Home > Letter to Dana Milbank about the Downing Street Memo and Corporate Media (...)

Letter to Dana Milbank about the Downing Street Memo and Corporate Media Complicity in War Crimes

by Open-Publishing - Tuesday 21 June 2005
30 comments

Media-Network Wars and conflicts International USA UK

To: milbankd@washpost.com, Sketch@washpost.com, ombudsman@washpost.com

Mr. Milbank---

Regarding Friday’s WashingtonSketch ("Democrats Play House To Rally Against the War"): what an offensive, intelligence-insulting, childish rant, totally lacking in professionalism and propreity. Give me a break.

First of all, the Washington Post--- as well as much of the mainstream press--- seems more than a bit confused about the Downing Street Memo. (In this age where apparently the words LIE/LIAR/LYING are taboo in political discourse, I will for the moment play along and simply suggest that you and your colleagues are merely confused, and your much more professional competition in the foreign press and the blogosphere just happened to have hit the truth a bit sooner than you have, that’s all). Your dismissive, trivializing treatment of the memo leads me to think you are under the misunderstanding that this is something akin to a few scribbilings on a cocktail napkin. Allow me to correct you: the Downing Street Memo is the ACTUAL MINUTES OF A BRITISH CABINET MEETING, CONDUCTED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THOSE OFFICIALS MET WITH THEIR AMERICAN COUNTERPARTS, DISCUSSING WHAT EXACTLY TRANSPIRED IN THAT JOINT MEETING. The label, "memo" has unfortunately led more than a few folks unwilling to do the easily-accomplished research (yourself included) about the nature of this document to take the easy road and treat it as some peripheral, flimsy piece of desperate evidence on the part of the antiwar movement...a movement, I might add, that does not follow party lines, contrary to your feebleminded, overly-simplistic condemnation of it. Actually, I have no doubt that you understand the serious magnitude of the DSM and its damning evidence showing that the platform for Iraq was entirely based upon--- I’ll say it since you won’t--- lies; otherwise, why the desperate article on your part?

An easy question, an easy answer: to save your own ass. If not your own personally, certainly the Washington Post’s collective one--- after all, you and your colleagues helped sell this war, didn’t you? You and your brothers-in-arms at the New York Times, with your historically-respectable reputation and considerable clout in the journalism arena, took your position and abused that power by convincing the reading public that we simply had no other choice but to go into Iraq...despite the ample evidence available showing that such White House statements were not based upon fact. Ever heard of "objectivity"? Your colleagues apparently haven’t; had such a thing been considered, the Washington Post would have spent a bit less time regurgitating the White House version of truth and spent a little more on examining the inconsistencies and contradictions in their supposed "intelligence." Instead, you sold us on a war based entirely on lies, a war that any true patriot (not the blind flag-wavers you seem to support) who has read the Constitution realizes is an act of treason committed by Bush et.al., a war where we have violated the Geneva Conventions and summarily punished an entire nation under the guise of "bringing freedom"...and folks are beginning to realize this. You failed to follow the basic journalism tenet (obvious even to the readership you treat as simpletons) of objectivity, and instead you duped America into war and killing and rape and torture. Over 100,000 people are dead, and it’s your fault. All the flailing and pitiful attempts to distance yourselves from this war will not change the fact that the Washington Post’s’ pages are sopping wet with blood. YOU LIED TO US. YOU ARE LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING US TO THIS POINT. And then you have the nerve to try to further insult us by treating the Downing Street Memo as some peripheral, flimsy argument on the part of the antiwar movement? Who do you think you’re kidding?

Contrary to your condescending views of your readership, what you were so desperately trying to accomplish in Friday’s sad excuse for journalism was brilliantly transparent. You fooled no one, and here’s the kicker: you failed miserably. You did not in any way, shape, or form save your own or the Washington Post’s ass, but instead provided glorious spotlighting for the miserable failures that have apparently become Daily Operating Procedure at the Washington Post in coverage of all things Bush. There you are, fires all around you, and you’re just standing there spitting with a dry mouth! What a spectacle! Too bad it’s not funny; it’s hard to laugh when thousands of people are dead because of the Washington Post.

