Blair scorns Iraq claim by Meacher

[Barrett808]

Tony Blair yesterday "totally rejected" remarks by his former minister Michael Meacher blaming the Iraq war on the United States' desire for world domination.

Mr Meacher, who was environment minister until three months ago, suggested the Americans might have failed to prevent the 11 September attacks because they gave a pretext for military action.

He has already outlined his opposition to war, calling the case for action an "uncertain fantasy". Criticising the British Government for colluding with the US, he said the Bush government always intended to take control of the Gulf region in order to secure further oil supplies.

A Downing Street spokesman responded: "He is obviously not a government minister any more. His views are his own and ones which clearly would not be shared by the Prime Minister."

...

The US embassy insisted Mr Meacher's views, particularly the suggestion that the US government knowingly stood by while terrorists killed its citizens, "would be ... monstrously offensive, if they came from someone serious or credible".

(more)

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=441049

[Maple]

1. LOL they can 'scorn' and 'reject' all they want

It doesn't change the truth.

[Must_B_Free]

2. Much of the article is not even Meachers words

He has quoted and referenced many sources, including PNAC itself.

So, to attack Meacher's credibility is an extremely weak defense. Kind of a "16 words" defense tactic.

And what of Clare Short?

The jig is up. Look out!

[IkeWarnedUs]

3. Link to article by Meacher in today's Guardian

See for yourself what Meacher said.

Here's a sample:

<snip>

We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN".

Much, much, much more: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html

A copy of the Project for the New American Century's September 2000 report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses; Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century" can be viewed at http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

This is (almost) better than sex!