On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:08:00 -0000, "IMM" wrote:



Still conformed to a UN resolution.

You know very well that there was not UN support for the action taken.

There was. It was in existence since 1991 and covered the current conflict.

Oh come on. That's not reasonable, If there had been UN support, it
would have been a UN action.



I saw parliament on TV just now. Dennis Skinner was v good.

I can think of a number of adjectives in connection with Dennis
Skinner, but I wouldn't include "good" among them.

I know Andy, words like brilliant are better.

Not what I had in mind. Dear Dennis is a dinosaur in the same
genre, although at a different place in the spectrum to his late
lamented namesake, Mr Thatcher,


Points that
came up. No us having committee after committee looking into matters
going
over the same thing. Skinner said the lot opposite won't be satisfied
until
the government is out

That is stating the obvious. It is the job of the opposition to
present an opposing view to that of the government of the day.

So, having inquiries for the sake of it, or to shut up the idiots opposite
is silly.

It is having enquiries for the sake of it if their terms of reference
are so limited as to make the conclusions foregone. OK, so the
government wants to waste tax payer's money and organise defective
enquiries, believing that the issues will go away. They won't.
Beyond a certain point, this approach becomes ineffective. Mr TB and
co. have sought to manipulate the House, the media and the public.
If they feel that they cn get away with it, then fine. Sooner or
later, and it's usually sooner, these tactics come home to roost, and
something that may have been relatively unimportant at the outset
turns into a whole new game.

One only has to look at the seeding events for Watergate and for the
Lewinsky affair to realise that.






(that is their aim, as Iraq is not really a big issue
with them).

Of course it's a big issue. The government misled the House and the
people.

They misled no one at all. Read the Hutton report.

I have. The whole thing. I don't draw the same conclusions as
Hutton from the information at all.


The idiots and their right wing press hailed Hutton just before
the results came out. When the results did not suit them they called him
a
liar, biased, and other assorted insults. What a bunch of saddos.

I suspect that you would have said the same thing regarding Hutton had
he flipped the coin the other way and believed the position of the
others involved and not that of the government.

If the government had lied then the PM goes. It is simple. But he never.

Quite. He should have done. The whole setup is riddled with far
worse sleeze than the Conservatives ever managed, and of a more
insidious nature.



This is the same whitewash and phony logic that starts with the
conclusion desired and selects the events to lead to it.

Not so. Great report!


As I pointed out, I suspect that you would have said the opposite had
it impeached Teflon Tony.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl