anthonyqkiernan
|
Smoke & Mirrors
Jun 04, 2003, 20:14
|
Blair is having his investigation. It will show that he did not doctor the dossier to mislead parliament. Everyone will grumble about the certain elements within the secret service. The fact that no WMD's have turned up will no longer been the issue. Quoth he: Alakazamy Stairheid Rammy!!!
In other news today: Who'da thunk it?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,970331 ,00.html
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
Bollocks
Jun 04, 2003, 20:15
|
|
If you try and look, you'll need to type the end of that link in place.
|
Vybik Jon
|
Re: Smoke & Mirrors
Jun 04, 2003, 20:37
|
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,970331,00.html
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
Cheers, Jon
Jun 04, 2003, 21:02
|
|
:oD
|
PlateOfFood
|
Re: Cheers, Jon
Jun 05, 2003, 17:26
|
Whats this?
If click on Vybik Jon's link it comes up with a 'Sorry page can't be served', but if I make it end .htm instead of .html I get an empty page with no story but the heading 'Wolfowitz: Iraq War Was about Oil'. Is that the story, and has it been taken down or something?
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
Re: Cheers, Jon
Jun 05, 2003, 19:45
|
Indeed it has. Their reason:
"Paul Wolfowitz:
A report which was posted on our website on June 4 under the heading "Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil" misconstrued remarks made by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, making it appear that he had said that oil was the main reason for going to war in Iraq. He did not say that. He said, "The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil." The sense was that the US had no economic options by means of which to achieve its objectives, not that the economic value of the oil motivated the war. The report appeared only on the website and has now been removed."
|