And so, on Friday, you followed the oh-so-predictable pattern at the Post, upon realizing that a story isn’t going to just die as hoped, of launching into attack mode...easy to spot after several years of such treatment in your pages on nearly anything that casts Iraq, or Bush, in a critical light. The DSM story gets bigger and bigger, thanks to the foreign and independent press and the bloggers--- folks who have time and time again shown you how your job was meant to be done--- and now that it is clear that it won’t be gloing away, off you go with a nasty, belittling diatribe where anyone raising a dissenting voice is assigned to the loony bin. Given, it was feeble and pitiful and utterly transparent, but on the page it was indeed mean and childish and, quite frankly, more the sort of hysterical blathering I’d expect from the likes of Michael Savage or Ann Coulter. Is that the sort of company you wish to keep? Who am I to complain...it’s your demise.

Considering the high standard for political discourse you have set with your name-calling and (not even particularly clever or well-written) middle-school-cafeteria sarcasm, I thought it only fair to respond to your maturity with words you shouldn’t fail to understand...and if I have indeed given you too much credit, I trust that you can reflect upon the past four years of Washington Post reporting and put two and two together to see what I mean:

You, sir, are a filthy whore. Your colleagues at the Washington Post--- every last one of you who has ignored the truth in favor of pushing the Bush agenda, every one of you who has insulted the intelligence of your readership and abused their trust and now has the sheer GALL to belittle them for seeking the truth--- whores, every one. Rather than considering such quaint concepts as objectivity in your journalism, you have instead opted to take sides with the Bush Administration and assist them with their war crimes. That makes you a whore. Attempting to silence dissent? That too makes you a whore.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/letters/

Forum posts

  • This is good stuff!! WRH readers are hot! I hope WAPO’s archives will be available for the new - Nuremburg War Crimes Trials. This guy needs to be Milbanks replacement!!

    To quote Maxine Walters - Keep the "HEAT IN THE STREETS" !!! - DSM Rally June 16, 2005 Wash, D.C.

    "FIRE THE LIARS!!" - applies to corporate owned newsfakers also...

  • THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!

  • That’s excellent! Thank you!

    • This is an excellent response to the media liars who have forced our once great nation into a downward spiral, but we all need to do more - and moving to Canada is not an option!

      Which is why I choose to stay and stand up against these corporate loving thugs. I am an AMERICAN and a TRUE PATRIOT that does not have to wrap himself so tight in the flag that it blinds me from seeing truth about Bush and his cohorts like so many in this country.

      There will be a huge demonstration in Washington D.C. on September 24th, 2005 (go to Impeachbush.org for more info). The only problem I have with the organizers of this demonstration is that they are calling it an ANTI-WAR protest where I would call it an IMPEACHMENT rally. The former sounds like we are all tree-hugging flower people who just hate war in general (not that there’s anything wrong with loving peace) but we demand justice for the lies and the deception that occurs on a daily basis, with the aid of our own proganda-media, that have caused the murders of our beloved TROOPS, as well as, the murders of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians.

      The illegal actions of this administration have destroyed many lives; and they are attempting to destroy our integrity as well as our country right before our very eyes.

      We will let the world know that we live in a country that respects the rule of law and not be part of those who try to bend or change the rules when it suits our agenda.
      Americans are a law-abiding, loving and generous people who demand accountability as we all practice what we preach.

      We have nothing to do with the corporatist liars (Bush-Cheney) who have outsourced our good name to commit torture and treason.

      WE SAY:
      NO to corruption, NO to lies, NO to deception, NO to propaganda, NO to election rigging, NO to right-wing talibanism in America (I am a Christian but I do not subscribe to their brand of [anti]-Christianity), NO to intelligence fixing, NO to BUSH and his entire administration, including the Democrats who have aided him (Kerry and Lieberman come to mind).

      All laws passed by Bush need to be reversed, all appointments (including justices) must be recalled. All corruption must end, and that means removing all those placed by Bush in every branch of our government.

      Our voices will finally be heard, even without the now defunct ’Fourth Estate.’

      They will know that the American people, unlike the self-branded ’liberal’ media, is not in lock and step with the thieves and murderers who have (temporarily) usurped our government.
      America will once again prevail as a leader of integrity and justice.
      America will once again be for its people and not for the greedy corporatists like Bush and Co.
      The cancer that is eating away at our nation must be stopped and must be stopped now.

      I refuse to move to Canada, it’s beautiful but too damn COLD!

    • You speak for 70% of the citizens of the United States of America.

    • more like 30% dear boy. but let the delusion continue! its fun, like watching a movie - nothing like real life! any popcorn?

  • I AM SO TIRED OF THEIR LIES, WHICH THEY SEE AS THEIR REALITY, WHICH MAKES IT FACT, AT LEAST TO THOSE WITHOUT ANY BALLS, I.E. MILBANK. THAT’S RIGHT...MILBANK, THE POST, THE TIMES, ETC. HAD A HUGE RESPONDSIBILITY TO UNCOVER AND REPORT THE REAL FACTS. THE REAL FACTS HAVE BEEN UNCOVERED....HELLO!!!! WAKE UP! GREAT LETTER!!!! TRUTH WILL PREVAIL.. LET THIS SNOWBALL AND CRUSH EVERYONE OF THEM FOR EVERY UNJUSTIFIED DEATH, BOTH AMERICAN AND IRAQI, THEY DID CAUSE.

  • I AM SO TIRED OF THEIR LIES, WHICH THEY SEE AS THEIR REALITY, WHICH MAKES IT FACT, AT LEAST TO THOSE WITHOUT ANY BALLS, I.E. MILBANK. THAT’S RIGHT...MILBANK, THE POST, THE TIMES, ETC. HAD A HUGE RESPONDSIBILITY TO UNCOVER AND REPORT THE REAL FACTS. THE REAL FACTS HAVE BEEN UNCOVERED....HELLO!!!! WAKE UP! GREAT LETTER!!!! TRUTH WILL PREVAIL.. LET THIS SNOWBALL AND CRUSH EVERYONE OF THEM FOR EVERY UNJUSTIFIED DEATH, BOTH AMERICAN AND IRAQI.

  • The DSM, without a doubt is a damning document offering factual evidence against the Bush War Machine Administration.

    With that said, your Rush Limbaughish insulting diatribe was unnecessary. Virtually half your text was ranting. Were you more interested in the rant or the WP / American Press coverage of the DSM?

  • Too bad you guys didn’t learn anything from Dan Rather in the creation of fraudulent documents. You already lost this debate. Let go of the past.

    • The only fraud being perpetrated here is that foisted on us by your lying president and his complicit press. Thankfully the truth is finally coming out.

  • This is an excellent response to the media liars who have forced our once great nation into a downward spiral, but we all need to do more - and moving to Canada is not an option!

    Which is why I choose to stay and stand up against these corporate loving thugs. I am an AMERICAN and a TRUE PATRIOT that does not have to wrap himself so tight in the flag that it blinds me from seeing truth about Bush and his cohorts like so many in this country.

    There will be a huge demonstration in Washington D.C. on September 24th, 2005 (go to Impeachbush.org for more info). The only problem I have with the organizers of this demonstration is that they are calling it an ANTI-WAR protest where I would call it an IMPEACHMENT rally. The former sounds like we are all tree-hugging flower people who just hate war in general (not that there’s anything wrong with loving peace) but we demand justice for the lies and the deception that occurs on a daily basis, with the aid of our own proganda-media, that have caused the murders of our beloved TROOPS, as well as, the murders of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians.

    The illegal actions of this administration have destroyed many lives; and they are attempting to destroy our integrity as well as our country right before our very eyes.

    We will let the world know that we live in a country that respects the rule of law and not be part of those who try to bend or change the rules when it suits our agenda.
    Americans are a law-abiding, loving and generous people who demand accountability as we all practice what we preach.

    We have nothing to do with the corporatist liars (Bush-Cheney) who have outsourced our good name to commit torture and treason.

    WE SAY:
    NO to corruption, NO to lies, NO to deception, NO to propaganda, NO to election rigging, NO to right-wing talibanism in America (I am a Christian but I do not subscribe to their brand of [anti]-Christianity), NO to intelligence fixing, NO to BUSH and his entire administration, including the Democrats who have aided him (Kerry and Lieberman come to mind).

