Oh, oh.. authenticity of DSM under attack by blog...

[Rex_Goodheart]

Michael Smith admitted to the Associated Press that memoes were retyped?

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/004746.php

[AX10]

1. or is this some BS from the right to cover Bush's arse?!!

[Jackpine Radical]

25. Who knows--a few Rubes & Boobs might buy it.

Worth flying up the flagpole to see if anybody waters it.

Duh, Megadittoes, Rex.

[goclark]

2. and?

Why would they give him the originals?

[kentuck]

3. But...

The Repubs want this story to die. If they make a big stink out of whether these are "fake" documents or not, it will only bring more attention to them. They don't want that right now. They would rather the story just disappear...

[Maple]

4. It's a repeat

of the Dan Rather gambit.

Worked once, why not try it twice?

[DaveinMD]

6. they tried

it during the Schiavo fiasco too.

[Catch22Dem]

5. I saw this coming from a mile away

Even posted about it this morning.

[Bravo411]

7. They have been verified.

They were re-typed and the originals were destroyed to protect the source. The information was verified as correct by another source, and the British Government has not disputed the authenticity (i.e. the accuracy) of the information.

[AX10]

8. Can the FReepers really do a "Rather" with them then?

I hope not.

[xray s]

11. No

The DSM are not the Rove set up that the Rather memos were.

This is the real shit.

[ailsagirl]

34. How can they get away with dismissing the contents just because

they'd been retyped??

What difference does that make if the content is IDENTICAL
to the original and authenticated?

We're entering Alice in Wonderland again, folks. They're going
to pull another fast one.

[personman]

13. There is a difference

between authenticity and accuracy in this case. If the British government officials had said "The sky is green" and it was recorded in the memo, that would be an authentic memo even if the information in it is false.

The big deal of this though is that this is what a British government official who, having just come back from America to get an impression of our government's plans, stated as his opinion of what our government's intentions were. The fact that these memos were never supposed to see the light of day is one of the reasons they have credibility. Why would he lie or spin this information to his co-workers if they were never going to be seen by anyone outside of the British government?

(I watched the DSM hearing today, very informative even though I though I already knew all the important details)

[KoKo]

14. Didn't NBC say they verified ALL the Memo's?

:shrug: Would they lie...given what happened to CBS with Rather?

[indie_voter]

20. The photocopies destroyed, the originals returned to source n/t

[Bravo411]

36. I stand corrected

I had originally read that the original leaked document had been retyped, then destroyed to protect the source. Which is no big deal since the original doesn't refer to a singe memo, but is one of many official copies of the document. I have since been made aware that it was photocopied, then returned to the source, and that the copy was then destroyed to protect the source.

I was in no way trying to spread any doubt about the authenticity of the documents. If there was any doubt about their authenticity, then that would have been brought up in Britain during their recent election, which is when the story broke in the Sunday Times. Never has Blair or anybody else in the British government tried to challenge them.

[rndmprsn]

9. my god these people are so f#cking predictable....

second term slump...i know they are EXTREMELY repetitious, but this is getting ridiculous

[xray s]

10. propaganda blast of the week

Now we all know what the talking pigs will be saying tomorrow.

Much adieu about nothing...and a dupe topic anyway



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3898818

[berni_mccoy]

12. Here's the actual verification process

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Backstory_Confirming_the_Downing_Street_0614.html

Reed'em and weep freeptards!

[leesa]

15. Interesting that you post this nonsense.

They are official minutes.

[Fluffdaddy]

17. Be aware that there are FReepers among us trying to spread doubt

It will not work

[Dinger]

16. Tsk Tsk Tsk . . . . Too Late KKKarl

Runaway train . . . not to be stopped

[rocktivity]

18. If the memos are fake, why hasn't anyone on Blair's side said so?

Because they can't. And they can't because they know that if they do, something even more incriminating could come out--up to and including the actual source!

:headbang:
rocknation

[autorank]

19. The public is ready to believe this. Who cares about Rove-like bull shit

If they did this, Rove is a one-trick pony. The content was verified. Nobody claimed that they had the originals, as in Rather's situation. I don't think even Murdoch is willing to trash his premier media property to help *. That blogger is really tedious. He probably sits around in a British Navy uniform and a for-and-aft hat barking orders to his dog in a faux British accent. Fuck him.

[Jackpine Radical]

26. OMG what an image.

"He probably sits around in a British Navy uniform and a for-and-aft hat barking orders to his dog in a faux British accent."
:rofl:

[autorank]

28. Typical freeper...pity their poor pets having to listen to their drive.

:hi:

[chalky]

21. Guess those freeps should get behind Conyers, then.

Let's have their lord and master come out and answer the FIVE LITTLE QUESTIONS.

Prove us wrong.

I dare them.

[Rex_Goodheart]

27. ?

Which five little questions?

[chalky]

32. Seriously!? Dude.

1)Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?
2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?
3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?
4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?
5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?

www.johnconyers.com

[burythehatchet]

35. WTF is your point Rex_Goodheart?

Great freakin name btw. Is there a web site that you feel deserves a little bit more exposure?

These threads represent an incresingly futile approach Rex me lad. Go to plan B

[Botany]

22. Creative Response Concepts ...

..... of Arlington, VA are busy again....

but this time it will not be like Kerry not fighting the swift boats or
CBS not standing up for their story .......

[rocktivity]

23. From the DU Top Ten Conservative Idiots page

Vol. 201, story #2:

The facts were not being fixed in any shape or form at all...And let me remind you that that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations. Now, no one knows more intimately the discussions that we were conducting as two countries at the time than me...

That's what Blair said during his press conference with Georgie. Not "We NEVER discussed anything about fixing the facts." Not "The memo is a hoax." Not "The memo is inaccurate." If those things were true, all he had to do was say so!

:headbang:
rocknation

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[Rex_Goodheart]

30. WTF are you talking about?

WTF are you talking about?

You will find nobody in this country who despises George W. Bush more than I do, and nobody who wants more to see these memoes used against him in impeachment proceedings.

Now why don't you go climb back into your can?

[killbotfactory]

31. They've been living in a repub fantasyland for four years already

I guess four more won't hurt them.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

33. uhh..

Why would anyone care what a website that has a "biting" fetish has to say?


ie.
'Thus every blogger, in his kind, is bit by whom comes behind'