BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth

Subject: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Peter T.
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 02:58 PM

As reported (see BBC News), Tony Blair (presumably covering his ass, except revealing it even more, prior to testifying) finally stated that he just felt like getting rid of Saddam Hussein, along with his American pals ("He was a threat to the region"), lies about weapons of mass destruction or not. Britain and America get to decide who is a threat, where, because their souls are pure. They get to overthrow regimes, drop bombs (now called drones) on anyone they choose, cross national boundaries, because they rule.


yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 03:02 PM

I'm sure the Kurds were happy to see Hussein go by-by. As to the BS about WMDs--welcome to the world I guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 04:20 PM

Does anyone think that Saddam Hussein was a greater "threat to the region" than Tony Blair and George Bush turned out to be? Not to deny that Saddam Hussein was indeed a war criminal, with the blood of many thousands on his hands - but how does that differentiate him from that pair?

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 04:22 PM

Specialist subject: Stating the bleeding obvious!

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: ard mhacha
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 04:44 PM

To answer your question McGrath, I think it is obvious who were responsible for more deaths, Bush and Blair of course, and it is continuing, what a smary smile Blair has a bigger turn-off than Thatcher, and you can`t get worse than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 04:49 PM

If my memory serves me well, it wasn't obvious to the political class before it all started going horribly wrong.

It wasn't obvious to many on Mudcat either, with few very honourable exceptions.

The thing which makes me angry is that many of the politicians who "fell in" behind Blair are still around and proclaming their liberal principles

Am I the only one who thinks "politics" and those who engage in "politics" are perpetrating a gigantic con on the public?

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:19 PM

Nope. There are at least two of us here who think that. Maybe a few more as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: gnu
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

Helen.... great stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:46 PM

It wasn't obvious to many on Mudcat either, with few very honourable exceptions.

My recollection, for what it's worth, is that the people posting in support of the war, even as that time, were in a minority.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:51 PM

Seems to me that Bush used some 20 year old term paper by some college kid that Tony Baloney came up with as the final proof (ha) that Saddam had WMD and was going to attack us with them...

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Gervase
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:58 PM

Akenaton, you should have been around at the time. Those of us that were remember very few voices in favour of the war.

For me this latest revelation on the studio sofa of a D-List autocutie just shows the utter amorality of Blair and, should it be needed, gives me another reminder of just why I despise him.
And now we have Cameron jiggling up to the rail to try to prove that he's the next Blair. God help us.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 06:03 PM

Oh I was here alright Gervase, maybe my memory is playing tricks.
I'll check back.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 06:38 PM

Try the Wayback machine for the Mudcat

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 07:54 PM

Well, I was against it from the very beginning... No, make that even before the very beginning... I remember who was in the anti-war corner very well and who in particular wasn't...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 06:25 AM

"Does anyone think that Saddam Hussein was a greater "threat to the region" than Tony Blair and George Bush turned out to be?"

Does anyone think?? Judging by what has been written here so far obviously very few here do. Toddle off and examine the evidence and then come back and answer the question.

You can ignore Iraq of the era of Gamal Abdul Nasser's pan-Arabic dreams and openly hostile threats to annihilate the state of Israel and the Jewish people, the pre-1979 threats against the sovereignty of the state of Kuwait. The rumbling and seemingly endless border dispite with Iran. Since 1979 you will find that Saddam Hussein has waged war against his own people, against two of his immediate neighbours and threatened violence against a third while sponsoring terrorist organisations to carry out attacks against a fourth. On the other hand Tony Blair and George W. Bush attacked Iraq once in order to rid the region of this plague. And that MGOH is what the point of differentiation is.

Was it justified?? Was it the correct thing to do?? Of course it was. Left alone in 2002 Saddam Hussein, with UN sanctions lifted, or just merely ignored, would by now be into either the third or fourth year of the second Iran v Iraq War. There is no way on God's Earth that Saddam would let Iran get anywhere near to acquiring a nuclear weapon - fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: gnu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM

I was in favour of going into Iraq but as events unfolded and the deceit became glaringly obvious, I was not ("not" to avoid being long-winded).

