Bush told Blair we're going to war, memo reveals

[sabra]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1700879,00.html

Bush told Blair we're going to war, memo reveals

· PM backed invasion despite illegality warnings
· Plan to disguise US jets as UN planes
· Bush: postwar violence unlikely


Tony Blair told President George Bush that he was "solidly" behind US plans to invade Iraq before he sought advice about the invasion's legality and despite the absence of a second UN resolution, according to a new account of the build-up to the war published today.

....

The memo seen by Prof Sands reveals:

· Mr Bush told the Mr Blair that the US was so worried about the failure to find hard evidence against Saddam that it thought of "flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours". Mr Bush added: "If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach (of UN resolutions)".


· Mr Bush even expressed the hope that a defector would be extracted from Iraq and give a "public presentation about Saddam's WMD". He is also said to have referred Mr Blair to a "small possibility" that Saddam would be "assassinated".

...

· Mr Bush told the prime minister that he "thought it unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups". Mr Blair did not demur, according to the book.

[Stanchetalarooni]

1. Mutherfuckers.

But we knew that anyways.

[NativeTexan]

128. Of course he has always been a rat-bastard!

always....

[NativeTexan]

129. I am SHOCKED...SHOCKED I tell you!!....

OK....we knew it all along. It's just that as big a liar as we always knew Bush was.....we are NOW finding out that we are still only scratching the surface!!

[joefree1]

2. Ding ding ding ding

Smoking Gun or more truth for the media to ignore. Hello DNC, anybody awake.

[Kierkegaard]

19. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

"Huh? What???"

Every day I wonder how far these diabolical M*$%#@&$%@*&s will go before someone stands up and knocks their shit out...

[nookiemonster]

52. Well, at least it's not a bj.

:sarcasm:

Fascists.

[Kierkegaard]

57. God forbid!

Ken Starr would have to come out of retirement to guillotine the offenders. :eyes:

[SammyWinstonJack]

63. Not even a BJ would get this arrogant prick impeached.

Pinhead** could be caught in bed with a live boy and a dead girl and the corporate owned media whores would find a way to spin it in a positive light and the bush** zombies would take it as the gospel.

[stop the bleeding]

109. you got that right - unf**king amazing. n/t

[ktowntennesseedem]

124. My new favorite bumper sticker; saw it just last week:

Will someone please give Bush a blowjob so we can impeach him!

[TankLV]

50. More truth for our so-called DEMOCRATIC Leadership to sleep walk thru.

Again.

Nothing - I repeat - absolutely NOTHING will come of this.

You can take this to the bank.

We need new "leaders".

If anything DOES ever comeo of this - that is, bushco is thrown out, tried and imprisoned - I will be happy to take all commers out to the restaurant/bar of their choice.

I doubt I will have to pay up, unfortunately.

[ishtar66]

90. Here is what I think will happen...

The American People (not the current Democratic leadership) will finally have enough of this bozo and they will be trounced in the November elections, before that the Republicans could start getting nervous.

I cannot believe how spineless and gutless the Democrats have become....

Hopefully something will develop before that but another positive I see is that no matter how the "Great Leader's" speeches are spun, they aren't doing anything to bolster his popularity.

A concerned and riveted Canadian.

[Tigress DEM]

138. HERE is the Plan. WAKE UP our House of Representatives.

John Conyers has already started on the IMPEACHMENT protocol, but he is being ignored by the rethug controlled HOUSE.

Find out who you House Rep is and find 20 friends to do a sit in - camp right in their office and DEMAND IMPEACHMENT - not just of *ush, but all his cronies.

http://www.house.gov

throw in your zip code and there is your rep.

YES we need new leaders, but if we don't HAVE to WAIT until 2006 to remove the rotten maggots stinking up our country, why SHOULD we?

[Tigress DEM]

133. MSNBC Poll - Anyone here think Bush has the "right plan"?

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11121234

It's at:
30% Yes
70% No

with my vote.


We can do better than that, can't we?

[Critters2]

147. Done

Yes 30%
No 70%

[MagickMuffin]

165. Here is the result for 3:47 am cst

Did President Bush persuade you that he has the right plan for the country? * 158959 responses
Yes 30%
No 70%

Does seem like a lot of movement.

[Zhade]

3. K/R

NT!

[Lochloosa]

4. This statement alone should scream Impeachment!

"The diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning", the president told Mr Blair. The prime minister is said to have raised no objection. He is quoted as saying he was "solidly with the president and ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam".

[EVDebs]

12. Plans made to seize oilfeilds made long ago....1973

and then 'dusted off' and reassigned to Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2432151

They always intended this to happen. The public was dragged along kicking and screaming. And in Three Days of the Condor, the movie, the NYTimes was made to look like 'whistleblowers' ! Hilarious when you compare that to their role as toadies today.

All very sad and Nixonian. In fact, Bush is the New Nixon.

[davekriss]

81. Great film

I often have made reference to this, Three Days of the Condor, such a prescient (and well made) film. Recall:

Turner: "Just look around you." (referring to the NY Times building) "They've got it. That's where they ship from. They've got all of it."

Higgins: "What? What did you do?"

Turner: "I told them a story. You play games, I told them a story."

Higgins: "Oh, you -- You poor, dumb son of a bitch. You've done more damage than you know."

Turner: "I hope so."

(pause)

Higgins: "You're about to be a very lonely man. It didn't have to end this way."

Turner: "Of course it did."

(pause)

Higgins: "Hey, Turner. How do you know they'll print it? You can take a walk, but how far if they don't print it?"

Turner: "They'll print it."

Higgins: "How do you know?"

(fade back to busy NY city street bustle, Higgins and Turner walking away and getting lost in the crowd)

A favorite of mine, this film (in my top 10 list, which has about 100 films on it). Of course, in real life, we know they generally won't print it, especially now that the major media is concentrated in the hands of 6 behemoth companies with vested interest in maintaining the military-industrial assembly line of death and destruction.

[WinkyDink]

115. Agreed. And best RR film, as well.

Labyrinthine truth.

[Miss Chybil]

34. Nothing screams Impeachment outside of winning in November. nt

[earthside]

60. Impeachment ALERT!

Indeed!

I just put up an 'Impeachment ALERT!' at my web site: www.Earthside.com

[ishtar66]

122. in today's papers (February 3,2006)

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/02/another_downing.html

[jazzjunkysue]

132. Ap and BBC on air. Hot damn. We have a winner.

[wordpix2]

72. WHY is Blair *'s butt-boy? Is he getting a cut from Big Oil or what?

[ishtar66]

91. He already has...

Tony is now a member of the Carlyle Group!

[wordpix2]

143. Tony a member of Carlyle? Oh, that explains it, then

[Tigress DEM]

134. Screaming IMPEACHMENT is a GOOD thing at the top of my lungs.

Take the MSNBC poll

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11121234

Has *ush convinced you he has the right plan?

rofl

[Apollo11]

5. This is huge

I just saw this on The Guardian website, and logged on here right away to share the news. Looks like sabra beat me to it!

This adds to the mountain of evidence that Blair has played the role of Bush's poodle and lied to the British Parliament and public about the real reasons for invading Iraq. Already 100 British soldiers have died in Iraq. Their loved ones are looking for answers.

Tony Blair just last night lost 2 votes in the British Parliament (House of Commons). This new evidence on Iraq will make it more difficult for him to carry on as Prime Minister. He wants to hold on until May 2007 (will be 10 years in the job). Right now the only thing helping him is that there is no consensus on who should take over. Gordon Brown is also very pro-USA in many ways.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Also coverage and interviews on UK Channel 4 News

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1661

A UN spokesman commented that U2s could fly above the range of Iraqi missiles (and already had), without escort, so this would have been a deliberate provocation.

Also, from The Guardian article:

Earlier in January 2003, Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, expressed his private concerns about the absence of a smoking gun in a private note to Mr Blair that month, according to the book. He said he hoped that the UN's chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, would come up with enough evidence to report a breach by Iraq of is its UN obligations.

ie Straw didn't think the Iraqis were in breach at the start of January - after the Iraqis submitted their dossier (you know, the one that's never been made public, which said they didn't have any WMD). They cooperated after that - so it seems the British Foreign Secretary never thought Iraq was in breach of the UN resolutions.

[ishtar66]

92. Another possibility....

The Brits may deal with Tony's perfidy before the Americans get around to giving King George his just desserts.

[Tigress DEM]

136. Think they are talking Galloway for PM in UK?

Isn't he their Ted Kennedy (ie Ted is Lion of the Senate & Galloway is Parliment's Roaring Lion blasting out truth to power) w/o the dead body draped against his campaign?

[muriel_volestrangler]

144. Thank you

:rofl:

we needed a bit of comic relief.

Galloway is one of two politicians who are currently laughing stocks in the UK. The other, Mark Oaten, has admitted to using male prostitutes despite being married with children; Galloway appeared on Celebrity Big Brother, where he took part in the various humiliating exercises, and, despite his declared intention of "talking directly to the youth of the country", ended up insulting all the young contestants (and taking the piss out of a recovering alcoholic), so that a poll on the national pop station got a 92.5%/7.5% hate/like vote for him. http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/55047.html

However, Oaten did turn up in parliament to help defeat Blair's bill to outlaw insulting religion. Galloway, rarely for him, also turned up to vote - with Blair. The only MPs less likely to become PM are those from Sinn Fein - because they refuse to affirm allegiance to the queen.

[Tigress DEM]

152. Ah, that's a bloody shame then.

One does prefer a bit more polish on a leader then that I guess.

Due to our state of cowards and scoundrels here, we'd be able to bypass the polish and take him for his grit. To US it would seem that at least he had tried to connect with the youth. All I know is he came over here and gave Norm Coleman the verbal spanking he deserved.

Would you like to swap Norm for John? Norm has a sweet little boy face. Has impeccable manners. Charm you to death really. And I do mean really. Lies like a used coffin salesman. Probably wreck your country in a year or two, but he gets on with the youth pretty well.

I'd just love to unleash Galloway on our Senate. My God, half of them would hide under their desks when he bellowed.

Translation please, what pray tell is (taking the piss out of someone)?

[muriel_volestrangler]

158. Sorry, I thought that was international English

"To take the piss" is to to taunt, tease, insult etc.

John who? I doubt I'd like to swap, though - Norm Coleman is undoubtedly a nasty little worm who dserved what he got from Galloway. Galloway is eloquent, but has enough faults that he doesn't have wide popularity. He's the sole MP for a party that's an uneasy alliance of Trotskyists, Muslims and a few others that came together over the Iraq war. He seems to have a knack for treading on other people's toes in a way that they always hold it against him.

[Tigress DEM]

161. Sorry, got a cold, bit foggy.

I thought Mr Galloway's first name was John. Looked it up. Ah, another George.

I thought maybe to take the piss out of someone might be to scare them so badly they peed on themselves.

We also have an archaic saying that someone who is an energetic type in a troublesome but not strictly illegal way is said to be full of "Piss and Vinegar" so I wondered if George gave the chap a verbal dressing down about his drinking and took all the fire out of him.

[Dawgs]

6. Nothing to see here!!!

Everyone knows that the Brits have a different definition for 'arranged around'.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Oh, yeah, I forgot about that fleet of UN spy aircraft

Twit.

[pschoeb]

31. No, he's a moranic supertwit , The best part is the painting of UN

colors magically makes them UN planes, and the UN will automatically get all upset even though they didn't sanction the mission, wow what a master mind, not. His next plan was to have them painted with French colors, then France would have had no choice but to go to war, he is our mostest greater master moran, cause he can't get fooled again.

[Hardrada]

100. This has to be from some P.G. Wodehouse novel.

Birdbrain Bushy Worcester!

[Dawgs]

9. Are these actual quotes by the President?

I skimmed over the article, but couldn't tell if these were actual quotes. If yes, then he's fried (well, at least by us).

[TankLV]

51. By whom? Surely our so-called leaders haven't managed to pry their

lips from his behind yet, after the "wonderful" dem response to the SOTU speech!

[nashville_brook]

10. why is he still in office? why isn't Oprah on this?

[Wise Doubter]

17. That really is the ticket !

as sad as it may sound, if Oprah were to bring any of this debacle of a presidency to light it would be over for them before the first commercial break.


Sad society that pays more attention celebrities than actual politics.

[ClintonTyree]

24. Oprah's too easily fooled by liars as it is............

bush would make her head spin around in circles. Besides, Oprah is much too busy getting to the bottom of REAL issues, like if Katie and Tom are still in love, things like that. :eyes:

[OnionPatch]

38. Right, and

Martha Stewart will follow up at 11:00. :)

Sorry, but Oprah is going to stay in her safe little bubble.

[WinkyDink]

116. This is NOT Oprah's purview! Let the ELECTED LEADERS act!

Maybe Sir Paul McCartney should try to unseat Blair?

[pinniped]

11. A set-up, eh?

It sure sounds like something these whackos would do to attain their goals.

Did the puke set up something here as well? Say, back in 2001?

[EVDebs]

14. DOD had plans since 1973 to seize the oilfields...

Maybe not Iraqs but Saudi Arabia's and with a little tweaking, voila ! This is why the Quakers are being spied on domestically people.

http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases.htm

The map here shows that the Iraqi poll is correct about Iraqi fears about 'permanent bases'

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=hmpg1

[McCamy Taylor]

48. Scoop Jackson knew about it, cause CIA raided his archives and

took papers in early 2005 when the DSM's were first becoming news, and Scoop Jackson's Office is only important to the current administration because it is where Wolfowitz, Perle and other Neo-Cons got their start--and were already talking their ideology and plans for the world way back when. Former Jackson aid, Cold War strategist extraordinaire, neo-Con and pavement greasemark Gus Weiss may have known what was in Jackson's archives. We wont know because he died along with other's in the government in 2003 who got dizzy in tall buildings after they objected to invading Iraq.

[EVDebs]

120. Even in a murder trial circumstantial evidence can convict ....

In bringing illuminating facts to the public's attention, now sooo distracted by merely 'getting by', I think the old tactic of 'teach-ins' should make a come-back.

The Credibility Gap is now as wide as the Grand Canyon and even the old reliable Operation Mockingbird outlets can't contain the blowback.

The current Iraqi opinion poll juxtaposed with the '14 Enduring Bases' map, which got the Quakers on someone's domestic spy list, should be front and center at any new Bush press conference.

[Roland99]

13. Link to similar article (anyone else reminded of Operation Northwoods?)

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1661


Deja vu all over again.

[sabra]

15. wow, there's some great background articles/reports there

thanks.

[EVDebs]

135. Who in the DOD / Joint Chiefs of Staff makes up this garbage anyhow ?

The War Powers Act of 1973 requires such specificity and clarity that these pretexts for war now require pretexts of legality ! LOL !

The Dept of Justification's Office of Legal Counsel is the place where Alito spawned from...whilst in Reagan's REX84 'suspend the Constitution' phase with Ollie and Co.

[Straight Shooter]

16. "A small possibility that Saddam would be assassinated."

IOW, if our covert operations go as planned, I can kill the man that threatened my daddy, even if I can't stand my daddy either.

U2 planes disguised as UN planes? Good grief.

[sabra]

20. "U2 planes disguised as UN planes? Good grief."

tell me about it!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

69. The fleet of U2's that the UN has.

Why not dress the Army up that way, too. :think:

[Chiyo-chichi]

110. IF they had done this and IF the Iraqis had fired on the "UN" plane

they'd have had their justification for war and anyone who suggested (even with with proof) that it was NOT a UN plane would have been smeared & branded a conspiracy theorist.

And there are still people out there who say that Bush DIDN'T lie us into this war?

And there are still people out there who don't believe that an administration capable of suggesting something like this could have had anything to do with 9/11?

[SpecialK]

111. Good point

This gives HUGE credence to the 'conspiracy theorists' that suggest that Bush Co. has at the minimum not told us the entire truth about 9-11.

I don't understand why this is NOT ON THE COVER OF EVERY SINGLE NEWSPAPER IN THE US.

What's it going to take???

The best we can hope for is that BLAIR gets in trouble, then we may finally hear something over here in Idiotland.

[WinkyDink]

118. "Calling Gary Powers! Calling Gary Powers!"

"Don't get shot down, now!"

[demo dutch]

18. Blair ... another lying bastard!

[Joe Chi Minh]

42. Blair never lies, because he believes whatevever he says....

because he says it. It was asserted by a psychologist that he's one of the few politicians in Parliament who has never have told a lie. The truth is what he wants it to be at a given time.

[0007]

21. The whole world is getting a full dose of this news and how wrong

it was to invade. The whole world is now looking at junior & Bair as war criminals.

Only a small dose will be issued to the American people. Is it because the media is in cahoots with the crime cabal or just plain scare shitless?

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

28. The whole world, sans the Republicans

They all have their fingers in their ears, and you hear nothing but a very loud "LA LA LA LA LA LA" coming from their offices...

[motocicleta]

76. that's the frickin question, isn't it?

And we will ever know the truth? Is the media scared, bought off, or stupid? It's at least one of the three, but I personally suspect a potent cocktail of all of these. We've gotta figure out how to have a reasonable press, or we're heading straight to ... well, I don't know where, but I'm starting to suspect a combination of Germany circa WWII and Soviet Union circa 1989 - 1991.

[grytpype]

22. Well it's a good thing that the war has turned out so well.

Because otherwise, it would really look bad for Bush. Close call there.

[sabra]

23. just some minor technicalities.... that's all.

[cal04]

25. this article states he made his decision in 2002

For the secret documents — seen by The Sunday Times — reveal that on that Tuesday in 2002:
Blair was right from the outset committed to supporting US plans for “regime change” in Iraq.
War was already “seen as inevitable”.
The attorney-general was already warning of grave doubts about its legality.


AS a civil service briefing paper specifically prepared for the July meeting reveals, Blair had made his fundamental decision on Saddam when he met President George W Bush in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002. “When the prime minister discussed Iraq with President Bush at Crawford in April,” states the paper, “he said that the UK would support military action to bring about regime change.”

Blair set certain conditions: that efforts were first made to try to eliminate Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) through weapons inspectors and to form a coalition and “shape” public opinion. But the bottom line was that he was signed up to ousting Saddam by force if other methods failed. The Americans just wanted to get rid of the brutal dictator, whether or not he posed an immediate threat.

The Americans had been trying to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks; but the British knew the evidence was flimsy or non-existent. Dearlove warned the meeting that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”. It was clear from Dearlove’s brief visit that the US administration’s attitude would compound the legal difficulties for Britain. The US had no patience with the United Nations and little inclination to ensure an invasion was backed by the security council, he said. Nor did the Americans seem very interested in what might happen in the aftermath of military action. Yet, as Boyce then reported, events were already moving swiftly.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1592724,00.html

[emulatorloo]

44. from channel 4 story "Bush made it clear that he had already decided"

<snip>

Channel 4 News has seen minutes from that meeting, which took place in the White House on 31 January 2003. The two leaders discussed the possibility of securing further UN support, but President Bush made it clear that he had already decided to go to war.

<snip>

President Bush said that:

"The US would put its full weight behind efforts to get another resolution and would 'twist arms' and 'even threaten'. But he had to say that if ultimately we failed, military action would follow anyway.''

<snip>

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1661

[ClintonTyree]

26. But, if we don't fight them there.........

we'll be fighting them here. The Iraqis were poised to invade the U.S. ask anyone on FR!
Unfortunately, this won't make a bit of difference to our mostly brain dead citizenry. They've already accepted the fact that bush is a liar, but the only reason he lies is to protect us. :scared: They've accepted that as fact and more evidence that he's a lying, war-mongering, law breaking sack of shit isn't going to change their opinion of him. After all, he's keeping them SAFE! :puke:

[Richard R.]

27. This article could be a trick

This article makes no sense because the US had already offered the UN a U-2 plane. There was no need to "paint a plane in UN colors" as the article states. Bush would have known that. This may be a planted article based on a fake document, designed to discredit The Guardian and the anti-war movement. Here's Hans Blix in a report to the UN dated January 27, 2003:

"While we now have the technical capability to send a U-2 plane placed at our disposal for aerial imagery and for surveillance during inspections and have informed Iraq that we planned to do so, Iraq has refused to guarantee its safety, unless a number of conditions are fulfilled. As these conditions went beyond what is stipulated in resolution 1441 (2002) and what was practiced by UNSCOM and Iraq in the past, we note that Iraq is not so far complying with our request. I hope this attitude will change."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm

[muriel_volestrangler]

32. Someone from the UN pointed out that they fly too high for the Iraqis

to be able to shoot them down, and that fighter escorts were never needed. So Bush was talking about an unnecessary provocative flight, hoping to get it shot down.

