Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (17702)	6/16/2005 4:28:04 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 20773

THE RIDICULOUS MAINSTREAM MEDIA VERSUS REALITY: [RGD: The Downing Street Memo should be the death-knell of the mainstream media which has exhibited total moral bankruptcy on this matter.] rawstory.com Backstory: Confirming the Downing Street documents Larisa Alexandrovna New documents from across the Atlantic paint a picture of a President bent on war and administration officials determined to deliver war in Iraq at any cost. Against the backdrop of the Bush Administration’s public statements, the documents raise questions about whether the Blair and Bush administrations covered up earlier actions after the invasion. The original Downing Street Memo, initially reported by Sunday Times Online , includes the transcribed official minutes of a 2002 meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair, members of British intelligence, MI-6 and various Bush officials. Advertisement The most damning part of the minutes, as noted by MI-6 director Richard Dearlove, was 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.” Confirming the documents Six additional UK Iraq documents, acquired by RAW STORY, reveal the depth and breadth of the plan to go to war and the extent of the deceit on the part of the President and his cabinet, in conjunction with the Blair government. The documents are transcribed photocopies in PDF format and were acquired from a British source and corroborated by Michael Smith, the journalist who first received the original leaked memos. This site validated them through an independent source and with Smith. The documents were not reported in order, so the DSM was actually reported later. “I was given them last September while still on the [Daily] Telegraph,” Smith, who now works for the London Sunday Times, told RAW STORY. “I was given very strict orders from the lawyers as to how to handle them.” “I first photocopied them to ensure they were on our paper and returned the originals, which were on government paper and therefore government property, to the source,” he added. The Butler Committee, a UK commission looking into WMD, has quoted the documents and accepted their authenticity, along with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Smith said all originals were destroyed in order to both protect the source and the journalist alike. “It was these photocopies that I worked on, destroying them shortly before we went to press on Sept 17, 2004,” he added. “Before we destroyed them the legal desk secretary typed the text up on an old fashioned typewriter.” The copying and re-typing were necessary because markings on the originals might have identified his source, Smith said. “The situation in Britain is very difficult but with regard to leaked documents the police Special Branch are obliged to investigate such leaks and would have come to the newspaper's office and or my home to confiscate them,” he explained. “We did destroy them because the Police Special Branch were ordered to investigate.” The documents, including the original Downing Street minutes, have been vetted by other foreign and domestic news organizations (see Raw Story Timeline). Documents at a glance It is important to introduce these documents, first, as they appear, in their own right with key points highlighted. RAW STORY has constructed a timeline of events to better clarify the process of “From Policy to War.” (Timeline). A quick overview of each of the most recent documents appears below. Additional Sources: * Raw Story Timeline * Butler Committee * Blair – A Case to Answer * AfterDowningStreet * Professor Michael Lewis <See Original URL for the Six Linked Documents....>

To: stockman_scott who wrote (17702)	6/16/2005 8:27:02 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 20773

CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: NTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Radical Right Pushes Agenda For U.N. De-form americanprogressaction.org Today, the right-wing leadership in the House of Representatives will force a vote on a measure that, if passed, would effectively hamstring the mission of the United Nations. Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) has proposed a measure that would require the United States to withhold up to half of its regular contributions to the U.N. if the organization does not take orders from the United States Congress. Despite selling the crippling proposal under the guise of "reform," the White House, former U.N. ambassadors, and the global community have condemned the radical right's agenda for what it truly is -- an effort to do harm to the United Nations. HYDE NOT HAPPY WITH ELIMINATING TEN STORIES OF THE UN - HE WANTS IT ALL: With the United States facing a critical juncture not only in the war on terror but in its relationship with international allies, the Hyde bill, which has already passed through the House International Relations Committee on a largely party-line vote, threatens to harm our efforts to build and maintain credible relationships with foreign governments. Withholding dues, according to the New York Times, takes a "meat-ax approach" to the idea of U.N. reform and attempts to "bludgeon the organization into submission." Rep. Tom Lantos, ranking member of the Committee, called the effort "draconian." Rep. Hyde's bill would both undermine the Executive powers of President Bush, who has said we are "committed" to the U.N., and undermine America's commitment to vital U.N. missions, such as those urgently needed to keep the peace in Sudan. HYDE IS EVEN TOO RADICAL FOR BUSH: The White House made the right move yesterday in condemning the Hyde measure, which would financially-downsize the institution. "We specifically cannot agree to the withholding provisions," Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said. "We are the founder, host country and leading contributor to the U.N." Thus, withholding 50 percent of its contribution would "deal a great blow to our credibility." Eight former U.N. ambassadors who served in both Republican and Democratic administrations wrote a letter to Congress yesterday, arguing that "withholding U.S. dues to the U.N. threatens to undermine our leadership and effectiveness at the U.N. and the reform effort itself." CONSENSUS EXISTS ON NEEDS FOR REFORMS: On Tuesday, a congressionally-mandated bipartisan task force released its recommendations for U.N. reforms. Many of the reforms that have been discussed both in the Hyde bill and in the bipartisan task force report were previously put forward by Annan himself. Headed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, the task force suggested the need for more "oversight of U.N. spending, protecting whistle-blowers and shedding unneeded staff." U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan quickly applauded the ideas, saying he "supports many of the recommendations and believes that the task-force's strong commitment to working with other Member States and the UN staff is the best basis on which to pursue and achieve lasting reform." Hyde's bill thus threatens to undermine the consensus that already exists on the need for reforms, and the manner by which he chooses to do it only isolates the U.S. from this much-needed debate. POLITICS IS UNDERMINING POLICY: Many view the Hyde bill as a brazen attempt to interject politics into a policy debate. The bill appears to be an opportunity for the radical right to show their colors and do their dance, as evidenced by the name of the bill -- the self-aggrandizing Henry J. Hyde United Nations Reform Act of 2005 -- and as seen with respect to the process by which this bill has been taken up -- as a stand-alone measure rather than as a part of the State Department authorization process, which seems the most logical vehicle for the bill. Overlooking his own credibility issues, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay grandstanded on the bill, saying the "U.N. should not be blindly trusted."