Tony Blair

31st July 2010

This post – “Prescott: Tony Blair had the gift of “true leadership” - is PART 1 of 4. [Updated with all posts in series, at end.]

Apologies if this series in the ongoing saga seems a touch overkill. Consider yourselves fortunate. There might be more than four before I’ve had my little old say.

I just couldn’t get it all into one post without going on and on and on and on ….

…. and you know how I hate to go on.

Read Part 2, Prescott – Media’s take; BBC

Part 3, Prescott: tittle-tattle Viewspapers and Part 4, John Prescott: Straight Quotes, Unvarnished Truth, still to come. (Will link when completed.)

John Prescott’s closing words to the Iraq Inquiry Friday, 30th July 2010

“I learned that true leadership is not about having the benefit of hindsight. It is about having a gift of vision, courage and compassion, and I believe that Tony Blair had all those three.

Well said, Lord Prescott. VERY WELL said.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott leaves after giving evidence at the Iraq inquiry on July 30, 2010 in London. (Getty)

Below, in case you missed them, are all of John Prescott’s closing comments to the Inquiry:

_______________

SIR JOHN CHILCOT: Thank you. I think that brings us to the point where it would help us to have your sense of — because we are a lessons learned Inquiry, what are the most important lessons you can draw on from the Iraq experience over all the years, and then any further reflections you may have.

RT. HON. THE LORD PRESCOTT: I have thought about that and wondered, as I have just said in my last answer, could we have done more? We would have liked to have avoided it, but it didn’t happen.

I think the answer I want to give myself, though, is impressions at the end, if you give a witness an opportunity to say something, Sir John.

Reading the evidence and listening to all the arguments, I know it is quite fashionable to be critical of Tony Blair inside and outside this Inquiry. We have seen a few people gloss over their part of the history and what happened, but let me say that no-one in Government took this decision to go to war lightly. We thought considerably about it.

I personally and privately witnessed the Prime Minister agonise over each and every death over Iraq, civilian and military, British and Iraqi.

I learned that true leadership is not about having the benefit of hindsight. It is about having a gift of vision, courage and compassion, and I believe that Tony Blair had all those three.

If you want to see if his humanitarian interventionism, which has been a discussion here, succeeded, then go to Kosovo and go to Sierra Leone. Hopefully we will soon be able to say the same for Afghanistan and Iraq and finally welcome our brave troops back home, confident of a job well done.

I think that’s my conclusion, having worked with Tony Blair, and witnessed it at close hand, and privileged to do so. That’s the point I want to make as a lesson that people should take into account when they are looking at this Iraq Inquiry.

SIR JOHN CHILCOT: Thank you very much, Lord Prescott. Anything further you want to say?

RT. HON. THE LORD PRESCOTT: No.

______________

IRAQ INQUIRY WEBSITE information

Main page – VIDEO EVIDENCE – John Prescott – TRANSCRIPT – John Prescott

_______________

This post – Prescott at the Iraq Inquiry: Tony Blair had the gift of “true leadership” – is the first of four.

The second is now online here – Iraq Inquiry, Part 2: John Prescott & The Media’s take; BBC

_______________

READ ALL ABOUT IT, TROOF SEEKERS !!!

[FROM OUR MEDIA? I 'DOUBT' IT]

__________

Julie has an excellent post on this - “Iraq Inquiry: Public hearings with John Prescott”. No spin, just facts.

_______________

RELATED

Series on Prescott at the Iraq Inquiry (2 of 4 online)

ALL POSTS IN THE JOHN PRESCOTT IRAQ INQUIRY SERIES

Iraq Inquiry website Home page. Video evidence of Tony Blair and entire transcript from his evidence.

Video evidence of John Prescott and entire transcript of the evidence of John Prescott.

ETCETERA

Top BBC reporter guilty of misrepresenting Iraq Inquiry evidence

Hans Blix told Blair Iraq had WMD

‘Former United Nations weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix told former Prime Minister Tony Blair that he believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction six months before the invasion of Iraq, the Iraq Inquiry has heard.

Giving evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the war, Blix said he told Blair of his belief privately some six months before the invasion.

“I, like most people at the time, felt that Iraq retains weapons of mass destruction,” he said. “I did not say so publicly. I said it perhaps to Mr Blair in September 2002 privately, but not publicly.”‘

A recent comment from an Albanian, Mr Leonard Dedej from Tirana – “It takes big leaders to make the hardest turns in peoples life…mr Blair is a big leader and a great man for millions of people in Balkans!!!for stopping a savage war!about Iraq I believe that the press wherever it is has not the right to judge on this issue because it simply is to small to judge!!history will judge mr Blair!as long as it is an ongoing war no one can blame mr Blair,after all he started something for a big reason..the press its often wrong because it fights for audience!!!”

Tags:20/20 hindsight, BBC, Blair agonised, Chilcot Inquiry, compassion, courage, coverage rebuttal service, David Cameron, deaths, former Prime Minister, gift of vision, Hans Blix, humanitarian interventionism, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, John Prescott, Julie, Lord Prescott, Lord Prezza, media, not about benefit of hindsight, peking university, press, RT. HON. THE LORD PRESCOTT, Sir John Chilcot, sky news, Tony Blair, true leadership, truth and lies, videos
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, Afghanistan, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, British Politics, British Prime Minister, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Kosovo, Law - British Domestic & International, Legacy of Tony Blair, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, President George Bush, Press - Truth & Lies, Sierra Leone, The Independent - Daily Mail - Guardian - British "feral" Press, United States of America | 2 Comments »

Top BBC reporter guilty of misrepresenting Iraq Inquiry evidence

July 29, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

At his blog John Rentoul has also mentioned this “late & grudging apology” by the BBC

30th July 2010

BIAS AT THE BEEB

The BBC has been forced, reluctantly, to admit that their ace commentator, Laura Kuenssberg, got it wrong!

After a wait of several months, the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit has finally responded to one of this blog’s regular commenters.

He had complained about the distorted reporting of Ms Kuenssberg when she covered Tony Blair’s appearance at the Iraq Inquiry on 29th January, 2010. [You may recall this broadcasting journalist being in trouble on the same occasion over having her Twitter link with her anti-Blair instant comments on the screen behind her as she spoke to the camera.]

His complaint concerned Kuenssberg’s reference to evidence given to the inquiry (by Sir Christopher Meyer) “that during their Crawford meeting, Blair and Bush had signed ‘a deal in blood’ that the UK would go to war alongside America if that was their decision.” (see full extract below). He pointed out that Ms Kuenssberg’s remarks were inaccurate in that Sir Christopher had actually said he was not there so he did not know whether a deal had been done ‘in blood’. He also complained that the report was biased since it chimed with the false version of Sir Christopher’s testimony put out by the anti-war lobby and was presented against the constant background of the anti-Blair demo on that day, with placards like “BLiar”, “Blair – War Criminal” being thrust in front of the cameras.

Read the BBC’s finding first (pasted below), and then see what the complainant has to say. The BBC’s response is now online. See Response from BBC Complaints Unit

_______________

ECU Ruling: News (10.00am), BBC News channel, 29 January 2010

Publication date: 19 July 2010

Complaint

In an item on the proceedings of the Chilcot Inquiry, the reporter referred to the evidence given by Sir Christopher Meyer the previous November about a meeting between Tony Blair and George W Bush in the Spring of 2002, and reporting him as having said that, during the meeting, Mr Blair had “signed a deal in blood…that the UK would go to war alongside America if that was their decision”. A viewer complained that this was a misleading account of Sir Christopher’s evidence which, together with the use of footage of demonstrators outside the Inquiry venue, resulted in bias against Mr Blair.

Outcome

Sir Christopher, while making clear that he believed the meeting had led to agreement on the need for regime change, had also made clear that options other than military action were still under consideration, and it was inaccurate to report him as having suggested that an absolute commitment to go to war alongside the US had been made. However, as the item also reported Mr Blair’s dismissal of Sir Christopher’s evidence in relation to the meeting, the inaccurate reporting of that evidence did not result in imbalance. The footage of demonstrators simply illustrated what was happening outside the Inquiry venue at the time, and had no bearing on the issue of impartiality. Partly upheld

Further action

All involved in the broadcast have discussed the story and the issues it raised. Senior editors on the News channel will continue to emphasise the need for editorial vigilance in terms of ensuring that space and time is made for proper and sufficient context to be given when reporting specific and detailed quotations from witnesses in long-running inquiries.

_______________

Here are Ms Kuenssberg’s full remarks taken from the transcript, as sent to the complainant by the BBC:

“Well that interesting mention, as you said there, of Crawford, let’s just remember for people, that meeting that Tony Blair had with President Bush in the Spring of 2002. Now at this inquiry, one witness, the former UK Ambassador to the States said, at that meeting Tony Blair signed a deal in blood with President Bush that the UK would go to war alongside America if that was their decision. Now Tony Blair has dismissed that today, he dismissed Christopher Meyer really, saying well look, he wasn’t there at that meeting and I think you could tell from his body language really what he thought of the attempt by Sir Christopher Meyer to put that point when he was here at the inquiry.”

_______________

THE COMPLAINANT’S THOUGHTS ON THIS RULING

“Although the BBC Complaints Unit have reluctantly conceded that Ms Kuenssberg’s remarks were inaccurate they have denied there was any bias despite all the facts pointing that way.

The BBC News Editors initially defended Kuenssberg’s report on the ludicrous grounds that it was her role to make clear to the audience what Sir Christopher was really saying and that this was how it had been reported by everyone else. This in itself reveals the BBC’s biased mindset on the Iraq issue (no doubt linked to the ramifications of the Hutton inquiry which resulted in several BBC resignations).

The Editorial Complaints Unit did not refer to this absurd defence in its ruling but denied that Ms Kuenssberg’s report was biased since she had also referred to Tony Blair’s dismissal of Sir Christopher’s evidence.

This new argument for there being no bias took no account of my point about the reference to Blair’s attitude to Sir Christopher’s evidence being made against the backdrop of “BLiar” placards which subliminally must have influenced the BBC’s audience against what Blair had said. Nor did the BBC Complaints Unit take account of my point about how this biased backdrop could have been easily avoided by turning the cameras round and presenting Ms Kuenssberg’s remarks against the backdrop of the Conference Centre instead, as had been done in other reports.

I therefore remain dissatisfied with the ECU’s findings on bias and will be appealing to the BBC Trust on the matter. I do not expect much joy from them however since they have already refused to formally consider another of my appeals about the BBC’s coverage of the inquiry. There is clearly something very fishy and disturbing about how the BBC and their supposed watchdog, the BBC Trust, are treating these Iraq inquiry complaints I now have a number of them going through the complaints process covering different days of the inquiry and an obvious pattern of bias is emerging both in the reporting and in the way the complaints are being treated which accords with what was said about media coverage of the Iraq inquiry in the Ban Blair Baiting petition and in the New Statesman blog post here. This is a national scandal and I will be saying more about these other cases once the complaints process has been completed.”

_______________

MY OWN COMMENT ON THE RULING

I was in attendance on the day Mr Blair appeared at the Iraq Inquiry (see my report here and another one here including my own pictures.)

He answered questions for more than SIX hours. From the man himself, the man who made the decisions, there was plenty of material to fill any unbiased ten minute reporting slot.

Updated: The complaint regarding Ms Kuenssberg, who is supposed to be an impartial commentator, was a complaint concerning her 10:00am report on 29th January. By that time Mr Blair had been providing his evidence to the Inquiry for half an hour. There may just have been SOMETHING noteworthy he had already said in his OWN evidence. A little something positive on his own behalf? If there was, Ms Kuenssberg chose to ignore it. Instead she resorted to reminding viewers of an earlier witness’s evidence. NOT a witness who necessarily agreed with Mr Blair wholeheartedly. NOT a witness who understood that the Prime Minister was in the end the man in the hot seat. Oh no. She felt compelled to resort to the anti-war/anti-Blair lobby’s twisted version of Sir Christopher’s “signed a deal in blood” phrase.

I note that as far as I understand it Sir Christopher did NOT contact the BBC to complain about the distorted use of his words. However in their investigation, the BBC Compaints Unit seems to have consulted him as to the meaning of his original words. Perhaps his failure to make his own complaint about Kuenssberg’s twisting of the colourful phrase tells us something about HIS political sympathies. [Aside: yesterday his voice was heard on the BBC News Channel defending and even praising David Cameron's foreign policy pronouncements in India on Pakistan, and in Turkey against Israel. So clearly we understand his political sympathies.]

Why did Ms Kuenssberg not remind people of those who agreed with Mr Blair’s decision? Why start off the day by putting the anti-view so firmly to the audience? Bias. Pure and simple.

Such distorted and brainwashing reporting of another’s words is disgraceful. Not only was it NOT what Meyer said, it is exactly the opposite. There should have been much more than just a cosy BBC discussion about it. Laura Kuenssberg should have been severely reprimanded .

The BBC Complaints Unit

Tags:anti-Blair, background demo, BBC, BBC journalist guilty, Beeb, bias, bias at the beeb, Crawford, deal written in blood, ECU, ecu news, Editorial Complaints Unit, editorial vigilance, former UK Ambassador to USA, Iraq inquiry, John Rentoul, Laura Kuenssberg, misrepresentation, misrepresenting, partly upheld, placards, President George Bush, reporter, ruling, Sir Christopher Meyer, sufficient context, Tony Blair, Twitter on BBC screen
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Law - British Domestic & International, Legacy of Tony Blair, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, President George Bush, Press - Truth & Lies, Terrorism, The Independent - Daily Mail - Guardian - British "feral" Press, United States of America | 16 Comments »

France declares war on Al Qaeda. Got the message ‘anti’-warriors?

July 29, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

29th July 2010

Following the murder of one of its citizens in Africa, France has declared war on Al-Qaeda and matched its fighting words with a first attack on a base camp of the terror network’s North African branch, after the terror network killed a French aid worker it took hostage in April.

The declaration and attack marked a shift in strategy for France, usually discrete about its behind-the-scenes battle against terrorism.

“We are at war with al-Qaida,” Prime Minister Francois Fillon said Tuesday, a day after President Nicolas Sarkozy announced the death of 78-year-old hostage Michel Germaneau.

Quite what that George Bush- sounding declaration means is harder to work out. In the past declaring war has always meant one territorial area against another. THAT is what is different about today’s “war” against parts of a political-religion. That is what Tony Blair meant when he said “the kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux – let us re-order this world.”

From the ‘hearts that bleed’ – a phrase pinched from Melanie Phillips in her eye-opening “Londonistan” – we have long heard the “it’s OUR fault” – sorry – “Blair’s fault” that Britain and Britons are attacked by upset Muslims. It’s all about Iraq, the bleeders tell us.

If, they opine ignorantly, if only we’d just left the sweeties to sort out their own backyard without barging in there on the tailcoats of GW Bush we’d never have been attacked by fundamentalist Islamists on 7/7 or at any time. They LOVED us before that, don’t you know? Sweethearts.

It was always a cock and bull story. So, in time-honoured fashion, it was leapt upon as the troof by our useless press. The cock-and-bull is clear when you look at the 49 countries which didn’t ‘go in there’ – (to Iraq) – and have still suffered at the hands of fundamentalist killers.

France is NOT on that list. Nor is Germany. Nor is Pakistan, nor is Yemen, nor is Mali, nor is Jordan. And, of course, nor is IRAQ! And yet Iraqis – Muslims – are still being killed by those who are either Al-Qaeda or Taleban linked. If you still can’t see the picture – join the dots.

[Just as an aside, and perhaps, as part of the bigger picture it is worth noting that Turkey remains on the list despite reneging on its support before the war began and denying U.S. forces passage to its border with Iraq during the invasion.]

But France did participate in the war in Afghanistan. So perhaps THAT’s what’s done for them. Yeah, right.

This site – The Religion of Peace – for those with eyes to see, gives you an idea what the world is up against. The WORLD. Not just those who put their principles and their countries’ names and soldiers on the line for freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I repeat here that I do not believe that all Muslims are terrorists. Far from it. I DO believe, because I can read, that people who say they are ‘doing Allah’s work’ are almost daily murdering others worldwide.

It is some job to wage war or even declare war on a group such as this. And France is on a hiding to nothing in many ways. But perhaps at last some in the west are waking up to the fact that there IS a clash of civilisations.

Until we can work out how to get the average peace-loving AND democracy-supporting Muslim on OUR side AND to stand up and be counted against their uncivilised fellow-travellers we will not have begun to solve the issue.

Tags:Al Qaeda, Al Qaida, France declares war, hostage killed, kaleidoscope has been shaken, Michel Germaneau, north Africa, President Nicolas Sarkozy, Prime Minister Francois Fillon
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, africa, Al Qaeda, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, British Politics, France, Human Rights and HR Act, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties, Iraq, Islam, Legacy of Tony Blair, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Muslims, Nicolas Sarkozy, French President, President George Bush, Press - Truth & Lies, Religion & Religious Issues in Politics, Sharia Law/Sharia Finance, Terrorism, The Independent - Daily Mail - Guardian - British "feral" Press, United States of America | 10 Comments »

Blixing it at the Iraq Inquiry. Hans High on his own importance, with 20/20 vision

July 28, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

Read what the papers say here

28th July 2010

IRAQ INQUIRY (watch at official website) (Entire transcript here)

Hans Blix was the Executive Chairman of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission to Iraq, 2000 to 2003.

HANS BLIX: “Some people maintain that Iraq was legal. I am of the firm view that it was an illegal war. There can be cases where it is doubtful, maybe it was permissible to go to war, but Iraq was, in my view, not one of those.”

_____

Did YOU spot the important words in the above sentence spoken by Hans Blix yesterday?

“illegal war” ? – No, that’s the Liberal Democrats’ take.

“doubtful” ? – No, that’s the press’s take.

Give in?

The important words are “in my view”.

_____

Perhaps it should not surprise us, but the press have been fairly quiet about Blix’s evidence. I wonder why?

I QUESTION BLIX’S VIEWS

But, to be fair, and before I lambast him on much of what he said yesterday, Dr Blix IS right on this. Though this is fact, as opposed to his opinion -

‘He stressed that Tony Blair never put any “pressure” on him over his search for weapons in Iraq and did not question that the prime minister and President Bush believed in “good faith” that Iraq was a serious threat.

“I certainly felt that he [Tony Blair] was absolutely sincere in his belief.”‘

I QUESTION BLIX’S JUDGEMENT (just a few examples)

BLIX: “What I question was the good judgement, particularly of President Bush but also in Tony Blair’s judgement.”

