Sunday 23 May 2010

Don't Mention The War!

Two Fucking Liars

Quite a feast of hypocrisy to be had as the candidates for next leader of the NuLiebore Party try to distance themselves from responsibility for the clusterfuck known as the Iraq War.

Let's not forget that this wonderful adventure was all about American businesses wanting to "secure" oil supplies, and never mind the consequences for the Iraqi people or the poor bloody foot soldiers who were going to die or be maimed. To ensure that this happened, Bush and Bliar repeatedly lied and lied and lied, ably supported by the likes of all the candidates for leader except the gobshite Diane Abbott.

I wonder which candidate would get Mrs David Kelly's vote?

The Penguin


Anonymous said...

Anyway of getting this piece of news out to all the Labourites who'll be voting for a new Leader? It might upset the voting considerably.

Anonymous said...

Yeah they've distanced themselves from the war. So they admit THEY were wrong then. C*NTS!!

They bastards will never learn or change. One of their own m.p.'s says so.

Anonymous said...

John Prescott's "why i'm RUNNING FOR LEADER" wesbite.

Anonymous said...

"Let's not forget that this wonderful adventure was all about American businesses wanting to "secure" oil supplies"

It was also about the greater Israel project in the region, led by a completely co-opted US congress, senate and executive by the likes of AIPAC and all the other Israeli lobbyists. The longer the occupation, the better from their point of view regardless of the cost in UK and US soldiers lives or to our economies.

Ed Butt said...

Neither of them is going to win, it's looking like a stitch up to get the Blairite Milliband D elected leader without any serious opposition.

But if that happens the party will split and many of the tree hugging left may well join the Greens.

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Nick Roberts said...

Anonymous and RP:
It was all about the Kuwait war which ceasefire Saddam violated, and his weapons of mass destruction which Hans Blix and others found and reported before the war started up again, and some of whose nuclear fuel the UN took possession of. Much of the UN's reported weapons of mass destruction disappeared in the 6 months of fruitless diplomacy before the Coalition removed that particular genocidal dictator from power.
Oddly, the recipient country of thousands of trucks full of something or other from Iraq each day during that diplomatic holiday was Syria - a country bombed by Israel in 2007 to almost no publicity from the anti-Israel BBC. Wow, they even missed the now-traditional 'wedding party' as far as I can tell.
And you don't secure oil supplies by 'invading' a country that your Democrat Congress then obliges to use Chinese engineers to extract. You used to do it by cosying up to as many oil-rich regimes as you can.
Perhaps, for some reason, Saddam was unpopular in the region, which is why he got little more support than wind from the locals and the liberal lie that it was war for oil?
He looked guilty by cancelling site inspections, he acted guilty by not allowing weapons inspectors all he had promised, the UN said he possessed WOMD and materials for more, and he was guilty.
That the Blair phony war let Saddam hide his weapons did not mean they never existed.
And in military planing it's capability: not intentions, that risk assessors are concerned with.
Badly managed and horribly mis-described as it was by the coalition, this was a war for some idea of international law, and against someone with weapons-grade NBC equipment.