Boris sums it up again- Blair silent about death of Saddam

#1
Here is a small piece of the excellent article.

I can't believe you missed the manner in which they bumped off the former Iraqi leader, but in case you are one of the few on the planet who does not have access to a television or the internet, it was a hellish business.

The viewer was led by cameraphone into some dark dungeon full of hooded men. There was a rope and scaffold, and the only visible face was Saddam's, looking calm and dignified.

You could see flash after flash from the cameras and hear them goading and taunting a man on the verge of his death. He replied rather mildly.

Then there was a yammering of "Moqtada! Moqtada! Moqtada!", in honour of the fanatical Shia cleric, and a chanting of the name of the Prophet, and then — whoosh — almost in slow motion you saw him fall through the trap.

There was a great scuffling, and joyous shouts, and at last you had what they call the money shot: a man in death, his bloody neck at right angles.

Was this what we fought for? Is this really the lesson in human rights and Western values we hoped to deliver to the people of Iraq? This wasn't justice. This was a sectarian lynch mob. This was a snuff movie.
Edited to add the link

DOH!!!


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/01/04/do0401.xml
 
#2
Before the invasion, Saddam politically outwitted and outmanouvred both Bush and Bliar and now "Dumbya and Dumber" have scored yet another own goal. These idiots would extinguish a fire by chucking a bucket of petrol over it.

The puppet government in Iraq has just created another martyr...
 
#3
Good article. Boris does a good line in 'Goodness graciouss what a bounder' type articles on Blair but this one seemed to have a sense of conviction behind it. This is the sort of thing that needs to be coming at Blair from Cameron and from his own backbenchers.
 
#4
The puppet government in Iraq has just created another martyr...
Oh one of those are you ? The whole world is a conspiracy of White Men who make lesser breeds dance like marionettes......................I suppose it is easy to think of Arabs as nothing more than glove puppets - but I think the Persians have always been good at getting them to perform.

Do you think blundering incompetence is an Arab trait ? I mean the Iranian puppet Mukta Al-Sadr seems to have survived his murder of Britain's glove puppet al-Khoei and the British were too stunned to kill Mukta.

Pretty wet puppetmasters when you think - oh for the days of George Young and the SO Section of SIS............................ :twisted:
 
#5
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/01/04/do0401.xml

Boris pretends to be a fool (as ever) or think that the Telegraph reader are complete fools (at least a part of them are not).

How dare the Prime Minister pretend that it is somehow nothing to do with him? He was the only Western leader of any importance to join George W. Bush in the war to remove Saddam.
Rt.hon, learned mr.Howard would support mr.Bush likely even more enthusiastically.

It was Blair who sent thousands of British troops to join the coalition, and Blair who authorised the spending of at least £5 billion on a war in Mesopotamia, and it was Blair who was therefore directly co-responsible for putting Saddam Hussein on the end of that rope.
...and it was mr.Johnson himself who voted for these spendings.

The trial itself was a farce...

Saddam was guarded by American soldiers, and ministered to by American nurses, and it was in an American helicopter that the "witnesses" were taken to the execution.

The Iraqis could have performed this job only with the active and intimate support of the coalition, of which we are meant to be partners.
So naive is Boris (or thinks that only idiots read his articles). Our American friends would do it with or without British approval. Btw, mr.Johnson had excellent possibility to protest in the Parliament. But why did he (as mr.Blair now) kept silence?
 
#6
KGB_resident said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/01/04/do0401.xml

Boris pretends to be a fool (as ever) or think that the Telegraph reader are complete fools (at least a part of them are not).

How dare the Prime Minister pretend that it is somehow nothing to do with him? He was the only Western leader of any importance to join George W. Bush in the war to remove Saddam.
Rt.hon, learned mr.Howard would support mr.Bush likely even more enthusiastically.

It was Blair who sent thousands of British troops to join the coalition, and Blair who authorised the spending of at least £5 billion on a war in Mesopotamia, and it was Blair who was therefore directly co-responsible for putting Saddam Hussein on the end of that rope.
...and it was mr.Johnson himself who voted for these spendings.

The trial itself was a farce...

Saddam was guarded by American soldiers, and ministered to by American nurses, and it was in an American helicopter that the "witnesses" were taken to the execution.

The Iraqis could have performed this job only with the active and intimate support of the coalition, of which we are meant to be partners.
So naive is Boris (or thinks that only idiots read his articles). Our American friends would do it with or without British approval. Btw, mr.Johnson had excellent possibility to protest in the Parliament. But why did he (as mr.Blair now) kept silence?
Buggar Me

I actually agree with something our Sergei is saying
 
#7
Sven: I would happily use a pickaxe to bugger you. Cnut.

Sergei: the Tories supported the war in Iraq because Toneee BLiar lied to them and used a politicised security service to lie for him.
 
#8
Dread said:
Sven: I would happily use a pickaxe to bugger you. Cnut.

Sergei: the Tories supported the war in Iraq because Toneee BLiar lied to them and used a politicised security service to lie for him.
Personal invective again Dread?

Bet You used to take guys round the back if they disagreed with You in the bar eh??
 
#10
Dread said:
Sven: I would happily use a pickaxe to bugger you. Cnut.

Sergei: the Tories supported the war in Iraq because Toneee BLiar lied to them and used a politicised security service to lie for him.
your very nieve if you believe the tories turnaround wasn't in the least bit opertunistic.

It's mainstream politics mate,there is no difference between the 3 parties, if the tories were in power and labour was the opposition you could bet the outcome would be the same and Tonly Blair and his cronies would be making the same noises the tories are now.

partly the reason why I won't be voting for the Liberal conlabourtives next election.
 
#11
I see in this morning's Metro (it's free FFS) that Blair has put his support behind an inquiry into the manner in which Saddam was executed.

So, look forward to the official report in six months time, explaining how Saddam's suicide could not have been prevented.
 
#12
KGB_resident said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/01/04/do0401.xml

Boris pretends to be a fool (as ever) or think that the Telegraph reader are complete fools (at least a part of them are not).

How dare the Prime Minister pretend that it is somehow nothing to do with him? He was the only Western leader of any importance to join George W. Bush in the war to remove Saddam.
Rt.hon, learned mr.Howard would support mr.Bush likely even more enthusiastically.

It was Blair who sent thousands of British troops to join the coalition, and Blair who authorised the spending of at least £5 billion on a war in Mesopotamia, and it was Blair who was therefore directly co-responsible for putting Saddam Hussein on the end of that rope.
...and it was mr.Johnson himself who voted for these spendings.

The trial itself was a farce...

Saddam was guarded by American soldiers, and ministered to by American nurses, and it was in an American helicopter that the "witnesses" were taken to the execution.

The Iraqis could have performed this job only with the active and intimate support of the coalition, of which we are meant to be partners.
So naive is Boris (or thinks that only idiots read his articles). Our American friends would do it with or without British approval. Btw, mr.Johnson had excellent possibility to protest in the Parliament. But why did he (as mr.Blair now) kept silence?
Sergei, Michael Howard and the Conservative Party supported the government's action based on false evidence presented to Parliament. Since then, William Hague has said that ultimately invading Iraq was the right thing to do, in order to depose Saddam, but it has been grossly mismanaged since.

Do you have Boris' voting record in the house? As I understand it no vote is taken to allocate specific funds for war fighting as this is taken into account as part of the MOD's overall vote (someone slap me if I have this wrong).

I agree that the SPAMs would probably have c0cked this up as well if they'd done it themselves, but it is important that the Iraqi Government is given responsibility for its own justice proceedings. I believe Boris' point (and I agree) is that we weren't monitoring the proceedings closely enough to register our displeasure or otherwise with the undertakings for the execution. Certainly no-one has suggested that we even attempted to monitor the proceedings, let alone influence them.
 
#13
Sergei, Michael Howard was not in charge of the Conservative Party at the time of the vote, it was that chap with the bald head, you know don't mess with a quiet guy, him. Get your bloody facts right will you and Parliament is not sitting at the mo, the dears are all still on holiday. Blair's silence over this is telling. The man should do us all a favour and stay in Coconut Grove. Politicisation of the Intelligence Service, ask your Dad.
 
#14
ABrighter2006 said:
I see in this morning's Metro (it's free FFS) that Blair has put his support behind an inquiry into the manner in which Saddam was executed.

So, look forward to the official report in six months time, explaining how Saddam's suicide could not have been prevented.
Quite.

Somehow I doubt that this inquiry will go back to consider the manner or reasoning behind his toppling, or the subsequent consequences.

Having grown up on a diet of WW2 recent history, both GWB & his poodle are living in a WW2 fantasy, where they get to play at being true statesmen, giving inspirational speeches to the country, sending in the troops etc. It was like when we used to play at war in the school playground, except some of us grew out of it.

The 'liberation' of Iraq was supposed to be a rerun of Germany, the Ba'ath party were the new Nazis; Saddam was Hitler; his trial was supposed to be Nuremburg. The utter (and entirely predictable) shambles of the trial and the execution, show how far from the truth this fantasy has been.

PS I was expecting a user name change to ABrighter2007?!
 
#15
anyone who thinks Saddam was not a "martyr" from minute one of day one of Telic, is sadly mistaken. Hanging him just reminded everyone that there was this bloke called Saddam who hadn't been underlined in history's ledgers yet.

Sunni times ahead for Iraq then?
 
#16
Dilfor said:
PS I was expecting a user name change to ABrighter2007?!
a la "The artist formerly known as AB2006" Uhhmm, you've spotted the flaw Dilfor, I was thinking along the lines of:

"If_that_usless_PM_Blair_is_removed_forcibly_from_office_by_the_rozzers_and_then_subsequently_charged_with_accepting _cash_for_honours_and_then_goes_on_to_be_impeached_for_war_crimes_in_the_next_year,_that’ll_make_for_a_brighter_2007”

Somehow, I think that even ARRSE won't be able to handle a user name that long.

Back to the drawing board! Any suggestions?!
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#17
ABrighter2006 said:
I see in this morning's Metro (it's free FFS) that Blair has put his support behind an inquiry into the manner in which Saddam was executed.

So, look forward to the official report in six months time, explaining how Saddam's suicide could not have been prevented.
:D :clap:
 
#18
Bat_Crab said:
Sergei, Michael Howard and the Conservative Party supported the government's action based on false evidence presented to Parliament. Since then, William Hague has said that ultimately invading Iraq was the right thing to do, in order to depose Saddam, but it has been grossly mismanaged since.
Алина! Сжальтесь надо мною,
Не смею требовать любви.
Быть может за грехи мои,
Мой ангел, я любви не стою!
Но притворитесь! Этот взгляд
Все может выразить так чудно!
Ах, обмануть меня не трудно!..
Я сам обманываться рад!

Alina! Have mercy on me,
Dare not to desire your love.
May be for my sins
My angel, I don't deserve it!
But pretend! This glance
Can express everything so lovely!
Ah, it is so easy to deceive me!..
I'm happy to be deceived myself!
 
#19
Never mind Tony's silence, what about Cherie? Can you imagine how much she could rake in for speaking out about Saddam's human rights?

As for Tony's silence, he probably thinks that whatever the leader of Iraq wants to do is fine...erm...oh I see...yes, bit embarrassing what? Maybe it is time for regime change?
 
#20
Cuddles said:
Never mind Tony's silence, what about Cherie? Can you imagine how much she could rake in for speaking out about Saddam's human rights?

As for Tony's silence, he probably thinks that whatever the leader of Iraq wants to do is fine...erm...oh I see...yes, bit embarrassing what? Maybe it is time for regime change?
Given Maliki's statement yesterday, when he does step down, it begs the obvious question; Did he jump, or was he pushed? Or alternatively, did he just have his strings cut?
 

Latest Threads

Top