Tony Blair where are the weapons of mass destructi

Forums Forums TV Newsroom Tony Blair where are the weapons of mass destructi

This topic contains 15 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  daved2424 12 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #24717 Reply

    indigo20
    Participant
    #24718 Reply

    indigo20
    Participant

    Tony Blair where are the weapons of mass destruction?

    Tony Blair lied about weapons of mass destruction.

    And because of Tony Blair lies, British soldiers have died.

    #24719 Reply

    wolverine
    Participant

    :angry:

    How could you say that ?
    Arms of mass destruction were found and they now are kept in a safe place.
    It is to time to wake up from your too long rest, guy.
    There’s still to seek for Bin Laden’s catapults and the job will be done…..

    #24720 Reply

    rob237
    Participant

    indigo20+Apr 24 2005, 09:00 AM–>(indigo20 @ Apr 24 2005, 09:00 AM)
    Tony Blair where are the weapons of mass destruction?

    Tony Blair lied about weapons of mass destruction.

    And because of Tony Blair lies, British soldiers have died.

    Bullshit………….

    I’m fed up of folk trotting out the same old rubbish.

    British soldiers have died, honourably, in the excercise to remove a tyrant from his power-base before he murdered even more of his own people, and caused ever more instability in that region.

    Saddam’s removal, because of his murderous tyranny, was always the prime objective. Those playing the WMD card, do so for some misplaced political purpose.

    #24721 Reply

    Alloneword
    Participant

    wolverine+Apr 24 2005, 11:56 AM–>(wolverine @ Apr 24 2005, 11:56 AM)
    Arms of mass destruction were found and they now are kept in a safe place.

    Did I miss something here? I ain’t heard no mention of WMD being found and if they have been it must have been a small find m8 not the truck loads we were lead to believe.

    It was great that Tony and our boys (and of course the US lads & ladies) got rid of Saddam and no body would say that is a bad thing (apart from Saddam himself) but you have to see the light guys and Blair took us to war on the basis of WMD’s NOT on the fact that he wanted Saddam out, do you not remember the coverage of Jeremy (or whoever it was) in his NBC suit trying to talk, why did he have all this sh*t on for, you trying to tell me he’s trying to loose some weight and sweat some of it off.

    Blair lied it’s that simple if you can’t see that you need to get an appt with specsavers guys, cancel your labour membership and take those rose tinted glasses of.

    British men and woman have died in this war “FACT” and we went to war on a WMD basis and there was none.

    SIMPLE AS THAT GUYS

    #24722 Reply

    hamishnewhouse
    Participant

    Forgive me but I thought WMD was found in Iraq

    He was found in a hole on 13 December 2003.

    Saddam was the biggest WMD in Iraq.

    I was sick of Saddam playing his silly little diplomatic games, whilst killing his own people. The UN was innefective at preventing him chasing his WMD dreams. The best and only place for him is in frount of a FAIR court (unlike the courts under his rule) and sentenced to a just punishment.

    I am no fan of Tony Blair, but I will defend to my death the decision he made in taking this country to war. I just wish he did it with a little less spin.

    #24723 Reply

    dodrade
    Participant

    hamishnewhouse+Apr 24 2005, 09:48 PM–>(hamishnewhouse @ Apr 24 2005, 09:48 PM)

    I am no fan of Tony Blair, but I will defend to my death the decision he made in taking this country to war.

    Are you saying then you would be willing to serve and die in Iraq so Bush can keep Iraqi oil?

    #24724 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    hamishnewhouse+Apr 24 2005, 08:48 PM–>(hamishnewhouse @ Apr 24 2005, 08:48 PM)
    Forgive me but I thought WMD was found in Iraq

    He was found in a hole on 13 December 2003.

    Saddam was the biggest WMD in Iraq.

    I was sick of Saddam playing his silly little diplomatic games, whilst killing his own people. The UN was innefective at preventing him chasing his WMD dreams. The best and only place for him is in frount of a FAIR court (unlike the courts under his rule) and sentenced to a just punishment.

    I am no fan of Tony Blair, but I will defend to my death the decision he made in taking this country to war. I just wish he did it with a little less spin.

    I like you way of thinking hamish.

    #24725 Reply

    Alloneword
    Participant

    hamishnewhouse+Apr 24 2005, 08:48 PM–>(hamishnewhouse @ Apr 24 2005, 08:48 PM)
    Forgive me but I thought WMD was found in Iraq

    He was found in a hole on 13 December 2003.

    Oh yea so that thing Colin Powell held up at the UN in a small tube was Saddam’s finger or something, did you never see the bit of his speech talking about mobile labs? No i guess not.

    All1

    #24726 Reply

    lakewood
    Participant

    Just to add to this discussion – a letter from The Times
    “Sir, In my view it is Michael Howard who is guilty of misleading the country over the advice from the Joint Intelligence Committee leading up to the Iraq war. As you report (Election 2005, April 25), Mr Howard repeated on television the phrase from the JIC report that intelligence from Iraq was ?sporadic and patchy?.
    What he left out is the following, from the same paragraph:

    “But it is clear that Iraq continues to pursue a policy of acquiring weapons of mass destruction and their delivery means.
    Elsewhere in the same report the intelligence people say:

    We continue to judge that Iraq has an offensive chemical warfare programme . . . From the evidence available to us we believe Iraq retains some production equipment. “
    These are all quotes from the committee report to Government on March 15, 2002, and can be found in Annexe B of the Butler report.

    If a politician is told by intelligence people that something ?is clear? and ?we judge? and ?we believe?, can this advice be ignored? Even if the Government had said that intelligence was hard to get (and it should have done), politicians could not dismiss the conclusion of the JIC that the weapons or plans existed.

    The committee?s caveats are widely quoted. But the positive conclusions in the March 2002 intelligence report have been widely ignored.

    Yours faithfully,
    ALAN FEINSTEIN,
    Hall Fold,
    Calver, Hope Valley,
    Derbyshire S32 3XL.
    April 25.

    #24727 Reply

    daved2424
    Participant

    Was it really very responsible posting his address on the Internet?

    #24728 Reply

    lakewood
    Participant

    I posted it ( Cut and paste)as it was printed in The Times internet version so I could not be accused of doctoring. Also it seems right to attribute the source.

    #24729 Reply

    daved2424
    Participant

    I believe in this case the Times was wrong in printing his address and you should not have done either. Ommitting the address is not doctoring, nor is it attributing the source. Mentioning his name is, come on, surely you know that?

    #24730 Reply

    Steven
    Participant

    daved2424+Apr 27 2005, 11:49 AM–>(daved2424 @ Apr 27 2005, 11:49 AM)
    I believe in this case the Times was wrong in printing his address and you should not have done either. Ommitting the address is not doctoring, nor is it attributing the source. Mentioning his name is, come on, surely you know that?

    Oh come on, your saying that a mere forum member should have a different set of standards to a national newspaper?

    #24731 Reply

    eagleeye
    Participant

    If his name’s already on the website of Times Online, it’s already on the internet surely?
    Anyhow the issue is what he said, which is accurate. I love it when politicians are caught out with their selective memories or quotes. Mr Feinstein showed how ‘selective’ MH’s little quote was. Mind you the media do the same thing – take half a sentence and use it as if it’s all you said

    I’m still curious about Hans Blix who now tells all and sundry how he knew for sure there were no WMDs in Iraq before the war. So why didn’t he have the guts to stand up and say so, loudly and unequivocally? If he had, it would have pulled the rug out from under the Pentagon, Dubya and TB’s support base. Maybe…

    Seems to be anyhow that TB is riding this one as the public has “Iraq fatigue”. Plus no-one can report from there anymore as the terrorists/insurgents/bandits/badguys have made sure that they get little publicity by kidnapping journalists, executing westerners etc so they’ve left Iraq.

    I think the WMDs disappeared after 1991, when
    Saddam’s regime was emasculated. I’m sure he wanted them; but I think he faked having them in a misguided attempt to prevent invasion.

    #24732 Reply

    daved2424
    Participant

    Steven+Apr 27 2005, 06:50 PM–>(Steven @ Apr 27 2005, 06:50 PM)

    daved2424+Apr 27 2005, 11:49 AM–>(daved2424 @ Apr 27 2005, 11:49 AM)
    I believe in this case the Times was wrong in printing his address and you should not have done either. Ommitting the address is not doctoring, nor is it attributing the source. Mentioning his name is, come on, surely you know that?

    Oh come on, your saying that a mere forum member should have a different set of standards to a national newspaper?

    Yes, why not? I certainly have a different set of standards to national newspapers. For example The Sun, The Newws of the World, The Star, The Daily Hate Mail, The Telegraph… However, I am dissapointed in the Times, I owuld have expected more. If you think about it, if you wrote a letter to the editor would you expect him to print it? No. I was just questioning whether it was wise to repeat that decision. We are all big boys and girls are we not?

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
Reply To: Tony Blair where are the weapons of mass destructi
Your information: