Republican Strategy for Kerry re: Downing Street Memo?

[dooner]

John Kerry Reportedly To Present "Downing Street Memo" To Congress
All Headline News, June 5, 2005 7:36 a.m. EST
Douglas Maher - All Headline News Staff Reporter

Washington,D.C. (AHN)- After remaining almost silent since losing the 2004 election by thirty four electoral votes, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts is reportedly planning to to present Congress with The Downing Street Memo, reported last month by the London Times.

<snip>

However, All Headline News has re-discovered that a bill signed by then President Clinton named "The Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998" gave President Bush all of the legal recourse necessary for the war.

Stating directly from the bill: "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government. "

The H.R. 4655 law was signed into effect October 31,1998.

Republicans plan to issue a response to Senator Kerry by using his own words against him, a tactic used in the 2004 Election. Where Sen. Kerry was quoted as saying the war was justified and Saddam Hussein needed to be removed.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/2235942822

[napi21]

1. Yes, Shrub had the legal recourse to remove Hussein, but he did

NOT, nor does any Presidenet have the authority to LIE! If Shrub had gone to the American people and say, I want to remove Hussein from power because he is a bad and evile dictator, he had every authority to do that! That's not what he did!!! The DSM makes it clear that he didn't think he could get the Americans to support him for THAT reason, so he made one up! The problem isn't the action he took, it is the lies he used to get approval!!!

[oxbow]

22. THAT BILL WAS INTRODUCED AND LOBBIED FOR BY THE PNAC

It's just a case of Cheney and company methodically laying the groundwork for war beforehand

Source: "Weapons of Mass Deception"

You're absolutely right though. This is the perfect GOP defense against the DSM, and we should begin counteracting the disinformation right now.

[BattyDem]

2. If Bush had "all of the legal recourse necessary for the war ..."

then why did he lie to Congress and the American people about the WMDs? Why did he fix the facts around the policy? Why did he bother going to the UN? Why did he imply that Saddam was behind 9/11? Why did he imply that Saddam and OBL were working together? Why has his reason for the war changed over and over again? (WMDs, connection to Al Qaeda, regime change, liberate the Iraqi people, establish democracy in Iraq, etc.)

Bottom line: He lied!

Let them attack Kerry - all he has to say is, "I thought the war was justified because I believed President Bush ... but he lied to me and to the American people."

[suston96]

3. Legal Recourse?

Does that include lying and fabricating and morphing intelligence to, as the memo indicates, to justify going to war?

I don't think so.

That Liberation Act does not authorize such "high crimes and misdemeanors" against the United States.

[Botany]

4. Clinton's fault!

Fuck you W and the horse you rode in on too

[peacetalksforall]

5. Here's a summary:

Quote -
SUMMARY AS OF:
10/5/1998--Passed House, amended. (There is 1 other summary)

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

Authorizes the President, after notifying specified congressional committees, to provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations: (1) grant assistance for radio and television broadcasting to Iraq; (2) Department of Defense (DOD) defense articles and services and military education and training (IMET); and (3) humanitarian assistance, with emphasis on addressing the needs of individuals who have fled from areas under the control of the Hussein regime. Prohibits assistance to any group or organization that is engaged in military cooperation with the Hussein regime. Authorizes appropriations.

Directs the President to designate: (1) one or more Iraqi democratic opposition organizations that meet specified criteria as eligible to receive assistance under this Act; and (2) additional such organizations which satisfy the President's criteria.

Urges the President to call upon the United Nations to establish an international criminal tribunal for the purpose of indicting, prosecuting, and imprisoning Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi officials who are responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, and other criminal violations of international law.

Expresses the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people and democracy transition assistance to Iraqi parties and movements with democratic goals, including convening Iraq's foreign creditors to develop a multilateral response to the foreign debt incurred by the Hussein regime.
Unquote

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR04655:@@@D&summ2=m&


IF ANYONE SAYS THAT THIS IS authorization to play super macho with SHOCK and AWE, bomb the hell of them, destroy their infrasturcture, throw butts on the floors of their mosques, rip people out of their homes, torment and torture their men and abuse every cultural belief they hold as humans, use kids and schools the way insurgents do, and slaughter all our humans and ruin their futures...please tell me which line it is on.

