127 Comments

1. Terrye:

I saw an excerpt from an article in the Times online dated one day before the Downing Street memo in which it was stated that no final political decision had been made about the war. They said that memo had been authenticated and that was the first time I realized this one had not.

Silly me, I thought that if a bunch of ninnies believed they had the smoking gun to impeach Bush they had surely made sure it was real.

And the thing is the memo is not even damaging in any conclusive sense.

I heard something on Fox about a story in the LA Times regarding prisons in Iraq and intimidation, torture etc. They say the source is an Iraqi attached to the government or something. For all I know he is an old Baathist hang over. Who knows?

I am beginning to think there is a coordinated effort on the part of the Bush Amdinistration’s opponents both here and abroad to damage not only Bush but the new government in Iraq in the hopes that the country will collapse and lots of people will die. The next phase will be the release of the remaining Abu Ghraib pics by the ACLU.

For a bunch of pacifists the left sure hangs out with a rough crowd. And for a bunch of people that like to say things like Bush lied people died, they sure do have a cavalier attitude toward the truth.

Jun 19, 2005 - 8:39 am 2. chuck:

Here is a recording of Coughlin. He seems to be in that strand of populism that descended through Williams Jennings Bryan. It all sound quite odd today.

And the thing is the memo is not even damaging in any conclusive sense.

This is one reason that I am skeptical that these are actually forgeries: too much work for the return.

I heard something on Fox about a story in the LA Times regarding prisons in Iraq and intimidation, torture etc.

I have always assumed that there is some level of this going on. The whole region suffers from the same, culture and tradition don’t change overnight. It will be a shame if Iraq is singled out. Why not the PA instead?

Jun 19, 2005 - 9:03 am 3. Curmudgeon:

Conyers was revered once? That must be ancient history indeed. I’ve been a resident of MI for almost a quarter century, and he’s been considered a bad joke and an embarrassment that whole time. He is quite possibly the stupidest member of Congress and a solid argument for term limits.

Jun 19, 2005 - 9:17 am 4. Syl:

I really don’t give a rip about the DSM. I don’t care if it’s fake or not. It revealed nothing except the Left’s choice of definition for the word ‘fix’, choosing American English over British. Fix, as in repair, rather than fix, as in attach or affix.

Why do these jerks continue to look for proof of things that did not happen when each time they say ‘Gotcha’ they make fools of themselves? Why do they continue doing the same thing over and over and perpetually expect the results to be different next time?

————

A side trip on Poverty and Why I think the Anti-globalists Are All Wrong and Should Be Spending Their Time Buying Stuff Instead of Playing With Puppets…

http://techcentralstation.com/061705A.html

(linked from Glenn yesterday and it was a real eye-opener for me)

I once got into an argument over poverty and globalization with a bunch of feel-good do-gooders in which I claimed that the most effective means they personally had to eliminate poverty was simply to go about their lives as usual, spending money on the best products at the cheapest prices. Yes, give to local charities, but only if you’re on your way to Wal-Mart.

You can imagine the reception my post got. LOL

I somehow feel vindicated. Consumerism, materialism. Way to go. And let’s be sure the Republicans state as part of their platform that their biggest constituency is…the American housewife!!

OT, sorry.

Jun 19, 2005 - 9:41 am 5. Jamie Irons:

Terry,

Over at “The Fourth Rail” there’s a superb analysis of how the Iraq war can and should be won, and it would seem that the main thing required of us here on the home front for that to happen is to stay true to our ideals and not waver.

Of course, if one doesn’t give a fig for the fate of one’s country, and it is only important to regain political power, then one should, by all means, go about distorting what happened prior to the war, screaming “Bush lied; people died!” at the top of one’s lungs, and generally, behaving like a fool.

But don’t forget, such a fool is a “patriot,” just like the rest of us.

Jamie Irons

Jun 19, 2005 - 9:55 am 6. Jamie Irons:

Sorry, Terrye, for misspelling your name just now.

Jamie Irons

Jun 19, 2005 - 9:56 am 7. David Thomson:

ìNow the paper is using an anonymous spokesman to say memos from an anonymous source “appeared authentic.”

I hesitate to call people liars. This is a moral judgment and one is entering dangerous territory when questioning somebody else’s honesty. However, you can unhesitatingly describe these journalists as unreliable with the truth. They are not worthy of our trust. The MSM should be considered normally guilty of journalistic incompetence until proven otherwise. We are not morally or logically obligated to give them the benefit of the doubt. At the very best, the MSM are comparable to a well meaning dunce who means well, but constantly gives you bad information.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:32 am 8. neo-neocon:

Vast left-wing conspiracy, anyone?

I actually used to believe that journalists were careful about their sources when they printed things. But then again, it seems to be true that journalists were more careful about such things–many long years ago, that is (see this post for a history of the use of the anonymous source, and some suggestions on how the problem might be controlled).

Lately so many of these shaky memos are coming out that one wonders why they continue to use such tactics. Rathergate, Downingstreetgate (that one doesn’t roll so trippingly off the tongue, does it?) Well, perhaps the reason is that these tactics work for them, despite the transparent duplicity. They seem to slowly but surely add to the doubts people have about Bush, Blair, and the war. As the approval polls inch downward, point by point, the instigators must feel that these ploys are doing what they had hoped they would.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:36 am 9. neo-neocon:

David Thomson–I hadn’t read your post yet when I wrote mine. I agree with you that it is premature to accuse the press in this case of outright lying (which I did in my post). I’m usually more restrained about making charges like that. But at this point, even if they didn’t absolutely know these memos were lies, to print them without absolute authentication, in light of all that has happened and the importance of the issues, amounts to the equivalent of criminal negligence–a shocking, destructive, and reckless disregard for the truth. Your “well-meaning dunce” scenario is certainly the very best possible scenario–is “well-meaning dunce” something like “useless idiot?”

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:42 am 10. Old Dad:

David Thomson:

You’re analysis is spot on, but I think your conclusion a tad bit generous.

We can make moral judgments about the DSM fabricators, and those that subsequently have used it to harm our country. At best they are criminally careless and need to be held accountable.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:51 am 11. PeterUK:

I am no legal expert, but a newly typed document that purports to be a copy of another document and authenticated bu an anonymous sourch who said it looks authentic would get laughed out of court.

“It looks authentic” as in a film set?

Does the person who authenticated the copy remember in exact detail the wording of the document?

Did the journalist copy the document verbatim,no additions or omissions?

Since the original has been destroyed there is no proof whatsoever that it even existed.

How would this fare if it were the contested will of a deceased millionaire?

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:53 am 12. David Thomson:

ìVast left-wing conspiracy, anyone?î

Nope, Iím not buying this line of reasoning. There is little evidence of a conscious conspiracy. These people simply live in their own echo chamber where everyone is on the same page. A dissenting voice is rarely encountered. They supposedly embrace the views of the enlightened elite. Who can possible question their morals or objectivity? Beware of those who so thoroughly lie to themselves. It makes it easier for them to seduce you into also swallowing their bovine excrement.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:53 am 13. Rick Ballard:

NNC,

I have some suspicions of a double game here. If we attack the memos because thay are false and term the providers liars, what shall we say if the memos are indeed real? The burden of proof in the matter lies with the originator. The content of the memos is neither shocking nor relevant, which is why this entire matter reeks of “set up” to me. In the event that the memos are proven to be “real”, those claiming that they are false will be made to seem to be fools. Additionally, the specious content will assume a “weight” that is unmerited.

