Hutton Inquiry a 'whitewash' .....

[questionnaire]

Apart from the Murdoch-owned 'Sun' and 'Times' newspapers, the whole British press, conservative, liberal and radical alike, have supported the B.B.C. although they are traditional rivals, and accused Hutton of whitewashing the whole sorry affair. He found Blair and his government 'not guilty' of exaggerating intelligence reports, lying about WMD and exposing whistleblower Dr. David Kelly, which of course led to Kelly's 'suicide'. On Sunday, 4 respected medical doctors wrote to the Observer newspaper claiming that Kelly could not possibly have committed suicide and the coroner's verdict simply did not fit the autopsy findings.



Hutton's is the latest in a long line of whitewashes performed by the Law Lords on behalf of the government, Denning's report into the Profumo affair in 1963 and Scarman's report into the riots in 1981 being the most well-known. It is such a crude obvious whitewash that polls are showing that very few people in Britain have any faith in it. When combined with ex-inspector David Kay's recent revelations, this is an indication of the breakdown of democracy in Britain and America. Only the stupid believe Blair and Bush now.



Steve H

[DreamTone7]

....and only the stupid believe whatever the media tells them to.

[questionnaire]

..... but, on balance, carefully selected media are now more trustworthy than these puppet politicians, although one should never swallow anything whole.

[Rev9Volts]

and on a side note everyone was wrong for usa/uk doing what we did in iraq. not that out politicians are not perfect or i am taking up for thm, but you all never mention the what 300,000 innocent iraqies killed by saddam???

[questionnaire]

Rev, perspective please. At a conservative estimate (by UNICEF) over 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 died because of USA-imposed sanctions. Where does the 300,000 fit with this?



Do you know how many deaths have been caused, directly and indirectly, by US military actions since WWII? Do you know how many wars have been started by the USA since 1890 to 'protect their interests overseas'?

[DreamTone7]

US sanctions? No. Saddam ate just fine, thank you. And with the billions he was making on the oil he was shipping out the back door through Syria, he could have done something to help those 500,000. He was the leader of Iraq, he was responsible for his country, and he let those kids die because of his own greed. Just another ploy on somebodys part to blame America....again. Saddam was responsible for what went on in his country....and nobody else. Nobody was forcing him not to spend any money to feed his people. Gimme a break.

[questionnaire]

"US sanctions? No. Saddam ate just fine, thank you. And with the billions he was making on the oil he was shipping out the back door through Syria, he could have done something to help those 500,000. He was the leader of Iraq, he was responsible for his country, and he let those kids die because of his own greed. Just another ploy on somebodys part to blame America....again. Saddam was responsible for what went on in his country....and nobody else. Nobody was forcing him not to spend any money to feed his people. Gimme a break."



This is just plain dumb!! Why don't the rich in America do something to help the homeless flooding into the shelters during the current cold spell? It's the same principle. The fortunes of despots are not big enough to make a difference to whole national economies. There's just too much information for a few posts on a message board. Your government and media keep your whole population ill-informed, even what you think are independent sources are not. Read the UNICEF study, then read about then number of Iraqis killed by American bombing raids, then read about America and Israel interfering with the water supply, then read about the effects of depleted uranium shells lying all over the place, then read about how the first American oil company tried to acquire Iraq's oil by force as far back as 1919, then read about why permanent war is an economic necessity for the USA, then get back to me.

[Galmin]

"I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it".



~Madeleine Albright, when asked by reporter Leslie Stahl (CBS 1996) whether US policy objectives in Iraq were worth the death of 500.000 children.



1,5 Million in total, 500.000 children.

Quote:

---

Gimme a break

---

Ever heard of Hans von Sponeck?

[DreamTone7]

Interesting that Albright said what she did, as it was Saddams choice, and not hers, to make.

[DreamTone7]

...and questionnaire, don't you think that while Saddam was so busy shipping oil out he just might have been able to get a little food in the same way? Ya think? Your logic completely evades this key part of the equation....probably because it allows you to continue to believe the half-truths you have been fed.

[questionnaire]

I'm the one being fed half-truths? Hahahaha!!



You still believe that deposing this nasty dictator was the principle reason for the illegal invasion? Did you know that Standard Oil tried to convince the US government to invade Iraq as far back as 1919?

[DreamTone7]

Since you seem to know more than everyone else, please enlighten us as to why the US went into Iraq.

[Galmin]

Wolfowitz said it was because Iraq is swimming in oil and that the WMD stuff was a bureaucratic excuse.



He should know, shouldn't he?

[DreamTone7]

Why should he know? Did Bush tell him?

[Galmin]

I believe the Deputy Secretary of Defense has a pretty precise hunch about why the country is going to war.

Quote:

---

Why should he know? Did Bush tell him?

---

Bush is probably one of the few in the administration who actually doesn't know.