The holes in Blair's arguments, and how he sidesteps key issues

[emad]

The holes in Blair's arguments, and how he sidesteps key issues
Published: 17 September 2005

In an interview with the BBC yesterday, Tony Blair defended the Government's anti-terror proposals, which would make the glorification of terrorism an offence and extend the period in which terrorist suspects can be held without charge.

Nigel Morris, The Independent's Home Affairs Correspondent, casts a critical eye over the Prime Minister's arguments.

"We have spent money on Iraq and Afghanistan and we are engaged in a major strategic battle in both countries, because this international terrorism has decided to make both countries a battleground."

Afghanistan was sheltering al-Qa'ida terrorists before the Taliban was ousted. However, there was no known al-Qa'ida presence in Iraq before the removal of Saddam by the US-led invasion; terrorists are exploiting the political vacuum and ethnic tensions of post-Saddam Iraq.

"This international terrorism is a movement. It has got an ideology and it has got a strategy."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article313204.ece

[emad]

1. It's called blatant denial.

n/t

[mrfrapp]

2. It's a good rebuttal

Blair has a reputation for being a good orator but his rants on this subject over the last several months are barely coherant. This rebuttal does a good job of puncturing the main arguments but honestly it would be far simpler just to point out that the man is rambling. I would have hoped that enough thought had been applied to these policies that Blair could explain any rationale clearly and lucidly. Instead, we get a performance worthy of a schoolboy.