I have proceeded from the viewpoint that the MSM is lying for over 35 years and had I been able to wager to that effect I would be writing this from my own tropical island. In general, they do lie, either through ommission or falsehood, and I have no problem in calling them liars. In this instance some patience is required in order to make the statement with assurance.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:59 am 14. David Thomson:

ìBut at this point, even if they didn’t absolutely know these memos were lies, to print them without absolute authentication, in light of all that has happened and the importance of the issues, amounts to the equivalent of criminal negligence–a shocking, destructive, and reckless disregard for the truth.î

Criminal negligence is indeed the right way to look at this matter. A nice person who carelessly gets drunk and kills someone in an automobile should still be arrested. We must allow God to make the ultimate determination regarding the state of their soul, but the state must deal with their reckless behavior.

Jun 19, 2005 - 11:03 am 15. chuck:

I notice that my link to Coughlin speaking is broken. Here is a working link. It is worth listening to Coughlin just to get a feel for an old branch in the social justice tradition.

Jun 19, 2005 - 11:16 am 16. Richard Nieporent:

I find it very convenient that the reporter destroyed the original memos to “protect” his source. Thus, we must trust that the reporter properly vetted the memos to be sure that they are accurate. Of course we know that reporters are scrupulous in checking their sources. If you don’t believe me just ask Mary Mapes.

Jun 19, 2005 - 11:31 am 17. David Thomson:

Iím convinced that Richard Nixon would have never been driven out of office had he been a Democrat. Am I saying a conscious conspiracy occurred to force him to resign? No, but Iím convinced that Ben Bradlee would have protected John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson in similar circumstances. Nobody would have had to say anything. On a gut level, the journalists involved would sense that itís best to take a chill pill and let their boss handle the matter. Bradlee would have made a few phone calls—and the story would have died. A small number of people might have copped a plea in a court of law.

Conspiracy theories revolve around the premise that people are consciously aware of their behavior. They know that they are outright lying. Iíve learned long ago, though, that sometimes such individuals are merely in a tacit agreement with each other.

Jun 19, 2005 - 11:39 am 18. marc:

Richard Nieporent,

The originals may not have been destroyed. Smith now says he photocopied the originals, gave them back to his source and burned the photocopies after typing them out. If you can believe that.

See here:

http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/06/britain-downing-street-memos-fake.html

Jun 19, 2005 - 11:58 am 19. Buddy Larsen:

Third reference on this string to the speculation over who was communicating with the North Vietnamese Government concerning our POWs.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:22 pm 20. Monica:

Part of the memo’s contents could be real and part created by the person who copied them. The point is we’ll never know because the information can’t be validated, which makes them absolutely worthless.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:24 pm 21. Barry Dauphin:

I would think that destroying original government documents would land a reporter in a whole lot of trouble. So if the original wasn’t destroyed, it can be produced and checked for discrepencies.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:28 pm 22. M. Simon:

Once you understand the true meaning of DSM it all becoimes perfectly clear.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:37 pm 23. PeterUK:

Buddy,

I have been trying to raise some steam on that issue, so far the collaborators have had no repercussions,except for Mr Christmas in Cambodia.

If one of the peaceniks can end up running for President what are the rest doing?

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:38 pm 24. Buddy Larsen:

Marc’s link contains the email addy for the editor of the online Times:

online.editor@thetimes.co.uk

Maybe the editor will straighten out the confusion via posting on this site, as I’ve just emailed asking him to do.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:42 pm 25. PeterUK:

The crux of the matter is that the only existance that the memos have is strictly word of mouth.

Only typed copies exist.

Photocopies have beeb destroyed.

The anonymous source has disappeared into the woodwork with the original documents.

I have shares for sale in a diamond mine,any takers.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:44 pm 26. Syl:

Let’s be careful not to fall into their little trap. Okay?

Discount the contents. Forget the provenance. It is a side issue.

Jun 19, 2005 - 12:49 pm 27. Swopa:

It almost seems like a Marx Brothers routine except real people’s lives are involved in all this!

Well, there’s certainly some kind of slapstick involved here — except you’re the one falling on his face, Roger.

At the very least they are another example of the kind of unsourced hearsay journalism that has turned even the most august of mainstream media outlets into a joke.

Uhh, except for one little thing, Roger. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the memos existed in this place called “the real world” — a place far removed from the blogospheric info-cocoon you and your commenters apparently never leave — where the real people named as authors and recipients can be asked about the content of the memos.

None of them has disputed the reported memos’ authenticity, including Tony Blair … you’ve heard of Tony Blair, right, Roger? … who’s been asked repeated about the memos since May 1st.

Ohmigod, maybe they’re all in on the conspiracy!

I return you now to your regularly scheduled ignorance and delusions.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:03 pm 28. Buddy Larsen:

Peter, what struck me was Wretchard’s mentioning the movie “The Marathon Man”, which–as movies will do–burned in the image of ex-SS living comfortably bourgeois post-WWII lives, totally free of any repercussion over direct harm they did to specific individuals.

The parallel with the murdered ex-POW is pretty strong. How would we know if some specific now-middle-aged beneficiary of all the sacrifices of all the Viet Nam vets isn’t aware this very moment that he/she specifically forwarded to the NVA the execution-causing information about (then) Lt. James Rowe?

Would that person step forward now and defend that action? Of course not–because that person knows he/she was wrong about Vietnam. That crowd has been wrong about every single movement it has generated, and now wants us to believe it is right that we should pull out of Iraq.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:04 pm 29. triticale:

Swopa, have you stopped beating your wife?

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:18 pm 30. Rick Ballard:

Ah, Swopadopa, your logic string is untied and your ass is hanging out again.

You quote Roger thusly:

“At the very least they are another example of the kind of unsourced hearsay journalism that has turned even the most august of mainstream media outlets into a joke.”

Are the memos soureced or unsourced?

Per the original article, they are unsourced.

Which makes Roger’s statement logically true.

I’d suggest a remedial logic course but I just don’t think you’d pass the entrance exam.

Charles needs to come up with a more effective banning tool.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:21 pm 31. TedM:

As usual, the comments have covered a great many points of interest. What bothers me most about the DSM flap is the intellectual dishonesty of members of Congress and the media. No intelligent person reading the memo can be unaware the the meaning of fixed is the British usage and not the American slang relating to fixing something like a horse race or prize fight. And yet these people are deliberately misinterpreting the words to suit their need to cripple both the administration and the country.Where is Joe Lieberman and other Democrats. It is time for them to take a stand.

