National Review attacks the Downing Street Memo

[wicket]

Looks like the Bushies are getting scared!

http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins200506060801.asp

This and other excerpts have caused a furor on the American Left. Ralph Nader is calling for impeachment (again), and John Kerry has vowed to bring the matter to the Senate floor. Of course, the memo simply contains the impressions of an aide of the impressions of British-cabinet officials of the impressions of unnamed people they spoke to in the United States about what they thought the president was thinking. It is sad when hearsay thrice-removed raises this kind of ruckus, especially since a version had been reported three years ago. As smoking guns go, it is not high caliber.

-snip-

I think the fact that the Downing Street Memo had once been classified has a lot to do with its current notoriety. People might suppose that a “secret” document must ipso facto be important. But not always, and not in equal measure. The section of the memo dealing with strategic planning, yes, that was worth keeping close hold on. But the speculations about the inner workings of the American government? Sounds like the same things one could have heard on any newscast. Looking at the document in context it is hard to see what the commotion is about. Most of what might be thought sensational has already been written about elsewhere, to little fanfare. The charge of intelligence fraud (if it is such a charge) has already been investigated and found baseless. And the allegations that the president had already decided to go to war and was thus deceiving the American people are personal opinions based on unsubstantiated impressions from unnamed sources.

[Avalux]

1. National Review.......

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[autorank]

2. The "Bill Buckley erudite rhetorical generator" --NR

Pure Buckley: "a “secret” document must ipso facto be important." This is tedious beyond words...

I have a statement I'd like to make to the vile bullies who stuffed these NR authors in a locker in high school: YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT THEM THERE.

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY!

Contact the DNC and Give 'em Hell About NOT Acting on Election Fraud

[paineinthearse]

3. Previously posted in EDITORIALS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=130072&mesg_id=130072

Thought it looked familiar :>

[wicket]

5. great minds think alike

:D

[Vyan]

4. Well, there's an simple solution...

to discovering whether the MINUTES of the impressions of the impressions are accurate -- have the Bush Administration release their minutes and impresssions of their pre-Iraq War conversations with Sir Richard Dearlove.

And it's not as if we haven't had some former members of the Bush Administration come forward with plenty of documents indicating that their were intensions and plans to invade Iraq long before 9/11 (except for both Richard Clarke of the NSA and Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil) and it's not like anyone at the Pentagon has confirmed what they've said (except for form Office of Special Plans aid Lt. Col Karen Kwaitkowski).

Vyan

[Karenina]

7. The use of the word "MEMO"

is the frontline of obfuscation. Form vs content. Hey, it WORKED for *AWOL...

DOWNING STREET MINUTES - OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT MINUTES OF AN OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT MEETING - distributed to U.K. EYES ONLY in the form of a memo...

[JNelson6563]

6. Heh. Another "pre-emptive strike"

Seems to me the people are not happy for having been duped into supporting this war. As more and more evidence of the lies they coaxed the people down this road with is revealed they will react predictably. They will brand it as not credible, just a pack of lies! Lies from those who hate America! :eyes:

Julie

[wicket]

8. kick

:kick:

[wiggs]

9. Again...the memo is not the only ammunition we have....

....there are all kinds of articles, interviews, and statements that support what DSM says. Loads of evidence presented in DU alone.

To me, if our dem leaders do not use all of these together in a strong multi-pronged way, they are setting themselves up for a fall. And if that happens, we have to ask why.

Would an attorney go to a preliminary hearing or to trial with one piece of evidence when there are hundreds of other pieces out there to reinforce his case???? To do so would leave him open to an all out attack on his one piece of evidence and it would be easy to cast doubt on it. No attorney would do that unless he is incompetent or his aim was to lose the case.

With resepct to DSM, this national review article is just the start of the attack on the memo. More will come. Trillions of dollars ride on it. Careers ride on it.

Focusing on DSM alone is an irresponsible, QUESTIONABLE approach to building a case against this administration. How our media and our leaders build this case will be telling.

[grumpy old fart]

10. funny how they slough off the "impressions of unnamed sources".....

"And the allegations that the president had already decided to go to war and was thus deceiving the American people are personal opinions based on unsubstantiated impressions from unnamed sources."

This is what HEARINGS are for!!!! If these "unsubstantiated impressions" are indeed substantiated, they constitute impeachable high crimes.

[Dr Fate]

11. Democrats are giving the media all the time in the world to spin this.

Not smart.