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 08:09 AM

Blair has not conceded deceit.
He maintains that he believed Sadam had wmd, but that he was a threat in any case.
Who knows what the death toll would now be under him and his sons.
If only the aftermath had been properly planned for.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 12:28 PM

Blair/New (over-the-border-Scottish) Labour have made England less safe by stepping-up post-war mass-immigration rates.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Stu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 12:36 PM

"Left alone in 2002 Saddam Hussein, with UN sanctions lifted, or just merely ignored, would by now be into either the third or fourth year of the second Iran v Iraq War."

Complete, unfounded supposition.

"There is no way on God's Earth that Saddam would let Iran get anywhere near to acquiring a nuclear weapon - fact."

Not a fact at all. More supposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 01:58 PM

From July 29, 2002....the building storm.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/jul/29/foreignpolicy.iraq

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: pdq
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 02:03 PM

"...Saddam Hussein was indeed a war criminal, with the blood of many thousands on his hands - but..."

No, not thousands. Amnesty International gives Saddam a "lifetime death count" of 1.4 million.

1.4 million ties him with Pol Pot as one of the two worst butchers since Stalin or Chairman Mao.

Had the coalition forces not taken Saddam and his supporters out, they would have killed many more people than the subsequent war has produced. Between 250 thousand and half a million dead. Perhaps Saddam would have started another war with Iran. We will never know, thankfully.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: ard mhacha
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 02:10 PM

"The Iraqi people will be dancing in the streets" aye and we will all be holidaying in Iraq sunbathing on the banks of the Euphrates, and "in a few weeks time we will capture Bin Laden, he is holed up in a cave and we have him completely surrounded".
Remember all of those quotes, what a blundering pack of fools going into a war on a pack of lies with no planning whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Rasener
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 03:33 PM

>>killed many more people than the subsequent war has produced. Between 250 thousand and half a million dead<<

Wonderful.So that excuses Blair and Bush.

How can anybody be proud of that. How can anyone justify that many deaths.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 03:42 PM

Stalin killed more people than Hitler too. A lot more. Does this mean it was wrong to ally with Stalin to fight Hitler?

Politics is a matter of pragmatism. The USA and UK did not go into Iraq to save the lives of Iraqis or Iranians. In fact, it's laughable to think so, because the USA and UK (governments) value the lives of Iraqis and Iranians at about the same level that they value the lives of cockroaches, as far as I can see.

I do not speak of the soldiers or the ordinary people when I say that, I speak of the political high command who are the people who make the decision to go to war. They are driven by pragmatic considerations, not by a desire to save the lives of people in Iran or Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: pdq
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 03:51 PM

"...USA and UK (governments) value the lives of Iraqis and Iranians at about the same level that they value the lives of cockroaches..."

That statement is just plain crap. Insulting, too.

I know US service men who served in Iraq and they keep in touch with Iraqi citizens they met and call friends.

Few if any US service men and women think their hard work was wasted. They see a reasonably safe country with a stabile elected government.

Daily body count among civilians has dropped from 159 per day (btw 1979-2003) to about 20 per day now, and most of those are from deliberate acts of terrorism by Islamic extremists.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:11 PM

I can't help but reflect of images I saw on TV and in magazines of the Iraq mission to free Kuwait.

There were images of very many Iraq solders all along the highway from Kuwait to Iraq. It impacted me much....as according to reports, many of these Iraq folks did not volunteer to fight. They likely had families, who wondered where they were....and preferred a decent burial...just like coalition families would want. But, there they were, not even offered the final dignities of death....a burial, or creamation. The cockroach image, while extreme...seems closer to reality.

Flash back to the Vietnamese war. The USA went to great lengths....many years after the conflict to return bodies and bones for burial.

So, why a different standard? Why cannot we extend some decency to a fallen solder and their family....regardless of which side they are on....they are not cockroaches.....they are humans, like us....before God.

Sorry to take you off topic....but, this has aleays bothered me...as a human and a Christian.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:26 PM

Little Hawk speaks the truth.

I was reading a report in one of the papers, concerning the mindset of the American soldiers who took part in the My Lai massacre.

One young man explained that although they were slaughtering and raping women and children, they were not, to the soldiers, women and children, they were not even Vietnamese or even human.......they were Communism, a disease which had to be irradicated.

Politics and politicians turn decent young men into unthinking psychotic killing machines in time of war.

In peacetime they content themselves with simple mind control as can often be seen on these threads...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:26 PM

I already clearly stated, pdq, that I am NOT accusing the ordinary soldiers or the general populace of thinking that way. I think it is the fact that we have many good ordinary people involved in the process, excercising their own moral judgement, that keeps thing in wars and occcupations from getting a whole lot worse than they might have.

Actually, it goes both ways. Some ordinary people and some soldiers DO have an attitude toward Iraqis and Iranians as being worthless "ragheads", worthy of extermination. Just listen to them talk when they think only their friends are listening! But I think those people are a pretty small minority, and I think most people have a basically good attitude toward other human beings. It's the politicians and people at the top who make the pragmatic decisions who worry me, not the general populace or the soldiers on the ground who are facing the actual conditions these wars create.

Decisions are made that have to do with money, oil, territorial control, and overall strategy, and those decisions end up hurting many people for the benefit of a few.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Arkie
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:27 PM

Saddam was a evil man and ruthless ruler who happened to have one of the world's richest oilfields at his disposal. A good reason for the UK and USA to go to war to support their oil interests. BP and their American investors had once had access to the fields and one could expect American oil vultures to circle the fields when the smoke cleared. I would suspect Bush, Cheney, and Blair had a different outcome planned than what has occurred. As for Saddam going to war with Iran that would have surely thrown all Americans and Britons into mourning. One cannot describe the intensity of admiration felt in these countries for Iran. There were some who thought with Saddam at the helm Iraq and Iran were held in check. Now there might have been some fear that Saddam was a threat to Saudi Arabia. One would certainly hope that some good could come from this whole mess. And I hope that the people of Iraq will be able to establish a stable government that will provide security and opportunity.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: gnu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:38 PM

Arkie... that is one hope that I feel is likely to happen. The Iraquis are as as good in soul, spirit and justice as any. Let us hope. It's time for healing and renewal.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Peter T.
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:39 PM

My point was not that Saddam Hussein wasn't a sadistic thug. It was that George Bush and Tony Blair believed they had the right to get rid of him, based (if the truth be told) on GWB's desire to finish his father's job, delusions about the glories of Americanization, and the strategic necessity to keep access to oil. In so doing, they destroyed the very, very fragile international consensus about the legitimacy of aggression simply because they felt like it.   This turns international politics back into naked imperialist power, and undermines the very moral arguments that were being deployed to make the case.

It is noticeable that (by omission) Obama was making the same points in his Nobel speech. His (increasingly wobbly) argument is based on defending a nation under attack, to which NATO and the UN have subscribed. Whether that is true any more is troubling (as are the border crossings and flagrant use of drone bombs) in Afghanistan. The causal links to Al-Qaeda attacks/Taliban control and so on, are pretty thin these days.....

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:43 PM

I get BBC world news where I live and the Blair story broke I think it was Thursday morning. But I don't get what the BIG revelation was. What I got was that he had sufficient reason independent of US policy to commit British forces to a cooperative action with the US. So he was never a lapdog, which I agree with.

Throughout the bulk of the war, I think Blair's public utterances had more cogency and logic than W Bush's.

This does not mean that for a great part it was a ham-handed affair. The how of it did not stand up near as well as the why of it, and ultimately the why of it suffered as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: OG1
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 03:28 AM

You cannot blame Tony Blair, George Bush or Barack Obama for being the lap dogs that they are. You had to know that in order to become a politician you have to sell your soul first.

