The Truth(?) Behind the Downing Street Memo

[brindis_desala]

Without wishing to rain on any parades (I have signed Conyers petition)
as far as I can tell no one has asked the obvious question- who leaked the minutes and why? There is no question that BushCo fabricated the evidence in order to invade IRAQ but throughout this tragic chapter it has been a common but inaccurate assumption that Tony Blair is W's lackey. Nothing could be further from the truth. This war is being prosecuted for and because of British interests equally. It is fantasy to think that Blair was a mere blushing wallflower when in fact he may be the puppetmaster. In my view the leak was either to solidify the LIE and shore up his liberal credentials or a little payback for W's blundering stupidity for having turned IRAQ into a cesspool. The Brits are sharp, slimy fellows; caveat emptor.

[wtmusic]

1. The Brits are paying back whom for what?

If it sounds too complicated, it probably is.

[Carolab]

2. Nope. The memo/minutes make it quite clear the US had this agenda.

It's the neocon world domination adventure.

[me b zola]

3. The minutes were leaked

during the UK elections, meant to do political harm to chimp's lap dog. We are just reaping the benifits.

[DisassemblingHisLies]

4. Blair the puppetmaster?

Have you forgotten the "Saddam tried to kill my daddy" statement?

Are you familiar with PNAC & their "vision" for our country, which includes attacking possible future competitors first, assuming regional hegemony by force of arms, controlling energy resources around the globe, maintaining a permanent-war strategy, etc.?

No, Blair's eagerness to participate in this misadventurous money-making scheme, as well as his fervent support for our election-stealing "president", is most likely the result of a lifetime membership to PNAC & will receive corporate payoffs in exchange for his cooperation. Why else would both *Bush & Blair consistently appear so giddy in public while so many are dying in this God-forsaken, tragic mess in Iraq?

As for who leaked the UK meeting minutes, I'm guessing that it was simply someone who had a conscience & is hoping it will lead to righting the long list of wrongs.

[JDPriestly]

5. Paul O'Neill

described seeing a map shortly after the Bush administration took office, maybe February 2001 or so. It showed a hypothetical division of Iraq into sections and notations about what companies and countries might get what shares of the land/assets in Iraq. It's in the book entitled The Price of Loyalty, in the first fourth of the book or so.

[DisassemblingHisLies]

10. I mentioned a PNAC membership because John Major is a member, too.

I strongly suspect Blair is getting a big personal payback for his collusion in this Iraq mess. Every time I see a photo shot of either *Bush or Blair, they seem inappropriately jovial.

Out of $184 billion spent in this mess, our guys don't have the equipment they need. Why? Where did all the money go?

[DrDebug]

11. Welcome to the DU, Dissassembler ;)

:toast:

[Amonester]

14. I say nobody can really "look" into secret bank accounts.

Yeah. They sure would NOT deposit some huge amounts of "fresh" ca$h in places where no income tax revenue declarations are "required" hey?

Nahhh.... They sure would NOT do that. Every Koolaid drinker BELIEVES they are as good as Jeezusss, and a lot of 'brave' PNAC junta supporters hidding behind their computer screens all day while recruiters "waste" federal (taxpayer's) monies since they can't find enough little kids to feed the MIC limb-cutting "quotas" say, that it's the damned Clenis Lefties (their "mantra," not mine...) who spread such untrue propaganda!

No. BushCo filling up the tax heaven's coffers??? NAHHH...

Yo must be kidding me, Commie? :sarcasm:

[JDPriestly]

6. Interesting question.

Questions about the authenticity of the minutes will arise unless your question is answered. I suspect the minutes are accurate. If they are not the final minutes, they are a draft of the minutes. From what I have read, it appears that the evidence that the minutes are authentic is the fact that Blair supposedly dismissed them as "old news" or something to that effect and did not question their authenticity.

You never know. Blair and Rove may have set a trap. Maybe they are waiting until the press bites, and then they will bring up the evidence that they have had all along that the minutes are not authentic. Still, they should have said something -- responded in some way by now if the minutes are not authentic.

[femme.democratique]

7. Yes, they are sharp. In fact, I see the relationship crumbling every day

I think the British government is going to be the downfall of BushCo, and it won't be an accident.

[elehhhhna]

9. Payback for our telling their King George to Eff-off many years ago.

[brindis_desala]

8. Dems need to think strategically and stop being reactive.

While we yammer over the memo's significance the war goes on and we are distracted from more important issues namely: What happened to the 8.8 billion dollars? Does a plan exist for Iraq outside of fomenting civil war? Kerry was right on this point and it needs hammering. The memo I maintain was a fig-leaf to cover the fact that Blair helped make a hash of it. And btw US hegemony did not begin with the PNAC and British Petroleum has been ruling the Middle East (and the Muslim Brotherhood) for an Old English Century.

From CNN:
The minutes also quoted the unnamed British official as saying the U.S. National Security Council had "no patience" with taking the dispute to the United Nations and "no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record."

