That Downing Street Memo that I mentioned a while back is finally roosting. Nader and Kerry apparently want to march this into impeachment. Both being the fair and disinterested parties have given plenty of thought to this. Of course, the tin foil hats are probably helping them think.
And Ralph Nader's tin foil beany is obviously on way to tight.
All about this memo. I did find a much more reasonable explanation of this rather thin bit of evidence at NRO. James Robbins does a quite nice job looking at the issues in that memo. I especially like this statement on the content.
UPDATE: Here is an entry from QandO on the same topic. Look at the comments. There are some fascinating statements. (I just saw Alcoa stock spike.)
When I go back [to Washington] on Monday, I am going to raise the issue," Kerry said, referring to the Downing Street Memo in an interview with Massachusetts' Standard Times newspaper.So stunning that no one has thought to bring the issue up for more than a month?
"I think it's a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home," the top Democrat added.
And Ralph Nader's tin foil beany is obviously on way to tight.
"It is time for Congress to investigate the illegal Iraq war as we move toward the third year of the endless quagmire that many security experts believe jeopardizes US safety by recruiting and training more terrorists," wrote Nader with co-author Kevin Zeese. "A Resolution of Impeachment would be a first step."Three years is endless now. You just have to love Nader and how predictable he is. You can read the Nader/Zeese article in where else? The Boston Globe. I really like this bit:
The president and vice president have artfully dodged the central question: ''Did the administration mislead us into war by manipulating and misstating intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to Al Qaeda, suppressing contrary intelligence, and deliberately exaggerating the danger a contained, weakened Iraq posed to the United States and its neighbors?"Strange that Senate Intelligence commitee that looked at this and found nothing wrong. Let's not mention that there were quite a plethora of senators that also had access to the intel. Why doesn't Ralph recall that part?
All about this memo. I did find a much more reasonable explanation of this rather thin bit of evidence at NRO. James Robbins does a quite nice job looking at the issues in that memo. I especially like this statement on the content.
Of course, the memo simply contains the impressions of an aide of the impressions of British-cabinet officials of the impressions of unnamed people they spoke to in the United States about what they thought the president was thinking. It is sad when hearsay thrice-removed raises this kind of ruckus, especially since a version had been reported three years ago. As smoking guns go, it is not high caliber.Have a read. It's quite enlightening.
UPDATE: Here is an entry from QandO on the same topic. Look at the comments. There are some fascinating statements. (I just saw Alcoa stock spike.)
1 comment:
I've read the memo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the whole shebang come down the word "fixed" when it refers to the intelligence in regards to the reason for war? In my reading of it, I saw that word meaning, "set" or "finalized" as in "fixed in place", not "repaired" or "manufactured." Is this just evidence that our Democratic nabobs and their servants in the fourth estate can't bloody read?
Post a Comment