Bollitics The Chilcot inquiry

[markavfc40]

one less dictator in that volatile region the better, for all of us

Though some might well argue that the removal of that one dictator (the one about whose regime Blair said, "even now he can save it by complying with the UN’s demand") has left Iran in a position of much more power in the region (regardless of whether it is Dinner Jacket or the religious leaders who are actually in charge).

Perhaps not better for many of us.

What a load of bollocks. Are you suggesting that the more dictatorships around the world the better as it will stop other dictators becoming more powerful?

What your suggesting is pathetic and as long as their are those of us who are of sane mind in the world then we will always be in a position to get rid of these evil **** when they get out of hand and history I'd suggest as shown that.

[tonyh29]

As bad as Tony Blair may appear to have been now it is so much more frightening to think that the man who has clearly modelled himself on Mr Blair, but with half the intelligence, will soon be leading the country.

Step up Mr Cameron and his sidekick, the equally squirmy,Mr Osbourne. The next five years with these two inept **** in charge blaming all their wrong doings on the previous incumbents of number 10 will be so much fun for those wealthy enough to ride it out.

and the relevence to this thread is ???

[markavfc40]

As bad as Tony Blair may appear to have been now it is so much more frightening to think that the man who has clearly modelled himself on Mr Blair, but with half the intelligence, will soon be leading the country.

Step up Mr Cameron and his sidekick, the equally squirmy,Mr Osbourne. The next five years with these two inept **** in charge blaming all their wrong doings on the previous incumbents of number 10 will be so much fun for those wealthy enough to ride it out.

and the relevence to this thread is ???

Did Blair not today play the leading role at the Chilcot inquiry? and won't Cameron, like Blair be Prime Minister of this country?, all be it an incompetent one.

[tonyh29]

Did Blair not today play the leading role at the Chilcot inquiry? and won't Cameron, like Blair be Prime Minister of this country?, all be it an incompetent one.

well unless you've travelled forward in time I don't see how you can actually predetermine what sort of PM Cameron will make .. still he went to Eton so of course it goes without saying he's going to rape the poor and kill the NHS ...if only he had worked Down pit and been a good solid honest working class bloke like our previous 2 PM's ...

.. but the Chilcot inquiry was about our entry into an illegal war , not what type of Pm you think Cameron will make

[snowychap]

What a load of bollocks.

Is it?

Are you suggesting that the more dictatorships around the world the better as it will stop other dictators becoming more powerful?

No. I suppose if you read it that way that might explain your opening salvo.

But, whilst we're on that, do we measure how bad the world is by the number of dictatorships? :?

What your suggesting is pathetic ...

Saying that some might argue something (in this case that there is an argument to be had about the dynamics of power that are now the case in that region) is pathetic?

If you read it in the way that caused you to react as above (i.e. wrongly in as much as it wasn't at all what I said), then perhaps.

However, as the inference you drew was some kind of stretch, I'd ask you, please, to go back and read again what I posted in terms of discussing the intent behind the war; the flimsy reasons (changed each time they were seen through); the planning of it and the aftermath, and the claims by those who made the decisions that they can't be held responsible for things which they claim were unintended consequences.

[markavfc40]

well unless you've travelled forward in time I don't see how you can actually predetermine what sort of PM Cameron will make .. still he went to Eton so of course it goes without saying he's going to rape the poor and kill the NHS ...if only he had worked Down pit and been a good solid honest working class bloke like our previous 2 PM's ...

Where the **** did that come from? I couldn't give two monkeys **** what Camerons background is. Anyone with half a brain can see that its the party he represents that will ultimately prove to be the problem. The fact that him and sideshow Bob ( Mr Osbourne ) will lead this country is probably not such a bad thing as they will be that incompetent it will ensure only one term of Tory rule.

Anyway back to the Chilcot enquiry. Like others have said on this thread I think Blair came across very well yesterday not that he should have to explain himself for what was clearly the right decision.

[snowychap]

I think Blair came across very well yesterday...

:crylaugh:

Who let Charlie Falconer on to VT.

[meregreen]

Well I'm not Charlie Falconer , and I thought he came across pretty well too.

[snowychap]

Of course he'll come across pretty well: he's Tony Blair.

