Mary Mapes could not be reached for comment.

when are the idiots at the white house going to stop looking at typewritten copies of unsourced memos and saying,"they look like something we said, or thereabouts. what idiots.

This is the funniest damn thing I've heard in a long time. Rather stepped in the shit, so this guy had to as well. I wonder how many Brits will swallow this tripe without chewing on it first.

I have proof, I typed it up myself! LOL this has to be a parody.

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

Why, yes, that's exactly how i would maintain my chain of evidence! ;)

"...by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals."

Um...uh...ok

Here we go again...

You have got to be kidding. Lock the originals in your lawyer's safe, sure, but destroy them? No serious journalist can, with a straight face, say that there is any merit to this guy's claims.

But AP attempts to gloss over this gaping credibility gap with this:

A senior British official who reviewed the copies said their content appeared authentic.

So, Mr. May or May Not Exist looked at words the reporter typed and said "Yeah, that looks like the kind of thing a government official would write?"

Awfully weak tea there, Smith, old chap.

By the way,did he copy them at a Kinko's?

Ahem! That was already posted by moi, er, sorry just got off the EU thread, me at #40 on the Miscellaneous Links page and I liked it so much I copied and pasted it at #7 on the EU thread too!
Great minds think alike, Charles, but you can't duck your responsibility for this - had you not ripped open the charade Dan Rather and CBS tried to perpetrate with the TANG memos, journalists wouldn't be reduced to destroying alleged originals, after obtaining them and copying them from undisclosed sources.
Yah just know that good ole Danny boy is reading that and thinking "duh, why didn't we think of that?".

Is that evidence enough to stand up in court?

In the court of public opinion?

#4 winry-chan - why I think you qualify to work in the LA District Attorney's office!
;>)

So what's the bottom line here? We gotta take some lefty reporter's word for this? You're kidding right?

And the MSM is gonna cover this aspect of the "story" how? Not.

#10 TotallySirius - it's not even good enough to sit down in court - either a real court or the court of public opinion. Of course, since the MSM nearly controls the court of public opinion, it might hold up for them.
Orson Buggy - I'm rethinking your comment to me about this on the Miscellaneous Links thread; Jayson Blair may in fact have moved to England after all!

SNAFU, Copies of memos concerning meetings the writer didn't attend. Why wouldn't you believe?

#13 realwest

I forgot the '/rhetorical' tag(again)

I agree with above. The originals are kept, under lock and key. No one would destroy them.

What is even more corrupt is that a journalist would even think it was acceptable to claim that they typed up their own evidence and destroyed the originals.

I'm going to print up a Lotto ticket tomorrow with tonight's winning numbers. I'll just say I accidentally destroyed the original. AP will surely back me up on the credibility and legality of my claim. Easy Street, here I come!

#3 Orson Buggy

I have proof, I typed it up myself! LOL this has to be a parody.

I hate to break the news to you, but they're serious.

All the news that's fit to print, once we make it up! Michael Smith is a wannabe novelist. Most journalists are you know.

I have the memos that prove that Jimmy Hoffa shot JR. I copied tham and destroyed the originals, because my source at Disneyland insisted on being anonymous.

#9...Yeah Charles,you really opened up a can of worms with the Rathergate memos...Journalists now have reached new levels of integrity

"Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals"

/sarcasm off-:>)

Michael Smith is the Michael Moore of England.

I just looked at the first two documents. They appear to have been converted to PFD from either a fax or a scanner, probably a fax. The real interesting thing is that both PDF files were created on 9/21/2004. If the PDF copies of these documents have been around that long, why are we just hearing about them?

Neither Bush nor Blair (or anyone else in either govt.) has said the memos were false. If they had been forged or altered, it would have been said. Why would Bush and Blair answer questions about the memos if they were false? By doing so, they confirmed they were real. Suggesting they were forged is just silly.

I defer to Triumph the Insult Dog about wonderful these kinds of documents are ... "to poop on".

#22 [Engineer]

It's easy to make a file appear to be from an older date. Simply shange the date on the computer, type and save. Viola! Your computer don't care what day it is.

23 Brandywine

Neither Bush nor Blair (or anyone else in either govt.) has said the memos were false.

How would Bush know what a member of the British government wrote?

If Oprah Winfrey said she's a Zulu this week,why should'nt i believe the Downing Street Memos are fake but accurate?

#26
[Engineer]
How would Bush know what a member of the British government wrote?

He would have been told if the memos were false.

#25 Orson Buggy

It's easy to make a file appear to be from an older date. Simply shange the date on the computer, type and save. Viola!

True, but why do that unless you are hiding something?

Your computer don't care what day it is.

Depends. I have software that won't run if you do that.

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

Well doesn't that just beat all?

What is with the Left and their Memos of Doubtful Provenence?

Isn't that CONVEEENIENT!

I'm "channelling" the Churchlady.

#23 Brandywine

George Bush did not claim Bill Burkett's ridiculous TANG Memos were false, either, only that he knew nothing of them. In fact, many on the Left still use that as proof that they are real.

[Suggesting they were forged is just silly.]

They *are* forged. The reporter himself admits he produced them by typing them up.

Besides, even if genuine, there isn't any damning evidence there. All leaders of nations have frank discussions about this kinda shit. They all haev those who criticize them for their ideas and decisions as well.

Who gives a rat's ass? There has been ample reason to take out Saddam since the first violations of the sanctions after GW1. The first missile shot at our air patrols was reason enough for me. The deaths due to Saddam's cruelty are reason enough. The fact that Saddam supported suicide bombers in Israel is reason enough. And, the bastard had the weapons, thanks to Russia, they are ferreted away somewhere else, most likely because Saddam's weapons program had Russian fingerprints all over it.

I see we killed another 50 of those jihadist bastards. Hooah!

More from the dog-ate-my-homework school of journalism...

Folks, Tony Blair has not denied the authenticity of the memos. In Britain, the Official Secrets Act requires that the reporters turn over the originals. Instead, they copied them and returned them to their source(s). Smart move.

#7 Belize042

You have got to be kidding. Lock the originals in your lawyer's safe, sure, but destroy them? No serious journalist can, with a straight face, say that there is any merit to this guy's claims.

More importantly, no Impeachment Proceeding can, with a straight face, say that there is any merit to this guy's claims.

"I" think Dan Rather may have the originals!
tee hee :-)

#36 piniella

He says he copied them, then destroyed them. The originals, according to him, no longer exist.

36 piniella

Instead, they copied them and returned them to their source(s). Smart move.

Since these were copied and then destroyed, and you said "returned to their sources", does that mean they didn't exist in the first place?

Shit, they weren't even copied i.e. Xerox, they were retyped...

#29 [Engineer]

If you used an old enough version of Acrobat, it wouldn't care. Version 5 perhaps.

#39 not neo -

Even better!

28 Brandywine

He would have been told if the memos were false.

Really? The Labor Government is more left wing than our Democrats. Many members of the British government hate Bush as much or more than Howard Dean does. They aren't as vocal because Tony Blair is the head of the party and he would kick their butt.

#36 piniella

From the AP story:

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

Smith admits he destroyed the originals. I suspect very strongly the "originals", like Burkett's "originals", never existed.

#43 piniella

Even better!

Absolutely better. These documents are worthless now, in a legal sense.

Does anyone else recall that the idea of invading Iraq was all over the news in the Summer of 2002?

Where did UN Res 1441 come from in November of 2002, if not for the White House's pressure to get serious with Saddam?

Hello? This is not news. For instance, at LGF on June 11, 2002

The sources said Mubarak turned down Bush's appeal for Egypt's cooperation in a military campaign to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. They said the U.S. president urged his Egyptian counterpart to end diplomatic and trade cooperation with Baghdad.

Now we're supposed to be newly impressed that the Bush Administration was looking at dropping the hammer on Saddam?

We knew this 3 years ago! So what?

I wonder why Bush doesn't make available OUR minutes of the DC meetings with Sir Richard Dearlove ("C")?

