Blair defiant over Iraq invasion

[emad]

BBC News snip:

Tony Blair has acknowledged evidence about Saddam Hussein having actual weapons of mass destruction was wrong, during his keynote conference speech.

On Iraq he said: "I can apologise for the information that turned out to be wrong but I can't sincerely apologise for removing Saddam."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3692996.stm

[Englander]

1. To the PM,may I take this oppo. to say.........

Fuck off!!!!



Hopefully,by the end of the year,he will be
the last war-monger in office;

Aus.election in October,* in November.


:nopity: :nopity:

[gratuitous]

2. Time-honored method

Hey, when dealing with a colossal fuck-up, focus on something else! Sure, we were dead wrong about those weapons, and threat posed to the country, and how dangerous the situation was, and now we've squandered billions of dollars, lost hundreds of soldiers, killed thousands of civilians, but we got rid of Saddam!

Okay, we didn't really have any right to do that, it was against international law, our justifications for ignoring that law are now revealed as so much balloon juice, and did we mentioned the thousands dead, and the billions of dollars squandered? But we got rid of Saddam!

Back to the kennel, Poodle boy.

[Supersedeas]

8. Great take Grat

[Seabiscuit]

19. Love that quote

"I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on"... HUGE lie. No TV cameraman ever filmed the first plane hitting the north tower - it came as a surprise to everyone. It was NOT on TV.

Can't that dildo-brain ever do anything but lie, lie, lie, lie, lie???

The only footage available was near some firemen, taken by an amateur, who pointed his running camera up as they all heard the noise of the plane overhead, and caught the plane, from quite a distance, hitting the north tower.

[coalition_unwilling]

3. How about the two British soldiers killed today in Basra

Are you sorry about that, you shithead?

[AP]

4. My feeling is that they died in an effort to ensure that the US doesn not

control ALL of Iraq (which would be terrible for Iraqis) and they died in effort to prevent Bush from using chaos in the ME from helping ruin Europe economically, which would result in fascist gov'ts from winning elections in Germany, Spain, and the UK.

[AndyTiedye]

5. The Spanish and the Germans Know Better

Alas, the specter of the Tories taking over again in Britain looks all too real,
and once they get in, they always stay in for decades.

[jpgray]

6. There are only 9,000 UK soldiers in Iraq--what do they control?

Nothing. Zip. Nada. Did we hear about this number dwindling from over 50,000 to 9,000? Nope. Wake up, AP! Don't defend George's fig leaf.

[AP]

14. You wake up. You think sabotaging the EU by sabotaging their economies

isn't part of Bush's plan? You really think they want a gov't in place in the UK which is committed to democracy and middle class wealth?

Wake up.

[jpgray]

15. Yes, Blair's support of Bush has really helped out Labour politically

:silly:

[AP]

16. I bet he would be gone by now if Bush were in total contral of Iraq.

And if you think Schroeder benefited from criticizing Bush, you should check the last election they had in Germany.

Schroeder's gov't took a big hit because people are blaming him for the economic lull.

That's how fascists win. They cause economic lulls and then make sure the liberals get blamed, whether it's Allende, Carter, Davis, Schroeder or Blair.

Blair is fighting a much bigger battle than you realize.

Like I said, open your eyes.

[jpgray]

17. Fighting fascism by waging imperialist wars? Brilliant!

Sorry, but helping to kill thousands of Iraqi civilians for no reason is no kind of economic plan I've ever heard of. Any political 'strategy' that requires Blair to be part and parcel of the invasion of Iraq, to stand up with Bush and be counted for everything he stands for is the worst kind of 'ends justifies the means' rhetoric I've ever heard. I'm not sure what tortured rationalization you've developed that makes Blair a hero for supporting this murderous disaster, but insofar as it is a political strategy it is a massive failure--Blair's approval numbers at 43% are lagging the Liberal-Democrat leader Charles Kennedy's by 10%, and they are far worse than recently-elected Zapatero's, for example, whose approval rating is at 60%.

:)

[AP]

22. Because the US are fascists doesn't mean the UK are behaving as fascists.

The UK is not using the war to shift a lot of money to private corporations. They're not behaving like fascists in the areas they control and, in fact, the role they are playing is basically to prevent the US from controlling the entire nation. Last I checked a few months ago, if you googled "British controlled," "Iraq," "Basra", and "relatively peaceful" you got a lot of hits.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. Are you seriously saying that the invasion of Iraq

has caused an economic lull in Germany, but has magically spared the UK?

Germany's economy has its own problems, which are independent of the Middle East, or Bush's military policies in general. The people there are quite capable of criticising Schroeder for his domestic policies.

In the mean time, the vast majority of Germans agree with Schroeder's stand on Iraq. In fact, the story in 2002 was that Schroeder would have been defeated in the election, were it not for his opposition to war in Iraq.

The prospect of a U.S.-led war on Iraq has coloured much of the election debate. Stoiber has accused Schroeder of damaging U.S.-German relations by flatly opposing German involvement in any war.

But Schroeder's stance has been popular with voters -- turning from the prospect of certain defeat to a cliffhanger election.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/09/21/germany.wrap/

So, checking the last parliamentary election they had in Germany - yes, he benefited. Time for you to rethink your position?

Compare that to the UK, where Labour's popularity has plummeted - 3 polls came out at the weekend, and all 3 had the Tories now picking up a larger percentage of the vote than Labour. One even had the Lib Dems beating Labour too.

[AP]

21. I'm talking about the state elections about four weeks ago when the RW'ers

took a chunk out of Schroeder's party's seats and the reason was because they were unhappy with the economy.

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. And the economic problems are unrelated to Iraq

Schroeder, in the national elections, was more popular because he opposed the war in Iraq. So opposing the war is a good way to stop right wing parties winning in Europe. Blair didn't do that.

[AP]

24. Right. Price of gas has nothing to do with the economy. Sure thing.

Opposing the war was never going to stop the war. The war was going to go on. Blair was in damage control mode. And I think he has controlled the damage brilliantly.

Of course it's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation.

But he's in a much stronger position than if he stayed out, the war went on, and if the US were in total "control" of ALL of Iraq.

Schroeders party did take a hit because of economic problems. Those problems are related directly to the price of oil which is directly related to what's going on in Iraq. The last general election was so soon after the invasion, the economy wasn't an issue. Persistent economic problems will register more with the people than Schroeder's position on Iraq as time passes.

Folks, this is how the fascists took power the last time in Germany. And Bush knows it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. The price of oil affects all economies, not just Germany

so the USA can hardly use it as a weapon against Germany. It would make an even worse weapon against the UK, since the UK still exports about as much oil as it imports.

The last general election was before the invasion; and, as the article said, Schroeder gained support in it because of his stance on Iraq. Don't you remember the American politicians saying he was pandering to his electorate? The economic problems in Germany are not related to the oil price - take, for instance The Economist's analysis (which says nothing at all about energy costs being a problem): "That performance has been sluggish of late, with growth at nil in 2003, perhaps 1.4% in 2004, and unemployment hovering above 10%", and yet "Between the end of February 2002 and the end of February 2004, the price of oil in dollars rose by 51% (from $20 a barrel in 2002 to more than $35 a barrel today), but it rose by only 4% in euros" (http://healthandenergy.com/tax_cuts_increase_oil_prices.htm).

Have you ever read any economist saying Germany's problems were related to the price of oil? A single one? Or did you just come up with that yourself?

[AP]

27. I got the idea from Eric Margolis. I strongly suspect that...

...chaos in the ME has a very direct influence on the economies of Europe. What are Europe's primary sources of oil? The North Sea and the ME. The UK probably has things under control becuase. Germany doesn't.

Blair is keeping the economy cool in the UK. Schroeder has less control.

Schroeder HAD support because of Iraq. Schroder is loosing support now because of the economy.

Economic development is fueled by fuel. The cost of oil has a direct influence on economic development. When the price goes up, it means that oil companies get a big slice of the cost of economic development, and the cost itself creates more friction for development. Eric Margolis has an entire book -- War at the Top of the World -- about the geopolitics of oil.

[reorg]

29. how can someone be so deluded?

I guess you believe Tony is getting a rebate on world oil prices for his lying and bullshitting in support for the Bush fascists?

Oil prices on the rise is a good thing. It may be less agreeable for emerging industrial countries like China and India, but Europe is able to tax fuel so heavily that the current doubling of crude oil prices is hardly worth mentioning at all.

The US is much more dependent on road transport, and obviously much more used to cheap gas. They also may have a reason to get control over whether oil is paid in Dollars or Euro. And it is US companies who obviously gain from this bloody invasion. Blair's role? My private suspicion is that he was launched and supported by some clandestine US agency all along. Nobody understands why he is doing what he does. His outrageous participation in the ME conflagration is certainly not in the interest of a liberal party.

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. Is Tony Blair Crazy, or Just Plain Stupid?

Blair may well owe a political debt to the financiers and press barons who launched his meteoric political career and badly want this war.

But plunging Britons into an unjust, unnecessary war to please these neo-imperialists is intolerable.

The only other explanation - that Blair is doing all this out of conviction - is even more frightening.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0316-03.htm

by, errm, Eric Margolis.

[AP]

35. Read War at the Top of the World

and tell me you honestly don't believe the US wants to control European economic development by controlling the ME.

[muriel_volestrangler]

36. while a book on Afghanistan, Kashmir and Tibet may be interesting

I do wonder how much it will say about the Middle East and its effect on the European economy. If it was really about the Middle East, wouldn't he have called it "War in the Desert" or something?

[AP]

38. So you're not going to read it?

[AP]

39. Or are you just going to judge the book by its cover?

Literally.

[muriel_volestrangler]

43. No, I'm judging it by the online reviews

which say it's about the Himalayan area. I'll keep an eye out for it in bookshops, so that I can examine it myself, but since the online bookshops say its about the countries, it seems pointless to order it, and then get disappointed if I find out that it really is.

[AP]

45. Here's what's inside that book:

It puts conflicts from Afghanistant to Kashmir to Tibet in the context of regional battle for control of oil so that Russian, India and China can fuel their economic development.

I'm saying that Iraq is about Europe's economic development.

[AP]

32. That's exactly what I ask myself about the knee-jerk Blair haters

I can't believe they can't see the big picture.

[Djinn]

40. my "Blair hating"

started WAY before jumping into bed with Bush - it had to do with him being a tory leading the Labour Party.

[reorg]

28. once again your ignorance is showing

It certainly has escaped your attention, but one of the most eminent and hotly debated points before the first SPD/Green government came to power was the "Eco tax", the plan to raise the price of gas to then 5 deutschmarks per litre (2.5 Euro).

It is indeed hoped for and necessary that gas prices will be raised. Otherwise we won't be able to force our car manufacturers to make fuel efficient cars. We will have no clout in developing applications for alternative fuels, creating new jobs in the process.

If you further want to waste valuable and scarce resources instead of supporting the development of renewable energy, you can continue to do so. But pay the price for it, and please don't tell us that we need cheap oil.

Schröders party did take a hit, not because of economic problems, he did take a hit because he lied to his voters, and wants his base to pay the price for handouts to corporations. This is why HE needs to pay.


BTW: the fascists took power after a long process during which first the moderate left SPD and then the conservatives were totally discredited, due to their own policies, and because no alternative besides the equally discredited and certainly much maligned Stalinists were there. There were many very specific reasons, none of which comparable to today's situation. We some way to go until it may happen again. Before that, there is a lot of hope that a majority of voters will have the sense to push for real democracy and real reforms instead of defending the minions of coporate masters.

[AP]

33. I'm ignorant?

Raising taxes on gasoline gives the gov't a cut of the cost of energy and taxes a little profit away from the retailer and the oil companies. Raising the price of a barrel of crude gives more profit to oil companies. The gov't may get a cut of that in the form of tax revenue, but it's only a small % of the increased wealth and political power that the oil companies get.

It's also giving oil companies a big % of the wealth created by economic development, and creates a lag on economic development.

War at the Top of the World by Eric Margolis goves over all of this. It argues that much of the politics from Turkey, through the ME and all the way out to China are all about controlling the source of oil so that China, Russia, India, the US and Europe can sabotage each other's economies and have competitive advantages.

It's amazing that people have blinders on and can't see that that's what's going on. The US wants to be the only superpower. They don't want Europe, Russia, India and China to have cheap fuel so they can effeciently grow their economies. Blair was between a rock and a hard place, but preventing the US from being in total control of the ME, and therefore over Europe's economy was the right thing to do. If he didn't, European economies would suffer and all pro-EU liberal leaders would get voted out of office, and fascits anti-EU nationalists only interested in economies which deliver wealth to the very top and who are true imperialists would easily win election.

Again, economic misery is how fascists get liberals out of office. It was the CIA strategy in Chile against Allende. It was what Wall St did for Arnold in the recall election (they lowered CA's bond rating). It's what Bush had planned for all the pro-EU governemnts in Europe.

I think it's SO obvious that Bush doesn't want the EU to be an effective, liberal economy and chaos is Iraq is part of the strategy to do that. Rumsfield was MAD when the UK said they were going to participate.

[reorg]

26. sorry, but this is complete nonsense

Schröder actually benefited already: He would not be chancellor now had he not opposed the illegal Iraq invasion.

The SPD takes big hits in elections ever since because they try and push through so-called "reforms", social cuts they had criticised when in oppostion against the conservatives.

And that's NOT how fascists win. Fascists don't win in Germany. They may gain a few points in some regional elections, but overall they are not a danger.

Leftists win. The PDS won big time in the East. The new left party, currently being formed by those who drop out of the SPD in increasing numbers, will get most of the votes of those who are discontent. The new left party is predicted to win more than 10% in the upcoming federal election.

So don't fool yourself, the "moderates" are losing. And I really do hope they will. If you continue to support Blair you will go down with him.

As an aside, please don't try and co-opt Allende. Comparing war-mongering criminals like Blair and Schroeder (yes, he did it, too) with Allende is a disgusting insult to all socialists who have some respect left for their convictions.

[w4rma]

44. Why do you think that Bush would be in total control without Blair?

Noone is in control in Iraq. And the guerellas are going to keep on blowing up oil machinery.

[otohara]

7. May The Voters Do The Same For YOu

puppet poodle - better yet "impeach the poodle"

[saigon68]

9. Defiant Poodle barks back

His master, President Cheney, has a firm grip on his leash.

[Zorra]

10. As an outsider, my take is for Labour to dump Blair immediately, and

run another candidate.

Blair is going to lose, and bring the entire Labour Party down with him if they don't get rid of him.

At least he apologized to some degree, but....

"Hey, I lied and a lot of y'all died, and I spent a whole lot of your money for nothing, but at least we killed a lot of innocent Iraqis in the process! Huh-huh."

What a douchebag.

[JoFerret]

11. Maybe the pro hunt faction

could be sent to Iraq.

"Mr Blair was interrupted briefly twice by anti-war and pro-hunting protests."

[daleo]

12. He can't sincerely apologize for anything

Liars are never sincere.

[MichiganVote]

13. Fine. Don't apologize Blair. The Brit's have had it w/your sorry arse

Too bad Americans are not as sensible about their own joke of the century, George Bush.

[saigon68]

20. Toy Poodle ordered by master to help take off heat.

Really embarrassing to finally admit he fucked up.. But the Toy Poodle in his usual fashion, distracts the sheep with his pronouncements

His scrip written by none other than his master President Cheney, who is still holding his leash.

[jeanmarc]

31. Much more honest headline

He's not apologizing at all. Throw the bastard out!

[emad]

34. Here's an as yet totally unconected Blair/Bush2 story from UK -

a real blast from the past - which may well nail the two bastards with capital criminal charges.........

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/13506269?source=Evening%20Standard

Commander Andy Baker who said the excavation resulted from "Fist rate intelligence" (as opposed to WMD intelligence....) is remembered by some specialist UK journos reporting organised crime in the 1980s for his dealings with foreing visitors from the US who met with problems in Londonh and needed personal bailing out by Thatcher making a pone call or two to the VP's office.....

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. Wow! You've outdone yourself this time, emad!

That's the funniest non-sequitor I've ever seen anyone come up with! :party:

[emad]

42. In contrast to your perennially amusing attempts at highbrow.........

Commander Alan Fry:


head of Special Branch/anti-terrorism in the Met, was always a good pal especially to those UK hacks/Middle East banking specialists who handed over their extensive research and data files to the Bob Morgenthau investigation in NYC that closed down BCCI in the US.

Those who know Fry professionally will appreciate the nuances of the cat-n-mouse game being played out at the Royal Courts of Justice this year where BCCI is suing Bank of England for £1 billion for misfeasance. In particular the exquisite delight of knowing that the MI5/special branch files subpoenaed by the plaintiffs contain detailed intelligence that links Blair and Bush2 back to at least 1974 in a series of Banco Ambrosiano transactions, later followed by BCCI offshore branch transfers. These funds were the result of drug and arms smuggling in the Middle East specifically via Dubai (Union Bank of the Middle East, Galadari Finance Foundation, Al Hamdoulilah Finance Trust NV),laundered through Cayman Islands and Dutch Antilles
subsidiaries.

These financial links also show the primary connections between Blair, BUsh2 and this man:

Ken Noye, currently serving life for the murder of Stephen Cameron

and

Neville Lawrence, father of murdered schoolboy Stephen and convicted late 60s gangster, associate of Robert Maxwell and paid stooge of Maxwell's gangster brother in law Stuart Gold....

and

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Al Qaeda terrorist protected according to the subpoenaed BCCI files by Stella Rimington during her tenure at MI5,

and

ex-FBI director, Louis Freeh.

PC Blakelock, who was murdered at the Broadwater Farm riots in 1985, was the original arresting officer in 1983 after the Brinks Mat bullion heist at Heathrow Airport when Lawrence, Gold and Noye were implicated in the subsequent "dissappearance" of almost half of the robbery proceeds from a warehose owned by Noye associates in Bristol who ran a gold smelter.

Over 20 years ago......

Watch that particular house of cards tumble down and you will see the terrible downfall of Bush2 and his Poodle.

[Matilda]

41. I think Blair will win a third term.

Partly because he's intelligent, articulate, strong and also quite
good-looking and presents well, but principally because THERE ISN'T
ANYONE ELSE.

His judgment has been faulty - I don't think he was misled over WMD,
but he misjudged the willingness of the British people to be dragged
into an obviously illegal war, and he's way too arrogant (and too
much a puppet of the US) to admit the whole thing was a mistake.
But he'll get away with it and scrape in for one more term, because
there's no alternative. The Tories supported the war and so now
they can't run with the issue because they're as guilty as Blair,
and there is no alternative leader with the charisma that Blair has,
like him or not. And there is no third party well-organised enough
to capitalise on the discontent that the British are obviously
feeling with both their major parties, but perhaps it may happen
in the election after next.

I can't help feeling with Blair that there's been a helluva lot of
promise wasted.