]

6. Official confirmation of the information is new though.

Real tough for the Pubbies to undermine the
credibility of the British government maybe.

[ValentinoM]

40. I believe you, and Rich isn't the first good guy to say this..

I don't get it either, what am I missing that the media doesn't seem to understand.. I thought this would be a slam dunk.. SHIT!

[Debs]

50. What you dont get is

That the media does not see its job as informing the public but serving power. It doesnt serve power to push the issue of Bush being a scandalous liar. Bush is serving power so he will be protected.

[ValentinoM]

60. You are correct.. If the media doesn't report it.. how will people learn??

[99Pancakes]

75. MSM

It's all about ratings. I am fed up with the amount of "news" shows that fold in christian-angled stories these days. This all started after DumbDumb stole the Presidency again.

[Fovea]

5. You can't see it on radio

But I bet Rich was wearing fishnets and bright red nail polish.

[welshTerrier2]

95. actually you can ...

just fyi, the Al Franken Show is now being shown on TV on Sundance Channel (Direct TV Channel 549) ...

the show airs at 11:30 pm (edt) for one hour and is repeated the next morning at 2:30 am (edt) and again at 7:00 am edt ...

[Canuckistanian]

7. The Prophet hath spoken

Look for this to be quoted ad infinitum on the wingnut shows.

[merbex]

8. It is a big deal because while Clark and O'neill were "discredited

with the "trying to sell books" meme and Woodward's book was spun into isn't B* a "hands on,tough guy" the Downing St MINUTES
are an OFFICIAL GOV"T ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that Bush was manipulating, lying and FIXING facts around the stated goal of WAR with Saddam/IRAQ

You can't make money on sales of a gov't document, and B* is a lying motherf.......

Those are the facts

And it is a big deal

[redqueen]

9. Operation Mockingbird

Look it up.

[PsyOpsRunsOurCountry]

120. Bingo. Please post this everywhere. The CIA is the media for 60 years now.

It only barely came out in the 1975 Church Committee hearings on CIA abuses that hundreds of CIA operatives were in the media to keep 'the story' leading to a permanent wartime economy.

After the tip of this iceberg surfaced, it was vigorously pushed back out of view until Carl Bernstein, of Watergate Woodward and Bernstein fame, wrote a lengthy 1977 Rolling Stone Article on Operation Mockingbird.

The CIA revealed assassinations, torture, toppling governments, etc.

But they absolutely refused to divulge much on Operation Mockingbird because it is their single most important weapon. It allows them to run the country the way they want. PRICELESS.

The CIA is run by the small criminal gang that uses the White House as their permanent club house since WWII with occasional changes in spokesperson (President.)

So we have our own KGB and state-run press, like Pravda.

Until this gets through to 'the left' and they tell Republicans that we are ALL being lied to so we will kill for the rich, we are gonna have Vietnam for ever.

It is that bloody simple.

READ AND SPREAD THE WORD:
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/Media%20Readings/Berstein%20-%20CIA%20and%20the%20Media.htm

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm

http://agitprop.org.au/stopnato/20000318mediaoverb.php

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/index_fr.html?content=articles/doors_of_perception.html

[KoKo]

11. Without the whole quote in context how can anyone judge that what you

quoted isn't taken OUT of context. We've seen lots of quotes thrown around DU recently that have been taken out of context. :shrug:

Frank Rich has been consistently good at exposing the Bush hypocracy...I can't throw a dagger at him because of this. It's the "inconsistent" ones I worry about like some of our duplicitous Senators like Joe Biden.

[kaitykaity]

12. Franken asked him the question.

"you don't think this is a big deal."

His answer clearly showed why he doesn't think
it's a big deal.

It's wrongheaded, but I did not hear it wrong.

That's three times today I've been accused of
getting it wrong or lying.

I'm really getting tired of it.

Why don't you come up with a "direct quote"
of Rich's position to counter me, instead of making
vague accusations?

[bpilgrim]

21. he is good... but he was try'n to down play it, imho --------- --- > MP3

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/aar/af/DSM/AAR-AF-DSM-OLD_NEWS.mp3

he have to hold ALL their feet to the fire... nothing personal but they're pro's and if their smart they will take advantage of all the extra editors helping them stay honest ;->

:hi:

peace

[KoKo]

25. Thanks b.pilgrim.....no problem...

:hi:

[psychopomp]

142. Good Lord I had to listen to that 3 times to follow his wiggling

his way around that direct question. WTF is he thinking? This is an obscene effort at getting Bush off of the hook!

Thanks for the link:toast:

[NightOwwl]

13. Wow...surprised Rich would react like this.

In case he forgot, Clarke and O'Neill were completely discredited by the White House, and Woodward (as far as I know) has never said anything publicly or in his book that the intelligence was fixed around the facts. The DSM proves without a doubt that the War in Iraq, as presented to the American people, was a complete sham. Each time Bush got up in front of the American people and talked about WMDs, imminent threats, mushroom clouds...these were DELIBERATE lies.

Sure, a lot of DUers knew the Bush administration had already made the decision to go to war, but most people didn't. My husband (a Democrat) believed and supported Bush even though he despised him, because he could not believe that his government would lie about something this big. Now he tells me, "You were right all along." This is one time I wish I wasn't.

People deserve to hear the truth, but, I guess since he didn't lie about a blow job, it's no big deal. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[merbex]

37. My husband was the same way;

I told him:1st -rule Gov'ts lie!

2nd rule Repug administrations don't know how to tell the truth as evidenced by Nixon- Watergate, Reagan Iran Contra, Bush I ditto,

Ford brought us Cheney (instead of an obscure Congressman he made him Chief of Staff)& Rumsfeld and gave these bastards "credibility" in an administrative high ranking postion that they parleyed into Big Bucks and neo con fame

[bpilgrim]

14. ------------ -------------- ------------- --------- > MP3

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3805341

btw: DUPE ;->

peace

[kaitykaity]

16. Thanks! Maybe now people will listen for themselves.

btw: A clear headline of who is talking and what they said
would be very helpful. ;->

[bpilgrim]

17. true

you sure beat me there ;->

i say the more the better :toast:

peace

[kaitykaity]

18. Absolutely.

Hey, between the two of us we have a perfect
post. After all, you got the audio.

:hi:

[bpilgrim]

19. thank GORE he 'INVENTED' the INTERNETs ;-)

a match made in heaven ;->

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/aar/af/DSM/AAR-AF-DSM-OLD_NEWS.mp3

peace

[johnaries]

143. You DO know that Gore was given a special Webby award

don't you?

"Setting the record straight on one of recent history's most persistent political myths, The Webby Awards will present former Vice President Al Gore with The Webby Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of the pivotal role he has played in the development of the internet over the past three decades. Academy member Vint Cerf, widely credited as a founder of the internet, will present the award to Gore."

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050503/latu082.html?.v=8

[Kurovski]

15. Depends on who "we" are.

There still are not enough people referring to Bush as a liar the way they did with Clinton over his finger-wagging session denying the Monica thang.

And of course, not enough people are yet talking impeachment over those lies.

So yes, it is a big deal, especially for those who thought Bush meant it when he said he was trying to make war the last option.

But what is also true; for some the Bush lies are nothing new.

[mzmolly]

30. RIGHT, WE believed those people THEY did not!

Exasperating.

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. I agree with Rich

And the fact that it's an official document of the British government doesn't make a whole helluva lot of difference.

This is seriously a DU panties-in-a-wad issue that doesn't touch beyond the left blogosphere, sorry to say. Main reason: everyone already knows that Bush lied to get into Iraq. A third are fine with that, a third are outraged, and a third don't give a fuck. Them's the breaks. DSM is just another thing for lefties to get up in arms about, but has little impact outside a very restricted set of affective engagements.

[kaitykaity]

23. And it's attitudes like this....

Facts are facts are facts.

The DSM confirm that the cabal are war criminals.
Ever see "All the Presiden't Men"? Confirmation
is a very big deal.

The media coverage before the Watergage story got
going was very similar to what we've got going on
now, and we all know how that turned out.

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. Keep believing it

I promise not to invoke an "I told you so" moment when this goes absolutely nowhere.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kaitykaity]

64. No, I'm the one hacking your arguments to pieces and

you're the one getting all pissy about it.
Now you're down to don't like it too bad.

I don't like like it that Bush lied and I don't
like it that the media won't cover the proof of
the lie.

I think what I don't like is a whole lot more
important than your offended feelings.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kaitykaity]

69. I'm still here. I hven't walked away.

That would be a victory right there -- clearly
demonstrating a statement of yours is not valid.

You're the one down to personal characterizations
here rather than the issues.

You went there.

That's two.

Need I go on?

:rofl:

[alcibiades_mystery]

71. Please do go on

Start with anything resembling a cogent argument.

[kaitykaity]

74. Please present something that rebuts my

already stated cogent arguments and I'd be happy to.

[alcibiades_mystery]

77. I'm still trying to find them

n/t

[kaitykaity]

81. Well then you need to drop the attitude and open

your eyes. They're there.

All you have to do is quit trying to insult your way
out of this and pay attention.

[alcibiades_mystery]

91. I'm paying attention

I don't see an argument of merit here.

You say that the memo will have a significant impact if only it is publicized adequately. I simply don't think that's the case, and you've given me nothing to hang my hat on there. That's the argument I'm looking for. And I think I've paid very close attention to your own insults throughout this thread, in addition to your dogmatic claims. I'd like some substance, though.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alcibiades_mystery]

106. Oh, my sincere apologies

I was adding that as a qualifier because I really thought the ability of the DSM to have an effect was dependent on proper publicity. Is that NOT what you're saying?

