Bremer contradicts Blair on mass destruction weapons in Iraq

[NNN0LHI]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20031228/pl_afp/britain_us_iraq_blair&cid=1521&ncid=1480

LONDON (AFP) - The US civil administrator for Iraq (news - web sites) Paul Bremer denied the existence of laboratories in Iraq making weapons of mass destruction for which British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) says US-led teams have massive evidence.


But in a pre-taped interview scheduled for transmission here Sunday, Bremer retreated when he learned that it was Blair who had made the claim. snip


"I have read (Kay's) reports so I don't know who said that," Bremer said in an interview on the British ITV1 channel with Jonathan Dimbleby.


"It sounds like a bit of a red herring to me," the American continued. "It sounds like someone who doesn't agree with the policy sets up a red herring then knocks it down."


But Bremer retreated when told the claims were made by none other than President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s staunchest ally Blair.

more

[Liberal Veteran]

1. Bremer must be longing to spend more time with his family.

:)

[maggrwaggr]

2. they're having trouble keeping their lies straight

which is the problem with lying. The truth is a lot easier to remember.

[kentuck]

13. That is true.

They lie when they don't even have to lie. Remember the British plane that radioed them on their trip to Baghdad??

[0007]

20. Remember when Air Force One was on the terrorist list to hit on 911?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. Yep...that's when Junior continued to sit in the 2nd graders' classroom...

...for another 30 minutes while in "grave danger".

Junior also claims to have seen the first plane hit the WTC, and his reaction that the pilot was pretty bad. Since we all know where he was when informed by Andy Card of the impact of the 2nd plane, where could he have been located to have seen the crash of the first plane? We've been told that Junior was in his limo on the way to the Sarasota, Florida, classroom when the WTC was first struck at 8:46am EST. So, let's discuss Junior's limo, a vehicle packed with the latest in communications technology, to include the capability of closed-circuit television.

But, if we assume that Junior saw the first plane strike the WTC on the closed-circuit television in his limo, that would assume someone had a camera trained on the WTC and was beaming that signal to the limo.

And that would assume, at the very least, foreknowledge of the events of 911, wouldn't it?

[Cooley Hurd]

3. More dumb crooks that can't get their stories straight...

No wonder we can't win this war... :eyes:

[Rose Siding]

4. That sounds like a dangerous "mistake" for Bremer to make

I wouldn't be feeling too secure right now if I were him. -Provided of course that ANY BIG US MEDIA is awake this weekend.

[T Bone]

10. Oh Bremer is safe alright

He is Bush's cousin, right? So he is safe. He can't help it though that stupidity runs in all the branches of the family.

[proud patriot]

5. Rate It !

:hi:

[roguevalley]

6. Good grief. At this rate we are going to lose half of the 'coalition

of the willing' if Britain gets pissed and goes home. :)

Its almost perverse the pleasure I get out of their ineptitude.

[Cocoa]

7. what a tangled web they weave...

:-)

[madrchsod]

8. remember it was reported that

little george was really pissed that blair broke the saddam pulled from the hole story before bush.don`t fuck with me ,tony........

[AP]

9. Blair's telling the truth.

Bremner is lying for Republicans so that Democrats nominate an anti-war democrat upon whom they'll spring this information next October.

Blair, on the other hand, is trying to help the Democrats win.

[NNN0LHI]

11. If Blair was trying to get a Dem elected next year it would be simple

If he would just rescind his own decision to be part of the coalition of the willing and pull the British soldiers from Iraq citing Bush and his minions lies that caused Britain to be dragged into this screw up. That would do it.

Don

[AP]

12. Notice how Blair had access to this info. Psst. Because UK was in there.

How can Blair achieve anything by being marginalized like Chirac?

How many times do I have to listen to ignorant Americans say, "I hate the French." Don't know if I coudl take hearing, "I hate the British" on top of that.

I don't think Blair could have any influence on anything going on in the world if he were marginalized like that.

[Capt_Nemo]

17. Ha, ha, ha! "Marginalized like Chirac"

For your information Chirac and Schroeder nowadays have much more influence
on a global scale than Blair, because now other nations (like China, Russia,
South Africa or Brazil) realize that is of no use talking to Blair
and prefer to deal directly with the bushies, who have the real bargaining
power, than with a mere lackey.

It was Blair that became marginalized. Ironicaly by his own actions...

And about the "info" that Blair has... As this Yahoo story says, it came out the following day
that he was talking strictly about Kay's previous report
and NOT about new data:

"Blair did not go into detail, but a spokesman for the prime minister said that the findings were part of the interim report produced by the survey group several months ago."

He just spun the non-existence of proof
into proof of existence in a most Rumsfeldian way.

That's Blair's "info": a big fat zero.

[AP]

18. Trust me. Chirac has no influence at all over who gets elected pres in 04.

Blair can play a slight role if people listen to things like this (and with his Libya move).

[Capt_Nemo]

22. I said "Global influence" and that, although you may not...

... understand, is way more important than influence in the US.

As for Blair's influence on the US presidential elections, even if
he had it, which I don't believe, he is
stuck with backing the shrub all the way, otherwise he will be
undermining his own position, for he will have to admit lying
to his nation all the time for the last 2 years.

Trust me, Blair's influence in world affairs is now very seriously
compromised, and that is a good thing!

[AP]

31. Obviously, there's some connection between British and American politics.

We go Dem, they go Labour. They go Tory, we go Republican.

Blair is so compromised in the world that he couldn't remove the Libya threat?

[Capt_Nemo]

33. There was no "Lybia threat" to start with!

Did you read what IAEA's ElBaradei told the press about Lybia's
supposed WMD programes?

Damn', AP, I never saw anybody as gullible as you!

Blair tells Kaddafi: if you read this script out loud to make me look
good I will guarantee that the sanctions on your country are lifted.
Kaddafi: I'll do it!

"Lybia threat"... geez... :eyes:

on edit: it is nice to get back to neverending Blair controversies
with you but right now I have to go. I'll be back soon. Don't go
away.

[salin]

23. He played a role in 2002 -

just not for the democrats.

[Capt_Nemo]

16. So the mythical laboratories realy exist, AP?

Does your devotion to Blair transports you to a parallel universe
or what?

The problem with your argument is that, in the REAL WORLD there is no
such thing as a network of WMD laboratories in Iraq. Blair is once
again lying his ass off to save his political carreer.

Bremer didn't uderstand what the hell he was being asked about
and said that he knew nothing of about the question, only AFTER he
was put into the context and realized that he was contradicting
Blair.

[AP]

19. That's not how I read it.

The Republicans are programmed to deny anything that might make Iraq look like it was founded on anything but madness up to a Dean nomination and they're saving teh truth (no matter how slight) until after.

Bliar removed Libya from the table to help Democrats win, and Blair is trying to let America know about what's being found in Iraq now so that it can't be a surprise helping Republicans later.

[salin]

24. That is a very generous read

unless Blair was forced to help bush and the GOP in 2002 (and no longer is under such threat), or unless he deeply regrets his role in those elections and the result of having to deal with a further emboldened bush due to full control of Congress, there is no reason to suggest that he will suddenly reverse the political role he played just over a year ago and start hurting republicans to help democrats.

[AP]

30. Bush would have done even better in 2002 if the entire world were agianst

him.

He did pretty well with France against him.

Americans love that kind of shit.

[salin]

35. France was not against him in November 2002

that built up through the winter and the farce of the inspections in December.

No, bush couldn't push the war at the level he needed to (to keep folks scared and voting GOP for "security) - but he needed to keep that message escalating. Enter Blair, who aside from the rolling out of their message in March 2002, had played a pretty silent role. Blair carries the message - giving the momentum in the press (after the DOSSIER - the faked one - gets announced) to get his war vote before the election, and to get homeland security through before the election, and to clobber folks like the honorable Senator Cleland by resisting homeland security.

Blair was a bit player in the drama ... but pushed the media message forward with gravitas. For the republicans. The question is whether it was by force or choice, and in the current elections whether he would still be forced (or how would he have gotten away from it) or would he still choose to help the republicans. It would be foolish to assume that he would work to help any democrats. Those days are past. He has tied his fortunes to this crowd.

Wasn't there also some odd report last month or so where he spoke highly on a personal level of Bush... while refering to Clinton as having been a bit of an odd fellow?

Doubt that some of the close senate races would have tipped GOP - without the strong war rhetoric and legitimacy that Blair gave to it. Public opinion in September was against going to war, and even more highly against (60+%) going without the UN. With the "Dotty Dossier" and the very respectable Blair trumping up the (faked) danger of Hussein - the numbers started reversing.

[Capt_Nemo]

25. Blair did his Lybia number as a showcase for the bushies

regime change preventive war rationale, a "proof" that it "shocks and
awes" the other arab regimes. It is a score for the neo-con camp,
in domestic PR terms (on the ME doesn't change a thing).

As for "not having read it that way", it is a pity that you didn't
realize what happened:
Dimbleby asked Bremer about the existence of a network of WMD labs
uncovered by the ISG.
Bremer replied that Kay's report didn't metion such thing and so it
could be a "red herring".
Dimbleby then tells Bremer that the lab revelation had come from
Blair.
Bremer awkwardly retreats, trying to distance himself from what he
just said.

[salin]

27. Actually it does change things

the info that the very rudimentary nuke technology is from Pakistan... along with indications that other dangerous new nukes (think North Korea, Iran, etc.) are coming from Pakistan... is very dangerous information. Combined with the two recent assassination attempts on Musharef? The Libya situation - by result of information - has shed light on a much larger problem.

Though the problem won't play one way or another in presidential elections - unless the public can begin to grasp the HUGE complexity of issues related to the "War on Terror" - and to do that they have to begin to realize the diversion (and now quagmire) that was Iraq. I don't see this public shift happening while the news and the simpleton president continue to speak in very simplistic terms.

So we have a newly identified HUGE threat (the reality of the problems with Pakistan.)

But it won't play in the elections - because the bushies won't let it.

[Capt_Nemo]

28. You are talking about perception in the west about the ME

I am talking about the dynamics of the relations in the ME regimes
and there nothing has changed (with the exception the Kaddafi is now
the poodle's own poodle!)

[salin]

36. I am talking of neither

just that one major piece of information came out (though one suspects it was known) that has serious implications regarding how we work with Pakistan has an impact on all of the surrounding countries - outside of the ME (with implications in the ME). If Pakistan is the source of rogue Nukes... then it is an issue... but how - even with sane people running foreign policy (which our current folks are nothing, if not INSANE) - to deal with it... and how does that impact the nuclear standoff in Kashmir? how will that impact other work in the region.

Regarding Libya itself. You are correct. Nothing has changed. They have been trying to jump through hoops to get off of sanctions for many years. You are also right that it is being played up as some kind of Bush victory. It helps bush when we play the perception that this is a "win" in the War on Terror. Which of course, it isn't.

Blair's playing a role in something that works well for Bush? What a shocker! Of course he has been on this course since the Spring of 2002 - for whatever noble or greedy motives - his actions have grown more predictable.

[Jonte_1979]

26. Uhm, yeah

That has to be it. It's all about Howard Dean. Thank God Tony Blair came up with an ellaborate plan to give Edwards the nomination, thereby making the world safe for democracy again!

[Capt_Nemo]

32. What AP is implying is that the WMD casus belli

built by Bush/Blair was after all true. And if one accepts, like
Blair, that it is a valid case for an invasion, then one has to
accept that the shrub is after all a reasonable leader, wise indeed!
I would even suggest AP to consider he is supporting the wrong
candidate... :evilgrin:

[salin]

21. Except of course

when he helps the republicans - like he did in 2002 to take back the senate.

Bush spent the summer beginning to hype Iraq... then he fell silent prior to the war vote and the elections... and BLAIR - picks up the job by announcing the new 'evidence' found.... by starting to pick up the war rhetoric and speak of it often. As such the news media carry the sources - over and over again.

By choice or force - Blair carried some water for the GOP in the 2002 elections by the timing of his revelations of the (fake) new evidence - and his taking the lead over (from bush) during the election cycle - for pushing the war rhetoric.

[AP]

29. If Blair helped Bush, why was Rumsfeld so upset when they agreed to go in?

Furthermore, Blair pushed diplomacy until the bitter end. Furthermore, he was the one who convinced to deal with Afghanistan first. Bush wanted to into Iraq right away.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Ah the lies and the counter lies

when will it ever end?

BTW I wonder if relations will get even more frosty now...

[stickdog]

15. Liars and the lying lies they tell.

Oh, what a tangled web ...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

37. WMD are now a "red herring."

Interesting.

[Barrett808]

38. Blair Facing More Accusations of Deceit over Iraq Claims

Blair Facing More Accusations of Deceit over Iraq Claims
By Jamie Lyons, Political Correspondent, PA News

Tony Blair tonight faced a fresh wave of attacks for “deceiving” the country over Saddam Hussein’s weapons arsenal.

The US official running Iraq has rejected the Prime Minister’s claim that evidence of Saddam’s hidden weapons laboratories had been unearthed.

Meanwhile former International Development Secretary Clare Short stepped up her calls on Mr Blair to quit over the war saying his deceitful actions were worse than those of shamed John Profumo.

And Labour’s Diane Abbott warned the Premier had risked backbench rebellions by making loyal MPs feel like “pillocks” over the Iraq war.

The most potentially embarrassing development came when Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, dismissed Mr Blair’s latest weapons claims.

(more)

http://www.news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2346503

[54anickel]

41. Poodle's Poodle - Gadhafi

How can they expect anyone to believe anything they say anymore?

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36346
Gadhafi armed al-Qaida with bio-chem weapons
U.S. raised terror alert largely due to new Libyan intelligence

Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi provided al-Qaida with chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction before changing heart and agreeing to destroy his arms program, Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin has learned.

Libyan intelligence chief Musa Kussa told U.S. and UK spy agencies that tens of thousands of weapons had been produced at 10 secret sites in the country. Kussa has named hundreds of what he termed "sleeper" al-Qaida agents in Britain and the U.S.

Gadhafi's dramatic turnaround has earned him a future meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush.

He was welcomed back on to the world stage with the understanding that his help to Osama bin Laden would never officially be mentioned.

more...

[Myra]

39. Christ! This is amazing!

"It was, he suggested, a 'red herring', probably put about by someone opposed to military action in Iraq who wanted to undermine the coalition.

'I don't know where those words come from but that is not what David Kay has said,' he told ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme. 'It sounds like a bit of a red herring to me.'"


Black comedy at its finest.

[Dr Fate]

40. It's getting harder to keep all their lies straight...

...I cant tell which ones are the original lies, and which ones are lies to cover up lies...

[BlueEyedSon]

42. kick (and go rate the article)

[kainah]

43. saw someone on C-SPAN's Washington Journal the other morning

Can't remember who it was but he said that he had just been reading about this story before coming on the air. He noted it hadn't hit the US press "yet, but I'm sure it will." I laughed out loud when I heard him say it. Oh, such naivete!!! :dunce:

You do have to give that reporter a lot of credit, though. Very clever to lure Bremer into this response.