Iraq Bombshell Goes Mostly Unreported in US Media

[kentuck]

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2511

<snip>

The minutes also recount a visit to Washington by Richard Dearlove, the head of the British intelligence service MI6: "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."

That last sentence is striking, to say the least, suggesting that the policy of invading Iraq was determining what the Bush administration was presenting as "facts" derived from intelligence. But it has provoked little media follow-up in the United States. The most widely circulated story in the mainstream press came from the Knight Ridder wire service (5/6/05), which quoted an anonymous U.S. official saying the memo was ''an absolutely accurate description of what transpired" during Dearlove's meetings in Washington.

Few other outlets have pursued the leaked memo's key charge that the "facts were being fixed around the policy." The New York Times (5/2/05) offered a passing mention, and the Charleston (W.V.) Gazette (5/5/05) wrote an editorial about the memo and the Iraq War. A columnist for the Cox News Service (5/8/05) also mentioned the memo, as did Molly Ivins (WorkingForChange.com, 5/10/05). Washington Post ombudsman Michael Getler (5/8/05) noted that Post readers had complained about the lack of reporting on the memo, but offered no explanation for why the paper virtually ignored the story.

In a brief segment on hot topics in the blogosphere (5/6/05), CNN correspondent Jackie Schechner reported that the memo was receiving attention on various websites, where bloggers were "wondering why it's not getting more coverage in the U.S. media." But acknowledging the lack of coverage hasn't prompted much CNN coverage; the network mentioned the memo in two earlier stories regarding its impact on Blair's political campaign (5/1/05, 5/2/05), and on May 7, a short CNN item reported that 90 Congressional Democrats sent a letter to the White House about the memo-- but neglected to mention the possible manipulation of intelligence that was mentioned in the memo and the Democrats' letter.

...more

[Zerex71]

1. Just think to yourself, "Now if this had been Clinton..."

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. How many times since 2000 have I thought the very same thing.

"Now if this had been Clinton..." :banghead:

[Stanchetalarooni]

3. Why not on the floor of the House and Senate?

Or is it all just so much theater.
In situations like this I feel so out of touch with how things really work in the world.
Or, is it that I am utterly horrified at how things really work in the world?

[Ganja Ninja]

4. Good point.

Why is it up to us to try and stir up the media? Why aren't the Democrats in Congress and the Senate raising hell and making a scene? They should all be pounding their shoes on their desks and not allowing anything to go on. Make them shut down both houses. That will get some attention.
I'm sick of us having to write a media that doesn't care what we think. I'm also tired of prodding our Democratic leaders to take a stand.

[ourbluenation]

5. In a way it's old news

The media and everyone knows he manufactured reasons to go to war...that 9-11 had nothing to do with it. In regards to the media, I think they're just kind of saying, "yeah - so what...doesn't everyone know this already?"

The non-storyness of this story is scary.

[European Socialist]

6. This is true for the past 4 years.

If you were in a car with an insane driver, would you politely ask them to drive better. No-you would raise hell to get him to pull off the road-and do what you could to keep him from getting back on the road. Democrats need to develop a sense of urgency!

[bonzotex]

11. exactlly

Why aren't our "leaders" outraged? Why do they continue to pretend there is a chance in hell of working constructively with these fascists? The logical explaination isa they are just as corrupt and like the staus quo such as it is. We need new leaders. There are few we should keep. There are many we shouldn't.

[Nothing Without Hope]

7. The corporate media's corruption is so obvious, they don't even TRY to

look like they're anything but propaganda any more. They are fascist collaborators and are doubtless being well paid for their treason - surely lying to the American people about the horrors this government has perpetrated and the election it stole is treason?

[OneForLuck]

8. What does it take exactly....

for Americans to start standing up and telling this ass, "Enough is enough!" And what does it take to get the Democratic Party mobilized as a cohesive unit to go after him?? They're killing me!!!

[newyawker99]

9. Hi OneForLuck!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mwb970]

15. I can't believe we are putting up with all this.

Is it because we don't know what to do? Who to follow? Why to care?

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. I emailed the UK leaked memo to Senators Durbin and Obama

because I wanted them to know that WE, the people, knew about it and we wanted it addressed/investigated. They ALWAYS answer my emails....except THAT one. I wonder why? Something is up....IMCPO. They are ignoring this deliberately.

[JDPriestly]

12. It's bizarre

I read on an obscure website that the memo was a fake, but then I read that Blair had not denied the truth of its contents. This is just the strangest non-story yet. Maybe there is something going on.

[chughes1614]

13. Small story on CNN main page today...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/britain.war.memo/index.html

I'll be interested to see if this is still on the front page of CNN at noon. It isn't the headline story either, and clearly should be. Is this story up now at CNN

1) because we have exerted enormous pressure on these people via email, and a ongoing discussion

2) because Bunnypants is home from vacation

At this point I'm going to have to go with number one. Hopefully some other media outlets will follow suit. We shouldn't have to do this.

One thing of importance. When these filthy pigs screw the American public like, they hand us more ammo to shoot at the right. It is going to be tough for the other filthy pigs to call the media "liberal" from here on out. Don't underestimate that, or hesitate to crack the nearest Repuglithug over the head with it.

[Don_1967]

14. S.O.B.

Standard operational Bullshit!!!The media is controlled by the rich corporations and Bush is there bitch.

[ooglymoogly]

16. corporate media has built this admin so it could take over the govt

they promoted it, they have never given more than a few minutes to any news that could damage this bunch of thugs...and now the house of cards they have built has become so unwieldy that the slightest wind could bring it down...so they have circled their wagons and will not let the bad news fly....they chop off at the knees any news story that makes this treason obvious. but this one is to big to kill and now that 89 members of congress have spoken they have to cover it..imo

[lonestarnot]

17. Well we can't have real news in Amerika...real news is an abomination!

[Nothing Without Hope]

18. Major story on it in the LA Times:

The article is in the "World" section and is quite long. This is serioius attention, at least. I don't know where it is in the print version of the paper.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-memogate12may12.story
May 12, 2005

Indignation Grows in U.S. Over British Prewar Documents

Critics of Bush call them proof that he and Blair never saw diplomacy as an option with Hussein.

By John Daniszewski, Times Staff Writer

LONDON — Reports in the British press this month based on documents indicating that President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair had conditionally agreed by July 2002 to invade Iraq appear to have blown over quickly in Britain.

But in the United States, where the reports at first received scant attention, there has been growing indignation among critics of the Bush White House, who say the documents help prove that the leaders made a secret decision to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein nearly a year before launching their attack, shaped intelligence to that aim and never seriously intended to avert the war through diplomacy.

(snip)

The leaked minutes sum up the July 23 meeting, at which Blair, top security advisors and his attorney general discussed Britain's role in Washington's plan to oust Hussein. The minutes, written by Matthew Rycroft, a foreign policy aide, indicate general thoughts among the participants about how to create a political and legal basis for war. The case for military action at the time was "thin," Foreign Minister Jack Straw was characterized as saying, and Hussein's government posed little threat.

Labeled "secret and strictly personal — U.K. eyes only," the minutes begin with the head of the British intelligence service, MI6, who is identified as "C," saying he had returned from Washington, where there had been a "perceptible shift in attitude. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and . But the intelligence and the facts were being fixed around the policy."

(snip)

[McCamy Taylor]

19. It's gathering steam--LA Times, CNN, Ivins--Look for Rove Smoke

Something big will go down in the next few weeks. I predict a Gulf of Tonken in volving N. Korea. We KNOW they have nukes. Iran and Venezuela have been going no where and any attempt to sell war with these countries is likely to meet with intense public skepticism.

The big question---will China let us? China, Japan and Asia have it in their power to destroy our economy and topple the Republican regime. Will they sit back and let the US wage a limited nuclear war in their backyard in order to prop up W.'s pissant presidancy?

[UTUSN]

20. It's So Much Easier for Our Crack Investigative Media

to cover chewing the cud over historical decisions of 60 yrs ago than to dig up some truth about today.