British Embassy won't comment on "leaked document"

[katinmn]

On Monday I inquired of the British Embassy whether it had a statement on the DSM. Here's the response I got today. I think Tony Blair and Bush plan to just sweep their little plot under the rug.

We can't fall for that one.

From: <BritainUSA.com>
To: <xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re : Your Enquiry
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:17:37 +0000

Dear Ms Stone

Thank you again for your enquiry. However, we cannot comment on leaked documents.

You may be interested in what Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, said in his press conference on Tuesday:

"No, the facts were not being fixed in any shape or form at all. And let me remind you that that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations.

"Now, no one knows more intimately the discussions that we were conducting as two countries at the time than me.

"And the fact is, we decided to go to the United Nations and went through that process, which resulted in the November, 2002, United Nations resolution to give a final change to Saddam Hussein to comply with international law.

"He didn''t do so. And that was the reason why we had to take military action.

"But, all the way through that period of time, we were trying to look for a way of managing to resolve this without conflict.

"As it happened, we weren''t able to do that because, as I think was very clear, there was no way that Saddam Hussein was ever going to change the way that he worked or the way that he acted."

I hope this will be helpful to you

Yours sincerely

British Embassy Enquiry Service
www.BritainUSA.com


YOUR QUESTION

Has the British Embassy issued a statement on the Downing Street Minutes? Do you have any comments as to their legitimacy? I'm a science and health writer so this isn't really my area of focus. However, I am very curious. Thank you.

[katsy]

1. Some critical analysis:

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The transcript of the minutes being written before approaching the UN means nothing.

[flpoljunkie]

2. It is a lie to say that Saddam did not cooperate with the inspectors. Bush

yanked them out after El Baradei said there was no evidence that Saddam had reconstituted his nukes, and rushed to war all the while repeating the ridiculous claim that "war was his last resort." Like hell, it was.

Tony Blair rolled over like a good poodle, when after insisting that Bush go to the United Nations, Bush stiffed him and rushed to war.

Blair came with hat in hand this week and got virtually nothing from Dubya. Too bad for us all he ever thought he could do business with Bush.

[katinmn]

4. You're right. The inspectors were there for what - a year?

That's one more bald-faced lie that they were denied access for inspection.

[KoKo]

3. "we cannot comment on Leaked Documents." WHA? Are the

documents forged, or real?

The non-comment seems to say they are real but they can't comment that they are. If they weren't real then surely they would accuse someone of "leaking false documents" and charge them with a crime? Or, maybe just fire them as what happened to Rather's producers. :shrug:

This "cat and mouse" game is getting a little stale. Why won't someone come forward and give more information.

Thanks so much for your trying to get to the bottom of this. :yourock:

[katinmn]

5. Yeah, they imply there's a difference between "leaked" and

regular documents.

Pretty lame, I'd say. They just want to distance themselves from Blair and Bush's treason.

And it is treason.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

6. That's probably because the DSM

was addressed to our ambassador David Manning! (he wasn't ambassador back then tho, just the lowly chief foreign policy wonk to Blair)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html

[Nikki Stone 1]

7. A form letter? I wonder how many inquiries they have received?

I guess they couldn't have said anything else. But it's worth saving, anyway. When the whole house of cards falls down, you can frame it.

[Imagevision]

8. But no wmd's were ever found, why bitch about Saddam not complying

Because Bush spews about with; " well Saddam was a bad guy" - so that makes it ok to kill over 100,000 iraqi civilians??

[Nikki Stone 1]

9. That's a good point

This argument just keeps being repeated and repeated. But there were no WMD, everybody knew it, and the Downing Street Memo makes it clear that everybody knew it.