    All laws passed by Bush need to be reversed, all appointments (including justices) must be recalled. All corruption must end, and that means removing all those placed by Bush in every branch of our government.

    Our voices will finally be heard, even without the now defunct ’Fourth Estate.’

    They will know that the American people, unlike the self-branded ’liberal’ media, is not in lock and step with the thieves and murderers who have (temporarily) usurped our government.
    America will once again prevail as a leader of integrity and justice.
    America will once again be for its people and not for the greedy corporatists like Bush and Co.
    The cancer that is eating away at our nation must be stopped and must be stopped now.

    I refuse to move to Canada, it’s beautiful but too damn COLD!

    • i wouldnt mind helping out with bus fare, and some warm socks maybe. canada, land of universal healthcare! head north my man. please.

  • Finally someone speaks at the level I’ve expected this issue to be elevated too. Bravo, kudos and thank you for articulating my sentiments. All these innocent people dead because of all these lies. Zero accountablility and the American public remains hoo hum. I would have expected lynch mobs, riots in the streets a very pissed off US public. Nothing... and who said there was no validity to the Manchurian Project?

    Kind regards,

    Drew A. Farion
    drew.farion@sympatico.ca

  • Yes, very good. Nice try.

    your response in this discourse will have zero effect.

    As much as it is enjoyable to see other sides of the Iraq war it is frustrating to see that there are people who are trying to enlighten the "brothers-at-arms" of the same.

    It is time to give up and see the players and policy play out... Pity we live in this age and time.

    • Speak truth to power. Even if you’re not being paid to do it! Democracy thrives on timely, factual discourse, for the public to observe. Fascism and corporate control of government can only thrive in an era of news black-out, in an atmosphere of censureship and propaganda.

  • THANK YOU....Thank you.....thank you very much. You have said everything that I feel inside. I honestly could not have articulated it as well as you have. I am too shocked and angry at our country’s leaders and sadden by our world situation. It has often left me speechless and a loss for words...my heart has been burdened with so much hopelessness and sadden by helplessness.

    The WORLD should wake up to the truth. We must look ourselves in the mirror, we must look eachother in the eye and wash our hands to reality. Look closely at our children. Look at how we treat one another. Look at the heart of your neighbor instead of the shell it sheild from reality. Take a closer look at our leaders. Ifthey can not profess the basic lessons God has taught us....then beware of them...beware of their misdeed. Beware they are advancing their self-serving agendas. Watch who they associate with them...watch who gainfully profit or accelarate in their deeds.

    Is it for the good of ALL or is it for the good of a select few? Are the world’s abundance limited only to the previledge few dictated by those friends of our leaders? People, God gave us all a gift appropriately. Use your eye....to witness the deeds of others. Use your ears to descern what is right. Use your mouth to speak and only speak the truth. Use your heart to guide your conscience. Use you hands to build and protect your world. Use your legs to travel toward freedom. Use your brain to bring you home to peace and a ligitamate prosperity.

    The wrongdoers and their friends will be burried by the dirty money they have collected. They will drown in the blood of our children whom they committed in the name of freedom. They will fall madly intoxicated by the insanity they have inflicted in thousands of innocent people. They will burn in the heat of our anger. They will freeze as we coldly gaze at them while we stand tall in their defeat. We will turn our back and walk away as leave them to go forward to join our humanity to work towards rebuilding our hope, future, freedom in peace and harmony with our neighbors. The world that was meant to be.

    RJM

  • Wonderful letter, thank you for writing it.

  • That was an excellent letter. I think its time we take off the kid gloves and get really serious, and your letter does that. Only one oversight in your letter - you left out "accessories to murder" in addition to "whores"

  • Thank you!!! Keep the pressure on. I have a somewhat cynical friend who a few weeks ago predicted that even if the media was forced to report on the Downing Street Memo, they would twist it around, try to minimize it and try to make it see unimportant. Obviously this has proven true.....but it is internet sites like this and the foreign press that may prevail.

