Comment at end
30th July, 2009
OH NO HE DIDN’T
Just a quick marker especially for the TROOFERS out there.
As the Iraq Inquiry gets underway, expect the ‘TRIAL of Tony Blair’ to gain momentum. Many people are likely to be disappointed.
Covered here by the Guardian’s Michael White and here at The Telegraph. More, MUCH more to follow.
And the press should watch their Ps & Qs.
See my TRIAL of Tony Blair posts
Advertisement
Tags: Iraq Inquiry launched, Sir John Chilcot, Trial of Tony Blair
July 31, 2009 at 9:05 pm |
The Clarkson talking / Guido / C i F / Dully Tele pervs won’t be at all disappointed Blair friend . . .
When the inquiry finds the truth and speaks it they will restate their imaginative versions as many of them do re the sad death of Dr David Kelly.
As we both recall from a few years back on C i F they enjoy their rage and hatred, it is what they feel they are for. Their guilty self loathing demands that they issue forth righteous anger.
And Cameron, who originally agreed that a largely private inquiry would be best, but then realised that the propaganda opportunities would suit him, as Clegg knew all along, will concentrate on the initial aspects, when the relatives of dead soldiers make headlines about their requirements of the inquiry.
Leaving the inquiry until there are as few as 150 UK military personnel in Iraq may well have been the best security, it was not the best politics, as I pointed out around 6 months ago.
August 1, 2009 at 12:40 am |
QZ – I do find some of this deeply irritating and quite worrying as regards the political comprehension of our fellow-countrymen. And David Davis is a disgrace. He’d obviously prefer a British former prime minister to be branded a criminal and locked up for life than that such as Binyam Mohamed should be treated as what they (he?) probably are – out to destroy the British state.
DISGRACEFUL.
Davis is one strong reason that normal well-balanced Brits should NOT vote for Cameron’s party.
Chilcot seems to be getting his
attack… defence in first. This ITN report shows clearly the bias of the reporter, imho. Normally, due to their ‘balance’ requirements, I find the broadcasters a touch more balanced than the papers. Not here in this video report.This journalist is clearly of the opinion that Blair is getting his come-uppance and that he now has no hiding place. Interspersing Chilcot’s interview with the initail bombing of Iraq and the anti-war demonstrators he has no truck with the fact that Iraq has actually had a successful outcome for its people.
The truth might actually punch this ITN reporter and Guardianistos etc where it hurts. Not that the little naysayers would understand or accept the “truth”, unless it’s THEIR truth. Their brains are numbed and impervious to accepting anyone else’s truth.
As for the timing – I don’t think that matters, to be blunt. This inquiry is flawed in my opinion, and is NOT necessary. Much of its conclusions in – let’s see – TWO-THREE years time? – will be negated by the unsatisfied. For the simple reason that Americans will have refused to provide evidence, so leaving much conjecture still. As always.
August 1, 2009 at 10:41 am |
Dave Davis is seriously unbalanced, just look at his utterly self destructive by-election, fraid I haven’t read whatever he has to say on the Inquiry.
The Inquiry may last over a year, certainly it is charged by Gordon Brown not to ramble for years as one set up in 2000 still is, forget its name & what it is about, as much everyone else by now. In fact the original terms were intended to ensure this Inquiry would be a rather speedier effort.
Had this Inquiry been commenced 6 months ago, which might have had security implications, it might have been completed by the next General Election, which would have made a difference.
I hope there is an interim report, as there may well be, if the rabids, such as Davis, spend much of their propaganda effort telling lies, as we may be sure they will.
How much evidence the USA and its witnesses will provide is unclear, BUT we may be quite sure the rabids will make out there is lots being held back. We should not rule out inquiries by Uncle Sam into the rough edges of their involvement, particularly the reconstruction and Cheyney’s input.
You are right that the outcome has been a success for those Iraqis who want a
democracy, a failure for those who would prefer their own rabids i/c the shop.
In practice Davis names and shames himself by the remarks you report. It is time for a Roll Call to be commenced of such charlatans.
BTW, do you recall that, when Davis’ leadership campaign manager (in all but name) Derek Conway was on the public rack over his claims for Parliamentary expenses to cover the advice given him by his sons while at College the fact that Davis and Conway had shared a corporate donor surfaced?
How swift was the Haltemprice and Howden scunner to recall and make a big public fuss about a letter he claimed to have written to No 10 some months earlier and to which no reply had been made? Davis is shambles so far as the truth is concerned.
Just as this Inquiry will be highlight for the howwwls of the rabids, and the bereaved families, we may expect the truth it clarifies to remain hardly noticed.
August 1, 2009 at 11:53 am |
QZ – I think it is The Bloody Sunday Inquiry you refer to. Also known as The Saville Inquiry it was actually set up in – wait for it – 1998!
So I don’t see this one finishing in a year or perhaps even two without a lot of moans and groans from the dissatisfied, about no American witnesses, no cross questioning of Blair by “the families”, no … you fill in the blanks – I can’t be bothered.
This at Conservative Home is about Davis’s comments in the Commons when Brown first announced the Iraq Inquiry. You might note this comment:
Now blame CAN be apportioned. Are they happy? You bet. NOT.
These Tories do not yet GET Cameron. Cameron will do anything and everything to protect Blair. And he is right. There is more than just a former Prime Minister’s freedom at stake here.
This is on the “maverick” Davis:
http://howarddenton.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-is-david-davis-picking-fight.html
Davis is on a mission, I think, to pinch the leadership back from Cameron.
It seems he was considered by many to have performed better in the head-to-head with Cameron, but he still lost. I think he is bitter, thus all the ‘freedom’ campaigns. But although the Conservatives may have moved Left thanks to Blair’s re-positioning of them, but they are not THAT Left.
Yes, the press will be silent if Tony comes out of it anything near “purer than pure”.
I’m wondering if the next campaign against Blair will be the dodgy expression campaign. See The Times here. By using pictures like this they need say very little to get their message over – “this man can’t be trusted”.
August 1, 2009 at 1:51 pm |
I think Dave Davis may well fancy the Tory Leadership if they lose, as they may, or the leadership of a faction – UKIP Tories – whether they win by a large margin or lose by any margin.
Chameleon wants to be one of the PMs’ Club, and for GB to keep our seats at the top tables unqualified etc. That is what “mummy,” “Sammy” & Co have primed him for. So he won’t want TB to be maltreated in any way which might establish a precedent.
Davis couldn’t care, he is a real uber alles kind of guy, compensating like mad.
Chameleon hasn’t brought the tories left I fear, just done some cosmetic work on their homophobia, racism etc.
Read Sam Brittan on their loony right wing approach to public debt:
http://www.samuelbrittan.co.uk/text341_p.html
August 1, 2009 at 2:22 pm |
On Cameron supporting Blair – quite, QZ. My point on precedent, exactly.
But he also LIKES Blair whereas he HATES Brown. And Blair has said he won’t be criticising the government whichever party is in charge.
As for Left movement – the Tories have moved left – into the centre-ish. I know a lot of Tories and they are basically now – well, Blairites, let’s be blunt. As is Cameron on most issues, Europe excepted (or confused)!
There are quite a few Conservatives who do get annoyed at Davis over his standing up against ID cards and over siding with such as Shami Chakrabarti over civil rights.