Is BLAIR the most accomplished liar we have had as Priminister (Prime Minister)?

Watching Blair in this inquiry is like watching a world class manipulator of facts. Taking the miniscule fragements of information that suit his cause while ignoring massive amounts of factual evidence and events that do not help his story.

At the same time he is still talking like somebody lining up more wars that if he was in power he would like to start.

Will he go down in history as our Nixon??

83 Comments

I would imagine one doesn't get to be Prime Minister without learning how to manipulate facts...

He's a politician, what do you expect?

Original Poster

Flodd;7690576

I would imagine one doesn't get to be Prime Minister without learning how … I would imagine one doesn't get to be Prime Minister without learning how to manipulate facts...



True, but he takes this to a new level. Just compare him to Brown or Cameron under pressure. Even Bush looks uncomfortable while tellin lies. Blair actually turns the whole thing round. He actually seems to glow under pressure.

Banned

What is a priminister?

All politicians lie or stretch the truth. At least he came to the correct conclusion, that's all the counts tbh.

Everyone has to "stretch the truth" at some point, just in politicians it's more exaggerated.

As for the man "glowing under pressure", it's a good trait for someone like a PM to have imo...

He is making the panel look like bumbling fools. I'm not sure if it's because he's so good or they are so bad.

Original Poster

guv;7690637

What is a priminister?All politicians lie or stretch the truth. At least … What is a priminister?All politicians lie or stretch the truth. At least he came to the correct conclusion, that's all the counts tbh.



http://home.comcast.net/~stormkatt/images/Portfolio/Logos/GrammarPolice.gif

Congratulations.

Your priorities in life are worrying. My bad spelling gets you going, but your happy to sit back and let polititians send people to die in war based on lies! :thinking:

W...

Original Poster

civms47;7690657

Everyone has to "stretch the truth" at some point, just in politicians … Everyone has to "stretch the truth" at some point, just in politicians it's more exaggerated.As for the man "glowing under pressure", it's a good trait for someone like a PM to have imo...



I prefer a somebody who is taking the decision to risk lives to be uncomfortable when explaining why all his histrionics about WMD turned out to be rubbish.

ants97;7690704

He is making the panel look like bumbling fools. I'm not sure if it's … He is making the panel look like bumbling fools. I'm not sure if it's because he's so good or they are so bad.



Absolutely agree. These hand picked establishment figures seem to be acting as his straight men/women. Very different style to when George Galloway was called to the Senate!

Banned

Plum;7690707

Congratulations.Your priorities in life are worrying. My bad spelling … Congratulations.Your priorities in life are worrying. My bad spelling gets you going, but your happy to sit back and let polititians send people to die in war based on lies! :thinking:



You maaad? I've asked you to clarify and spelt out that he may have stretched the truth, but need to deal with terrorists. Maybe you're happy they exist. I'm not.

Banned

Plum;7690707

Congratulations.Your priorities in life are worrying. My bad spelling … Congratulations.Your priorities in life are worrying. My bad spelling gets you going, but your happy to sit back and let politicians send people to die in war based on lies! :thinking:



It wasn't spelling or grammar - it was complete stupidity. You simply MUST have known that was incorrect when you posted. It's not a typo or a small error - its blatant.

Banned

vibeone;7690764

It wasn't spelling or grammar - it was complete stupidity. You simply … It wasn't spelling or grammar - it was complete stupidity. You simply MUST have known that was incorrect when you posted. It's not a typo or a small error - its blatant.




LOL.... and he even has to go back and edit and add W... at the end

I can think of a word beginning with that letter too! Can you guess what it is?

Plum;7690601

True, but he takes this to a new level. Just compare him to Brown or … True, but he takes this to a new level. Just compare him to Brown or Cameron under pressure. Even Bush looks uncomfortable while tellin lies. Blair actually turns the whole thing round. He actually seems to glow under pressure.


It sounds like you're uncomfortable seeing someone with the courage of his convictions explaining his behaviour and decision making in an open and detailed way with the confidence of someone who firmly believed that he was doing the right thing.
Unfortunately there is no 'massive amopunts of factual evidence' to the contrary unless you are counting the speculation and conjecture of the red top press and the suppositions of those people whose intentions were to serve their own interests.

Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would be a much better place ,,,,Not,,,

cannyscot;7690784

It sounds like you're uncomfortable seeing someone with the courage of … It sounds like you're uncomfortable seeing someone with the courage of his convictions explaining his behaviour and decision making in an open and detailed way with the confidence of someone who firmly believed that he was doing the right thing.Unfortunately there is no 'massive amopunts of factual evidence' to the contrary unless you are counting the speculation and conjecture of the red top press and the suppositions of those people whose intentions were to serve their own interests.



At last someone who can think for themselves on this forum,Well said..

Original Poster

vibeone;7690764

It wasn't spelling or grammar - it was complete stupidity. You simply … It wasn't spelling or grammar - it was complete stupidity. You simply MUST have known that was incorrect when you posted. It's not a typo or a small error - its blatant.



So people have gone to war on a lie and this is your priority also. I am not getting into a slanging match with you or anyone else about it.

Having a go at somebodies typo/spelling/grammar mistakes is one of about 5 or 6 tricks that are continaully used here to denegrate people on this forum. Too bad if your dyslexic, apparently your views don't count.

I will change it for you two and anyone else who is stressed, but could we move onto the subject of the thread.

I'm still with Maggie Thatcher tbh.

tonyg1962;7690813

Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would … Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would be a much better place ,,,,Not,,,



think you might've meant north korea.

He isn't B..liar by name only.;-)

ants97;7690855

think you might've meant north korea.



Lol well spotted,:oops:

Banned

Plum;7690842

So people have gone to war on a lie and this is your priority also. I am … So people have gone to war on a lie and this is your priority also. I am not getting into a slanging match with you or anyone else about it.Having a go at somebodies typo/spelling/grammar mistakes is one of about 5 or 6 tricks that are continaully used here to denegrate people on this forum. Too bad if your dyslexic, apparently your views don't count.I will change it for you two and anyone else who is stressed, but could we move onto the subject of the thread.



You could explain why you edited your post and added "W......" while you're about it. After all, we wouldn't want to denegrate people on this forum!

Adam2050;7690851

I'm still with Maggie Thatcher tbh.



No. She was a biatch.

ants97;7690855

think you might've meant north korea.



Just a typo. Careful, you'll upset someone!

Banned

tonyg1962;7690813

Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would … Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would be a much better place ,,,,Not,,,



Perfectly encapsulates your whole argument.

Bravo.

Banned

He's actually coming across as articulate, intelligent, very understandable, knowledgable and truthful Not that anyone here would notice that.
RAARRRG!

TONY BLIAR! THE SUN! OUR BOYS! IMMIGRANTS!!! ARGH!!! MUSLIMS!

Adam2050;7690851

I'm still with Maggie Thatcher tbh.



She caused more harm to this country than Blair and all other politicians put together ever did.:x

cannyscot;7690784

It sounds like you're uncomfortable seeing someone with the courage of … It sounds like you're uncomfortable seeing someone with the courage of his convictions explaining his behaviour and decision making in an open and detailed way with the confidence of someone who firmly believed that he was doing the right thing.Unfortunately there is no 'massive amopunts of factual evidence' to the contrary unless you are counting the speculation and conjecture of the red top press and the suppositions of those people whose intentions were to serve their own interests.



Repped.

Banned

Inactive;7690909

She caused more harm to this country than Blair and all other politicians … She caused more harm to this country than Blair and all other politicians put together ever did.:x



+1

My opinion is that one day a Nuclear or biological weapon will be used by terrorists in a major city in the west and that Tony blair may have put that day back by 10- 15 years, But it will still come,

this enquiry won't bring back the dead

Original Poster

tonyg1962;7690813

Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would … Yes a world with Saddam Hussein with WMDs and Iran and South Korea would be a much better place ,,,,Not,,,




Not sure of your point...

Sadam had no WMD. He was under pressure from Sanctions and was willing in the end to allow weapons inspections. The weapons inspectors were asking for more time and believed they could make sure Sadam had no WMD.

Now thanks to the Iraq debacle and Afghanistan the other countries you mentioned, (i won't make bid deal you mistake- we all make them. I don't see it as reflection on your intelligence) are in a stronger position to develop weapons as the US are unable to threaten anything as everybody knows they are overstretched.

The world is less safe because of Blairs decision

Banned

DanJackson;7690905

He's actually coming across as articulate, intelligent, very … He's actually coming across as articulate, intelligent, very understandable, knowledgable and truthful



I'd say unrepentant more than anything else.

Banned

FilthAndFurry;7690937

I'd say unrepentant more than anything else.



Well he did something he believed was right at the time based on the evidence presented to him. He has nothing to repent on that basis.

tonyg1962;7690924

My opinion is that one day a Nuclear or biological weapon will be used by … My opinion is that one day a Nuclear or biological weapon will be used by terrorists in a major city in the west and that Tony blair may have put that day back by 10- 15 years, But it will still come,



or that by "illegally" invading iraq on the coat tails of the USA he's alienated and converted more terrorists of whatever persuasion and brought such an attack forward by 10-15 years.

Banned

tonyg1962;7690924

My opinion is that one day a Nuclear or biological weapon will be used by … My opinion is that one day a Nuclear or biological weapon will be used by terrorists in a major city in the west and that Tony blair may have put that day back by 10- 15 years, But it will still come,



Even though most analysts say that more people have been radicalised due to the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions, and the 7/7 bombings were directly attributed to them.

Maybe we need to fear South Korea more:roll:

Plum;7690929

Not sure of your point...Sadam had no WMD. He was under pressure from … Not sure of your point...Sadam had no WMD. He was under pressure from Sanctions and was willing in the end to allow weapons inspections. The weapons inspectors were asking for more time and believed they could make sure Sadam had no WMD.Now thanks to the Iraq debacle and Afghanistan the other countries you mentioned, (i won't make bid deal you mistake- we all make them. I don't see it as reflection on your intelligence) are in a stronger position to develop weapons as the US are unable to threaten anything as everybody knows they are overstretched.The world is less safe because of Blairs decision



But to allow weapons inspectors back in they had to relax sanctions which would then allow Saddam to start gathering material again,

Banned

DanJackson;7690945

Well he did something he believed was right at the time based on the … Well he did something he believed was right at the time based on the evidence presented to him. He has nothing to repent on that basis.



I actually agree that he believed what he was doing was right, but I'm not so sure the 'evidence' had anything to do with it.

He even told Fern Britton that if it wasn't because of WMDs, then he still felt Saddam needed to be removed.

Banned

ants97;7690946

or that by "illegally" invading iraq on the coat tails of the USA he's … or that by "illegally" invading iraq on the coat tails of the USA he's alienated and converted more terrorists of whatever persuasion and brought such an attack forward by 10-15 years.



s_%22Peace_For_Our_Time%22_speech"]Ah, that old argument....

Plum;7690727

I prefer a somebody who is taking the decision to risk lives to be … I prefer a somebody who is taking the decision to risk lives to be uncomfortable when explaining why all his histrionics about WMD turned out to be rubbish.



I'd prefer someone to be able to confidently explain why he took the decisions that he did. His confidence to me shows that he believes he did the right thing.

Now, I'm not arguing whether going to war was right or wrong. But what's worse, a PM that thinks he's right and has the courage of his convictions, or one that thinks he's doing the wrong thing but goes ahead and does it anyway?

guv;7690978

s_%22Peace_For_Our_Time%22_speech"]Ah, that old argument....




ah the old argument of comparing saddam to hitler

Banned

civms47;7690996

[QUOTE=Plum;7690727]I prefer a somebody who is taking the decision to … [QUOTE=Plum;7690727]I prefer a somebody who is taking the decision to risk lives to be uncomfortable when explaining why all his histrionics about WMD turned out to be rubbish./QUOTE]I'd prefer someone to be able to confidently explain why he took the decisions that he did. His confidence to me shows that he believes he did the right thing.Now, I'm not arguing whether going to war was right or wrong. But what's worse, a PM that thinks he's right and has the courage of his convictions, or one that thinks he's doing the wrong thing but goes ahead and does it anyway?



I think someone who is single-mnded enough to think that what he wants to do is worth lying to the country about and sacrificing young men's and women's lives for is worse.

I suppose if you spent 7 years telling yourself you did the right thing for the right reasons, you might actually come to believe it.

Or at least sound plausible saying it.

Inactive;7690909

She caused more harm to this country than Blair and all other politicians … She caused more harm to this country than Blair and all other politicians put together ever did.:x



Yep.

Banned

ants97;7691008

ah the old argument of comparing saddam to hitler



No, I was actually compairing Blair to Chamberlain..... but I claim my Godwins... :thumbsup:
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text
    Top Discussions
    1. Any PS4 News Here29213598
    2. 75% off Sky TV for existing customers. Only works when you call the specifi…17386134
    3. Just heard this...2 ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ congrats to all on 392k ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★7764005
    4. hOW SHOCKED WERE YOU AT THE GLASGOW FRUIT MARKET CONFLAGRATION??11

    See more discussions