The claim that Clinton authorized what Bush did is a their WORST LIE YET.

[dooner]

7. thanks for that info n/t

[truthisfreedom]

8. heh. so now they try to fix the facts around Kerry? like they painted him

during the campaign? i hope the Dems have the wherewithall to bite them in the ass.

[TahitiNut]

11. Yep ... by peaceful means, NOT an illegal invasion based on LIES.

The parade of LIES is unending.

One of the glaring omissions in this barrage of lies is the FACT that the lies from the neocon right didn't just begin in January 2001. They've been peddling outright LIES about Iraq for 15 years.

[KC21304]

6. All Kerry has to do is read his speech to the Senate

before the vote. I hope someone has it. I did on my old computer but I don't now. Darn. Anyone ?


On edit to clarify. I mean the speech he gave to the Senate before the vote to give Bush the power to go to war.

[globalvillage]

10. This one?

TEXT FROM THE SPEECH JOHN KERRY MADE ON THE SENATE FLOOR
October 9, 2002

KERRY'S OTHER MAJOR IRAQ SPEECHES
John Kerry on Iraq War Full Text
September 20, 2004

Main points from Kerry's speech on Iraq
September 20, 2004
MORE ON IRAQ
Flip-flopping Charge on Iraq Unsupported by Facts
September 23, 2004
Kerry always pushed global cooperation, war as last resort.


www.kerryoniraqwar.com



Obviously, with respect to an issue that might take Americans to war, we deserve time, and there is no more important debate to be had on the floor of the Senate. It is in the greatest traditions of this institution, and I am proud to take part in that debate now.

This is a debate that should be conducted without regard to parties, to politics, to labels. It is a debate that has to come from the gut of each and every Member, and I am confident that it does. I know for Senator Hagel, Senator McCain, and myself, when we pick up the newspapers and read about the residuals of the Vietnam war, there is a particular sensitivity because I do not think any of us feel a residual with respect to the choices we are making now.



http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/kerry-iraq.html

[KC21304]

12. That's it. Thanks globalvillage. The one from Oct. 2002

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. Always my favorite part of his speech:

Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?

[cestpaspossible]

18. Why is that your favorite part?

Most people would probably cite phrases such as I will support a multilateral effort to disarm Iraq by force, if we have exhausted all other options. But I cannot - and will not - support a unilateral, US war against Iraq unless the threat is imminent and no multilateral effort is possible. or in the context of the discussion of the Downing St. Minutes As the President made clear earlier this week, "Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable." as more on-point.

Why is the sentence you quoted your favorite part?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. Because it was evident at the time that this was bullshit.

With the merest bit of inquisitiveness.

I think 75% of that speech is right on the money. If one were to look at that 75%, one would come away with the impression that this war idea isn't based on the most solid of ground. It's the 25% that stands out- the 25% that is the "rationalization."

Here's another beaut:

Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster?

Pure-D bullshit. Hussein, if he did, sought nukes for the same reason as us or anyone else (I'm sure I don't have to point out the advantages). And, oh yes, the current group of nuclear weapons manufacturers are so responsible. They would never think of using that power to their advantage. The disaster that they're trying to limit is their own hegemony.

Piffle.

Note: I've got four or five more lines that exposite on this theme. Yet I want to reiterate that 75% of the speech was fine. Be honest. You thought he was gonna vote no, too...didn't ya?

[cestpaspossible]

23. You haven't explained WHY your favorite parts are the few mistakes

That is my question -- WHY is that your favorite part? Is it just some malicious joy at seeing Kerry make a mistake?

It would be like me saying that my favorite part of the Dean campaign was the 'Scream' or his statement that "Saddam Hussein must be disarmed"... sure, those things happened, but why would I take pleasure in the fact that they happened?


:shrug:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. Ours is not to wonder "why"...

Why? Because he let me down. And he let 1700 kids and their families down. Additionally, I'll admit that they're my favorite parts because they're my basis for not supporting Kerry in the first place. Shitty, but honest. Kerry is way too good of a man to succumb to that kind of rhetorical bullshit. Oh yeah, Dean fucks up all the time, too. But he usually errs on going too hard than going too soft. If you know what I mean...

