In other words, get rid of Bliar and the rest of his criminal Gang.
Such debates give me hope, as they are increasing in volume and clarity, all over the world. I recently read this, and said 'finally, people are waking up'. Though I fear what the "Neo-Con" Fascists will do while backed into a corner, the risk of doing nothing is much, much greater.
Cheney Can't Scare Me Anymore
I'm not sure we're quite ready for this approach, but for the first time since Sept. 11, I see signs that America is gradually coming to its senses. The country is like the addicted gambler who, instead of continuing his doomed search for a game he can win, finally begins to wonder if the real problem is his presence in the casino.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/15378263.htm
Such debates give me hope, as they are increasing in volume and clarity, all over the world. I recently read this, and said 'finally, people are waking up'. Though I fear what the "Neo-Con" Fascists will do while backed into a corner, the risk of doing nothing is much, much greater.
Cheney Can't Scare Me Anymore
I'm not sure we're quite ready for this approach, but for the first time since Sept. 11, I see signs that America is gradually coming to its senses. The country is like the addicted gambler who, instead of continuing his doomed search for a game he can win, finally begins to wonder if the real problem is his presence in the casino.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/15378263.htm
Best defence against terrorism is a split with US, say voters
By Peter Riddell
MOST people believe that the Blair Government’s foreign policy has increased significantly the risk of terrorist attacks and now want Britain to distance itself from America and set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, according to a poll for The Times.
The Populus poll was undertaken over the weekend as news came of the death of 14 British servicemen on board a crashed Nimrod aircraft in Afghanistan.
The results underline the unpopularity of Tony Blair’s Middle Eastern policy and how a majority of voters believe there is a direct connection with terrorist plots and attacks at home.
Nearly three quarters of the public (73 per cent) believe that “the British Government’s foreign policy, especially its support for the invasion of Iraq and refusal to demand an immediate ceasefire by Israel in the recent war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, has significantly increased the risk of terrorist attacks on Britain”.
Moreover, three fifths (62 per cent) agree that “in order to reduce the risk of future terrorist attacks on Britain the Government should change its foreign policy, in particular by distancing itself from America, being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq”. Women (66 per cent) and Liberal Democrat voters (74 per cent) agree with this view particularly strongly.
Nonetheless, a similar proportion of voters (63 per cent) believe that “Muslim extremists hate democracy and the Western way of life, and if Britain’s foreign policy were different they would find another excuse for their terrorist activities”. This is a widely held view, backed by two thirds of Labour and Tory voters, but only just over a half (53 per cent) of Lib Dems.
However, voters are also sympathetic to Muslim concerns. Just a half (52 per cent) believe that “even though there is no justification for terrorism, the British Government’s foreign policy, especially towards Iraq and the recent attacks on Lebanon by Israel, is anti-Muslim and it is understandable that many Muslims are offended by it”. Most people back the increased security at airports and say they feel safe travelling. Just under one in three (29 per cent) believes that the airport authorities have “overreacted to the threat of terrorism and introduced excessive security measures that cause unnecessary delays without improving safety”, the view argued by Ryanair. But more than two thirds (69 per cent) disagree.
Just a third believe that security checks should be “particularly focused on people who appear to be from the same ethnic or religious background as previous terrorists, rather than treating everyone as if they represent an equal risk”. But two thirds disagree.
Only a quarter (26 per cent) say they would not feel safe travelling from British aiports at the moment, but 71 per cent say they do feel safe flying.
A third report that they or someone in their families were directly affected, experiencing delays as a result of increased airport security. But two thirds say they were unaffected.
Populus interviewed 1,504 adults by telephone on September 1-3. For more details go to www.populuslimited.com
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2344755,00.html
By Peter Riddell
MOST people believe that the Blair Government’s foreign policy has increased significantly the risk of terrorist attacks and now want Britain to distance itself from America and set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, according to a poll for The Times.
The Populus poll was undertaken over the weekend as news came of the death of 14 British servicemen on board a crashed Nimrod aircraft in Afghanistan.
The results underline the unpopularity of Tony Blair’s Middle Eastern policy and how a majority of voters believe there is a direct connection with terrorist plots and attacks at home.
Nearly three quarters of the public (73 per cent) believe that “the British Government’s foreign policy, especially its support for the invasion of Iraq and refusal to demand an immediate ceasefire by Israel in the recent war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, has significantly increased the risk of terrorist attacks on Britain”.
Moreover, three fifths (62 per cent) agree that “in order to reduce the risk of future terrorist attacks on Britain the Government should change its foreign policy, in particular by distancing itself from America, being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq”. Women (66 per cent) and Liberal Democrat voters (74 per cent) agree with this view particularly strongly.
Nonetheless, a similar proportion of voters (63 per cent) believe that “Muslim extremists hate democracy and the Western way of life, and if Britain’s foreign policy were different they would find another excuse for their terrorist activities”. This is a widely held view, backed by two thirds of Labour and Tory voters, but only just over a half (53 per cent) of Lib Dems.
However, voters are also sympathetic to Muslim concerns. Just a half (52 per cent) believe that “even though there is no justification for terrorism, the British Government’s foreign policy, especially towards Iraq and the recent attacks on Lebanon by Israel, is anti-Muslim and it is understandable that many Muslims are offended by it”. Most people back the increased security at airports and say they feel safe travelling. Just under one in three (29 per cent) believes that the airport authorities have “overreacted to the threat of terrorism and introduced excessive security measures that cause unnecessary delays without improving safety”, the view argued by Ryanair. But more than two thirds (69 per cent) disagree.
Just a third believe that security checks should be “particularly focused on people who appear to be from the same ethnic or religious background as previous terrorists, rather than treating everyone as if they represent an equal risk”. But two thirds disagree.
Only a quarter (26 per cent) say they would not feel safe travelling from British aiports at the moment, but 71 per cent say they do feel safe flying.
A third report that they or someone in their families were directly affected, experiencing delays as a result of increased airport security. But two thirds say they were unaffected.
Populus interviewed 1,504 adults by telephone on September 1-3. For more details go to www.populuslimited.com
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2344755,00.html
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Yes but its all too late!
07.09.2006 07:26
Sure T.Bliar has been bloody awful but do you really believe that Gordon Brown or any other politician will be any better once they are given that position of power?
Itsme
Perhaps -- but do it with eyes open
07.09.2006 14:56
It's hard to forsee future events so perhaps the only way to do this is to look back over the past several decades to analyze what would have been different had there NOT been this special arrangement of automatic mutual support, deferral to each other's interests, etc.
I would argue that in the absence of this "special arrangement" US policies and options would have been affected slightly but Britain's in some rather major ways. Perhaps THAT is why whoever is in power chooses to keep "the arrangement" in effect. Once it's over, it's probably over for good (not clear how it could ever be reinstated since it depends on trust "whatever you decide we will stand beside you").
Mike Novack
e-mail:
stepbystpefarm mtdata.com