Leaked Memo: What Did It Say?

[audiotech]

Doubt it. Qatar is half the size of Wales [according to the standard journalistic equivalency os measurements scales TM] and has either one or two US military bases, they would therefore fry lots of their own.

It's funny how people are thinking that there must be something *more* to it than just a standard strike, as if that's not bad enough?

Forget Qatar, as I never mentioned it. I was thinking a general conversation mentioning Iraq, or maybe Iran?

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Forget Qatar, as I never mentioned it. I was thinking a general conversation mentioning Iraq, or maybe Iran?

Aah, okay, the main story arising from the leak centred around the part of conversation in which Blair allegedly dissuaded Bush from launching a strike on Al Jazeera HQ, which is in Qatar; I thought you were referring to that.

It's possible then that nuclear strikes were discussed in relation to elsewhere in region. Personally, I don't doubt that Bush would consider and discuss such a possibility.

I wouldn't rule out a conventional strike against Iran, but nuclear? Talking about it is one thing, doing it is another. I'd hope that he was talked out of such stupidity though.

I still think there's a possibility of an imminent strike against Iran by either the US or Israel. If it's going to happen, I reckon it'll happen before Tony Blair leaves office.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

I don't understand why there is so much speculation on this thread. All of the facts are in the public domain except for the transcript of the memo itself. It is about the American plan to bomb the Al-jazeera studios in Quatar. Quatar was and is a friendly country. Al-jazeera is an independent news broadcaster trained by ex BBC journalists. It is highly respected for its balanced reporting giving the world news that includes the point of view of the Arab world.

America did not want the balanced reporting that showed Iraqi casualties because it contradicted the managed news produced by their own correspondents 'embedded with' the military.

America proposed an attack on the Quater headquarters of Al-jazeera and Blair objected directly to Bush. The raid did not happen. Good for Blair.

That is the story. There is no need to embellish it or speculate further. The facts are out if not the actual memo.

 

[Geoff kerr-morg]

Was it about bombing Al Jazeera?

 

[Geoff kerr-morg]

Was it about bombing Al Jazeera? sorry didn't see above , my hearing aids you know

 

[phildwyer]

Was it about bombing Al Jazeera? sorry didn't see above , my hearing aids you know

I don't think so, personally. That is, I think bombing al-Jazeera was discussed, but I think the leak was prompted by more serious stuff, which we don't yet know about. I'd guess a nuclear strike on Iran, or rather a massive aerial assault, some but not all of which will be nuclear. That is certainly well on the cards.

 

[Aldebaran]

I don't think so, personally. That is, I think bombing al-Jazeera was discussed, but I think the leak was prompted by more serious stuff, which we don't yet know about. I'd guess a nuclear strike on Iran, or rather a massive aerial assault, some but not all of which will be nuclear. That is certainly well on the cards.

That wouldn't be exactly "breaking a secret" either. It is common knowledge they are criminal and crazy enough to dream of doing this.
By which one should reflect on what is worse, or indeed more criminal: direct annihilation by US nukes of thousands of innocents, or cruelly slow and painful annihilations by US depleted uranium. May I invite you to visit Iraqi households and hospitals to watch the results of that.

salaam.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Perhaps there is something the memo that would make compelling evidence in a trial of Blair at the ICJ or someplace for complicity in US war crimes.

Not a worry for Bush as the US isn't signed up to the ICJ, but potentially a real concern for Blair now that his time as PM is finally coming to an end.

 

[Aldebaran]

Perhaps there is something the memo that would make compelling evidence in a trial of Blair at the ICJ or someplace for complicity in US war crimes.

If that were the case those preventing it to be known make themselves -at least- guilty of the crime of obstructing the course of justice and - at its worse- can be depicted as complicit to the crime.

salaam.

 

[phildwyer]

That wouldn't be exactly "breaking a secret" either. It is common knowledge they are criminal and crazy enough to dream of doing this.

Not in the UK it isn't. I find most Brits are still incredulous at the notion that the USA will nuke Iran. In the USA itself, by contrast, the public has been prepared for such an attack by years of punditry. It will be interesting to compare the public reaction in the USA with that in the UK if and when it does take place.

 

[Aldebaran]

You should better wonder about the Middle Eastern reactions.
It is not because it is as good as common knowledge that the US dreams about doing this, that it shall be looked at as if it is a totally normal consequence of lunatics governing a nation with a WMD capacity able to destroy the whole planet multifold.
We are already on waiting of the inevitable consequences of the DU contamination (wind and sand don't miraculously pause and lay down at borders).
All one can hope for is that by some miracle Bush and all the other criminal lunatics drop dead. Today would just be soon enough, in my view.

salaam.