A Flood of Downing Street E-mail Alerts

I've been flooded this week with e-mail notices about the upcoming Downing Street Memo Congressional hearings being held tomorrow initiated by Representative John Conyers (D-MI).

I think it's interesting to watch how these progressive grassroots organizations have helped keep this issue alive through the Internet. I'll pass along all of these e-mails for you to read through down below.

I used to consume about 90 minutes of political news a day, but I've parsed that down to about 10 minutes of scanning headlines per day with the rest of my 30 minutes of spent surfing blogs covering the New Media movement.

I pick up the slack by scanning the titles of e-mails that I'm sent by a number e-mail lists (mostly progressive but a few conservative).

If more opposition Congressmen and Senators pick up on this, then this story could have legs -- especially if more documentary evidence or testimony turns up tomorrow. Otherwise this story will have a hard time breaking out of progressive anti-war circles and into the mainstream consciousness.

I personally think the Downing Street documents contain some pretty compelling circumstantial evidence that the Bush Administration never took the United Nations weapons inspection process seriously. It reinforces the hypothesis that the US only went through the UN because Tony Blair's demanded it as one of two conditions for being a part of the Coalition of the Willing -- (the other being a concrete plan for Israel & Palestine).

The UK takes International Law seriously, and the US political establishment and therefore media don't think it's all that important. But these latest memos have helped introduce these International Law issues into the US media bubble where they have been almost universally ignored leading up to the war and up to the present moment.

After the Congressional resolution passed in early October 2002, war was seen as inevitable by the US media and the inconsistencies in the Bush administration's arguments presented at the UN and the ones presented at home were largely overlooked by a myopic US media.

A more detailed overview is here and here are all of my blog postings tagged International Law.

Plenty more about the latest Downing Street developments can be found in the flood e-mails listed below...

FYI: I don't necessarily endorse all of these e-mail messages -- I haven't clicked through any of the links, called anyone or tried to pass along any of my writings on the subject.

I just thought it'd be interesting to document these grassroots actions to see if they help create enough political support for further Congressional action.

Transparency and Openness is what our Democracy is supposed to be about, and I'm all for an open and detailed inquiry into this matter.

Anyway, the first e-mail that I received within the last week was from Democracy for America:

Subject: Did You Get the Memo?
Date: 6/8/05 3:45 p.m.

Dear Kent,
Read the Downing Street Memo

Since the United States went to war in Iraq, nearly 1,700 of our troops have died there -- most of them long after President Bush put on his flight-suit to boast of an end to "major hostilities."

Despite his declaration, though, the war rages on for our nation's sons and daughters -- with no end in sight. Senior military officers have started to admit off the record that, even if we stay for years, we may ultimately fail. Our country has paid a terrible price in blood, in tax dollars, and in the global reputation that generations of Americans have built.

It gets worse. A secret British document revealed last month -- the Downing Street Memo -- all but confirms a sickening truth. Obsessed with Saddam no matter what the cost, President Bush and his aides dragged the nation to war with fixed evidence and false claims about non-existent Iraqi WMD's.

Despite pressure from ordinary people who have read the few reports of the memo in the American press, the White House has stonewalled on the issue. And the vast majority of our complacent media allows it.

Enough is enough. I'm tired of waiting for President Bush to own up to the facts -- and we apparently can't count on our own media to ask the simple, tough questions.

So, first things first -- read the memo and commit to making sure every other American does, too:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/memo

The Downing Street Memo makes clear that Bush wanted intelligence that justified a war, no matter how the facts had to be bent to get it.

The memo consists of the minutes of a meeting where the British intelligence chief, just back from the White House, told Prime Minister Tony Blair that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and [weapons of mass destruction]. But the intelligence and facts," the Downing Street Memo continues, "were being fixed around the policy. The [National Security Council] 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."

Today, American soldiers and their families deal with the aftermath of a war hastily planned and poorly executed by an ideologically obsessed White House that finds money for corporate welfare, but not for armor for our troops.

The American people deserve an explanation -- but it's clear that even with Blair in Washington this week, the press won't do the job on its own. So we will have to take the memo directly to the people. Ask your friends, family and co-workers: have they read the memo? Ask them here:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/memoinvite

Read the memo for yourself -- the full-text is at the end of this email.

We all have to spread the word about the deceptions it reveals. Together, we can put the truth on our leaders' agenda.

But it's going to take a lot of work. That's why grassroots DFA groups across the country will be setting up tables, handing out copies, and asking Americans: have you read the memo?

When it comes to matters of war and peace, doesn't every American deserve the truth?

Tom Hughes
Executive Director
Democracy for America

P.S. -- At democracyforamerica.com, you can find a print version of the memo to post or hand out in your community, along with a print petition you can use to inform your friends and neighbors. And through our event planning tool, you can set up a Downing Street Memo table right at your own town square, student center or neighborhood corner.

I got this the next day from MoveOn PAC:

Subject: 500,000 signatures needed today to expose Iraq lies
Date: 6/9/05 11:31 a.m.

Dear MoveOn member,

Last month the Times of London printed "smoking gun" evidence that long before the invasion of Iraq the Bush administration was determined to go to war, intentionally distorting intelligence, and lying to the American people.

The proof comes from the classified minutes of a British cabinet meeting, referred to as the "Downing Street Memo." So far President Bush has refused to explain or directly respond to the memo, but pressure is mounting daily from Congress and the public. This week Tony Blair visited Washington and the press finally started asking the obvious questions—creating a critical opportunity to turn up the heat.

One Congressman, John Conyers of Michigan, has started a citizens petition—demanding that Bush directly respond to the evidence of deception contained in the Downing Street Memo. When half a million Americans sign, Rep. Conyers will personally deliver the signatures to the gates of the White House.

If we can reach 500,000 signatures today we can bring this scandal to light while the story is still hot. Please add your voice today:

http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/?id=5651-1864367-cAGh4P0yYzoLdpiRX3zALw&t=3

The smoking gun memo quotes high level British officials during a July 23rd, 2002 cabinet meeting, discussing recent conversations with the Bush Administration on their decision to invade Iraq and the manipulation of intelligence to back it up. Below are two key excerpts:

Sir Richard Dearlove, Director of the British foreign intelligence service, (MI6) reported on his recent meetings in Washington:

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.[1][1]

Later British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw added:

It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.[2]

The British government has not disputed the authenticity or accuracy of the smoking gun memo, even in the few crucial days after the story broke before Tony Blair's re-election.[3]

What the Bush administration told these foreign officials is the exact opposite of what the President repeatedly told Congress and the American people about his decision before the invasion, and what he continues to claim - that he was trying to avoid a war America did not want, and that intelligence about the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was clear and compelling.[4]

Why is it important to confront the Bush administration now and get this story out?

The Bush administration continues to peddle falsehoods about the rush to war and intelligence manipulation, despite overwhelming evidence from former administration officials, and now our closest allies. Two weeks ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told troops stationed in Iraq: "This war came to us, not the other way around."[5] And just yesterday Bush avoided a direct question about the Downing Street Memo by simply reiterating his claim that the war was a choice of last resort.[6]

We must make it clear that lying to the people and our representatives about the life and death choices we face must not go unaddressed. Democracy cannot function without truth from our leaders, and it's time for the deception to end.

With limited news coverage and an administration completely dismissive of any evidence it doesn't like, exposing the truth can feel like a daunting challenge. But we've been here before. Many of us joined MoveOn at a time when the White House and the press didn't believe there could be any real opposition to the President's war, and it took millions of us working together to prove them wrong. That time has come again.

Please help take the first crucial step by helping Representative Conyers directly confront President Bush with signatures and comments from 500,000 Americans demanding a real response to the Downing Street Memo—and the truth about the war.

Please sign today:

http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/?id=5651-1864367-cAGh4P0yYzoLdpiRX3zALw&t=4

Thanks for all that you do.

--Ben, Adam, Jennifer, Eli and the MoveOn PAC Team
Thursday, June 9, 2005

Notes:

For more information about the Downing Street Memo, including the full text, visit http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

To read the full text of Representative Conyers' sign on letter, go to: http://www.moveonpac.org/tellthetruth/conyersletter.html?id=5651-1864367-cAGh4P0yYzoLdpiRX3zALw&t=5

[1] The Downing Street Memo, http://www.moveon.org/r?r=741

[2] The Downing Street Memo, http://www.moveon.org/r?r=741

[3] CNN, Bush asked to explain UK War Memo May 12, 2005 http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/11/britain.war.memo/

[4] There are dozens of quotes by Bush and senior administration officials containing false claims about invasion plans and WMD's compiled by the Center for American Progress, and searchable here: http://www.claimvfact.com/

Here are just a few directly from the President and the White House official statements, made before the war and after the time of the Downing Street Memo:

* "Of course, I haven't made up my mind we're going to war with Iraq." [10/1/02]
* "Hopefully, we can do this peacefully—don't get me wrong. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there's a chance he may decide to do that. And war is not my first choice, don't—it's my last choice." [11/7/02]
* "This is our attempt to work with the world community to create peace. And the best way for peace is for Mr. Saddam Hussein to disarm. It's up to him to make his decision." [12/4/02]
* "The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons...And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes." [9/26/2002]
* "I expected to find the weapons [because] I based my decision on the best intelligence possible...The evidence I had was the best possible evidence that he had a weapon. [2/8/2004]

[5] CNN, "Rice makes surprise visit to Iraq" May 15, 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=739

[6] New York Times, "Bush and Blair Deny 'Fixed' Iraq Reports" June 8th 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=740

Buzzflash sent out a special report over the weekend pointing to the latest Downing Street documents published by the London Times over the weekend.

Subject: Whoa, Smoking Cannon Revelation of Bush/Blair Iraqi Lies!
Sent: 6/11/05 9:49 p.m.

For the full story go to the main headline at BuzzFlash.com on Saturday
Night!

Four Star Alert, This is the Smoking Cannon After the Smoking Gun and the
Smoking Bullet About Fixing Intelligence: "The briefing paper, for
participants at a meeting of Blair’s inner circle on July 23, 2002, said
that since regime change was illegal it was "necessary to create the
conditions" which would make it legal."

"The briefing paper is certain to add to the pressure, particularly on the
American president, because of the damaging revelation that Bush and Blair
agreed on regime change in April 2002 and then looked for a way to justify
it."

When will Bush be held accountable when the proof is so overwhelming it
would have gotten any other president impeached by now?

Go to BuzzFlash.com for the details.

Then a follow-up message from Democracy for America on Monday:

Subject: Personal Secret UK Eyes Only
Date: 6/13/05 3:30 p.m.

Dear Kent,

Last week, I sent you the full minutes of a July 2002 meeting where the British intelligence chief -- having just returned to London from the White House -- told Prime Minister Tony Blair that, in regards to Iraq War planning, "the intelligence and facts were being fixed" by the Bush administration.

Those minutes -- the "Downing Street Memo" -- finally made the front page of the Washington Post on Sunday. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) holds hearings on the matter later this week.

But now there's even more: As if we didn't have enough evidence that the White House sacrificed over 1,700 American lives to a war based on trumped-up charges, this past weekend brought news of yet another memo -- this time, the PERSONAL SECRET UK EYES ONLY briefing paper from that July 2002 meeting.

What does the new memo show? That British officials worried about "creat[ing] the conditions in which [they] could legally support military action" -- because they knew the facts made no case for the war Bush had decided to wage. Worse, it confirms the rudely obvious fact that Bush had no clue how to deal with Iraq after toppling the regime. To quote:
"A post-war occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise. As already made clear, the US military plans are virtually silent on this point."

See the new EYES ONLY briefing and the Downing Street Memo for yourself:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/memo

Together, these briefings give us the painful, raw truth. In 2002, George W. Bush fixed the facts. He didn't have an exit strategy. He still doesn't. And every day, our sons and daughters in Iraq pay a terrible price because of it.

We need to get out of this mess.

Democracy for America is looking for ideas - yours - on how best to spread the word on the Downing Street papers. Is it reprints in newspapers across the country? Is it a "Did You Get The Memo?" advertising campaign? Or, maybe, it's billboards in Crawford?

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/downingideas

Be creative. The best ideas always come from the grassroots. Later this week, we'll announce the campaign that you help design.

The facts in the memo and the briefing can't be twisted, and they can't be fixed. Together, we're going to get them to as many people as we can -- because America deserves the truth about the White House's failed and misguided policy.

With thanks,
Tom Hughes
Democracy for America

I then received the following message 40 minutes later from United Peace & Justice on Monday:

Subject:Hold Bush Accountable for his Iraq War Lies
Date: 6/13/05 4:10 p.m.

Downing Street Memo Offers Proof of Pre-War Intelligence Manipulation
Join the Conyers' Initiative to Demand a Resolution of Inquiry
Take Action TODAY and on June 16th (details below)

By now you've probably heard about the Downing Street memo, the minutes of a meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and top U.S. intelligence officials in July 2002, where -- more than half a year before the Bush administration started it's war on Iraq -- the Bush administration's efforts to manipulate intelligence data in order to justify going to war are laid out. It's concrete proof of what the anti-war movement has known all along: The war on Iraq was based on lies.

Now, in a critically important new development, Rep. John Conyers, Jr. is convening a hearing to gather more testimony about the Downing Street Minutes and the Bush administration's manipulations and lies. On this Thursday, June 16th, Rep. Conyers, the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other members of Congress will use this hearing to address a set of Constitutional questions raised by the information disclosed in the Downing Street Minutes.

Rep. Conyers is prepared to lead the fight to pass a Resolution of Inquiry which would direct the House Judiciary Committee to launch a formal investigation into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House to impeach President Bush. The hearing on Thursday is part of this process, and there are several ways you can join this effort:

1) Take a moment right now to sign on to a citizens petition/letter campaign initiated by Rep. Conyers. It is directed to the White House and demands answers, it demands the truth. Hundreds of thousands of people have already signed the letter, and we want to help expand this effort. The names gathered by this Thursday will be included in the delivery of the petitions to the White House that Rep. Conyers will do after the hearing.

2) Urge your representative to join this effort. Close to 100 members of Congress have already signed on. Now is the time to push the people who represent you to take a stand, to do the right thing!

To get the most up-to-date list of the members of Congress that have signed on to the Conyers letter, and to send an email to your member of Congress, visit http://www.afterdowningstreet.org.

3) On Thursday, June 16th, there will be a demonstration in Washington, DC in support of the hearing and petition delivery by Rep. Conyers. If you live in driving distance of Washington, D.C., try to attend this important gathering. Or consider organizing a solidarity demonstration in your city or town. The details of the Washington protest are still being worked out, so be sure to check the web site for the exact time and place, as well as downloadable flyers for the event.

You can also find more information there about the hearing and petition campaign, and other news about developments related to this.

For more information about the Downing Street Memo, including the full text, visit http://www.downingstreetmemo.com

I then received the following Action Alert from Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting on Tuesday:

Subject: Downing Street Memo Activists "Wing Nuts,""Paranoid"
Date: 6/14/05 2:49 p.m.

FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2545

ACTION ALERT:
Downing Street Memo Activists "Wing Nuts,""Paranoid"

June 14, 2005

After over a month of scant media attention, mainstream U.S. outlets have begun to report more seriously about the "Downing Street Memo," the minutes of a July 2002 meeting of British government officials that indicate the White House had already made up its mind to invade Iraq at that early date, and that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" of invading rather than seeking a peaceful solution.

A June 7 White House press conference with George W. Bush and Tony Blair offered the first public response from Bush to the memo, and with that came an upswing in U.S. media attention. But some in the media took it as a chance to lash out at the activists who have been bringing attention to the story all along. On June 8, Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank referred to Downing Street Memo activists--some of whom were offering a cash reward for the first journalist to ask Bush about the memo--as "wing nuts." He also offered an illogical explanation for the memo's low media profile:

"In part, the memo never gained traction here because, unlike in Britain, it wasn't election season, and the war is not as unpopular here. In part, it's also because the notion that Bush was intent on military action in Iraq had been widely reported here before, in accounts from Paul O'Neill and Bob Woodward, among others. The memo was also more newsworthy across the Atlantic because it reinforced the notion there that Blair has been acting as Bush's 'poodle.'"

Milbank had reported the same day (6/8/05) that his paper's latest poll showed that only 41 percent of Americans approved of the Iraq war--which makes one wonder when exactly the war would cross Milbank's threshold and become unpopular enough to make the memo newsworthy. Secondly, Milbank argued the memo isn't news because other similar stories were once reported--a peculiar explanation, to be sure. Finally, Milbank's third rationale--that the memo was news in the U.K. because it confirmed existing suspicions--would seem to directly contradict the second principle of not reporting familiar stories.

Los Angeles Times editorial page editor Michael Kinsley opted for sarcasm over serious discussion, deriding activists in a June 12 column for sending him emails "demanding that I cease my personal cover-up of something called the Downing Street Memo." Kinsley kidded that the fuss was a good sign for the Left: "Developing a paranoid theory and promoting it to the very edge of national respectability takes ideological self-confidence."

What does Kinsley mean by paranoid? Criticizing the Times for not giving the story much attention would be accurate: Prior to the Bush-Blair press conference, a Nexis search shows one story about the Downing Street minutes appeared in the paper nearly two weeks after the story broke (5/12/05), and that columnist Robert Scheer mentioned it a few days later (5/17/05).

In fact, Kinsley's mocking seemed to serve no purpose, since his fallback position is a familiar media defense: We all knew the Bush administration wanted war, so this simply isn't news. As Kinsley put it, "Of course, you don't need a secret memo to know this." As for "intelligence and facts...being fixed around the policy," Kinsley eventually acknowledged that "we know now that this was true."

So, to follow Kinsley's logic: People who demand more Downing Street coverage have developed a "paranoid theory" that accurately portrays White House decision-making on Iraq. His only quarrel with what he calls a "vast conspiracy" pushing the mainstream media to take the memo more seriously is that the activists think such information is important, and should be brought to the attention of the public, whereas Kinsley--and apparently many others in the mainstream media--doesn't "buy the fuss."

ACTION:
Contact the Washington Post ombudsman Michael Getler and ask him if it is appropriate to label media activists "wing nuts" in a news story. Also, ask Los Angeles Times editor Michael Kinsley to explain how Downing Street Memo activists are peddling a "paranoid theory" that he also suggests is correct.

CONTACT:
Washington Post
Ombudsman
Michael Getler
Phone: (202) 334-7582
ombudsman@washpost.com

Los Angeles Times
Editorial & Opinion Editor
Michael Kinsley
michael.kinsley@latimes.com

As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you maintain a polite tone.

I then received the following e-mail from CODEPINK on Tuesday evening.

Subject: Memo-Gate: Demand the Truth!
Date: 6/14/05 5:26 p.m.

Dear Supporter,

A few weeks ago, CODEPINK joined together with other groups to form the After Downing Street coalition in order to publicize the shocking Downing Street memo. This memo shows the Bush administration's determination to invade Iraq even though Iraq posed no threat to us, and its decision to "fix" intelligence data to justify the case for invasion. With more than 100,000 deaths, over $300 billion tax dollars spent, and a severely tarnished international reputation, we, the American people, must now ensure that those in charge are held accountable. The Downing Street memo presents a unique opportunity to do that and we need your help.

Here are important ways you can help:

1. Sign Rep. Conyers petition and get your congressional Rep to sign as well. Shortly after the May 1st leak of the memo, Rep. John Conyers sent a letter to George W. Bush asking for an explanation. To date, more than 100 of his congressional colleagues have also signed on. Please urge your congressperson to join! (See link below to send a letter to your Rep.) If you have not already signed the letter yourself (over 500,000 people have!), or if you are willing to send the letter to friends for their signature, click here.

2. Pressure your Congressional Representative to join this effort. On Thursday, Rep. Conyers will hold a public hearing to look into the constitutional questions raised by the memo. Directly following the hearing, Rep. Conyers, together with other members of Congress and concerned citizens (including CODEPINK), will go to the White House to hand deliver the letter with the 500,000 signatures! Send your Rep an email letter urging him or her to: a) sign on to Conyers' petition letter, b) attend the June 16 hearing on the Downing Street Minutes, and c) support a resolution of inquiry into impeacheable offenses. Please email your Rep today and ask him or her to do the right thing! Spread the word!

If you are in the DC area, come join us at the June 16 Hearing and Rally in Lafayette Park.

3. Pressure your media to cover the hearing and the memo itself. The White House would love to see this memo fade away, and so would much of the mainstream press! Let's force them to cover the issue. Contact your local media. Click here for action ideas, sample letters to the editor, press releases and op-eds.

The way we see it, this memo shows that the Bush administration has engaged in a conspiracy to deceive Congress and the American people about the reasons for going to war. That constitutes a High Crime, and grounds for impeachment. While it is highly unlikely that a Republican Congress will impeach George Bush, it is critical for us to push the process and to educate the American people about the lies that sucked us into this quagmire in Iraq. Let's ride the Downing Street wave as far as we can take it!

With a passion for truth,

Dana, Farida, Gael, Jodie, Medea, Nancy, Rae, and Tiffany

I got the following message from TrueMajority on Tuesday evening:

Subject: Downing Street Memo: The Smoking Gun
Date: 6/14/05 9:49 p.m.

We All Thought Bush Was Lying; Now We Have Proof
Help Rep. Conyers Find Out What Really Happened

Dear Kent,

We all thought that Bush was lying when he said that we had to invade Iraq because of 9/11 and Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Well, now we have proof. A British journalist uncovered a memo to Tony Blair from his chief of foreign intelligence written after a series of high-level meetings in Washington back in July of 2002—months before Colin Powell’s famous presentation to the United Nations.

Basically, the memo states that the Bush administration was set on ousting Saddam Hussein despite the circumstances. However, since that would violate international law, the administration planned on using terrorism and WMDs as the pretext, even if the facts didn’t support it. You can read the entire memo here, but these are a few of my favorite lines:

"It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action...but the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran." In another section, the intelligence advisor writes: "But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

That’s a smoking gun if I’ve ever smelled one. While administration officials filled the airwaves talking about the need to remove Saddam because of his WMDs and his being an imminent threat, they were confiding to their closest ally that that really wasn’t true. Apparently Tony Blair deserved the truth but the American people didn’t.

Rep. John Conyers and 88 other members of Congress sent a letter to the president asking five straightforward questions about the memo (see them below). Their request has been met with stony silence. Rep. Conyers is asking the American people to join him as he tries to get some answers, by signing the letter yourselves. If you are a member of TrueMajority, you can sign the letter by simply hitting "Reply" and "Send," and we’ll add your name. If you were forwarded this e-mail or would like to read the full text of the letter, simply click here:

http://action.truemajority.org/campaign/DowningStreetMemo

Rep. Conyers is holding a hearing on this issue on Thursday, June 16th, so please take action and urge your friends to do the same before then.

