blair embarrassed when bremer goes off script

[zimv20]

link (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1113182,00.html)


Tony Blair was at the centre of an embarrassing row last night after the most senior US official in Baghdad bluntly rejected the Prime Minister's assertion that secret weapons laboratories had been discovered in Iraq.

In a Christmas message to British troops, Blair claimed there was 'massive evidence of a huge system of clandestine laboratories'. The Iraq Survey Group (ISG) had unearthed compelling evidence that showed Saddam Hussein had attempted to 'conceal weapons', the Prime Minister said. But in an interview yesterday, Paul Bremer, the Bush administration's top official in Baghdad, flatly dismissed the claim as untrue - without realising its source was Blair.

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 [ISG chief] David Kay has said,' he told ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme. 'It sounds like a bit of a red herring to me.'

[toontra]

Hah! Who needs enemies when you have friends who drop you in it by unexpectedly telling the truth (for a change!)

Blair's decision to support Bush is now revealed for what it was - a personal bid for world statesmanship in the face of the facts.

[pseudobrit]

Sounds like they forgot to synchronize their ************ files.

[3rdpath]

thankfully bremer has called " ************" on blair's statements, but where was bremer when cheney was making similar bogus claims?

and speaking of red herrings....how about this little tidbit thrown in at the end of the article:

"In recent days, senior Whitehall officials have raised the extraordinary possibility that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction after all - but believed he did after being misled by his own advisors."

i can't wait for bush to adopt this far-fetched, though theoretically impossible to debunk, hypothesis... just think of it, we can attack anyone because they " believe" they have wmd.

priceless.

[pseudobrit]

Originally posted by 3rdpath
i can't wait for bush to adopt this far-fetched, though theoretically impossible to debunk, hypothesis... just think of it, we can attack anyone because they " believe" they have wmd.

priceless.

Or better yet, since Bush has already said that having WMD is the same as potential to get WMD, maybe the end result will be that if someone in the nation believes they might have the potential to get WMD they can play host their own US asskicking invasion (paid for by the US taxpayer).

"Mr. President, why did we invade Quebec?"

"Some of them thought they might be able to make a batch of mustard gas.
And they're French"