[DrRang]

39. Articles re planes in No-Fly zones flying lower and lower,

deliberately trying to provoke Iraqi anti-aircraft site into shooting at them, thus furnishing a "provocation" for invasion. I can't remember where I read this, and it's not the same thing exactly, but shows the same kind of thinking.

[CAcyclist]

145. Somehow I have faith that the Guardian checks its sources

It's your comments that make no sense

[daleo]

29. Blair's bald-faced lying is still amazing to read

"The revelation that Mr Blair had supported the US president's plans to go to war with Iraq even in the absence of a second UN resolution contrasts with the assurances the prime minister gave parliament shortly after. On February 23 2003 - three weeks after his trip to Washington - Mr Blair told the Commons that the government was giving "Saddam one further final chance to disarm voluntarily".

He added: "Even now, today, we are offering Saddam the prospect of voluntary disarmament through the UN. I detest his regime - I hope most people do - but even now, he could save it by complying with the UN's demand. Even now, we are prepared to go the extra step to achieve disarmament peacefully."

On March 18, before the crucial vote on the war, he told MPs: "The UN should be the focus both of diplomacy and of action ... would do more damage in the long term to the UN than any other single course that we could pursue.""

I think Powell knew how badly (and baldly) he was lying too. This was nothing but a calculated hit on a country by an international mafia.

[muriel_volestrangler]

33. And shortly after the White House meeting ,he released the 'dodgy dossier'

http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/02/week_1/06_dossier.html

which was the old student thesis that Baliur's office plagiarised, in an attempt to make Iraq look more dangerous. They were releasing propaganda like that, hoping to turn British opinion (and parliamentary opinion) in favour of war, because they knew the Iraqis weren't in breach of the UN resolutions.

[calimary]

30. Kickez-vous!

Kicked and recommended.

Visualize IMPEACHMENT!!!!!!
Then go DO something about it... like maybe supporting HR635 - and urging your congresscritter to sign it.

Here's a thread about it...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2079620

[jilln]

35. Bush said "internecine"?

I had to look it up. Doubt he knows the word.

[MsLeopard]

54. I agree

Bush never heard of, much less used, the word "internecine."

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

107. I laughed when I saw that word too, but

I think that someone else must have posed the question to Bush as in "So, wouldn't one expect some internecine conflicts?" - (imagine the unctuous diction of Blair) and that Bush would have said "Huh? Wha . . ? Well, I'M not expecting any internecine conflicts" leaving unsaid - "since I don't know what the f!@#k you're talking about!"

[jilln]

121. HAHAHA!

You're probably right, and when you add the British accent, that should make Bush one confused puppy...

The way it's written, it may just be someone paraphrasing Bush.

[Tigress DEM]

139. rofl

[Critters2]

149. !

:spray:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

36. this has got to be bogus. There is no way B**

B** knows what internecine warfare is.

[lumpy]

37. Believable

after the lies presented to the world via Colin Powell, Geo.W, Cheney, Rice and various traitors comprising the Bush administration. Justice should be served now.

[scarface2004]

40. bush told blair...

i say we lose 10, maybe 20 million tops!!

[Nightjock]

41. It makes my head spin

I can't take it!

If Clinton did this every repug mouthpiece would be on EVERY talking head show and the public would revolt!

And the difference between a democrat and a republican sheep voter is simple.

We would not blindly defend Clinton. We would be asking WTF?! We would be DEMANDING ANSWERS!

I really, really can't take it anymore. This country is in the fucking toilet.

[journalist3072]

43. Idiot Son is consistent, if nothing nothing else

Didn't Pat Robertson say that Idiot Son also told him there wouldn't be any casualties?

And according to this, he told blair there wouldn't be post-war violence?

Simply amazing. This rat bastard refuses to join the reality-based community.

[ClintonTyree]

102. bush's hotline to god..........

must be having some technical difficulties, or......... god is lying to bush like bush lies to us! But why? Does god want "W" to fail?

[JMDEM]

45. Half a Trillion wasted on a lie

One half trillion dollars wasted on a stinking set of lies.

Oh, by the way, your kids can't go to college anymore.

[TankLV]

56. Just how much is a single life worth?

Just wondering.

[rodeodance]

66. and about 2,230 US troops dead--and thousands of Irai and Afgans

[Joey Liberal]

46. Blair and Bush should be impeached n.t

[Twist_U_Up]

47. Nobody ever expected them to fly planes into buildings

bullshit MIHOP

[samhsarah]

49. K&R

[tabasco]

53. Bush and the corporate cabal wanted war so much ...

it made their teeth hurt. It's MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for the Bush gang as war-profiteering corporations are raking in billions, and oil companies rake in record profits with Iraqi oil off the market.

I hope this shows the military people how much the President did to avoid war. NOTHING. These bastards did everything in their lives to avoid combat but send our brothers and sisters off to war without a second thought !! Remember the President doing a skit the he thought was funny looking for WMDs in his office?? That's how much these rotten bastards care about the troops. They make jokes about fucking up the reason for the war!! Of course, WMDs were never the real reason for launching the war. That was just a convenient story to fool the gullible American public (Wolfowitz even said so!)

Dirty rotten no-good bastards. This Nation will not recover until we can prosecute and punish these criminals for their high crimes. Unfortunately, that will be too late for these guys:

[davekriss]

85. Exxon profit last fiscal year = $36 billion

That's $36 billion, or more than the GDP of 103 nations on the face of this earth. Hear that giant sucking noise? That's the effect of GWB policies of death and destruction, which of course benefit his "base" enormously.

$36 billion and pretty soon the number of American GI dead will exceed the number Al Qaeda killed on 9-11. Was it worth it? Exxon shareholders certainly think so; Halliburton executives will think so when they open their bonus checks this year. Reminds me of chilling character Orson Welles played in The Third Man, the great ferris wheel scene:

HARRY: "Look down there..." (LONG SHOT, from Martins' eye line of the fair ground far below and the people now on it.)

HARRY (O.S.): "Would you feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever?"

HARRY: "If I offered you £20,000 for every dot that stopped - would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money? Or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?...Free of Income Tax, old man...free of Income Tax.

(CLOSE SHOT - HARRY, looking off CL for Martins. Sound of wheel over scene.)

HARRY: "It's the only way to save money nowadays."

(CLOSE SHOT - MARTINS, looking off CR for Harry. He moves forward.)

MARTINS: "Lot of good your money will do you in jail."

Bush is in lala land, but those around him have a bit more sophistication. Did Cheney, Perl, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Negroponte, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al, really sit down and count the dots they could afford to spare? You bet! And they figured they could spare a lot. And meanwhile the arms manufacturing and oil sectors of the Bushian economy boom while the rest stagnates or declines. Just as our plutocrats planned. Mission accomplished, indeed!!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

55. Olbermann's on this story!

[Tigress DEM]

131. KICK! KICK! Dish the details!!

:kick:

[rzemanfl]

58. I could swear the U.S. offered U-2s to the U.N. before the war.

Lot of U's in that sentence. I am sure I read this somewhere before the War.

Had I read all of this long thread I would not have posted this, my recollection is verified above.

[alarcojon]

59. Can it get worse than this???

WTF!!

If this is true, think about it. Flying US jets under UN colors? That's got to be illegal, not to mention immoral. And Bush and his little bunch of idiots must have been the only people who couldn't foresee the ethnic and religious warfare. All they had to do was log on to DU, for crying out loud.

War crimes tribunals all around, please!

[janetle]

61. My thoughts exactly--what more could it take??

[AzDar]

62. OMFG! " Painted in U.N. colors"??? How low and illegal will they be

ALLOWED to go??

[rodeodance]

65. another dsm that our msm is NOT reporting *but Keith Olberman did

[AndyA]

151. Why is this not being reported in the media?

Write, call, complain! Ask why this story isn't being reported.

[Hubris Heaver]

67. Well the original plan was to send in

criminals who were dressed up as Polish soldiers in to take over a radio station...oops, wrong war, same caca.

[alfredo]

64. K&R We need to get back in control of congress. That might be

the only way we can stop him from destroying this country.

[acmavm]

68. Lying treasonous bastards. bush** & blair belong in a cell with dogs

lunging at them while, or naked in a pyramid smeared in feces.

Wouldn't that be some poetic justice?

[HuffleClaw]

70. i expect they'll simply deny this like they did

the other memo's, the downing street ones and the one that talked about the al-jazeera bombing idea. or maybe scotty will say he won't comment because it would be 'politicized' if he did?

[kentuck]

71. This is like the 2nd Downing St. Memo....

even more damaging than the first. But if the media ignores it, it may as well never happened...

[wordpix2]

73. how much more evidence does that repuke Congress need to IMPEACH?

[spindrifter]

74. This is a trophy memo that illustrates

some, but only some, of the many ways BushCo fundamentally misunderstood Iraq. Why would anyone rely on them to even pick a brand of toilet paper?

[Clara T]

75. kick in disgust

when will the people rise up.

[ishtar66]

94. Here's a thought....

How many of the American People are aware of all this? It isn't being covered in the big papers (perhaps the NYT will cover it who knows...) but in the absence of any coverage how do you get the word out so that the people are informed?

Once they are informed and critical mass is achieved things will happen, until then the challenge is in getting the word out.....

So instead of lamenting and getting frustrated we should focus on getting this information widely disseminated.

[marmar]

77. Adolf and Benito...

Together again. :pals:

[yorkiemommie1]

78. what's sickening is that many Dems will continue to cower

lest they be accused of 'hating America' and much of the populace will just shrug it off.

just pure unadulterated evil is what this is!

[autorank]

79. I'm sure Labour would re-elect Blair again. They're lobotomized.

LOBOTOMIZED...how about that. Lacking the excuse of massive voter suppression and election fraud, the British get to bear the full responsibility for electing Blair. Why would they do that? Oh, the Torries are 'just awful' and the Liberal Democrats, well they're too moderate. That's what we heard here during the election. Appologies for a war crime and it's perpetrator. Just wonderful.

Well, if the British want to vote their pocket book, they can turn the economy over to the Irish. Look what they've done. Ireland doesn't attack anybody and they do quite well.

Ireland:

GDP ranking 4th by per capita (at PPP) (2005)
GDP growth 5% (2005)

Inflation 2.3% (2005)

[savemefromdumbya]

83. We didn't want Blair as Labour leader

The Blairites have contaminated the party so much. Now it is like the SDP (going further right)

[autorank]

87. What about the so called 100 rebel back benchers. Lots of talk there.

My understanding is that Kennedy needed 60 votes to turn the tables. This is just amazing. Sad too.

First they knock out Wilson, then give you Thatcher, then Thatcher in drag without a brain (bLiar).

Labour RIP

[progressivebydesign]

80. Can we impeach that bastard NOW?????? n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

82. Game, set and match

Anybody who still can't call Bush a liar over the invasion simply doesn't have the word in his vocabulary.

Months ago on these forums, I said that the Downing Street memo was not the smoking gun but that it laid right on top of it.

This is the smoking gun. It is established beyond any doubt here that Bush could not be certain that Saddam had anything, yet he and his aides said at the same time that Saddam's possession of a biochemical arsenal was an established fact. This was a lie and Bush knew it was a lie.

It is time to convene an international tribunal for war crimes in Iraq. Let the trials of Bush and his aides begin.

[Tigress DEM]

88. Some countries did try but buckled under pressure from US

http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/universal/univindex.htm

Lawsuit Against Rumsfeld Threatens US-German Relations (December 14, 2004)

Under German legislation that allows for universal jurisdiction, New York’s Center for Constitutional Rights and Berlin’s Republican Lawyers’ Association filed a lawsuit against US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials liable for the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Pentagon warns that “frivolous lawsuits” would put the countries’ relations at risk, and Rumsfeld threatens to boycott the annual Munich security conference if the lawsuit advances. (Deutsche Welle)

Belgium Court Dismisses War Crimes Cases (September 24, 2003)

Belgium's highest court gives in to US threat and diplomatic pressure and dismisses war crime complaints against US President George Bush, US Secretary of State Colin Powell and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Thus restoring the country’s diplomatic relations with the United States and Israel.( Associated Press)

Belgium Makes Justice Less Global (June 24, 2003)
Under pressure from the US, Belgium shrinks from its obligation under international law to vigorously hold war criminals accountable. (Christian Science Monitor)

Belgium to Curb War Crimes Law (June 23, 2003)

Under intense pressure from the US, Belgium has diluted a law that gave Belgian courts universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity. (BBC)

US Threatens to Boycott Belgium Over War Crimes Law (June 13, 2003)

The US threatens to boycott Belgium and withhold funding from NATO in protest over a Belgian law that allows for prosecution of war criminals under universal jurisdiction. (Guardian)

Blair’s Grand Mistake (May 20, 2003)

A Belgian lawyer filed a war crimes case against US general Tommy Franks, alleging a number of breaches of the Geneva Convention during the Iraq war. This Guardian article points out that the angry response from the US underlines the folly of Tony Blair’s belief that the Bush administration is interested in justice.

US Commander Franks Faces Belgium Genocide Case (April 18, 2003)

Four doctors used Belgium’s universal competence law to bring an action against US Commander Tommy Franks for war coalition military operations in Iraq. Legal experts think the court may gain jurisdiction over the case despite amendments to the law in March 2003, designed to avoid the law being used for political complaints. (Expatica)

[Jack Rabbit]

137. Thoughts on universal jurisdiction, international law and global citizens

Neoconservatives and other right wing kooks express reservations about the International Criminal Court that are not valid, but those same arguments are more persuasive when applied to the concept of universal jurisdiction.

Universal jurisdiction may look like a useful tool for maintaining international law and order, but this is deceptive. A system of individual nations taking it upon themselves to apply and interpret international law is a recipe for disorder. Although we may agree with the ends of the specific legal actions taken in Belgium or Germany, it is too easy to see that the means used to this end would be subject to abuse and institutions established in the name of international law that in fact merely give license to cynical actions in the spirit of national self-interest or even the personal interests of tyrants.

It isn't that Belgium or Germany isn't trustworthy, but imagine China, Iran or Bush's US claiming universal jurisdiction and applying it as its leaders see fit; imagine Bush simply claiming the authority to charge anyone in the world with international crimes and being able to try the "offender" in US courts. The "offender" might be the populist president of a Latin American country who flips the bird at the IMF and World Bank. Bush has already established kangaroo courts for terrorist suspects; should we allow him to claim universal jurisdiction and do likewise to Hugo Chávez and Evo Morales?

International law needs to be applied and interpreted by impartial international courts, not national courts claiming universal jurisdiction, no matter how well-intentioned. To that end, cases against Bush, Blair and their aides should be heard by an international tribunal under the auspices of the United Nations. If such cases can be brought to the International Criminal Court, despite the Bush junta's expressed reservations about its jurisdiction, then that is where is should they should be heard. If not, the UN should convene a special tribunal for war crimes in Iraq and crimes against humanity arising out of the so-called war on terror, like the currently on-going war crimes tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

In an age of globalization, each of us is as much a citizen of the world as of his country. It must be admitted that from time to time a state falls into the hands of dark persons who abuse the powers of the state to violate international law such as by waging unjustified wars of aggression or torturing detainees taken in combat or other police actions. Those of us who are citizens of such a state often feel conflicted to our loyalties to that state and to the greater human race.

Personally, I pledge that as a citizen of the world I will not interfere with agents of a duly constituted international body whose duty is to apprehend suspects charged with war crimes in Iraq or crimes against humanity arising out of the war on terror, nor will I harbor or otherwise give aide to those suspects; I further pledge to assist in the apprehension of these war crimes suspects if necessary. That many of these suspects hold positions of honor and trust in the state of which I am a citizen is for me a source of shame.

When the authorities of a state act in their own self-interest so outrageously against the good of humanity at large, then even the citizens of this state should have the right to appeal to international powers to restrain the criminal actions of renegade leaders. This is not treason. One may wonder whether the concept of treason has any application to the citizen of a state which has fallen into the hands of such tyrants. Willy Brandt was not a traitor to Germany because he went abroad and worked to undermine the Nazi war machine during World War Two. Indeed, it was an act of patriotism. Herr Brandt was later honored to head the German government.

The crimes of the tyrants who abused the power of the German state of which Willy Brandt was a citizen are well documented. In the wake of the Reichstag fire (which, by the way, was most likely the work of Herr van der Lubbe) and in the name of protecting German citizens from foes real and imagined, foreign and domestic, civil liberties were curtailed and wars of aggression were waged, often predicated on lies. In the wake of the September 11 attacks (which was definitely the work and Osama bin Laden and his associates) and in name of protecting Americans from foes real and imagined, foreign and domestic, civil liberties are curtailed and wars of aggression waged, often predicated on lies. Again we must raise the concept that the authorities of a state are acting so outrageously in their own self-interest against the greater human race that the very concept of treason does not apply to a citizen of the state that works to undermine the authority of those in power. Is it any more possible for an American to be a traitor in 2006 than for a German to have been a traitor in 1940?

The supporters of these suspected war criminals in this country will no doubt claim that those of us who will support international agents seeking to apprehend the suspects for the purpose bringing them to trial are traitors. This charge is categorically rejected. An American citizen who supports international law in the face of neoconservative tyranny is no more a traitor to the United States today than Willy Brandt was a traitor to the German state in the face of Nazi tyranny seven decades ago.

[Tigress DEM]

153. So how does one go about begging the ICC to take our pRes, please?

If enough American's throw ourselves on the mercy of the ICC that *ush refused to sign onto, do you think it would make a difference?

[savemefromdumbya]

84. COULD WE HAVE A STATEMENT FROM HOWARD DEAN or Reid?

At least the Chair of the Dems could say something or even Harry Reid?

[ishtar66]

95. Dean, Reid, Kerry and Kennedy

They should be updated on a regular basis and consulted on a course of action....

[savemefromdumbya]

127. If this was hyped then it would wash away Bush and Cheney

where is everybody?

[freefall]

86. This is serious stuff no doubt but it is also old news. While we are busy

worrying about the legality of the Iraq Occupation they are busy planning their next invasion. Please go to this link and read the information and kick and recommend it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x307657

Iraq is going to look like a picnic if the administration preemptively attacks Iran.

Thanks,

freefall

[Tigress DEM]

89. If it's the proof we need to IMPEACH it's right on time.

This ISN'T the DSM, but a more explicit memo that actually says what DSM only alluded to having been possible.

I want this bozo out of there.

We should be able to IMPEACH Cheney too, because Haliburton has been aiding and abetting Iran to improve their weapons of mass destruction and Cheney still has links to them, among other things.

Thing is if we get some impeached or put away for war crimes and get some indicted and convicted of their corrupt activities, we might be able to pare it down to those we can stand or at least make the ones left petrified to pull the same kind of shit.

[Senator Obama]

98. Two things...

If we bring articles of impeachment against Bush, it should be easy to also find impeachable offenses against Cheney.

Second..impeachment is a political process. It is unfair to blame the Democrats as being spineless. The fact is they are powerless and now all three branches of government are controlled by a single party. There is absolutely no traction in the current climate and won't be until and unless we can shame republicans into action. The question would be, how do we do this? Cannot the DNC or even special interest groups with Democratic endorsement take the case directly to the people.

I used to read boards like this and dismiss some of the cries of fascism and demise of our country as being hysterics. No more. This government I have realized does not now, nor has it for several years represented any shape or form of democracy. It is a kleptocracy bordering on fascism.

Obama

[magellan]

101. The problem re the Dems is twofold, as I see it

First, the media won't give them the time of day for the most part, and when they do it's usually in the form of a panel discussion between a Dem and a Repub with a corporate media shill siding with the Repub. My gut reaction has been to question why Dems even bother with these farcical one-sided mudslinging matches; their time would be better spent watching the Capitol Hill lawn grow.

In addition, the corporate media won't touch stories like this one for obvious reasons. So the chance to even bring it to the attention of the majority of Americans doesn't exist, much less the opportunity to elaborate on what it means (and without being shouted down by some Uber-Repub).

I don't know how to overcome the media problem. Long term the corporations running them need reining in, but that's not going to be easy.

Second, the Dems tend to come off as spineless because they don't stand together on important issues. Election reform, for example. My impression at this point is that most Congressional Dems aren't informed, don't see a problem, or don't see one that deserves their attention. THAT'S A HUGE MISTAKE.

The even bigger mistake is not showing a united front in the face of Bush**'s corrupt regime.

