|
President of Europe - Good Luck
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multime...ir_622220a.jpg
God help you all !! Not content with starting the demise of a once great country, prepare yourselves as he will soon have control of a continent. 'President' Blair waits on voters of Ireland - Times Online |
Originally Posted by Funkii Munkii
(Post 8974531)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multime...ir_622220a.jpg
God help you all !! Not content with starting the demise of a once great country, prepare yourselves as he will soon have control of a continent. 'President' Blair waits on voters of Ireland - Times Online BTW I think you are grossly exaggerating the actual extent of the powers the EU president has. But apart from that excellent post, full of the usual SN non partisan political comment |
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8974563)
Well I'd far rather have a exponent of EU reform like TB, than a Franco-German traditionalist.
BTW I think you are grossly exaggerating the actual extent of the powers the EU president has. But apart from that excellent post, full of the usual SN non partisan political comment Dave |
Originally Posted by hutton_d
(Post 8974570)
Unlike your posts then Martin ..... or can you just not make your mind up?
Dave |
lol after he made a complete of cnut running a small island like ours they give him a continent?
|
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8974579)
hmmm I think you'll find that I look at both sides of the argument...you should try it, you might learn something;)
Dave |
Originally Posted by hutton_d
(Post 8974609)
On the subject of Billy Liar I saw him speak for the first time in opposition and thought, 'what a smarmy get!'. Gave him a chance when they won by a landslide in 97 but no, nothing he ever said or did changed my opinion of him. And everything he has said, or more to the point DONE, since has just reinforced that opinion.
Dave |
An even bigger opportunity to feather his own nest
|
YouTube - Gordon's EU Nightmare :)
Blair will have everyone in some religious school before you know it. |
What I'd like to know is why someone has the power just to make him president? And who? And why don't we get a vote?
|
TB probably got the job after GB made him look so good...
|
I have to say that reading that a man is waiting to 'be proclaimed president' without being fettered by any democratic process does not make me feel easy: even if his power is not extensive.
|
There is no denying that he is a very capable person and can charm the proverbial off most. No one can speak against that, but the question is, what are his real motives and personal policies?
We know how he fiddled and lied to get his way especially over the attack on Iraq and I believe his reasons were to get his feet well and truly under the table with the USA. That has made him a very rich man now and doubtless very well suited to dealing with the Eu Commission's lack of ability to get its accounts audited for some 14 years! How they have the brass neck to continue in the job is a marvel to me! I know we would do far better out of the Eu as far as the constitution is concerned but remain as a trading partner which was what we were conned into believing in the initial referendum but yet again was a lie on the part of Ted Heath! Norway is doing pretty well at running its own country! I certainly don't fancy living in a province of the Eu with Billy Liar in control as well! Les |
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 8975363)
There is no denying that he is a very capable person and can charm the proverbial off most. No one can speak against that, but the question is, what are his real motives and personal policies?
We know how he fiddled and lied to get his way especially over the attack on Iraq and I believe his reasons were to get his feet well and truly under the table with the USA. That has made him a very rich man now and doubtless very well suited to dealing with the Eu Commission's lack of ability to get its accounts audited for some 14 years! How they have the brass neck to continue in the job is a marvel to me! I know we would do far better out of the Eu as far as the constitution is concerned but remain as a trading partner which was what we were conned into believing in the initial referendum but yet again was a lie on the part of Ted Heath! Norway is doing pretty well at running its own country! I certainly don't fancy living in a province of the Eu with Billy Liar in control as well! Les Right just so Im clear; the conspiracy is that Tony Blair lied about WMD in Iraq so that he could make money when he left office?:cuckoo: Have you any idea how daft that sounds? |
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8975908)
Right just so Im clear; the conspiracy is that Tony Blair lied about WMD in Iraq so that he could make money when he left office?:cuckoo:
Have you any idea how daft that sounds? |
Look, Martin, you don't think he was known as "Billy Liar", or "Tony B. Liar" to all except the sycophants for nothing, do you?
|
Originally Posted by Paul Habgood
(Post 8975970)
As far as i am aware he lied about WMD's and thier time to hit the UK. He left office and has done very nicely from the worldwide old boy network that looks after the likes of TB. Seems about right don't you think
It's frankly ridiculous to suggest that a Prime Minister would deliberately lie about an issue as important as going to so that he can make a profit. Are your thought processes that simple, do you not think this whole issue is enourmously complex, for a start how on earth did Blair get the rest of the world to lie about WMD. According to you he planned this whole thing, well clearly he forgot to think about what would happen after his 'lie' was discovered.:Whatever_ And this from a guy totally obsessed with his legacy....Oh and he must just love the 'Billy Liar' name. Why is it conspiracy first and cock-up second on SN, when in the real world cock-up is nearly always to blame If you can prove one single word of this conspiracy then I'll apologise public and recant any respect I have for our former PM, so knock yourself out:) |
Memo confirms Bush and Blair knew claims Iraq had WMDs were lies
"... A confidential memo obtained by the Observer, detailing a meeting between President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirms their determination to press ahead with the invasion of Iraq in 2003 without any evidence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and without United Nations approval. The five-page memo, written by Blair’s foreign policy adviser Sir David Manning, is dated January 31, 2003, some two months before the invasion began. It records the thinking of Bush and Blair as it became increasingly obvious that United Nations weapons inspectors would not find the advanced weaponry, including a nuclear capability, that both leaders were using to justify military action. According to the memo, Bush discussed various possible provocations that might trigger a second UN resolution to justify war in the absence of any WMD. One plan being considered by the White House was “to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover” provoking Iraqi forces into opening fire and thereby putting them in breach of a UN resolution. Bush also discussed his hopes that an Iraqi defector might still be “brought out” to talk about WMD, or that someone might assassinate Saddam Hussein. The memo confirms that the decision had already been taken to go to war. Bush expressed his readiness for war, even if their provocations failed to produce the second UN resolution. The US, in order to offset its economic decline relative to its rivals, was determined to use its military strength to seize strategically crucial energy resources in the Middle East. Bush, accordingly, had already decided on a date for the start of the war. Manning records, “The start date for the military campaign was now pencilled in for 10 March. This was when the bombing would begin.” “Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,” wrote Manning. British imperialism hoped to gain some share of the spoils from the plunder of Iraq. Blair told Bush he was “solidly with the president” in his thinking. ..." etc etc Dave |
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8976207)
Have you so much hate in your heart that you actually believe this obsurd nonsense?
It's frankly ridiculous to suggest that a Prime Minister would deliberately lie about an issue as important as going to so that he can make a profit. Are your thought processes that simple, do you not think this whole issue is enourmously complex, for a start how on earth did Blair get the rest of the world to lie about WMD. According to you he planned this whole thing, well clearly he forgot to think about what would happen after his 'lie' was discovered.:Whatever_ And this from a guy totally obsessed with his legacy....Oh and he must just love the 'Billy Liar' name. Why is it conspiracy first and cock-up second on SN, when in the real world cock-up is nearly always to blame If you can prove one single word of this conspiracy then I'll apologise public and recant any respect I have for our former PM, so knock yourself out:) Perhaps you should not have such a blinkered view? |
Originally Posted by hutton_d
(Post 8976258)
Memo confirms Bush and Blair knew claims Iraq had WMDs were lies
"... A confidential memo obtained by the Observer, detailing a meeting between President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirms their determination to press ahead with the invasion of Iraq in 2003 without any evidence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and without United Nations approval. The five-page memo, written by Blair’s foreign policy adviser Sir David Manning, is dated January 31, 2003, some two months before the invasion began. It records the thinking of Bush and Blair as it became increasingly obvious that United Nations weapons inspectors would not find the advanced weaponry, including a nuclear capability, that both leaders were using to justify military action. According to the memo, Bush discussed various possible provocations that might trigger a second UN resolution to justify war in the absence of any WMD. One plan being considered by the White House was “to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover” provoking Iraqi forces into opening fire and thereby putting them in breach of a UN resolution. Bush also discussed his hopes that an Iraqi defector might still be “brought out” to talk about WMD, or that someone might assassinate Saddam Hussein. The memo confirms that the decision had already been taken to go to war. Bush expressed his readiness for war, even if their provocations failed to produce the second UN resolution. The US, in order to offset its economic decline relative to its rivals, was determined to use its military strength to seize strategically crucial energy resources in the Middle East. Bush, accordingly, had already decided on a date for the start of the war. Manning records, “The start date for the military campaign was now pencilled in for 10 March. This was when the bombing would begin.” “Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,” wrote Manning. British imperialism hoped to gain some share of the spoils from the plunder of Iraq. Blair told Bush he was “solidly with the president” in his thinking. ..." etc etc Dave I think the true nature of this 'leak' is betrayed by the last paragraph |
theres nothing wrong with politicians that an undertaker cant fix
|
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8976305)
I think the true nature of this 'leak' is betrayed by the last paragraph
|
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8976305)
I think the true nature of this 'leak' is betrayed by the last paragraph
How about Downing St apologises for dodgy dossier - Channel 4 News ? What do you say about that? This whole government lies time after time. In fact whenever you see their mouths opening! Dave PS: and, so that I don't show any "political bias" that last remark also applies to most politicians of whatever party, colour, creed or sexuality ... :Suspiciou |
Originally Posted by Funkii Munkii
(Post 8974531)
God help you all !!
Not content with starting the demise of a once great country, prepare yourselves as he will soon have control of a continent. |
Originally Posted by hutton_d
(Post 8974609)
On the subject of Billy Liar I saw him speak for the first time in opposition and thought, 'what a smarmy get!'.
|
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 8976727)
Yes but David I suspect you are one of those for who the colour of the rosette rather than the quality of the speech makes the decision for you as to whether they are a great speaker or a smarmy git. Say what you like about Blair and he did lie abut the WMD, but he is a very good public speaker.
On the *rosette* front the same can be said of Cameron, though I'll admit that Billy Liar does *speak* better in public. Dave |
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 8975908)
Right just so Im clear; the conspiracy is that Tony Blair lied about WMD in Iraq so that he could make money when he left office?:cuckoo:
Have you any idea how daft that sounds? Les |
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 8976865)
Well done Martin, your post is right up to your usual standards!
Les Does this mean you are not going to answer the question???? Come on Les can't post nonsense like that, unless you've got some evidence to back it up |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:55 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands