I notice the last entry hasn't got a little comment box.

And the reason we have that data? Paperclip.

Off... the... deep... end.

The truth hurts.

Your kidding me right? You just cant take one sentence and twist it to fit into your distorted logic. All of the new documents that came out since DSM corroborate what was said in the DSM. They already decided on going to war and they were looking for a politically acceptable excuse to do what they wanted to do.

The entire context of these memo's point to a deliberate deception to fool the public into accepting an illegal war.

Deal with the fact that our government is hopelessly corrupt, and use your talents to let your readers realize that they need to think twice about who it is they are voting for.

I'm sure this will be gripping television, if presented in Conyers' trademark monotone. The guy makes Patrick Leahy sound like Jesse Jackson by comparison.

The problem here is that the right-wing will dismiss the DSMs out of some misguided devotion to the “red team,” while the hard left-wing (tho, few of the politicians, so far) will jump on this out of devotion to the “blue team.”

We have to stop this kind of politics. We’re Americans first!

The fact is that the DSMs represent further evidence that the Bush administration “fixed” facts and intelligence around policy resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of people, including over 1,700 American soldiers.

This should, if true, outrage anyone who cares about this country and about our standing in the world.

What is needed, therefore, is an investigation and hopefully Conyers can get the ball rolling on that.

We need to do the same thing we did during the Nixon years... pray! "Dear God, before you get Bush, get Chaney first." It worked for Nixon and Agnew - it can work again.

There is a "deep throat" in the White House right now just gathering enough information, and the courage to act. We need to pray for them too.

Where is the outrage that the so-called weapons of mass destruction had absolutely nothing to do with why the Bush Administration wanted to invade Iraq?

The Bush Administration was not deceived about weapons of mass destruction: the Bush Administration did the deceiving.

This is the most intelligent thing I have read on Downing Street. Kinsley is no friend to Bush either, just a very bright guy.

http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/showcase/la-oe-kinsley12jun12.column

Wow, your blind eye to the truth couldn't be more evident. Absolutely incredible. I'll only point out one fallacy in this virtual basket of untruth you have woven on this forum. Your claim that the 2nd memo disproves the first is just silly. It does the opposite. You use a quote from the memo to prove your point:

Wizbang: states not once but twice that "no political decisions" to invade Iraq had been made.

DSM: Although no political decisions have been taken, US military planners have drafted options for the US Government to undertake an invasion of Iraq.

You are quite semantically challenged. You got the "no political decisions" part right, but you got the "made" part dead wrong. The real word from the memo is "taken", as you can see above. In the English language these two words mean completely different things. Thanks for playing though. Maybe next time you'll uncover the first monkey's eyes and the second monkey's ears and take in some real truth. You can leave the 3rd monkey with it's hands over it's mouth, you've already said enough.

Bush has lied from the start about weapons of "mass" destruction, ( though DU weapons are commonly used in Iraq as well as napalm), he lied about Saddam's ability to cause us trouble, he lied about every pretense he's made for this act of agression, These memos may be a small part of this but they fit right in with Bush's plot. If those who are responsible for the security of our people, our constitution had been paying attention and stood up to this silly excuse for a president, we would not be in that mess in Iraq.
I think this guy needs a lesson in common sense, but then some just aren't capable of learning.
impeach the damned chimp.

It's pointless to attempt dialogue with the right because they have no humility. When Johnson figured out the wickedness of Viet Nam, he did the prudent thing and chose not to participate in the 1968 election. When Carter was rebuked, he left office and devoted his efforts improving the fate of the impoverished.

What does the right do? They defend to the last a manifest destiny to screw everyone until the bitter end for gains to be enjoyed by the privileged few. It is a tragedy that they are so successful in being able to garner the legions they do with their hollow promises of bounty for the faithful. It would be a small concession that their tactics and intent only effected the willing, but their footprint dooms not only those calling for reason, but the innocent young who have no ability to redress.

Shame on you who support such egocentric and destructive pursuits.

It's amazing (and disturbing) how Bush-haters can read something in nothing (the DSM), and see nothing in something (Select Committee On Intelligence, the 9/11, Butler, Kay and Duelfer reports).

Dearlove, referring to the statement "Military action was now seen as inevitable," is according to Wizbang, "characterizing his impressions of the opinions of US intelligence officials he had recently met with."

