Arguments raged and feathers ruffled over the fanciful ‘Iraq Crisis’ and the purely hypothetical terrorist threat from WMD’s that have neither been found or proven to exist in Iraq, excepting the chemical and biological arsenal supplied by us, which has largely been destroyed. The motion which was intended to endorse the “government’s strategy” so far... and permit “consequences up to and including force” was rejected by over a hundred ‘rebel’ Labour MP’s who voted for an amendment saying, Tony Blair has failed to “make the case” – yet... although this does not necessarily make them anti-war.

It was the ‘opposition’ party who gave their full, unmitigated support and Michael Portillo outlined the link between Saddam and Osama... “they are co-belligerents” he said, but claimed Iraq has greater links to Palestinian terrorists because Hussein is the hero of suicide bombers. He called for a new organisation (World Army) to replace NATO dealing specifically with ‘counter-terror’ on a global scale with the US, UK and Australia at the forefront. Portillo, who fancies himself as the next Conservative PM when Martial Law is imposed, wants to send an “unambiguous message of hostility” to terrorists and admires the Prime Minister’s reckless, defiance of his own party and the whole country.

Gerald Kaufman dismissed the illegal US administration as distasteful and labelled it “a bad World citizen” – (naughty) but the UN Ambassador, Jeremy Greenstock’s excuse for bombing Iraq is “it’s attitude” - if it’s about bad attitudes then the USA is the most delinquent Nation of all, which is why Kaufman wants the UN to uphold the New World Order rather than America, and insists Hussein is a threat to that “Order.”

Kaufman’s incontrovertible evidence in the case for war is:- only coercion from Britain made the US take the UN route to war, otherwise it would have gone-it-alone and isolationalism in the White House would be a danger, so we must remain allied to America for that convoluted reason, or Bush may get out-of-hand. UN approval for military might would make it easier, according to Blair, to make demands in the future and deal with other threats posed to the Empire which need “deterred” like Iran, Syria and North Korea, paving the way for the escalation of war.

Tony Blair’s second resolution (for legal cover) was termed, “a push for peace...” but citing George Orwell’s 1984, George Galloway declared, the consensus from the front benches sounded more like a push for war, the reverberations of which would disfigure life around the World for our entire lifetime. Galloway drew the parallel between 1914 – when neither side wanted to fight, but had to go through with it, simply because they had turned up, and it destroyed the fabric of European civilization.

Galloway believes we could reshape World events by defying the US, who would have difficulty proceeding further without UK backing. He says it’s all about Bush, this “born-again, right-wing, Bible-belting, fundamentalist Republican” and agreed with Kaufman’s criticisms of America, reminding the House how the USA has shunned International Treaties, he also called Texas “the execution chamber of the World.”

Galloway, who does not mince his words, said it’s a slap in the face for Hans Blix if he asks for more time and it’s denied, but he was called “an embarrassment” for his ‘radical’ points of view. Another outspoken Glaswegian, Alex Salmon, threw the dodgy dossier in Blair’s face (not literally, unfortunately) and a fiery Scot, the father of the house, Tam Dalyell pointed out, "we are not rebels, we are dissenters” and described himself as "incandescent with anger" (ye canny take oor freedom... again) while Blair’s position began to look more untenable, with no mandate for war.

Douglas Hogg is troubled by the morality of war and thinks all other options should be closed first, because self-defence is a weak argument since the Iraqi regime is not an imminent threat to our security. However, to be anti-war was interpreted as a comfort to Hussein, succour to the enemy and appeasement, by the likes of Julian Lewis, some Tory upstart, full of his own self-importance, trying to sound prominent; revisiting WWII and that old chestnut, Hitler, he said, sometimes you need to achieve “peace by conflict” a totally Orwellian contradiction in terms.

The only truism uttered during the debate in the Mother of all Parliaments was, “if we put the same energy into peace, as we put into war, this could be the first century, without conflict.” And America’s response to all this? Time’s up for Saddam Hussein, it’s time to prepare for battle… by intensifying the “Leader of the Free World’s” pre-war propaganda. All dissent, we are told, will fall silent, and Arabs will be grateful.

George Bush was introduced as having “moral clarity and political aptitude” and warned; “we must look at security in a new way in our country because it’s a battlefield for the first war of the 21st Century” (i.e. WWIII.) He will prevent “the triumph of hatred and violence in the affairs of men” by pursuing networks of terror with military power, violently hunting down the enemy one by one, showing the definition of American justice. The danger of ‘outlaw regimes’ with WMD’s must be confronted (with violence) and Bush won’t let tyrants intimidate the civilized world or it’s stability and spread discord, that’s his job. Support by Arab States for the slogans of hatred and tactics of terror in Palestine will not be tolerated and Iraqi freedom will be an example to other Nations, the war would create an opportunity for peace and democracy, everywhere...

Coincidentally, like Portillo, Bush claimed we need an ‘international body’ to counter global terrorism by force, if necessary, and he said, the UN’s words must have meaning, because a global threat cannot be tackled alone, if the UN does not pass the second resolution, (declare war) it will weaken it’s founding purpose… peace. The threat to peace, doesn’t come from the just demands of the civilized world, but those who flout these demands. The Leader promises to “restrain the violent” and his armed forces will meet the great tests of our time, with skill, honour, courage and violence. America will go forward with confidence in the power of human freedom, resolve and purpose, to an age of free people, policing... err... keeping the peace of the World. Spontaneous applause!