No flames please, but I will never forget how disappointed I was during the '04 campaign when Kerry couldn't once bring himself to call Bush** a liar. He said everything but. I'm afraid skirting the truth is not good enough when the opposition is so very good at lying and dissembling. The Dems have GOT to get their act together and start using language that will reverberate with the people. LIARS. CORRUPT. CRIMINALS. UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Just my two cents.

[Senator Obama]

103. Great response...

I appreciate the time you took to give your thoughts. I must admit you're right on all points and I too am equally frustrated at Democratic fecklessness.

I have got to believe that Dean and company can weave this into the campaign theme of "Culture of Corruption". Our party superstars, my moniker's namesake being the point man, needs to use his face time to discuss these matters. Memos as detailed and apparently authentic containing this kind of damaging revelations ought to be discussed and should be leading the news tommorrow. The fact that they're not is understood by the facts as you've already stated. Once again though, I have got to believe that we as a party can start a grass roots accountablity. After all, how did Newt Gengrich (sp) get his "contract on America" across?

Obama

[stepnw1f]

126. You are the "Real" Obama?

[freefall]

108. Right on. n/t

[Tigress DEM]

130. I agree with some of what you said. Media is a prob. DEM solidarity too.

Media ---- Mainstream Media is a problem as you said.

A tactic that has been successful is flooding them with emails and calling them on their shifless behavior at every opportunity. It IS actually better than it was before. DEMS weren't even represented --- I don't count Hannity and Colmes - Colmes contract stated something that made him the milktoast guy who took it in the butt all the time.

If they continue to invite DEMS at all, our DEMS are getting their stratagies in place. For instance John Kerry didn't let Katie Couric get away with anything when he was addressing the pRes inaccuracies about the state of the union. He body slammed her.

We have to reinforce our DEMS when they do good. Flowers for Barbara Boxer, tons of email to Kennedy, Conyers, Kerry, Kunich, Dean whenever they show us they are fighting for us helped give them the strength to go on. If they are doing it for us and all they hear is whining, how inspiring is that?

Support the MSM Newspapers VS MSM TV --- THEY tend to get be more fact based - at least sometimes. They DO tend to report BOTH sides, but at least SOME of the facts get in there. With them it's a constant battle for REAl issues on PAGE 1 and rebuttals to inaccurate editorials.

After Katrina, even MSM TV is a little better. Even in MSM TV land there is the McLear report. 360. Even Geraldo sometimes digs in about issues that the pretty faced news boys won't touch.

The boots on the groud reporters WANT TO cover the truth. It's the high up editors and owners (FAUX is connected with one of *ush's cousins - it will NEVER change, unless that connection is severed - but they are fun to bash anyway) that KILL the REAL News Stories. $$$$ is the only thing that sways them. Letters to the station, canceling cable subscriptions, threatening to boycott sponsers -- anything and everything done in that vein makes them nervous. Their money and our support keeps *ush from outright conscription of the press. It came really close until the Guckert/GANNON thing broke.

ALSO direct anyone who seems misinformed and intelligent enough to understand the truth when they hear/see it to alternative news sources ---- AIR AMERICA RADIO ---- TRUTH OUT.ORG ---- BUZZFLASH.COM


************ DEM Solidarity.

1) Tell them when they do good.
2) Kick their asses when they really blow it.
3) Mobilize our grassroots movements into our House of Reps Offices and demand IMPEACHMENT

ISSUES not personalities must come first

A-1 Priority
IMPEACH or through other due process evict all the corrupt elements in this administration.

Select candidates that support
1) VOTERs RIGHTs to have every vote accurately counted and permantly verifiable.

2) Campaign Finance Reform
/ Those DEMS that take RNC or other PAC money that seems questionable should be questioned and only if the answers are verifiable and acceptable should they be supported.

3) Government Transparnency
/ reinstate Freedom of Information Act on privatized "Government Contractor" info for one
/ publish the studies repressed by the *ush regime
/ get the TRUTH about this administration into our children's textbooks
/ reinforce our checks and balanaces with less arbitrary standards than "appearance of impropriety" that enable use to keep judges in check as well.

4) American's rights to life
/ healthcare
/ reasonable regulations on Corp USA to save lives
/ reasonalbe assistance to Americans in poverty or crises

5) American's rights to liberty
/ no Domestic spying outside of FISA control
/ no tolerance for racial profiling
/ no tolerance for hate crimes
/ no tolerance for corporate seizure of citizen property

6) American's rights to private pursuit of happiness that doesn't shove ANYONE's rights down anyone ELSE's throat
/ civil unions for gays so they can take care of those they love
/ marriage can be left to the church, but the church has to refrain from persucuting gays
/ freedom of speech and the freedom not to listen
/ porn, kkk, freepers etc... all have the right to speak their views in public, but not demand that anyone listen against their will - ie Nudes in "action" where kids can see or crosses burning on lawns.
/ our adult level conversations need to remain AT the level of adults and within that space between the nose and the fist that don't meet by intent.

7) Strong Voter involvement before AND after election
/ Continuing to listen to constituents even when not up for re-election

[Tigress DEM]

125. House of Representatives has to bring on the IMPEACHMENT

John Conyers is all over that, but he doesn't have enough sway in the Republican controlled House to get it done.

WE THE PEOPLE have to give him the TRACTION he needs.

I think we should start IMPEACHMENT sit ins with our House Reps until they give in and pay attention to the facts.

Welcome to DU by the way.

Your chosen moniker might get you attacked at times, just a heads up. Obama is considered by some to be a DINO - Democrat In Name Only.

Still you seem to have gotten the kernel of truth with the "kleptocracy" revalation you have had. The facts have been hidden and obscured with propoganda. I didn't believe one of my friends back in the late 90's when she was talking about some of this stuff. She wasn't very patient with me, said she was telling the truth and I could believe it or not.

We chose to leave politics alone to keep our friendship. It didn't survive, but I understand her frustration these days.

[CAcyclist]

146. It's not old news and Iran has short-circuited the US's

machinations by agreeing to have their nuclear fuel processed outside their country in Russia.

[BlakeB]

93. Im on a radio station...

called KAOK 1400 AM as the liberal panelist. Im flanked by a Repub and a Libertarian... I am going to definitely bring this up tomorrow. I gotta do my part in getting this out there. I just hope it turns out to be 100% true so I don't look like an idiot. Wish me luck.

[Lars39]

97. Start a thread tomorrow so listeners can report.

Your post might get lost in this thread. And of corse, Good luck! :hi:

[Senator Obama]

104. Man am I jealous....Good Luck

I really wish I could get on a talk show like that in my area. I am motivated beyond belief to defeat these sleaze bags.

Obama

[raccoon]

113. Good luck, BlakeB! Let us know how it goes. nt

[freefall]

123. Good Luck and please report back. n/t

[BlakeB]

148. I'm probably not gonna go in today.

I think the MWF liberal panelist said she would come in so I decided to get some damn rest. The past two weeks have been busy for me. Between getting my schools chapter of the college dems going, the radio show, working in the state party for the upcoming house elections, campaigning for our branch of the state party's candidate to win the state chair (which he did), getting promoted to "deputy clerk" in the state party... and other random nonsense in the wake of Hurricane Rita (Im from Cameron, the place Rita wiped clean) it has been crazy as hell.