Questioning political judgement? Easy for non-politically responsible Blix to say. No point in my using what-iffery here. Suffice it to say that, for his own reasons, it is likely that had Bush and Blair done nothing about Iraq, Blix would also have questioned their “judgement”. There are many backs needing protection and many agendas at play.

And …

‘While he believed Iraq “unilaterally” destroyed its weapons of mass destruction after the 1991 Gulf War, Dr Blix said he never “excluded” the prospect that it had begun to revive some form of chemical and biological capabilities.’

So he never “excluded” the “prospect”. But LACK OF political responsibility meant that he could stand back and criticise the judgement of those who HAD those responsibilities. His hindsight 20/20 vision tells him he might have been wrong in including that prospect. He neatly forgot to remind us of his lack of judgement.

It seems also that Dr Blix confuses the past with the present. (And some might suggest that he not is as clear-headed as he’d like us to think about the present.)

For instance, Sir Roderic Lyne to Blix at around 29 minutes into the video (page 20 of transcript) on Resolution 1441:

SIR RODERIC LYNE: Did you feel that it gave Iraq a realistic possibility of meeting the requirements of the resolution?
DR BLIX: Yes, except that it was very hard for them to declare any weapons when they didn’t have any.
SIR RODERIC LYNE: No, but we didn’t know they didn’t have any. I mean, I ask the question because we have had at least one witness that has said that actually the way it was drafted was actually as a trigger for military action, but that’s evidently not what you felt at the time from what you have just said.
DR BLIX: No. There is this big discussion as to whether a second resolution would be required. I for my part thought that to me it was clear that a second resolution was required.

And at around 40 minutes Blix expresses concern that some saw the UNSC as paralysed. As they say, he would be concerned at that, wouldn’t he?

And -

“However, it seemed plausible to me at the time, and I also felt — I, like most people at the time, felt that Iraq retains weapons of mass destruction. I did not say so publicly. I said it perhaps to Mr Blair in September 2002 privately, but not publicly because I think there is a big difference between your role as a trustee of the Security Council, “Investigate this and report to us”, and the role of a politician.

Yes. Quite.

And, on the document regarding raw uranium from Niger – at 48/49 minutes (pg 33 of transcript) -

Blix: The Niger document was scandalous. If IAEA could conclude in a day’s time that this was a forgery and this document had been dancing between the Italians and to British and the Americans and to the French and they all relied upon it and Bush alluded to it and mentioned it in the State of the Union message in 2003, I think that was the most scandalous part.
SIR JOHN CHILCOT: I would like to say something about the Niger question just in the light of what you have said because the Butler Committee, which you recall, concluded the British Government had intelligence from several different sources, that the visit to Niger was for the purpose of not actually the acquisition of uranium but acquiring it, the forged documents were not available to the UK Government at the time it made its assessment. So the fact there was forgery does not actually change the British Government’s assessment on the Niger issue. I thought for the record I should just say that.
DR BLIX: I am glad they didn’t manage to misinterpret that one.

Very funny, Dr Blix.

His judgement? Questionable.

I QUESTION BLIX’S GOOD FAITH

‘Since the war, Dr Blix has accused the UK and US of “over-interpreting” intelligence on weapons to bolster the case for war but he said the government’s controversial September 2002 dossier on Iraqi weapons seemed “plausible” at the time.’

The implication? At a later time, it isn’t plausible. Blix’s 20/20 all over again. It is NOT “good faith” to question by insinuation the good faith of others.

HIS good faith? Questionable.

I QUESTION BLIX’S HIGH-HORSE RIDING

After 9/11 and in the run-up to war, he said the US government was “high on” the idea of pre-emptive military action as a solution to international crises.

“They thought they could get away with it and therefore it was desirable to do so.”

A facile and politically naive remark, and inconsistent with that of someone who says he does not question others’ “good faith”.

HIS getting away with it? Not here he won’t.

I wonder what Blix thinks of Iraq today? Does that, and the Iraq that might have been with Saddam still in power, not indicate something? Something small? Like, for instance, Blair was right?

Blix is said to have written to the Chilcot Inquiry on several occasions to offer himself as a witness since he had waited and waited and had not yet been asked. But yesterday he came, he spoke and he used no smoking gun. Nothing to see here. Move along.

_____
WHAT THE PAPERS SAY

I find it interesting how our papers use selected quotes from evidence. For instance for the Mail & the Financial Times, noteworthy were his opposing positions. Not that they point out that he opposes himself.

1. Guardian: Hans Blix live

2. Independent: ‘UK & US should have realised Iraq evidence was suspect’

3. Daily Mail: ‘Hans Blix told Tony Blair before Iraq invasion that he would not find any WMD’

Mail: “Tony Blair was told by Hans Blix one month before the Iraq War that he was unlikely to ever find weapons of mass destruction.”

4. FT: Blix told Blair Iraq may have illegal weapons

FT: ‘Hans Blix, former UN chief weapons inspector, told Tony Blair one month before the Iraq invasion that he thought Saddam Hussein may still have illegal weapons in spite of his growing doubts on the matter.

Mr Blix told the Iraq inquiry that he was becoming increasingly concerned about the credibility of western intelligence. He told Mr Blair in February 2003 that it would be “paradoxical” if Britain and the US invaded Iraq with 250,000 men only to find “very little” there.

Yet he told the then UK prime minister during the private conversation: “I said I still thought there were prohibited items in Iraq.”

Mr Blix also revealed that in late 2002, only a few months earlier, he had told Mr Blair that he “felt that Iraq had retained weapons of mass destruction”.

It seemed “plausible” to him especially in relation to anthrax stocks, he recalled. An Australian UN inspector had found evidence of anthrax reserves in Iraq which seemed “very convincing”, he said.

The testimony adds new nuances to the complex debate which raged in the months preceding the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.’

