Shays Lies about DSM

[Don1]

Below is an email that I received back from Rep. Chris Shays regarding DSM. I am sure that I will eventually write something back after I stop fuming from him insulting my intelligence.

Dear Donald:

Thank you for your email expressing support for a Congressional investigation into the so-called Downing Street memo. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views with me.

The Downing Street memo is the record of a July 23, 2002, meeting in the office of the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, attended by his senior national security team. The notes were leaked to the press in May 2005, and indicate the belief of British intelligence analysts that President Bush had decided to use military force in mid-2002 and that the President wanted to justify the use of force by emphasizing the threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Because the memo is now public and open to public scrutiny and debate, it seems to me that a Congressional investigation of the British government's perception in 2002 is unnecessary. In addition, an investigation would likely not yield important new information about how the U.S. government should manage current challenges.

Despite agreements among the international intelligence community, Republican and Democrat lawmakers, and both the Clinton and Bush Administrations that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs, stockpiles of these weapons were not found. I do not believe Presidents Clinton and Bush lied about the threat of WMDs. Rather, it seems to me the President's decision was based on intelligence that turned out to be incorrect. The disagreement now is whether the United States should have given Saddam more time to prove he had destroyed his weapons. President Bush felt we had waited long enough, and I supported his decision to use force.

The Downing Street memo also warned Great Britain's leadership that there was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath of military action. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, which has oversight of the Department of State and the Defense Department, I know the concern about postwar planning was well founded. For example, we know mistakes have been made by the President, Congress and the intelligence community. We did not take proper steps to prevent the looting that took place when coalition forces first entered Iraq. It is clear we should not have disbanded the government, the army or the police.

Our military's role in removing Saddam Hussein from power and ending his regime was highly successful, but the task of winning the peace and rebuilding Iraq should have been placed in the hands of the State Department instead of the Department of Defense. Had the military remained focused on capturing the remaining elements of Saddam's regime and fighting terrorists, had the State Department been called upon to take a greater role in the reconstruction efforts, and had Congress asserted the oversight role granted to it by our founding fathers, the reconstruction may have proceeded without such resistance and turmoil.

I have long believed the quickest route home for the brave men and women of our military is to help the new Iraqi government run its own democratic nation. The most important way to accomplish this goal is to focus our efforts on training an effective Iraqi security force. The bottom line is Iraqis want to defend their own country, and I strongly support the United States' commitment to ensuring that in addition to training, they have the tools and manpower necessary to do so.

Please do not hesitate to contact my office again. Because mail is delayed by Anthrax screening, e-mails, phone calls, faxes, and in-person visits are the most effective ways to communicate with my office. I also have recently begun a periodic e-newsletter and would be happy to send it to you. To request this e-newsletter, and for other information, please visit my website at www.house.gov/shays.

Sincerely,

Christopher Shays
Member of Congress



CS:jp

I cannot guarantee the integrity of the text of this letter if it was not sent to you directly from my Congressional Email Account: [e-mail]. If you have any questions about the validity of this message, please email me or call my Washington, DC office at: 202/225-5541.

[rodeodance]

1. this comment says--move on, its old news.

.....In addition, an investigation would likely not yield important new information about how the U.S. government should manage current challenges.

[Don1]

3. Huh?

So a lie that resulted in killing 100K civilians including 50K children doesn't matter for future developments in the Middle East?

The only purpose it serves is to perpetuate the military industrial complex's "War on Terror" indefinitely so that it can sustain the defense contractors within the neo-cons' Ownership Society.

[ray of light]

2. check this out.

I spoke to Representative Joe Schwartz (Michigan) and his line is: "Well, it's a foreign memo and we don't really know that it means it the way we think it means. But Rep. Schwartz will vote on it when it comes to the floor." ---quote from their Press Secretary

[Don1]

4. What the Heck does that mean?

So he'll vote on it even though he doesn't understand it?

and he doesn't understand it because it is in British English instead of American English?

God, these people drive me crazy...

[ray of light]

5. I agree!

BUT I have been spreading his comments far and wide! We MUST get these people on record. And we will hold them accountable in 06. This is why I'm always encouraging people to join the Democracy Cell Project and learn how to become effective advocates.

Does it matter that this guy says he's a moderate Republican when he talks like that? But they are not use to people actually saying, "I'm going to make sure your constituents KNOW what you're saying while you're in DC."