Obama gets the Nobel Peace price, just as he escalates an on going war.??? ...give me a break.

These criminals are just proxies for their true corporate masters. Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild made damn sure that Blair got his "Golden Parachute" before he left office. It pays to be a "good boy" and do what you are told.

Check out the following links:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1467020.ece

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delano_family

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v97/n196/a03.html

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/sassoon.htm

http://cliffordshack.com/oil_chrono.html

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:24 AM

Governments can actually do as they want, because in years to come they will just throw their hands up and say "Sorry we got it wrong" and there's nothing we can do about it.

Unless we then bring them to book as they are the Nazis.

I wonder?

sal

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:31 AM

One claim he made that has not been picked up.
He said that his actions would be better understood when the true nature of the threat to the world from radical Islam became apparant.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Stu
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:38 AM

Regardless of whether regime change is a bad or good thing, the real issue is that was not the reason the public were given for going to war. Although Bush probably persuaded Blair at the Crawford meeting that regime change was his main motive for war (Blair started dropping references to it into his speeches after the meeting) the fact remains the public (at least in the UK) were being told that war was necessary because of Saddam's WMD's. That was what parliament voted on and that was what the UN rejected in their vote.

The truth is, anyone with half a brain could see at the time there was an underlying motivation for this fiasco. Hans Blix was sidelined by the hawkish bullies of the US and the UK government followed dutifully in their footsteps. The one thing I would say is that a sizeable number of people realised that Blair was obsfuscating and wheedling around the subject and whatever happened afterwards, it is a fact that many thousands have died as a result of people not being presented with the full facts or intentions of our political leaders, and that is very, very wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 06:28 AM

Documented Iraqi Use of Chemical Weapons

Date
Area Used
Type of Agent
Approximate Casualties
Target Population

Aug 1983
Hajj Umran
Mustard
fewer than 100
Iranians/Kurds

Oct-Nov 1983
Panjwin
Mustard
3,000
Iranian/Kurds

Feb-Mar 1984
Majnoon Island
Mustard
2,500
Iranians

Mar 1984
al-Basrah
Tabun
50 to 100
Iranians

Mar 1985
Hawizah Marsh
Mustard/Tabun
3,000
Iranians

Feb 1986
al-Faw
Mustard/Tabun
8,000 to 10,000
Iranians

Dec 1986
Umm ar Rasas
Mustard
thousands
Iranians

Apr 1987
al-Basrah
Mustard/Tabun
5,000
Iranians

Oct 1987
Sumar/Mehran
Mustard/nerve agents
3,000
Iranians

Mar 1988
Halabjah
Mustard/nerve agents
hundreds
Iranians/Kurds

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 06:31 AM

Iraqi-Acknowledged Open-Air Testing of Biological Weapons

Location-Date
Agent
Munition

Al Muhammadiyat – Mar 1988
Bacillus subtilis[5]
250-gauge bomb (cap. 65 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Mar 1988
Botulinum toxin
250-gauge bomb (cap. 65 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Nov 1989
Bacillus subtilis
122mm rocket (cap. 8 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Nov 1989
Botulinum toxin
122mm rocket (cap. 8 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Nov 1989
Aflatoxin
122mm rocket (cap. 8 liters)

Khan Bani Saad – Aug 1988
Bacillus subtilis
aerosol generator – Mi-2 helicopter with modified agricultural spray equipment

Al Muhammadiyat – Dec 1989
Bacillus subtilis
R-400 bomb (cap. 85 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Nov 1989
Botulinum toxin
R-400 bomb (cap. 85 liters)

Al Muhammadiyat – Nov 1989
Aflatoxin
R-400 bomb (cap. 85 liters)

Jurf al-Sakr Firing Range – Sep 1989
Ricin
155mm artillery shell (cap. 3 liters)