Taking that to be true, how is it that the DSM does not show US administration predetermination to go to war?

Oh, and let's have the WA Post's 3rd paragraph do the talking some more:

"One observation in the memos is vague but intriguing: A British official is quoted as saying that the "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." Yet it was argued even then, and has since become conventional wisdom, that Mr. Bush, Vice President Cheney and other administration spokesmen exaggerated the threat from Iraq to justify the elimination of its noxious regime. And the memos provide no information that would alter the conclusions of multiple independent investigations on both sides of the Atlantic, which were that U.S. and British intelligence agencies genuinely believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and that they were not led to that judgment by the Bush administration."

Those pesky facts always get in the way of the moonbats fun.

"War planning" or planning for a "military option" and "predetermination" are two entirely different things.

Sure, the US and UK probably "predetermined" that SOB Hussein wasn't going to cooperate with UN Inspectors without military pressure. So? Who didn't know that? And who didn't know that Hussein likely wouldn't comply with the inspection process which would lead to, what, another UN Resolution? How many should we have given Hussein? 17? 18? 24? 32? Do I hear 41? Send him to bed without dinner, maybe.

What IS your point regarding the DSM, BHers? You still don't have a legit beef even 3 years later.

Truth is truth. It is the exact time form place and event. Opinion or subversion or twisting of facts is not truth. You cannot confront evil and, apparantly, truth.

Randy: Form a coherent sentence first (i.e., see you first sentence), then make a point without being obtuse and vague.

The cat is definitely out of the bag, now.

Anyone who continues to believe that the Bush administration did not deceive the American people in order to attack a nation that posed no threat is just a slave.

A slave to what? Facts? History? Logic? I'm sorry I was paying attention since Gulf War One when Saddam Hussein repeatedly violated UN Resolution 687 (17x, no less), murdered Sunnis by the thousands, collaborated with multiple terrorist groups (yes, al Qaeda, too, please see the 9/11 report for evidence), starved his own people and children, and was bombed into cooperation not once, but twice (with the second yielding unverifiable results because Clinton didn't allow the inspectors back into Iraq) under the Clinton Administration and God knows what else he was doing in the 4 years of ZERO inspections Being a good little dictator, right?

And you still want to say you were deceived? Only if you weren't paying attention.

Hey guess what! There is no evidence that shows that Hussein collaborated with terrorists. It would not have been in his best interest to collaborate with terrorists, since he ran a secular government and terrorists are generally islamic extremists. Catering to terrorists would only have opened the door to greater instability, and there is nothing a dictator hates worse than not having complete control of his empire.

There is nothing in any of those "inquiries" that definatively states that Hussein collaborated with terrorists. He was not guilty of any U.N. resolutions that Israel, Great Britain, and the U.S. are not guilty of themselves. There are plenty of dictators around the world right now that make Hussein look like a boyscout, some of them are U.S. allies. There is one thing that sets Hussein apart from all the other potential regime change possibities. His country is floating on a sea of oil. Wonderful, precious, sweet crude that will drive our economy and run our big, deadly, military machine. You like history? Read some history about why it is Hitler invaded Russia, knowing it would be a failure. Read about why Empires, when faced with depleting resources, wage war to access those resources.

Im not saying that we intend to steal Iraqs oil. We just want to be able to buy it. When every other country begins to show diminishing returns on oil production, which is right around the corner, Iraq will be in the position to sell crude at top dollar. To whoever they want. Hussein would be be raking in cash hand over fist, and he probably could have been flexible enough to say I dont want to sell to the U.S.

So maybe Hussein was a threat after all. The problem is that he was not a threat for the reasons that we were told that he was a threat. The real reasons are probably much more scary. Just remember that war is never waged for noble purposes such as spreading liberty and democracy. Or for freeing an oppressed people. At the root of every war you will find that money and resources are the basic cause.

For those of you who dont believe me that global oil production is reaching a critical phase do some research on Hubberts peak. There is plenty of very accurate a detailed information about peak oil production on the internet. Each day that goes by, I become more convinced that that is the reason we are in Iraq, not some goddamn U.N. resolution.

