Something smell fishy? (non boaty)

[trevor_loveday]

Re: But I\'ll be dun seen

Do they not still use the transparent autocue boards so that it appears that they are looking out to the assembled masses but are actually reading the words in front of them?

As for democracy, few want the Foundation hospitals, many of his own ministers have misgivings, the conference votes against them, but Tony says he's going to do it anyway. Is there no stopping him?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

To worry so much about the process seems to be indicative of a navel gazer, never really understood the fascination myself.

A picture would be nice, perhaps in crayon?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

A navel vessel with sun in navel orange . . .

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

Re: A navel vessel with sun in navel orange . . .

I knew you were the man for the job, now give your kids back their crayons!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

Re: I\'ve seen a rubber band

I've also seen the opposite, where the evidence was so overwhelming that the jury went not guilty because they thought the police had fabricated it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bob_tyler]

Re: But I\'ll be dun seen

Have you read the extract from Robin Cook's diaries?

This proves that Blair lied as he knew that there were no WMDs in Iraq two weeks before the statement. Fit to be PM?- ******!

PM Knew WMD Claim Was
Incorrect - Cook

TONY Blair privately conceded before war with Iraq started that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction that could be used within 45 minutes, former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook has claimed.

Mr Cook said that it was clear when he spoke to the PM just two weeks before conflict began that Mr Blair did not believe Saddam's weapons posed a "real and present danger" to the UK.

He also gained the impression that Mr Blair was determined to go to war regardless of the progress made by Hans Blix and his team of UN weapons inspectors.

Mr Cook's claims are included in a book based on diaries he kept during the tense period in the run-up to war, serialised in the Sunday Times.

In it, he claims that the head of the Joint Intelligence Committee John Scarlett "assented" when he suggested that Saddam had no WMD capable of being used over long distances to target cities.

And he says that a "large number of ministers" spoke up in Cabinet against British involvement in the US-led military action - the nearest to a "mutiny" he had seen since Mr Blair took office.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Captain_Chaos]

Re: But I\'ll be dun seen

Its not just Tony Bliar that has been rumbled, Gearge Dubbya is coming under increasing pressure in the US because americans realise that they have been conned.

The thing that p****s me off is the stance taken by Bliar that Saddam was a git and deserved to be ousted. I have sympathy with this view but the means by which he did it are totally unacceptable and if he had an ounce of integrity he would resign.

The worrying thing about the Cook diaries is the comment that Bliar was acting more out of evangelistical zeal than making sober decisions based on facts.

<hr width=100% size=1>My drinking team has a sailing problem

 

[Sarum28]

Kill em all let God sort it out

<hr width=100% size=1>Jonathan & Avril

 

[JonA]

I thought I noticed a slight whiff of fish as soon as I heard the phrase "Wepons of Mass Distruction". It sounds like an adman's phrase like "99%of all known germs", a bit too pat, and I've allways worried about unknown germs and the remaining 1%.

Jonathan

<hr width=100% size=1>JonA

 

[Twister_Ken]

Kills 99% of all known germs

My favourite ad slogan was "Nothing works faster than Anadin"

So I never used any.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[tcm]

So, now what?

I don't disgaree with the evident discomfort/anger that the levers of power have being misused. I am uncomfortable tghat a parallel is being drawn with Stalin, who may have been quoting or praphrasing Marx or Machiavelli, but whatever.

INteresting note 1: The full dossier (and more) was available for all MP's prior to a vote. IDS, for example also declared himself "convinced" even prior to the september dossier. With a military background, his weak leadership and the ever-possible charge of opportunism, the conservative party vote backed the PM, and was decisive in the Commons vote to go to war. With rebels and libdem opposition, a tory "no" would have meant no war. Of historical interest.

Note 2. Hutton will of course run down a blind alley, set up by Campbell, who cleverly picked a fight with the BBC that the 45 minute claim was "wrong". Of course, the 45 minutes was quoted out of context. Hence in common parlance "wrong", but not technically "made up by the government" hence the bbc is technicaly wrong. But gilligan has been vilified by his loose reporting - his loose semantics. Again, historical interest.

The last time a warmongering president (LBJ) asked the Uk for help, Harold Wilson manage to avoid the handshake and didn't take UK troops to vietnam - a not dissimilar righteous adventure. Again, this is backward-looking hand-wringing.

More interestingly - what now? A "full enquiry" could grind on for months or years. I am not sure what we want, only that we don't want this. Should Blair resign? Should there be an Election? Other options seem...lesser options.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

Re: So, now what?

I was actually accusing l'escargot (flippantly I hasten to to add) of using Stalin's old (possibly misquoted or misattributed) argument for the end justifying the actions used to achieve it . . . never suggested that there was any comparison between our Tone and Joe S (but see below).

TB has been shown up now as a man who was more concerned with making his mark on history than with the common business of government - perhaps the only thing he really does have in common with Stalin - but he will merit at best a footnote rather than a chapter. He's been left as a bit of a broken reed as a result of his brief appearance in the spotlight, but I somehow doubt he will resign just yet - I'm sure he will make another limping pass across the world stage soon in an attempt to redeem himself.

I think if history bothers to judge him it at all will see his vanity as the achilles heel.

The silver lining? No politician will find it easy to drag this country into wars that are none of our business for at least the next twenty years . . .

- Nick


<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[suse]

Re: But I\'ll be dun seen

Therefore all thoughts and actions are right, providing no-one else has done them before, and they're done by a toughie. Bit of an open-ended thought process here?

<hr width=100% size=1>