Home > Bush asked to explain UK war memo- CNN only US media to maintain credibility

Bush asked to explain UK war memo- CNN only US media to maintain credibility

by Open-Publishing - Thursday 12 May 2005
14 comments

Media-Network Wars and conflicts International USA UK

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Eighty-nine Democratic members of the U.S. Congress last week sent President George W. Bush a letter asking for explanation of a secret British memo that said "intelligence and facts were being fixed" to support the Iraq war in mid-2002.

The timing of the memo was well before the president brought the issue to Congress for approval.

The Times of London newspaper published the memo — actually minutes of a high-level meeting on Iraq held July 23, 2002 — on May 1.

British officials did not dispute the document’s authenticity, and Michael Boyce, then Britain’s Chief of Defense Staff, told the paper that Britain had not then made a decision to follow the United States to war, but it would have been "irresponsible" not to prepare for the possibility.

The White House has not yet responded to queries about the congressional letter, which was released on May 6.

The letter, initiated by Rep. John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the memo "raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of your own administration..."

"While various individuals have asserted this to be the case before, including Paul O’Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Richard Clarke, a former National Security Council official, they have been previously dismissed by your administration," the letter said.

But, the letter said, when the document was leaked Prime Minister Tony Blair’s spokesman called it "nothing new."

In addition to Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon, Attorney General Peter Goldsmith, MI6 chief Richard Dearlove and others attended the meeting.

A British official identified as "C" said that he had returned from a meeting in Washington and that "military action was now seen as inevitable" by U.S. officials.

"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 U.N. 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."

The memo further discussed the military options under consideration by the United States, along with Britain’s possible role.

It quoted Hoon as saying the United States had not finalized a timeline, but that it would likely begin "30 days before the U.S. congressional elections," culminating with the actual attack in January 2003.

"It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided," the memo said.

"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 British officials determined to push for an ultimatum for Saddam to allow U.N. weapons inspectors back into Iraq to "help with the legal justification for the use of force ... despite U.S. resistance."

Britain’s attorney general, Peter Goldsmith, advised the group that "the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action" and two of three possible legal bases — self-defense and humanitarian intervention — could not be used.

The third was a U.N. Security Council resolution, which Goldsmith said "would be difficult."

Blair thought that "it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the U.N. inspectors."

"If the political context were right, people would support regime change," the memo said.

Later, the memo said, Blair would work to convince Bush that they should pursue the ultimatum with Saddam even though "many in the U.S. did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/britain.war.memo/index.html

also see
Corporate News Media
Incompetent, Criminally Negligent or Complicit?

The members of today’s news media warrant outrage from the people of the world who have fallen victim to their despicable practices. With each new day brings new crimes while a false sense of reality is passed to the American people via our media. In olden times when street justice was the norm we would be dragging our beloved anchormen and women into the streets and having a public lynching, for these people have been the empowering force behind the most despicable and dangerous American administration in history.

NOTE: I use this word: Lie. Not mislead, not misstate, misspoke, neglected to inform, omitted, left out, misrepresent, factually incorrect etc. Part of the definition of a lie is to leave a false impression. These people lie to us. LIE. THEY LIE. Bush LIES. Cheney LIES. FOX News LIES. CNN LIES. NBC LIES, ABC LIES...THEY ALL LIE!

This article is not intended to be an editorial news piece. It does not adhere to the standards set by writers past. It is rather angry and undignified. It is supposed to be angry. I (we) should be angry. There has been too much writing and discussion about the state of the media. The good people who are trying to address the problems with the media have been dignified, intellectual, soft spoken and IGNORED. IT IS TIME TO GET LOUD! It is time to get angry! It is time to stop the madness!

Forum posts

  • I could not agree with you more, in fact I just made a similar post the other day and was thrilled to see CNN actually made me eat a word or two

    until I saw that no other major media had any mention of it at all

    its enough to make you sick

    • 1. We have been at war with Iraq since 90. Do you really think this just popped up one day?

      I guess its what you want it to say and what you want to believe. This will never be resolved to your desire or mine for that matter. Its funny as a conservative I believe the government should not interfere in our lives except to protect us from foreign nations, etc. You on the other hand want the govenment to be completely in charge and in our lives (I dont understand) You dont trust our government why do you trust it with everything being in our lives????? Bush has been president for almost 5 years not 60. You can’t blame him for the sun, moon, stars and storms? Find a hobby and relax.

    • Troll...no one wants to keep reading your stupid excuses for that fuck face you make cheap excuses for. Why don’t you get a hobby and fuck off. You need to troll the GOP sites and that would help the rest of us relax and enjoy this site a lot more.

    • Reality is a tough pill for you to swallow.

  • 314038.jpg

  • CNN calls itself the most trusted source in news. Foxnews claims to be fair.

    Both can non temper much with facts, so they claim to have the opinion of the Americans (whoever that might be) behind them.

    Propaganda at its best.

  • booga booga booga. Hysterical and Comical.

    • I said it back in December and I’ll say it again now. Bush won’t last the year without indictment or impeachment. The mob is getting angrier, the evidence is getting deeper and the outcy is becoming louder.

      If you want to bring down this administration, sell your stocks, move your money into bonds or gold or foreign equities. Get your friends to do the same. Tell your broker you want to diversify into Latin America and the Far East. Stop buying at Wal-Mart. STOP DRIVING SO MUCH. Economize and buy locally if possible. Nothing will get action and anger quicker than a slumping stock market. All those corporations who supported Bush should be made to pay with lower stock prices, lower earnings, no profits.

      A general strike is a very good idea that’s been bantered around here. I say a national day of protest in which we voice our opinion by refusing to work. Shut down the airlines, trucking, some vital services for a day. If 50% of the American work force didn’t show up for a day, the media would have to report on that or they’d surely be branded as propagandists and liars.

      General Strike, this summer. Think about it. Maybe some nice summer day in July. Spend some time with your kids, wave some signs, bring down the government. Sounds like a plan...

    • When is Bush and friends saying we will be able to relocate to Mars? I think it’s time to move in order to get back to the basics in life! Let me see... I would probably like to buy or trade for some scenic canyon-front property when it comes out on the market ( they will have an open market, right? ). When I move to Mars my wife can work for the external revenue service or maybe I can even open up a Hummer dealership like I’ve always wanted...

    • First CNN is a propaganda informercial for the Bush Administration. They give one minute summaries of stories such as this one, and spend WEEKS giving details of the Michael Jackson trial.....

      Sedond, here is no way a Republican House of Representatives will bring impeachment charges against George Bush. He knows that...and you’d better realize that as well. Bush and his cartel are war criminals who will never have to answer for their crimes. Bush pulled the US out of the World Criminal Court, knowing that he could be indicted by an International Tribunal for his war crimes.

      Here’s evidence that George W. Bush is the World’s Leading Terrorist:

      CLICK HERE

    • You are wrong about you second point. Clinton had no business signing off on the ICC. He didn’t have approval from our legislative bodies and he knew himself that none of our senators or congressmen were going to support it.

  • I like a day of general strike. They have to know that we oppose this trash. If we’re going to get these leaders to listen to us it’s time for us to start voicing our concerns. Imagnie a strike for a day?! Hit them where it hurts!

    • This is a great idea and I hope it will spread like a wild fore in july....

  • I see where John McCain almost tripped and broke his leg as he jumped up and immediately came to too stupid to defend himself Bush’s defense by twisting the facts to attempt to downplay the fact that the British people are starting to ask so hard questions about the truth of what the poodle and the smirk had cooked up months before they attacked Iraq. It is so funny to watch the slimeballs that "represent" us making excuses for each other and trying to out do one another’s lies, each vying for the title of biggest liar. And truly it is hard to decide who the prize goes to since they are all so good at it and practice it everyday. If they hadn’t gone into politics they could all be bad actors.