WP: Memo: U.S. Lacked Full Iraq Plan (DSM on A1)

[Pirate Smile]

Memo: U.S. Lacked Full Iraq Plan
Advisers to Blair Predicted Instability

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 12, 2005; Page A01

A briefing paper prepared for British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top advisers eight months before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq concluded that the U.S. military was not preparing adequately for what the British memo predicted would be a "protracted and costly" postwar occupation of that country.

The eight-page memo, written in advance of a July 23, 2002, Downing Street meeting on Iraq, provides new insights into how senior British officials saw a Bush administration decision to go to war as inevitable, and realized more clearly than their American counterparts the potential for the post-invasion instability that continues to plague Iraq.

In its introduction, the memo "Iraq: Conditions for Military Action" notes that U.S. "military planning for action against Iraq is proceeding apace," but adds that "little thought" has been given to, among other things, "the aftermath and how to shape it."

The July 21 memo was produced by Blair's staff in preparation for a meeting with his national security team two days later that has become controversial on both sides of the Atlantic since last month's disclosure of official notes summarizing the session.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

OK - there really is a British "Deep Throat":

"That memo and other internal British government documents were originally obtained by Michael Smith, who writes for the London Sunday Times. Excerpts were made available to The Washington Post, and the material was confirmed as authentic by British sources who sought anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the matter."

I'm posting this here because the Mods keep dumping the Wash Post story in with the Sunday Times story.

The fact that this has hit the front page of Washington Post makes it much more important for the US Corp Media and is worth pointing out. This should get HUGE US coverage.

edit to add - this is amazing because it also details the COMPLETE INCOMPETENCE in planning for the aftermath. Fraud in initiating the war plus a reckless disregard/incompetence in dealing with the aftermath.

[Bluebear]

1. "the material was confirmed as authentic by British sources"

Therein lies its future! If our media is allowed to listen to Novak et al who dismiss it, there is no hope.

Nominated and this deserves its own thread here anyhow! Cheers Pirate!

[FreedomAngel82]

7. Exactly

So all of the bullshit Colin Powell gave on the Daily show this past week is purely bullshit.

[chknltl]

9. were his lips moving?

then he was spewing propaganda.

[Pirate Smile]

11. Here is a link to a thread with more corroborating evidence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3837080&mesg_id=3837080

[Pirate Smile]

18. Here this link to the WP story works. They moved it. but it is still A1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/11/AR2005061100723.html

[johnaries]

2. A British Deep Throat!

"the material was confirmed as authentic by British sources who sought anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the matter."

Recommending!

[Nite Owl]

3. Front page!

:bounce:

[Coexist]

6. kick

[democrat in Tallahassee]

4. they thought the war would end in a week or two; roses would be

thrown and no one would ever remember what he said before the war and now the lies are gonna explode right in his monkey face.

[liberalla]

34. Ha! Monkey face! (with apologies to monkeys everywhere)

Come on Blair! Spill the beans!

[DoYouEverWonder]

37. Tony is spilling the beans

All of this stuff is coming directly out of DOWNING STREET. Yet no one is calling Tony on leaking this stuff? I think Tony finally turned the tables on W and has him by the balls. The next few weeks should be a lot of fun.

[liberalla]

38. I like that idea!

I had just posted "I wish these two would have a spat and break up" on another forum...

Maybe they did... only georgie doesn't know it yet...

I agree, lots of fun!

[Ioo]

5. Read here...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1650822,00.html

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Malikshah]

10. "Avoid lampposts."

That'd be my advice

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Douglas Carpenter]

13. Let's keep at the media--we're getting somewhere

:bounce:


Just a reminder of some very, very important links:

To sign Congressman Conyers’ letter

http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com


To put and keep pressure on the Mainstream Media:

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/takeaction.html#awaken


http://www.afterdowningstreet.org


LISTEN TO THE RANDI RHODES SHOW-to keep up daily with what’s going on with--THE DOWNING STREET MEMO:

http://www.therandirhodesshow.com


Peace
O8)

Here is my standard letter to the Media:


Dear Sir/Madam:

As you know, on May 1 of this year a document now commonly referred to as “|The Downing Street Memo” was released into the British Press. This document raises serious question about how the administration was handling intelligence related to Iraq and appears to suggest that the Bush Administration had already decided on war when publicly it was claiming that no such decision had been made.

This document and perhaps other documents suggest that the Bush administration was determined to “fix intelligence” around a predetermined policy.

It is most disturbing that there has been a virtual media blackout regarding “The Downing Street Memo”. Even more disturbing is the absence in the America media of any credible discussion or coverage regarding strong, credible and independent evidence that the Bush Administration intentionally mislead the U.S. Congress, the media and the American people.

I do hope you will accept the responsibility to address this issue and provide serious investigative journalism into this matter.

Furthermore, on Thursday June 16, 2005, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other House members will hold a hearing to consider testimony concerning the Downing Street minutes and questions of possible fixing of prewar intelligence. I do hope you will be giving full coverage to these events.

Sincerely,

[Supersedeas]

39. slowly...ever so slowly...the Corporate journalists are acknowledging a

gut check

[Daphne08]

14. Link is broken, maybe this will work

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/11/AR2005061100723.html

[DrDebug]

15. nominated and kick

[dalloway]

16. can someone clarify for me?

are the WaPo and Sunday Times story going back to the same document or are there two--one on the lack of planning and one on the need to find a legal justification for the war?

THIS IS AMAZING STUFF--I'm just trying to keep straight if they go back to the same source or are 2 separate documents.

[Spazito]

20. They are both about the same memo

It is just that the Sunday Times focused on the legality part as it affects Blair while the WP focused on the lack of planning as it relates to the bush cabal.

They both use the Header of the memo in their articles:

Iraq: Conditions for Military Action

[dalloway]

25. so basically the WaPo ran the softball interpretation of the

memo to ruffle the fewest feathers while claiming to actually be covering it. I think the explosive part is the legality issue as reported by the Times, Yes?

[Just Me]

26. Yep. The legality is the poignant part of the memo.

Yes. WaPo shifts focus to poor post-war planning, which has already been covered (i.e. we didn't need the memo to characterize the post-war planning as poor).

Surprised?

The corporate media have been complicit in the BFEE/neoCON corruption from the very beginning.

[Spazito]

27. Exactly!

Watch how the US media has already focused on the lack of post-invasion planning instead of the real issue of the lies of blair and bush to their own citizens and illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

[dalloway]

29. and of course it is the WaPo article that is being picked up

by they wires--not the Sunday Times one. This is CRAZY!

What do we do? Gang up on the NY Times and hope that, in their quest to do a different angle than the WaPo, that they cover the legal angle?

[bklyncowgirl]

17. Focus of article important--incompetence=criminal negligence?

Pointing out that the memo corraborates the notion that the Bush administration failed to plan for the aftermath of the invasion is important.

IMHO this makes them guilty of criminally negligent homocide and frankly anyone who lost a family member in this ill concieved war should be demanding answers and frankly contacting their lawyers.

These lying war criminals were so intent on their little adventure and getting their greedy hands on all that oil, that they disregarded all advice from anyone who knew anything about war and about the Middle East.

Sounds like criminal negligence to me--and this should be proveable--whereas lying about WMD is something that may be more easily obsfucated.

[steve2470]

19. kick nt

[Pirate Smile]

21. MTP just brought up the new document from the WP article re not

being prepared to deal with the aftermath of the invasion.

No discussion (yet hopefully) of the implications of the full article.

[City Lights]

22. This is currently the WaPo's most emailed article.

:bounce:

[Roland99]

23. Excuses, excuses, excuses.

That's all we ever hear. No one is accountable.


http://www.conjur.com/blog/2005/06/12/excuses-excuses-excuses-the-propagandist-will-be-busy-this-week-making-more-im-sure/

[Just Me]

24. So, they not ONLY committed fraud against the people,....

,...but they also FAILED to plan for the aftermath of their illegal death expedition?!?!?!?!!!

Damn!!!

CONVICT, NOW!!!! :grr: :grr: :grr:

[Coexist]

28. front page is front page

but I have been checking out the Sunday talking head shows, and don't see it much.

[Fridays Child]

30. Why would Tony worry about postwar Iraq, if he and George...

...weren't planning on an Iraq war?

[liberalla]

32. Ooooh!!! Excellent observation!!!

I hope people pick up on that and ask the question too!

I'm going to email it to Randi Rhodes (quoting Fridays Child)!

Hey! Forget "Freedom's on the March!", now it's:


Truth is on the March!

[stickdog]

31. The article is PURE SPIN. The real lead - COOKED INTELLIGENCE - is buried.

The post-war non-planning aspect is less than a bombshell. This article s nothing but mass misdirction and MSM CYA.

[glitch]

33. Pure Pincus - this is why he gets paid the big bucks. nt

[magellan]

35. Why would the US & UK have intensified bombing of Iraq from May '02 onward

...if they weren't trying to soften up Saddam's defenses in preparation for war?

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war

The Sunday Times (UK)
May 29, 2005

'RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war'
Michael Smith

THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war, new evidence has shown.

The attacks were intensified from May, six months before the United Nations resolution that Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, argued gave the coalition the legal basis for war. By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive....

We mustn't let anyone forget, there are PILES of evidence like the MOD document referred to in the above article, all corroborating the fact that BushCo decided to invade Iraq and then justified it by cooking intelligence and lying to Congress.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

36. This part of the memo is being used to distract from the manipulated

Intelligence.