<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Media Matters - Downing Street Memo</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/tools/syndication/tag_rss/downing_street_memo</link>
<description>This link is for use by RSS-enabled software to retrieve Media Matters items matching the term: Downing Street Memo</description>
<language>en-US</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008, Media Matters for America</copyright>

<item>
<title>&#x3C;i&#x3E;Wash. Times&#x3C;/i&#x3E; misleadingly touted Bush U.N. visits as refutation to Downing Street memos</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506240006</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506240006</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:11:10 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Limbaugh baselessly suggested Downing Street memo &#x22;may be a fake&#x22;</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506210007</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506210007</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:31:34 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>British sources contradict Woolsey&#x27;s claim that &#x22;fixed&#x22; does not mean &#x22;cooking the books&#x22; in the Downing Street memo</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506210004</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506210004</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:45:04 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>ABC asked Rice about Downing Street memo; CNN and Fox passed</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506200001</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506200001</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:32:15 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>British sources confirm that meaning of &#x22;fixed&#x22; -- as in &#x22;manipulated&#x22; or &#x22;cooked&#x22; -- is the same in Britain and America</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506170003</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506170003</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 16:21:46 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Mainstream media cover-up: In five weeks following its disclosure, Downing Street memo drew little attention</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506160002</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506160002</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:59:37 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Some questions for media dismissing Downing Street Memo as old news</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506150005</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506150005</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:05:48 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>While editors nationwide call for increased scrutiny of Downing Street Memo, biggest editorial pages remain silent</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506150003</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506150003</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:55:21 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Russert failed to correct Mehlman&#x27;s claim that 9-11 Commission, Senate report &#x22;totally discredited&#x22; Downing Street Memo</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200506060008</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200506060008</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 6 Jun 2005 18:44:24 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Readers complain, but &#x3C;i&#x3E;Wash. Post&#x3C;/i&#x3E; ombudsman mum on lack of coverage of U.K.-Iraq memo</title>
<link>http://mediamatters.org/items/200505090005</link>
<description></description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamatters.org/items/200505090005</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 May 2005 18:25:56 EST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>