Thanks for seeking the truth,

Andrew Greenblatt

Online Organizer

You can read the entire letter and the Downing Street Memo click here. Here are the five questions in the letter:

1) Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?

2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?

3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?

4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?

5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?

Amy Goodman at Democracy Now! took up the issue on Wednesday morning by interviewing Rep. John Conyors. Here is the e-mail digest that DN! sent out:

Subject: DN!: Downing Street Memo Comes to Washington//Untold Story of Emmett
Date: 6/15/05 1:55 p.m.

TODAY'S DEMOCRACY NOW!:

* The Downing Street Memo Comes To Washington, Conyers Blasts "Deafening
Sound of Silence" *

We speak with Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) who is convening a public hearing
tomorrow in Washington on the so-called Downing Street Memo and other newly
released documents that he says show the Bush administration's "efforts to
cook the books on pre-war intelligence." We also speak with former CIA
analyst Ray McGovern.

Listen/Watch/Read
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/15/1345223

As I was writing up this compilation of e-mails, I just received another alert from the Institute of Public Accuracy:

Subject: Downing Street Memo: Deception and Cover-Up
Date: 6/15/05 4:15 p.m.

Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org

PM Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Downing Street Memo: Deception and Cover-Up

On Thursday June 16, 2005, from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. in Room HC-9 of the U.S. Capitol, Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and other members of Congress will hold a hearing on the Downing Street Minutes and related evidence of White House efforts to cook the books on pre-war intelligence.

Later on the same day at 5:00 p.m. ET in Lafayette Square Park, in front of the White House, Congressman Conyers will deliver to the White House a letter addressed to President Bush and signed by over 500,000 Americans and over 90 members of Congress. The letter asks the President to respond to questions raised by the Downing Street Minutes.

Among those speaking at the hearings will be: Joe Wilson, former U.S. ambassador and WMD expert; Ray McGovern, 27-year CIA analyst who prepared regular presidential briefings during the Reagan administration; Cindy Sheehan, mother of a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq; and John Bonifaz, co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org.

The following are available for interviews:

JOHN BONIFAZ, DAVID SWANSON, david@davidswanson.org, http://www.AfterDowningStreet.org
Bonifaz and Swanson are two of the co-founders of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition which is urging Congress to begin a formal investigation into whether President Bush has committed impeachable offenses in connection with the Iraq war. The Downing Street Memo consists of minutes of a meeting with the British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top foreign policy advisors in July 2002 before the U.S. Congressional and UN votes on Iraq. The minutes state that: "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." [Video on the controversy is available at: [http://hijackingcatastrophe.org/downingstreet>.]

WILLIAM CHRISTISON, bill@christison-santafe.com, http://www.counterpunch.org/christison02082003.html
RAY McGOVERN, mcgovern@slschool.org, http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/15/1345223
Available for a limited number of interviews, McGovern was a 27-year career analyst with the CIA. The Washington Post in its lead editorial today writes: "The memos add not a single fact to what was previously known about the administration's prewar deliberations. Not only that: They add nothing to what was publicly known in July 2002."
McGovern said today: "If the editors of The Washington Post knew that as of July, 2002, the President had, in the words of the Downing Street Memo, 'inevitably' decided on war, if they knew that the president intended to use as justification the conjunction between terrorism and so-called weapons of mass destruction, and if they knew that the intelligence and facts were being 'fixed' around the policy, then why didn't they say that clearly at the time?"
Former director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis, Christison said today: "The Downing Street Memo shows that war was not a last resort as the administration continues to claim, but a first resort. While many of us came to that assessment before the invasion, the Memo fits in with other things we have found out since the invasion -- like revelations by former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil that Bush and others wanted to go after Iraq from the start."
As members of the steering committee for Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, McGovern and Christison were among the authors of the article "Cooking Intelligence for War" [], which appeared just before the invasion of Iraq.

JOSEPH WILSON, joewilson@jcwilsoninternationalventures.com, http://www.politicsoftruth.com
Wilson is author of the book "The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity." He also wrote the New York Times op-ed in July 2003 titled "What I Didn't Find in Africa," in which he stated: "The question now is how that answer [the finding that Iraq did not obtain uranium from Niger] was or was not used by our political leadership. If my information was deemed inaccurate, I understand (though I would be very interested to know why). If, however, the information was ignored because it did not fit certain preconceptions about Iraq, then a legitimate argument can be made that we went to war under false pretenses."
Wilson said today: "My question appears to have been answered by the Downing Street Memo: The administration was fixing the facts to fit the policy it wanted. It's incorrect for anyone to state that this is old news since we supposedly all knew that Bush wanted war under any circumstances. Until the 2004 election a majority of Americans mistakenly thought we found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

CINDY SHEEHAN, scindy121@aol.com, http://www.gsfp.org
Sheehan is co-founder of Gold Star Families for Peace. Her son Casey was killed in Iraq. She said today: "Members of Congress -- whether they are Democrats or Republicans -- should do the right thing. They have a Constitutional duty to investigate the facts surrounding the Downing Street Memo. They didn't ask my son if he was a Democrat or Republican when he joined the military. These are life and death questions and should be treated that way."

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

From the conservative perspective, the Downing Street Memo has also hit the Media Research Center's radar screen a number of times over the past week.

From the MRC's 6-8-05 Cyber Alert

Networks Pounce on Opportunity to Hype "Downing Street Memo"

1) Enabled by a question posed at Tuesday afternoon's press conference at the White House with President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, MSNBC's Countdown, with Keith Olbermann making it his lead item, and CNN's NewsNight all jumped on a cause celebre of the left, the so-called "Downing Street memo." NBC's David Gregory described it as "a rallying cry for war critics" which "claims that in July 2002, the President had already decided to go to war and claims, quote, 'the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.'" CNN anchor Aaron Brown boosted the credibility of the memo as he asserted that "even if we aren't exactly sure how the intelligence service and the administration got it so wrong" on Iraq, "one answer comes in the so-called 'Downing Street memo' written by a British intelligence official who says the WMD threat was deliberately exaggerated to sell the war. Neither the President nor the British Prime Minister would acknowledge that, how could they?"

Finally, today's MRC Cyber alert criticized NBC's coverage of the Downing Street Memo and heralded Fox's coverage of the "New Annan Scandal":

FNC Picks Up New Annan Scandal Link, NBC Plays Up British Memos

1) An illustration of mainstream versus new media news judgment. On Tuesday night, FNC's Special Report with Brit Hume led with how the commission investigating the UN oil-for-food scandal is "urgently" reviewing documents which, FNC's Jonathan Hunt reported, "appear to contradict [UN Secretary General Kofi] Annan's claim that he knew nothing about the awarding of a major oil for food contract to a company that employed his son." But none of the broadcast network evening newscasts, nor CNN's NewsNight, mentioned the development even though the Tuesday New York Times ran an article on it and before 1pm EDT Tuesday the AP distributed a story, with reaction from the Volcker committee, headlined: "Memo Suggests Annan Oil-For-Food Link." Instead, the NBC Nightly News regurgitated the so-called "Downing Street Memo" as Andrea Mitchell gave publicity to how "war critics have come up with seven more memos verified by NBC News. One, also from July 2002, says U.S. military planners had given 'little thought' to postwar Iraq."

Notice that the MRC considers Fox News to be "new media." Hmmmm... I think I'd peg Fox News as old school corporate media, but that's just me.

Anyway, we'll see where this story goes from here. I think that there is enough chatter in the progressive circles that could keep this issue alive whether conservatives like it or not.

What did Reagan say? "Trust, but verify."