  • After growing up in the Soviet Union and reading so much on the atrocities of both German and Soviet secret police, one remembers very well that there were always more than enough of people who cried support for the "noble goals" of the secret police. Nobody wants to remember that the Soviet concentration camps were sold by Stalin to the Western world as a perfect place to ’correct bad traits in bad people’. Same happened with the certain showy camp in Germany. Think Gitmo… Those who sang – and continue singing - with the administration in support of the illegal and inhuman Bush war can even find useful to claim ignorance of the lessons of history.
    The USA is in a terrible position of a discredited demagogue: The precious achievements of the nation, that were hard won through strenuous efforts during the last 280 years, have been fast squandered by the oil-weapon-production interests that are controlling the immoral spoiled ignoramus in the WH. In fact, the USA gave up on most important principle of the Western legal system - innocent till proven guilty - and has lost the most important principle of democracy - accountability from the top.
    The "patriotic GOP" - and "patriotic journalists" - lack any courage be truly patriotic.

  • Wow. Nailed it with that one. Thanks.

  • Thank you for handing Dana Milbank’s head to himself! Well done! David O. Berkeley, CA, USA

  • daynah shillbank=bonesman

  • This letter rocks. I think that you should send it to another newspaper or media outlet to see what type of firestorm Milbanks’ may have ignited. If another paper investigates Milbanks’ or does a story on reaction to his article it will bring additional attention to the media blackout.

  • They will continue to lie, they will not pull the troops out because they are not done stealing the oil from Iraq. They injoy seeing innocent people dying, It gives the power and strength! Halliburton is not going to stop until they are done doing what they are doing over there! Its time for the American people to stand up and GET THESE KILLER, LIARS, AND THIEVES OUT!
    Bush and his buddies are selling out America and its people for their sneaking deals to get richer and the poor will be their slaves!Bush is doing all this for his Daddy! The Bush senior is the one who made illegal deals with Saddam, Saddam will never be tried because the truth will come out! They will keep him locked up to silence him! Thats why its kept out of the news!YOU SON OF A BUSH!

    • so let me get this straight the 450,000 innocent people saddam murdered dont count right? stopping that killing was then therefore...bad? is that what you are saying? you have no compassion what so ever for the innocent dead iraqi muslims? are you a bigot? seriously. cause to treat that kind of slaughter like it never happened is reminiscent to me of the holocaust deniers. i mean, you have to be one of them, right? its only logical based on what you have said. or did you mean something else upon further...thought.....ahem.

  • They will continue to lie, they will not pull the troops out because they are not done stealing the oil from Iraq. They injoy seeing innocent people dying, It gives the power and strength! Halliburton is not going to stop until they are done doing what they are doing over there! Its time for the American people to stand up and GET THESE KILLER, LIARS, AND THIEVES OUT!
    Bush and his buddies are selling out America and its people for their sneaking deals to get richer and the poor will be their slaves!Bush is doing all this for his Daddy! The Bush senior is the one who made illegal deals with Saddam, Saddam will never be tried because the truth will come out! They will keep him locked up to silence him! Thats why its kept out of the news!YOU SON OF A BUSH!

    • hey guys, i know you all are fired up, very emotional, and it feels very good for liberals, but seriously, i need some help from you guys: can you explain the following logic traps in this whole ’bush lied’ alternative universe, and i am really serious, cause i work thru the logic, the things that have to be "true" for your alternative universe to be real, and i cant make sense of it:

      have you ever in your entire life known a human being who told you a direct lie, to initiate a specific action on your poart which the end result would prove the lie to be a lie? seriously. i kinda wonder this when people say bush lied about WMD. and i think "hmm, ok so he lied about WMD, so he could start a war, so we could go in and find....NO WMD!". wow. mind-boggling. seems kinda loony. i mean, lets take emotion out of it. just pretend your not you, and i am not me, and we are working thru this problem, dispationately. can you recall a time when someone did that? i didnt come up with one. so, you are ascribing a trait to another human being, that i presume, you have never actually witnessed such behavior before in your life. does that seem somewhat misguided? i dont know if thats the right word. and i am not trying to antagonize, but how about not based on the best logic and reasoning? i understand when emotion, like hate for example, is involved sometimes logic breaks down, but if you try to strip it away, doesnt the argument tend to fall apart. and not to mention:

      – if bush lied, then by definition clinton must have lied too in ’98, and he mentioned nuclear as well as chem/bio, for the monica/wag the dog bombing (among other things, please see: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/)

      – every top offical in the government lied, colin etc. presumably all duped. a complete fabrication, and snow job on hundreds of gov/mil/intel officals. we have to believe that, correct?