I fear we are losing the war at home. And that is the war of words. The almost daily attention to side issues and hammering away by the talking heads and congresspeople and the media is taking its toll. A number of people I know are starting to buy into the bullshit. These are people without an agenda. People who dont identify with either party. And they are being worn out by the headlines and code words. Halliburton, Abu Gharib, Gitmo, torture, etc. etc.And now Downing Street. Very few of the public will actually read the memos. The administration has failed to put on a daily talking points barrage of information. We have to stop saying War on Terror and naming names. The public is losing interest. After 911 they had 19 pictures of who the enemy is. Now what they are hearing and seeing is that the enemey is US. The cancer of radical Islam has fallen off the news. I blame the administration for not responding over and over. They need credible spokesmen. Not the Ann Coulters of the world. We all read Victor Davis Hanson. But, he is writing for the believers. We need men like him booked onto many TV and cable shows. Unless GWB wakes up, we will indeed see Vietnam again. That ugly part of it where there will be daily demonstrations with press coverage and calls for congress to stop funding. When loony Kucinich is taken seriously we are indeed slipping down the slope of retreat and defeat

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:21 pm 32. PeterUK:

Buddy,

May I point you to Captain Christmas in Cambodia and the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth.

Those who were students then are running things now.

BTW It is nice to see swopa back,there seems to have been an outbreak of Canadian moonbattery.recently.he is probably out of thereapy again.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:30 pm 33. Buddy Larsen:

Joe Lieberman could do wonders for the cause of rationality if he would model himself after the GOP’s gadfly McCain. He is invaluable as is, but should do more to help the poor Democrat rank & file keep their moorings on the war stakes, in the hot-air hurricane blowing from their party operations leadership.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:31 pm 34. chuck:

Ah, Swopadopa, your logic string is untied and your ass is hanging out again.

Hey Rick, give the guy a break. This very morning he found the other brain cell in the pocket of his shorts and now he is like a ninety year old with an erection. You’ve got to expect he’s going to be a bit wild.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:36 pm 35. PeterUK:

Chuck,

Yes but he doesn’t have to use it to type with.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:43 pm 36. David Thomson:

ìWhere is Joe Lieberman and other Democrats. It is time for them to take a stand.î

Thatís right, where in hell is Joseph Lieberman? When is he going to take a stand? And I donít want to hear the excuse thatís the Connecticut senator is forced to keep a low profile in order to accomplish more in the long run. Lieberman may represent the last chance for the national Democratic Party.

Jun 19, 2005 - 1:45 pm 37. Room 237:

I do not think there is any conspiracy. I just think that there are only a handful of adults left among the leadership of the Democratic Party — Lieberman, Clinton, Biden, Bayh — please add any otehrs, but I fear among the national Democrats, that may be it.

They should be worried because there will be a Democratic president again someday. And these soundbites will come back to haunt them.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:01 pm 38. Kyda Sylvester:

For me the most head scratching aspect to this story is:

“It was these photocopies that I worked on, destroying them shortly before we went to press on Sept 17, 2004,” [British reporter Michael Smith] added. “Before we destroyed them the legal desk secretary typed the text up on an old fashioned typewriter.”

Huh? Other than the obvious, what possible reason could there be for doing this?

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:15 pm 39. Rick Ballard:

“I fear we are losing the war at home.”

TedM,

I don’t know how old you are and even if you’re my age – 55 – you may not have been paying attention in ‘69 – ‘72.

We are not losing the war at home. Comrade Uncle Walty is not lying through his teeth on TV every night as “The Most Trusted Man in America”. Even if he were, the “Tiffany Network” of seditionists now carries the deserved weight of a feather. The American Pravda and Isvestia are run by men much less capable at agitprop than Punch and Bradlee were. Falling viewership and readership confirm that hypothesis.

The purveyors of the Big Lie that cost millions of lives in Vietnam and Cambodia were able to commit their subversion because they controlled the message. Today’s seditionists do not control print and TV and they have absolutely no control over the internet.

If we had a President who was an unprincipled poll driven compromiser such as Sen. McCain or Sen. Clinton, there would be cause for concern. That is not now the case. Please recall that President Bush pledged to spend his accumulated political capital rather than hoard it for the building of a “legacy”. Could anyone imagine that “spending” political capital by pursuing promises concerning matters of import and division would result in higher poll numbers?

We are not “losing” and the mounting hysteria of the opposition is the absolute best evidence of that fact.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:15 pm 40. Rick Ballard:

Kyda,

Think of it in terms of a set up. The typewriter is just part of the doublecross.

John Hinderaker gives a rational take on what is going on. Let’s just assume that the memos are as true as the information they provide is meaningless.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:19 pm 41. TedM:

Rick

I am 71 and well remember the Viet years. The 24 hour cable today is more powerful than the print media then. And Uncle Walter has been replaced by cable “news”.

I wish that you are right. but, I see it differently. In the Vietnam era we had the horror of war b rought into peoples homes for the first time via TV. We have that now. Even more so. Just think of the images seen over and over again on TV these days. And the endless count of US casualties. If a nation counts its casualties by the handful every day, it is doomed. Our enemies are willing to die for what they believe in. Apparently we are not.

I wish I were more hopeful, but I see too many parallels to the late sixties, early seventies. The drop in the polls (slanted as they may be) of GWB is a worrisome thing.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:32 pm 42. Buddy Larsen:

Yes…it’s too pat…the ‘old typewriter…the jokers in the press room owe Dan rather a favor so they’re gonna moral-equivalize his old ass.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:33 pm 43. richard mcenroe:

Oh, come now… as any good progressive can tell you, a lie in the service of a Higher Truth becomes a Higher Truth…

After all, they may not be authentic memos, but everybody who’s anybody just knows that the people who really know the truth really wanted to write memos just like them.

They just had to! Because they care so much!

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:50 pm 44. Rick Ballard:

TedM,

You make cogent points and advance a logical argument. In rebuttal I would offer:

1)Fox News being the predominant cable news channel.

2)Rush Limbaugh/Hugh Hewitt and many others providing solid support that influences 10 times as many people as the NYT and al-WaPo do.

3)The fact that Bush is about 10 times as believable as Nixon – and isn’t talking about ‘Peace with Honor’.

4)The internet – with PJ Media leading the way.

5)The absence of the draft.

I believe that the combination of those factors outweighs by a large margin the images to which you refer. That and the fact that the military is carrying a public approval/confidence ratin of 78% while the MSM is receiving an overly generous 28%.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:50 pm 45. Terrye:

Ted:

People are just discouraged. But let me tell you this is not Viet Nam.

I remember the Viet Nam war and we are not seeing that kind of reaction.

I do think the administration needs better PR but I think that the best PR will be time passing and things slowly getting better. Our expectations in this world of quick everything are not relaistic and so people get tired out quickly.

But what do I know?

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:52 pm 46. c:

DSM set-up or no, the inescapable fact these days is that the liberal main media’s standard for “proof” documents is only that they tell us they’re genuine, even if faked but real. Not having originals or certified copies or even a credible chain of provenance isn’t required of our investigator-reporters and “watchdog” press. Most of the news media are of the same mind when it comes to accusations and assertions about those whom they are after- all uncertainties are prejudged in favor of charges. The accused must prove their innocence beyond all paranoid doubt, else questions linger.

Government, conservative or pro-American parties, OTOH, had better have their i’s dotted and their t’s crossed on 100% verifiable docs notarized by God or Allah with not a smidgeon of doubt or they are discredited and become part of a conspiracy in which questions loom large.

