Even though the U.S. press, including the Chicago Tribune, didn't adequately discuss these allegations (by British national security aide Matthew Rycroft, based on a July 2002 meeting of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his advisers, including Richard Dearlove, the head of Britain's MI-6 intelligence service), a front page article about the controversy still has to give 'background' on the topic, which is almost as good.
A British official's report that the Bush administration appeared intent on invading Iraq long before it acknowledged as much or sought Congress' approval--and that it “fixed” intelligence to fit its intention--has caused a stir in Britain.But the potentially explosive revelation has proven to be something of a dud in the United States. The White House has denied the premise of the memo, the American media have reacted slowly to it and the public generally seems indifferent to the issue or unwilling to rehash the bitter prewar debate over the reasons for the war.
All of this has contributed to something less than a robust discussion of a memo that would seem to bolster the strongest assertions of the war's critics.
...In the U.S., however, the account has drawn only passing attention, even in Washington, where the debate over prewar intelligence on Iraq once dogged the White House. No weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and Iraqi scientists have told U.S. inspectors that any weapons Iraq did possess were destroyed years ago.
Opponents of the war and administration have launched e-mail campaigns to elevate the issue. One Web site, www.DowningStreetMemo.com, encourages visitors to sign a petition and “take action.” Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) wrote a letter earlier this month to the White House, signed by 89 House Democrats, that expressed concern about the memo's revelations.
Tribune
The memo is available here
Can we start impeachment proceedings yet?
{Chicago}
Technorati Tags: Chicago