He's one of the most convincing public speakers and con men we've seen in an age.

The point was what he said and what he didn't say not how he said it.

He could probably read the text of an Osama Bin Laden call to arms and 'come across pretty well'.

[meregreen]

Of course he'll come across pretty well: he's Tony Blair.

He's one of the most convincing public speakers and con men we've seen in an age.

The point was what he said and what he didn't say not how he said it.

He could probably read the text of an Osama Bin Laden call to arms and 'come across pretty well'.

Various accusation there without any specific facts. You don't like him, fair enough. I thought he did a good job in his term of office. Told the truth more than that old Harpie Thatcher ever did.But then ' I didn't like her. Guess our prejudices tend to influence our perceptions.

[tonyh29]

I thought he did a good job in his term of office.

more importantly he got out just before it all went tits up and poor Gordon got saddled with the title Britain's worse ever PM

I watched him in action yesterday , he was given a fairly easy ride I thought .. but he did put his point across well ..the trouble is I think the country was looking for him to apologise instead of lecturing everyone ...

[snowychap]

Various accusation there without any specific facts.

No accusations at all (in fact a compliment which was meant as a backhanded insult).

You don't like him, fair enough.

No, I don't. Slimey, duplicitous, deceitful little shit who has done little to improve the state of our politics and a lot to damage it.

Told the truth more than that old Harpie Thatcher ever did.

I can't imagine that I could separate them in a photo finish but I'm not sure what that old cow has to do with what a twunt Blair is.

Two awful people though awful (mostly) in different ways.

Guess our prejudices tend to influence our perceptions.

Apart from the fact that I was judging him yesterday on what he was saying and what he was not saying (though I didn't watch the last couple of hours so in that time he could have said something completely different - still four hours out of the six might be viewed as basing one's judgement on the evidence laid before one and I'm not sure which dictionary defines that as 'prejudice').

BTW, a lot of what he said (especially when he jokingly referred to his vocation as an 'envoy') could be viewed as an attempt to pave the way for military action in and against Iran.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Blair's 'evidence' of Jan 29th 2010 taken as future 'evidence' of a case against Iran (be it a UK Inquiry or somewhere else) just as his past speeches (or cherry picked excerpts) were seen as evidence for what he claimed as fact now.

[tonyh29]

Blair Iraq inquiry evidence ludicrous, says Short From the BBC

seems Prescott stopped Brown from resigning .. bet you regret that one now don't you Pressa

[Gringo]

seems Prescott stopped Brown from resigning .. bet you regret that one now don't you Pressa

If gordo had resigned, blair would have lost the vote and resigned and gordo would have won the ensuing leadership election.....so careful what you wish for now.

[Gringo]

Blair Iraq inquiry evidence ludicrous, says Short From the BBC

Cabinet Respnsibiliy - Pah

Short says cabinet misled on war legality

Tony Blair's cabinet was "misled" into thinking the war with Iraq was legal, ex-International Development Secretary Clare Short has told the UK's inquiry.

She said she was now "shocked" by the advice Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, had given them shortly before war.

Mr Blair "and his mates" decided war was necessary, and "everything was done on a wing and a prayer", she added.

She quit the cabinet two months after the March 2003 invasion, in protest at planning for the war's aftermath.

In her evidence to the Iraq inquiry, during which she was highly critical of former Prime Minister Tony Blair, she said the cabinet had not been a "decision-making body" and called Parliament a "rubber stamp".

The UK eventually went to war without achieving a second United Nations resolution authorising the move.

'Didn't come'

Lord Goldsmith ruled that this did not preclude military action in a definitive statement circulated at cabinet shortly before the war began.

Ms Short said there was no suggestion that he had had any legal doubts, and said that any discussion of the legal advice was halted at that pre-war cabinet meeting.

In light of Lord Goldsmith's "doubts and his changes of opinion" that have since emerged, Ms Short added: "I think for the attorney general to come and say there's unequivocal legal authority to go war was misleading."

She said: "I think he misled the cabinet. He certainly misled me, but people let it through."

Ms Short also told the inquiry that she "was seeing the intelligence" to do with Iraq during the earlier stages of preparations for a possible invasion.

Critics of the war have suggested that Lord Goldsmith changed his mind about the issue in the days before the conflict, first issuing draft advice spelling out the arguments for and against the need for a second resolution before a week later concluding that action was justified on the basis of existing resolutions.

Ms Short was also critical of the amount of intelligence made available to her Department for International Development.

11 September

She told the inquiry that, in late 2002: "We asked for a briefing... This just didn't come and didn't come."

Ms Short also said: "It became clear there was some sort of block on communications."

In the run-up to the conflict, Ms Short warned Britain should not invade without a second UN resolution.

She has previously said she was persuaded by Mr Blair to stay in the cabinet after the war started, with a promise that her department would play a leading role in Iraq's reconstruction.

Ms Short, who now sits in the Commons as an independent MP, eventually quit the government over the lack of UN involvement in the reconstruction effort.

Mr Blair told the inquiry last week that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had been a "monster" who, he believed, "threatened not just the region but the world".

He said British and US attitudes towards the threat posed by Iraq "changed dramatically" after the terror attacks on 11 September 2001, since they highlighted the dangers of links between failed states in possession of weapons of mass destruction and terrorist groups.

He suggested Saddam would have co-operated with groups such as al-Qaeda, had he been allowed to stay in power.

'Difficult to handle'

But Ms Short told the inquiry this was "historically inaccurate", adding: "There was no evidence of any kind of an escalation of threats."

She also said: "We could have gone more slowly and carefully and not have had a totally destabilised and angry Iraq."

"The American people were misled to suggest that al-Qaeda had links to Saddam Hussein.

"Everybody knows that is untrue -- that he had absolutely links, no sympathy, al Qaeda were nowhere near Iraq until after the invasion and the disorder that came from that. "

On Sunday, Ms Short told the BBC that Gordon Brown, then chancellor, had been "marginalised" in the build-up to the war and the then chancellor had neither opposed nor supported it.

During an earlier hearing, former head of the armed forces Lord Boyce suggested officials from Ms Short's department had refused to co-operate fully in the immediate aftermath of the invasion because of their opposition to the war.

Mr Blair's former spokesman, Alastair Campbell, told the inquiry that Ms Short had been "difficult to handle" in the run-up to the invasion and suggested there was a fear she might leak things she did not agree with.

But, in his evidence, former Cabinet Secretary Lord Turnbull said such criticism was unfair and Ms Short and other more independent voices in cabinet had been effectively sidelined.

Hilary Benn, who succeeded Ms Short as international development secretary, will also give evidence on Tuesday.

[snowychap]

Gordo to give evidence next friday and Miliband major the week after.

Gordon Brown will give evidence to the Iraq inquiry next Friday, it was announced today.

He is scheduled to take questions for around four and a half hours about his involvement in Iraq policy both as chancellor and as prime minister.

Sir John Chilcot and his team originally said that they did not want to call Brown before the general election because they did not want his evidence to be exploited for party political purposes.

But Chilcot changed his mind after the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, suggested that Brown had something to hide. Chilcot decided that it would be unfair to Brown not to let him give evidence before polling day.

The inquiry has heard evidence that the Treasury did not give the Ministry of Defence all the resources it wanted and Brown is likely to be asked about this in detail.

But he may also be asked whether he was in favour of the decision to go to war. Although Brown has defended the war, he said little about it in public at the time, and there were claims that he privately believed that the invasion was a mistake.

In an interview at the weekend Brown insisted that he did support Tony Blair's decision to use military force.

"For me, it's always been about a country that refused to cooperate with the international community over many, many years, when it was in breach of its international obligations," Brown told the Independent on Sunday.

"In Britain, it's a cabinet decision. You accept the collective responsibility in a cabinet, and I would expect every member of a cabinet I was in to accept their collective responsibility. When a decision's made you've got to stand up and defend it."

Two other cabinet ministers who were also originally going to be questioned by the inquiry after the election will also appear in early March.

Douglas Alexander, the international development secretary, will appear next week after Brown, on Friday afternoon. David Miliband, the foreign secretary, will give evidence the following Monday.

[tonyh29]

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has admitted giving incorrect evidence to the Iraq Inquiry on defence spending.

Mr Brown told Sir John Chilcot's panel that the defence budget had risen "in real terms every year".

But House of Commons show Mr Brown's claim was wrong, and he has now written to Sir John to correct it.

so he basically lied , stole some headlines , flew off for a nice pre election photo shot with some troops and hoped he would get away with it

he really is the biggest word removed alive

[drat01]

Excellent spin Tony - you obsession is now starting to rival others

Gordon Brown is to correct his evidence to the Iraq Inquiry after accepting defence spending had not risen in real terms every year under Labour.

The PM, chancellor during the war, said he now accepted it "did not rise in real terms" in one or two years.

Tory leader David Cameron said there had been years when there had been "real terms cuts" adding: "At last the prime minister has admitted it."

Mr Brown told MPs he had written to the inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot.

Mr Brown appeared before the inquiry into the Iraq War on 5 March, and denied starving UK armed forces of equipment when he was chancellor.

Cash terms

He told the inquiry that the defence budget was "rising in real terms every year" - but House of Commons figures showed this was not the case.

Asked at prime minister's questions on Wednesday if he would correct the record, Mr Brown said: "Yes. I am already writing to Sir John Chilcot about this issue."

He said defence spending had risen from £21bn in 1997 to around £40bn this year and "grows every year in cash terms".

In three years of asking the prime minister questions I don't think I have ever heard him make a correction or a retraction

David Cameron

But he said: "Because of operational fluctuations in the way the money is spent, expenditure has risen in cash terms every year, in real terms it is 12% higher, but I do accept that in one or two years defence expenditure did not rise in real terms."

That is from the BBC site BBC story

The desperation of the Tory party now to deflect from issues such as Belize funding etc is worrying as it shows that their craving for power is becoming obsessional. On a day when jobless figures come down and even the Tory party spokeperson comes out and near congratulates labour

.."Obviously it's very... it's welcome news that unemployment figures are going down," she said.

- Ahem Very what Theresa? Surely the media training Ashcroft has paid for for all Tory party leaders would have avoided such a gaffe.

You see Tony you keep wanting to pin that word "liar" on to Brown- I suspect you are deliberately forgetting what the meaning of that word is. I know a Tory or two who know what it means ............... :-)

[kidlewis]

Excellent spin Tony - you obsession is now starting to rival others

Gordon Brown is to correct his evidence to the Iraq Inquiry after accepting defence spending had not risen in real terms every year under Labour.

The PM, chancellor during the war, said he now accepted it "did not rise in real terms" in one or two years.

Tory leader David Cameron said there had been years when there had been "real terms cuts" adding: "At last the prime minister has admitted it."

Mr Brown told MPs he had written to the inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot.

Mr Brown appeared before the inquiry into the Iraq War on 5 March, and denied starving UK armed forces of equipment when he was chancellor.

Cash terms

He told the inquiry that the defence budget was "rising in real terms every year" - but House of Commons figures showed this was not the case.

Asked at prime minister's questions on Wednesday if he would correct the record, Mr Brown said: "Yes. I am already writing to Sir John Chilcot about this issue."

He said defence spending had risen from £21bn in 1997 to around £40bn this year and "grows every year in cash terms".

In three years of asking the prime minister questions I don't think I have ever heard him make a correction or a retraction

David Cameron

But he said: "Because of operational fluctuations in the way the money is spent, expenditure has risen in cash terms every year, in real terms it is 12% higher, but I do accept that in one or two years defence expenditure did not rise in real terms."

That is from the BBC site BBC story

The desperation of the Tory party now to deflect from issues such as Belize funding etc is worrying as it shows that their craving for power is becoming obsessional. On a day when jobless figures come down and even the Tory party spokeperson comes out and near congratulates labour

.."Obviously it's very... it's welcome news that unemployment figures are going down," she said.

- Ahem Very what Theresa? Surely the media training Ashcroft has paid for for all Tory party leaders would have avoided such a gaffe.

You see Tony you keep wanting to pin that word "liar" on to Brown- I suspect you are deliberately forgetting what the meaning of that word is. I know a Tory or two who know what it means ............... :-)

remember though that whilst overall unemployment figures are down, the longer unemployed figures have actually risen.

so again it all depends on what data you pick and what areas you look at.

[tonyh29]

If that were a proper court of law then Brown committed Perjury and would be held in contempt

Simples .......