It’s not a fair fight but, as Rick points out, these cheating media tactics may be more self-discrediting than effective against their targets and ideological foes. But what a sorry state of old journalism.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:55 pm 47. PeterUK:

TedM,

Nice to see you posting again,I don’t think it is the casualties this time, it is the undermininig of your nations moral certitude that seems the main danger the national determination.

The other problem is that, as far as wars go, it is is a small war which has little effect on the people at home,they are getting indifferent.Apart from the price of oil going up,if one didn’t read the news there would be no realisation that a war was taking place.In fact in Iraq it is not a war but what was called in colonial times as a “ploice action” or “punitive raids”.

So with those sapping morale on one side and ennui on the other,I think you have a point.There is the Vietnam blueprint and there are those trying to made events fit it.

Jun 19, 2005 - 2:59 pm 48. Kyda Sylvester:

So, we type the memos on an “old fashioned” typewriter in order to lure the VRWC into a trap? Wow, these puppies are even sicker than I previously thought (and that secretary is dedicated–I read somewhere that the memos together were 36 pages long).

John Conyers takes on Dana Milbank.

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:05 pm 49. Barry Dauphin:

Well this should make for a few laughs: Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said Sunday he intends to run for president in 2008.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050619/D8AQSKCG1.html

Maybe he can take on Conyers for veep.

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:09 pm 50. JJay:

Some solace can be taken in the plunging circulations and ratings of the MSM. The time is coming when their conceits and deceits will be read only by the leftwingers who still subscribe and watch. Everybody else will have bailed.

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:15 pm 51. PeterUK:

Thinking about it I don’t know where one would find an old typewriter,except at flea markets and car boot sales.Where can the ribbons be found that wil fit?

Mr Smith seems to have forgotten the old adage “Keep it simple”

I do hope they have the typist in a safe place.

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:24 pm 52. Acheron:

One thing I’ve noticed in much of these “I’m so patriotic” controversies is that everyone routinely grants the Durbins, Kennedys. Kerrys, Reids et.al. credit for good intentions– well-meant comments from loyal oppositionists.

For the first time since our Civil War, when Copperhead Senators like Vallandigham were excreted to Rebel territories, I sense that the Democrat Party’s extreme partisanship is in fact actively disloyal, akin to espousing Jeff Davis’ Confederacy while camouflaging Union sentiments. In these days, we ask “disloyal to what?”

The only answer I can give is disloyalty not to the American Union, but to the idea of American free-market, representative democracy as such. “Hitler”, etc. fall trippingly off liberalista tongues, because they admire and subliminally approve the totalitarian National and International Socialisms (Naziism, Communism) so woefully evident a few short decades back. Now it’s Islamofascism they celebrate, and it is truly difficult to deal with… descending into expletives, perjoratives, however valid, avails us nothing.

What is to be done? The Boomer Generation, Class of 1968, has shown itself again the most seriously dysfunctional in all our history. As of 2004, they have begun bleeding away; by 2018, they’ll be anomalous; but no-one will ever be able to say again that this great country, our America, is not capable of fostering a brood of traitors to every ideal our Founders sought to instil forever.

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:27 pm 53. PeterUK:

Will Durbin raise his voice for the Buddhist monks decapitated in Thailand??

http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=143&sid=5881994&cKey=1119168314000

Via LGF,

In the name of God will none of these people speak out?

Jun 19, 2005 - 3:44 pm 54. Kyda Sylvester:

Peter, I wondered myself. Did he mean by “old fashioned” an ancient piece of equipment, or in the sense that any typewriting in the age of word processing is “old fashioned”? I don’t know why I’m stuck on this, but it’s just so bizarre. There doesn’t seem to be any point to it.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:07 pm 55. PeterUK:

Kyda,

With the volume of traffic it is hardly likely that Number Ten uses old typewriters.I should imagine that they don’t have a very long life there.So there doesn’t seem much point in duplicating the memos on an old typewriter.

Unless of course Smith is extracting the urine.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:14 pm 56. Buddy Larsen:

Rosebud…rosebud…rosebud….

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:25 pm 57. Ed Poinsett:

It is not Vietnam, and the people are not losing faith. Only the MSM and Congress lose faith, as if they ever had any.

I was at the Atlanta airport yesterday (Saturday) to pick up a family relative. As I waited at the baggage claim, individual soldiers dressed in desert fatigues came off various planes. There was a small USO kiosk that they couldn’t miss. For each soldier, the USO lead a cheer and a round of applause. People throught the area responded enthusiastically. I didn’t see or hear a single protest.

The soldiers to a man, smiled and really seemed appreciative. I was proud to be there!

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:26 pm 58. Syl:

Hey peoples, when you speak of the class of ‘68 and bemoan the boomers, remember this…

I am a boomer too!

So, puhlease. Enough!

I like to use a broad brush just like everyone else, but when it hits home…well, pfeh.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:35 pm 59. Rick Ballard:

“Unless of course Smith is extracting the urine.”

Which is precisely what he is doing. Kyda, think of the whole thing as a set up. The memos that I have read contain no unknown information. Some of what they contain could come straight from Tommy Frank’s book. Conyers &c. cannot be accused of anything approaching competency in critical faculties and are merely following the boys at Ko$ and DU. Where else would you expect Democratic policy to be developed?

The bit with the typewriter is the blowoff. In this instance the Dems were willing if unwitting shills and even Milbanks was bright enough to read the scam and borrowed enough honesty to report it as such.

The hilarious part of this is that, in the end, Conyers &c. are going to be the marks. Milbanks saw to that. The serious part is how close bloggers came to buying into the scam. In one sense, Smith’s typewriter story was a tip to bloggers.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:39 pm 60. Kyda Sylvester:

Yeah, rosebud, macguffin–I get it. I just don’t get it. What was the purpose of the devise? To get the right-wing blogosphere in another faked documents uproar? A journalist for the London Times takes a subject as serious as this and plays juvenile games with it? For what purpose? Perhaps to influence two national elections? Like I said, this is one sick puppy.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:46 pm 61. Rick Ballard:

The previous was too hard to follow. Here is another way to look at it.

1. Smith breaks story concerning “secret” memos that in fact contain no new information.

2. Ko$$acks/DUers spin like tops generating multiple absurd scenarios – all dependent upon inability to parse British English. (when will the Brit’s learn real English?)

3. Conyers &c., Congressional Clown Corps, buy the Ko$$ack/DUer fable and hold “pretend” hearings – why not – they’re pretend Congressmen.

4. Milbanks sniffs out the stinking rat and writes the story showing the ConClowns as marks.

5. Smith, realizing that things are getting a bit out of hand accross the pond, comes up with the typewriter tip to warn off those with IQ’s above room temperature.

Yep – it’s sheer conjecture. We’ll see.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:52 pm 62. Terrye:

I heard a soldier say the other day that everytime he walked into a restaurant or a public place of any kind he was thanked and people were very kind to him. they applauded.

and that was New York.

So I think that most Americans really do not want this to turn into Viet nam. And I don’t think most people want to see the Iraqi people suffer more than they already have either.

