Free Dartmouth
5/16/2005 05:11:00 PM | Justin

The Downing Street Memo

This Downing street Memo (also here) was leaked and published by The Sunday Times of London on May 1st, but I only began hearing about it in the last week, because U.S. media doesn't seem to like covering anything that makes Bush's war look bad. CNN finally had something about it on May 12, but I don't think Fox News has touched it yet.

The memo is an internal communication among British government officials describing the minutes of a meeting that took place between Bush Blair, and other high-level officials in both governments in July, 2002.

Some disturbing quotes from the memo:

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 Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. 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...
The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he 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."

"Fixed"? Isn't that just a diplomatic way of saying the facts were being invented, and that they were, in essence, lying? And if Iraq really had less WMD capability than Libya, North Korea, or Iran, then The Bush Administration's public insistence that Iraq was an "imminent threat" begins to seem quite at odds with the actual intelligence assessments. Finally, it isn't very reassuring that the timeline for war was being set to correspond with the timing of U.S. election rather than with any real military considerations.

I should mention that this memo was leaked 30 days before the British election, probably for political reasons. That said, no British MP's are questioning the document's authenticity, nor is the White House. On May 6th, 90 house democrats, led by Congressman John Conyers Jr. wrote a letter to the Bush Administration demanding an explanation, but as long as the media doesn't cover the memo, there's no reason The Bush Administration should feel compelled to respond, or defend itself.

Even while the press is playing dead, American opinion is gradually shifting away from Bush on the Iraq war, with the latest Gallup polls showing at 50% of the American public believes President Bush "deliberately misled" the on Iraq and WMD.

Links to this post:

Create a Link


Post a Comment

The Free Press

Alums for Social Change
The Green Magazine
The Dartmouth
Dartmouth Observer
Dartmouth Review
Inner Office
The Little Green Blog
Welton Chang's Blog
Vox in Sox
MN Publius (Matthew Martin)
Dartmouth Official News

Other Blogs

Arts & Letters
Body and Soul
Blog For America
Brad DeLong
Brad Plumer
Campus Nonsense
Crooked Timber
Daily Kos
Dean Nation
Dan Drezner
The Front Line
Interesting Times
Is That Legal?
Talking Points Memo
Lawrence Lessig
Lean Left
Legal Theory
Matthew Yglesias
Ms. Musings
Nathan Newman
New Republic's &c.
Not Geniuses
Political State Report
Political Theory Daily Review
Queer Day
Roger Ailes
Talk Left
This Modern World
Tough Democrat
Volokh Conspiracy
Washington Note
X. & Overboard

Magazines, Newspapers and Journals
Boston Globe Ideas
Boston Review
Chronicle of Higher Education
Common Dreams
In These Times
Mother Jones
New York Review of Books
New York Times
The American Prospect
The Nation
The New Republic
The Progressive
Tom Paine
Village Voice
Washington Monthly

Capitol Hill Media
ABC's The Note
American Journalism Review
Columbia Journalism Review
Daily Howler
Donkey Rising
The Hill
National Journal
NJ Hotline
NJ Wake-up call
NJ Early Bird
NJ Weekly
Political Wire
Roll Call

Search the DFP
Powered by Blogger

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.