We need to act on this: "Iraq bombshell this morning" the US media ignores

[iconoclastic cat]

This is a repost of my meagerly visited thread. I really feel the need to kick into high gear on this one. Any ideas?

*************
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/1/115530/0288
Bush / Iraq Bombshell This Morning
by smintheus


Sun May 1st, 2005 at 11:55:30 EDT

The bombshell from the British papers this morning has had virtually no impact yet on D Kos, and I'm curious to know why it has not turned American politics upside down already. The leaked memo from the Prime Minister's office of a secret meeting (July 23, 2002) shows that after consulting with Bush and his administration, the British leaders met to strategize about an invasion of Iraq that Bush had already decided upon (months before the Congressional resolution)! The memo reveals the depths of cynicism of both the US and UK governments. For ex., the UK head of intelligence reports that for the Bush admin "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy". Much of the memo is devoted to developing a strategy to provoke a war against Iraq, and the problem that there was no apparent justification for it. The Foreign Secretary said "the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran." More on the flip, with a link to the evidence.

Diaries :: smintheus's diary :: :: Trackback ::

The leaked memo shows that Blair's idea was to demand the return of weapons' inspectors; if Hussein refused, that would provide a pretext for war, and if he admitted them then they might find some sort of grounds for war. The memo also indicates that by July 2002 the US military had already stepped up attacks against Iraq for the express purpose of provoking that war outright. The British thought the Bush administration wanted to barge right into a war (timed around the fall elections), so the Brits were hoping to persuade Bush to use diplomacy to fabricate a pretext for war. The British Attorney General indicated that the only grounds for an invasion that were even remotely plausible was an old UN resolution. Blair indicated that Bush wanted to make a case against Hussein for WMD tied to terrorism.

This is colossal in my opinion; so why are we not already talking about 'Iraqgate' in this country? The Bush administration at this date was dismissing talk of an Iraq war as a figment of journalists' imagination; throughout the next eight months Bush & Co. continued to pretend that the decision had yet to be made. So this story blows wide open Bush's pretense of being a straight-shooter. Most fundamentally, it exposes his contempt for democratic process.

Here is a link to my diary from last night on the memo, which just scrolled away into the aether. It links to the text of the memo, and to stories in The Independent and in The Sunday Times.

*************
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/5/1/115530/0288/64#64


Press Conference, March 6, 2003 (none / 1)
by lecsmith on Sun May 1st, 2005 at 13:04:15 EDT

"Ann."

Q Mr. President, if you decide to go ahead with military action, there are inspectors on the ground in Baghdad. Will you give them time to leave the country, or the humanitarian workers on the ground or the journalists? Will you be able to do that, and still mount an effective attack on Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: Of course. We will give people a chance to leave. And we don't want anybody in harm's way who shouldn't be in harm's way. The journalists who are there should leave. If you're going, and we start action, leave. The inspectors -- we don't want people in harm's way. And our intention -- we have no quarrel with anybody other than Saddam and his group of killers who have destroyed a society. And we will do everything we can, as I mentioned -- and I mean this -- to protect innocent life.

I've not made up our mind about military action. Hopefully, this can be done peacefully. Hopefully, that as a result of the pressure that we have placed -- and others have placed -- that Saddam will disarm and/or leave the country."

The rest of the press conference text is well worth reading. Bush is masterful at his presenting his deceitful case for invading Iraq.



**********
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/5/1/115530/0288/188

I did not have sex with that woman..... (none / 1)

That was Bill Clinton's impeachable offense. He lied to the American people.

Well according to the latest leaked memo from July 2002:

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. 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. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

Now, on October 9, 2002, Bush told the American people that "war was not inevitable". This was a lie.

A tale of two liars. One told a personal lie that hurt no one but his wife and daughter. He was impeached. The other told a lie that led to war, caused death and destruction, has bankrupt the country and torn the world apart. He sits in the White House, a good old boy, laughing it up at the White House Correspondents dinner.

When will he be held accountable? I fear the answer is - never.

by landrew on Sun May 1st, 2005 at 17:23:00 EDT


*************

I will begin writing letters tonight, but is there a way to make this a concerted effort by DU?

[The Doctor.]

1. Looking for verification now...

be right back.

{OE}- Ok, this seems to be a good link;
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=634702

I haven't yet checked into the credibility of this newspaper, nor have I cross-referenced the story yet.

But yes, this looks pretty real and highly feasible.

I believe the time is coming for regular folks to start showing news outlets how to do some real journalism.
I'll be sending an article to my local papers if this checks out.

[Botany]

2. This is just one more piece in the puzzle ......

..... although damning and cold blooded this just goes w/ the PNAC letters
asking for the Iraqi war and bush being on record that, "When I am President I
will have a war in Iraq. this could get "legs" in the UK but here .......... ??????

[peacetalksforall]

3. NPR makes it sound like a non-event...gives the impressions that

there was only one battle.

[Jon8503]

4. Blair downplays memo claims

I agree, this should be kept at the front by someone. More confirmation about this entire mess.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big News Network.com Sunday 1st May, 2005 (UPI)

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has downplayed a leaked memo that indicates he was looking to justify the Iraq War eight months before the conflict began. Blair said the opposition Liberal Democrats and Conservatives were focusing on Iraq because they have nothing serious to say about other issues.

Conservatives have accused the prime minister of deceiving the Cabinet and the Commons over the war, and Liberal Democrats have said Iraq will continue to haunt Blair if he wins the election. On Sunday, The Times of London published an alleged memo dated July 23, 2002, by Matthew Rycroft, a former Downing Street foreign policy aide.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is quoted in the memo as saying U.S. President George Bush had made up his mind to take military action even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran, the memo reportedly said. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would help with the legal justification for the use of force, the memo stated..

http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php/cat/c08dd24cec417021/

[The Doctor.]

5. LMAO!!!!

"Democrats have said Iraq will continue to haunt Blair if he wins the election."

Blair doesn't have the support of 40 million plus ignorant Americns to keep him in power... that's funny.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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