[cestpaspossible]

25. So it really is just malicious attack-our-own glee? OK

just wanted to clear that up.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

26. Yeah, that's what I was saying.

:eyes:

[cestpaspossible]

27. See, sometimes a look in the mirror can be a good thing.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

28. Yep.

[CornField]

9. Who gave them permission to "fix" intelligence?

Who gave GW the permission to lie to me, to you, and the rest of the American people?

So many times I've heard that the impeachment of Clinton wasn't a moral issue based on his actions with Monica, but based on the fact that he lied to Congress and the American people. Well, if a lie is an impeachable offense, we should get the ball rolling.

[MH1]

13. I posted on this at dKos, and my blog..

Was going to do it here but you beat me to it!!

Here is the dkos diary - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/5/123520/3279

and my blog - Potential (R) response to Kerry on DSM, and why it's bunk.

I'm a little too burnt to post excerpts from it right now, but in those posts I did do a lot of analysis and extract stuff out of Thomas. So if you have a chance, please go take a look! (The only significant difference in the dkos post is the obligatory "can't we all just get behind Kerry on this?")

[dooner]

15. All Headline News is based in Houston and Boca Raton

"All Headline News Corp is a privately funded and held corporation that was founded in 2003 and officially incorporated in 2004. Headquartered in Wellington, Florida with technical network operations in Boca Raton, Florida and Houston, Texas."


Located in Texas and Florida? Hmm... difficult not to wonder about that.

[MH1]

19. Good Catch.

I agree. Texas and Florida. Hmmm.

[salin]

14. Please Senator Kerry - as you offer this - bring up NewsDays item on Bolto

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1523137&mesg_id=1523137&page=

It is timely (per his nomination)

And it gives an actual example of the manipulation alleged in DSM.

Go to the article - scroll towards the end - Bolton begins bullying in the summer of 2001 - issues? 1) to supress/hide some (selected) findings of US Weapons inspections in Iraq; and 2) to push to get some hand-picked folks hired in the organization.

Things heat up - and he does a charge to Europe and pull all strings - what was he trying to stop? Weapons inspections that were being pushed for ... as a way of trying to avert war.

[Lexingtonian]

17. it's not some sort of magic bullet

because the part of the American electorate that is presently wavering about the Iraq venture, Republican moderates, doesn't care a whole lot about the planning. Moderate Republicans care about the outcome, about the Bush people running out of meaningful bottom line accomplishments to show for all the blood and treasure expended. They expected lying about and oversell of intangibles and excuses.

To my impression, for moderate Republicans to give up on the Iraq policy, basically the prospects for 'freedom' as they define it have to vanish. Moderate Republicans appear to define this as the breakdown of trade, of physical safety and ability to travel and private property confiscation/destruction. In translation that amounts to outbreak of acute civil war conditions, beyond mere assassination levels.

Democrats have no control over this, obviously, so I consider most of the hankering over this memo as ultimately an argument about the place of political righteousness within the Democratic Party. Iraq will continue to deteriorate on its own to where moderate Republicans give up on the matter. The memo has a little use in, when the Bush people admit its contents, helping the British electorate consolidate its supermajority to getting Blair and Brown into withdrawal out of Iraq.

The exposure of the Guantanamo Bay business strikes me as far more effective stuff, politically, because Indies have their last faith in Bush and Republican governance pegged on the 'War On Terror' having some kind of practical effectiveness.

[dooner]

30. No, it's evidence of a crime

I believe you are saying that moderate republicans are only going to stop supporting the Ira war if it becomes impossible to make money there? That could be true (sadly) but possibly misses the point.

In addition to the lying and manipulation of intelligence, if war crimes have been committed, as evidenced by the Downing Street Minutes/Memo (as well as testimony and evidence brought forward by others formerly within the Bush administration) then I think it is our responsibility as citizens to stand up and demand an explanation. And to hold any and all guilty parties accountable. Those are our tax dollars buying the bombs and bullets.

Ditto for Guantanamo. I don't think any issue is more or less important.

While we would all like to stop the war, we need to also root out the evildooers... and I think we know who they are!

[oxbow]

21. delete

see above

[discopants]

29. Sen Kerry, please wait until after Jacko verdict!!!

or no one will ever know it happened.