Abu Obeydi Airfield – Dec 1990
Water
Modified Mirage F1 drop-tank (cap. 2,200 liters)

Abu Obeydi Airfield – Dec 1990
Water/potassium permanganate
Modified Mirage F1 drop-tank (cap. 2,200 liters)

Abu Obeydi Airfield – Jan 1991
Water/glycerine
Modified Mirage F1 drop-tank (cap. 2,200 liters)

Abu Obeydi Airfield – Jan 1991
Bacillus subtilis/Glycerine
Modified Mirage F1 drop-tank (cap. 2,200 liters)

To suggest that Iraq was not in possession of or working on WMDs is sheer stupidity (read bullshit or willful ignorance). Whether that was the reason for the invasion is another story.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 06:34 AM

The above two posts use info from


https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm


Lest you are not aware, they supply 'intelligence' to the decision makers in government (in the USA).

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Stu
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 07:07 AM

"Lest you are not aware, they supply 'intelligence' to the decision makers in government (in the USA)."

Ah, the CIA. What a reliable source of unbiased information.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 07:11 AM

I agree. However, woe is he who ignores their advice. Personally, I think both Bush and Cheney should be hanged by the fuckin' neck, but that was the info they were supplied with before the war in Iraq.

As to the poison gas/chemicals, the info on that goes way beyond the CIA. It's just at that time the US seemed to be helping the Iraquis with it all. Sluffing off the CIA's information means nothing. It neither proves nor disproves the truth of the situation. It is world knowledge that the first posted list

Documented Iraqi Use of Chemical Weapons

Date
Area Used
Type of Agent
Approximate Casualties
Target Population

Aug 1983
Hajj Umran
Mustard
fewer than 100
Iranians/Kurds

Oct-Nov 1983
Panjwin
Mustard
3,000
Iranian/Kurds

Feb-Mar 1984
Majnoon Island
Mustard
2,500
Iranians

Mar 1984
al-Basrah
Tabun
50 to 100
Iranians

Mar 1985
Hawizah Marsh
Mustard/Tabun
3,000
Iranians

Feb 1986
al-Faw
Mustard/Tabun
8,000 to 10,000
Iranians

Dec 1986
Umm ar Rasas
Mustard
thousands
Iranians

Apr 1987
al-Basrah
Mustard/Tabun
5,000
Iranians

Oct 1987
Sumar/Mehran
Mustard/nerve agents
3,000
Iranians

Mar 1988
Halabjah
Mustard/nerve agents
hundreds
Iranians/Kurds

is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 07:17 AM

Do a little work with Mr Google and you'll locate many sites--not all American or CIA--that attest to the use of various chemical weapons by the Iraqis.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 07:21 AM

Halabja.


For that alone I hope the bastard is rotting in Hell.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 07:29 AM

It's interesting to note that initially the American Defense Intelligence Agency blamed Iran for the attack on Halabja.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 10:20 AM

ALl those dates were prior to Iraq's destruction of their WMD, as I recall the history. Gotta keep the timeline straight. The lie about the Iraq WMD was that after they got rid of 'em, they were accused of still having them and preparing to use what they no longer had in order to generate fear in the hearts of 'Murkins everywhere.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: OG1
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 12:10 PM

People have to stop thinking and talking so much, about the WMD'd, etc. The gas that Saddam Hussein used on the Iranians and Kurds came from the U.S.

These criminals are just playing a world class shell game on the people. Everyone should be seeing the obvious, which is that the U.S. has been broke for a VERY long time, and by insuring that they and their siamese twin -the British- have complete control of the world's oil spigot they will then be able to keep the rest of the other countries in eternal servitude to them. This control of the earth's resources needs to be accomplished on a timely basis, before their citizens -I mean consumers- find out that their country's fiat money -dollars or pounds- are not backed by anything and really have no true value.

The veil has been lifted on their shaky "house of cards" and ponzi scheme -the Stock Exchange and The Fed. Thank God for the age of the internet!