      – the iraqi army heard bush’s lie and believed it becasue they had anti-chem suits on the battlefiled. OR, they were planted by USA forces, OR the iraqis were worried about US use of CBN?

      – the US mil/intel were duped - why would they carry all the chem suits on the battlefiled. OR they were complicit with the deception and making troops carry the equip was all part of the "ruse"

      – when the "pundits" talked about the jellied anthrax layed on the bridges during invasion, smart guys, real smart guys, many anti-conflict as well, presumably duped, totally? why would they discuss use of weapons that didnt exist? and use the threat as a way of saying "gosh, this shouldnt be done cause it too risky and casualties could be very high" - remember those days??

      – how about the technical issues, the sat-photos? fabrications? how mnay people would it take to fabricate? and what about the private sats that are constantly monotring - wouldnt a doctored photo be proven false by outside/alternative sources fsater than the rather memos? OR were THEY complicit too, OR was everything dual use? NOTHING that appeared WMD related was. it ALL was dual use? 100%

      – how about the iraqis who worked in the program? did they lie for bush? or were they dupes?

      so basically EVERYONE (i didnt get into foreign intel etc but theres lots more) were either COMPLETELY DUPED, or COMPLICIT, right? i mean, that would HAVE to be the case, wouldnt it? logically? can you help me sort out who exactly was duped, and who was complicit? it seems like a pretty big conspiracy. gosh, i mean clinton would have to be involved wouldnt he? what would his motivation be to assist bush in lieing us into an iraq war? help me out, please.

      and finally, for you guys sake, for your kharma, go here, read, let it sink in, dont go with anger, go with an open questiuoning mind, and then look at your position. you may find it humorous.
      go here:
      http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bushlied.htm

      also, to continue with the barrage of fact and the history lesson, and i am sorry about that, but perhaps it might help you out, lets consider:

      The following are inarguable facts known at the time:

      1: Saddam Hussein frequently “lit up” American and British aircraft patrolling the No Fly Zones in Iraq with active radar and fired on them numerous times.
      2: Hussein had used chemical weapons on Iranians and his own people during the Shiite uprising, including many Kurds.
      3: Iraq had violated 17 UN resolutions, including Resolution 1441 (which held that Hussein needed to make available to UN and IAEA inspectors all facilities and personnel possibly involved in the production of WMD, Iraq needed to disarm, and that serious consequences would unfold if Iraq was non-compliant).
      4: Iraq was systematically thwarting inspections by refusing inspectors’ demands, removing materials from the premises before inspections (satellite photos and eyewitness accounts confirmed this), and delaying inspections, eavesdropping on inspectors, and pretending that all facilities of potential interest to inspectors had been made known to the UN and IAEA.
      5: Hussein had many palaces declared off-limits to the inspectors, amounting to an area of nearly 12 square miles where Saddam might have had WMD facilities.
      6: Iraq was unable to account for many tons of chemical and biological weapons and had not provided sufficient proof to inspectors that the stockpiles were destroyed.
      7: In 1998, Hussein refused to cooperate with inspectors and they were pulled from Iraq.
      8: Iraq had purchased dual-use equipment over the years (including aluminum tubes that had the capacity for use in uranium enrichment) and had many manufacturing plants, which had the potential to churn out chemical weapons given the appropriate pre-cursors.
      9: Saddam helped fund many terrorist organizations, including the PKK (a Turkish/Kurdish terrorist group) and Abu Sayyaf (a group associated with al-Qaeda and based in the Philippines). Hussein also sent payments to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.
      10: Iraq allowed terrorists to operate in his country and offered them sanctuary. Abu Nidal and Khala Khadr al-Salahat (the likely bomb-maker of the charge that took down Pan-Am Flight 103) both resided in Baghdad, as did Abdul Rahman Yasin (a conspirator in the 1993 WTC bombing).
      11: Iraq had ties to Al-Qaeda going back to the 1970s and Al-Zarqawi, a terrorist with ties to bin Laden, was known to have disappeared from Afghanistan only to reappear in Iraq.
      12: Satellite photos confirmed the existence of an aircraft body similar in design to a 727 in the Salman Pak region of Iraq. Iraq’s claim to the contrary notwithstanding, evidence pointed to this location serving as a terrorist training camp.
      13: Intercepted radio calls to Hussein’s field commanders during the pre-war buildup indicated a high likelihood of WMD usage if allied forces attacked.

      The following are what the United States and other countries had good reason to believe were true, but had no direct evidence for:

      1: Iraq’s Mukhabarat was believed to have been behind an assassination attempt on President Bush (41) in April of 1993.
      2: Intelligence reports, deemed highly credible, claimed Iraq had or was building missiles that could reach distances of between 300 km to 650 km. Such ranges were well over the 150 km range allowed by resolution 687.
      3: Many defectors to the West claimed that Hussein was continuing his nuclear weapons research programs. Such defectors included Khidhir Hamza (one of Saddam’s top nuclear scientists) and Hussein Kamal (Saddam’s son-in-law and head of Iraq’s Military Industrialization Corporation). Kamal did claim that all WMD agents and related missiles were destroyed after the Gulf War, but admitted that the blueprints remained and the programs needed only “revision of decision to start production.” Furthermore, Kamel said Iraq’s long-range missile (the Al Hussein) blueprints were kept since that was, “the first step to return to production.” Certainly, it was no stretch for America’s intelligence to extrapolate such behavior to WMD programs and Kamal only had direct knowledge of Iraqi affairs up until 1995. Kamal was later killed by Saddam’s forces after returning to Iraq.
      4: Saddam Hussein was known to be dealing outside the constraints of the many resolutions he had been charged to obey when, for instance, he purchased advanced dual use or military equipment illegally from German, French, and Russian companies. In addition, Saddam was selling oil (also illegally) to the aforementioned countries and not using any of its proceeds to help his impoverished peoples.
      5: An Iraqi official, posing as a businessman, was known to have approached Niger, whose only real export is uranium. (The apparently forged documents regarding this encounter do not invalidate the attempted negotiation, rather they cast doubt on the actual method of attempted yellowcake purchase. In addition, these documents were not the only evidence that intelligence agencies used to determine if such negotiations were occurring).
      6: Iraq was believed to have mobile laboratories capable of manufacturing biological and chemical weapons. Satellite pictures along with other intelligence methods indicated a high likelihood that such labs existed.
      7: During the buildup of allied armed forces outside of Iraq, before Operation Iraqi Freedom began, many transport vehicles were seen leaving Iraq for Syria. It was (and still is) believed that Syria received materials illegal for Iraq to possess, some of which were likely buried in the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley.

      bounce it around. it might become clear. but go in clear-headed, no emotion, just logic. peace to you all. and good kharma.

    • try this too. might help:

      AS LEAKED GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS GO, the "Downing Street Memo" is pretty sexy. Not actually a memo but the official notes of a July 23, 2002, meeting in the British prime minister’s office, the document reproduces the thoughts and concerns about Iraq of Tony Blair and his key advisers, including his foreign and defense secretaries, his attorney general, and "C"—code for Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6, Britain’s foreign intelligence service, recently returned from high-level meetings in Washington. Rarely do you find an open window on such a high-level discussion, especially on a matter that will take a country to war a scant nine months later.

      The Sunday Times published the document on May 1, along with an accompanying article of some 2,000 words sexing up its contents. Other British media also reported on it, as did the U.S. press, with a scanting yawn.

      Anybody who thinks criticism of the "mainstream media" is the special province of right-wing America hasn’t been reading the left’s complaints about the perfidious media indifference to the memo. For Rep. John Conyers, the leading partisan Democratic websites, and the newly registered downingstreetmemo.com and afterdowningstreet.org, among others, as well as for the hundreds of thousands claiming to have signed petitions demanding a congressional investigation, the "Downing Street Memo" is the smoking gun, proof positive that the Bush administration—well, what exactly?

