Originally posted by PVS
ok thank you for that linkalicious! 🙂
btw, you know a classic JM strategy is to agitate others in a thread she doesnt agree with in an effort to get it closed. pretty childish dont you think? im glad you are mature enough to not resort to such a tactic.back to topic then? ✅
Really? You think she has a strategy?
Lets not go giving Jackie credit where others came before her....
I'm not trying to get this thread closed. Actually, I'm trying to get this thread going. Aside from us bickering....there have been a whopping 3 posts in this thread.
I don't need to be the judge of what's important or not....the number of replies speaks for itself.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Really? You think she has a strategy?
i've seen her do it, and i've seen her succeed.
Originally posted by Linkalicious
Lets not go giving Jackie credit where others came before her....I'm not trying to get this thread closed. Actually, I'm trying to get this thread going. Aside from us bickering....there have been a whopping 3 posts in this thread.
I don't need to be the judge of what's important or not....the number of replies speaks for itself.
well i'm glad we have your permission to stay on topic.
thanks 🙂 👆
Good now that I've given you permission, maybe you'll actually make an attempt to stay on topic this time instead of thinking up such witty patronising remarks.
When was this information actually discovered? I know the article is from today, but this information is far from new...it had to be in someone's possesion long before this article.
Other quest...who are they referring to when they say "C" and "CDS"?
heres a more detailed article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1592724_1,00.html
"The next contributor to the meeting, according to the minutes, was “C”, as the chief of MI6 is traditionally known."
just like those james bond films 😕
Originally posted by Linkalicious
When was this information actually discovered? I know the article is from today, but this information is far from new...it had to be in someone's possesion long before this article.
the memo has just surfaced, thus the new extensive coverage...and yet disgustingly (not surprisingly) complete lack of coverage in the american press. the memo itself dates back to well before the case was made for war based on 'WMD' and sadam's 'nookular' ambitions. so, its not old news, but rather blair/bush finally being caught with their pants down.
is anyone else just SHOCKED that the 'liberal bias' media hasnt even touched this issue? go to any major media site like bbc, cnn....ANY of them and try to find it in their database. amazing.
Originally posted by PVS
the memo has just surfaced, thus the new extensive coverage...and yet disgustingly (not surprisingly) complete lack of coverage in the american press. the memo itself dates back to well before the case was made for war based on 'WMD' and sadam's 'nookular' ambitions. so, its not old news, but rather blair/bush finally being caught with their pants down.is anyone else just SHOCKED that the 'liberal bias' media hasnt even touched this issue? go to any major media site like bbc, cnn....ANY of them and try to find it in their database. amazing.
I am not suprised at all. It would seem that the biased liberal media has to struggle against their mastes, who seem to have a red hand slipping money in their pockets.
On the cover of CNN's home page the top stories are:
• Top al Qaeda suspect nabbed in Pakistan | Special Report
• Al Qaeda still a homeland threat, Gonzales insists
• U.S.: 20 insurgents killed in fighting in Afghanistan
• Tony Blair up for third term as Britain's PM | premium content Video
• Victim's son: Bind, torture, kill BTK suspect | premium content Video
• Accountant describes Jackson 'liquidity crisis' | premium content Video
• CNN/Money: Nike pulls its shoes from Sears
• Brothers send 2 tons of salami to troops in Iraq
The first three stories continue to instill the fear of terrorsim and justify the war in Iraq. The BTK and MJ stories are more for people's entertainment. And the Salami story is pure fluff.
No mention of the memo we are talking about. No mention about the cover up of Pat Tillman's death by friendly fire, no mention about Korea. I just think it's interesting what is considered newsworthy.
Originally posted by PVS
the memo has just surfaced, thus the new extensive coverage...and yet disgustingly (not surprisingly) complete lack of coverage in the american press. the memo itself dates back to well before the case was made for war based on 'WMD' and sadam's 'nookular' ambitions. so, its not old news, but rather blair/bush finally being caught with their pants down.is anyone else just SHOCKED that the 'liberal bias' media hasnt even touched this issue? go to any major media site like bbc, cnn....ANY of them and try to find it in their database. amazing.
You clearly didn't look very hard.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4503061.stm
But frankly I agree with what he says- this memo has changed nothing at all. The reason people are not very interested in it is because there is basically nothing to it- just some people trying to make the most enormous fuss over really trivial things- and yes they are trivial, much as you are trying to inflate their importance.
http://www.rawstory.com/aexternal/conyers_iraq_letter_502
well...it seems 88 members of congress feel that this matter is in no way 'trivial' 😬
the letter signed and sent to bush reads:
May 5, 2005
The Honorable George W. Bush President of the United States of America The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
We write because of troubling revelations in the Sunday London Times apparently confirming that the United States and Great Britain had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in the summer of 2002, well before the invasion and before you even sought Congressional authority to engage in military action. While various individuals have asserted this to be the case before, including Paul O'Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Richard Clarke, a former National Security Council official, they have been previously dismissed by your Administration. However, when this story was divulged last weekend, Prime Minister Blair's representative claimed the document contained "nothing new." If the disclosure is accurate, it raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of your own Administration.
The Sunday Times obtained a leaked document with the minutes of a secret meeting from highly placed sources inside the British Government. Among other things, the document revealed:
* Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a July 2002 meeting, at which he discussed military options, having already committed himself to supporting President Bush's plans for invading Iraq.
* British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw acknowledged that the case for war was "thin" as "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, or Iran."
* A separate secret briefing for the meeting said that Britain and America had to "create" conditions to justify a war.
* A British official "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."
As a result of this recent disclosure, we would like to know the following:
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 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?
We have of course known for some time that subsequent to the invasion there have been a variety of varying reasons proffered to justify the invasion, particularly since the time it became evident that weapons of mass destruction would not be found. This leaked document - essentially acknowledged by the Blair government - is the first confirmation that the rationales were shifting well before the invasion as well.
Given the importance of this matter, we would ask that you respond to this inquiry as promptly as possible. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Members who have already signed letter:
Neil Abercrombie
Brian Baird
Tammy Baldwin
Xavier Becerra
Shelley Berkley
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Sanford Bishop
Earl Blumenauer
Corrine Brown
Sherrod Brown
G.K. Butterfield
Emanuel Cleaver
James Clyburn
John Conyers
Jim Cooper
Elijah Cummings
Danny Davis
Peter DeFazio
Diana DeGette
Bill Delahunt
Rosa DeLauro
Lloyd Doggett
Sam Farr
Bob Filner
Harold Ford, Jr.
Barney Frank
Al Green
Raul Grijalva
Louis Gutierrez
Alcee Hastings
Maurice Hinchey
Rush Holt
Jay Inslee
Sheila Jackson Lee
Jessie Jackson Jr.
Marcy Kaptur
Patrick Kennedy
Dale Kildee
Carolyn Kilpatrick
Dennis Kucinich
William Lacy Clay
Barbara Lee
John Lewis
Zoe Lofgren
Donna M. Christensen
Carolyn Maloney
Ed Markey
Carolyn McCarthy
Jim McDermott
James McGovern
Cynthia McKinney
Martin Meehan
Kendrick Meek
Gregory Meeks
Michael Michaud
George Miller
Gwen S. Moore
James Moran
Jerrold Nadler
Grace Napolitano
James Oberstar
John Olver
Major Owens
Frank Pallone
Donald Payne
Charles Rangel
Bobby Rush
Bernie Sanders
Linda Sanchez
Jan Schakowsky
Jose Serrano
Ike Skelton
Louise Slaughter
Hilda Solis
Pete Stark
Ellen Tauscher
Bennie Thompson
Edolphus Towns
Stephanie Tubbs Jones
Chris Van Hollen
Nydia Velazquez
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Maxine Waters
Diane Watson
Melvin Watt
Robert Wexler
Lynn Woolsey
David Wu
Albert R. Wynn