usandolamemo

2005-07-05T22:56:00.000-07:00

The Sushi memo is a 3 page legal memorandum on the topic of sushi allegedly written by a paralegal for a midtown Manhattan law firm on July 9, 2003. The memo is complete with exhibits and footnotes, and discusses suitable choices for takeout sushi restaurants in the area. The memo became an urban legend after an article about it was published in The New York Times.
Some people believe it is a parody or a joke. However, the law firm in question, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, has neither denied nor confirmed its authenticity. It has only specified that the paralegal's compensation for the time spent writing the memo was not billed to their clients.
Others view the memo as an example of harsh conditions paralegals face in large law firms, where they are often asked to perform demanding and often useless tasks assigned by their employers.
OutLine
The minutes were meant to be kept confidential and are headed "This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents." It deals with the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, and comes at a point at which it becomes clear to those attending, that U.S. President George W. Bush intended to remove Saddam Hussein from power by force.
The minutes run through the military options and then consider the political strategy in which an appeal for support from the international community and from domestic opinion would be most likely to be positively received. It suggests that an ultimatum for Saddam to allow back United Nations weapons inspectors be issued, and that this would help to make the use of force legal. Tony Blair is quoted as saying that the British public would support regime change in the right political context.
The most controversial paragraph is a report of a recent visit to Washington by head of the Secret Intelligence Service Sir Richard Dearlove (known in official terminology as 'C'):
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

2005-07-05T22:55:00.000-07:00

2005-07-05T22:51:00.000-07:00

Summers memo
The Summers memo was an excerpt of a 1991 memo signed by Lawrence Summers (though actually written by an aide, Lant Pritchett) who was, at the time, Chief Economist of the World Bank.
In this excerpt, the memo advanced an economic argument for the dumping of pollution from first-world countries in the territory of third-world countries. The argument was intended to be an "ironic aside" by the memo's original author, Lant Pritchett, and was intended to support an argument in the memo that free trade would not necessarily cause environmental benefits for developing nations.
The excerpt was leaked to the media with the implication that it was a serious, standalone memo, and it instantly became a symbol within the anti-globalization movement of "the arrogant ignorance of many conventional 'economists' concerning the nature of the world we live in" (Brazilian Secretary of the Environment Jose Lutzenberger).
Lawrence Summers initially accepted responsibility for the memo, but claimed that this argument was satirical and not meant to be taken seriously. An aide, Lant Pritchett, later stated that he had written the memo and Summers had only signed it.
Several economists have noted that although the "memo" may be regarded as morally deplorable, the economic argument in itself is impeccably logical and makes perfect economic sense.