I'm not as smart as Republicans, so maybe someone can explain this

[jobycom]

How can the Republicans first claim that the DSMinutes are just old news, and then claim that they are faked? Like, first they are true and everyone knows they are true so what's the big deal? Next, they aren't true and are fakes and no one should believe them?

My head hurts. I guess they are just smarter than me.

[Goldmund]

1. Who's saying they're fake??

[politicaholic]

9. Turn on your radio and find out...

This is a "call to idiots" by the GOP.

[democrat_patriot]

14. Michael Smith re-typed the originals and than he

destroyed them to protect the 'deepthroat'.

Now the RW is claiming they could have typos - not originals - maybe changed the meaning - blah blah blah.

This is a problem - not originals.

[LynnTheDem]

21. Not quite; he photocopied the originals and gave them BACK to the source.

Then he retyped the photocopies. And then he destroyed the PHOTOCOPIES.

[jobycom]

24. I know, I just copied from the article. They article is also wrong

about Dan Rather.

"The revelation has conjured up memories of the CBS News forged document scandal last year, where anchorman Dan Rather argued that damaging records he obtained from President Bush's National Guard file were essentially accurate, even though they had been faked by his source."

The Killian memo has not been proven to be faked, and there is plenty of evidence that it could be accurate. The issue was that the chain of possession was not verified by CBS properly, and therefore couldn't be proven to be genuine.

[LynnTheDem]

30. Smith did say he "destroyed the originals"...original photocopies after

he handed the originals back to his source. The article could & should have made that more clear.

The "Killian memo proved fake" has forever been entered into "Great American Myths", to join other such false beliefs as "we nuked Japan to save millions of US troops", "Hussein dumped incubator babies onto the cement floor to die", "Iraqi troops massed on Saudi's border", the "Clinton was handed OBL on a platter", and "America is the free-est nation in the world" myths.

[jobycom]

18. Not recommending this as a news source, just showing what they are saying

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/6/20/105038.shtml

British reporter Michael Smith, who broke the memo story in the London Times on May 1, revealed to The Associated Press over the weekend that "he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals."

Smith's admission means there's now no independent way to determine the accuracy of the Downing Street Memo, i.e., whether he made any typos or transcription errors that could have changed the memo's meaning.

[Goldmund]

20. Hm

It could be the anti-Rove. Neither Bush nor Blair are disputing the authenticity of these memos. But if they raise the profile of this story by claiming they're fake, and then Smith produces the originals, that would be quite a nice slam-dunk.

[LynnTheDem]

22. HE DID NOT DESTROY THE ORIGINALS!

He destroyed the PHOTOCOPIES he worked off of, AFTER he RETURNED THE ORIGINALS to his source.

*Not yelling at you, yelling at the frigging stupidest MFers on the planet, rightwingnuts.

[jaxx]

19. Every dubya lover on the web is saying this.

Check out some other forums or the winger press spots. No originals, no case.........so they say. Rather is getting alot of mention, as the memo's will equate to the AWOL stuff. If it weren't for the Raw Story report earlier about this, the wingers would have a field day. As it is, they are trying to discount the memo's as fast as they can.

[LynnTheDem]

25. I detest stupid people, and no one's more stupid than a rightwingnut;

"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1308368,00.html

PM Blair: "And let me remind you that that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations..."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050607-2.html#

[jobycom]

27. I am. I'm more stupid than a wingnut

Because I can't understand what they understand. I don't understand how two opposite statements can be true, and they can understand it, so they must be smarter than me.

[LynnTheDem]

29. They understand how 2 opposites can be true because they are stupid.

See, you're NOT stupid, therefore you can never udnerstand total absolute stupidity.

[BlueEyedSon]

2. The DSM are old news, AND faked, AND lies.

[jobycom]

3. See?

You're smarter than me, too! I just can't quite grasp it.

[BlueEyedSon]

6. AND irrelevant. Terra, terra, TERRA!!!!

[bicentennial_baby]

4. They assume you're not paying attention

Rational Apathy, and all that jazz...Your life supposed to be so complex and crappy that you can't focus on the glaring hypocrisy of every day life in America...

[jobycom]

13. Well, my life IS pretty crappy, trying to survive Bush's economy

So I guess when Clinton screwed up Bush's economy, it helped Bush distract Americans from paying attention to him?

[wryter2000]

5. They're fake

But everyone knows that Dan Rather made them up last summer. See how that works? :evilgrin:

[Bluzmann57]

12. Whaddaya mean Rather made them up?!

It has to be Clinton's fault. After all, he got impeached for (shudder) actually getting some! What a rotten so and so.

[napi21]

7. Well, the first excuse didn't work, so they had to try something else.

That's the way they do things. Remember, Shrub sold his war in Iraq on the WMD story, well, that didn't work, so then it was to remove an evile Dictator, or bring Democracy to the ME, or several reasons he's tried. You know how it works. Throw all the sh*t up against the wall and see what sticks.

[kaitykaity]

11. Pinch, pinch you owe me a Coke, Jinx.

Great minds and all of that.

:hi:

[jobycom]

16. Didn't someone count up 26 different reasons for the invasion?

I mean, that's a lot of reasons. Saddam must be really bad.

[kaitykaity]

8. The "old news" line wasn't working, so they had to switch

to something else.

I mean, the faked document mantra worked on Dan Rather,
so they're gonna try it again.

If that doesn't work, on to something else.

I think they're just poking fingers in the flooding
dike myself.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[kaitykaity]

15. No, not destroyed. Returned to their source.

Also, the reporter couldn't copy the official letterhead
or he'd go to jail.

[jobycom]

17. I think

As the story stands today that the originals weren't destroyed, just the copies of the originals that were leaked to the source who retyped them.

[LynnTheDem]

23. HE DID NOT DESTROY ANY ORIGINALS!

He took photocopies of the originals then HANDED THE ORIGINALS BACK to his source.

He worked off the photocopies, then retyped the photocopies for newspaper photos, and then he destroyed his PHOTOCOPIES.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[jobycom]

28. It fascinates me how much higher the Republican standard for evidence

is for critical memos than for proof of WMD, terrorist connections, etc. If the Republicans would have held to such a high standard of proof before invading BOTH Afghanistan and Iraq, or before imprisoning "terror suspects" in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib or Afghanistan, then there would be a lot less suffering in the world right now.

As for a lack of originals giving the Republicans a valid argument on this case, maybe if Blair hadn't already confirmed they were legitimate it might. But Blair and his government have already confirmed they are legite, so the Republicans have no valid argument. As always. I'm trying to remember once when they were right... No, can't do it.

[LynnTheDem]

31. Oh yes and that would have prevented the rightwingnuts from screeching

"FAKE!"

:rofl:

No they do not have a "valid arguement to call them fake";

"The Foreign Office yesterday acknowledged the documents were genuine"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1308368,00.html

PM Blair: "And let me remind you that that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations..."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050607-2.html#

[baby_mouse]

32. Welll....

It's because they're what we scientists call VERY STUPID.