Originally posted by @cobham-saint
And there it is, the word āsuspectā. None of the MPās were given the truth on which to make any sort of decision other than the one they did.
The 2million (of which I was one) had no real proof that Bliar was lying to us - although we suspected it.
Iām sure you can quote all sort of facts to back up your arguments but itās with the benefit of hindsight, which is easy. At the time I think it was a lot less simplistic.
Didnāt stop a significant and vocal minority from sussing it all out, including the millions that marched in London.
Lack of hindsight is not really excuse when someone like Corbyn enumerates exactly whatāll happen in 2003 and it all plays out as he says.
I donāt disagree with what you say Pap.
I marched, but Iād hesitate to say Iād sussed it all out - more a case of mistrust of Bliar and the Govtās motives. There were few real facts available at the time.
I think that while Corbyn called it right, he is now in a good place because of it, but Iād question whether even he had the full facts. Call it serendipity but I think it was his pacifist views that made him make the call and and as a result has got him where he is today (Iām all for him remaining head of Labour btw).
Originally posted by @cobham-saint
I marched, but Iād hesitate to say Iād sussed it all out - more a case of mistrust of Bliar and the Govtās motives. There were few real facts available at the time.
I think that while Corbyn called it right, he is now in a good place because of it, but Iād question whether even he had the full facts. Call it serendipity but I think it was his pacifist views that made him make the call and and as a result has got him where he is today (Iām all for him remaining head of Labour btw).
I think youāre probably doing yourself and Corbyn a disservice. It was pretty obvious at the the time that theyād exaggerated the threat as a means to go to war. If it had been a simple case of pacifism you wouldnāt have got that many people marching.
George Galloway@georgegalloway
Donāt miss my show tonight on @talkRADIO with John Pilger Peter Hitchens Peter Oborne and Julian Assange. 7pm. Mother of all Talkshows.
Thatāll be worth listening to, I reckon.
Hans Blix. David Kelly had pretty good actual knowledge others not just Corbyn articulated the concerns
Bliar simply presented only what backed his view most people with a brain read & listened to both sides.
Good points one and all.
what I think Iām really getting annoyed / frustrated about is the holier than thou attitudes of some people who apparently had all the answers back then or are twisting the findings of the Chilcott report to fit their world view (having not read it but relying on the media for the āfactsā)
No, before Pap comes back with an essay, Iām not having a pop at anyone on here
An interesting read from the Guardian.
One other thing thatās always bothered me, though itās on a rather more general level, is the whole question of weapons of mass destruction and the definition thereof. Given that this was a key point of the supposed justification for invading Iraq, I think itās worth mentioning.
My concern here is that the term WMD suggests an equivalence between nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and itās an equivalence that simply doesnāt exist. The smallest nuclear weapon in the arsenal of the US or Russia is many times more powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki - sufficient to lay a large city to waste. Thatās buildings, people - everything. Chemical or biological weapons simply dont have that power. Yes, theyāre horrible, but theyāre not on the same scale.
Does this matter? I think it does. Nobody in their right mind would have tried to persuade parliament or the public that Sadam had access to nuclear weapons, but it was well known that he had in the past both possessed and used chemical weapons (which we had kindly sold to him). So using a term that effectively extended the destructive power of nuclear weapons to considerably less destructive ones was a handy enough way of selling the invasion.
Iād be interested to know how often the generic term āweapons of mass destructionā had been used prior to 2002, if indeed it had been used at all.
Saddam used VX nerve agent gas against a Kurdish village in Northern Iraq. It was horrific, but it was a nerve agent gas sprayed by a crop spaying plane etc. Brutal and awful but quite cheap
Iraq never had a sophisticated nuclear missile system they couldnt afford it
In news likely to surprise no-one. it turns out that Chilcot report was set up to avoid blame.
Thatās right, kids. Millions of pounds of taxpayer money advanced in the interests of keeping war criminals from trial.
This should come as no surprise to anybody. Reports a few months ago that so far the Government has spent upwards of 500,000 quid on legal fees keeping Jack Straw out of court regarding his role in illegal renditions. The whole Chilcott enquiry was an exercise in whitewashing and protecting the criminals in Government who lied and took us into an illegal war. Now today we have Tony Blair announcing his comeback into politics, announcing that May is āweakā, and Corbyn is a ānutterā. Only Saint Tony can heal the country! Jesus H Christ, does this man not realize how despised he is? Does he really think that everyone will just forget about Iraq, and welcome him back, throwing rose petals at his feet? He is pathologically deluded, certifiable in my opinion.
Of course the same thing is happening with the child abuse enquiry, another victims organization pulled out this week, on top of the leaders, various lawyers etc, citing no faith in the integrity of this so called inquiry. The last thing the establishment want is to get to the truth of organized sexual abuse of children, they know that would end up uncomfortably close to home. If the truth was really being sought, Mike Mansfield QC is the obvious choice to head up the inquiry, as has been pointed out many many times by legal brains in this field, but that will never happen. Precisely because Mansfield would get at the truth, he would ask the awkward questions of certain pillars of the establishment who were involved in and covered up this vile scandal.
Following on from this, today the Home Office has been forced to admit that the Government hold large amounts of secret files on the minerās strike and the battle of Orgreave. Just after the Home Secretary announces that there will be no inquiry into Orgreave, this comes out. She made a perverse decision based on information in āSecret filesā. In a democracy, before any decision is made regarding an inquiry, this stuff should be out in the open, transparent. What is Amber Rudd afraid of? That her idol Margaret Thatcher will be shown up for what she was, a fascist. there are any number of eye witness accounts of a āpresenceā other than official police, no numbers on their uniforms, which is unlawful, the use of military horses, etc etc. Soldiers masquerading as policemen, is tantamount to fascism no matter how you cut it. Trade unions were infiltrated by the state, and organized violence initiated by the āpoliceā, etc etc. Disgraceful. There should be outrage at these revelations, the farcical child abuse inquiry, the Chilcott whitewash and cover up, but there isnāt. Not really. People just seem to shrug their shoulders and accept it. A sad and sorry state of affairs.
Why Nott Arf old chap.
You almost sound surprised?
The sooner you lot realise that Politicos lie all the time to simply keep their snouts in the trough of āthe Political Eliteā the sooner you can start finding anti - party Politicos who actually do good instead of harm.
Yeah right
To be fair to the warm bosom of Sotonians, I think weāre much better at spitting out spoon-fed dross than your average football forum, Nottarf being a spoon swerver of some distinction.
Iām just as disappointed at what passes for independent inquiry these days. Chilcot cost millions, took years, and told us something any sensible person would have sussed already. The Child Abuse Inquiry has so far, been a travesty, now on its fourth chair. The first two had to be removed because they were linked to some of the cases. The third, a Kiwi import, ended up leaving amid accusations of racism. That inquiry isnāt going to report shit until all the major players are dead. Mind you, that might happen sooner than expected. Westminster politicians accused of child abuse have a startlingly short life expectancy post-accusation*.
Orgreave is just another example of the government abusing mechanisms to cover up previous abuses of mechanisms.
Donāt know whatās sadder. The apparent indifference of the government or the people. At the very least, youād expect people to be disgusted with the revelations of high profile paedos and the associated cover-ups, but there hasnāt been the sort of public clamour to turn the CSA inquiry into something that is actually going to deliver.
Originally posted by @pap
Originally posted by @Dubai_Phil
Why Nott Arf old chap.
You almost sound surprised?
The sooner you lot realise that Politicos lie all the time to simply keep their snouts in the trough of āthe Political Eliteā the sooner you can start finding anti - party Politicos who actually do good instead of harm.
Yeah right
To be fair to the warm bosom of Sotonians, I think weāre much better at spitting out spoon-fed dross than your average football forum, Nottarf being a spoon swerver of some distinction.
Iām just as disappointed at what passes for independent inquiry these days. Chilcot cost millions, took years, and told us something any sensible person would have sussed already. The Child Abuse Inquiry has so far, been a travesty, now on its fourth chair. The first two had to be removed because they were linked to some of the cases. The third, a Kiwi import, ended up leaving amid accusations of racism. That inquiry isnāt going to report shit until all the major players are dead. Mind you, that might happen sooner than expected. Westminster politicians accused of child abuse have a startlingly short life expectancy post-accusation*.
**Orgreave is just another example of the government abusing mechanisms to cover up previous abuses of mechanisms. **
Donāt know whatās sadder. The apparent indifference of the government or the people. At the very least, youād expect people to be disgusted with the revelations of high profile paedos and the associated cover-ups, but there hasnāt been the sort of public clamour to turn the CSA inquiry into something that is actually going to deliver.
For me that is the saddest thing, you have āDemocracyā and yet the constant erosion of faith in that system over so many years (back to Profumo and beyond no doubt) means that you guys all just do a rolly eyes thingy everytime.
But well put Pap.
Separately not wanting to go āPoliticalā on it, I do have a slither of a glimmer of hope that perhaps, just perhaps, Mr Politically Incorrect himself COULD just maybe start widening the chink in the armoury of āThe Eliteā
Of course on an equal level of expectation I expect UK to win Eurovision, England win the World Cup and the skates to qualify for the UCL next year. But at least it is a glimmer.
Originally posted by @Dubai_Phil
For me that is the saddest thing, you have āDemocracyā and yet the constant erosion of faith in that system over so many years (back to Profumo and beyond no doubt) means that you guys all just do a rolly eyes thingy everytime.
But well put Pap.
Profumo was unusual in that the story actually hit the papers, establishing a tone for the future reporting of scandals. It probably wasnāt unusual in terms of frequency, especially if we just constrain ourselves to the sexual side of it.
These days, weāve undergone a bit of a revolution, even if few people have realised that. The maturing Internet means that those in control of the perception of our democracy can be challenged immediately, often with evidence-based stuff.
Separately not wanting to go āPoliticalā on it, I do have a slither of a glimmer of hope that perhaps, just perhaps, Mr Politically Incorrect himself COULD just maybe start widening the chink in the armoury of āThe Eliteā
Doubt it, mucker. While there was something of a hope that would happen, I havenāt been encouraged by the top team heās picking, or the agenda it might have when it gets its feet under the table.
People are too busy to question why there was no proper investigation into Orgreave, or the child abuse - they have Eastenders, The Sun, and Strictly-X-Factor-Bake-Off to distract them.
One of the cover-ups that was exposed after decades of denial was Hillsborough.
We need people to ask questions and itās quite clear that we donāt have the quality of MP to do that at the top level.
Perhaps we need the familes of the 96 to train the rest of the country in how to pursue truth, as too many people are happy to just shrug their shoulders and let injustice go unchallenged.
I get what youāre saying, Rallyboy. The problem is nowt new; was called bread and circuses in Roman times.
Youāve constrained yourself to shows like X-Factor and Bake Off, but one of the reasons that I tend not to watch broadcast TV is because almost every show is a circus, whether its remit is entertainment or not. Benefits Street was two parts poverty safari and eight parts propaganda, chiming with the anti-claimant rhetoric of the time, designed to cultivate the impression they were all like that.
The news is a horror circus. Iām down at my old dears at the minute and they watch TV all the time. It is frightening how programmable people are. Theyāre like blank fucking discs that get wiped and re-filled at the end of the day. I have heard both my mum and my grandad espouse completely different opinions on different days based on whatever the latest is on the news, and relatively speaking, theyāre both very cynical people. And yet, they fall for it hard. Tis a powerful spell. The circus industry is in full swing.
The bread side of things isnāt as well covered. Itās only really down to the voluntary generosity of the British public that we donāt have more people dying from starvation. What would happen if food banks didnāt exist?
It is a dreadful situation, which will probably get worse before it gets better. It may just create the conditions for real change. A hungry man at a circus isnāt focused on the acts.
Isnāt it funny that despite both of your apparent inferences that such distractions are beneath you, you both failed to mention one of the most powerful tools of distraction currently employed in the UK, primarily used against the male section of the masses. A distraction that the vast majority on here, yourselves included have unquestionably succumbed to. Namely the circus that is the football industry.