      As C’s comments are summarized, he had found in Washington that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" of going to war to remove Saddam, "justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD"; C went on: "Military action was now [as of July 2002] seen as inevitable." According to comments attributed to Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, "The case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."

      There we have it in black and white: Bush lied about WMD and cooked the intelligence to support his position. At last, proof enough to start the impeachment proceedings.

      Except, of course, that the folks peddling this story have long been convinced that Bush lied and cooked the intelligence. The question is: What have they got that will persuade someone who is not already a member of the ne plus ultra Bush-hating left?

      The answer is nothing. In describing the leaked document in the terms above, I have been faithful to the way in which left-wing bloggers, activists, and assorted hangers-on have described its contents—which is to say, as inflammatorily as possible. But such a tendentious description comes at the expense of fidelity to what the document actually records.

      For smoking-gun enthusiasts, the key to the plot is that word "fixed," as in, the fix is in. As in, the intelligence and facts weren’t what Bush needed, so he fixed them. The problem with this analysis, if you can call it that, is quite simple: If what is being described is chicanery and wrongdoing in the form of the Bush administration fabricating intelligence, how come nobody in the room with Blair when C drops this bombshell is sufficiently perturbed to do so much as ask a follow-up question? How come Blair’s "sofa cabinet" just goes on earnestly discussing the military options?

      I know, I know: Because they were in on it! You Brit lefties sit down.

      In fact, exactly how is it that the official note-taker at this meeting, Blair’s thirtysomething private secretary for foreign affairs—far junior to all others in the room—decided to record this momentous revelation with a colloquialism worthy of a James Cagney gangster movie? The answer is that he is doing no such thing. "Fix" here is clearly meant in its traditional sense, in the sort of English spoken by Oxbridge dons and MI6 directors—to make fast, to set in order, to arrange.

      The context of the C comment leaves little room for any other interpretation. John Scarlett, then the head of the Cabinet Office Joint Intelligence Committee (later himself head of MI6, the first to serve openly), has just remarked that "Saddam’s regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. . . . Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based."

      C picks up from there. The note-taker, Matthew Rycroft, records the comments as follows:

      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.

      The point is that the Bush administration seems bent on going to war based on the terrorism/WMD case without going to the U.N. (thus obtaining a legal justification in the Security Council—a point on which C turned out to be wrong) and without "publishing materialon the Iraqi regime’s record" (thus making a humanitarian case—which Blair would subsequently emphasize). The "policy" decision was that the case was going to be made on the basis of terrorism/WMD, with the evidence "fixed"—made fast, set in order, arranged—to buttress that case, notwithstanding that, in the view of some present, other cases might be stronger (hence Straw’s point about Libya, North Korea, and Iran).

      It’s striking that the Times’s story hyping the memo makes no mention of the "fixed" passage until roughly its 26th paragraph, where the term goes unremarked. Far be it from me to suggest that the Brits have done a better job as custodians of the English language than Americans. But the Brits do at least know how they speak it.

      As far as the "inevitable" charge goes, we have been down this road over and over again. It’s a pity C didn’t tell the Quai d’Orsay about his conclusions that summer. The semi-official line from the French foreign ministry is that officials there didn’t conclude the war was inevitable until January 2003. Yes, some in the Bush administration thought from early on that war would be the only way to take care of the Saddam problem. But the decision isn’t made until the president says he has decided. That’s what makes it a decision.

      If you really want to find something scandalous in the "Downing Street Memo," you might focus on the line, "There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." The Bush administration might have benefited from a little prodding from 10 Downing on that point.

      At the Bush-Blair press briefing last week, a Reuters correspondent did ask the two about the memo—without consequential result. But the good ol’ "mainstream media" had it about right in concluding that there is nothing in the document but more proof for partisans already persuaded.
      ========================================================

      really think about it, and question authority, the one that lacks logical thought and reasoning, and proloiferates ignirance and non-critical thinking. question them. question the haters. make them answer these logic traps. you would be amazed how smart you will look! good luck!!