British memo shows Bush manipulated Iraqi intelligence to justify his war.

Yahoo News has a story up about a highly classified British memo that was leaked during their recent election which shows that Bush tried to fit the facts to his policy instead of the other way around so he could justify taking out Saddam to the American public.

A highly classified British memo, leaked in the midst of Britain’s just-concluded election campaign, indicates that President Bush decided to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein by summer 2002 and was determined to ensure that U.S. intelligence data supported his policy.

The document, which summarizes a July 23, 2002, meeting of British Prime Minister Tony Blair with his top security advisers, reports on a visit to Washington by the head of Britain’s MI-6 intelligence service.

The visit took place while the Bush administration was still declaring to the American public that no decision had been made to go to war.

This just confirms what many of us strongly suspected all along. Bush lied to us repeatedly about his decision making process with regards to deciding to take this country to war. He lied about not having made a decision yet, he lied about what Iraq was capable of, and lied via omission by handpicking facts to support his policy while ignoring anything that didn’t.

The newly disclosed memo, which was first reported by the Sunday Times of London, hasn’t been disavowed by the British government. A spokesman for the British Embassy in Washington referred queries to another official, who didn’t return calls for comment on Thursday.

A former senior U.S. official called it “an absolutely accurate description of what transpired” during the senior British intelligence officer’s visit to Washington. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

A White House official said the administration wouldn’t comment on leaked British documents.

How convenient that the White House has a policy of not commenting on leaked British documents. Not that it matters, he’s already been re-elected and has enough support by the Fundamentalists in his party to ensure that nothing close to the word “impeachment” so much as gets uttered in Congress over this issue.

As of this past May 1st it’s been two years since Bush stood on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln with a banner fluttering behind him declaring “Mission Accomplished” and in that time 1,457 more U.S. Soldiers have died. Additionally it’s estimated that between 21,447 and 24,324 civilians have been killed in Iraq since the start of our “liberation” of their country. Meanwhile we still haven’t caught Osama bin Laden and brought him to justice for the events of 9/11. And if you’ve been paying attention to the news recently it seems that the Iraqi elections have done little to stem the tide of car bombings in Iraq and the U.S. seems incapable of making a dent in the terrorist problem.

While I’m busy picking at old scabs, whatever happened to all those pesky Weapons of Mass Destruction that the Administration kept promising they’d find eventually? Has anyone found a single chemical or biological weapon anywhere that might in any way validate the big lie Bush used to take us there in the first place? No? So surely all those conservative bloggers who told the rest of us that we’d be eating our words once they dug them all up have since gotten around to apologizing for their unfounded faith in the Presidents claims, right? No? Just shut up and wait, they said. So how long do we have to wait? Another two years?

It seems there’s a slow, but sure release of damaging news items like this as time goes by and yet no one seems to get all that outraged about it. Among his supporters Bush seems incapable of doing wrong and no amount of proof showing just how dishonest he is makes a bit of difference to his fans. Clinton lied about a blow job and had to go through an impeachment. Bush lied about Iraq and took the U.S. into what is clearly an illegal war and the best we can manage is to have Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) circulate “a letter among fellow Democrats asking Bush for an explanation of the document’s charges”. Yeah, I’m sure he’s quaking in his boots over that. Are the priorities of the people in this country really that fucked up that a blow job is more deserving of an impeachment than an illegal war? Thousands of people didn’t die when Clinton got his hummer in the oval office, though a nice dress was stained pretty badly.

Perhaps that’s the problem with Bush; no one’s blowing him so he has to get rid of his testosterone by invading other countries for no reason other than he really, really wants to. Quick, someone get that man a couple dozen loose interns and maybe he’ll lighten up a bit.

Found via Life in Bush’s America.

15 thoughts on “British memo shows Bush manipulated Iraqi intelligence to justify his war.

  1. Are the priorities of the people in this country really that fucked up that a blow job is more deserving of an impeachment than an illegal war?

    Umm dare I point out it was the christian right wing activists who got Clinton impeached, and I daresay they aren’t too bothered about what lies are told by GWB as long as they get their holy war in the middle east.

    As for Bliar ( yes we call him that over here in the UK ) well he also professes to be a christian, see a pattern forming yet anyone?

  2. Unfortunately, I have to go along with your assessment, Les.  The Democrats will mumble and grumble, the Republicans will do their usual song and dance, and nothing will come of it.

    Hey, it’s all just a carny trick- switch those shells around fast enough, don’t stop long enough for anyone to get a good look.  Pretty soon the television-bred attention span of the American shills is used up, and they’ll not only forget what shell the coin is under, but forget that there ever was a coin.  Life is wonderful, ain’t it?

  3. (Thanks for reading my blog Les)

    Part of me agrees that the Dems are weak and will not really push the issue, and it pisses me off to know end.

    I have also hear from a few Dem staffers that the Dems are basicly allowing the Republicans to implode in, and at the right time, step in and look like the heros…

    Please take a moment and read this entry on my blog Here

    I think there is a grander plan to wait, and then at the right time, hold the republicans feet to the fire by making them vote yes or no for this stuff, and use all the no votes aginst them come 2006.

    So I am taking a wait and see tude, Ried is shaping up to be a smart guy.

    Thanks for letting me comment on your blog…

  4. You have an excellent blog there and I stop by often. In fact part of the reason I haven’t written as many political rants is because you’re writing most of them already. grin

  5. I am glad to see that at least Knight Ridder picked up the story on the memo. I have known about it since Monday or Tuesday and found no mention of it in The NY Times, The LA Times or The Washington Post. (I didn’t try the Boston Globe.) If the AP or Chicago Tribune carried it, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch omitted same when they “reported” on the British election. The closest our papers came to the story was to indicate that Labor (probably) lost seats because Blair’s opponents accused him of lying about Iraq.

    Repeating the link at Marq’s blog, the full text of the memo – the minutes of a meeting – is available at the TimesOnline. It is absolutely damning.

  6. Well, who could have seen this coming? And I agree, there isn’t going to be a fraction of the uproar there was over Clinton. At least it’s all out in the open now.

  7. The Tony and George show.
    An excellent series that covered some of the aspects of Tony and Georges “special” relationship.
    Blairs lies to the electorate cost the labour party over 100 seats in the recent elections.This seems to be the consensus of the political pundits in the UK.
    Fox news has apparently been saying the election “victory” was a mandate for Blairs stance on the Iraq war.!!!

    It also allowed George Galloway who was ejected from the party over his criticism of the Iraq war to overturn one of the safest labour seats standing as a member for Respect an anti iraq war “single issue party”
    A sample of G Galloway
    Branded as an opportunist and bandwaggoner he will now have a platform and the right to harangue Blair in parliament.
    So if even a corrupt and bias democracy such as ours can produce this there is maybe some hope.

  8. Clinton got a blow job and the fed gov shut down for weeks, we spent millions and nothing came of it.

    Our current moron in chief has killed 1500+ of our solders, 3000+ people in the WTC and over 100,000+ Iraqies and NOTHING will happen!!!!!!!

    Guys, Impeachment starts in the HOUSE. So we MUST win back the house in 2006

  9. I don’t think it’s fair to hold Bush accountable for the deaths of the 3,000+ people who perished in the WTC bombings. I don’t think anyone saw that coming and I don’t think having a Democrat in the White House would’ve made any difference in whether or not it came to pass.

    But I am hoping the whole Terri Schiavo thing comes back to bite the Republicans in the ass come 2006.

  10. Les, I disagree, there is ongoing evedence that the pending attack was well known.

    The PDB “Bin Laden determined to strike in US” (Read it Here (CNN))

    The “FAA Gets 52 Warnings Before 911” (WashingtonPost)

    The Federal Aviation Administration received repeated warnings in the months before Sept. 11, 2001, that al Qaeda hoped to attack airlines, according to a previously undisclosed report by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks.

    There is also the works of Richard Clark. While I am not saying Bush flew the plan himself (I am not in that column at all) I think that if you start looking around you will see that the info was there, but was ignored. So I think that the blood is on Bush’s hand. Bush was making a case to go to war with Iraq before 9-11 even happened, and as this whole thread talks about, he was looking for information to go to war with Iraq, and all other information was ignored because it did not make the case he wanted..

    My thoughts, Great blog, I like the cussing, because most of the time, all I can say when I post is “What the Fuck!” but I try not to cuss on my blog, my mother reads it smile

  11. It’s true that the Bush Administration likely had information about 9/11 prior to the attacks, but don’t forget that Clinton also knew bin Laden to be a threat and also did nothing. The blame for the attacks doesn’t rest on one person or even one administration.

  12. Are the priorities of the people in this country really that fucked up that a blow job is more deserving of an impeachment than an illegal war?

    Quite obviously, the fanatical fundies are way more frightened of a blow job than a war.  They know war and I seriously doubt if most of them have ever given or received a blow job.  People fear most what they know nothing about.


  13. Here is the latest in this story that seems to have fallen under the radar of any of the “mainstream” media.

    Eighty-eight members of Congress have signed a letter authored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) calling on President Bush to answer questions about a secret U.S.-UK agreement to attack Iraq, RAW STORY has learned.

      At least someone is trying to hold this megolomaniac responsible for his rash decisions.

  14. In a follow up to the Downing Street article, TimesOnline ran a story today about the bombing campaign designed to provoke a reaction from Saddam Hussein that would justify military action on our part. Recall this statement from the Downing Street memo.

    Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, told the meeting that “the US had already begun ‘spikes of activity’ to put pressure on the regime

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.