OK, so your argument is simply that the DSM will have a significant effect, full stop? Fair enough. Still love to get some substance to help me believe that.

Stop perceiving (or pretending to perceive) condescension.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alcibiades_mystery]

117. How dare you?

I feel sorry for your wife.

Do you have no bounds of indecency?

[kaitykaity]

131. You insult me all over the place, you bring your wife

into the discussion, and now you pretend to play
wounded hero?

Bwhahahahahahahahahahaha.

[alcibiades_mystery]

132. You're so far over the line

It's not even funny.

You see an personal attack, hit alert. Those are the rules of the board.

Besides, I brought my wife in as a reasonable explanation for why I didn't respond for lo on 35 minutes. If you choose to use her in your bizarre message board contest, that's your poor judgment, not mine.

[kaitykaity]

135. Insult is not the same as a personal attack.

You very, very, very, very, very carefully straddle the
line of what's an insult and a clear personal attack.
And you know it.

Your pretense affrontery is laughable. You don't want
your wife mentioned in the discussion, don't bring her
up. You did it.

You can dish it but you can't take it, eh?

[alcibiades_mystery]

137. I brought up having dinner with my wife

You said you feel sorry for her.

I'll leave it to the judgment of decent people who was acting in a civilized manner and who behaved improperly.

I better not bring up my grandmother, or she will surely too come in for your no-holds-barred style of verbal abuse. Ooops, too late. I guess she's fair game now too...:crazy:

[Jacobin]

24. Yep

Those on DU all up in arms about this may not have been around here pre-invasion to see that this was a very well known fact for anyone who cared to read some of the several op-eds from BushI officials who were very very upset about the notion of invading. There were ZILLIONS of posts about this, and several newspaper articles, some of which I uselessly faxed to congresscritters before the IWR vote, to no avail

And your one third thingy is pretty much spot on, unfortunately

[bpilgrim]

28. I've been here and i KNOW the M$MWs have been SPINNING the war for YEARS

time for the TRUTH to OUT.

NO ONE has CONCEDED that the neoCONs FIXED THE INTEL and LIED to the american people.

the OFFICIAL STORY TO-FUCKING-DAY is the Intel was FLAWED.

peace

[Jacobin]

33. Gee, didn't you read the articles about the OSP?

(Office of Special Plans) and how they were cooking the intel to make the war look inevitable? And the Powerpoint presentation found in the park in August 2002? How you 'don't try to sell a war' in the summer, you wait for the Fall? and Brent Scowcroft's op-ed in the NYT? I'll have to dig up the other 'hints' that this was planned and was going to happen no matter what.

Look, I'm as pissed or more pissed about the IWR and the invasion as anyone. I lived through the Viet Nam debacle. It's happening again, and it could have been stopped but for our feckless, ball-less incompetent corrupt fuckwad "democrats" in Congress.

But to herald this memo as some great whoop ti do, that's igoring history.

[kaitykaity]

35. Yeah, but all of that was before there were 1700 dead kids

and hundreds of billions spent.

Yeah, they told us so then, and no, it didn't matter
then.

But this is now, and it's a whole new ballgame
now.

[Jacobin]

39. Wha?

I thought the memo was pre-invasion? This makes no sense.

The reason you stop a war before it starts is so that people aren't killed for some idiotic naive, stupid, ill-conceived, whack job reason. Once its started, duh, yeah, people get killed.

If I understand your reasoning, the pre-war memo (one item among MANY which demonstrates that Smirk was bound and determined to go to war because his polls were sagging), is remarkable and damning NOW because it was written THEN, because kids are dead NOW.

Never mind. Go for it. I hope it helps sway some folks. It's not 'news'.

What it does do for me is piss me off royally even more that the god damned democrats went along with this warmongering freak in the white house, that's what it does. It reminds me of these spineless pusillanimous fucks voting for the fucking war.

[kaitykaity]

41. No, not nevermind. No nevermind now.

Gotta see if we can get through this.

Look, you gotta remember the political climate in
2002 -- right after 911. Come on, don't you remember?
Rah, rah, freedom fries, the Dixie Chicks? The
haze of patriotism, the squelching of dissent, and
the whorish media doing it's whorish best to cheer
Bush on?

All of that has changed. That's number 1 why the then/now
thing is important.

Number two, this is an official document. Not something
that can be dismissed with the wave of the royal Rovian
hand or the collective blathering of the Lords of Loud
and their talking point of the day of why Clarke/O'Neill
are not to be believed.

And number three, WE are a lot better organized now than
we were then.

So if you want to blame the Democrats for being caught in
a vice and not knowing how to get out of it, go ahead.
Talk about pounding your forehead bloody.

