The Return of Fake But Accurate?Via
Captain's Quarters, we learn today the startling news that the infamous Downing Street Memos are not originals,
but retyped "copies". The originals were supposedly burned by the reporter who did the retyping job.
The eight memos — all labeled "secret" or "confidential" — were first obtained by British reporter Michael Smith, who has written about them in The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Times.
Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.This is interesting because I noted some concern about the
first memo way back on May 6th, when I initially looked into the case:
I suspect that the memo has received some degree of vetting; the London Times is not CBS News (DOH!). Unfortunately, the Times has only the transcript and not a copy so it can't be verified in any other way (e.g., initials, signatures, etc.). But I'd be very surprised if this is a completely original memorandum prepared shortly after a meeting on July 23, 2002 as it is purported to be.Not bad, if I do say so myself. Now if I can just call the chiropractor to get me out of this contorted position caused by patting myself on the back.
Update: Mr Right has
a terrific post on this with lots of links to different reactions to this news. In particular, check out Power Line's comments, which I generally agree with. However, if the real memo ever surfaces, I will bet you dollars to donuts that the line "There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." turns out to be an addition to the original memo.
