From another forum I visit, someone posted:
I strongly suggest that everyone here sign the petition, write the President a letter, and tell as many people as you know. After the petition reaches 500,000 people, Congressman John Conyers (D - MI) is going to deliver the petition to the President.

I believe it's sad that we even need a petition for this. A full-fledged investigation should've been launched immediately. It was only the cooperation of the media and the people that led to the investigation of Nixon. Hopefully, bias in the media and apathy won't permit this criminal to stay in office.

I'd also like to add a few things... First of all, a lot people aren't aware that "C" is the nickname for the head of MI-6, or that CDS is an acronym for Britain's Chief of Defence Staff.

For any non-Brits or ignorant people in general, here is a breakdown of the people mentioned in the letter.

Individuals who put out the memo:
Foreign Policy Advisor, David Manning, who endorsed the memo
Matthew Rycroft, Manning's Aide who wrote the memo

Individuals who recieved the memo:
Defence Secretary, Geoff Hoon
Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw
Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith
Cabinet Secretary, Sir Richard Wilson
Chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee, John Scarlett (currently head of MI-6)
Ex-Director of GCHQ, Francis Richards
Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Admiral Sir Michael Boyce
Head of MI-6 ("C"), Sir Richard Dearlove (resigned in 2003)
Head of Defence Staff, Jonathan Powell
Director of Political & Government Relations, Sally Morgan
Head of Strategy, Alastair Campbell

Many Republicans and New Labour-supporters have alleged this memo was just "the opinion of one man" and that it wasn't endorsed by any government-officials, so it means nothing. That is completely incorrect.

#1. Foreign Policy Advisor, David Manning, ordered the memo to be written.
#2. The memo was written, as a summary of their discussions, a collection of their opinions, by Manning's Aide, Matthew Rycroft.
#3. In the memo, it was the opinion of the head of MI-6, that "Military action was now seen as inevitable", and "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
#4. It was the opinion of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), that the U.S. was planning military action.
#5. It was the opinion of the Foreign Secretary that it seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided, and that the case was thin. That's the reason why he wanted to meet with Colin Powell.
#6. It was the opinion of the British Attorney General that the case for the Iraqi war would not be legal, without WMDs.
#7. Blair confirmed its authenticity, although rather subtly. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...ge/4503061.stm ) No one has denied its authenticity, either.

If you look at the way that the memo was written, it's organized according to and within the context of statements and actions of specific individuals.

As to who leaked the memo, my guess is that it was Richard Dearlove. Because he said that the evidence didn't support an invasion of Iraq, in the memo, he resigned from MI-6 in 2003, and then a year and a half later, this memo comes out? Everyone else, in the memo, who were against the Iraqi war has since waffled, now saying that they never had any doubts, that it was limited evidence at the time, and so on.

I am sorry, Buddy.. But on this forum, you are wasting your time.

First of all, Junior will NEVER be impeached coz the Republicans control DC.

Secondly, you have to PROVE that he intended to LIE on some of the statements..even though they have been proven untrue.

Thirdly, it will be a waste of taxpayer's money. (Remember all that cash spent on investigating a President who lied about a sexual act?) Look at how much was wasted on independent commissions. We just cannot afford it.

Lastly, our Prez is the "man in a bubble". He is insulated and has teflon skin. Nothing will touch him..not even a confession from Tomy Blair. Why? Because the media is this country are "(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)"!!!

So..I hate to burst your bubble but..IT AIN'T HAPPENING!!

__________________
"Only a fool tests the depth of the water with both feet."

Been there. Done that.

The memo is the opinion/interpretation of a single foreigner. Sorry, but the opinion of a single foreigner isnt grounds for impeachment in the US.

Try this article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20...n/33324/nc:742

__________________
Those who think they know everything, usually know the least.

"Sorry, but the opinion of a single foreigner isnt grounds for impeachment in the US. "

oops, the "memo" that was read to congress by Bush was made up.....I guess there is no correlation..

I tried that article, I found this

And this..

And this..

What the article actually says, is that the blogger is a similar cynical bastard like me, who wasn't supprised and kind of knew these news already ~ so facts were fixed, Bush wanted the war and the evidence was thin. The article simply stated that the memo was merely extra evidence rather than any new information.

You know Sadistic, the claims of the U.S. president are only opinions/interpretations of a single american citizen. You should never care what that man has to say!

Now - tell me, if the U.S.'s best ally's foreign minister's opinion with the best top-secret intelligence available doesn't count, then who's opinion will? And Sadistic, I want you to answer this question..