:banghead:

[Jacobin]

96. I think we were better organized before the invasion

The anti war protests were historic in proportions.

The dems went along with Bunnypants because they have no morals, no scruples, no spine, no wisdom, they are not statesmen, they are political hacks and are worthless spittle (the ones who voted for the IWR)

Since then, the dimwit has gotten a new term. While I suspect substantial corruption at the polls, clearly 45 million more or less voted for the idiot.

I don't think that shows any dem organization, considering the clusterfuck that this administration has been. The media of course has glorified the boy dunce and castigated any democrat.

Ah, fork it. the memo simply reinforces what ANYONE who was paying attention knew long before the invasion started.

[kaitykaity]

122. Well, if you're right, we may as well just give up and

submit to the martial law and get it over with.

:eyes:

The Dems went along because that's where the country
was. Bush had 90% approval ratings, and the Republicans
were successful enough in 2002 in destroying anti-war
Democrats without having even more ammunition.

I was mad at the Dems too, but I think it's better to look
at the new leadership we have now (Reid not Daschle,
Pelosi not Gephardt, Dean not McAuliffe) and all of the
work from people like us and take heart in that.

[Jacobin]

125. I know what you mean

Its just sad that the IraqNam thing has to end in unmitigated disaster and giant expense for it to be 'over'. I don't think it will end there.

I think we can expect counter attacks from exceedingly pissed off Iraqis for years to come, even after we leave.

[kaitykaity]

128. You're right, it won't end there.

We will be suffering from Bush fatigue 30 years
from now. (I won't be alive then, but my nieces
and nephews will.)

[kaitykaity]

123. Oops, double post.

[bpilgrim]

52. having US officials ADMITTING it was FIXED to our allies is a BIG DEAL

sorry AND the MEDIA hasn't reported this... the OFFICIAL COVER is still FLAWED Intel, hello...

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

58. You mean British officials CLAIMING it was fixed, right?

Unless we're talking about another set of minutes?

[bpilgrim]

65. NO, UK officials discussing what US officials TOLD THEM an Independent

Investigation is REQUIRED to get to the BOTTOM of this.

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

73. Right, so, UK officials CLAIMING they were told it was fixed

If that's what the minutes say.

[bpilgrim]

78. that's what the MINUTES say, and Bush and Blair were just asked --- > MP3

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/DSM/DSM-Bush-Blair.mp3

psst... pass the word

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

79. Is it?

n/t

[bpilgrim]

82. link to MINUTES ----------- ------------ ---------- > LINK

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being FIXED around the policy."

psst... pass the word ;->

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

92. Hmmm

I see the opinion of a British party to the meeting, not an admission by anyone. Show me how I'm wrong.

[bpilgrim]

98. pretty credible, eh? not like it's someone who's not in the loop...

and why EVERYONE must UNITE on DEMANDING an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION.

fyi: that's the page everyone else is on...

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

102. Oh, I'm not on the same page

My bad.

I think it's a failed strategy that will waste time and resources. As I've said. But, that's just my position. Nobody's stopping you from pursuing your desired course.

[bpilgrim]

109. yeah, we all KNOW it's a UK source...

"I see the opinion of a British party to the meeting, not an admission by anyone. Show me how I'm wrong."

so we're all in agreement on that.

but apparently now your arguing that we shouldn't DEMAND an INDEPENDENT incestigation....

"I think it's a failed strategy that will waste time and resources. As I've said. But, that's just my position."

well, Nobody's stopping you from NOT contributing.

:hi:

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

112. Not at all

Demand an independent investigation.

It is merely my contingent prediction that it will go nowhere. I wouldn't bet a lot on it, 'swhat I'm saying. But I'm talking about the future here, so no doubt I might be wrong.

Demand away, by all means.

[alcibiades_mystery]

45. Of course they can't admit they lied, but everyone knows they lied

and folks just like the show.

It's like a magician, really.

The magician will never say that X is just an illusion, a clever sleight of hand, etc. They'll always wink and say "No, it's magic," at least to the crowd. And the crowd will eat it up, and want more, even though everyone in the crowd knows that it is a "lie," an illusion, and that they're not really seeing what they're seeing.

So in you run to the amphitheater, yelling "Wait, everybody! It's just a trick! There's no magic! The TRUTH must OUT!" And everybody yawns, and says "We know it's a trick, but isn't it fabulous!" And who looks like a fool?

That's why the whole "truth must out" dictum for the Bushies is just silly, and a catastrophic misread of the political situation. Everyone knows it was a lie. Rushing in to "inform" people of that makes you look like a fool.

[kaitykaity]

46. You know, I'd buy that if people knew about this memo.

But they don't. The MEDIA WON'T COVER IT. Here in
Portland -- liberal mecca -- our local paper hasn't
run it. They've run two brief stories and three
editorials.

Couple of guys protested the paper yesterday, holding
up signs and handing out flyers, and they said that
seemed like lots and lots and lots of people said,
"What memo?"

Telling the truth is silly and foolish? Not now,
not ever. Not when blood and treasure are involved.
I don't think many people die at magic shows.

[alcibiades_mystery]

48. Cart before the horse

The reason why the fabled "memo" is not being covered is because everybody already knows what it attests to. It is of little interest for that reason. I suppose you think if it was splashed across every paper in America everybody would be up in arms? If that's the case, I think you're completely oblivious to the real tenor of the situation, and the real danger of it. People are not struggling to free themselves from repression. Far from it. they desire their own repression, which is far worse. In such circumstances, speaking the "truth" is often foolish and silly, yes ma'am, because speaking the "truth" is a futile operation. The point is to produce new desires, not to demonstrate how the old ones were "wrong." And don't be facetious w/ the magic show analogy. You know damn well what I meant, and you also know that no analogy matches perfectly, else it wouldn't be an analogue to the thing, but the thing itself.

[kaitykaity]

51. I know damn well no such thing. I can't help it if I nailed you

and you know it.

Only and informed populace can consent to its governance.
That's civics 101. It is our job to do whatever we have
to do to move this forward.

The facts may have been attested to, but not from an
unimpeachable source. This official government document
is unimpeachable. Next.

So why so hell bent on shutting this up, eh?

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kaitykaity]

61. Gee, nice namecalling.

Little bit defensive, are we?

I am saying do whatever we can to change the problems
you point out.

You are saying these are the problems and there's
nothing we can do about it.

That's bullshit. I call you on it, and you call me
names?

You inferred I was calling you a FReep. I said no
such thing. That you read that into it is on you.

[alcibiades_mystery]

68. Right

The old left-handed insinuation, followed by the denial, and then it's my fault. Message board rhetoric circa 1994. Well done. :eyes: You must be a real pro at unconscionable argumentative tactics. Unfortunately, I'll call it everytime. You want to imply I'm a freeper, do so. If not, then your suggestion that I'm "hell-bent on shutting this up, eh?" should be retracted, not least since I said no such thing.

I also never said "There's nothing we can do about it." That's a real distortion, since I said in post 48 "The point is to produce new desires, not to demonstrate how the old ones were 'wrong.'" You've transformed this into "Because you don't agree with kaitykaity's tactics, you think nothing can be done." I'm guessing that was just an oversight, and not a deliberate attempt to obscure my position.

[kaitykaity]

72. I asked why you were so pessimistic about this.

You are pessimistic about the impact of the memo.
Asking why is not out of bounds.

You went nuclear with the "she's calling me a Freeper"
and now you're trying to exert your rhetorical muscles
about my rhetoric WITHOUT ANSWERING THE FUCKING QUESTION.

Well, I didn't bite on your insults.

I still maintain that the memo is important and
we need to do everything we can to get it in front
of people.

You say it's a worthless exercise with no possible
meaningful outcome. You provide no reason why except
some lame analogy about a magic show.

So who is looking out for the bigger goal here
of getting rid of Bush? Me or you?

[alcibiades_mystery]

76. Wrong-o

I've provided my reason throughout this thread. The magic show analogy was just a demonstration of the point. The point, as I've said time and again, is that the minutes will not have any significant impact because most people already understand that the run-up to war was based on fixed intelligence and overblown rhetoric. That's the point. the minutes reveal nothing on that score. They will not amaze or shock anyone. And because they will not accomplish the goal you imagine for them (keyword: imagine), they serve relatively little purpose in the big picture of removing Bush from office.

Who's "looking out for the bigger goal"? I suspect that we both are. We simply have different understandings of how to reach that goal. You think that goal can be reached by dazzling people with the "truth," in this case, about the beginnings of the Iraq War. I disagree. I don't think that moves us one step closer to that goal. Let's not pretend that this is about YOU, on the one side, looking out for the bigger goal, and ME, on the other, trying to move us away from that goal. However, you slice it, that is a personal attack on this board. I freely admit that we're both looking out for that goal, I just think you're wrong in how to get there. That's been my point throughout this thread, despite your mischaracterizations. But I would never be so low as to suggest that you're not trying to get there. that's a horrible personal attack, in my opinion.

[bpilgrim]

83. do you not think this is reason to call for an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION

to get to the bottom of this>

peace

[kaitykaity]

85. Good question, Billy!

Thank you.

Can't wait for the holier-than-thou, superior,
I'm smarter-than-you answer.

[bpilgrim]

87. crickets

me, too ;->

peace

[kaitykaity]

88. Noticed that, huh?

Lol.

[alcibiades_mystery]

93. Oh excuse me

I should have eaten dinner at the computer rather than with my wife...:eyes:

[kaitykaity]

105. You start an argument, it's rude to leave.

Hey, weren't you the one lecturing me about Internet
etiquette a few posts ago? Since you've been around
so long and everything.

[alcibiades_mystery]

108. It's ruder to skip dinner with my wife

to pursue an online argument that's going nowhere with someone I could care less about.

A hard trade-off, yes, but ultimately a fair one...

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alcibiades_mystery]

118. It is nearly effortless

given the right material.

[kaitykaity]

130. Typical projection.

You abuse people and then blame them because you
abuse them.

Hm.

[alcibiades_mystery]

133. Keen analysis

Dr. Freud...:eyes:

I only pray that nobody has actually had to act on your armchair psychoanalysis...

[kaitykaity]

138. More insults.

Gee this is like catching fish in a barrel.

As you can tell, you can't touch me. You think
you're pulling my strings with your little distractions,
but I can play this game all night.

Oh, yeah, I've seen this type of thing my whole
life. I know what it is, I know how it works. You
ain't gettin' away with nothing.

So get back on topic and share you ideas please?
Instead of being Dr. No and repeating that the memo
will have no impact, why bother.

'Kay?

[alcibiades_mystery]

140. Well of course

You insult me, I'll generally reply in kind.

As for fish in a barrel, you've produced an aquarium of personal attacks here, and its filled to the brim.

That said, this thread was very specifically about one issue, and I've provided my thoughts on that issue. I'd be happy to discuss further why I think this thing has little traction, but to then ask for other "ideas" opens the scope without limit. As it stands, I do most of my political work locally, because I think local struggle over local issues is most effective way to produce collective responses and momentum. So most of the ideas (on education, on zoning, on infrastructure) will probably mean little to you. At the state and national level we need more communication and collaboration between such local groups, rather than top-down directives and DSM-style fantasies of removing Bush from power through scandal. Our efforts should be focused on getting all those good small ideas (from Butte, Montana to Hagersville, Maryland, to Nags Head, to Daly City) connected into a coherent tissue, so that through them responses to the bigger issues will emerge. This is a long-term response to the destitution of American politics over the last thirty years: no fix will come with one fell swoop, or one fell scandal, as it were. As I see it, Bush is a symptom, not a cause, and we must address the cause rather than fantasizing about ridding ourselves of the symptom. And that begins locally, and through multiple local collaborations. The goal is to defeat cynicism by producing something positive, not to feed cynicism with endless A-HA! strokes that ultimately go nowhere (such as DSM).

So yes, then, I can say please pursue DSM to your heart's content. I think it is ultimately counterproductive, but who knows, right? At the same time, I can say 1) I think it will go nowhere, since it does nothing to address the real cancer of cynicism and despair that afflicts our political system (and, in fact, promotes it, hence its counterproductive tendency) and 2) time would be better spent pursuing positive alliances and local connectivities, the kinds of networks we would need for the long struggle. There is no easy fix to this mess, so everytime one is promoted, I can't help but shake my head and shrug. I think DSM has lit up the left blogosphere because it provides the illusion of an easy fix (if only this gets out...etc.). This has a good quality, in that it promotes hope. But it is also a time and energy sink, and misses the larger problem of collective construction of a mass movement, with its different pace and rhythm, like Enron, and Bush Knew, and Bush AWOL, and Gannongate before it. So, you see, my "naysaying" is in fact grounded in a desire for positive action; it is just positive action with a different timeframe and a different set of assumptions about what is possible and what is effective.

[alcibiades_mystery]

136. Beg your permission to leave the argument again, please

Wife and I are going to Barnes & Noble to have some coffee and read.

I wouldn't want to be so rude again to leave without informing you...:crazy:

toodles.

[kaitykaity]

139. C'ya. Have fun.

:hi:

[alcibiades_mystery]

94. Sure, why not?

Have an independent investigation.

Knock yourself out. It ain't going anywhere anyway.

[bpilgrim]

100. so you don't support an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION?

or you think bush and the reTHUGs will say no?

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

104. Sure, I support it

I'm all for it. Go for it. Get it done. Rah rah rah.

I just don't think it'll do anything.

But please, by all means, lead the charge.

[bpilgrim]

111. EXCELLENT!

"I just don't think it'll do anything. "

then get out the way.

cya :hi:

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

114. As long as "Get out of the way"

doesn't mean "Shut up" or "Don't try to move people to other strategies you feel are more effective," I guess we're square, dog.

[bpilgrim]

124. then get run over

when you offer NOTHING.

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

127. Right

Whatever.

[bpilgrim]

129. rhetorically

of course ;->

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

134. Oh, I stand by my initial claim

This is going nowhere, for the reasons I've stated. We've reached what the rhetoricians call a point of stasis, so there it is. Rhetorically speaking.