Essentiall, the argument by the Washington Post's editorial page, which enthusiastically supported the Iraq war, and other media outlets, is that because everybody already knew that Bush was a LIAR about prewar intelligence, the DS memos add nothing new. Clearly, however, the DS memos futher solidify the Bush administration's fraudulent words and actions that led this country into an unjust war. As articulated so well by www.mediamatters.com:

"the fact that it became conventional wisdom that Cheney and Bush were manipulating intelligence to bolster their case for war does not negate the significance of the head of British intelligence reporting the same thing based on his conversations with U.S. officials.

The analogy to President Clinton bears repeating: By the Post's reasoning, if independent counsel Kenneth Starr had produced definitive evidence that President Bill Clinton had committed perjury, the Post wouldn't have reported it because many Americans already believed it to be true. Does anyone really believe the Post would have ignored such a story?

The Downing Street Memo raises important questions that are most decidedly not "old news" and need to be asked. Among these questions reporters might consider asking are the following:

The Downing Street Memo relates discussions about Iraq between Richard Dearlove, chief of British intelligence agency MI6, and Bush administration officials. Presumably, the head of British intelligence would have met with senior administration officials. With whom did Dearlove meet? Who told him that military action was inevitable? Were these officials also making public statements indicating that the administration had not decided whether to invade?

Exactly what did American officials tell Dearlove that led him to conclude that the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy?

The memo states that in early 2002 the administration had begun "spikes of activity" -- i.e., increased bombings of Iraq -- to pressure Saddam Hussein. Documents recently released in Britain showed that the Royal Air Force dramatically increased bombings of Iraq during 2002, presumably in concert with the United States. Was the intent to goad Saddam into a military response that could be used as a pretext for invading Iraq?

The memo states, "No decisions had been taken, but [the British Defense Secretary] thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections." The Bush administration began to make the case for war in September 2002 because, according to White House chief of staff Andrew Card, "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." Were the November 2002 elections part of the calculation on the timing of the invasion?

According to the memo, "It seemed clear that 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 neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran." How does the administration square this with its multiple, unequivocal statements on Saddam's supposedly terrifying arsenal of weapons?

During their recent joint press conference, both Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair denied that the decision to go to war had been made by the summer of 2002. Yet no one has disputed the memo's authenticity. So were U.S. officials lying to Dearlove, telling him that war was a foregone conclusion when it wasn't? Was Dearlove lying to Blair about what he was told? Both possibilities seem absurd, yet someone somewhere was not telling the truth: either Dearlove, the American officials with whom he met, or Bush and Blair. Which is it?"

For Kevin, or whoever posted the Memo Stunt thread,

At least 122 members of Congress signed the letter that John Conyers hand delivered to the White House. If you consider that a stunt, then you really don't belong posting commentary on, well, anything really.

For everyone commenting on this absurd thread,

It's great to see such a huge response to a pile of nonsense. Keep fighting, and hopefully we'll be rid of Bush soon.

"Keep fighting, and hopefully we'll be rid of Bush soon."

Yeah! Let's all keep it up, and we'll be rid of him in as soon as 3.5 years. Otherwise we'll be stuck with him all the way until the end of his term.

And if we want to get rid of Bush, don't call him a liar. Or say he lied.
Instead, we should remember to call him a LIAR. And remember to say he LIED. The all caps REALLY LOOKS IMPRESSIVE.

Heh, 122 Democrats would never collaborate on a stunt, now would they.

The democrats are just looking for something to use to impeach President Bush.

Everytime they come up with a new conspiracy theory they hype it up, and declare over and over again that it's going to "BRING BUSH DOWN". Of course their language is a little raunchier.

First it was the Plame affair, and then Gannon/Guckert. Then when it doesn't pan out (because most conspiracy theories/much ado about nothing charges doesn't don't pan out), they'll whine that Bush got away with it yet again and if only the MSM weren't in the Republican's pocket they would investigate and take down Bush.

Pathetic

Hi, Peter.

I’m sorry, but you are demonstrating slave-like characteristics.

There is plenty of evidence that George Bush wanted war with Iraq and the reasons had little to do with 9/11. (And deep down in your little heart, you know it.)

So, face the truth, Mister.

You’ve been duped. You you’ve been had. You’ve been horn-swaggled!

It’s not your fault and you owe these politicians nothing. But we all need to stand up when we’ve been lied to by politicians concerning WAR.