"There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action," the official said, according to the minutes published by the Times.

Bud Beck: "More of the same from punch drunk Democrats!"

"Forward thinking critics might see this as the opportunity to do the type of damage some believe the new disclosures should do. They of course would be correct.

Bush moves ahead too fast for the slow thinking Democratic leadership. This was proven beyond any shadow of a doubt during the 2004 Presidential election and it continues to be true."

http://www.politicalgateway.com/main/columns/read.html?col=355

[Carolab]

12. The memo is the entre to the rest--get it?

The memo is the way we incite the masses to demand more, even impeachment.

Conyers is a strategic player.

[brindis_desala]

15. I get it. Thats not the point. It's the eggs in one questionable basket

I am cautioning. There are better "smoking guns" to rouse the indolent.
Most journalists still look on this (rightly or wrongly) as "old and partisan". Corruption is always a story and harder to defend than "spreading freedom" as a default position.

[bunny planet]

23. Yes, I think we have not been paying enough attention to Coingate.

There are lots of little worms under a lot of rocks in Ohio.

[Carolab]

24. But we need something to kick open the door.

What else do we have that we can really prove? Besides, underlying this is the WHOLE enchilada--PNAC and the coup to achieve it.

[magellan]

13. Documents have been leaking from the British government

...since last year. The Downing Street memo wasn't the first any probably won't be the last.

I read somewhere -- sorry I don't recall where -- that these leaks are being attributed to the Tory Party. That would make sense as the Conservatives stood to gain the most from poking the Iraq War hornets nest before the May 5th election...and it worked.

FYI from the Prime Minister's official spokesman on May 17th:

"Asked if there was any leak inquiry into the "extraordinary" number of secret documents leaked to Sunday newspapers during the election campaign that were later found to be genuine, such as the minute of the Crawford Texas meeting and the Attorney General's advice, the PMOS said that 'we took very seriously the leaking of any document and this kind of document in particular'. He had not heard any explanation as to why there were so many leaks, but he had no doubt that there would be the proper inquiries made. As to what form they would be that was a matter for the Cabinet Office."

[brindis_desala]

17. Uh, So the British public thinks the Tories were against this war???

The British voter did not need the memo to know the intelligence was "sexed" up this was old, old news. Are you familiar with the name Andrew Gilligan?

[magellan]

21. No, the Brits know the Tories supported the war along with Labour

Read my post again. I never said the Tories didn't support the war, or that the Brits knew nothing about Blair's lies before documents began leaking. I know what the Brits knew and when. I lived there until right before the war.

Are you implying that everyone should just yawn at the PROOF we now have and say, "Oh, we already knew that, move along"?

Are you implying that just because the Tories and Dems supported the war, they can't use this PROOF of the lies to show Blair and Bush** to be the liars we believed them to be for political gain?

What's your problem?

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

16. I just wish that

the memos had some direct quotes and corroboration, then it would truly be a smoking gun. I bet some more will come out to corroborate this memo.

[Amonester]

18. It would be 'nice' if Kerry would (finally...) denounce the PNAC

gansters along with the DSM.


One year too late.


Better late than never (I know President Kerry was elected).


Still... So many American voters are absolutely "clueless" about the PNAC Dominionists...


No wonder... :boring:


Kerry AND Conyers (2 = better than 1, let alone 100 elected Dems for once, give them a spine, please, someone?)

[lyonn]

19. After mulling this situation over

I guess the bottom line is, most people here in the U.S. and Britain didn't care to be critical enough of the plan to go to war and now that we are there say - we must finish this war/job/adventure. Admitting a mistake by either country apparently is against all they stand for, after all, "we are supreme", or like "water under the bridge, we must carry on." I'm afraid this kind of dismissive logic is what is controlling this downward slope we are on. No On Really Cares!

[brindis_desala]

20. I think there are many that do care but feel powerless.

There were vast worldwide antiwar demonstrations but the politicians on both sides blindly ignored them. Iraq is a dicey situation now because there are enough bad actors involved to make a peaceful resolution well nigh impossible and the discouraging reality is that any imminent withdrawal would probably have to be done by a Republican Administration or the Democrats would be blamed for the ensuing chaos. Simply Being in Iraq is a Hobson's choice. The best progressives can do is keep pointing to the corruption and hope it piles so high that the neocons' shifting excuses no longer hold.

[bunny planet]

22. I agree that as far as oil being the real reason we went to war, Britain

is just as interested in obtaining Iraq's oil and related contracts as the US. Britain's economy grew by leaps and bounds when the North Sea oil strike came on line and now that it has peaked and is in decline, they too are very worried about where they will get enough oil to keep them from economic disaster. I don't think Blair was the puppet master, but I've wondered how he could put up with *'s stupidity and risk everything unless there was something desperately important in it for him. I have wondered who is responsible for the leak and if there is more to it than just trying to embarrass and possibly unseat Blair in the UK election. Yes, the Brits have quite a lot of nasty experience with Empire and all that rot.