Too funny!

I wish my job was this easy!

#9 realwest

This is silly. The journo was protecting his source. Many sensitive documents are marked in ways that identify who the document was given to. These markings can be invisible or undetectable.

Again, this is entirely absurd notion, that the DSM is not genuine. Bush and Blair addressed points in the memo at their press conference. Ask yourself, why would they do that if they knew the docs were false, in any way? And how would they not know?

#36 piniella

They aren't memos. They are artist's renditions of what the alleged memos were. Since he "destroyed" them, they can't be affirmed or denied. this reporter has no leg to stand on.

#48 piniella

I wonder why Bush doesn't make available OUR minutes of the DC meetings with Sir Richard Dearlove ("C")?

He said that he'd release it just as soon as Kerry releases all of his military records.

22 [Engineer] - where did you see the documents that showed they were created on 9/21/04 ?

#23 and #28 - I note that today's your first day as a registered lizadroid and that the two referenced posts are your first two posts.
That being the case, I'm gonna give you a pass on those posts. As to #23, the guy who gave the media the memos says there weren't the originals, but copies he typed. So how do YOU know whether or not they weren't forged
or "retyped" correctly? Moreover, when he and Blair were QUESTIONED about them, what should they have said (this more for Blair than for Bush)? And if they refused to dignify the questions with an answer, this would have been an even bigger news (non) story than it is. Uh, were you by any chance at Mr. Conyer's "hearing " yesterday?

#46 not neo - "Absolutely better. These documents are worthless now, in a legal sense."

As you might recall, several "originals" exist because they were sent to all who attended the meeting.

I love the last line in this paragraph:

The AP obtained copies of six of the memos (the other two have circulated widely). A senior British official who reviewed the copies said their content appeared authentic. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secret nature of the material.

Apparantly, when a document and its information are considered "Classified" or "Secret" it is not in refernce to the document or the information itself; just the identity of the official leaking said document.

48 PINI

I love that guy's name...

Dick Dearlove...

Dear my dear Dick,

How I love my Dick, my precious, precious Dick.

Love

Debbie Dearlove

#54 piniella

As you might recall, several "originals" exist because they were sent to all who attended the meeting.

Again, in a strictly legal sense, there is only one original. Copies don't count unless they are legally certified. The Downing Street memo's are toilet paper.

#50 brandywine

An anonymous source has little to no value in my opinion. First off, the source was in violation of law *if* the memos were real. I really don't trust criminals.

Do not feed the [piniella] troll!

It's an excitable liberal, just observe it from a distance and try not to make eye contact.

The key to assessing whether or not official behavior is an impeachable offense does not hinge upon whether an act is or is not a criminal offense; it is dependent upon official misconduct such that it violates the public trust.

57 not neo just conservative

The Downing Street memo's are toilet paper

I've still got half a roll left with pictures of Howard Dean on it. Do I have to switch to the DSM kind, or can I finish the Dean roll?

#56 Bubble Girl

reminds me of the refrain from the Owl and the Pussycat. LOL

This looks, bad, very bad, for the reporter... he has written for two different papers on these memos, claiming a semi-conspiracy, one that the LLL's have latched onto in their Holy Grail Of Impeachment Quest.

Now this reporter has the "dog ate my homework" equivilant saying he destroyed (not bloody likely) the originals and put forth fake ones he typed himself.

Not looking good.

60 piniella

it is dependent upon official misconduct such that it violates the public trust.

Or in the case of Clinton and Gore, whether there was a controlling legal authority...

 #60

piniella  6/18/2005 03:18PM PDT

The key to assessing whether or not official behavior is an impeachable offense does not hinge upon whether an act is or is not a criminal offense; it is dependent upon official misconduct such that it violates the public trust

Impeachment Obsessed Behavior...

1. Is Dan Rather in charge of the British press now? BBC? Or this is yet another coincidence?

2. Here is the 1st of 3-part series

[Link: satire.myblogsite.com...] MICHAEL JACKSON RECEIVES 4 OFFICIAL AND 1 UNOFFICIAL OSCAR VERDICTS"

The Audience Raves as "Hillarious, Awesome, Cool, Hot, Funny, and Wow

Comments are not compensated, but highly appreciated.

Enjoy the weekend.

#60 piniella

The key to assessing whether or not official behavior is an impeachable offense does not hinge upon whether an act is or is not a criminal offense; it is dependent upon official misconduct such that it violates the public trust.

Indisputably true. However, you have to make a strong enough case to convince 2/3rds of the people making the decision.

I could write literally anything on a piece of paper. "Elvis is a Space Alien held by the CIA at Area 51." Then I could walk out the door and claim that I'd copied it from a secret memo, and then destroyed the original. You see what I'm saying? There's no credibility whatsoever here.

64 Aladin

Or... it depends on what your definition of "is" is... or what your definition of oral sex is too.

According to Clinton, Oral Sex is NOT SEX.

#23 and #28 - I note that today's your first day as a registered lizadroid and that the two referenced posts are your first two posts.
That being the case, I'm gonna give you a pass on those posts.

Excuse me? What does that mean? What is a 'pass'? I thought we were discussing the DSM.

As to #23, the guy who gave the media the memos says there weren't the originals, but copies he typed. So how do YOU know whether or not they weren't forged

OK. Let's try this again. The documents were copied by hand. Their authenticity is not in dispute. People who know could and would have said if they were. Neither Bush or Blair would have answered any questions about the DSM if they were not the real thing.

#60 piniella

i don't think so. many presidents have done things to violate the trust of segments of American Society. It has to be a criminal violation to be impeached, i.e. lying to a grand jury about getting a blowjob.

#50 brandywine

Again, this is entirely absurd notion, that the DSM is not genuine. Bush and Blair addressed points in the memo at their press conference. Ask yourself, why would they do that if they knew the docs were false, in any way? And how would they not know?

Bush and Blair dismissed them as absurd. What else would they do, indeed.

Michael Smith admitted that he destroyed the originals, if they ever existed, therefore, these so-called Downing Street Memos can never be authenticated and carry no legal weight whatsoever.

#57 not neo - "Again, in a strictly legal sense, there is only one original. Copies don't count unless they are legally certified. The Downing Street memo's are toilet paper."

Q: Mr. Rycroft, do you recognize this item?
RYCROFT: Yes I do.
Q:Would you tell that Court what it is?
RYCROFT: It is an accurate copy of the minutes I took of the July 23rd, 2002 meeting.

JUDGE: Mr. Bush, you are hereby remanded to jail.

68 Bubble Girl

According to Clinton, Oral Sex is NOT SEX.

Hence the crap that is happening at high-schools like the one in Columbus, was it Miflin, or something like that?

Did Sandy Berger have something do with this?

#50 Brandywhine - "This is silly" - no, you are. That you willingly believe this nonsense suggests to me that you believe 60 Minutes II's report on the TANG memos was true also (after all, why wouldn't Bush say they were false; if he knew they were false wouldn't he say so; if he didn't know, he could've asked someone or been told by someone; he didn't say they were false, therefor they must be true.)
Unless you are simply trolling here, you owe it to yourself to review the TANG memo's - see the upper left side of this thread "Rathergate" to see why the rest of us have such enormous disrespect for the media and it's anonymous sources and faked/retyped but MOST DEFINITELY NOT ORIGINAL documents.

Aladin @ 73

Not just High School, but Middle School. How nice of Bill Clinton to clarify it for them..

"Our newspapers, for the most part, present only the caricatures of disaffected minds. Indeed, the abuses of the freedom of the press here have been carried to a length never before known or borne by any civilized nation." --Thomas Jefferson to M. Pictet, 1803. ME 10:357

72 PINI

Baby, about the law... you don't know jack! Is this Court MTV you are relying on?

72 piniella

Wow, that must mean they're not fake...

#69 Brandywine

Then I can use a hand printed copy of my driver's license and it's legal?

A hand typed copy of anything is worth less than the paper and ink it takes to produce them. Try printing your own money sometime.

