Goodriddance!
Judge Dredd | 10.05.2007 15:55 | Analysis
Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Lenin, Pol Pot and Maggie Thatcher all thought they were right.
No Tony you lied in order to take the country to war on behalf of the American Empire. That is treason, not against the state, or government, or the crown, they have already whored themselves to the yanks, but the people of Britain - we shall never forget and never forgive your crimes.
Nor will we forget the blood on the hands of every single member of the Labour Party. They are the people who made it possible for the British government to kill more Muslims than the BNP and NF could ever dream of and created the conditions to bring about our own 'home-grown' Islamic terrorists.
Now go into the dustbin of history, take Prescott and Reid with you, and stay there!
No Tony you lied in order to take the country to war on behalf of the American Empire. That is treason, not against the state, or government, or the crown, they have already whored themselves to the yanks, but the people of Britain - we shall never forget and never forgive your crimes.
Nor will we forget the blood on the hands of every single member of the Labour Party. They are the people who made it possible for the British government to kill more Muslims than the BNP and NF could ever dream of and created the conditions to bring about our own 'home-grown' Islamic terrorists.
Now go into the dustbin of history, take Prescott and Reid with you, and stay there!
Judge Dredd
Comments
Hide 5 hidden comments or hide all comments
Your solution ?
10.05.2007 16:27
Sanctions ? Diplomatic Pressure ? Nothing ?
Realist
How much do you get paid as a sock-puppet?
10.05.2007 17:30
2. The myth of the liberation of Iraq, is things are better but they are demonstrably not so. Show one shred of evidence that Iraq and the Middle East is a more stable and safer place today than it was before the invasion?
3. Like so many lies told by New Labour you are now creating a new revisionist version of history - that the war was about regime change, but that is not what Tony told parliament.
Realist your a New Labour Troll acting as an apologist for imperialism and your racism is revealing - you wouldn't advocate the RAF to drop bombs on Irish 'terrorists' to win the war in Ireland, but have no problem them bombing Iraqi or Afghan 'terrorists' to win the war in those countries. I guess those Iraqis and Afghans must be to wrong colour. That is REALITY.
Judge Dredd
Hold Up
10.05.2007 20:09
I assume you're referring to 7/7.
Remember, we still don't know what took place that day, nor who was responsible, since Bliar himself (whose Regime was caught in several blatant LIES in the following weeks) obstructed the investigations, calling them "ludicrous distractions".
Meanwhile, he used this "useful crisis" to seize for himself powers the courts had denied him for four straight years, and plunged deeper into the Neo-Fascist failed policy of military aggression.
Kinda like Bush and 9/11 ...
al Qaeda = PNAC, CIA, Mossad (MI6?)
No Justice....
10.05.2007 20:13
Hibikina
Mossad agents
10.05.2007 22:29
See how Gordon tries to soften things and Blair comes up with some stupid sentence regarding terrorism , how he refuses to investigate the fact that MI5 new about the 7/7 bombers...Mossad agents, how he insists in being in the public eye, how he welcomed Sarzosky.
Want to be the next prime minister, news paper editor, journalist, send Mossad an email.
Blair does not work for Britain, he made it quite clear that his claim to success was: 'choose your enemies', he chose Mossad as friends and he got ten years out of it.
Others WILL follow.
The struggle (Jihad), has just begun, Tony goes, Sarzosky comes.
It is a huge problem, sign your soul and priniciples over to Mossad and Zionism and you have the news papers, america and a secret service agent team ready to kill thy opponent.
Who can beat you?
Someone willing to sink to your pitiful levels.
The army of the antichrist...Blair, Bush, Sarzosky, Berlusconi and many more scattered around the globe.
Democracy is dead, it only works to imprison charmin old demented ladies and children with ASBOS.
You call this democracy, jailing two people for leaking a document that exposes the illegal act of bombing a civilian building hosting a media reporting station?
THEY GOT AWAY WITH IT, SO THEY WILL CONTINUE, IT WILL GET WORSE!
PS how can I contact the heroes that have been jailed?
ASBO girl
No answer
11.05.2007 07:17
I see you didn't answer the question. But then I didn't expect you too.
Perhaps others who condem Blair would be kind enough to answer it, if they can.
I don't think they will, I expect like others who have posted here they will try to divert attention from the question by making ludicrous attempts to pull in Mossad (those Jews again) or play the old standby card of claiming the UK sold Saddam weapons so we are some way responsible for his use of them (in fact 95% of Saddam's weaponry came from the Russians).
Saddam was an evil, despotic dictator who killed hundreds of thousands of his people because they voiced political opposition to him. I'll ask again
WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE ?
Realist
What different?
11.05.2007 12:49
How far are we allowed to go back, Realist?
To Thatcher? In the 70's and 80's I would not have called Saddam a "moderate", or an "ally", or turned a blind eye when he was gassing the Kurds, or invading Iran. I would have tried to undermine, as opposed to prop up and strengthen, Saddam's regime. I would have stopped selling him arms(no matter how little you think they were).
Unlike US Ambassador Gillespie(sp?), I also would not have indicated to Saddam that we had no concerns about his invasion of Kuwait. I would have stressed to Saddam our intolerance of brutal tyrants. Maybe I would have sought UN approval to depose him after Kuwait, who knows?
The 90's? I would have dropped the sanctions that were responsible for a slow genocide against Iraq's civilians, and which also had the effect of strengthening Saddam's grip on power. A hungry and desperate populace are in no position to overthrow a despotic ruler. I would have changed that.
As for the current mess, I would have let the weapons inspectors complete their job, and I would believe them when they said that Iraq was "verifiably disarmed". I would have acted in accordance with International Law at all times.
There are a million and one things that could have been done differently, Realist, but I don't know why I am bothering telling you, as I suspect you are nowt but a troll.
John
Hey Realist
11.05.2007 13:02
I would have kept a strict arms embargo – not economic/medical sanctions that killed far more Iraq’s than Sadam managed
If a military attack were needed I would have only attacked military complexes not water treatment plants power plants bridges hospitals etc
I would have not occupied Iraq for 4 years bombing and killing all the people I claimed to be liberating
I would have not tried to hand pick a government that I could control and try to impose my rule on while stealing all the oil
Realist – you don’t give a shit about Iraqi people – you a pointless little arm chair warrior – not in Iraq – the first place I would send you
Oh by the way all the Iraqi people I know including myself (UK -Iraqi) think pepole like you are mindless fools
Haidar
Still not answering the question.
11.05.2007 14:33
What different?
11.05.2007 13:49
"What would you have done?"
How far are we allowed to go back, Realist?
AS FAR AS WHEN BLAIR CAME TO POWER WHICH IS THE POINT I WAS MAKING AND YOU ARE TRYING TO IGNORE. BLAIR HAD TO DEAL WITH WHAT HE HAD NOT WHAT HE WOULD HAVE LIKED
As for the current mess, I would have let the weapons inspectors complete their job, and I would believe them when they said that Iraq was "verifiably disarmed". I would have acted in accordance with International Law at all times.
THE WEAPON INSPECTORS WERE NEVER ALLOWED TO COMPLETE THEIR WORK. THEY WERE OBSTRUCTED AT EVERY INSPECTION AND WERE DENIED ACCESS TO OVER 20 SITES IN IRAQ. THE FINAL REPORT FROM THEM NEVER DESCRIBED IRAQ AS "verifiably disarmed"
There are a million and one things that could have been done differently, Realist, but I don't know why I am bothering telling you, as I suspect you are nowt but a troll.
I AM NOT TROLLING I AM TRYING TO SHOW YOU AND OTHERS WHY I THINK BLAIR MADE THE CHOICES HE DID AND HOW ON BALANCE THEY WERE PROBABLY THE RIGHT ONES
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Realist
11.05.2007 14:02
Let me answer this for you – I would have supported democratic movements in Iraq
THE UK, US, FRANCE AND OTHERS WERE ALL DOING THAT
I would have kept a strict arms embargo – not economic/medical sanctions that killed far more Iraq’s than Sadam managed
AGREED, BUT BY THE TIME BLAIR CAME TO POWER THE SOVIETS HAD SUPPLIED SADDAM WITH ALL THE WEAPONS HE NEEDED.
If a military attack were needed I would have only attacked military complexes not water treatment plants power plants bridges hospitals etc
I GUESS YOU HAVEN'T HAD MUCH MILITARY EXPERIENCE THEN.
I would have not occupied Iraq for 4 years bombing and killing all the people I claimed to be liberating
WOULD YOU HAVE ABANDONDED THEM TO THE RUMP OF THE B'ATH PARTY AND THOSE SEEKING A THEOCRACY ?
I would have not tried to hand pick a government that I could control and try to impose my rule on while stealing all the oil
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ WAS ELECTED BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE AS YOU WELL KNOW
Realist – you don’t give a shit about Iraqi people – you a pointless little arm chair warrior – not in Iraq – the first place I would send you
UNLIKE YOU I HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, I WAS BORN THERE
Oh by the way all the Iraqi people I know including myself (UK -Iraqi) think pepole like you are mindless fools
AND IRAQIS LIKE ME THINK YOU FOOLISH AND BLINDED BY YOUR IGNORANCE
Haidar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Realist
Still not answering the question.
11.05.2007 14:33
What different?
11.05.2007 13:49
"What would you have done?"
How far are we allowed to go back, Realist?
AS FAR AS WHEN BLAIR CAME TO POWER WHICH IS THE POINT I WAS MAKING AND YOU ARE TRYING TO IGNORE. BLAIR HAD TO DEAL WITH WHAT HE HAD NOT WHAT HE WOULD HAVE LIKED
As for the current mess, I would have let the weapons inspectors complete their job, and I would believe them when they said that Iraq was "verifiably disarmed". I would have acted in accordance with International Law at all times.
THE WEAPON INSPECTORS WERE NEVER ALLOWED TO COMPLETE THEIR WORK. THEY WERE OBSTRUCTED AT EVERY INSPECTION AND WERE DENIED ACCESS TO OVER 20 SITES IN IRAQ. THE FINAL REPORT FROM THEM NEVER DESCRIBED IRAQ AS "verifiably disarmed"
There are a million and one things that could have been done differently, Realist, but I don't know why I am bothering telling you, as I suspect you are nowt but a troll.
I AM NOT TROLLING I AM TRYING TO SHOW YOU AND OTHERS WHY I THINK BLAIR MADE THE CHOICES HE DID AND HOW ON BALANCE THEY WERE PROBABLY THE RIGHT ONES
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Realist
11.05.2007 14:02
Let me answer this for you – I would have supported democratic movements in Iraq
THE UK, US, FRANCE AND OTHERS WERE ALL DOING THAT
I would have kept a strict arms embargo – not economic/medical sanctions that killed far more Iraq’s than Sadam managed
AGREED, BUT BY THE TIME BLAIR CAME TO POWER THE SOVIETS HAD SUPPLIED SADDAM WITH ALL THE WEAPONS HE NEEDED.
If a military attack were needed I would have only attacked military complexes not water treatment plants power plants bridges hospitals etc
I GUESS YOU HAVEN'T HAD MUCH MILITARY EXPERIENCE THEN.
I would have not occupied Iraq for 4 years bombing and killing all the people I claimed to be liberating
WOULD YOU HAVE ABANDONDED THEM TO THE RUMP OF THE B'ATH PARTY AND THOSE SEEKING A THEOCRACY ?
I would have not tried to hand pick a government that I could control and try to impose my rule on while stealing all the oil
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ WAS ELECTED BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE AS YOU WELL KNOW
Realist – you don’t give a shit about Iraqi people – you a pointless little arm chair warrior – not in Iraq – the first place I would send you
UNLIKE YOU I HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, I WAS BORN THERE
Oh by the way all the Iraqi people I know including myself (UK -Iraqi) think pepole like you are mindless fools
AND IRAQIS LIKE ME THINK YOU FOOLISH AND BLINDED BY YOUR IGNORANCE
Haidar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Realist
Still not answering the question.
11.05.2007 14:34
What different?
11.05.2007 13:49
"What would you have done?"
How far are we allowed to go back, Realist?
AS FAR AS WHEN BLAIR CAME TO POWER WHICH IS THE POINT I WAS MAKING AND YOU ARE TRYING TO IGNORE. BLAIR HAD TO DEAL WITH WHAT HE HAD NOT WHAT HE WOULD HAVE LIKED
As for the current mess, I would have let the weapons inspectors complete their job, and I would believe them when they said that Iraq was "verifiably disarmed". I would have acted in accordance with International Law at all times.
THE WEAPON INSPECTORS WERE NEVER ALLOWED TO COMPLETE THEIR WORK. THEY WERE OBSTRUCTED AT EVERY INSPECTION AND WERE DENIED ACCESS TO OVER 20 SITES IN IRAQ. THE FINAL REPORT FROM THEM NEVER DESCRIBED IRAQ AS "verifiably disarmed"
There are a million and one things that could have been done differently, Realist, but I don't know why I am bothering telling you, as I suspect you are nowt but a troll.
I AM NOT TROLLING I AM TRYING TO SHOW YOU AND OTHERS WHY I THINK BLAIR MADE THE CHOICES HE DID AND HOW ON BALANCE THEY WERE PROBABLY THE RIGHT ONES
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Realist
11.05.2007 14:02
Let me answer this for you – I would have supported democratic movements in Iraq
THE UK, US, FRANCE AND OTHERS WERE ALL DOING THAT
I would have kept a strict arms embargo – not economic/medical sanctions that killed far more Iraq’s than Sadam managed
AGREED, BUT BY THE TIME BLAIR CAME TO POWER THE SOVIETS HAD SUPPLIED SADDAM WITH ALL THE WEAPONS HE NEEDED.
If a military attack were needed I would have only attacked military complexes not water treatment plants power plants bridges hospitals etc
I GUESS YOU HAVEN'T HAD MUCH MILITARY EXPERIENCE THEN.
I would have not occupied Iraq for 4 years bombing and killing all the people I claimed to be liberating
WOULD YOU HAVE ABANDONDED THEM TO THE RUMP OF THE B'ATH PARTY AND THOSE SEEKING A THEOCRACY ?
I would have not tried to hand pick a government that I could control and try to impose my rule on while stealing all the oil
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ WAS ELECTED BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE AS YOU WELL KNOW
Realist – you don’t give a shit about Iraqi people – you a pointless little arm chair warrior – not in Iraq – the first place I would send you
UNLIKE YOU I HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, I WAS BORN THERE
Oh by the way all the Iraqi people I know including myself (UK -Iraqi) think pepole like you are mindless fools
AND IRAQIS LIKE ME THINK YOU FOOLISH AND BLINDED BY YOUR IGNORANCE
Haidar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Realist
Still not answering the question.
11.05.2007 14:35
What different?
11.05.2007 13:49
"What would you have done?"
How far are we allowed to go back, Realist?
AS FAR AS WHEN BLAIR CAME TO POWER WHICH IS THE POINT I WAS MAKING AND YOU ARE TRYING TO IGNORE. BLAIR HAD TO DEAL WITH WHAT HE HAD NOT WHAT HE WOULD HAVE LIKED
As for the current mess, I would have let the weapons inspectors complete their job, and I would believe them when they said that Iraq was "verifiably disarmed". I would have acted in accordance with International Law at all times.
THE WEAPON INSPECTORS WERE NEVER ALLOWED TO COMPLETE THEIR WORK. THEY WERE OBSTRUCTED AT EVERY INSPECTION AND WERE DENIED ACCESS TO OVER 20 SITES IN IRAQ. THE FINAL REPORT FROM THEM NEVER DESCRIBED IRAQ AS "verifiably disarmed"
There are a million and one things that could have been done differently, Realist, but I don't know why I am bothering telling you, as I suspect you are nowt but a troll.
I AM NOT TROLLING I AM TRYING TO SHOW YOU AND OTHERS WHY I THINK BLAIR MADE THE CHOICES HE DID AND HOW ON BALANCE THEY WERE PROBABLY THE RIGHT ONES
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Realist
11.05.2007 14:02
Let me answer this for you – I would have supported democratic movements in Iraq
THE UK, US, FRANCE AND OTHERS WERE ALL DOING THAT
I would have kept a strict arms embargo – not economic/medical sanctions that killed far more Iraq’s than Sadam managed
AGREED, BUT BY THE TIME BLAIR CAME TO POWER THE SOVIETS HAD SUPPLIED SADDAM WITH ALL THE WEAPONS HE NEEDED.
If a military attack were needed I would have only attacked military complexes not water treatment plants power plants bridges hospitals etc
I GUESS YOU HAVEN'T HAD MUCH MILITARY EXPERIENCE THEN.
I would have not occupied Iraq for 4 years bombing and killing all the people I claimed to be liberating
WOULD YOU HAVE ABANDONDED THEM TO THE RUMP OF THE B'ATH PARTY AND THOSE SEEKING A THEOCRACY ?
I would have not tried to hand pick a government that I could control and try to impose my rule on while stealing all the oil
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ WAS ELECTED BY THE IRAQI PEOPLE AS YOU WELL KNOW
Realist – you don’t give a shit about Iraqi people – you a pointless little arm chair warrior – not in Iraq – the first place I would send you
UNLIKE YOU I HAVE BEEN TO IRAQ, I WAS BORN THERE
Oh by the way all the Iraqi people I know including myself (UK -Iraqi) think pepole like you are mindless fools
AND IRAQIS LIKE ME THINK YOU FOOLISH AND BLINDED BY YOUR IGNORANCE
Haidar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Realist
Hide 5 hidden comments or hide all comments