"peace"

[kaitykaity]

84. That;s better. Still condescending, but something to work with.

First off, this is a productive exercise. Nay-saying it,
as you are, does not imply "moving away." Obstructing it,
saying it's worthless maybe. But not that other accusation
you keep making to distract from the core of the conversation.

You're ignoring several important factors in your zeal
to feel that your analysis is superior.

Those factors at play here other than the memo that you are
studiously avoiding that do in fact make the unimpeachable
truth of the memo pertinent, important, and possibly
devastating include but are not limited to --

1700 dead kids.

billions and billions of dollars spent.

A military stretched an debilitated to the point of cracking.

A liberal talk radio network getting our message out.

Howard Dean as DNC chair working to solidify our base.

Congresscritters like John Conyers tired of taking it
in the neck and refusing to back down.

So whether or not what is in the memo is "dazzling"
or not is completely irrelevant.

This unimpeachable source is a hook to hang everything
else on. That in and of itself makes it worth our while.

Be productive. Quit just saying no.

[alcibiades_mystery]

90. Better...still a distortion, but at least workable

I shouldn't have to say that I'm not "just saying no," but I suppose I must.

That said, I guess we'll see who was right here. I contend that this is going nowhere. You contend that it will either light the world afire or at the very least slowly erode at Bush's ability to continue on his disastrous course. We'll see how it shakes out.

Besides that, I think this is productive, if it turns people towards strategies other than the fabled "Aha!" that will never come.

[kaitykaity]

110. Well, thank you. I think.

Eroding Bush's ability to be a disaster is also
a worthwhile goal.

I shouldn't have to say this, but a lot of people have
been working really hard for a really long time to take
advantage of something like this.

It is only through our efforts that the question was even
asked at that press conference today.

If you have some good ideas of what to do, present them.
Don't just tell us we're being stupid and that there's
no hope.

If not this memo, then what??

[alcibiades_mystery]

116. Ay yay yay

a lot of people have been working really hard for a really long time

I count myself among them, and thank you not to imply otherwise...I've had my ass in the grass contra Bush, kaity.

Don't just tell us we're being stupid and that there's
no hope

I never said anything of the sort.

[kaitykaity]

126. Where are the ideas??

Do you have any??

[stickdog]

144. Come on, man. We get bombarded with tons of crap news nobody cares

about on a daily basis. That reason this didn't appear in ANY major media news outlet until grassroots activists and bloggers raised a huge stink is because the story was actively suppressed.

How can you speak of the public non-reaction to a story they HAVEN"T YET HEARD? You may be right, but, if so, why was the story actively suppressed?

[bpilgrim]

26. "DU panties-in-a-wad" - lol - we are TACKING BACK the COUNTRY

and got a whole lot more than our panties in a wad... better DUCK-N-COVER :nuke:

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

43. Don't hurt your thumb with that TACK

For rizzah.

[KoKo]

34. Constitutional law was broken, though. And Lies are important given

that we live in such a "morally riteous time," with the RW Fundies and Delay type Christians" spouting off about supposed lies of Dems all the time. :shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

44. Yes, I suppose so

Then again, the RW "righteous" will just go ahead and spin it as the mistaken opinion of one Limey (SecDef though he might be), and that'll be that. You know it and I know it. Besides, we all know how the right has already spun these lies, in private and amongst themselves if not in public: Perhaps the case was made based on weapons, but we did think there WERE weapons, and besides, people need a little incentive to do the right thing. That's the problem: the right wing rank and file and, I'd suspect, a good number of other Americans, don't feel qualified to make decisions, so if "leadership" requires a few untruths to get the people aboard, then so be it, the ends justofy the means, tra la la. That's why DSM will go nowhere fast. because people already know they've been lied to, and they even like having been lied to. They may even desire it more generally. The whole of American society rests on any number of illusions. Anyone who can have a friendly backyard bar-b-cue with the neighbors without being repulsed by the wealth differential in the world and the obvious raping of the world and the majority of its people for that slight bourgeois pleasure DESIRES the lies that allow them such banal bliss. Bush just took the standard lies we all live with in America a step further, and, from the looks of it, nobody really gives a damn. But everyone already knows. They just prefer the illusion to the reality.

[Cats Against Frist]

89. I totally agree with you, and admire your no-nonsense approach

You are a realist, my friend. We ALL desire the lies -- even most of us, right here. Just check out the lounge, where the topic-du-jour is always pop culture. Think -- if 49 million people (the people who voted for JK) stopped going to McDonald's or Wal-Mart, and decided to put their asses where their mouths are, we could make a fuck of a lot of progress. Hell, even you and I are implicated, simply for being here, posting.

It's fucked up. Thanks for making sense.


