Forgeries Abound!
Just when you thought it couldn’t get worse for the MSM, it does. Captain’s Quarters has the latest on the fake Downing Street Memo that was distributed and the subject of those “make-believe” impeachment hearings and the usual rancorous thundering from the left. Turns out that by the author’s OWN ADMISSION that the documents are not originals typed on an old typewriter and the originals were burned making it impossible to authenticate anything. This is not a rumor going around, this is what the author, Michael Smith himself, said to the AP. As CQ makes clear there is a difference between fakes and frauds. The documents are clearly fakes as the author himself states. But that certainly calls into question whether they are frauds as well.
That brings us to story two. Remember the Dishonorable Traitor Dick Durbin calling the US Military nazis based on a FBI memo? Turns out that Durbin was also lying about the memo too. Myopic Zeal brings the quote from Fox News that states:
One knowledgeable official familiar with the memo cited by Durbin as well as other memos said the FBI agent made no such allegation and that the memo described only someone chained to the floor. Anything beyond that is simply an interpretation, the official said.
So it looks like Durbin also was lying about the comments of a confidential memo because he knows they probably won’t release it and he’ll get away with it (much the same is true in the Downing Street Memos, they can’t release it so they can be mischaracterized without the government being able to adequately defend). Blogs for Censure is up and running calling for the Dishonorable Traitor Dick Durbin to be censured. I don’t think he should be censured… I think every GOP commercial should feature this man’s comments and if Democrats don’t explicitly condemn it, they should be ipso facto unqualified for any office anywhere in this nation.
Enough is enough. There is plenty to criticize about America. The Democrats have moved beyond that to make up stories to criticize. First it was Dan Rather, then Isikoff, the Amnesty International, then the Downing Street Memo, now a U.S. Senator. The entire party has made it clear to the nation they are not interested in constructive solutions, they are interested in fabricating charges. It’s time to throw them out of office. I don’t want censure… as an Illinois vote, I want a recall.
Related Posts:
Durbin’s conduct definitely disqualifies him to hold public office. Let the facts come out and let Illinois voters have a chance to redress the mistake of having elected this disgrace.
Comment by Van Helsing | June 20, 2005
Durbin did not forge that memo. It was released by the FBI months ago in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from the American Civil Liberties Union. A PDF copy has been posted on the ACLU’s website for six months or so. Here is the link to it.
Your statement that he forged it is false and defamatory, especially now that I have told you that it is false and provided documentary evidence. Please post a correction prominently.
RESPONSE: Close, but not quite.
Read Durbin’s comments here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2005_record&page=S6594&position=all
Note, they aren’t the same as those memos… He’s either quoting a different memo (which he is) or greatly expanding on the one at the ACLU…
Try again.
Comment by Katherine | June 20, 2005
What a pity that this story is codswallop.
“A former senior U.S. official called it “an absolutely accurate description of what transpired” during the senior British intelligence officer’s visit to Washington. He spoke on condition of anonymity.” - Knight Ridder, May 5.
RESPONSE: A pity that the documents are forged and we won’t know if they really ARE authentic. One official’s opinion hardly makes fact.
Comment by Phoenician in a time of Romans | June 20, 2005
RESPONSE: A pity that the documents are forged and we won’t know if they really ARE authentic. One official’s opinion hardly makes fact.
Keep trying.
Times of London:
“DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell”
None of which have said it is false.
Washington Post:
“That memo and other internal British government documents were originally obtained by Michael Smith, who writes for the London Sunday Times. Excerpts were made available to The Washington Post, and the material was confirmed as authentic by British sources who sought anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the matter.”
New York Times:
“n a Sunday morning television interview, Mr. Blair did not deny that the meeting took place in July 2002, but he recalled that “subsequent to that meeting, we went the United Nations route,” seeking a resolution in November 2002, calling on the Iraqi government to disarm. An effort to secure a more bellicose second resolution faltered in early 2003.”
RESPONSE: The documents are fake. Period. No intelligent discussion exists to be otherwise… the aren’t even copies, they are reproductions. They may or may not be frauds as well. Just because they didn’t deny it doesn’t make them real either. Bush didn’t say anything about the Killian memos either.
Don’t you think this sort of denial is a little pathetic?
Comment by Phoenician in a time of Romans | June 21, 2005
RESPONSE: The documents are fake. Period. No intelligent discussion exists to be otherwise… the aren’t even copies, they are reproductions. They may or may not be frauds as well.
Oh, for Pete’s sa-
You didn’t type the words that appear on my screen. In fact, all your so-called “readers” are only reading copies of words you supposedly wrote. How can you call yourself a blogger when the only person who ever reads what you write is yourself? Your blog is fake.
Same logic.
Just because they didn’t deny it doesn’t make them real either. Bush didn’t say anything about the Killian memos either.
Perhaps because the Killian memos weren’t written by him. The fact is that multiple sources, American and British, have confirmed the memos as authentic, and when questioned, nobody present has denied them. They’re good enough for journalism, good enough for British libel laws, and good enough to be used as a primary source in the history books.
Deal with it - they’re real. According to teh British government, Bush was gung-ho for a war which had nothing to do with the Sept. 11th attacks.
RESPONSE: You’re reading the blog… In May I got over 100k hits. Let’s move on.
The documents are not the originals, they weren’t even copies, they were reproductions, hence fake. They may have the correct info, they may not but we can’t authenticate them. The sources have not authenticated them, they have said that it was there impression it was correct. The document is 3 years old. How about let’s compare it with the ORIGINALS…
Comment by Phoenician in a time of Romans | June 21, 2005