SHOCKING: Britain's Defence Minister under fire for lying (BBC Radio)



M

Michel Boucher

Guest
N

Nobody

Guest
Oelewapper wrote:
> Britain's Defence Minister under fire for lying on Iraq - on BBC radio:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/audio/geoffhoon.ram Sensational. Incredible stuff... !!!!

Well, there is nothing that is terribly new in that 20 minute broadcast. Just confirms suspicions
that 1- the intelligence knew there was no international threath 2- ministers and Bliar made sure
they had deniability.

I think was was more telling was teh former speaker (his name espaces me) who admitted in parliament
yesterday that he knew about it and had personally told Bliar prior to resigning his post.

Mr Bliar may claim his aides didn't tell him. But he can't deny that he wasn't told by others, he
can't deny he wasn't told by other world leaders, he can't deny that he wasn't told by Blix and El
Baradei that none of the so called intelligence they were given panned out.

And all this happened before the illegal invasion began.

Both Bliar and Bush deserve to be tried for war crimes. Their invasion of Iraq was just as legal as
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, or Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. And you should include the
leaders of spain and australia in that war crime tribunal. They are personally responsible for more
deaths than those who perished on 9-11, especially outside the USA since these leaders did not have
any popular support for their crime.
 
S

stan

Guest
In rec.food.cooking Mycroft <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shocking! A politician lying............hang on a minute they do that for a living but are not
> supposed to get caught!

It all stems from the fact that when honest politicians tell the truth, they get voted out of
office. The truth sometimes hurts. Jimmy Carter can attest to what happens when you run a truthful
political campaign.
 
S

Steve Wertz

Guest
>Actually, quite credible since all of the US has now ...

Why does it not surprise me that you'd be the first to respond to this crossposted trolling?

-sw
 
O

Oelewapper

Guest
"nobody" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Well, there is nothing that is terribly new in that 20 minute broadcast.
Just
> confirms suspicions that 1- the intelligence knew there was no international threath 2- ministers
> and Bliar made sure they had deniability.

First of all, you've got to keep in mind the exact circumstances of this morning's interview: about
one week after the Hutton-whitewash, by the same program (the Today Program) that sparked the whole
"Hutton-Kelly-BBC" row and put the defence minister in an extremely difficult position. But above
all, during this interview - following yesterday's Common's scandal about the PM's ignorance about
the 45min WMD claim - the defence minister actually gets caught with his pants down: in a follow up
report towards the end of the program (see other audio-file), we hear some quotes by the minister
from the time of the Hutton-inquiry, where he confirms to be well aware that the public opinion
(misguided by major press outlets) thought that the 45-minute claim referred to ballistic weapon
delivery capabilities, and that this was exactly the ("imminent threat") issue/argument at the time:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today5_hoon_20040205.ram

The defence minister says there that he 'recalls' the press articles... in other press interviews,
he has earlier said that he didn't bother to correct public opinion because that would be something
that would have been "too difficult" to achieve...

The conclusions of this are far reaching, which is why the journalist (John Humphrey) keeps pressing
the issue:

1. Tony Blair should have asked questions about this '45mins imminent threat WMD' issue, because it
concerned the security of the nation. Now Blair says he didn't bother to ask... despite the fact
that he toke the country to war over the issue.
2. Geoff Hoon is lying, and actually contradicting earlier statements in the press and before the
Hutton inquiry (under oath).
3. David Kelly, whose name was leaked to the press by Geoff Hoon's office, under supervision of Tony
Blair who said that he was "empathlically not" aware of the naming strategy, despite the fact
that Lord Hutton, of all people, found that the PM indeed was chairing the precise meeting where
this naming strategy was decided upon - well David Kelly was right when he said

Blair's press spokesman, Alistair Campbell.
4. Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's Today Program journalist who had claimed the

found that AG did not have the necessary proof to substantiate this claim, and AG last week was
forced to quit the BBC; well AG is hereby proven right:

interview !!!

This radio interview is a real shocker !!! This is not the normal way BBC journalists interview
politicians,... but given the particular circumstances, and the accurate exposure of the exact lies
by TB and GH, that were the issue of the Hutton-report/whitewash, I believe John Humphry was
absolutely right to press the issue in the way that he did.

Andrew Gilligan and Greg Dyke should be restored in their job at the BBC. Geoff Hoon and Tony Blair
are not ordinary politicians, lying as part of their job, but instead they are national traitors and
international war criminals, and they should therefore be made to resign...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/audio/geoffhoon.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today5_hoon_20040205.ram
 
J

Jarg

Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> In rec.food.cooking Mycroft <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Shocking! A politician lying............hang on a minute they do that
for a
> > living but are not supposed to get caught!
>
> It all stems from the fact that when honest politicians tell the truth,
they get
> voted out of office. The truth sometimes hurts. Jimmy Carter can attest to
what
> happens when you run a truthful political campaign.

You mean the truth according to Jimmy Carter? Putting aside the subjective nature of "truth", you
are wrong that he lost because of his campaign. He lost because he was a terrible leader and inept
to boot. History will not judge his presidency kindly.

Jarg
 
M

Michel Boucher

Guest
Steve Wertz <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>Actually, quite credible since all of the US has now ...
>
> Why does it not surprise me that you'd be the first to respond to this crossposted trolling?

Glad to confirm your opinion, whatever that might be, not that I care, eh?

And just for your info, there were three postings when I received the thread. I chose to respond to
the first, but that does NOT mean I was first to respond. If you have problems with doing the math
on that, too bad :)

--

"I'm the master of low expectations."

GWB, aboard Air Force One, 04Jun2003
 
W

Warchild

Guest
"Jarg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:D[email protected]...
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > In rec.food.cooking Mycroft <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Shocking! A politician lying............hang on a minute they do that
> for a
> > > living but are not supposed to get caught!
> >
> > It all stems from the fact that when honest politicians tell the truth,
> they get
> > voted out of office. The truth sometimes hurts. Jimmy Carter can attest
to
> what
> > happens when you run a truthful political campaign.
>
> You mean the truth according to Jimmy Carter? Putting aside the
subjective
> nature of "truth", you are wrong that he lost because of his campaign. He lost because he was a
> terrible leader and inept to boot. History will not judge his presidency kindly.
>
> Jarg
>

History looks at Jimmy Carter very kindly. As for his presidency, I don't think that history will
give it much thought, as it wasn't noted for war-mongering and personal scandals. Certainly he had
his problems to overcome, like the hostage crisis, but he had his successes, like Camp David.
 
J

Jarg

Guest
"devil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
> On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 19:00:51 +0000, Jarg wrote:
>
.
>
> He mostly lost because of the deep recession that putting inflation under control required.
>
>

I'm not sure many economists would concur withh your views about the necessity of a recession to
control inflation. Certainly in other times inflation has been controlled without recession. In any
case, that was only one reason he lost the election. You are overlooking his foreign policy
failures, the Iran hostage crisis and Afghanistan for example. Nice enough man but he exuded
impotence.

Jarg
 
J

John Bailey

Guest
"Sam D." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Oelewapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Britain's Defence Minister under fire for lying on Iraq - on BBC radio:
> >
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/audio/geoffhoon.ram
> >
> >
> > Sensational. Incredible stuff... !!!!
> >
>
> But what did he prepare for dinner?

If he keeps dropping his boss in the brown sticky stuff... Cyanide?

John

Hoping he invites Tony over to share.
 
S

Stark Raven

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Jarg
<[email protected]> wrote:

> You mean the truth according to Jimmy Carter? Putting aside the subjective nature of "truth", you
> are wrong that he lost because of his campaign. He lost because he was a terrible leader and inept
> to boot. History will not judge his presidency kindly.
>
> Jarg
>
Sorry but it's the American people that history will look unkindly on. We were terrible, petulant
followers during Carter's Presidency, unworthy of being led anywhere other than death valley.
 
A

Alan R Williams

Guest
"John Bailey" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Sam D." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Oelewapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Britain's Defence Minister under fire for lying on Iraq - on BBC radio:
> > >
> > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/audio/geoffhoon.ram
> > >
> > >
> > > Sensational. Incredible stuff... !!!!
> > >
> >
> > But what did he prepare for dinner?
>
> If he keeps dropping his boss in the brown sticky stuff... Cyanide?
>
> John
>
> Hoping he invites Tony over to share.

Maybe they could go for a walk in the woods together.

Alan

--
Alan Williams, Room IT301, Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road,
Manchester, M13 9PL, U.K. Tel: +44 161 275 6270 Fax: +44 161 275 6280
 
N

Nobody

Guest
Stark Raven wrote:
> Sorry but it's the American people that history will look unkindly on. We were terrible, petulant
> followers during Carter's Presidency, unworthy of being led anywhere other than death valley.

You forgot that Carter got Egypt and Israel to sign a real, long lasting peace agreement that has
lasted to this day. That is quite an achievement considering that none of the other presidents were
able to get anything real done.

A president doesn't have 100% control over the ecomomy. He can help steer it, but he can't steer it.
It is possible that Carter may not have steered it sufficiently in the right direction (or perhaps
helped steer it in wrong direction). But it isn't 100% his own doing. (and yes, that applies to Bush
as well, although Bush definitely has streered it very much in the wrong direction over his whole
stay at the white house)

As far as the Iran hostages issue, which was Carter's real undoing at the 1980 elections, it would
have happened to any USA president at the helm during that time period.
 
T

Tarver Engineer

Guest
"nobody" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Stark Raven wrote:
> > Sorry but it's the American people that history will look unkindly on. We were terrible,
> > petulant followers during Carter's Presidency, unworthy of being led anywhere other than death
> > valley.
>
> You forgot that Carter got Egypt and Israel to sign a real, long lasting
peace
> agreement that has lasted to this day. That is quite an achievement considering that none of the
> other presidents were able to get anything
real done.

It has only cost American taxpayers $5 billion a year since 1979.
 
D

Dan Brusca

Guest
Wow, that's really blown my faith in politicians :p

--
www.moviedirt.co.uk
 
J

John Bailey

Guest
> > > > Sensational. Incredible stuff... !!!!
> > > >
> > >
> > > But what did he prepare for dinner?
> >
> > If he keeps dropping his boss in the brown sticky stuff... Cyanide?
> >
> > John
> >
> > Hoping he invites Tony over to share.
>
> Maybe they could go for a walk in the woods together.
>
> Alan

Such a nice picture....

john