Back to where you were, to continue reading

___

RELATED

Blix’s evidence (watch at official website) (Entire transcript here)
The Iraq Inquiry website
Resolution 1441
Baroness Manningham-Buller: Increase in terrorism “shouldn’t stop you doing what you believe”

EARLIER POSTS HERE

_______________

Tags:Blixing it, GW Bush, Hans Blix, Hans High, hindsight, Iraq inquiry, on the train, own importance, Sir John Chilcot, Tony Blair, usa, with 20/20 vision
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, British Prime Minister, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Law - British Domestic & International, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, President George Bush, Press - Truth & Lies, The Independent - Daily Mail - Guardian - British "feral" Press | 2 Comments »

Another CameronBalls on Gaza: Er WRONG again, DC. (video)

July 27, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

27th July 2010

[Aside] - Iraq Inquiry (watch here) – Hans Blix says that he told Mr Blair, privately, in September 2002, that he thought Saddam Hussein might well have had WMD. Says that the Niger document on uranium was a “”forgery and “scandalous”. Chilcot pointed out the British government’s position on THAT particular document. Blix responds with, “I’m glad they didn’t manage to misinterpret that one”. Nice to notice how “unbiased” Blix is, isn’t it?

Now, where was I? Oh yes, our present great leader has announced that “Gaza is a prison”. Bright and balanced stuff, is it not? Again – NOT.

From Tom Gross Media, h’t to Guido here. Dear old Guido has really upset his fan-base today. Good for him.

I hope Mr Gross has no concerns over my copying and pasting the below in its entirety.

_______________

A nice new shopping mall opened today in Gaza: Will the media report on it?

July 17, 2010

Will the Western media show these images?
All notes below by Tom Gross

Please scroll down below for photos of the new shopping mall that opened today in Gaza. I have also attached new photos and film of Gaza’s hotels, beauty spas, swimming pools, beaches and street markets — images the BBC, New York Times and others refuse to show you.

Meanwhile, Hamas are deliberately leaving some Gazans in plastic tents, in order to fool gullible Western journalists and politicians who are brought to Gaza to witness a staged “humanitarian crisis.”

(Photo of a new mall that opened today, July 17, 2010. If there “are no building materials allowed into Gaza” how did they build this shopping center, or the new Olympic-size swimming pool pictured below?)

Two days ago the EU pledged tens of millions of EU taxpayers’ euros to add to the hundreds of millions already donated to Gaza this year, much of which has been misused to procure arms.

UPDATE, Sunday July 18, 2010:

Some journalists who subscribe to this list have asked me for a quote. You are welcome to use the following.

Political and media commentator Tom Gross said:

“On a day when (because EU Foreign Policy Chief Baroness Ashton is in Gaza) the BBC and other media have featured extensive reports all day long on what they term the dire economic situation in Gaza, why are they not mentioning the new shopping mall that opened there yesterday?

“When leading news outlets mention the so-called humanitarian flotillas from Turkey, why do they omit the fact that life expectancy and literacy rates are higher, and infant mortality rates are lower in Gaza than corresponding rates in Turkey? Have they considered that perhaps the humanitarian flotillas ought to be going in the other direction, towards Turkey?”

WHAT HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE?

Last year, this website revealed to a Western audience pictures of the bustling, crowded food markets of Gaza that the Western media refuse to show you. Earlier this year, I reported the new Olympic-size swimming pool of Gaza (no shortage of building materials or water here) and the luxury restaurants, where you can “dine on steak au poivre and chicken cordon bleu”. (Over 300,000 people have viewed photos on that webpage since May, according to my website monitor.)

Now I want to draw attention to the fact that this morning, on the day that the EU again criticized Israel (but not Egypt) for supposedly oppressing Gazans, on a day when the BBC TV world news headlines again lead with a report about how “devastated the economy in Gaza is,” an impressive new shopping mall opened in Gaza (photos below, followed by a selection of other photos from Gaza).

Will those Western journalists who write stories about “starvation” in Gaza and compare it to a “concentration camp” report this?

Instead of reporting on the mall opening, the British-based international satellite broadcaster Sky News reported today “The humanitarian situation in Gaza remains dire.”

NEW GAZA SHOPPING MALL

Photos from Saturday, July 17, 2010:

More photos here.

Here is a news report in Arabic on the opening of the mall from today’s Palestine Times. (Click on each of these thumbnails to view the full photos.)

This is the official website of the Gaza mall. (UPDATE July 22, 2010: Warning note: Some browsers have reported that there may be a virus attached to the Gaza Mall site if you open it, but many others, including mine, have not found this to be the case. In any event, so many people have been directed to the Gaza mall website — www.gazamall.ps — from this website that the mall’s website’s bandwidth has been exceeded so currently you will be unable to access the site in any case if you open it. I have posted a screenshot below, translated from Arabic.)

UPDATE, July 20, 2010

More pictures of the mall here, here, and here from The Palestine Times.

And this video of the mall has today gone up on YouTube. (The captions that have been added to this video are not mine, nor do I approve of all of them.)

The mall is being widely featured in media throughout the Arab world, for example here (courtesy of AP), but why the continuing silence from Western media who subscribe to AP and who continue to cover “the situation in Gaza” day after day without mentioning the economic progress there?

The mall includes a supermarket, international clothing stores, a food court, beauty products, a children’s playground, a restaurant, and much-needed air conditioning. The mall is not only for Gaza’s elite. Tens of thousands of shoppers from Rafah to Beit Hanoun have already visited the site within a matter of days, according to Palestinian press reports.

“There are international firms such as Adidas and Lacoste and Paris’ top selling perfumes,” said the head of the mall’s board of directors, Salah a-Din Abu Abdo. “Nevertheless, the local traders and businessmen are those running the business. I hope that in the future we’ll get merchandise from other foreign chains wanting to open branches here.”

UPDATE, July 21, 2010

Yediot Ahronot, Israel’s largest newspaper, whose editors subscribe to this email list, has now covered the mall.

UPDATE, July 21, 2010

The National Post, one of Canada’s largest newspapers, almost alone among Western media has run a comment piece about the Gaza mall and also referring to this (Tom Gross media) webpage.

UPDATE, July 21, 2010

Glen Beck today showed the mall on his show on Fox. He said that the media will gladly show you a “Palestinian with a bloody face but won’t show you the Gaza shopping mall.”

It is fine that Fox hyave featured the mall, but why aren’t the BBC, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS and others interested in a balance, rounded approach to covering Palestinian issues?
BIAS IN A LEAGUE OF ITS OWN

Before I draw attention to other photos below, please let me restate again my overall position since several other commentators have misrepresented it recently:

I have consistently supported the creation of an independent Palestinian Arab state alongside Israel since I first became interested in politics. But there is no point in creating a new Palestinian state if it will primarily be used as a launching ground for armed attacks on Israel, which would only in turn likely lead to a much bloodier war between Israelis and Palestinians than anything we have witnessed in the past.

In order to make sure any Palestinian state is peaceful, and respects human rights for both its own citizens and its neighbors, it is crucial for Western policy-makers not be misled into making bad policy (as they have so often done in the past) in part, at least, as a result of believing the utter distortions of Western journalists, who greatly exaggerate the suffering of Palestinians and consistently cover up for the misdeeds of Hamas and Fatah.

Of course, one should not forget that the media is full of stereotypes and mistakes about other issues. Yet when every allowance has been made, the sustained bias against Israel is in a league of its own.

I am not for one moment suggesting that Israeli misdeeds should not be fully and unsparingly reported on (and indeed Israel being a vigorous democracy, such misdeeds are widely reported on in the Israeli media itself, and debated in the Israeli Knesset). But propagating the falsehoods of Fatah and Hamas propagandists has done nothing to further the legitimate aspirations of ordinary Palestinians, any more than parroting the lies of Stalin helped ordinary Russians.

Such bias, I believed, is not only wrong in itself but seriously detrimental to international efforts to bring about peace between Palestinians and Israelis.

MALNOURISHMENT?

These are some of the photos previously carried on the dispatch “Fancy restaurants and Olympic-size swim pools: what the media won’t report about Gaza” (May 25, 2010).

Above: the courtyard of the Roots restaurant in Gaza.

Above: A part of the restaurant’s 12-page menu, which includes a wide range of meat, poultry and seafood dishes. The restaurant is popular with Gazans holding weddings and other celebrations, UN and NGO workers, and foreign journalists.

Here are more pictures of the restaurant. (Also see more pictures of Roots further down this dispatch.)

***

Whereas the restaurant above is one of those popular with wealthier Gazans, the pictures below show life for ordinary people in Gaza.

Above: Recent photos show one of Gaza’s fruit and vegetable markets, a cake shop, and a children’s toy store in Gaza city. Hardly the “World War II-era concentration camp” that some Western journalists have claimed Gaza resembles.
Tom Gross adds: As I have written before, of course there is poverty in parts of Gaza. There is poverty in parts of Israel too. But when was the last time a foreign journalist based in Israel left the pampered lounge bars and restaurants of the King David and American Colony hotels in Jerusalem and went to check out the slum-like areas of southern Tel Aviv? Or the hard-hit Negev towns of Netivot or Rahat?

Playing the manipulative game of the BBC is easy. If we had their vast taxpayer-funded resources, we too could produce reports about parts of London, Manchester and Glasgow and make it look as though there is a humanitarian catastrophe throughout the U.K. We could produce the same effect by selectively filming seedy parts of Paris and Rome and New York and Los Angeles too.

MAYBE THE TURKISH FLOTILLAS ARE GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION?

In Turkey, life expectancy is 72.23 and infant mortality is 24.84 per 1,000 births.

In Gaza, life expectancy is 73.68 and infant mortality is 17.71 per 1,000 births.

Turkey has a literacy rate of 88.7% while in Gaza it is 91.9%. (It is much lower in Egypt and other Arab countries where Israel did not establish colleges and universities in the 1970s and 1980s.)

Gaza’s GDP is not as high as Turkey’s but it is higher than some other places in the Arab world, and it is much, much higher than most of Africa that gets 1,000th of the aid per capita that Gaza gets from the West.

(Source for above info: CIA World Factbook)

World hunger organizations report that 10-15 million children below the age of 5 die each year, and 50,000 people die daily. One-third of all deaths in the world are due to poverty.

While famine kills millions of children in Africa, India, and elsewhere, life expectancy for Gaza Arabs, at 72 years, is nearly five years higher than the world average. In Swaziland, for example, life expectancy is less than 40 years, and it is 42 years in Zambia.

Meanwhile Western governments, misled by Western media, continue to pour more and more money into Gaza for people that don’t need it, while allowing black Africans to starve to death.

As the correspondent for one of Japan’s biggest newspapers said to me last week, “Gaza and the West Bank are the only places in the world where I have seen refugees drive Mercedes.”

Photo above: India, where hundreds of millions live in poverty.

Photo above: A beach in Gaza.

STEAK AU POIVRE AND CHICKEN CORDON BLEU

(Repeat item from May 2010 dispatch.)

If you drop by the Roots Club in Gaza, according to the Lonely Planet guidebook for Gaza and the West Bank, you can “dine on steak au poivre and chicken cordon bleu”.

The restaurant’s website in Arabic gives a window into middle class dining and the lifestyle of Hamas officials in Gaza.

And here it is in English, for all the journalists, UN types and NGO staff who regularly frequent this and other nice Gaza restaurants (but don’t tell their readers about them).

Please take a look at the pictures on the above website. They are not the kind of things you see in The New York Times or CNN or in Newsweek, whose international edition last week had one of the most disgracefully misleading stories about Gaza I have ever seen, portraying it in terms which were virtually reminiscent of Hiroshima after a nuclear blast.
And here is a promotional video of the club restaurant:

In case anyone doubts the authenticity of this video (which is up on the club’s own website), I just called the club in Gaza City and had a nice chat with the manager who proudly confirmed business is booming and many Palestinians and international guests are dining there.

The front of the Roots Club flyer reads:
Ambiance galore.
Beautifully designed buffets.
Every detail handled for you.

GAZA’S OLYMPIC-SIZED SWIMMING POOL

Above: A Palestinian newspaper photo (May 18, 2010) shows Gazan children in the newly built Olympic-sized swimming pool which opened earlier in May 2010, despite continuing claims by some Western journalists and NGOs that there are no building materials and a severe shortage of water in Gaza.

***

Repeat item from May 26, 2010 dispatch:

While Western media, misled by corrupt and biased NGOs, continue to report on a “humanitarian catastrophe” in Gaza, the Palestinian Ma’an news agency reports on the Olympic-size swimming pool that opened in Gaza in mid-May 2010 (i.e. before all the recent kerfuffle about humanitarian flotillas sailing to Gaza).

“Gaza, (May 18, 2010): – Ma’an – Gaza’s first Olympic-standard swimming pool was inaugurated at the As-Sadaka club during a ceremony on Tuesday held by the Islamic Society.

“Gaza government ministers, members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, leaders of Islamic and national governing bodies, as well as club members and athletes were among those at the opening ceremony, where Secretary-General of the Islamic Society Nasim Yaseen thanked the donors who helped realize the project.

“Yaseen praised the As-Sadaka club for a number of wins in international and regional football, volleyball and table tennis matches.

“As-Sadaka athletes performed a number of swimming exercises in the new pool to mark its opening.”

STARVED OF WATER AND BUILDING MATERIALS?

Most Israeli towns do not have an Olympic-sized municipal swimming pool. Cities like Netanya – which have been hit by repeated Palestinian suicide attacks, car bombings, and terrorist gunmen that have left over fifty Israeli residents of the town dead and more than three hundred injured – do not have such a pool.

Nor, for example, do the Israeli towns of Sderot or Ashkelon which have been hit by thousands of Hamas rockets fired from Gaza in recent years, have an Olympic-sized municipal swimming pool.

BLAIR’S SISTER-IN-LAW: GAZA IS “WORLD’S LARGEST CONCENTRATION CAMP”

(This is a repeat item from the dispatch of September 14, 2008.)

In an appalling insult to Holocaust survivors everywhere, British journalist Lauren Booth said last week that the situation in Gaza was just like a “concentration camp,” and added that the “humanitarian crisis in Gaza is on the scale of Darfur.”

Booth’s brother-in-law, Quartet envoy to the Middle East Tony Blair, does not share her views. Her sister, Tony Blair’s wife Cherie Blair, once made comments appearing to justify Palestinian suicide bombs against Israeli school buses, but later apologized for the remarks.

Lauren Booth was recently issued a Palestinian passport by Hamas. Here is a photo from AFP (Agence France Presse) of Lauren Booth shopping in a grocery store in Gaza a few days before she made her Israeli “concentration camp” comments. Does it look like Auschwitz, or Darfur?

Here she is again in Gaza last week (i.e. Sept. 2008).

And here she is meeting Hamas terrorist leader, Ismail Haniyeh, who presents her with a special Palestinian “diplomatic passport”.

Booth writes for several British newspapers, including the Daily Mail, New Statesman, Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Times, and is often a guest on the BBC.

HOTELS IN GAZA

(Photos, June 2010)

AL-DEIRA HOTEL

This is just one of several such hotels in “concentration camp” Gaza:

GETTING A FACIAL BEFORE YOUR MASSAGE

A facial runs from $20 to $75, a one-hour massage is around $40 and a monthly gym membership is around $35 at the “Rosy spa” (above) in Gaza.

ANOTHER SIDE OF GAZA

(Film shot, June 2010)

More images of the horrendous situation in Gaza you won’t see on the BBC.

MORE AID, ANYBODY?

Never mind the economic crisis in Spain, Greece and elsewhere in the EU.

On July 14, 2010, the EU announced increased financial support for the Palestinians.

The Palestinian Ma’an news agency reports:

The European Commission has agreed an additional financial package worth € 71 million for the Occupied Palestinian Territory, topping up the € 224 million already allocated by the EU in the 2010 European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, as well as a reinforcement of humanitarian aid for Palestinian refugees.

***

Note: Also pioneering the way into exposing the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in not informing the public about economic development in Gaza has been this Middle East specialist site.

[All notes above by Tom Gross.]

____________________

Tags:Cif Watch, David Cameron, Gaza, Guido Fawkes, Hans Blix, Iraq inquiry, Israel, Palestinians, prison camp, shopping mall, Tom Gross Media
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, British Prime Minister, David Cameron, opposition Conservative Party Leader, Gaza, Hamas, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Israel, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Middle East - Countries/Issues, Middle East Envoy Blair, from June 2007, Palestinian Issues/ Palestine state, Press - Truth & Lies | 12 Comments »

Tony Blair’s 2012 Olympic Hopes

July 27, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

27th July 2010

Tony Blair’s Olympic hopes

After being widely credited with “winning if for Britain”, Mr Blair didn’t just hang up his trainers. He started his own Sports Foundation. Through that he has backed runners for the Great North Run and helped set up coaches in many sports, thus far only from around his old consituency base in the North East. Expect its influence to spread over the next two years.

With the Olympics just two years away what has this present government or even Brown’s three-year long administration done regarding encouraging sport in schools?

And answer came there none.

Tony Blair Sports Foundation Tennis Challenge 2010

Tony Blair to The Hague for the ‘mess/disaster/folly’ that is Baghdad today!

July 26, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

27th July 2010

And be quick about it, before it gets even worse better

Iraq, land of opportunity – says Jeffrey Archer (yes, him) at The Times

Baghdad today."Land of opportunity" Pic: Getty

I wonder if this appears anywhere else but the Times – as Rentoul reminds us here - behind a paywall? I shouldn’t think so. Most of our press and half of our present government are still dreaming of getting Blair to The Hague for the “disaster” that is Iraq.

Would you Adam and Eve it, Clegg? Ming?

Anyone ever think to ask the locals what they think?

OK, I will. Any Iraqis out there? Especially Baghdad locals? Please let us know what YOU think. (No loaded questions from me, note.)

_____

Rentoul:

There is an excellent article in The Times today (pay wall) about the revival of Iraq. “Reconstruction is visible right across the country,” its says.

Today [Baghdad] is a boom town, rather than a bomb site. If I were a young man, looking to make my fortune, I would be off to Iraq like a shot. Plenty of other young men are there already — Russians, French, Germans, Swedes, Chinese of course, even Turks and Lebanese. As one local politician remarked, when the Lebanese arrive you know there is money to be made.

Pity the article is by Jeffrey Archer. (I didn’t realise that he is 70, though.)

Tags:Baghdad today, boomtown Baghdad, disaster, folly, illegal invasion, Iraq, Jeffrey Archer, John Rentoul, land of opportunity, mess, nick clegg, Reconstruction visible, revival of Iraq, right across the country, The Hague, The Times, to The Hague, Tony Blair
Posted in 1. Tony Blair, BBC, Broadcast Outlets & Press, British Politics, Iraq, Iraq inquiry, Major Political Issues, Britain & World, Nick Clegg Liberal Democrats, Press - Truth & Lies, Prime Minister's Questions, The Independent - Daily Mail - Guardian - British "feral" Press | 1 Comment »

All set for more ‘Blixing it’ at the Iraq Inquiry?

July 26, 2010

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog

Daily Mail, sorry… Daily MaUl’s Underground ‘NEWS’ Map

26th July 2010

John Rentoul has this on Hans Blix, the day before Dr Blix appears at the Iraq Inquiry.

I bet The Daily Maul’s breath is bated. In fact it’s highly likely they have their “news” already seven-eighths written. So much for The Mail.

REMINDER

At the Iraq Inquiry in December last year – (h/t to Julie here)

Sir Jeremy Greenstock (UK ambassador to the UN from 1998 until July 2003) said:

“But I don’t think that Hans Blix was clear in his own mind and he makes this very plain in his book that the Iraqis either had weapons of mass destruction or did not have weapons of mass destruction and, therefore, he was wavering on quite a broad spectrum, whereas the United States was wavering on a much narrower spectrum because they were of a mind to think that, if the WMD was not appearing, it was because it had been hidden, not because it was not there.”

I expect the Junior Partner, David Cameron, would have been just as wavery as Dr Blix, had DC been the decider. Yeah, right.

Haven’t had time to publish further thoughts on Dame Eliza following my earlier thought on “My Fair Lady” – Spook ex-Head, Eliza Doolittle-Manningham–Buller sings. Discordant notes from Crispin Black

But Julie has put her finger on it. So I won’t re-invent the wheel. From Julie’s post here – Baroness Manningham-Buller: Increase in terrorism “shouldn’t stop you doing what you believe”

After dissecting the Baroness’s ifs/buts/maybes, which were somehow missed by most of our reliable and fair-minded press, Julie says:

‘The most significant remark however she made quite at the end of her testimony when she told the panel that “even if terrorism increases, that shouldn’t stop you doing what you believe, as the government believed, to be right”.

In other words, since Mr. Blair believed that it was right to remove Saddam, it was indeed the right decision for him to go to war, at least from his point of view, even if the invasion increased the terrorism threat on British soil.

Thank you Baroness Manningham-Buller.’

Well spotted, Julie. Why don’t you see if The Maul is looking for honest reporting? I’m sure they’re in need of a little.

Just make sure you know all The Maul’s keywords before your interview, J.

__________

Another recent gem from Rentoul [aka A REAL journalist]:

More green ink on Kelly

‘Today’s green ink correspondent for the Mail on Sunday is Glen Owen. Even by the standards of David Kelly conspiracy theory reporting, he has written a remarkable article. The essence of it is this: A Russian man says that another man who he says works for MI5 said David Kelly was murdered; the other man says he said no such thing. That is about it.

We will add Owen’s name to the list of people who have not yet responded to David Aaronovitch’s invitation to take part in a public debate on Kelly’s death, the ridiculous theories about which are debunked in Aaronovitch’s excellent book Voodoo Histories.

The list includes Norman Baker, a coalition transport minister, Paul Dacre, the editor of the Daily Mail, Peter Oborne, Richard Ingrams and some other people who are followers of David Icke.

Baker, Dacre, Oborne, Ingrams? What an illustrious, dependable, sane crowd. Icke better watch who he’s associating with.

And another from Rentoul’s numbered series: ‘Did governments block Blair invitations to Senate?’

As an addendum to the previous post, number 374 of my Questions to Which the Answer is No is asked by … the Scottish National Party.

Robert, a correspondent of mine, writes to draw attention to the above question, the title of an SNP press release issued yesterday, the first paragraph of which reads as follows:

The UK and US authorities are to be asked to clarify if any member of their administration or diplomatic service made representations to stop the Senate Foreign Relations Committee inviting former Prime Minister Tony Blair to give evidence on the relationship between the UK-Libya Prisoner Transfer Agreement and a $900 million oil deal between BP and Libya.

If you want to know what on earth they are talking about, my article in The Independent on Sunday tries to assist you. Meanwhile Robert announces a new series:

The Brass Neck award goes to the people who did free Megrahi, demanding an investigation into someone who left office two years before the event, to see if he secretly made them do it.

All summed up neatly in the last sentence above. Personally I have no idea whether “governments” did or didn’t. But if they DIDN’T they probably should have, if governments still HAVE any power these days. Especially the American government. Otherwise who KNOWS what the American voters might have made of the fine mess the US has made of its handling of the BP/oil-leak/Libya/oil/Megrahi/so-called deals business? Least said.

_______________

ETCETERA

1. Cameron? “ANOTHER FINE COP-OUT I’VE SORTED FOR YOU (AND ME) CLEGGIE-BABY”

Guess whose finger’s on the “shoot down that hijacked aeroplane” button? I suppose that means we’re safe to fly. The Dep has to ask his coalition partner, Shame of Chakrabarti first. Then she has to take a vote amongst Liberty members. Then the courts have to decide if that is a LEGAL position. Then the EU Human Rights’ courts have to overturn it if/when Liberty has been proven incontrovertibly, most assuredly, quite definitely to have chosen unwisely. For once.

So that’s it then. Next plane?

__________

2. Guido Fawkes is usually far more restrained than his commenters, thank God. For instance, here at ‘Mrs Duffy declares for David’ M, at least Guido poses a question. I couldn’t possible comment.

And on Sunday he asked- Does Anybody really like Balls?’ A little superfluous, even rhetorical. Still, to prove Guido is not as daft as most of his dullard commenters, he says this:

“It is possible that Ed Balls could come last in the leadership contest behind Diane Abbott and Andy Burnham. If so it would be the final humiliation of the TaliBrown, the cabal of bullying second-raters who ousted three-time election winner Tony Blair to install Gordon Brown, a politician who has never won a competitive election in his life.”

Just noticed this at Guido’s – ‘Fox’s neo-con charity slammed.’ Reference Charity Commission investigation into [Tory ties to] Atlantic Bridge. You don’t mean … you’re not saying…?!?!?!

That might shut the Nu-Lab haters at Guido’s for five minutes.

Oh, the joys.

__________

3. Great fun, this one - Nobel peace prizes are being awarded illegally. Mother Theresa was not eligible and should not have had hers. Whereas President Obama is not listed here, so presumably HE is eligible for trying to abolish the armed forces and striving to do away with war. Oh, FGS. Where do we get these idiots?