• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "7/7 was nothing to do with Iraq - Blair"

Collapse

  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by Not So Wise
    first thought is are they really stupid or do they think we are?
    They are playing to win - they know too well that stories don't hold for long as new one is needed, topic of Iraq stayed unusually too long for them, but other things like collapse of Rover is of no much concern now. This is why they took Rover into administration few weeks before Elections because this was the only way to guarantee that it won't blow JUST BEFORE the important date.

    Say take US Elections -- major assault on Falluja did not happen until day or two after the voting.

    Bottom line is this -- people get the Govt they deserve.

    Leave a comment:


  • Not So Wise
    replied
    Sometimes i wonder at politicians taking these stances in deneying what is perfectly logical to everyone ( Blair with bombing vs Iraq) or attempting to continue to create links where there are none (Bush with WMD/Terrorists vs Iraq), first thought is are they really stupid or do they think we are?

    But then i remember they have all these Media/PR and spin experts, doing 100's of polls and voter surveys and no matter what we might think of the politicians these other guys are very far from stupid, so it must be that huge portions of the population are the stupid ones, because they beleive this crap, even though any sensible person should not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lucifer Box
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    Blair mentioned Beslan happening even though Russia was opposed to Iraq war -- like it mattered in this case since Beslan was result of war in Chechnya.
    Nah, following Blair's logic, the war in Chechnya was just "an excuse".

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Blair mentioned Beslan happening even though Russia was opposed to Iraq war -- like it mattered in this case since Beslan was result of war in Chechnya.

    Leave a comment:


  • xoggoth
    replied
    Down at the Wednesday meetings of the suicide bombers club of course they are all discussing how to punish a decadent Western society. The invasion of Iraq is never even mentioned as a reason or justification for terrorism, should anyone mention it as a justification they all look baffled.

    Don't politicians come out with total crap?

    Leave a comment:


  • stackpole
    started a topic 7/7 was nothing to do with Iraq - Blair

    7/7 was nothing to do with Iraq - Blair

    Mr Blair said London's bombers and others used Iraq and Afghanistan as an excuse. He again denied the invasion of Iraq had made Britain a target.

    Following Blair's logic:

    1. If we hadn't occupied Iraq, terrorists could not use it as an excuse.

    2. Ergo, the occupation has provided a potential excuse.

    3. Ergo, it must have increased the risk.

    4. Ergo, the invasion of Iraq has made Britain a more likely target.

    5. Ergo, Blair has contradicted himself. Which is how you catch out liars.

Working...
X