72 piniella

JUDGE: Mr. Bush, you are hereby remanded to jail.

Did you have tingles down the back of your neck when you typed that? Maybe if you could step back from your hatred/obsession with President Bush, you'd look at things a little different...

"No greater harm can be done than breaking the covenant of trust between the President and the people; between the three branches of our government; and between the country and the world.:

CLOSING REMARKS OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE
AT IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF WILLIAM J. CLINTON
JANUARY 16, 1999

[Link: www.sentryoveramerica.com...]

BUSH = 3 FOR 3

#58 Orson Buggy

I really don't trust criminals.

There's a judge in Wenatchee, WA who does.

Why are you people bothering with zippy the pinhead? It just spouts the same old DNC talking points over and over!

DNFTT!

Please note: these documents have not been authenticated by anyone who is willing to go on record. In other words, at this point there remains serious doubt about their authenticity.

The news that Michael Smith destroyed the originals (or so he says) should make eyebrows raise.

Okay, a forest for the trees moment...

The Memos are not, in and of themselves, worth all the ballyhoo the LLL have tried to milk out of them.

This is lower on the scale than other LLL Urban Legends... they send up a kite and see how high it will fly...

Feverish LLL's latch onto it and won't let it go, no matter how stupid it gets..

"I destroyed the originals" Can someone tell me if he submitted his false ones as the originals to his newpapers?

#82 piniella

A judge's admonition to a defendant is *not* a definition of constitutional law. What ever you are smoking, stop being a Bogart and pass that joint!

#81 aladin - "Maybe if you could step back from your hatred/obsession with President Bush"

Why shouldn't I hate a traitor and a war criminal?

82 piniella

BUSH = 3 FOR 3

See my 81.

I'm off to the Parish Festival. Maybe see you all later. It's Mexican food tonight, so I'll probably get to finish that roll of Howard Dean toilet paper tomorrow...

#53 realwest

22 [Engineer] - where did you see the documents that showed they were created on 9/21/04 ?

Go FILE-DOCUMENT PROPERTIES

I am not sure this works unless you have the full version of Adobe Acrobat.

#75 Realwest.

Bush and Blair confirmed the authenticity of the DSM when they answered a question about it. It's as simple as that.

#88 piniella

You hate Clinton? Wow, who'd a thunk it?

#91 Brandywine - I agree.

#91 Brandywine

Bush and Blair confirmed the authenticity of the DSM when they answered a question about it. It's as simple as that.

It's "simple" if you are a fucking retard.

Let's see... there may have been a plan on the table to depose Sadam before the 9/11 attack on America. This is a problem, why? AHH, because some pisswillie leftoid doesn't trust a president who thought preparedness for war was a necessity. Of course! Good presidents only prepare for peace. That's what the ever so trustworthy United Nations is there for. So we don't have to prepare for wars, or anything.
You know what? I'll bet there is a plan on the table for war with North Korea. I bet there is a plan on the table for war against Syria, and Iran. Strike that- I hope to God that there is plan on the table for war against Iran, Syria, and North Korea. It would be suicidal not to have those plans on the table.
JWM

Where's Lucy Ramirez when you need her?

Look, look, I have the original Bible... I found it in my Grandmother's attic.

Can we see it?

Oh, well, I copied it and then I destroyed the real one.

Trust in me. It's true. Here's the ashes.

Guys, I hate to butt in, but DNFTT!

These trolls are idiots! If they can't see what's wrong with this picture, you're wasting you keypresses.

#93 piniella 6/18/2005 03:34PM PDT
#91 Brandywine - I agree.

See? My point is proven.

#91 Brandywine

Bush and Blair confirmed the authenticity of the DSM when they answered a question about it. It's as simple as that.

What utter bullshit. Dismissing the claims of these "memos" as absurd does not in any way confirm anything about them. Bush didn't even go that far with Bill Burkett's phony TANG memos; does that confirm them, too?

#93 piniella 6/18/2005 03:34PM PDT

#91 Brandywine - I agree.

Troll #1 agrees with troll #2! Imagine that!

jwm

I bet there is a war plan for just about every country out there. I'm sure some of them are quite old but I'd say a dozen or so are updated regularly.

88 piniella

Why shouldn't I hate a traitor and a war criminal?

Ok, we'll talk about Kerry then, since you brought it up. Jeez, you are all over the place!

Rayra @ 100

Rayra...

Piniella posted on another thread that you guys were buddies and that you said I was fat.

Bush has decided to overthrow Hussein
By Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott
Posted on Wed, Feb. 13, 2002
[Link: www.realcities.com...]

WASHINGTON - President Bush has decided to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein from power and ordered the CIA, the Pentagon and other agencies to devise a combination of military, diplomatic and covert steps to achieve that goal, senior U.S. officials said Tuesday.
No military strike is imminent, but Bush has concluded that Saddam and his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs are such a threat to U.S. security that the Iraqi dictator must be removed, even if U.S. allies do not help, said the officials, who all spoke on condition of anonymity.
"This is not an argument about whether to get rid of Saddam Hussein. That debate is over. This is ... how you do it," a senior administration official said in an interview with Knight Ridder.
Bush also is dispatching Vice President Cheney next month on a tour of 11 Middle East nations, including many of Iraq's neighbors, whose leaders are leery of a U.S. attack on Baghdad.
While the mission's purpose has been portrayed publicly as sounding out Middle Eastern leaders on Iraq policy, Cheney in fact will tell them that the United States intends to get rid of Saddam and his regime, several top Bush aides said.
"He's not going to beg for support. He's going to inform them that the president's decision has been made and will be carried out, and if they want some input into how and when it's carried out, now's the time for them to speak up," one senior official said.
Secretary of State Colin Powell signaled Bush's new approach last Thursday, telling a House of Representatives committee that "regime change" in Iraq "is something the United States might have to do alone."

Shades of Mary and Dan...Here we go again !
Typed on plain paper and given to a guy to take to the Houston Livestock Show...

Damn don't they ever give up.

Furthermore:

Bush lambasted Gore during the debates in 2000 about the inactivity of the Clinton adminstration in regards to Iraq. You had to be a complete idiot not to understand the "Regime change" in Iraq was going to be high on the list of a Bush Adminstration.

#71
Spiny Norman
Bush and Blair dismissed them as absurd. What else would they do, indeed.

They dismissed as absurd the idea that Bush had already decided to attack Iraq, as suggested by the DSM. They did not say the memo was 'absurd' or question its authenticity. Also, it's worth noting that around that time Bush transferred $700 million from the war in Afghanistan to war planning for Iraq, which strongly supports the contention of the DSM.

#69 Brandywhine - "OK. Let's try this again. The documents were copied by hand." No, they weren't. According to the reporter, he RETYPED THEM. This is the sort of thing I meant when I said I was giving you a pass because you are obviously new at this site.
Folks here are passionate about lots of things and we frequently disagree about matters, usually in a respectful manner. What most folks here don't treat respectfully are comments and commentators that are so easliy sliced and diced. You obviously didn't read what Charles posted (typed vs. copied by hand) haven't read any comments not directly addressed to you but which addressed your "arguements" (Bush answered questions about them, therefor they must be accurate) and HAVE MISSED THE WHOLE POINT. This isn't about whether or not Bush was contemplating forcing a regime change in Iraq; that has been exceedingly well documented in a zillion other places. This is about the media and reportorial integrity or the lack thereof.
Jeebus, please get a clue.

A Partner in Shaping an Assertive Foreign Policy
Elisabeth Bumiller. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Jan 7, 2004. pg. A.1

Ms. Rice was in similar lock step with Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, on going to war with Iraq, senior advisers to the president said, and served as an implementer of the president's wishes. Richard Haass, the former director of policy planning at the State Department who is now the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, recalls going to see Ms. Rice in July 2002, well before the president began making a public case for ousting Mr. Hussein, to discuss with Ms. Rice ''the pros and cons'' of making Iraq a priority.
''Basically she cut me off and said, 'Save your breath -- the president has already decided what he's going to do on this,' '' Mr. Haass said.

#108 Kevin Shook

"Regime change" in Iraq was going to be high on the list of a Bush Adminstration.

Pssst! Don't mention to the trolls that Clintoon had the same list!

Dont you have a protest to go to, swampy?

#106 piniella

That is a perfectly legitimate continuation of Bill Clinton's policies that had been in place since 1998.

Your point is?

#106 piniella
Finally, a President with some backbone! I am so grateful that I have the opportunity to watch this Administration in action. The strategerie is brilliant, imho.

"We're taking him out"
Daniel Eisenberg. Time. New York: May 13, 2002.Vol.159, Iss. 19; pg. 36, 3 pgs

TWO MONTHS AGO, A group of Republican and Democratic Senators went to the White House to meet with Condoleezza Rice, the President's National Security Adviser. Bush was not scheduled to attend but poked his head in anyway-and soon turned the discussion to Iraq. The President has strong feelings about Saddam Hussein (you might too if the man had tried to assassinate your father, which Saddam attempted to do when former President George Bush visited Kuwait in 1993) and did not try to hide them. He showed little interest in debating what to do about Saddam. Instead, he became notably animated, according to one person in the room, used a vulgar epithet to refer to Saddam and concluded with four words that left no one in doubt about Bush's intentions: "We're taking him out."

 #106

piniella  6/18/2005 03:38PM PDT

Bush has decided to overthrow Hussein
By Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott
Posted on Wed, Feb. 13, 2002

No. I am shocked. Shocked, just shocked. Why Hussein was a soulmate of Mother Teresa, a saint, a scholar, who promoted world peace and gave every family a free kite. Except the Kurds in the mass graves. The little children, babies, mothers, fathers, old people, all dead and buried under the hot Iraqi sun.

Kurds, in the scheme of things, don't count, do they, Pini...

Wow. Tell me - when the democrats go to impeach President Bush, are they going to remove themselves from office also? Did they not vote based on the same intelligence?

It's gonna get pretty empty up there in our nations capital.

#109 brandywine

They did not say the memo was 'absurd' or question its authenticity.

Since you didn't question my accusation that you are a fucking retard, it must be true by your "argument". Right?

#116 piniella

Again, Bill Clinton said the same thing in 1998 and failed to back it up.

Your point is?

"We're taking him out"

And we sure as hell did!
Now tell me why that's a bad thing.

JWM

#109 Brandywine -

Yup:

Mr. Woodward says in the book that the administration -- without informing Congress -- also diverted $700 million in funds, including military appropriations for Afghanistan, for Gen. Tommy Franks, who was secretly planning the campaign against Iraq. The plan, known as "Running Start," included about 30 preinvasion construction projects in Kuwait, which was used as a U.S. staging ground.
Latest Book on Iraq War Raises Political Pressure on White House
Robert S. Greenberger and David Rogers. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 19, 2004. pg. A.4

#93 piniella 6/18/2005 03:34PM PDT

#91 Brandywine - I agree.

Troll #1 agrees with troll #2! Imagine that!

Maybe Troll #2 copied Troll #1, after eating the original.

No links, but that's okay. They are copies of the originals.

#94 reaganite
#91 Brandywine
Bush and Blair confirmed the authenticity of the DSM when they answered a question about it. It's as simple as that.
It's "simple" if you are a fucking retard.

Sad.

#88 piniella

Why shouldn't I hate a traitor and a war criminal?

Proof please or STFU.

I suggest that you go read the bill that Congress passed giving Bush the power to invade Iraq. It list the reasons and WMD was only one of them. That bill is the law, not things you or the Brits might dream up.

I have in my possesion a document in which Saddam Hussein states that he simply adores WMD, and that he kept a vast array of weapons in Iraq. He further affirms that upon recognizing that the Coalition was about to invade, he invoked a prearranged plan to diperse his WMD to Iran and Syria. He also speaks to the vast network he has set up to disrupt Iraqi society in the event that he is deposed. This documemnt bears Saddam's signature, so you can tell that it is authentic.

Of course, I retyped it and destroyed the original, but you can trust me on this.

Did I tell you all that I wrote a book about former President Clinton's back door sex alliance with a prominent Saudi? Very interesting information was dug up during that investigation, I can tell you.

No. I don't have the original tapes or documents, I'm protecting my sources you know.

#125 Brandywine

Sad.

Well, you addressed my comment with denying it. Once again, it must be true, using your "logic" of course.

"IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
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 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."

[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

#129 reaganite,

Logic cannot penetrate the slumber of the True Believer. They will just continue to dream their dreamy little dreams.

brandy and piny, I hardly ever post here, but I check the posts as often as I can and I have found that overall the people here are smart, politically savy professionals. They have brains and aren't afraid to use them. They do not spout "talking points" and are more than willing to back up their points and opinions with facts, not fabricated, hallucinogenic fables. To my shame, I once was a democrat, but the party line was not my line and as I looked around, I realized I had grown up and my democratic associates had not. You could learn a lot from the folks here if you can open your minds just a bit.

#126 [Engineer] - "That bill is the law"

And Bush lied to Congress.

LOL!

See what I mean.

#131 Spiny Norman

They will just continue to dream their dreamy little dreams.

Oh I know, but I just had an abysmal golf game. Whack-A-Troll is just going to have to do.

#128 Sarah D.

No. I don't have the original tapes or documents, I'm protecting my sources you know.

I know that robe did not go to the drycleaners!

#119 reaganite - it's useless. This is Brandywine's first day here and his/her first posts here. I suspected troll, but figured I'd try to play it out - suggesting, for example that he/she read the Rathergate TANG work; directing her to the obvious "story" here which is NOT whether or not Bush wanted regime change, but about reportial integrity (ok, so I slipped in a little oxymoron!)and the result is: Brandywhine keeps repeating the same line: he didn't deny the memos were false, ergo they must be true.
Still hasn't answered my question as to whether or not he/she was at Conyer's "hearing" yesterday!
;>p

Sarah @ 28

When will it be published? I have been researching an unofficial bio on John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, how Kerry was Kennedy's man slave back in the 70's.

Got ahold of a photo of Kerry wearing a studded dog collar and Kennedy holding the leash...

so I traced it in pencil and then colored it back in with crayons and then destroyed the original.

#134 Spiny Norman

See what I mean.

It's like watching the kid who licks the frozen metal. You always know the outcome, but it's still so funny to watch!

 #133

piniella  6/18/2005 03:51PM PDT
#126 [Engineer] - "That bill is the law"

And Bush lied to Congress.

Okay, so can we impeach Kerry too. It's on the Congressional Record, his Christmas In Cambodia and the secret CIA hat. If that''s not lying to Congress, I don't know what is.

Remember how it was Nixon who ordered them to go... LOL LOL when LBJ was President!

#136 Ann

Dishdasha actually - and several of them. What better way to infulence U.S. policy than to cuckhold the true leader at the time - Hillary.

I love the smell of burnt trolls right before dinner

#137 realwest

Brandywhine keeps repeating the same line: he didn't deny the memos were false, ergo they must be true.

I claimed Brandywhine is a fucking retard, which it fails to deny.

Yeah, I know, it's not logical, but hey, what are the L³ good for besides ridicule?

As soon as I saw the headline of this entry, I knew the same bunch of deluded moonbats would be here trying, desperately, to prove that these memos are actually what they claim to be. It's just like TANG-Rathergate all over again. You know what the end result will be? Nothing. Bush will skate because there's nothing to prove he did anything out-of-sorts; the Left will still hate him. Why bother getting all worked up over it.

That said...

Brandywine: sure, the DSM memo might exist. If Bush & Blair refer to it, it might better the odds that it does exist--but we'll never know what it said if the original has been destroyed.

Piniella...there's just no hope for you at all. Find an ice floe somewhere and float away.

Official Secrets Act
UK act of Parliament 1989, prohibiting the disclosure of confidential material from government sources by employees; it remains an absolute offence for a member or former member of the security and intelligence services (or those working closely with them) to disclose information about their work. There is no public-interest defence, and disclosure of information already in the public domain is still a crime.

Maybe trolls need visual clues?

/don't feed them, I know

#138 Bubble Girl

Soon. I'm waiting for inspiration. I copied the original leaked Saudi communique, then destroyed the original.

My neighbors dog, drawn by the heady aroma of an open tin of sardines, got my copy and pissed on it.

I'm trying to write from memory now.

#123 Belize

Maybe Troll #2 copied Troll #1, after eating the original.

ROFL! Good one, Belize.

Why doesn't Bush release OUR minutes of the meetings Sir Richard Dearlove had in DC?

What is Bush trying to hide?

#135 reaganite 

Sorry about your golf game. This morning, my daughter presented me with new clubs for father's day...Nlke Slingshot irons. Unbelievably easy to hit. Won $20 against I guy I usually lose to.

#138 Bubble Girl

I've suddenly lost my appetite for dinner.

#145 piniella

defence

Ah, you're British! When did your mosque get broadband?

Sarah @ 147

lol... From memory. Yes, that will work. I have some repressed memories I haven't dredged up yet, I am sure with the proper hynotherapist I can remember more things about Kerry.

Repressed memories count too!

#150 FreakyBoy

Unbelievably easy to hit. Won $20 against I guy I usually lose to.

Sure, rub it in! ;-Þ

#144 j-damn - "Bush will skate because there's nothing to prove he did anything out-of-sorts"

If Bush truly did nothing wrong, why doesn't he release OUR minutes of the meetings Sir Richard Dearlove had in DC?

# 145

So, we'll protect the Brit criminal for releasing the documents in our efforts to smear "criminal" Bush?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

/can't blame them for trying, I guess ...

GAZE

Surely the most pertinent question remains thus:

Why is it that liberals think we should care about pre-emptive military action against Islamic theocracies?

# 152 A

The pieces begin to fall into place ...
:-)
:-)

How did a "memo" from a British guy who got the information from another British guy who talked to some unnamed Administration officials telling the second British guy what they guessed was on the Presidents mind even get any press?

Y'know, I said DNFTT, but I think that this is like mud wrestling pigs. Some of you incoragables just enjoy it (rolling eyes).

157 Spiritualized

I don't know. They are like shrieking howler monkeys, torturing us all the time. It's pretty annoying going to the local moonbat coffee shop, but otherwise, every one else doesn't give a rat's ass.

#155 piniella

Do you often ask one person to explain another's motives?

Earth2moonbat @ 160

So, I still have my equipment from the ER for the cryogenically frozen Arafish head. Perhaps we could use Pini for the body?

Personally, I don't care if we have to go into every slimy shithole in every middle eastern country to remove the supporters and perpetrators of islamic terrorism. The Taliban was first, Saddam was second. Let's get it on with the third.

A good reminder.

Let's roll.

#160 Earth2moonbat
We're not feeding them, we're mocking them!

#157 Spiritualized

Why is it that liberals think we should care about pre-emptive military action against Islamic theocracies?

Liberals are inherently frightened people. They drive Volvos.

I think some jihadis pose as liberals. They are just pissed that they are getting their asses kicked. It's embarrassing, you know.

#157 Spiritualized

The question should be: Why is it that liberals think we should care about pre-emptive military action against dictators who commit genocide and other crimes against humanity?

#165 Reaganite

Yeah, but does it make you feel like a man when you mock the handicapped? :)

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

Shocking, the lack of whiteout or permanent markers in Britain.
So was it Galloway who gave these "memos" to the reporter. Bet he steps forward and lies that he was the one who did.

#157 Spiritualized
Surely the most pertinent question remains thus:
Why is it that liberals think we should care about pre-emptive military action against Islamic theocracies?

What theocracy?

#157 -

Liberals lack any moral clarity, therefor it is only when they are attacked do they know to defend themselves. Hence their often misplace support of the self-proclaimed underdog.

#158 Buckaroo
Are they gone? Damn.

#165 reaganite

We're not feeding them, we're mocking them!

I toss them chocolate "candies" that say Ex Lax on them.

#167 Kevin

I can answer that one. The left wing nut jobs think that Bush is the war criminal, they think he is more dangerous than Sadaam, al Qaeda, or any other mass murderer out there.

#168 cjstavern

Yeah, but does it make you feel like a man when you mock the handicapped? :)

Well, since you put it that way, HELL YEAH!

#163 Bubble Girl

That'll work. And, ooh! ooh! I just found a little substation down at the surplus yard that'll put out about 230 kV. Think that'll juice 'im up?

#147 Sarah D

Soon. I'm waiting for inspiration. I copied the original leaked Saudi communique, then destroyed the original.

Have you ever noticed that journalists can come up with most f***ing ridiculous excuses/reasons and they can get published and draw a freakin' paycheck anyway, while in the working world I can actually certify that a different concrete mix arrived at a slab than what I had ordered, I poured it innocently and with good intentions not knowing the difference, and when the work is f***ed up, guess what, I don't get paid? And not only that, have to bust out the f***ed up slab, remove it, apologize profusely, and replace it?

I would sure as hell like to see some accountability from these people.

#173 Belize042

I toss them chocolate "candies" that say Ex Lax on them.

That is so wrong! Have you ever seen a L³ after one of your "treats"? We all get shit on! :-Þ

Earth2 @ 177

Whoa... ahunh!

Earth2... I have this awful feeling that whoever that was, was someone we know under a different nic? And trying to be funny?
Weird.

#170 Brandywine

What theocracy?

Oh, sorry - you're new... we are actually talking about the thrill of going into Iran next!

Iraq and Afghanistan are old news, here.

#179 Reaganite

Problem is the sh*t comes out their mouths.

# 172 Ann

Looks like it ...

/much more happy rather than disappointed ...

#182 cjstavern

Problem is the sh*t comes out their mouths.

They can't help it, they're full of it...

#179 reaganite

Hmm, good point. I must ask myself WWAD?*

*What Would Aisha Do?

/hoping for a better class of troll/froll

#178 SwampWoman

We're in the wrong profession.

#180 Bubble Girl

So... No head for Lucy?

I gotta go work off some of this bad temper and ill will, or I'm not gonna be allowed to teach the grandchildren any new words.

#185 Belize042

hoping for a better class of troll/froll

I'm hoping to hit the lottery and buy my own nation...

Funny how they vanish all at once. Somebody must have shown up with a new bag...

Earth2 @ 187

Do you have one for her?

#190 Reaganite

I'm hoping to hit the lottery and buy my own nation...

Just stay away from Cuba; I plan to establish my own matriarchal dictatorship there.

Belize @ 185

Have you met the Cryogenically Frozen Head of Arafat yet?

Reganite:

See dread comment #17 on this topic for an idea on that ;)

#193 SwampWoman

Just stay away from Cuba; I plan to establish my own matriarchal dictatorship there.

Okay! Too many hurricanes anyway...:-Þ

Earth2moonbat 6/18/2005 04:24PM PDT

Funny how they vanish all at once. Somebody must have shown up with a new bag...

More like mommy called them for dinner

#194 Bubble Girl

Uh. No. Should I?

#133 piniella

And Bush lied to Congress.

Do you understand how dumb such a comment make you look?

Please provide the source. The exact words where Bush lied. You can't of course because he didn't.

If you are talking about WMD, I can show you where John Kerry and Bill Clinton said the same thing and please note that the head of the CIA was Bill Clinton's boy.

#195 Belize042

See dread comment #17 on this topic for an idea on that ;)

EUREKA! I think you're on to something!

#135 reaganite - perhaps your golf game would be better if you were taller? I mean, how do you even get off the tee, when standing behind it you can't see the fairway for the ball!

#196 Reaganite

Okay! Too many hurricanes anyway...:-Þ

I suggest you cast your eyes toward Mexico. That place needs a kick in the ass and you're an ass kicker. Sounds like the perfect opportunity to me.