The other day I saw a picture of an Iraqi man in tears. Two American soldiers were holding him as he wept and one looked back at the flames behind them.

His children has just been killed by a suicide bomber. I wept. Today I saw another picture of a distraught woman being comforted by a young Iraqi man. And I wondered if her son had been killed in that blast in the restaurant.

For the life of me I can not understand how there can be any question whose side someone would be on in this fight. The lefties can say this would not be happening if the US was not there, but these people are not only killing Americans…they are killing people who want a democracy. It seems the Dems think every vote counts so long as they are ones who are voting.

screw everybody else.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:56 pm 63. Kyda Sylvester:

Rick, I’m not really as thick as I seem to be sounding. I just can’t get my mind wrapped around the fact that Smith (and others including the Times legal department) would actually stoop to such ridiculous measures. How desperate and pathetic is this. To my mind it’s almost as bad, if not as bad, as if he actually did fake the memos.

Jun 19, 2005 - 4:59 pm 64. Charlie (Colorado):

No intelligent person reading the memo can be unaware the the meaning of fixed is the British usage and not the American slang relating to fixing something like a horse race or prize fight.

Uh, well, actually I was, until someone pointed it out above.

Of course the rest of the syllogism could work out too.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:05 pm 65. Terrye:

The only think Bush really had to say about the memo was that he thought thre timing was “interesting”.

He also said he did not deliberately misled anyone.

Deufler said that the Iraqis were testing agents on people. If that is true, where is the stuff? This may seem off topic, but my point is that the powers that be really did believe the weapons were there.

I think the Democrats and the liberals in general need to sit back and shut up for awhile. I have a feeling that there is still a lot of stuff we don’t know.

Sometimes discretion really is the better part of valor.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:05 pm 66. Rick Ballard:

Kyda,

Geez, if I ever write something that implies that you lack intelligence, it wasn’t me.

The word here is serendipty – more precisely unfortunate serendipity. The London Times and Smith didn’t plan anything except to sell papers. You have to couple the lunacy of the Ko$$acks with the stupidity of the ConClowns to get this thing to where it is.

Milbanks caught the stink and Smith put up a caution sign.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:05 pm 67. Charlie (Colorado):

For me the most head scratching aspect to this story is:

“It was these photocopies that I worked on, destroying them shortly before we went to press on Sept 17, 2004,” [British reporter Michael Smith] added. “Before we destroyed them the legal desk secretary typed the text up on an old fashioned typewriter.”

Huh? Other than the obvious, what possible reason could there be for doing this?

Kyda, what’s even more puzzling is that this memo is dated after 2001, obviously. I don’t think anyone in the White House or CIA was using old fashioned typewriters then.

Try as I might, all I’ve been able to come up with that when the guy re-wrote the documents, he wanted to make sure no one claimed they couldn’t be real because they were word-processed. But surely he’s not so stupid as to not realize that a 2001 memo COULD and WOULD be word-processed?

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:10 pm 68. Charlie (Colorado):

… I don’t know, maybe I AM stupid today; I’m not getting the Eeevil Scheme notions above, either.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:15 pm 69. Kyda Sylvester:

Rick–We keep passing each other. Now, I want you to talk to me like a child. Last September, which was when the story first broke, Smith knew he would need verbatim copies of the memos that did not bear any identifying marks. So he said to legal “We need to produce our own copies so let’s do it on an old fashioned typewriter because…..” (please fill in the blank for me). Perhaps I have my timeline wrong?

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:16 pm 70. PeterUK:

Rick,

I haven’t bothered to read the Memos,since there is drivel like this frequently seeping out of our press.If you would be so kind as to provide me with the offending extract,I can probably give you most of the common usages.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:18 pm 71. PeterUK:

Mr Ballard,

We have a new contender,an Egyptian chap,now this really is my kind of cretin, via LGF

http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD92305

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:29 pm 72. Buddy Larsen:

Actually, a brouhaha over a fakery that then (”aHA!”) turned out to have been not a fakery, would neatly expunge memogate, newsweekgate, and a hundred lesser red-handed frauds on the legacy media’s part. Expunge insofar as to the talking-point, propaganda, bumper-sticker intellectual depth. And, for those folks, that’d be deep enough.

Tie Game! Blogosphere Credibility Destroyed! Read All About It! Film at Six!

Just speculating here, of course.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:30 pm 73. Kyda Sylvester:

Rick–We passed each other again. No, heavens no, I wasn’t suggesting that you were implying that I’m stupid (although after reading this string of posts, any number of people might justifiably come to that conclusion). I understand that it might all have spun out of control later, but what were Smith’s original motives, or reasons if that’s too strong a word, for having reproductions of the memos typewritten rather than word processed?

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:31 pm 74. PeterUK:

Buddy,

It is quite common to anounce shock horror,new revelations,unseen documents,unpublished pictures,which are as stale as an old pizza,they are simply trying to sell dead trees.

The best place to get a better picture is in a rival newspaper where a spoiling story will shower shit and derision upon the heads of the hapless journalist and his editor.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:38 pm 75. Kyda Sylvester:

So, Buddy, are you speculating that it was a setup all the way from and including the leaking of the memos? Or was this just a side plot hatched by Smith as an afterthought entirely separate from the straight news reporting of the memos?

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:39 pm 76. Pat Curley:

I wish I could always be as smart as when I wrote this, back on May 6th when I first looked into the Downing Street Memo:

“Unfortunately, the Times has only the transcript and not a copy so it can’t be verified in any other way (e.g., initials, signatures, etc.). But I’d be very surprised if this is a completely original memorandum prepared shortly after a meeting on July 23, 2002 as it is purported to be.”

Not bad, eh? Of course the sentence before seems to have been overly optimistic:

“I suspect that the memo has received some degree of vetting; the London Times is not CBS News.”

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:39 pm 77. Buddy Larsen:

Oh, the latter by far. As Rick said, serendipity. But, even trimmed as far as possible, it’s still pretty ghairy. Really, I was just following your head-scratching more than anything else. Scratching mine, too. British newspapers do have a pretty well-established reputation for pinballing, tho–as you know.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:44 pm 78. Buddy Larsen:

ghairy

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:50 pm 79. Rick Ballard:

Peter,

Some memos and the broad misinterpretation of “fixed” which seems to be the dingbat focal point.

Kyda,

In re Smith – I’m digging for his first pronouncement of the “legal secretary” bit.

Mr UK – Father’s Day dinner beckons but I shall return anon to inspect the newest cretin.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:51 pm 80. Buddy Larsen:

Peter, wrt Egyptian chap, the only way to avoid that sort of “who benefits” accusation is to never ever respond to any attack–at least not in such a manner as to give back better than you got. Winning a war means you started it. Hitler of the OSS, an invention of Bletchley Park.

Jun 19, 2005 - 5:57 pm 81. PeterUK:

Rick,

As it stands I cannot give proper opinion because,whilst the memo reads a certain way there is one significant problem,the section containing the word “fixed” does not read like a memo.

It reads like the reporting of a memo by a third party and is in the past tense and reads differently from the the options detailed below it.

Without detailed minutes of the meetings,presuming minutes were taken,this is only a copy of what purports to be a summary by whom?

