Jun 20 2005

What Is Michael Smith Up To?

Published by at 7:54 pm under All General Discussions,Downing Street Memos

I received a comment from Seixon (www.seixon.com) which addressed something I had noticed on the Rawstory site and started to address, but changed my mind simply because I was not sure what it meant. It is worth exploring.

There are two exclusive sets of documents here. One is the package of 6 documents he wrote stories on in September 2004 (Daily Telegraph, September 18). These documents have been quoted by the Butler Commission, and are most likely authentic, even though I only found evidence of two of them being quoted or referenced in the Butler Commission Report.

The second set of documents is the DSM itself, and the Briefing Paper. These two documents have no typewriter-written PDFs, like the previous six. Why is that?

Which took me to this extensive posting on events leading up to the big DSM discussions.

The news stories Michael Smith ran in September 2004 cited all of these first six documents, yet not the latter two that surround the whole Downing Street controversy that started on May 1, 2005 when Smith published his article. Is it not conceivable that Smith would have cited the Downing Street Memo back in September 2004 if he had it in his possession at the time? Why wait almost 8 months to release the more potent documents? I think the answer is that the Downing Street Memo and accompanying Briefing Paper did not arrive into his possession until after the US election. Smith has not commented on when he received the Downing Street Memo, only referencing that he received “the memos” in September. What “the memos” means in this context is perhaps purposely unclear.

I was wondering why the one really controversial memo was not in PDF. I was not aware that the Daily Telegraph had partial photocopies of the originals. I had my suspicions, Sexion has the goods. Most people who dismiss these memos as fakes rely on the fact that the British government has never refuted them. But the question now is, out of all these memos which ones were the ones Blair’s government did not refute?

The “smokescreen” is trying to get people to think that the Butler Commission has quoted the DSM, that Jack Straw and others have vetted the DSM, and that the DSM was part of the original bundle of authentic documents in September. This is of course false, deceptive, and dishonest.

The shell game! When someone asks Blair or someone in his government to address the memos, they are thinking the six retyped memos and not the ones which stand out for their lack of even a complete PDF?

What in the world is Michael Smith playing at?

Read the rest of the post by Sexion

Comments Off

Comments are closed.