Latest from the AP... this reporter must have been a prolific typist, and notice how the newspaper proclaim his copies as "authentic"

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

The AP obtained copies of six of the memos (the other two have circulated widely). A senior British official who reviewed the copies said their content appeared authentic. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secret nature of the material.

The eight documents total 36 pages and range from 10-page and eight-page studies on military and legal options in Iraq, to brief memorandums from British officials and the minutes of a private meeting held by Blair and his top advisers.

Belize @ 198

New poster who showed up last night. Hope it comes back.

#194 Bubble Girl

Uh. No. Should I?

Either somebody hacked your login, or you had a few too many yesterday. That was what started this whole thing off.

#201 realwest

I mean, how do you even get off the tee, when standing behind it you can't see the fairway for the ball!

I look under it! You're a lawyer and couldn't figure that out? Sheesh!

#203 Bubbles

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

It seems really unfair to me that the press has been laughing at the folks claiming abduction by aliens. After all, they have as much proof as to the authenticity of their experiences as professional journalists.

#193 SwampWoman

I plan to establish my own matriarchal dictatorship there.

Oooh, do you need some matriarchal minions?

Oh, and is it ok if reaganite is there?

#202 SwampWoman

I suggest you cast your eyes toward Mexico. That place needs a kick in the ass and you're an ass kicker.

No way, I want one of those fantasy dictatorships, you know, the ones the L³ claims are perfect?

#209 Reaganite

No way, I want one of those fantasy dictatorships, you know, the ones the L³ claims are perfect?

No shit? Hey, Ann! Do you speak Korean or Farsi?

/Silly question. Reaganite will immediately change the language.

#211 SwampWoman

Reaganite will immediately change the language.

They'll all have an Aussie accents and know where the good beer is!

#199 [Engineer]

Please provide the source. The exact words where Bush lied. You can't of course because he didn't.

Nope, no sources! Thanks for getting us back on topic -:)

Will you be at the TX BBQ meet-up, btw?

#208 Ann

Oooh, do you need some matriarchal minions?

Oh, and is it ok if reaganite is there?

Yeah, I could use someone to watch for assassins/in-laws as I nap in the hammock while the peasants toil away in the sun.

#212 rayra

Piniella querying his 8 Ball:

"Did G. W. Bush lie to Congress?" (Shakes 8 Ball and turns it over)

It is assuredly so.

"I knew it! I knew it! I'm gonna take a picture of this so the LGF folks can't say I made it up!"

What? What other 8 ball? Ohhh...

#203 Bubble Girl - Well sure! The AP received AUTHENTIC photocopies of the retyped copies of the memoranda.

As I said in my post #9, I blame Charles for all of this!

;>)

Copied and then the original destroyed...

hmmm.. where did I read about something similar happening several years ago ?

Something about a supposedly holy book beginning with a Q or a K, depending on your spelling.

Got it. It's the Quran... the 'unchanging' word of God, the one that Uthman collated and burned the originals so that there would be no conflicting versions.

Hilarious if it wasn't so terribly tragic.

Well, SwampMan is frothing at the mouth because I get back too late (in his opinion) from my walks. I am under strict orders to be back no later than 2115 or my knee will be totally incapacitated.

He's so cute when he looks like a homicidal maniac.

Maybe I better go ahead and get started, though. Just in case.

I don't want to sound like a Right-Wing Kool-Aid drinker, but as far as I can see Bush et al have not decieved, lied, or otherwise done anything in the WoT that was not up front and honestly approached.

Please throw me examples of why I am wrong and I bet at least in most cases I (or another lizard) can easily explain it away. This includes WMD!

#206 reaganite - AHA! That's your golf problem right there - you're teeing the ball up too high!

- Copies of "re-typed" copies of secret memos
- From unnamed confidential sources
- Verified by anonymous sources
- Published by "journalists" with an ax to grind

Bzzzt! Thank you for playing "You Bet Your Credibility!" Turn in your journalism degree at the door and please accept this lovely cow pie as a parting gift.

#220 jwbrown1969
Dude, the trolls ran away, we're just mocking them now!

Suuurrreee, we all believe that one, don't we. Wink wink.

Of course he destroyed the originals to protect the source. What what.

#221 realwest

AHA! That's your golf problem right there - you're teeing the ball up too high!

How am I going to see under it otherwise? Are you sure you're a lawyer? :-Þ

OT - sorry, but in the "make-believe world" inhabited by journalists these days, I'm afraid a REAL story might get lost in the shuffle:

Officials at the Seattle University of Law have launched an effort to educate students about the financial dangers of expensive coffee.
Honest!

[Link: enews.earthlink.net...]

I wonder if rayra has an unmarried brother.

#224 reaganite
Yeah I know, but after watching that stupid Anti-Semite Caucus meeting yesterday, I decided to research some of these lies and I was ready to defend 43's honor.

#215 SwampWoman

I could use someone to watch for assassins/in-laws ...

Hmmm. You do need your own country. And we really want a cool hammock... it's all good!

Since we now know that the pine nut is a moonbat conspiracy theorist who believes every single lame argument thrown up by loony lib news sources, maybe he ought to lobby for the incarceration of this reporter for destruction of evidence, since the memos are so "damaging".

Honestly, I'm just laughing my ass off over this 141st trivial whirlwind in the dust this year, courtesy of the party of irrational disconnection with reality.

Do we really need this kind of crap to know that the Socialist Democratic Party has gone off the deep end.

Do we need any more evidence of what was already evident a year ago? Everything since is like icing on the birthday cake.

Flush the dems, they need to find a new party that they can win with. Because their chances in the forseeable future are all but nil.

Burning bridges on the way to radicalized dogma is a sure path to historical footnote.

#212 rayra

Piniella must have blown his mid-month welfare check on an 8-ball - the spastic has posted 100 times in 24hrs and accomplished nothing.

Now you're denegrating spastics.

#227 realwest

Officials at the Seattle University of Law have launched an effort to educate students about the financial dangers of expensive coffee.

Did you know that the earth is round? Really! I saw a study on it!

Anonymous sources. Sheesh. When I was in college we had a policy that no anonymous writing was allowed. We didn't have a policy about sources, but you know, I don't think any of us would display the shameful lack of brains that the MSM does these days.

It's embarassing.

LGF has prompted me to become a journalist. I want this sort of bias to end. Unfortunately, as a writer I'm sure it can't.

The most we can do is make it transparent, and be open about agendas and the possibility of agendas. This myth of the possibility of being completely accurate and unbiased really needs to end.

#226 reaganite - Of course I'm sure I'm a lawyer...sheesh. Try to help a guy with a severe handicap (vertically challenged) and look at the grief I get!
If you tee it up high enough to see under it, that means you must be stroking the ball OVERHAND. That's your problem. No distance and usually a wicked slice that way!
;>)

#229 jwbrown1969
The problem you have is your world is based on facts. Really, why are you so insensitive to the L³s feelings?

#224 reaganite 6/18/2005
#220 jwbrown1969
Dude, the trolls ran away, we're just mocking them now!

It's interesting looking back in the archives of LGF, how the comments here used to host interesting discourse from people with different opinions. The 'troll' label was reserved for disruptive posters who tried to hi-jack threads, not people who disagreed with a premise, like the notion the DSM(s) were forged or otherwise false. Nor, until quite recently, were such disagreements answered with childish insults, like 'fucking retard', and threads devolved into lame back-slapping of the 'we showed him/her' kind. Really, if you think about what a troll is, someone who disrupts a thread, then reaganite and buddies fit the description: rather than debate the issue they stoop to personal attacks then when all debate has stopped, absolutely and finally kill the topic with idiotic chit-chat.

#236 reaganite

I am so ashamed

#235 realwest

That's your problem. No distance and usually a wicked slice that way!

My problem? A ball above your feet produces a hook! Now I know you're not a lawyer! All Lawyers golf! :-)~

#237 Brandywine

if you think about what a troll is, someone who disrupts a thread, then reaganite and buddies fit the description: rather than debate the issue they stoop to personal attacks then when all debate has stopped, absolutely and finally kill the topic with idiotic chit-chat.

It's only done when there is really no debate worthy of the attention. Been there too many times.

then reaganite and buddies fit the description:

I'm a TROLL! Won't Charles be proud of me?

Brandywhine Retard
I know logic isn't your strongest "asset" so I'll let you in on a LGF secret. Trolls are the people that are too stupid to actually use reason and facts. I know they are alien concepts to you, but please try to keep up.

#238 jwbrown1969

I am so ashamed

Nah! Revel in it, they'll hate us anyway!

Lordy, they're out of pot again.

#237 Brandywine

I agree with you on that score, but by naming names you're not doing much better... "Troll" and "retard" may not be morally equivalent, but they're definitely epithets.

#237 Brandywhine - "rather than debate the issue they stoop to personal attacks then when all debate has stopped, absolutely and finally kill the topic with idiotic chit-chat." And there's your problem right there.
Not only was this thread NOT about the accuracy of the memos (yeah, we're all really SURPRISED that Bush was contemplating regime change, as was Bill Clinton) but rather about journalistic integrity.

You ARE a troll in that you don't debate. You make a series of posts all to the effect that Bush didn't deny the memos were false, ergo they must be true, and IGNORE all of the other posters who, at least initially, POLITELY tried to debate with you.
A debate is when someone states something, someone else challenges it, and the first person responds to that challenge, not merely repeats what they said the first time.

Gee, I hope reaganite and others didn't offend your delicate sensibilities so much that you won't be coming back.
BTW - did you ever read the Rathergate part of this site that I pointed out to you? I thought not.

Sarah D
I just re-read the article you linked.

The whole problem with the LLL is that they have FORGOTTEN what happened that day. We here have not. That seems to be the basic difference between those of us who will never give up and those who would rather look for blame anywhere but where it belongs

It's the terrorists stupid!

#237

Whatever, Troll.

#244 Perelandra

I agree with you on that score,

You're new and rational. Here's the score. They're trolls when they keep spewing the same "argument" even when it's disproved. They won't give up their meme.

Bottom line, I used the "retard" bit to throw brandywhine's argument back into her face. Of course the troll is so dense it didn't recognize it's own "logic".

Maybe I should mention something that probably never occurred to the Pine Nut.

In international meetings held by goverment officials on sensitive issues, it is the responsibility of the hosting country to record the minutes.

The United States of America, like every other responsible entity on this planet, has a person who sits in on the meeting and takes notes, and before the official minutes are formally finalized, is allowed to object to any information in the minutes that may have been deemed to be inaccurate, incomplete, or false.

The reasons for this are legion. First, it avoids the he said/she said type of accusations that might ensue after a particularly acrimonious meeting between or among countries. And secondly, it avoids the sticky wicket of multiple variations upon the same story being used for varying agendas based upon geographic biases from becoming part of history. Think about it, it's not rocket science.

Pine Nut claims knowledge that no one other than his/her kind has. Such a gift.

Reaganite: Brandywhine Retard
I know logic isn't your strongest "asset" so I'll let you in on a LGF secret. Trolls are the people that are too stupid to actually use reason and facts. I know they are alien concepts to you, but please try to keep up.

The facts are that no-one in either administration has disputed the authenticity of the contents of the DS Memos.

Reason tells us that since the contents are embarrassing to both administration, had they been able to challenge authenticity, they would have done so. Also since people are quoted (and indentified) near-verbatim in said memos those people would and could have disputed any misrepresentation.

The strongest ASSet a troll has is it's scent.

#248 reaganite

All the same. Why lower yourself?

Unless you've completely lost your temper, in which case, oops. We're only human, after all.

"The power of the mind, for good or evil, consists in argumentation." -Josef Pieper, "In Defense of Philosophy."

When I haven't lost my temper yet, I greatly prefer critical thinking. Insults seldom profit anyone.

#250 Brandywine

Why didn't Bush dispute the "facts" as laid out in the TANG memo?

#244 Perelandra 6/18/2005 05:06PM PDT
#237 Brandywine
I agree with you on that score, but by naming names you're not doing much better... "Troll" and "retard" may not be morally equivalent, but they're definitely epithets.

OK, but understand I was called both for doing no more than speaking to the topic of this post. But you have a good point. I could have made my point better without any names.

Brandywhine,

Just maybe for a second you might think that the sheer shrill idiocy of the accusations as well as the frequency of same might force the administration to abstain from response, in order to avoid reducing themselves to the same course level of discourse that you prefer?

That's what really gets you, isn't it? That you can't trick the President into saying something about riduculous accusations that you can use as ammunition to elevate the status of your intifada?

You are a moron. If your co-idiots were all shot, I probably wouldn't even care. I'd never suggest such a thing, because I know that MY party is above such things.

But your party isn't, which is why you need to reform, or go away forever.

#250 Brandywhine

The facts are that no-one in either administration has disputed the authenticity of the contents of the DS Memos.

You haven't disputed my claims that you're a retard!

Reason tells us that since the contents are embarrassing to both administration, had they been able to challenge authenticity, they would have done so.

Reason tells us that since you haven't disputed it. it is embarrassing to you, had you been able to challenge the authenticity of my accusations, you would have done so.

#237 - No name, no credibility.

What happened to the reporter who recieved the memos? What's his name? OH- another "anonymous source," this time a "reporter" for a British left-wing paper. If he/she/it is so sure of the memos' conclusiveness and validity, they should put a name and face behind the accusations, innuendos and allegations. But they won't, because when this latest attempt to destroy the Bush team doesn't work, nobody will man-up and take any blame for it. Can't wait for the fallout.

We already had this game played by cBS, Newsweak, the NYSLIMES, and a garden variety of other leftist publications when they came out with their "smoking guns." When examined with scrutiny, however, their "stories" became about bad journalism instead of Bush, and the offending vermin scattered and disintegrated like cockroaches under a massive 100,000 cubic foot magnifying glass.

Its getting old, troll. Try real life above ground and in the open sometime - you may enjoy it better that that subterrainian sewer where you all live and "publish" from.

#252 Perelandra

All the same. Why lower yourself?

Well, to be honest, I enjoy bashing idiots. Would you allow some self anointed asshat in your home to screech inanities without challenge?

Insults seldom profit anyone.

Brandywhine has repeatedly insulted this blog by it's 100% refusal to actually read comments and *gasp* use logic.

Sorry, I'll keep bashing trolls.

#254 Brandywine

Like my mother always told me: Just because he did it first, doesn't mean it's right for you to do it to him back.

Caught heck a number of times for fighting with my brother, although normally what I'd do is provoke him until he physically hit me, and then try to get him into trouble for it.

At least half the time when he tried to whack me, it was my fault for torturing the heck out of him.

... possibly three-fourths.

It is interesting that the memos haven't been disputed. Neither were the TANG ones, though--and those were completely obvious. (Well, with Charles's help and a program that makes images switch back and forth.)

I have no idea what's going on there, but it is rather strange.

#258 reaganite

Would you allow some self anointed asshat in your home to screech inanities without challenge?

... probably. I'm from Minnesota.

#253 Sarah D. - don't bring up the TANG memos.
The troll hasn't got a clue about them even though it has been frequently advised to educate itself about them. What earthly reason would make Brandywhine want to learn about journalistic ethics or the lack thereof?
I mean, sure it's the topic of this thread, and sure, that's what MOST of the posters here were talking about, but so what?
Frankly, I'm surprised at you; asking a troll to read, research, reflect and debate is asking them to do more than can do. That's why they're trolls.

#261 realwest

Eh. Sorry - I temporarily lost my mind. '

:-P

#260 Perelandra

probably. I'm from Minnesota.

LGF isn't Minnesota.

#261 realwest

Frankly, I'm surprised at you; asking a troll to read, research, reflect and debate is asking them to do more than can do. That's why they're trolls.

Okay, now you sound like a lawyer! :-Þ

If these "memos," the looney liberal left's latest wet dream, were anything more than fake but accurate, lawyers would be falling over each other to get in on this one. They would be building a "dream team" that makes Wacko Jaco's defense look like Romper Room. The LLL is grasping at straws to think this has any real merit. They can dream, they have nothing left. They don't control the House, Senate or the White House so they have to go down to the basement to "play house" with their mock impeachment hearings because the big boys will not let them play in the "living room."

#246 alice in wonderland

Well, I'd have to disagree with that a bit. I don't think the problem is that they've forgotten. I believe the problem is that they blamed the U.S. for 9/11 from the beginning. It was our fault because of [insert moonbat theory here].

WE are the enemy.

#264 reaganite - just noticed that at 9:00PM
(right coast time) HBO has a special about Golf with Ray Romano and Kevin James - in case you want to see some INTENTIONALLY funny golf, that is!
;>

#253 Sarah D. 6/18/2005 05:21PM PDT
#250 Brandywine
Why didn't Bush dispute the "facts" as laid out in the TANG memo?

I have no idea. But it's not the same: Bush *did* dispute the facts in the DSM, and therein lies the problem for both him and Blair. That memo and seven others since released, tell a different tale than the one told at the time, that war was to be a last resort, not a done deal. Thus, the appearance of lying by both Bush and Blair, some would say proof. Now, not everybody minds being lied to a leader they support, but some do. People who don't support that leader mind a lot. (It's worth remembering that after 9/11 a lot of people who were not supporters of Bush were solidly behind the routing of the Taliban - I was one).

Again, I believe facts and reason tell us that the chances of the DSM (and 7 more like it) being faked or forged in some way, considering that they are minutes of meetings more than a few people attended, are remote, to say the least.

And to another poster who suggested my reviewing the TANG memo flap, apples and oranges, I believe.

Finally, to Perelandra, I already agreed. Being name-called is no reason to do the same.

You know what I think it is that is driving all these leftoid whiners insane?
The Donks' fair haired boy, ol' Ceegar Willie was outed, busted, and impeached for being the lying sleaze bag that he was. He disgraced the country and the office of the presidency. He left us unprepared, vulnerable, and open for the attacks of Sept 11.(for the record- I voted for him twice)
And they can't scare up a scandal on George W Bush to save their miserable souls. So they try and manufacture scandal. It doesn't work, and this increases their frustration until they actually have to hold A MOCK TRIAL to satisfy their childish wishful thinking. What is just anathema to these people is that the United States is, quite simply, the finest nation in the history of the planet, and that GWB is a leader of honor, integrity, and competence. Is everyone here at LGF in lockstep with Bush on everything? No. I have my beefs. So do many LGF'ers. But even though we may disagree with some of the things Bush does, we recognize that we are fortunate- indeed, blessed to have this man at this time, in this office.
JWM

#267 realwest

HBO has a special

Please don't tell me you pay for HBO?

#268 Brandywhine

(It's worth remembering that after 9/11 a lot of people who were not supporters of Bush were solidly behind the routing of the Taliban - I was one).

Nice strawman, besides that no one here believes that.

Really, would you at least try to refute my accusation that you are a retard?

You insist that W refute BS charges, why won't you refute mine?

Or are you really a retard?

Tell me, Brandywine:

Do you have an original of the Downing Street Memo? (aka DSM)

And why are you assigning a formal acronym to a highly questionable document that never indicted our President in the first place?

Do you have any powers of comprehension, or are you just terminallly stupid?

And now you have "copies" of destroyed additional documents (since the first didn't take...) that further indict the President for what? You don't think at all that it's convenient that the originals were destroyed, since you KNOW that the source would be snuffed, just like GITMO.

Geez, you are a freak and a fool.

You are a baiting liar. You want the President to bother to acknowledge your fake knowledge, and he won't.

I bet that REALLY PISSES YOU OFF!

Get lost.

#246
alice in wonderland
Sarah D
I just re-read the article you linked.
The whole problem with the LLL is that they have FORGOTTEN what happened that day. We here have not. That seems to be the basic difference between those of us who will never give up and those who would rather look for blame anywhere but where it belongs
It's the terrorists stupid!

How can anyone forget what happened that day? What some forget is that OBL is still at large, still commanding AQ and probably receiving assistance from the Pakistani Secret Police. What some also forget is that Saudi Arabia provided most of the terrorist that day, and still provides more and money. What some forget (or choose to ignore) is that the Bush Family are way way too close to the Saudi Royal Family who made a devil's deal with the religous fanatics behind 9/11. (That picture of Bush holding hands with the King made me want to puke). What some forget is that Saddam, for all his many evils (many, many) had nothing to do with 9/11. Zip. Nada. Even Cheney, who had been remorselessly promoting that notion, finally had to admit there was no connection.

There's plenty of blame to go around. Clinton for not doing more during his term, Bush for worrying about stem-cells when a memo predicting an attack lay unadressed on his desk. The airlines for resisting armored doors for years before because of the cost. On and on and on.

I just wish Iraq had been contained as before, and the resources had gone to really cleaning the Taliban out of afghanistan and (most important) getting rid of the poppy crop that finances global terrorism. Oh, and some of that 300 billion being spent on chemical plant security and port security. And enforcing the Northern and Southern borders too.

And a few more things.

#268 Brandywine - how can you say "apples to oranges" when you haven't even read the Rathergate section here? The lack of journalistic ethics IS THE THEME OF THIS POST BY CHARLES.
Bush didn't dispute the TANG memos, either. That didn't make them true. He hasn't disputed the "facts" in the DSM, either. That doesn't make them true, either. Those memos were written in June of 2002; there were numerous articles, TV "News" stories and the like before and after that, LONG before Congress voted to go into Iraq, indicating Bush's desire for regime change in Iraq.
I'm through with you; you are not stupid, you are not naive, you just don't want to or are unable to address the theme of this post. And pointing this out to you, over and over, is obviously not going to be productive.

#272 really grumpy big dog johnson
The troll won't answer my accusations it's a retard, but it still insists W has answer ridiculous accusations.

It's nothing but another hypocritical L³ troll.

#268 Brandywine

LOL!

Again, I believe facts and reason tell us that the chances of the DSM (and 7 more like it) being faked or forged in some way, considering that they are minutes of meetings more than a few people attended, are remote, to say the least.

Yes, of course, that's why the others in the meeting have verified the documents right?

#273 Brandywine

I just wish Iraq had been contained as before, and the resources had gone to really cleaning the Taliban out of afghanistan and (most important) getting rid of the poppy crop that finances global terrorism.

Okay, I no longer accuse you of being a retard. You have proven it beyond any reasonable doubt.

Opium finances global terrorism? Try OIL you simplistic fool!

Why is it that the usual idiots think that the blogosphere is a joke?

It makes them look at least as stupid as they really are?

BTW, (an acronym like DSM, but in this case means "By the way") thanks Brandyswine for your lack of response to my rebuttals of your posts.

Apparently you have deemed me unworthy of response. It's not my problem that you think that way.

ICNCL

This sounds familar:

Spradling: I'm going to charge him with possession and being under the influence while on duty. You plead guilty, I'll recommend thirty days in the brig with loss of rank and pay.
Kaffee: It was oregano, Dave. It was ten dollars' worth of oregano.
Spradling: Yeah, well, your client thought it was marijuana.
Kaffee: My client's a moron. That's not against the law.
Spradling: Kaffee, I've got people to answer to, just like you. I'm gonna charge him.
Kaffee: With what? Possession of a condiment?

from a few good men

#275 - reaganite. Bush did answer the question about the DSM. He said the minutes as reported were incorrect, that no decision had been made. He said this in the Bush/Blair press conference. Perhaps you didn't see/read it. That would explain your confusion about about 'not responding to accusations'. He did respond.

I guess the latest batch of L³ trolls have not read Slick Willy's pre-war memos.