The words used are not in quotes and could be a paraphrase of the original statement,since this is not an original document the section containing the word “fixed” and reads like no civil service document I’ve ever seen,I would say it was journalese.

In the context the words “made to fit” or “fitted” are more lkely.

Jun 19, 2005 - 6:52 pm 82. PeterUK:

Buddy,

You leave my cretin alone,I have money on him.

Jun 19, 2005 - 6:54 pm 83. PeterUK:

They are not goin to give up giving up,http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160017,00.html

Does the man think that the Jihad will allow you to leave with honour?

Jun 19, 2005 - 7:05 pm 84. Rick Ballard:

Peter,

I could find nothing in those memos to justify the furor. Smoke and mirrors and “Top Secret” by a journo.

Kyda,

I still haven’t found a date for the declaration by Smith concerning the type written aspect. My assumption has been that it is something that he said recently – within the past week. As to the veracity of what he says – I might believe the legal secretary if she were under oath. Otherwise, not.

Mr UK,

I hardly consider bringing an Egyptian nutter in as being entirely sporting. Since we have no established rules as yet, I must concede that this man would be almost impossible to beat. It was my understanding that we were to offer up members of our respective governments as competitors for the Cretin of the Week contest. Perhaps a formalization of the rules is in order.

I had really pinned my hopes on Sen. Dick this week, with Rep. Conyers as backup. Not even Little Dick Durbin can touch the Eygpyian though.

Jun 19, 2005 - 7:16 pm 85. PeterUK:

Mr Ballard,

Sorry you feel that way,but we have already paid the transfer fee,six belted Earls,twelve Bishops,five Archbishops,thirtytwo MPs and a dozen or so assorted civil servants.They will be unpacking the crates and proping them up to regain consciousness as I write. We did offer them George Galloway but apparently he was too crazy even for them.We won’t field him,it would be as you call it “Dirty Pool”.

We do have our eye on a very promising french head of state who is quite remarkable, in that, instead of everything being your fault,everything is our fault.Thought that would unnerve you.

Jun 19, 2005 - 7:38 pm 86. TedM:

I am back from fathers day festivities at my daughters house.

Thanks to those who responded to my earlier post.

I am using the assumption that the DSM’s are real. It wouldn’t be too smart to dummy up something when the purported author is alive and well and in a position to expose the fraud.

Nothing that I have read it at all surprising. I would be disappointed if we weren’t make those plans. I even believe that similar discussions were held in the Clinton national security meetings. There had to have been talks about what we and the Brits would do if Saddam succeeded in shooting down one of our aircraft maintaining the no fly zone. Of course that was before 9/11 so the invasion scenario was not a good one because of national and congressional attitudes. But I have no doubt that the Clinton meetings had to have standby plans for an invasion. 9/11 changed the attitude of many here and it made the planning of the Bush Administration easier in considering invasion. As was pointed out, Woodward’s and Franks’ books spell that out.All of this discussion by the antis reminds me of that great line from Casablanca, ” I am shocked. Shocked. Shocked that there was war planning going on in the back room”

Jun 19, 2005 - 7:46 pm 87. Buddy Larsen:

Right, the military has to have plans on the shelf for everything at all times. We still update the war-with-Great-Britain plan, tho the one for France is no doubt more current. Peter, I’m sure your folks have a plan for America electing Howard Dean or somesuch and declaring war on the Scots (to win the Bourbon distillers vote).

Jun 19, 2005 - 8:00 pm 88. Kyda Sylvester:

Rick–The fog clears if you’re correct that the typing was done only recently–I think it is true that he disclosed it only recently. Odd, though, that since all of this was done ostensively to protect his source and himself, he wouldn’t have attended to this little housekeeping chore straight away.

Hey, thanks for being the very model of patience. You’re a good dad.

Oh, and I don’t think it really matters to those creating the furor that there isn’t much of anything in the memos themselves, it only matters that they are.

Jun 19, 2005 - 8:01 pm 89. Rick Ballard:

Mr UK,

I see. I suppose he’ll be standing for Parliament in a bye-elction in Lower Upndown within the fortnight. Well, if he wins election, (or steals it without being caught) I suppose there is nothing to be done.

This French fellow – you’re not referring to Jacques the Knave are you?

I am beginning work on a set of rules for further engagements. To be mutually agreed upon, of course. I would propose that weekly contests end on Saturday each week at noon GMT. I would also propose that Jamie Irons be appointed judge. His work in ornithological pyschiatry makes him particularly suited to the task.

The base rule is that proposed Cretins of the Week must have been democratically elected to offices which they continue to hold through hook or crook. Contestants are permitted to propose one pol per week and the pol must be from their country of citizenship. Non-English speakers must provide translations adequate for judgement.

Jun 19, 2005 - 8:11 pm 90. ed:

Hmmmm.

I’d certainly like to know if these memos are authentic. But I think these memos are also completely irrelevant, so nothing (much) has been lost.

But I will say this much. I will NEVER accept any article, story or position based on documents without demanding authentication EVER again. It won’t matter who the author is, or whom the source is purported to be.

If the underlying documents cannot be authenticated, then the story is garbage. And the very first question I’m going to ask is if the documents have been authenticated and by whom. So I can then ask THEM.

Frankly this is too much like work for my taste. This is why I have paid subscriptions for God’s sake. But if journalists won’t do their jobs, then I’ll have to do it for them.

Roger. This PajamasMedia idea of your has got potential. But you guys need to be on top of stuff like this. Question everything and demand answers. Once you guys are in front of stories like this, then I’m willing to buy a subscription.

Jun 19, 2005 - 10:35 pm 91. Brown Line:

I’m told that in the office of the old City News Burea of Chicago, a large sign was posted that read, “IF YOU MOTHER TELL YOU SHE LOVES YOU, CHECK IT OUT!” Good advice for any journalist.

Of course, the City News Bureau is now out of business. And that sign now rests in some landfill. There’s a metaphor for “journalism” in the 21st century.

Jun 20, 2005 - 4:00 am 92. PeterUK:

It seems that there is more to Smith than meets the eye,he has connections to Mary Mapes,The Empire Strikes Back? via LGF.http://scyllacharybdis.blogspot.com/2005/06/michael-smith-strikes-again.html

Jun 20, 2005 - 4:45 am 93. Sather Gate:

Now you are getting down to your true agenda – slandering the Catholic Church. You really would like to smear Pope John Paul II and his well-known stand on the Iraq War, wouldn’t you? Why don’t you just come right out and say it?

Do you want to equate “Coughlin” with Pat Buchanan?

The days of the neocons are numbered……even Joe SixPack is starting to wake up.

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:16 am 94. Rick Ballard:

“The days of the neocons are numbered……”

They sure are. Unfortunately for you, the last number is 398,724,651.

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:26 am 95. TedM:

Hey Rick

Good MOrning

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:27 am 96. Buddy Larsen:

Mama Mia, Sather Gate! You’re being satiric, right? Father Coughlin doesn’t “belong” to the Catholic Church, he “belongs” to history as a particulary effective seditionist. Famous (google him, for cryin’ out loud) not as a priest, but as a seditionist.

