THIS BUSH SHILL NEEDS A BEAT-DOWN!

[tk2kewl]

Downing St. memos: Been there, knew that

By James Klurfeld
Newsday
June 24, 2005

Somebody needs to explain to me all this furor over the Downing Street memos.

Democrats and anti-war activists sound as if they have found the smoking gun that proves President George W. Bush lied to the nation and the world about his intentions toward Iraq. New York Rep. Charles Rangel went so far as to mention the word "impeachment."

<snip>

Hello? Anybody who was paying attention in the summer of 2002 had to understand that the Bush administration was beating the drums of war and that if an actual decision had not been made (what is the actual decision?) the mind-set was clear.

<snip>

The furor over the Downing Street memos is nonsense. It will take historians to figure out whether the invasion of Iraq was wisdom or folly. And that will depend on what Iraq looks like in 20 years. Meanwhile, this irrelevant debate is diverting the nation from a discussion of the critical issue before us: How much treasure, in lives and money, will we and should we continue to spend on Iraq? What will it take to make Iraq a stable, secure nation? And are we willing to pay it?

On edit: took my comments (below) out of the excerpt block

Klurfeld is intentionally leaving out the most damning information in the DSM. Yeah, we all know BushCo was hell-bent on going to war -- that's not the point. The point is that the war was illegal and BuschCo manufactured evidence to convince the Congress, U.N. and the public that the war was legally justified. Not to mention that they began the war before even manufacturing their bogus legal justification.

I had a LTTE published recently in Newsday so it's unlikely that they'll publish a response from me. Someone please set the record straight with Newsday.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. If you knew Bush was LYING: exaggerating/fabricating evidence....

using war as the option of FIRST RESORT.... why didn't you write about that at the time, you douchebag????

[tk2kewl]

2. Exaclty

but he ommits the important facts:

1. that the justification was a lie

2. the war was begun before it was authorized

[BlueEyedSon]

3. I suppose those are impeachable, possibly felonies and/or treason...

[ComerPerro]

4. Seems to be the new strategy

Delay, lie and stall when a story breaks, then finally acknowledge it but say that its "old news".

[The Sleeper]

5. let's see, how to respond to such excrement?

there are SO MANY ways that I'm positively rubbing my hands together with glee...

[tk2kewl]

7. this is where to send your comments

[e-mail]

250 words or less

I think my comment at the end of the original post, along with some DSM citations to back it up would make a good letter.

[AmandaRuth]

6. does not the DSM and related papers state that securing resources

was one of the main goals of the invasion?

So mindless freeps, it was about the oil.

[zbdent]

8. Some freepers are debating whether or not a mid-20th century leader's

"antics" were wisdom or folly . . .

[tk2kewl]

9. huh?

to what do you refer?

[zbdent]

10. the "Final Solution"

of the 30s & 40s . . .

[tk2kewl]

11. gotcha

[Supersedeas]

12. postpone the accountability -- by all means -- postpone accountability