What we did was insane and monstrous

Er, prehaps because he's an inhumane lying evil murdering self-deluded treacherous bastard? Either that or there's something wrong with him.

Many of these munitions were probably the same ones route'd thru UK airports. Another piece of evidence for Teflon's indictment over in The Hague.
Human decency demanded that a ceasefire be called for immediately. Regardless of either antagonist heeding it. At least we British would have been seen to taking a moral stand.
Instead we were let down once again by the poddle.
As for his weasel words, why cannot he admit what we all know is true, that he did not have permission from his master to act.
I hope he has nightmares for the rest of his shameful life for all the innocent blood shed/still being shed for his arrogance.
Rumour has it that his Q&A secession after that stomach churning speech at the TUC conference was carefully orchestrated.
How I would love to have my own Q&A session with Teflon and a cattle prod!

Yes. Almost everything Pinoc.., sorry Tony says, is illogical. I do not understand why people let him get away with it.*

I remember the "Q and A" (should be remaned "Q no A") session at the time of the UN bugging scaBlair just doged the chiefly 'lame ball' questions. The journalists should have taken him up on this and said things like: "Why do you never answer our questions?" , or "The answer you gave doesn't answer my question" or "Your defense citing refusal to answer the question as a matter of security is ill-thought out, I'll ask you again in case you didn't actually understand it."

Journalists should not be the simple conveyer belts of government responses, "information", dictats or statements etc., especially in cases like the one discussed here; the slaugher of 1000+ Lebanese.

To let Bliar have the media as in effect a personal propaganda tool is sickening. People who fail to challenge what politicans say are not journalists, there criminals.

But of course, their criminality is nothing relative to Blairs.

* actually, I think I do:- It's a career development move, believing if they making waves it will hinder their climb up the greasy pole. This of course draws questions towards those in posiitons that can promote people within the media. What allegiences do they hold one wonders? (but not for very long).

Only a psychopath could murder thousands and then turn on the chutzpah like Blair. The TUC performance was almost unique in that it allowed us a rare opportunity of the Bliar having to face a real audience of the disenchanted.

The media which has pandered to the Bliar's every whim is just as much criminally responsible for his serial murder spree as he and his cabinet.

String 'em all up, bring on the tumbrils.

qarsan--- you know why, he was an accomplice to it all, playing armchair strategist with real pawns. The Israeli govt has succeeded over decades in doing a fine job of training up its enemies, now we see the result.

Well done Haaretz. there is more strong criticism of Zionism there than in the vast majority of our press, tho the online 'comments' are scary to read.
Well done that reservist, too.

Send a link to all your MP's ? Some of them must be working on their "in the name of God, GO ! " speech.

May it come soon, as the smarmy sod needs to be put under as much pressure as possible before the October Surprise.

Speaking of Q&A sessions, this link is for an interview The Disease gave to Haaretz:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/760956.html

PS; it's nauseating

Another false argument Blair made at the TUC conference was over Iraq. He criticised those members holding up placards which had demands for the troops to come home. Blair said that those troops were there because the elected Government of Iraq requested them in order to keep order in the country. Leaving aside for the moment the fact that there is no order in the country. Those troops went in as part of an illegal invasion of Iraq. Blair is arguing that British troops are in Iraq to stop the chaos created by British troops going into Iraq. The puppet government might be requesting for the troops to remain in the country (although it wants a clear timetable for withdrawal) but that doesn't seem to be what the Iraqi people want or what the populations of coalition member states want.

re the haaretz interview:

apart from having a collective vomit here, we felt there was a repeated thread in bLiar's comments.

Does anyone else detect in this interview a goading, war-mongering tone. It is almost as if bLiar was trying to 'lead the witness' to a conclusion that some military action on Iran was in Israel's interests.

Unlike his ignorant, brainless, tosspot counterpart in the whitehouse, bLiar is a very clever lawyer/politician (which is what makes him even more dangerous). While the technique of 'leading the witness' is well known to him (both as politician and barrister) , of course, but is rarely so blatant.

Blair was 'prepared to pay the blood price' in his support for Bush and their shoddy illegal little war. I wonder if enough innocent blood has been spilled for Blair to be assured of his 'legacy'. It won't be quite what he had in mind though.....

jk5, The usual collection of distortions and outright lies !

TB with haaretz ---

"""Amongst the people in Europe and Western opinion there is a big battle to be won. I mean, I'm being just honest about this. And I think there is a desire not to face the fact that we are fighting a global struggle."""

"""I'm sure that is what should have happened.(in gaza) And it didn't. And the fact that it didn't means that there is in my view a need for the international community to support in a far stronger and more effective way capacity on the Palestinian side. """

.........................................................................
Regarding Iran, do you agree with the comparisons to the 1930s that we often read about?

""When you have the President of a country as powerful as Iran say those things, it may be very foolish of us to assume he doesn't mean them. And when he's also trying to acquire a nuclear weapon, then I think the warning signs are pretty clear... I think for a president of a country to say they want to wipe another country off the face of the earth and at the same time he's trying to acquire a nuclear weapons capability - if we don't get worried about that, future historians will raise a few questions about us and about our judgment.""
.................................................................................
The first quotes are the usual twaddle on the WOT etc, succeeded by something really vague on Gaza, and more bull on hamas and 'recognition' .

The really War-Mongering bit is the last .

Two weeks ago tomorrow morning jon Humphries at c 0847 said the same words "wiping off the face of the earth", and then added "allegedly.

NOW ! Ahmadinejihad either said it or did not, and are we to believe that the BBC ( and the British Government, why not !) do not have the resources to check it out ?

Well, they obviously do have farsi translators, but they have chosen instead to run with One Particular Version --- I think it was the very first one from reuters. Taken nicely out of context, with Very selective translation of a few words,you can do anything ?

Juan Cole, Virginia Tilley, both profs, and at least one german newspaper exposed this, but the Mainstream is STILL drumming it into our heads day and night.

I encourage all to check it out, because the Propaganda War for our heads is drummin away, and it is all based on that "speech" and those purported "nukes".

PS if anyone needs links, scream and i'll look em up, but google should do it.

PPS OCTOBER SURPRISE ? The Iranians are playing very carefully, but I would not put anything past our Dear Leader.

"apart from having a collective vomit here, we felt there was a repeated thread in bLiar's comments."

JK5, as with your comment above, you often speak of "we". Who does this refer to? A group, a movement, who? Or is it the Royal "We"?

Sometimes you appear to be refering to the anti-war movement, other times the left in general, sometimes - by implication - your comments can be read as if you talk for the whole of Blairwatch (posters and commenters alike).

Just interested, that's all, because as far as I know you are not a part of Blairwatch, (ie, have posting rights) simply a commenter on this site, like I am. Your choice of this word is unusual.

It is not that I disagree with you, simply how you phrase your statements. If you do represent a group/other website (jk5.net?) it would be helpful for others for this to be made clear it is that site to whom the "we" refers, rather than Blairwatch and to give links to avoid unneccessary confusion.

NEXT STOP IRAN = October Surprise ?

This is not a prediction, but these guys are proven mad enough to do it.

NEXT STOP IRAN ? tho the emphasis here will be "bunker-busting" rather than cluster-bombing .

This is but one review of the propaganda repeated ad nauseam not only by BLAIR /BBC, but widely across the spectrum.

Same here in frogland... same influences at work.

I heard it reported that the translation of Ahmadinejihad's speech was very carefully translated by US interests, the words taken out of context and a single misleading english version issued to the press.

The report stated that instead of calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the Earth he actually called for the current expansionist political regime to be removed.

The relevant section of his speech translated by somebody not in the pay of Bush or Bliar is:
"Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world"

(Ahmadinejad is referring to Ayatollah Khomeini when he speaks of "our dear Imam")

Source here

Of course the lying scum in the White House and the Kennel (10 Downing Street) can't possibly have us knowing that Ahmadinejad is actually being quite reasonable and suggesting that the war criminals the Israelis are stuck with as a government should be removed. Primarily because there are not many people left who would disagree with that statement, even in their own political parties.

Bush, however is signed up to invade Iran (or I Ran in moron speak) on behalf of the assorted power bases he is beholden to. The mainstream media will not break ranks on this as most of the US media are owned by arms manufacturers or worse (Disney) and the BEEB was neutered by Bliar when Greg Dike was fired.

I am a little disappointed that papers such as the Independent & Guardian have not carried this though, they normally show some guts in these matters, maybe we should send them the translation.

I also found this translation at a more reputable site, Information Clearing House
The original is from the NY Times but I do not have a subscription.

jk5 (Wed, 13/09/2006 - 16:32.)
I'd prefer to say Blair THINKS he's clever, which makes him more dangerous, and perhaps, more of a fascist?