Bayh's response regarding Downing Street memo

Thank you for contacting me regarding a series of
memorandums about conversations between British Prime Minister
Tony Blair and President Bush months before the Iraq War,
collectively known as the "Downing Street Memo." I appreciate
your thoughts and concerns on this important issue.

As you may know, a previously classified British
government memorandum was published in The Sunday Times of
London on May 1st, 2005. The memorandum detailed minutes
from a high-level meeting on Iraq held in July 2002 between
British and U.S. intelligence officials. Since this report, several
other internal British government documents related to Iraq have
been cited in various press reports including The Washington Post.

The Downing Street Memo, and related internal British
documents, raise concerns about the President's course of action in
Iraq. They indicate a British conclusion that the Bush
Administration made only half-hearted attempts at pre-war
diplomacy and failed to adequately plan for the postwar
occupation. Most of the problems we face today - the insurgency,
the loss of American and Iraqi lives, and the $200 billion price tag
- can be traced to these failures.

These documents also raise serious questions with regards
to the use of intelligence by the Bush Administration. In July
2004, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) - of
which I am a member - issued a report on the U.S. intelligence
community's prewar intelligence assessments on Iraq. This report
concluded that a series of failures led to the mischaracterization of
intelligence.

You may be interested to know that the SSCI voted in
February 2004 to expand our inquiry on prewar intelligence to
determine whether policymakers misused or mischaracterized
information provided by the intelligence community. I supported
this expanded inquiry, known as the "Phase II" effort, and believe it
has taken on renewed urgency given the recent revelations in the
Downing Street Memo.

I am honored to be a member of the Intelligence
Committee, as well as the Senate Armed Services Committee, and
believe that we must spare no effort in the prosecution of the
Global War on Terror and to winning in Iraq. Rest assured, I will
keep your views in mind as we deepen our oversight of
Administration action, both at the Committee and full-Senate
levels.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope the information
I have provided is helpful. My website, http://bayh.senate.gov, can
provide additional details about legislation and state projects, and
you can also sign up to receive my monthly e-newsletter, The Bayh
Bulletin, by clicking on the link at the top of my homepage. I
value your input and hope you will continue to keep me informed
of the issues important to you.

Best wishes,






Evan Bayh
United States Senator

EB/ dm

Sincerely,

Evan Bayh

Committee members to call for an investigation.


"the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) - of
which I am a member

-snip-
I supported this expanded inquiry, known as the "Phase II" effort, and believe it has taken on renewed urgency given the recent revelations in the Downing Street Memo.

I am honored to be a member of the Intelligence
Committee, as well as the Senate Armed Services Committee, and
believe that we must spare no effort in the prosecution of the
Global War on Terror and to winning in Iraq. Rest assured, I will
keep your views in mind as we deepen our oversight of
Administration action, both at the Committee and full-Senate
levels. "

Bayh, the guy who helped whitewash the FIRST official intelligence investigation..... :mad: :mad: :eyes:

Wake up to who this man is.....He is with them all the way, and sold himself over to Rove so he could get sElected on all his terms!!!!


http://tinyurl.com/b5oby

The whole thing is rigged and they WANTED the illegal war....Just wake up sooner rather than later, the fix was in by pure DINOs and their masters. :argh:

He talked about failures causing "miscaracterization" of intelligence.That is not an intelligence failure. He also talks about the failures of the Bush administration leading to 'concern' He is saying the administration and Bush lied.That is what mischaracterization is.


" They indicate a British conclusion that the Bush
Administration made only half-hearted attempts at pre-war
diplomacy and failed to adequately plan for the postwar
occupation. Most of the problems we face today - the insurgency,
the loss of American and Iraqi lives, and the $200 billion price tag
- can be traced to these failures. "

And he is holding the Bush "failures" as responsible.

but am I the only one one the board who agrees with Bayh? Am I the only one who thinks as he does on this?


Yes, I know I am.

agree.And I am not a moderate. It sounds to me that Bayh, who I don't care for so much, is on the right side on this one!

Remember who PNAC has under their control... http://www.defenddemocracy.org/biographies/biographies.htm

Bayh's first investigation, Phase 1, ordered by the senate committee.....Produced the biggest whitewash we've ever seen...He has a long way to go to level with the public. :mad:

I can always hope!

investigating the DSM would certainly be a plus for him with the Democratic base.

I am honored to be a member of the Intelligence
Committee, as well as the Senate Armed Services Committee, and
believe that we must spare no effort in the prosecution of the
Global War on Terror and to winning in Iraq.

In America, winning is the goal, no matter how we got into the mess. Sure, investigate, but we MUST WIN!

and actually points out the politicization of intel hearings that have yet to be heard? For Evan (who months after Kay returned continued claiming on tv his belief that we WOULD find WMDs), this is a pretty strong statement letter.

I am genuinely surprised.

he's almost taking something resembling a stand. This is weird. Must be the "new and improved I'm gonna run for prez Bayh."



P.S. Hey salin!

because his lurch right (since 2000) I have always viewed as part of the presidential candidate opportunist side of him; which was the 'Rose Garden' speech bayh, the ongoing touting the admin tying Iraq to 911 Bayh.

Maybe he realizes he has to win with democrats in order to get the nomination - and is realizing that to do this he can't sound like bushlite?

Or maybe in the preparation he has finally hired better staff that write better constituent letters (Lugar's staff has always written better letters that actually address the issue raised in the letter sent to Lugar; while Bayhs staff would respond with some stock letter than might be nominally related to the topic of the letter to Bayh but often sounded so generic - and was received with such a delay - that it would leave one scratching the head.)

Heya Thinking Woman! :hi:

I'd go with better staffing.

I think, actually, that Bayh will lurch back a forth more as his potential bid for prez gets closer. I think he'll be advised to pander to everyone in order to be considered a moderate (which is stupid advice but hey, they're politicians) and he'll follow that advice.

Although I have a slightly higher opinion of Bayh than you, I'm not necessarily thrilled with the "new and improved" version either. I'm going to just watch and wait I think and in the end, if by some chance he gets the nomination, I'll still support Anybody But A Repuke.

on each point.

I, too, think it is staffing.

I think the pandering is just beginning - and I lay it on the feet of insular dem strategists in DC (of which I was a part of that world, briefly, in the mideighties - and it is a very insular world) - and on bayh for mindlessly following the advice.

And - in the end - I would support him over a repub - just hope that I don't have that choice. While numerous dems who were not my fav in primaries have gotten the nod - I have always been able to embrace them and grew to embrace them more over the campaign. Would have a harder time doing that for Bayh - it would feel like I was supporting a modern version of G H W Bush (the 1992 version). In the end I would support him, but with a heaviness of heart, as it would represent how far to the right this entire country has moved over the past 20 years.