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

I've discussed this with a number of people, and have rebutted all arguments put forth. Here is a list.

In Blair's last town meeting (a while ago), where ANY CITIZEN could attend, the public absolutely butchered him over the memo. By the end of the meeting, he had been sweating so profusely and scratching his head so often, that he looked like Jack Nicholson in "The Shining." After he went evil, I mean.

But Bush's town meetings have been by invitation-alone. They send out "tickets" to specific constituents. At one point, three individuals were removed from the audience by the Secret Service for having a "No Blood For Oil" bumper sticker on the back of their car. [1]

I believe that both Bush and Blair lied.

Rebuttal: It's not authentic.
Counter-Rebuttal: No one questions its authenticity, anymore. The Blair administration calls it "nothing new." [2]

Rebuttal: It was the interpretation of the Foreign Secretary's Aide.
Counter-Rebuttal: It was a top-secret document, endorsed by the Foreign Secretary, as a summary of their discussions, and written by his aide. And if the aide were making false statements, the Blair administration could've claimed that it was false, and released evidence proving that (such as memos by officials immediately afterwards, claiming that the memo was an incorrect assessment). That has not happened. And it was not an essay, but a summary of their discussions.

Rebuttal: Iraq HAD WMDs!
Counter-Rebuttal: That is arguable, but even so, the memo itself states that the Chief of MI-6 (British Intelligence, remember James Bond?) said it's unlikely that Iraq was an "imminent threat", but rather, the U.S. was intentionally generating false intelligence to support an unnecessary war. That pre-war intelligence's failure has been reported in the media many times.[3]

Rebuttal: The 911 Commission and other investigations contradict the memo.
Counter-Rebuttal: Bush refused to allow the 911 Commission to exist for "nearly a year" after it was suggested. Even then, he only agreed to it, provided that he could appoint the head of the comission. So, arguably, the 911 Comission, the only "independent" investigation on intelligence was not independent at all. All other investigations were government-operated and therefore subject to political bias, just as with the pre-war intelligence. [4]

Rebuttal: "Fixed", in British English, means "established."
Counter-Rebuttal: It can be either our definition or Britain's "established." However, take a look at the context of the memo saying, "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." The qualifier 'but' implies a contradictory nature. For example, "I am a Liberal, BUT I am against gun control." So, within the context of, "Bush wanted to remove Saddam because of WMDs, BUT the intelligence was being fixed", the definition of intentionally adjusting applies and the intelligence was, indeed, being illegally 'fixed.'

Rebuttal: Cherry picking your intelligence is not lying.
Counter-Rebuttal: That is incorrect. Read the law. [5]
Rebuttal: All politicians lie.
Counter-Rebuttal: But just like with Nixon, Clinton, and Tom DeLay, if they are caught, they should be put on trial, because lying to Congress is a Federal crime, worthy of impeachment. Lying to Congress to support an unnecessary war could also be interpreted as treason, especially when Bush's trust-fund (for retirement) is vested in oil and the Vice-President used to be on the board of directors of the major oil company, Haliburton, which has recieved major government deals and bonuses in Iraq. [6]

Rebuttal: No one believes this memo. It's old news.
Counter-Rebuttal: The British newspaper, the Times, did a front-page story on it recently, as did the New York Times. 89 Congressmen have demanded that Bush answer the allegations put forth by the memo, led by Congressman John Conyers. [7]

Rebuttal: It's not solid proof that he lied.
Counter-Rebuttal: But there is enough evidence to support an independent investigation, and that's all we're asking for.

CNN'S COVERING THE DOWNING STREET MEMO, AT 11:30 A.M. ON SUNDAY!

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/mo...rder=0&thold=0

U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., yesterday accused the Bush administration of "dishonesty, lack of candor, and lack of planning" in launching war on Iraq. (That's two influential Senators, Kerry and Kennedy, speaking on it now).

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/mo...rder=0&thold=0



Military families in Britain have also taken their case to the International Criminal court.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/mo...rder=0&thold=0

There's a summary of all the current information and current events with the Downing Street memo, at:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/mo...rder=0&thold=0

...As well as information on how to protest. I'll be in Washington D.C. on Monday, protesting outside the National Press Club award luncheon, where Cheney is giving an award for Journalism.

Nathyn, even JP5 tried that on THIS forum when the memo was brought up - al a Rove. THEN they said it was memo about PREPARATION. NOW they say it is the "opinion" of one person (forgetting, of course, that Bush HIMSELF read a FAKE memo about Saddam from a "person" getting nuclear munitions from africa.....