But I will definitely tell you guys all about the show when I go back on the show Tuesday and break the story to South West Louisiana.

[freefall]

150. Congratulations on getting your person into the state

chair position. Sounds like getting some rest was the right choice. My heart goes out to anyone affected by the hurricanes. Good luck to you.

[thereismore]

96. Sadly, nobody will care. Just another memo. n/t

[mb7588a]

99. We didn't need this.

We all already knew this was the truth, via PNAC and Richard Clarke's book and others...


This is just proof of what we already knew, and to the media and elected Democrats it's dead on arrival. They have no interest in appeasing the "far left."

We won't hear anything about this. Similar to how we hear nothing about stifiling investigation after investigation. Similar to how we hear nothing about the Downing Street Memo. Similar to how we hear nothing about Plame. Similar to how we hear next to nothing about the NSA spying on us. Similar to how we hear nothing about the environment being flushed down the fucking toilet. Similar to how we hear nothing about the 46 million American without health care. etc. etc. etc.

rant off.

[Senator Obama]

105. Well I'd say this has nothing to do with appeasing...

the far left. This is not a leftist issue. This is about the integrity of our government. Somebody in our party has to stand up and take the lead. I have no idea why some of the non aspirants to the Presidency at least won't trumpet this information whenever they get face time. Why for instance isn't Pelosi and company advancing this agenda. Barbara Boxer could surely run with this.

This is more than the stupid book by Richard Clark. Clark knew alot alright, but he was out of the loop in the real war planning. This is an official account of a meeting between heads of state in which our president is caught conspiring to go to war by manufacturing the motive. This proves conclusively he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. Yet he lied about the situation to suit his case for war. This takes us from suspecting the obvious to actually having legal proof that this occurred. Of course the President would hide behind executive privilege should we try to subpoena any of his records. But it seems to me Condi and Card could definitely be forced to testify under oath. It is not clear as to whether a British citizen could be summoned for testimony but I'll bet somebody who was at that meeting might very well do so.

Obama

[Trevelyan]

119. Didn't Blair ignore a subpeona from Fitzgerald to testify?

Seems I read that on AfterDowningStreet.org

[mb7588a]

164. legal proof isn't worth shit in a congress where

you aren't in the majority, obama.

[leftchick]

106. Can the UN charge bush with security council violations now?

I highly doubt this will get anywhere with our corrupt congress. Can't the UN bring the chimp up on some charges? Please someone save us from this madness. :(

[berner59]

117. BBC TV news had the reporter on yesterday...

Who broke the story... It was a pretty long segment... Can't the Brits at least get their act together and get rid of Blair?? That would be big news you would think and then average people could MAYBE connect the BIG FAT DOTS!!!

[Trevelyan]

112. "Internecine?" From the lips of Chimpy McFlightsuit? I'm skeptical.

Bush told Blair he: "thought it unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups."

Internecine?" From the lips of Chimpy McFlightsuit? I'm skeptical.

I think it more likely he said, "They won't be doin' no fightin' with theirselves, or anybody else who might be enemies or not enemies, eh, um, so they will only fight their enemies, but only us and not against their own selves."

To which Blair answered, "Smashing, what!"

And that was it, then they went to war.

[SpecialK]

114. Heehee...Chimpy McFlightsuit - LOVE IT!! n/t

[alarcojon]

142. Hey, if you like that one, check out the collection

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x136

Welcome to DU! :toast:

[Che_Nuevara]

140. If this surprises anyone, punch yourself. (n/t)

[Tight_rope]

141. Burn the motherfuckers!

:mad: :mad: :mad: :grr: :grr: :grr: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[rodeodance]

157. K.Olberman reported this Thrus. eve. Tonight he commented Dems did

not and -no one made an issue or this--and the 'news' ignored it also.

[redacted]

154. BLAIR-BUSH DEAL BEFORE IRAQ WAR REVEALED IN SECRET MEMO (Guardian UK)

<snip>

A memo of a two-hour meeting between the two leaders at the White House on January 31 2003 - nearly two months before the invasion - reveals that Mr Bush made it clear the US intended to invade whether or not there was a second UN resolution and even if UN inspectors found no evidence of a banned Iraqi weapons programme.

"The diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning", the president told Mr Blair. The prime minister is said to have raised no objection. He is quoted as saying he was "solidly with the president and ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam".

The disclosures come in a new edition of Lawless World, by Phillipe Sands, a QC and professor of international law at University College, London. Professor Sands last year exposed the doubts shared by Foreign Office lawyers about the legality of the invasion in disclosures which eventually forced the prime minister to publish the full legal advice given to him by the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith.

The memo seen by Prof Sands reveals:

· Mr Bush told Mr Blair that the US was so worried about the failure to find hard evidence against Saddam that it thought of "flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours". Mr Bush added: "If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach ".

MORE

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1700879,00.html

ADDITIONAL COVERAGE (includes video)

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1661

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x316796#318460

[Dangerman]

155. THOSE WEASELS!!!

:grr:

[flamingyouth]

156. Duplicate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2081575

[peacetalksforall]

159. Paint U.S. aircraft in U.N. colors - OPERATION IRAQWOODS or

OPERATION BABYLONWOODS?

Here is a condensed paragraph from the James Bamford book -

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html

"In his new expose of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”

Now aren't our leaders the most wonderful old grandfatherly magnanimous gentle souls anyone could ever for?

Blessed be the peace ...........

[rodeodance]

160. Olberman was asking WHY the Dems have not jumped on this?-- I

forget who his guest was--but answer was not remarkable.

[TankLV]

163. Spineless cowards?

Don't care?

Moles - not really Dems?

Just sleep walking?

I'd certainly like to know!

They certainly are no OPPOSITION!

[redacted]

162. Sabra, thanks for posting this story. But please use the original title

that the original story carries for the thread title if you post in LBN. Otherwise, typing a phrase from the original title of the news report in the DU search page will return no values, leading others to conclude that the story hasn't appeared here in LBN when it already has. The wong search results lead to duplicate posts and lots of wasted time that could be put to better use for the benefit of others here at DU. In other forums besides LBN, you can rename the story whatever you want.

Your thread title is:

Bush told Blair we're going to war, memo reveals

The actual story title is:

Blair-Bush deal before Iraq war revealed in secret memo

And thank you again for this and your other posts. You are amazingly talented at finding reports like this one long before they are available elsewhere on DU and the web, and everyone here GREATLY appreciates your work!

[bos1]

166. UN part sounds too stupid to be true.

The UN would have immediately said that they have no missing planes. I can see it being brainstormed but I doubt it would ever get past that. Now what is possible is that B* would just BS about it to Blair. I guess.

Let's hope the Downing Street Memos get released some day soon...