Yeah Bush wanted his war with Iraq for a whole lot of reasons that had nothing to do with 9/11 - Saddam's failure to abide by a string of Security Council resolutions, failure to abide by the accords of the first Gulf War, daily attacks on our planes, an attempt to assassinate his father, continued slaughter of his own people, etcetera and so on.

Only leftists suffering from selective memory loss maintain that the war was only about 9/11.

Ha , jason and the rest of you losers dream on , why don't you impeach that lying fraud Jon Fraud Kerry . You retards are a disgrace to the human race . You should be admitted, you people must have been hypnotized or something , your from another planet. Democrats are synonymous with lying , cheating , election fraud , corruption etc. what are you stupid or what . I laugh at you , if you stood before me I would laugh even harder.Your all traitors , liars and losers. Sore losers , mad as hell because you lost get over it . Clinton was a fuck up admit it , he did it to himself , don't you asses remember .CLINTON SAID HE DID IT BECAUSE HE COULD. Grow up or drop dead. Your a disgrace to this nation , the world does not revolve around you and besides your just fricken stupid civilian. What the hell did you people lose ??? Not a dam thing . Hell I voted for Clinton both times you shit for brains . Stop putting our troops in danger and stop trying to make shit up just cause someone told you not to like Bush. Guess what they lied to you too about John Kerry being smarter Than Bush , Well your own party lied to you too aren't you mad. Bush is a hell of alot smarter than Kerry , has a higher IQ and he the President of the United States. So there. Kerry got 5 D's HA one in pol. sci. . I always asked why do you say Bush is dumb?? not one person has ever been able to answer. You should feel dumb for being a Democrat. I voted republican nov.2 2004. first time . never again for the traitor liars election stealing democrats.

Wow man, seriously, that my friends is a RANT!

LOL I can't believe you people exist some of the stuff "you believe" has me rolling my god you people need help . Oh I hope they get that Bush this time ,Ha ha your too much . Put an end to all this . You don't like being called dumb and stupid then wake the hell up and open your eyes, I did. You are being lied to by your own Party and I know some of you know it and don't care. To you I f-off and die , burn in hell and all that stuff. Now for the one's who continue to believe the lies being fed to them ,or don't have the time to do research and find the answers and the facts and truth on your own like my mother and aunt , It's not your fault . I not expecting my 75 yr old mother to just pull a Kerry and Flip Flop, I love her regardless. WHAT PISSES ME OFF IS THAT THEY ARE STILL LYING TO MY MOTHER , DEMOCRATS AND THE LEFT WING MEDIA.tHEIR IS NO SUCH THING AS RIGHT WING MEDIA.dEMOCRATS ARE THE MEDIA AND THE MEDIA ARE THE DEMOCRATS.REPORTING THE FACTS AND TRUTH IS NOT RIGHT OR LEFT . GLORIFYING TERRORISTS AND OVERREPORTING ONLY THE DEATHS OF OUR SOILIERS "IS BIASED" THIS IS THE SAME WAY ALL OF YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO FOR YEARS. THE FACTS ARE OUT THERE I FOUND THEM AND YOU CAN TOO ON YOUR OWN . SINCE NOV2,2004 I'VE SPENT 2,000 HRS OF OVER 5,000 SINCE THE ELECTION FINDING THE FACTS FOR MYSELF AND I'VE SURE IF YOUR READING THIS YOU MOST LIKELY DON'T GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT THE TRUTH AND THE FACTS .YOU ONLY CARE ABOUT WINNING AND LOSING . I NOT ON NO DAM TEAM , I VOTED FOR WHO TELLS THE TRUTH AND WHO IS PROTECTING BE AND MAKING PROGRESS. THEIR IS NO EX-KKK MEMBER IN THE REPUBLICAN SENATE OR AN INTERN KILLER OR A TREASONOUS TRAITOR AND COMPLETE FRAUD OR A CA. Gov. who took 30 million from enron and then paid outrageous power prices after he killed many elderly with his blackouts. Boxer crying on the floor of the Senate "lying" and accusing Condi of lying . where are these people in the Republican Party ??? I dare any of you to find your parties equal on the Republican side . facts only , I can sit for hours and make shit up too. Good luck.

No way ,this is a rant(above) only in LA(keeps one from goin postal)

Then kudos to you my friend.