Tony Blair - What do you think of his 10 year reign?

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 28 Jun 2007, 10:09

So old Tony left yesterday, what do you think of his 10 year reign? My personal feeling, he did some good, but equally he did some bad things which is now has a long term effect everywhere

What are you own personal thoughts on this?

What do you think of his new job? I can't see it, as the one thing you need to be is neutral, with the middle east, you have to understand, what happened with Israel in the past was that they did take the land off by force, and if the govenment stands with Israel, then really you are not suited for this job.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 28 Jun 2007, 10:26

The Iraq debacle has cast a shadow on him and thats one thing he will be remembered for or will be written about as something bad he did in going along with Bush which is now shown as a big mistake. I agree with you though he did some good. There was a big feelgood factor when he came to power 10 years ago.
He's a charismatic man, moreso than Bush anyway.
You'd think Mr. Blair would have a rest now

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 28 Jun 2007, 12:00

Is the country in a worse state now than it was 10 years ago?

Short answer: Yes.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 28 Jun 2007, 12:10

Markgway wrote:Is the country in a worse state now than it was 10 years ago?

Short answer: Yes.

Hey Mark, Why do you think that is? I half agree with you, there is no recession, and employment is high. But the flip side is, our civil rights have been attacked since '9/11'..

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 28 Jun 2007, 12:27

JEWS DID WTC.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 28 Jun 2007, 14:35

slasher13 wrote:
Markgway wrote:Is the country in a worse state now than it was 10 years ago?

Short answer: Yes.
Hey Mark, Why do you think that is? I half agree with you, there is no recession, and employment is high. But the flip side is, our civil rights have been attacked since '9/11'..

Yeah. If ID cards or any checks would help combat terrorism (?) and prevent another attack then OK IMO. But the thing is, an ID card "proves your identity" right? Yet you also have to prove your identity in order to get a card?! If you have proved who you are once, why do you need the card?

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 28 Jun 2007, 15:13

Eva wrote:JEWS DID WTC.

We all know, already.
Give it a rest.

degeneration · Post by **degeneration** » 28 Jun 2007, 16:19

Don't really know whether blair did well, but one thing I'm sure of, there were other people that could have done a lot worse. "Better the devil you know..."

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Jun 2007, 19:30

Markgway wrote:Is the country in a worse state now than it was 10 years ago? Short answer: Yes.

Please explain how?

Unemployment is down, people are generally better off, we have the minimum wage, soon to have a smoking ban, same sex marriages, a ban on fox hunting, finally the stupid 11pm kick is gone (not that it's changed anything). The list goes on.

Sure you can easily quote lots of bad things (aside from Iraq) BUT lets not forget what a mess Thatcher then Major left the country in. That for me is the crucial point when you say Britain is in a "worse" state. Thatcher gave us the Poll tax, yep that was a good thing for the country.

Comparatively I think Blair did a bang up job. I'm sorry he's out. Even to this day I am 50/50 on whether we should've gone into Iraq (Sadam was a dictator let's not forger that, WMD meh!), that said I think everyone (even Labour) would agree what followed has turned into an utter disaster. We should've pulled our troops out years ago.

Taking Iraq out of the equation (I live in the UK not Iraq) I think Blair has done a very good job for the country. I've always found him interesting to listen too and frankly way more intelligent then Bush.

It annoys me that Brown got in without any competition but now he's in it's time to start proving himself to me/the British public.

Who would I vote for at the next elections? I've always voted Liberal Democrat as overall I agree with them the most but Ming Campbell is a complete non-starter, he's way to old for starters. I'd probably vote Labour next time. Frankly as long as the Torries don't in I'm happy.

I do think in 10 years time we'll all be looking completely differently at Tony Blair. Just look at Thatcher she was hated when she left but today she has a stature after her.

What do you think of his new job? I can't see it, as the one thing you need to be is neutral, with the middle east, you have to understand, what happened with Israel in the past was that they did take the land off by force, and if the govenment stands with Israel, then really you are not suited for this job.

I partly agree but lets not forget Tony Blair is an outstanding diplomat if nothing else, he is intelligent and articulate.

Let's not also forget he helped bring peace to Northern Ireland, something only 10 years ago would've been inconceivable. Let's not also forget there was a time Northern Ireland was a war zone. That said the Middle East is way more complicated than Northern Ireland. As for your point about taking the land by force that maybe true but that was 60 years ago so really the Israel's who live there now IMO have a legitimate reason to disagree. Time moves on.

To also point an inaccuracy in your statement. Tony Blair is now working for the EU not the UK so even if the British government are siding with Israel it's not the British government he is representing.

Do I think he's the right person for the job? He's certainly not the worst person for the job BUT it should've been a Middle Eastern national who has a better understanding of the area, and frankly he/she should probably be Asian.

Blair has a much better understanding of Northern Ireland than he could ever have of the Middle East. I don't think any Westerner really does, and that's the real problem.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 28 Jun 2007, 19:34

Hey Mark, Why do you think that is? I half agree with you, there is no recession, and employment is high. But the flip side is, our civil rights have been attacked since '9/11'..

Civil rights? The identity card scheme is an Orwellian nightmare that won't prevent terrorism in the slightest but will give the government every possible knowledge about ordinary citizens. Having my fingerprint and retina scan will make Britian safer? Not fucking likely.

Iraq? 'nuff said.

Crime? To say it's no longer safe to walk the streets used to be a gross exaggeration now it's reality. I can't walk two mins without coming across foul mouthed yobs who are probably packing knives. Maybe it's only a matter of time before one of us becomes the next statistic.

Manners? Down the toilet. We live in a selfish, obnoxious society where Chavs rule and decent people are becoming an increasing minority. Me paranoid? Come visit where I live.

Ecconomy? a myth perpitrated by the infamous New Labour spin. Gordon Brown inherited a healthy ecconomy from the Tories and did his damndest to fuck it up. Don't bother planning on a pension as you'll be working 'til you drop. The NHS and schools have sucked up your taxes into oblivion and guess what? They're in a worse state that before.

Education? Thousands of children leave school every year unable to read or write properly yet we keep getting record pass marks for exams. How curious. Violence in schools has gotten so bad knives are commonplace and teachers are constantly the victim or assaults or false sexual accusations.

Health? Doctors and nurses work incredibly hard but are scuppered at every turn by useless money-sucking bureaucrats who've run the system into the ground. If you do get taken into hospital beware MRSA. It may kill you before your illness does.

Employment? More government figures massaged to make them look good. The government has more ineffective unemployment schemes than you can shake a stick at. The clever part being that as soon as you go on one of these schemes you're no longer classed as unemployed. So you get shoved from one department to another and as long as you're not officially unemployed it keeps the rates down.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Jun 2007, 19:46

grim_tales wrote:Yeah. If ID cards or any checks would help combat terrorism (?) and prevent another attack then OK IMO. But the thing is, an ID card "proves your identity" right? Yet you also have to prove your identity in order to get a card?! If you have proved who you are once, why do you need the card?

I don't get the big deal. They've had them in America (I think) and across big parts of Europe for years.

We have a passport and most people have a driving licence anyway. To combine those so you don't need a passport to travel (as you don't on the continent) makes sense.

The British public just love to disagree on every point for the sake of it.

Markgway wrote:Civil rights? The identity card scheme is an Orwellian nightmare that won't prevent terrorism in the slightest but will give the government every possible knowledge about ordinary citizens. Having my fingerprint and retina scan will make Britian safer? Not fucking likely.

They already do. If they really wanted to find out they could find out what underpants size you wear

Orwellian! Take about an over exaggeration. It's an ID card.

Gordon Brown inherited a healthy ecconomy from the Tories.

I don't know how you figured that one. Do we have a Torrie fanboy in our midst

Markgway wrote:Employment? More government figures massaged to make them look good.

We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe, go figure!

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 28 Jun 2007, 19:49

bradavon wrote:Please explain how?

See my previous post.

people are generally better off

People have more disposible income. Which means they can drink more and buy bigger TVs. But try buying a house. The property market is an outrage.

we have the minimum wage, soon to have a smoking ban

Both good things I'll conceed. Though we've had the smoking ban for a while and Ireland even longer. England is merely following suit.

same sex marriages

Lol, that wouldn't be high on my list of plaudits, but if it keeps you happy, Brad...

a ban on fox hunting

A concession-laden ban that's never been properly enforced. But in principle I strongly approve.

finally the stupid 11pm kick is gone (not that it's changed anything).

The what?

The list goes on.

Does it? Please continue....

BUT lets not forget what a mess Thatcher then Major left the country in.

They did? Not comparitively. People were just fed-up with the same old Tory bores. It was nothing to do with bad government. John Major started the Northen Ireland peace process before Tony took over and nabbed all the credit.

Thatcher gave us the Poll tax, yep that was a good thing for the country.

Almost as good as the notorious council tax which replaced it.

Comparatively I think Blair did a bang up job. I'm sorry he's out. Even to this day I am 50/50 on whether we should've gone into Iraq

Tell that to the thousands of British soldiers dead because of his actions. Tell that to the thousands of Iraqi civilians murdered by insurgants.

(Sadam was a dictator let's not forger that, WMD meh!)

A dicatator who was no threat to the west. He was all but immasculated internationally and they knew it.

Taking Iraq out of the equation (I live in the UK not Iraq)

Yeah, fuck those stupid foreigners for getting in our way.

I've always found him interesting to listen too and frankly way more intelligent then Bush.

So am I. So what?

It annoys me that Brown got in without any competition but now he's in it's time to start proving himself to me/the British public.

He should be given some time until the next election in 2009.

Who would I vote for at the next elections?

Right now? I'd abstain.

I do think in 10 years time we'll all be looking completely differently at Tony Blair.

I don't. In fact, if anything, it'll take another 10 years to realise just how badly he fucked us over.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:04

What are you basing the education claim on Mark? ("thousands of children.. unable to read or write")? Do you know first hand? Sounds like something the papers would say

Students work hard for their exams and have to put up with the same crap every year, its a no win situation. If pass rates go up, standards have gone down. If they go down, students are illiterate, innumerate idiots. Which is it to be?

I agree that the hunting and smoking ban are good things Blair did, and I know Major started off the NI peace process but Blair pushed it forward (Good Friday Agreement).
I agree Iraq is bad, but most of the UN thought Saddam had WMD, not just Blair/Bush.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:08

Though we've had the smoking ban for a while and Ireland even longer. England is merely following suit.

Both Wales and Scotland's smoking ban came into power during Blair's run. Ireland is an entirely different country, you know this.

Lol, that wouldn't be high on my list of plaudits, but if it keeps you happy, Brad...

It's a definite plus to me, it's only fair, and long overdue.

John Major started the Northen Ireland peace process before Tony took over and nabbed all the credit.

True but I doubt Major could've completed it and even if he could it was still years away when he left.

A dicatator who was no threat to the west. He was all but immasculated internationally and they knew it.

I've never understood this argument. Just because Sadam was no effect to us it's okay for the West to continue to ignore him killing thousands of people? Granted thousands of Iraq's have died since but then they did under Sadam. Your point about Blair contributing to this doesn't take that into account.

The point now is what a disaster has been done since and is being continued to do so, get all the troops out. Anyway I don't want to take this into an Iraw discussion so will leave it there.

He should be given some time until the next election in 2009.

Why? We have no idea how good the leader of a party normally would be before an election. At the very least he should've had some party leader contenders.

I'll give you the property market it is an outrage.

p.s - LOL Oops - 11pm pub kick out law. Thank god that's gone.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 28 Jun 2007, 20:09

I didnt know that Brad, if you no longer need an EU passport but can use the ID card instead (having 1 card for several things) then yes it does make sense.

Brad I also agree with you - Saddam was a bastard and its good he's gone. He would of continued to kill his own people but we would have turned a blind eye as he was "no threat to us" - worse no?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:06

I believe that's the intention, it's what they do on the continent already. I know that much. A German friend used it to get into the country.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:12

Ooo loads of discussion, lets bring it on

bradavon wrote:Even to this day I am 50/50 on whether we should've gone into Iraq (Sadam was a dictator let's not forger that, WMD meh!),

Lets not forgot their are other 'dicator' around the world, but we don't do anything for those poor people. Also Sadam was given the supposed nukes by the US in the beginning. Sorry but we shouldn't have gone over there, all we did was went along the ride for George Bush Senior, if UK really cared for Iraq, they would have gone when Clinton was in Power still, when they had that option. Sorry but going after an USA incident was not needed.

I partly agree but lets not forget Tony Blair is an outstanding diplomat if nothing else, he is intelligent and articulate.

Well yes that is true, and the following is true

Let's not also forget he helped bring peace to Northern Ireland, something only 10 years ago would've been inconceivable.

As for your point about taking the land by force that maybe true but that was 60 years ago so really the Israel's who live there now IMO have a legitimate reason to disagree. Time moves on.

Sorry Brad, but no, Before people was living their peacefully before all this. How comes you can say time to move on, as equally the british, prime minister, but if we say anything against Israel, all the media and people are up in arm. No, not time to move on, I'm sorry for what happened to the Jews, but there was no need for this to have done. Anyway really it wasn't them, but Zionist, As there are Jewish groups who don't support the state of Israel, as in their true religion, they can't settle until the prophet appears. If Blair thinks like yourself, then that is the reason why I say Blair shouldn't be involved in this, as he has to 1st understand that Israel was taken by force from the people (who were christians as well as muslims, Please remember many christians have died, equally over there, but no one cares about them).

Blair has a much better understanding of Northern Ireland than he could ever have of the Middle East. I don't think any Westerner really does, and that's the real problem.

Yes that is true, but what about Paddy Ashdown, Did you watch his documentary on Channel 4 which he did regarding the Middle East? He researched it well

I don't get the big deal. They've had them in America (I think) and across big parts of Europe for years.

We have a passport and most people have a driving licence anyway. To combine those so you don't need a passport to travel (as you don't on the continent) makes sense.

Well if you are happy for your personal details to be available to all sectors, then that fine, personally I don't. The data protection act seems to be breaking down.

Orwellian! Take about an over exaggeration. It's an ID card.

Actually its getting pretty spot on, You are simply giving up your freedom to the state who say, We will take care of you from the bad terrorist, just give up bits of your freedom. Sorry but doesn't that scare you? It scares me and also my kids. Why are these supposed terrorist after us? Because they hate our freedom, well.. logically no, because we have given up our freedom to the state therefore the supposed terrorist have won really..

Now over to Grim, Sorry Dude

Brad I also agree with you - Saddam was a bastard and its good he's gone. He would of continued to kill his own people but we would have turned a blind eye as he was "no threat to us" - worse no?

Let me simply ask you this question?

When Saddam first started killing his own people, where was the USA and UK?

When Saddam first came into power, where was the west

Why did we attack AFTER 9/11?, Why not before when Clinton was in power?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:28

but if we say anything against Israel, all the media and people are up in arm.

Not me.

TBH I'm completely unqualified to really make a judgement on Israel, which was partly my point so are most Westerners (and especially politicians). I was just pointing out that Israel is a recognised country and that's not going to change any time soon. Just like the IRA finally saw this and stopped trying for the impossible.

Well if you are happy for your personal details to be available to all sectors.

But like I said our personal details already are. I'd see the point if the government was talking about storing data they don't already have but they already store my passport and licence details. I don't see what the difference is? Presumably you have a car and travel? Our data is already stored on servers/files all over the country and freely passed to whomever asks forr it.

Sorry but doesn't that scare you?

It what you say was true then it would.

When Saddam first started killing his own people, where was the USA and UK?

Fair point but that doesn't mean he any less should be removed, does it? Like I said I'm on the fence on this one. Besides today we should be concentrating on the events today not of 4/5 years ago. People are stuck in the past.

Shen · Post by **Shen** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:50

bradavon wrote: Orwellian! Take about an over exaggeration. It's an ID card.

brad, sorry but how much of the ID card scheme have you researched? the implications that it brings? the biometric card, will also eventually carry a RFID chip, now if you know anything about RFID you will know that these can be used as tracking devices. as well the cards will hold alot of unnecessary information about the person.
it even says on its website that it is because of the terrorists, but show me proof of these terrorists and not some scapegoat and i will agree, until then, no thanks, sorry, my personal information, is just that, personal.

of course this also is leading to the ultimate goal of micro-chipping people, which is already being implemented in America as the "cool" new thing to do. microchips will allow EVERY SINGLE PIECE of information about you to be accessed through a simple scanner, from you medical records to your bank details. a wave of the hand will eventually be used to pay for items in special scanners installed into shops, hence a cashless society.

As for Tony Blair, i kinda agree with Mark, education has become terrible, there are record numbers of people leaving school with a less than basic education, thus they cannot find employment easily, meaning as time proceeds our employment quota will fail. crime, well look in your city, and the surrounding ones, tell us what you see... here there is a major increase in crime statistics, i must point out the housing system also has degraded severely, it has now become a "bidding" system with priority ratings for each person/family. where i live there is often 300-400 people bidding on one house, where as before it would take a few weeks, maybe 2 months to find a house, now it is almost impossible, my sister and many people i know have been looking for a house for over a year and still have no luck.

as for Saddam, well, yes they got rid of him, but on the false pretext of WMD, i guess people would have more respect if they hadn't lied and invented evidence, and Saddam ruled with terror killing his people mercilessly. however, think about what the US and the UK have done there... we have replaced one terror regime with another, vengeance killings by the soldiers there are not uncommon, and attacks on civilians are all but daily. if my memory serves there have been 100's of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed since this "intervention" started. collateral damage is the proper term if i am correct. i am sorry but i have not and can never condone what has happened in Iraq, this for me, makes Blair a very weak leader to concede to America's outlandish ideas and go in with the plan to attack Iraq.

i agree he is a great diplomat, and is articulate and well spoken, and kudos to him for the Ireland situation.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 28 Jun 2007, 21:52

Not me.

TBH I'm completely unqualified to really make a judgement on Israel, which was partly my point so are most Westerners (and especially politicians). I was just pointing out that Israel is a recognised country and that's not going to change any time soon. Just like the IRA finally saw this and stopped trying for the impossible.

But equally towards the end the politicians understood why the IRA felt like this, So the same must be applied. Freedom fighter, terrorist, each of them have a motive for what they do, and this must be understood

But like I said our personal details already are. I'd see the point if the government was talking about storing data they don't already have but they already store my passport and licence details. I don't see what the difference is? Presumably you have a car and travel? Our data is already stored on servers/files all over the country and freely passed to whomever asks forr it.

I really don't want my details to be given to the EU, or its details to be held on a server in brussell, would you? Equally I wouldn't like my credit report to be viewable to the government or my doctor details, this is personal to myself. This was what the data protection act was designed to help us.

It what you say was true then it would.

Just you wait dude

Fair point but that doesn't mean he any less should be removed, does it? Like I said I'm on the fence on this one. Besides today we should be concentrating on the events today not of 4/5 years ago. People are stuck in the past.

I think the classic quote from George Santayana applies here
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Very true indeed, They was much worse people than Saddam, eg Robert Mugabe, why didn't we do anything to this person?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Jun 2007, 00:47

bradavon wrote:Do we have a Torrie fanboy in our midst

That's a laugh coming from the man who's giving Tony Blair a virtual handjob!

And it's Tory.

Markgway wrote:We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe, go figure!

Probably because thousands slip thru the cracks or are being shunted from one course to the next. As soon as you go on any sort of course you have to sign off which means they can consider you no longer unemployed even though logically you are still unemployed. Where I'm from the unemployment rate is something like 40% last I heard (but not if you believe government figures).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Jun 2007, 00:54

grim_tales wrote:What are you basing the education claim on Mark? ("thousands of children.. unable to read or write")? Do you know first hand? Sounds like something the papers would say

I'm education minister and I just forgot to tell you all. Duh, obviously it's second hand info as is most stuff we write. Why is it everyone can bandy "facts" about but when it comes to me I'm somehow supposed to have proper documentation to back it up. Illiteracy is a real problem in the UK and so many kids are leaving school without any qualifications or skills. You think I'm making this shit up?

Students work hard for their exams and have to put up with the same crap every year, its a no win situation. If pass rates go up, standards have gone down. If they go down, students are illiterate, innumerate idiots. Which is it to be?

I've been there and done that. Pass rates keep going up because it looks good for the education system. I honestly do not believe for a single second that today's standard of education is better than it was 10 or 20 years ago. I've seen exam papers reprinted that are fucking multiple choice! New Labour are desperate for kids to pass so they can meet their ludicrous 50% to University quota.

I agree Iraq is bad, but most of the UN thought Saddam had WMD, not just Blair/Bush.

Is that why the UN didn't sign off on the war? And we knew there were no weapons BEFORE they invaded. It's all a pack of lies told to justify a bullshit war.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Jun 2007, 01:06

bradavon wrote:Both Wales and Scotland's smoking ban came into power during Blair's run. Ireland is an entirely different country, you know this.

Exactly my point. Blair had nothign to do with the smoking ban in any of these countries. Only when they proved successful did England commit. He played it safe.

True but I doubt Major could've completed it and even if he could it was still years away when he left.

How could you possibly know that?

I've never understood this argument. Just because Sadam was no effect to us it's okay for the West to continue to ignore him killing thousands of people?

Britain doesn't have a mandate to act as A World Police. If anyone should have acted against Saddam it should've been other Middle Eastern countries. They could've supported an uprising. What we got instead was a bloodbath. Iraq has fuck all to do with the west (unless you count the fact that the region is in a bloody state because of western intervention over the last 100 years). But I guess it's next stop Zimbabwe. At least they were in the commonwealth.

Granted thousands of Iraq's have died since but then they did under Sadam. Your point about Blair contributing to this doesn't take that into account.

Great so instead of Saddam killing hundreds of thousands we're doing it along with the insurgants and terrorists we created. Super logic.

The point now is what a disaster has been done since and is being continued to do so, get all the troops out.

It has to be gradual. You can't just go in blow shit up and then run. They must be seen to be handing over power in a proper fashion and not just saying "seeya we've had enough!"

At the very least he should've had some party leader contenders.

There wasn't anyone willing to stand against him (and none that could win). Cameron is a prat anyways so if Brown held an election tomorrow he'd still win. Waste of time and money at the moment. Give him a little time and then we'll see what he can do to turn Labour's fortunes around.

p.s - LOL Oops - 11pm pub kick out law. Thank god that's gone.

I'm not much of a drinker so that never bothered me... but I'm not aware of any positive effect it's had on stopping drunken clashes. Maybe you know different?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 29 Jun 2007, 10:36

Slasher wrote:Let me simply ask you this question?

When Saddam first started killing his own people, where was the USA and UK?

When Saddam first came into power, where was the west

Why did we attack AFTER 9/11?, Why not before when Clinton was in power?

All good questions, we sold Saddam weapons and he has had those weapons for years before the invasion. That doesnt mean he shouldnt have been removed though? Maybe the Middle East countries did try uprising but Saddam's Ba'ath party would execute anybody they disagreed with.
When Saddam was in power in the Gulf War we were supporting him against Iran AFAIK, what did Saddam have to do with 9/11? However a terrorist attack has the right to be countered/avenged.
And as you say making the comparison with Mugabe, he's an evil despot too so why don't we bomb the shit out of Zimbabwe. (?)

As for the Israel situation, before 1948 didn't Israel/Palestine used to live peacefully together, and then when Israel became an independent state they moved into Palestine and took the land over.

Mark I agree with you, we left Iraq in a mess, we must sort it out, what we started must be completed, sadly I think if we pulled out it would be worse.
Re: The smoking ban. I don't smoke so I don't really care, if it improves our health then that is good

but on the other hand I dont see why there cant be smoking and non-smoking pubs TBH.
Sorry Mark, no I dont think you're making stuff up

Well some people just don't want to learn, when I was in high school we had that shit too.

A Level French was much harder than GCSE French for what its worth.
But I have good qualifications but not the experience or skills to find employment easily.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 29 Jun 2007, 12:16

Hey Grim

, lets continue this..

grim_tales wrote:However a terrorist attack has the right to be countered/avenged.

But there was no terrorism attacked from Iraq to UK? Also what Terrorist attack are we talking about, if it is 9/11, then on the FBI own website, for Osama who they say was the brains behind the attack, well 9/11 is not even listed. Check out the following link: http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

And as you say making the comparison with Mugabe, he's an evil despot too so why don't we bomb the shit out of Zimbabwe. (?)

.. Nah I was just saying that why did we go away Iraq and done sod all with Mugabe, We seem to have one rule from one person, and another rule for the other.