Tony Blair a bigger liar than Pinicchio

[steeljack]

just read this report on the BBC website ..
BBC News - Removal of Saddam Hussein 'right', says Tony Blair
where ex PM Tony Blair uses as an excuse for going to war Saddams previous use of chemical weapons 12 years earlier as a reason for invading Iraq ............
DOH .......12 years earlier ( British Govt.& the US had been supporting and encouraging Saddam Hussien in his war against Iran going back to the first Iraqi attacks on Iran in 1980 as away of toppling the Ayatollahs ) .
Question for Greg Pope (Local MP) why did you and the Labour party support an invasion of a former friend ....lets face it the North Atlantic allicance gave him 'carte blance' to go to war against Iran and a few years later to invade Kuwait and then said "oops" ...........
Further question for the sitting member for Hyndburn and prospective candidates ...do you support the build up of "Nato" forces in countries bordering on Iran .

sorry for the ramble but think its time to bring back the ducking stool for all politicians (local , national and international )

[jaysay]

The whole affair sickens me completely

[Eric]

Originally Posted by jaysay

The whole affair sickens me completely

Sickens a lot of folks ... but I don't think it's fair to single out one man to carry the burden of Britain's share of blame for that whole mess; just as I don't think it's fair to put all the blame for America's actions onto the shoulders of GW. I wouldn't buy a used car from Blair; and I would never think of Bush as anything other than a moron. But come on, Blair isn't parliament; and Bush had the support of Congress. Maybe only 17% of Americans could find Iraq on a map (fortunately, they were all Marines); but the public support was there. B and B cobbled together a causus belli, and hoped that they could find evidence to support it. They didn't, but went ahead and destroyed a country on the basis of threadbare altruism so transparent that it couldn't conceal the greed and the vengence behind it.

[andrewb]

It's pretty easy to get Parliament and the public on board when you say that there is evidence our national security is under threat. Given the truth I doubt the vote would have gone the way it did.

[cashman]

Don't think anyone of any policical persusion will dispute the fact Blair tells porkies, the question i have to the thread starter- Can you please tell me the name of n "Honest" politician?

[Benipete]

Not just Tony then? Most of the government ministers.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cashman

Don't think anyone of any policical persusion will dispute the fact Blair tells porkies, the question i have to the thread starter- Can you please tell me the name of n "Honest" politician?

Of course I can cashy urm, urm, urm, wait a minute its coming, urm urm urm. oh sod it I give in, pass.

[MargaretR]

All the political parties have the same basic outcome to work towards.

The illusion of 'left' and 'right' is there to let you think that you have had some say in the outcome - you haven't.

By voting for one side or the other you are giving your consent to be ruled by whichever wins.

They invariably taint your choice by promising some things that you agree with, but what about the things you don't agree with?

By voting for either of them you have given permission for them to do it on your behalf, because you consent to be ruled by the winner.

Conclusion - we are collectively responsible for wars
- democracy is an illusion.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by cashman

Don't think anyone of any policical persusion will dispute the fact Blair tells porkies, the question i have to the thread starter- Can you please tell me the name of n "Honest" politician?

That's a no-brainer .... Tommy Douglas.

[accyman]

so now hes admitted starting a war on lies when does he get dragged back from wherever he is sunning himself and get slung into prison ?

sure woudl be a vote winner for whichever party offers to have him prosecuted first because surely now if not long ago is the time to arrest him because not only did he fabricate an excuse to start a war which led to many deaths of not only the enemy but our troops but he also dragged other countries into this war all under lies he span.

if i put a lie on my tax forms i can be severly punished so i dont see why blair with what he has done shoudl be walking around free

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by jaysay

The whole affair sickens me completely

I think back to the time when B'liar was on a special edition of Question Time and faced with an opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq from an audience of people who were totally against the venture. I noted then that the jerk was unable to look anyone in the eye when stuttering around his answers to the questions being put to him. It was plain to me that he was lying and my opinion has never changed. Be interesting to see how he copes with the currrent enquiry which, I sincerely hope, will conclude with him being tried for war crimes. George Bush was just an idiot, but B'liar is a supposedly intelligent man whose scheming politics have brought about the wholesale distrust of politicians and Parliament in particular, not to mention the near bankruptcy that the nation now faces.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Stumped

I think back to the time when B'liar was on a special edition of Question Time and faced with an opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq from an audience of people who were totally against the venture. I noted then that the jerk was unable to look anyone in the eye when stuttering around his answers to the questions being put to him. It was plain to me that he was lying and my opinion has never changed. Be interesting to see how he copes with the currrent enquiry which, I sincerely hope, will conclude with him being tried for war crimes. George Bush was just an idiot, but B'liar is a supposedly intelligent man whose scheming politics have brought about the wholesale distrust of politicians and Parliament in particular, not to mention the near bankruptcy that the nation now faces.

I think you have to include Campbell, Blair's mouth piece in the early days, along with Brown and Mandy too

[Greg Pope]

Steeljack - there isn't a build-up of NATO forces in the sense that you imply. Obviously, there are extra NATO forces in Afghanistan but they are not on Iran's eastern border, the are centred in southern and eastern Afghanistan.

Iran's President has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map". In these circumstances do you think Iran should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and, if not, what do you think the international community should do about?

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I think you have to include Campbell, Blair's mouth piece in the early days, along with Brown and Mandy too

I'll include anyone foolish enough to breath the same air as B'Liar.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Greg Pope

Steeljack - there isn't a build-up of NATO forces in the sense that you imply. Obviously, there are extra NATO forces in Afghanistan but they are not on Iran's eastern border, the are centred in southern and eastern Afghanistan.

Iran's President has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map". In these circumstances do you think Iran should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and, if not, what do you think the international community should do about?

I think that Iran's President is facing enough problems in Iran ... and before storming in there to stop Iran from aquiring weapons of mass destrtuction (seems to me I've heard this somewhere before), it might be worth considering that "wipe Israel off the map" is more in the line of political rhetoric than a statement of intent. I think you should be more precise when you talk of the "international community" ... what is it exactly that you mean? Is it the military might of the US and its client states? Or is it something more like the General Assembly of the UN?