He is well-known, quite famous, a household name, really, to the WWII generation. As well as, of course, to the later generations, if they read and/or know a little recent history.

Furthermore, this site, host and all, are all over the archives–should you bother to care whether or not you know what you’re talking about–as being most supportive, respectful, affectionate, and aware of the importance of, Pope John Paul II.

Unless it is a joke–and not funny if so–your letter is hateful and nasty, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of the late Pope. He would never sneer at Joe Sixpack, and he fought the anti-Semites all his life. You are the one who insults the Pope.

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:43 am 97. Rick Ballard:

It’s a very good morning here in the Delta. Birds singing, fish jumping and some nice marine air holding the temp down.

You mentioned Woodward’s book on the runup to the war. Would you recommend it? I’ve only read excerpts and I wasn’t sure it would be worth the dough.

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:46 am 98. TedM:

yes Rick He wtote two. I thought they might be hit jobs, but found them factual and informative.

Clash of Civilizations,, Civilization and Its Enemies and What Went Wrong are also on my list of books to be read to understand the world in which we live

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:49 am 99. Buddy Larsen:

Peter, your link–WOW!

Jun 20, 2005 - 6:50 am 100. ed:

Hmmmm.

“You really would like to smear Pope John Paul II and his well-known stand on the Iraq War, wouldn’t you? ”

You got an actual quote FROM JPII? I’ve read a lot of things attributed to JPII, but most of that is from the Cardinals in the Vatican.

And there is a vast difference between the two.

So provide a quote and a *link* where *JPII* denounces the Iraq war.

Jun 20, 2005 - 7:13 am 101. IceCold:

This is similar to the Joe Wilson yellowcake non-story that somehow was treated as a controversy.

There is no underlying content of interest. The discussion of the authenticity of the document is fine, but to illuminate the emptiness of the matter let’s just stipulate that authenticity. Let’s even grant any meaning anyone wants to “fix”. So the darkest possible meaning is accepted for purposes of analysis.

The whole thing is immaterial to the US motivation for confronting the Iraqi regime, is utterly bereft of factual support, and is completely contradicted both by history and the findings of some dubious taxpayer-funded “investigations” that served to confirm what the history already showed to any intelligent observer.

The judgment that the Iraqi regime represented an intolerable threat in the post-9/11 world relied in no way on “intelligence assessments” of Iraqi WMD stocks. It was a straightforward and inarguable decision that the regime’s demonstrated recklessness and anti-US malevolence, combined with its past and ongoing capacity for WMD fabrication and its deep ties to terrorism including the current global variety were an intolerable package. Much as was the case in 1991 with Kuwait, Iraqi compliance with UN resolutions would have represented a disaster, as it would have left the regime in place (and in 1991, essentially unpunished for its aggression).

No “intelligence”, fixed, unfixed, good, bad or mediocre, had the slightest thing to do with this basic judgment.

What does the memo offer by way of examples of ways in which the intelligence was distorted to “justify” (again, only to those who didn’t/don’t understand the strategic calculation) an aggressive stance on Iraq? None, I believe.

Well that’s a pity. I guess there’s no way to evaluate the factual basis of that one broad, portentous sentence. Oh, wait, yes there is. It turns out not just one but several taxpayer-funded investigations of this precise question have been conducted in the last two years. And, what do you know — they looked at precisely this question and turned up no evidence for the allegation. In fact they turned up lots of evidence to the contrary — that while intense pressure was properly placed on the intel community to justify its assessments, their assessments were presented and seen by all the usual customers.

Which brings us back to my favorite observation, which apparently is/was beyond the comprehension levels of so many putatively smart folks so earnestly laboring over the whole issue (including the spineless/brainless Beltway types who wasted taxpayer money to “investigate” a non-question). The key findings on Iraqi WMD didn’t materially change for many years, beginning prior to Bush’s term. So if the intel were “fixed,” the devious Bush/Cheney neocon cabal are even more powerful than anyone has imagined, as they managed to use time-travel to go back in time and cook intelligence assessments years before they were in office.

So this electrifying sentence, if authentic, is irrelevant, undocumented, and thoroughly refuted by all the evidence. Other than that, it’s a stinging indictment of Bush’s disastrous Iraq policy, I guess.

Jun 20, 2005 - 8:29 am 102. Rick Ballard:

IceCold,

It’s good to have you back. I hope your project went well.

Your point about the “several taxpayer-funded investigations” applies to the Abu Ghraib/Guantanmo situation as well. The administration has given the opposition so little to work with that it appears that we will be treated to a Democratic “Ground Hog Day” for the forseeable future.

What I don’t understand is, if it didn’t work with the MSM megaphone turned to 200 decibels prior to the election, why do they think recycling at 125 decibels will work? Are the Democrats so intellectually bankrupt that they can’t come up with new accusations of any kind?

Jun 20, 2005 - 8:47 am 103. Buddy Larsen:

Rick, Ice-Cold–it’s gotta be a by-product of our species having evolved so fast that emotions lag intellect. Our limbic systems filter what we see and hear; limbic doesn’t ‘think’, it reacts. Ergo, the “story” can be whatever occupies the greatest volume of ink-and-air time. So the out-position in politics can ignore the overall story of history while exhausting us with the tiniest detail, and never be accused of anything but “covering the story”. They want a “tell.” Some ambiguous detail that will blow the whole thing open, the Giant Conspiracy that Accounts For All Things. The lost letters from FDR and Tojo and Hitler and Churchill conspiring with each other to start WWII as a parlor game bet.

Jun 20, 2005 - 9:28 am 104. Knucklehead:

Kyda,

The only reason I’ve been able to come up with for using an “old fashioned typewriter” would be to avoid leaving an electronic trail/copy.

Just trying to follow this. I haven’t been through the entire thread or links here but I fail to see how a “trap” whereby the blogosphere or whomever wrongfully claims the memos are fake would have any merit. So what? The blogosphere is not about to stop bulldogging this sort of thing if it gets “trapped” into an error.

The main point remains unchanged, the memo(s) show nothing particularly damaging fake or not.

Jun 20, 2005 - 9:41 am 105. Syl:

Knuck: “The main point remains unchanged, the memo(s) show nothing particularly damaging fake or not.”

That’s my point. The ‘trap’ is not necessarily believing something is bogus that is not, it’s the diversion from the real issue…that the contents, no matter how generated, are not damaging. Deviation from that core IS the trap.

Jun 20, 2005 - 9:44 am 106. Buddy Larsen:

excellent points.

Jun 20, 2005 - 9:50 am 107. Knucklehead:

Syl,

Thanks, I think I finally get it. The memos have become well enough known, and their contents sufficiently digested, to make it clear there’s no “there” there.

So, rather than let the story continue on to the conclusion that this was all much to do about noddafrickinthing, (or let it die away altogether) provoke an attack on the provenance of the memos themselves and have that become the story. In essence, since the memos failed as a “smoking gun”, get the Chimpy McBu$hitler Flying Monkey legions all stoked up and breathing fire about the memos and then go for the “where there’s smoke there must be fire” meme – they wouldn’t be trying so hard to discredit the memos if they weren’t dangerous!

Am I getting warm yet?

Jun 20, 2005 - 10:08 am 108. Kyda Sylvester:

Thank you, Knucklehead!

The last thing I wanted to do on this fine morning (there’ll be no need to torture myself with AC today) was drag out this dead horse and start beating it again. But the report over at Raw Story has this quote: “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.” So my question again, why a typewriter?

The Raw Story report goes on:

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.”

Not wanting to leave a virtual trail makes perfect sense. Now, thankfully, I can move on.

Jun 20, 2005 - 10:10 am 109. PeterUK:

Which is a cock and bull explanation because smith could have re-typed on his own typewriter since he is an admitted source.

Presumably the typist read the orginal documents and could provide evidence as to provenance,unless of course she was blindfolded.

Jun 20, 2005 - 11:33 am 110. Kyda Sylvester:

Oh, Peter, please…..I was happy there for an hour or so….

Jun 20, 2005 - 11:45 am 111. PeterUK:

Kyda,

The typewriter is a red herring,its the typist,she saw the original documents,the copies,Smith,the typewriter,knows the day and the date and can speak.

The typewriter,It’s never going to make a statement.

Jun 20, 2005 - 12:55 pm 112. Knucklehead:

Mr. UK!

You injure me, Sir. Cock and bull my cockerbullterrior.

First off, the provenance of the document(s) could have easily been hidden from a typist in a legal office whereas “capture” of the “originals” would yield a different matter.

I have no proof (haven’t set eyes on a typist actually working at a real “typewriter” in probably eight of ten years) but I suspect there are still typists employed at such work purely for situations requiring physical security of documents. There is no such thing as physical security of documents done on computers.

Last, but not least, an “old fashioned” typists whose job is to retype documents could very easily pay virtually zero attention to the contents of the document s/he was typing. They type, they don’t really read or comprehend – more likely to be thinking about cricket matches that what is contained in the document they are retyping.

Jun 20, 2005 - 1:02 pm 113. PeterUK:

I have here a copy of a piece of the original Holy Grail,are there any buyers out there?

Jun 20, 2005 - 1:23 pm 114. Buddy Larsen:

I Bid Twenty Billion Copy Dollars!

Jun 20, 2005 - 1:35 pm 115. PeterUK:

Buddy,

Trust me,you’ll never regret it.

Jun 20, 2005 - 1:52 pm 116. Kyda Sylvester:

Oh, you guys. All I’d like to know is, this Michael Smith (now there’s something floating around out there about a connection to Mary Mapes??), would he, did he, say to himself waaay back in September just before he broke the story something along the lines of:

Gee, I wish I could find a way to serve up some payback to the right wing blogosphere for Rather and Eason and the daily insults. At the same time I need a devise to detract attention away from the fact that there is absolutely nothing of substance in these memos. I’ve got it! I’ll have them reproduced on an old fashioned typewriter. That’ll really get ‘em goin’.

Either you buy that scenario or you look for another explantion for the use of a typewriter instead of a word processor. Knucklehead’s come up with the best one so far. And if you don’t buy it, then really whatever the explanation for the typewriter, it’s immaterial. There was little interest in these memos back in September but now Smith has a spotlight. Would he have hatched the above plot just recently, a plan possible only because he had, for whatever reason, reproduced those memos on an old fashioned typewriter?

If this is what everyone’s been trying to explain to me for the last 2 days, aren’t you glad I finally get it?! Now, I have only one question: Why the typewriter? (kidding, just kidding)

Jun 20, 2005 - 3:37 pm 117. Knucklehead:

Kyda,

Somewhere out there in all this stuff is a quote by the Michael Smith that the typewriting was used to avoid the British search and siezure laws somehow. Too lazy to look it up. The intent may have been otherwise but…

Jun 20, 2005 - 3:50 pm 118. PeterUK:

Kyda,

It could just be a sarcastic reference to the Rather debacle.

The main point is they are unsourced copies,it doesn’t matter if he chipped it them solid marble in cuneiform, they are reproductions.

All the rest is the standard flummery that comes with this kind of thing,basic misdirection,the meaning of fixed gets debated,the age of the typewriter ad nauseum,what gets forgotten is the fact that these memos are not original,they are “copies of photocopies”,the person who supposedly authenticated them is anonymous.Smith is a journalist.

Jun 20, 2005 - 4:03 pm 119. PeterUK:

Knucklehead,

It wouldn’t avoid search and siezure,if the police thought he had something they would turn his house over.Gain nobody would take his word that he did it on an old typewriter,they wouldn’t care.

What does the fact that the Police don’t seem to be interested tell you about the quality of Smith’s information?

Jun 20, 2005 - 4:11 pm 120. Buddy Larsen:

Takatakatakatakatak. Takatakatak *DING*

atakatakatak. Takatakatak. Taka *DING*

takatakatakataka. Takatakatakata *DING*

katakatakataka! Takatakatak! *DING*

(riiiiiiip)

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:01 pm 121. Kyda Sylvester:

Indeed, Peter, that is the point. Can’t say why exactly this likely irrelevancy sticks in my craw. Somehow I feel that if Holmes were investigating, he’d want to get to the bottom of it (The Clue of the Old Fashioned Typewriter). I can picture him saying to Smith: “Mr. Smith, you say that you reproduced these memos on an old fashioned typewriter instead of a modern word processor at the advice of your legal department because you did not want an electronic trail leading back to you. Did you not know, sir, did they not know, that any typewritten page can be traced to a unique machine?” Oh well, perhaps we’ll never know. At any rate, you’ll all be happy to hear, this dog is letting go of the bone.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:03 pm 122. Buddy Larsen:

Pay no attention. Y’all are doing good work. I’m a smirking idiot.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:05 pm 123. Kyda Sylvester:

Buddy, I haven’t laughed so hard in weeks. Really. It was first think I saw after I hit post. You’re not going to give the Gaslight treatment, are you?

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:10 pm 124. PeterUK:

Kyda

Exactly,forensics have been doing that for decades.

We would be better finding out what Mr Larsen is drinking,he sounds like a Kamikazi pilot dropping dud bomds on a battleship.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:15 pm 125. Luther McLeod:

I know, and agree, that there’s nothing of substance or consequence in the memo’s.

But, (and, sorry Kyda, but I am with you as to your befuddlement of the typing) why would this be done with a typewriter? Would a small amount of ‘white-out’ and a copier have not done the same thing. Were there notes in the margins, or in the body of the text, that would have precluded the quicker and simplest approach? I mean, eighteen pages of typing versus five minutes of ‘white-out’, come on, there’s a reason there. And, having experience, typists are not normally drones, most especially when they are trusted to the level that this typist was. They read it, they know.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:15 pm 126. Kyda Sylvester:

Ok, let me try that again:

Buddy, I haven’t laughed so hard in weeks. Really. It was first thing I saw after I hit post. You’re not going to give me the Gaslight treatment, are you? (I was still wiping the tears from my eyes.)

Thanks for the support, Luther.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:29 pm 127. Buddy Larsen:

Ha! I got it, Kyda, I words too when ing fast.

But, here, have a comic take on the affair–which (Thank the Lord) doesn’t even mention the T***w****r.

Jun 20, 2005 - 5:39 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: