Downing Street Memo: The Evidence We Need To End the Bush Presidency -->

[Dr. Jones]

Obviously everyone knows about the DSM. This website provides an AWESOME recap and some in-depth information on the matter.

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
 
DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02

cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.  But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.   The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

Source:http://www.tomjoad.org/downingstreetmemo.htm

[Dr. Jones]

1. No responses?

I realize this is of course old news, but still, very interesting, and shows plain and clear that Bush planned the Iraq invasion long ago and fabricated bogus intelligence.

[blm]

3. It's never old news to me - Dem lawmakers should have gone ballistic over

DSM, but while some did they were left hanging by the rest who were waiting for the media to tell them if it was a story or not.

[MH1]

4. Heh

The one left hanging was named "Kerry" not "Feingold" - could that have something to do with the deafening silence?

[rustydog]

2. The problem is, the person has written his OPINION

W see Bush's lies for what they are.

We saw through the "be very afraid" campaign in the run up to the war and we saw throught the bogus threats Saddam allegedly posed...

The problem lies in the media and the way the Republican party rallies around it's own.

One line of defense is: The Foreign Secretary has a right to his OPINION...it is just that, his opinion.
Quite simply put, he was in error. We never made up our mind until all avenues were exhausted...
Why does the Foreign Secretary wish to endanger England and America with such baseless pro terrorist commentary?