:hi:

[bpilgrim]

97. the CARTOON WORLD view is a funny thing... anything that threatens it WILL

be destroyed even the CHIMP and if people start to suspect that we ain't the ALL MIGHTY in the world in the world due to HIS lies there will be HELL to pay.



and just think... we got all the leg work the reTHUGs put in about why LIEs are IMPEACHABLE :evilgrin:

sure there will always be the TRUE believers out there who will NEVER CHANGE but the folks who do buy into the CARTOON WORLD VIEW will be MORTIFIED when they find out what they did last summer & the summer before, bet.

we are DEEP-THROAT's contemporary amalgam ;->

psst... pass the word :hi:

peace

[alcibiades_mystery]

99. I don't think so

And I've already said why.

Chirp chirp.

[bpilgrim]

101. oh

peace

[GodHelpUsAll2]

141. Bravo

I have read this entire thread and you have said everything I have been trying to.

This country already knows what has been going on. And those that don't, don't want to know. You can splash something across the front page all day long and it will reamin the same. Those who read it will have already know it, those who read it and didn't know will put it away and not think of it again because they don't want to know. They prefer to live in the own lives where nothing is bad and all outside evils are not permitted in.

We all here know what should be. 1/3 agrees with us. 1/3 we will NEVER sway. And the other 1/3 doesn't want to hear it. Until we come up with something that will make the 1/3 listen then we are swimming upstream against a very strong current.

[Jackpine Radical]

29. No big deal. Why do you people keep bringing this up?

We already know that Bush is a mass murderer and pathological liar who sodomizes dead animals and masturbates live ones. So enough already. What's your point? Why can't you people just shut up and quit boring us with this trivial crap?

[kaitykaity]

31. ...who has sex with dead girls and live boys...

:rofl:

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Well, yeah, that too.

But it ain't like he lost money in some land deal 25 years ago or got a BJ something.

[bpilgrim]

36. D'oh! sooooory...

http://images.globalfreepress.com

peace

[seabeyond]

38. yes we all knew it. we always know bush lies

we just didnt have written confirmation. and knowing a lie and being able to prove a lie is two different things. are we just to shrug shoulders and not be bothered by the amny lies.

yes we knew of bush lies. all he had to do was say i am not lying,.....

[Dr Fate]

47. Response: "The Iraq War is NOT 'old news'- it is a CURRENT EVENT."

n/t

[bpilgrim]

53. EXACTLY

peace

[Rex]

54. Why would this be a big deal?

Bush vs. Gore was no big deal
911...nope, not a big deal
Illegal war with Iraq, nada, no big deal
2004 selection? No big deal.

Yellow cake, anthrax, OBL, etc...no big deal!

Someone prove me wrong.

[kaitykaity]

55. Liberal talk radio. Didn't have that.

Howard Dean as DNC chair. Didn't have that.

Organized Dems like John Conyers. Didn't have that.

People like us kicking the media in the shins and
demanding that they cover the story. Didn't have that.

Love the pessimistic fatalism. I can understand it,
but it sure is sad.

[Rex]

63. Thanks

I needed to hear that! :)

[kaitykaity]

67. You're welcome.

I was so afraid the rest of your message was going
to hit me over the head. I've got another one going
here that's just obnoxious.

Thank you.

[Dr Fate]

57. Top DEMs refused to speak out, ON TV in all of those instances.

And if they refuse to do so on this issue, it will go the way of all the other scandals that DEMs give Bush a free pass on.

[Freddie Stubbs]

62. Who is the author of the DSM?

:shrug:

[muriel_volestrangler]

86. Matthew Rycroft, then Private Secretary to the PM for Foreign Affairs

afterwards made a Commander of the British Empire, and promoted to UK Ambassador to Bosnia.

http://www.britishembassy.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1106661056058

[Spectral]

70. The DSM IS big. That is why it is being pooh-pooed and ignored

If it weren't important, it wouldn't need the playdown.

The DSM is an independent document from our biggest ally in this war. It proves that the * administration fabricated the reasons for war and worked hard to manipulate the thinking of a British official.

It's written proof. It's dynamite. Therefore, everybody has to say it is unimportant. Even Democrats. Because nobody wants to end this war, really.

[bpilgrim]

80. EXACTLY - and the M$M just asked the BIG question to chimpy&poodle MP3

http://news.globalfreepress.com/mp3/DSM/DSM-Bush-Blair.mp3

peace

[OilemFirchen]

107. A heads-up to the naysayers

There's a reason some things are called "smoking guns".

Oh yeah, and Watergate was just some two-bit burglary. 'Member?

[Shoeempress]

119. And a fine example of why I sent in my letter canceling my

subscription today. NYT sucks.

[proud2BlibKansan]

121. Hey Frank, you know that column of yours?

I ain't learning nothing new from it. Time to move along. Don't need to read your unenlightening crap any longer. B-)

:mad: