Skip to content or view screen version

Why Blair wants Bin laden DEAD:

Luther Blissett | 25.10.2001 12:58

Not surprisingly Blair would like to see Bin Laden dead.
His trial by an international court, if accepted by the U.S
looks like the only way any kind of serious investigation of
9.11, imagine what Bin Laden might have to say about his dealings with Arbusta Oil and he Bush family and the days he whiled away on the CIA payroll. !!! this kind of scenario
would be a disater for all of them. see the torygraf article.

 http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$YRVIPXYAAAK4LQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2001/10/25/nblair25.xml


Blair: troops can kill bin Laden
By George Jones, Political Editor
(Filed: 25/10/2001)

TONY BLAIR gave the clearest hint yesterday that he
would prefer to see Osama bin Laden killed in the
military action being waged in Afghanistan.

In an interview with
The Telegraph, he
said he did not
expect to see bin
Laden stand trial
before an
international court.
"He is well
protected and well
armed. And I have
always thought it
unlikely that he will
be turning up in court one day. But we will wait and
see."

The Prime Minister announced the appointment of a
top-level envoy to Afghanistan to help the Northern
Alliance co-ordinate its attacks on the Taliban and
prepare for a broader-based government.

The appointment of Paul Bergne, 64, a former
ambassador to Uzbekistan and Tajikstan, as his
personal representative for Afghan affairs, will be
seen as an indication that Britain believes that the
Northern Alliance can play a key role in defeating the
Taliban and eliminating the al-Qa'eda terrorist
network.

Although Mr Blair made clear that he was not
endorsing a policy of state assassination, he left
little doubt that killing bin Laden during a bombing
raid or an assault on his hideout was the most
realistic outcome of the war.

British special forces working with the Americans in
Afghanistan have been told not to risk their lives
trying to take him alive. Mr Blair said he believed
there was no longer any doubt that bin Laden's
network was behind the September 11 attacks.

His acknowledgement that bringing bin Laden before
an international court was a "bit of an academic
question" was a harder line than earlier statements.

This week Robin Cook the former foreign Secretary
and now Leader of the Commons, told Arab
journalists that he believed in the "due process of
law" and would like to see bin Laden stand trial.

Mr Blair is following a policy similar to that adopted
by his predecessor, John Major, during the Gulf war.
Mr Major admitted recently that the allies had tried
to bomb Saddam Hussein's locations with the
intention of killing him.

Mr Blair said there would be no let-up in the
campaign until the allies had flushed out bin Laden.
In an interview on GMTV, he said: "We will get him in
the end." He told the Telegraph that he believed
that bin Laden was still in Afghanistan and
"constantly on the move" because all nine of his
terrorist camps had been destroyed.

Mr Blair appeared genuinely shocked by what he
had learned about the global scale of the al-Qa'eda
network and its "tentacles". He said that "literally
thousands" of people passed through the training
camps in Afghanistan and were sent around the
world. Al-Qa'eda was as well financed as some small
countries, with great purchasing power for
weapons.

The anthrax attacks in the United States were a
warning of what could happen if the terrorists
acquired chemical or biological weapons, Mr Blair
said. "There is no doubt in my mind that if the bin
Laden network could acquire really devastating
weapons of mass destruction capability, they would
- and they would use them."

Mr Blair sought to prepare the public for the
deployment of British troops on the ground in
Afghanistan - and the prospect that there could be
casualities. "It is important to be truthful with people
that if you commit your forces to action there is risk
of casualties," he said.

He rejected demands by some Labour MPs for a
pause in the bombing and underlined his personal
commitment to waging war against global terrorism.
He denied trying to silence Labour critics of the war.
He accused them of claiming that they had been
gagged rather than conduct a serious argument
about the Government's conduct of the war.

They were free to speak their mind - and he was
free to disagree with them. "That is the difference
between us and the Taliban," he said.

Mr Blair denied that the decision to incorporate the
European Convention on Human Rights into law was
hampering the campaign. But he acknowledged that
leaders of Arab nations were right to criticise Britain
for becoming a haven for terrorist suspects.

He also urged the judges to bear in mind issues of
national security as well as human rights when
considering cases involving attempts to remove
possible terrorist sympathisers from Britain.

Asked if the judiciary was making it difficult to deal
with the tentacles of al-Qa'eda, he said: "I hope
very much that certain of the decisions recently have
indicated that people understand why we need to
act against this."

There was a "gap between what we need to do and
where the law is at the moment". Mr Blair indicated
that he was still seriously embarrassed by the
controversy over Jo Moore, the adviser who within
an hour of the attacks on the World Trade Centre
suggested by email that it was a good day to "bury"
bad news.

Luther Blissett
- Homepage: http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$YRVIPXYAAAK4LQFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2001/10/25/nblair25.xml

Comments

Display the following 3 comments

  1. cipro for the masses, profits for both sides — dwight heet
  2. no they don't - maybe — zedhead
  3. could B — luther blissett