The only question is, what is going to happen when the shit truly hits the fans, and the U.S. citizens realize they have been on the proverbial "hamster wheel" all their lives, and that they will never attain true wealth, that all they are is world class consumers and NOT citizens? Consumers that have lost their culture and connection to the truly important things in life, family and motherearth.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 03:10 PM

Anyone who for one moment believes that Tony B Liar has told, or will ever tell, the truth about the mad dash to war in Iraq, is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Blair still holds to his story that he didn't know the intel was crap sexed up to give Geedub the excuse for his killing spree.

We saw the way Bush treated Blair in that oh so revealing off guard moment, when Tony acted like the well trained lapdog he really was.

He is now saying that even if he had known (another bloody lie...he did know) there were no WMDs, he would have considered it morally right to attack Iraq.

1. How can a politician with zero moral compass claim to have moral convictions about anything?

2. How can he claim moral rectitude in attacking Iraq, while ignoring worse regimes on the African continent (Zimbabwe, Darfur, Rwanda, Sudan, etc. etc.) which, coincidentally of course, happen to have no resources of interest to our leaders?

3. How can he still maintain the lie when it is common knowledge that he was party to the 2002 Downing Street memo, which told him Georgie was cooking the books almost a year ahead of the invasion?

The TRUTH is that the bastard was a willing partner in the whole sorry mess, but I'll lay odds that the so called "Public Inquiry" will never report that as its conclusion.

He will be heard in secret, and the public will never hear what he actually says. This, they will claim, is necessary "in the public interest", which translates to "They'll have blown New Labour's last vestige of hope of winning an election, if they tell the truth".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 04:17 PM

That was part of the problem. It was not possible to ensure the destruction of the biochemical weapons had actually occurred.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:41 PM

Supposition may be Sugarfoot, but I reckon the prediction would not have been too wide of the mark. Remembering of course that the last time Saddam invaded them it was because they wanted to negotiate, that resulted in a bloody stalemate that cost the lives of around 1.5 to 2 million.

It was that George Bush and Tony Blair believed they had the right to get rid of him, based (if the truth be told) on GWB's desire to finish his father's job, delusions about the glories of Americanization, and the strategic necessity to keep access to oil. – Peter

Well no actually, I believe it had something to do with:

-        The US having just been shown how vulnerable they were to attack
-        As a result of which a threat evaluation was ordered to identify what represented the greatest threat to the country and what could be done to defend against it. That evaluation was carried out by two independent groups the US Intelligence and Security Agencies on one hand and by the Joint House Security Committee on the other.
-        Both came out with an asymmetric attack, or series of attacks, similar in nature to the one recently perpetrated by Al-Qaeda employing the use of WMD (Chemical; Biological or Nuclear) Carried out by an unspecified terrorist group covertly aided and abetted by a rogue state hostile to the USA
-        Both the US Intelligence community (all nineteen agencies) and the Joint House Security Committee came up with a list of likely candidates for rogue states hostile to the USA who had the WMD expertise, technology and weaponry to provide any terrorist group of their choice with a weapon or weapons to attack the USA.
-        Saddam Hussein's Iraq came top of both lists, not surprising in the case of the US Intelligence Agencies they had told Bill Clinton exactly the same thing four years earlier.

Now in terms of reason, logic and by studying the work done I would back the above against the "reasons" supplied by Peter. How did the oil thing pan out for them Peter?   

The gas that Saddam Hussein used on the Iranians and Kurds came from the U.S. – OG1

Complete and utter myth.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:43 PM

Tony Blair specifically asserted, speaking in the House of Commons in February 2003, that if Saddam Hussein got rid of the WMDs he could stay in power. (See, for example, this contemporary news report.

"I detest his regime. But even now he can save it by complying with the UN's demand. Even now, we are prepared to go the extra step to achieve disarmament peacefully."

This week he has demonstrated, beyond any question, that he was lying to Parliament when he said that.