Connect the Dots

Yesterday evening, I spent some time browsing the right-to-moderate hemiblogosphere, to see what the other half is saying about the Downing Street Memo.  The answer: not much.  The primary comment seems to be that it is not important because it is not news.  Some repeat that Bush has claimed the memo has been discredited, but I can't find out exactly who discredited it using what evidence.  Others say that the matter already has been investigated.  Yeah, it was investigated by the Bush Administration.  Pardon me for being skeptical.

To say the DSM is not important because it is old news, is much like the White House response to the report that their paid ex-lobbyist had been rewriting scientific reports to make them more favorable to the oil industry.  Their response was to say that such revisions are part of their "normal process."  

So now we are to ignore the fact that the President of the United States started a war based on lies, because it is old news?  The President lying is old news?  No big deal?  

It is true that the one document is not conclusive.  But very few single data points are.  Recall the big flap about how our intelligence services didn't connect the dots?  There was no single bit of evidence that proved there was a big plot afoot.  There were lots of little bits, scattered around.  

The reason so many people are calling for an investigation is not that the DSM is conclusive; if that were the case, no investigation would be needed.  Rather, the reason people are getting all worked up is that there are many, many little bits of information, many little dots from which an image can be discerned.  And the picture that is emerging is not one of those pointillistic riverfront scenes; rather, it is a scene like the destruction of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor.  The DSM has become the rallying point, like the Alamo, or Pearl Harbor.

Someone has taken the trouble of pulling together a lot of it, and putting it into historical context, here: The Lie of the Century.  That merry band, the Big Brass Alliance (BBA), has documented much more.  Still, it would take a staff of serious research types, along with some attorneys with subpoenas, to put together a really comprehensive, convincing report.  The initial step is being taken by the Honorable John Conyers, who wrote a letter to President Bush asking for an explanation.  He originally wanted to get 100,000 signatures on it, but it is rumored that he now has over 500,000.  

The delivery of this letter is sure to be a media event, now that the Michael Jackson trial is over.  Maybe that will be what it takes to get on with the real business: impeachment.

category: politics