My newspaper column re: Downing St Memo. Thoughts?

[Moloch]

Now that Wacko Jacko finally has the prosecutors off his back-o, I am hoping that the mainstream media outlets will give the sensationalist drivel a rest for a while and focus on real news. Far too much real and actual news was swept under the rug in favor of oh-so-important topics as "Jesus Juice" and Wacko Jacko showering with young boys. Eww.

That's why I think newspapers are a superior medium to television news. High-quality newspapers, such as this
one, haven't reported on the Jackson trial at all. When you read newspapers, you don't have to sit through all the boring
crap and ridiculous tabloid fodder that Faux News has made such a staple of its programming over the past couple of
years, you can just ignore an article.

Incessant and irrelevant "news" items like the Wacko Jacko case and the missing and presumed dead blonde-haired Caucasian woman of the week only aid the Bush administration in its efforts to obfuscate its dealings with everything from the economy to the war on Iraq. Bush's allies at CNN and Faux are only too happy to help him.

One of the things that Bush is glad you haven't heard much about is what has been dubbed "The Downing Street Memo." The memo, revealed by the Sunday Times of London on May 1, details the minutes from a meeting of the staff of British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Dated July 23, 2002 (Eight months before the invasion of Iraq), the memo states that intelligence indicated that Iraq was not a threat to its neighbors or the United States and that its WMD-manufacturing
capability was less that North Korea, Iran or Libya.

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD," wrote Matthew Rycroft, author of the memo and foreign-policy aid to Blair. "The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action," he continued.

British officials have not denied the authenticity of the report and the Bush administration has "no comment." Lucky, Democrats in the House of Representatives and Senate will have, by the time you're reading this, made an inquiry into the misdoings. John Kerry plans to call for impeachment. Sour grapes? No. A great American standing up for what's right. Woo hoo.

If you would like, the full text of the memo is available here: http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memo.html

What could be worse than a leader lying to the world to start a war that has caused the lives of 1,701 U.S. soldiers and between 22,248 and 25,229 (According to the Iraq Body Count project) Iraqi civilians? Would that leader have to systematically order the deaths of an entire ethnic group? Start a Communist revolution in which the goal is to move residents from the city to an agrarian socialist paradise, all the while executing between 50,000 to 100,000 "dissidents"?

What does Bush have to do to spark an outrage?

[peacebird]

1. what does bush have to do to spark outrage?

bend over and have Saddam slap it up his wahoo in the rose garden while playing Putin's pipe would probably be called showing masculine leadership.

In short - the delusional will refuse to be outraged by anything bush does.

[RedCloud]

2. Or say he has suffered enough, poor pretzel face.

Lucky Bush, he hit the trifecta.

[katty]

3. Sadly-all bush needs is to be outed/verified w/his male playmates

that would blow the cover on everything--his base would go bezerk as the rest of us scratched our heads going-this is all it took to get him out??!!